#129600 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 3:12 am Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt jagkrit2012 Hi Annie Just input some thought besides well explanation from Sarah and Jon. > A: I must say the ideas discussed regarding realities and seeing visible object, not self, attachment as cause of grief and the seeking pleasant feelings has all been very beneficial. JJ: As you move on, you will find that why this understanding is not only very beneficial but is the most important in one's life. ============ > What is meant by detachment to physical things? for example i feel great attachment to my mothers wedding ring that I was given. Does that mean for example, I must give it away or not care if I loose? JJ: Detachment does not mean giving away or ignoring because that object attaches to your mind. Unless you understand more about reality of attachment, you will understand more about detachment. ============ > A: how does one go on in life and better ones self if there is no concept of self? JJ: One can do good with self but not that perfect good. But for the one who is selfless, what do you think he is capable of when he or she has a chance to do good. ============ > A: How can I be selfless without self care first? JJ: You can not be selfless with self care because you are adding up more self. Only right understanding about self can give idea to you that in fact there is no self. It is great that you enjoy learning dhamma. Anumodhana Jagkrit #129601 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:07 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Howard, and Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > ======================================= > > Just an 0bservation: Distinguishability of objects of consciousness that are alleged to be separate realities does not imply their being actual realities or separate entities. Yes, paramattha dhammas are distinguishable, but so are Ford cars from Mercedes, pine trees from rose bushes, you from me, and the Dhammastudy group from the U.S. Congress from the U.S. Supreme Court. > > I was wondering why the U.S. Supreme Court never answered my questions about the inherent nature of dhammas. ------------------------- HCW: Yes, one must wonder! -------------------------- > > Howard, if there is a visible object followed by a sound object are you saying that we don't know whether they are in fact facets of the same object, experienced at separate moments, or whether they are indeed separate realities? -------------------------- HCW: I'm not clear on your question. What "same object" are you hypothesizing? Consciousness functions for a bit as seeing consciousness and then moves right on to hearing consciousness. We clearly note the qualitative difference but then, IMO, go too far in conceiving a "sight entity" followed by a separate "sound entity". I think of waves in the ocean: Through thinking they are distinguished, but they are not separate entities except as a matter of convention. ------------------------------ > > Best, > Rob E. > > = = = = = = = = = = = = > ====================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #129602 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:08 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Agin - My apologies to you, Jon, for not including you in my reply to this post. With metta, Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Howard, and Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > ======================================= > > Just an 0bservation: Distinguishability of objects of consciousness that are alleged to be separate realities does not imply their being actual realities or separate entities. Yes, paramattha dhammas are distinguishable, but so are Ford cars from Mercedes, pine trees from rose bushes, you from me, and the Dhammastudy group from the U.S. Congress from the U.S. Supreme Court. > > I was wondering why the U.S. Supreme Court never answered my questions about the inherent nature of dhammas. > > Howard, if there is a visible object followed by a sound object are you saying that we don't know whether they are in fact facets of the same object, experienced at separate moments, or whether they are indeed separate realities? > > Best, > Rob E. > > = = = = = = = = = = = = > #129603 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:21 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Howard, I sent a reply to this message a couple of days ago, but it has hasn't shown up. (Probably my fault.) Here is a cut down version: ---- >> KH: In Theravada `emptiness' (sunnatta) "refers exclusively to the anatta doctrine:" "Void is the world because it is devoid of a self or anything belonging to a self" (Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka). >> > HCW: Yes, and in Mahayana as well. What is the meaning of this "self" that is denied? --- KH: I think that is the question we need to answer: what is the meaning of self (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? Does 'self' mean 'itself?' Or does it mean 'a self?' In other words, does the doctrine of anatta tell us that a dhamma is not a dhamma? Or does it tell us a dhamma is devoid of a controlling entity? Surely only the latter makes sense! When you and others say a dhamma can exist without having "own being" that sounds like doubletalk to me. You can't have it both ways; existence *is* own being. ------------ > H: What does it mean for an odor to be devoid of self? Does anyone think that an odor has a spirit/soul within it? ------------ KH: Yes, in a way they do. Perhaps most people would not use the word spirit or soul with regard to an odour; they reserve those terms for animate things. But they do think an odour has a lasting quality. And that is essentially the same thing. The lastingness of an inanimate object is the equivalent the soul of an animate object. Belief in a lasting (non-momentary) odour is atta belief. Belief in a sentient being who can detect odours is also atta belief. -------------------- > H: What people think is that an odor has a core of separate existence and identity, and that is the error being made at that level. -------------------- KH: Well something smells! There must be an ultimate reality of some sort that is contacted by the sense of smell. Otherwise all odours would be imaginary. Ken H #129604 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:42 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - I find what you write below to be very clear and said very pleasantly! We do see this matter rather differently, however. :-) 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) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > I sent a reply to this message a couple of days ago, but it has hasn't shown up. (Probably my fault.) Here is a cut down version: > > ---- > >> KH: In Theravada `emptiness' (sunnatta) "refers exclusively to the anatta doctrine:" "Void is the world because it is devoid of a self or anything belonging to a self" (Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka). > >> > > > HCW: Yes, and in Mahayana as well. What is the meaning of this "self" that is denied? > --- > > KH: I think that is the question we need to answer: what is the meaning of self (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? > > Does 'self' mean 'itself?' Or does it mean 'a self?' > > In other words, does the doctrine of anatta tell us that a dhamma is not a dhamma? Or does it tell us a dhamma is devoid of a controlling entity? > > Surely only the latter makes sense! > > When you and others say a dhamma can exist without having "own being" that sounds like doubletalk to me. You can't have it both ways; existence *is* own being. > > ------------ > > H: What does it mean for an odor to be devoid of self? Does anyone think that an odor has a spirit/soul within it? > ------------ > > KH: Yes, in a way they do. Perhaps most people would not use the word spirit or soul with regard to an odour; they reserve those terms for animate things. But they do think an odour has a lasting quality. And that is essentially the same thing. The lastingness of an inanimate object is the equivalent the soul of an animate object. > > Belief in a lasting (non-momentary) odour is atta belief. Belief in a sentient being who can detect odours is also atta belief. > > -------------------- > > H: What people think is that an odor has a core of separate existence and identity, and that is the error being made at that level. > -------------------- > > KH: Well something smells! There must be an ultimate reality of some sort that is contacted by the sense of smell. Otherwise all odours would be imaginary. > > Ken H > #129605 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 3:09 pm Subject: Re: Question on Parami jagkrit2012 Dear Linh, Nina, Sarah and all > I share the same ideas that developing panna is a long long process and when we all were born with kilesas, if there is no support from other qualities: dana, sila,nekkhama,...,it will so hard to achieve panna parami. > However, i'm still little confused. Somewhat i still think that panna is the only thing that we need to develop, and others come later. Seems i've mixed all qualities in one panna. Can we make it clearer? JJ: Linh's question about panna's quality reminds me to one sutta directing to heedfulness which is the development of panna and its supreme quality. AN 10.15 PTS: A v 21 Appamada Sutta: Heedfulness translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu "To the extent that there are animals — footless, two-footed, four-footed, many footed; with form or formless; percipient, non-percipient, or neither percipient nor non-percipient — the Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, is reckoned the foremost among them. In the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as the footprints of all legged animals are encompassed by the footprint of the elephant, and the elephant's footprint is reckoned the foremost among them in terms of size; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as the rafters in a peak-roofed house all go to the roof-peak, incline to the roof-peak, converge at the roof-peak, and the roof-peak is reckoned the foremost among them; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as, of all root fragrances, black aloes-root is reckoned the foremost; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as, of all wood fragrances, red sandalwood is reckoned the foremost; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as, of all flower fragrances, jasmine is reckoned the foremost; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as all wattle-and-daub-town princes fall subject to a wheel-turning emperor, and the wheel-turning emperor is reckoned the foremost among them; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as all the light of the constellations does not equal one sixteenth of the light of the moon, and the light of the moon is reckoned the foremost among them; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as in the last month of the rains, in autumn, when the sky is clear & cloudless, the sun, on ascending the sky, overpowers the space immersed in darkness, shines, blazes, & dazzles; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them. "Just as the great rivers — such as the Ganges, the Yamuna, the Aciravati, the Sarabhu, & the Mahi — all go to the ocean, incline to the ocean, slope to the ocean, tend toward the ocean, and the ocean is reckoned the foremost among them; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them." ............ When come back to Linh's question of mixing all quality in one panna, this smile somehow shall clarify in comparison that other paramis which is kusala dhamma or skillful quality do not mix in one panna but these paramis are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness which is the development of panna. Anomodhana Jagkrit #129606 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:13 pm Subject: What atta is denied? truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, >KH:I think that is the question we need to answer: what is the >meaning of self (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Good question. Buddha denied Upanishadic or Hindu conception of Atman. Buddha has not spoken a single English word such as "self". So we must be very careful not to conflate ancient Hindu concepts and modern western ones. Suttas could be more difficult to understand because the Buddha was talking to people living in that culture, he used their terminologies, and sometimes He was parodying/making fun of Brahminical practices. With best wishes, Alex #129607 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Mar 29, 2013 11:41 pm Subject: Re: What atta is denied? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex & Ken - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello KenH, all, > > >KH:I think that is the question we need to answer: what is the >meaning of self (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Good question. Buddha denied Upanishadic or Hindu conception of Atman. > > Buddha has not spoken a single English word such as "self". So we must be very careful not to conflate ancient Hindu concepts and modern western ones. > > Suttas could be more difficult to understand because the Buddha was talking to people living in that culture, he used their terminologies, and sometimes He was parodying/making fun of Brahminical practices. > > With best wishes, > > Alex > =============================== Alex, I agree with you that Ken's question is key! I have seen suttas that vary from each other on emphasis. IMO, the general emptiness that is central to Mahayana has its roots in the Pali suttas. Mahayana deals both with the lack of self-identity/own-being in dhammas as well as in persons, though still putting the anatta of persons first. Theravada concentrates on the selflessness of persons. The Pali suttas don't explain in much detail what 'anatta' means with regard to "individual" namas and rupas, and most often the explanation relates to ownerlessness and uncontrollability. But the emptiness/lack-of-own-being in dhammas is also expressed there in many suttas. With metta, Howard /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) __________________ /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) ___________________ /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) _____________________ /Now suppose a man, when dreaming, were to see delightful parks, delightful forests, delightful stretches of land, & delightful lakes, and on awakening were to see nothing. In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: 'The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a dream, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.' Seeing this with right discernment, as it actually is, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace./ (From the Potaliya Sutta) __________________________ /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) #129608 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:08 am Subject: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member t.sastri Hi old & new DSG members, - My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) following Sarah's encouragement. [She wrote in an email: Maybe you can drop by to say 'hi' sometime :-)] So I thought : why not? Why don't I go there to renew friendship with old members (some are young, though) and get to meet new members too? Thanks to Sarah's friendly suggestion. So, guys, how are y'll doing? Truly,Tep=== #129609 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 2:52 am Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member sarahprocter... Hi Tep, Glad to welcome back an old friend and again, good to hear from you again! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > following Sarah's encouragement. .... S: You mentioned that some of your viewpoints might not be appreciated by some here, but I'd like to stress that we're all just here to share our ideas and understandings with friends, so share any views or comments you like! I know you always consider the Teachings deeply and study carefully, so always a pleasure to discuss with you, Tep. Metta Sarah ===== #129610 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member nilovg Dear Tep, I am glad to see you here again. I always found discussions with you worth while, a lot to consider. Nina. Op 29-mrt-2013, om 14:08 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > y name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. #129611 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:13 am Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member upasaka_howard Welcome back, Tep!!! With metta, Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi old & new DSG members, - > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > following Sarah's encouragement. [She wrote in an email: Maybe you can > drop by to say 'hi' sometime :-)] So I thought : why not? Why don't I > go there to renew friendship with old members (some are young, though) > and get to meet new members too? Thanks to Sarah's friendly suggestion. > So, guys, how are y'll doing? > Truly,Tep=== > > > > > #129612 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 4:08 am Subject: Invisible hand? tadaomiyamot... Hi Everyone I do not know if it is Kun Sujin's own metaphor or not, but she says that "Kamma is an invisible hand". I CANNOT visualize the metaphor. Can anyone help me understand in what sense "Kamma is an invisible hand"? tadao #129613 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:11 am Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member philofillet Hi Tep I try to limit my participation here to posting things I have heard in the audio discussions because I personally don't believe in the value of hitting the head against the stone wall ( debating for the end purpose of agree to disagree.) But I'm glad that you are well. And I hope the stone wall is fruitful for you and others. Just doesn't work for me and what works for me naturally (nobody more important!) comes first. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi old & new DSG members, - > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > following Sarah's encouragement. [She wrote in an email: Maybe you can > drop by to say 'hi' sometime :-)] So I thought : why not? Why don't I > go there to renew friendship with old members (some are young, though) > and get to meet new members too? Thanks to Sarah's friendly suggestion. > So, guys, how are y'll doing? > Truly,Tep=== > > > > > #129614 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:42 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. thomaslaw03 Hi Ken H, -" ... there are only dhammas, and no self." I think according to SN 22.90 (the Channa Sutta), to say "there are only dhammas", this is one extreme. The SN sutta records the Buddha as saying thus: " ... "Everything exists" (sabbam atthiiti), this is one extreme. ..." The middle way insight in the text "means to be devoid (empty) of the two extremes: the self-based view of existence and the self-based view of non-existence"(Choong MK, The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism(1999), pp. 33-4; The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism (2000), pp. 61-2). Thomas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > ------ > > T: About the middle way of emptiness (such as neither existence/arising/eternalism nor non-xistence/ceasing/annihilationism, neither sameness nor difference, neither coming nor going) found in Samyutta suttas/Samyukta sutras, you may first read SN 22.90 = SA 262 (See also Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism (2000), pp. 60-66, 91-97, 192-199, 239; and The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism (1999), pp. 32-40). > > > I hope this helps. > ------ > > KH: Thanks for trying but, no, it doesn't help. Rather than read books I would prefer to discuss the "middle way of emptiness." > > In Theravada `emptiness' (sunnatta) "refers exclusively to the anatta doctrine:" "Void is the world because it is devoid of a self or anything belonging to a self" (Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka). > > I am willing to accept that the Mahayana schools may have different meanings for emptiness, but in Theravada it definitely means `devoid of a permanent self, or soul.' > > So paramattha dhammas exist, and they are soulless. > > The Channa Sutta (SN 22.90) you referred me to bears this out. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one." > > By and large, the world is seen as a place where the self lives eternally or where the self is annihilated. Only the Buddha has taught a middle way, in which there are only dhammas, and no self. > > Ken H > #129615 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 2:59 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Thomas, --- <. . .> T: > > I think according to SN 22.90 (the Channa Sutta), to say "there are only dhammas", this is one extreme. --- KH: Perhaps you would like to join join Howard, Alex and me in answering the question: what is the meaning of 'self' (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? Does it mean `itself' (as in: a dhamma is devoid of itself)? Or does it mean `a self' (as in: a dhamma is devoid of a self)? So far we have Howard saying both meanings are intended, Alex saying only the former is intended, and me saying only the latter is intended. If, like Howard and Alex you believe a dhamma is devoid of itself, perhaps you could explain what that means. We hear people saying a dhamma exists "but not in its own right" or "but not in and of itself" or " but not with its own being." Can you explain what that means? It seems like doubletalk to me. Ken H #129616 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa _003 (DT 890 )to Htoo. htoonaing... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Htoo, Thank you for your post. As you say, siila is not pure without pa~n~naa. I am just adding something. > keeps the degree of panna is not high yet. ----- N: Some readers may think that keeping the five precepts is like keeping some rules. and that there has to be first this, than vipassanaa. Or, he cling to and idea of self who keeps the precepts > and can practise vipassanaa. All sorts of interpretations are given > by different people. > > Instead of rules, maybe we can see the precepts as ways of training. > One sees the value of avoiding what can harm others. It depends on > conditions whether this is always possible for a person. Meanwhile as > he develops more understanding of the present reality, like seeing > now, visible object now, there are more conditions to avoid harming > others. > ------ > Nina. --------------------------- Dear Nina, Thanks for your kind comment and adding. You are right. You meant vipassanaa is not one after another ( siila first, samaadhi secondhi second, pa~n~naa third )? I think 'idea of self is completely destroyed at the time of sotapatti-magga-citta arising'. So however you try or who hard you try there is still idea of self at least as anusaya. Did you notice the 'discussion between Saariputta and Pu.n.na'? With respect, Htoo Naing #129617 From: "htoonaing@..." Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:03 pm Subject: Vipassanaa _005 (DT 892 ) htoonaing... Dear Dhamma Friends, When approaching the foot of the mountain there is blockage of forest. The first step up the mountain is realization of naama and ruupa along with their characteristic. There is a space just in front of the mountain. In that space there are two cleansing steps. The first step is realization of naama and ruupa but not along with full-understanding of their characterisitics. This step is further reinforced by the second naana or second step. This step involves realization of causes of naama and ruupa. These two steps or two naana are still not vipassanaa naana. They are pre-vipassanaa naana. Without these two naana there will not be true vipassanaa. To be true vipassanaa there must be these two naana as prerequisites. There is a saying in a tradition that " 'vi' cannot be made without 'va' ". That is 'vi' will never arise without 'v'. Here 'va' means 'naama-ruupa vavatthaana naana'. 'Vi' means 'vipassanaa'. So without 'naama ruupa vavatthaana' or separation of 'naama' and 'ruupa' vipassanaa naana will never arise. These first two naana are in front of the mountain. Beyond the pace is forest. Beyond realization of naama and ruupa is forest. Forest of complex and complicated naming systems. May you be well and happy, With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing #129618 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? nilovg Dear Tadao, I thought of you when reading about the commemoration of the calamities in Japan and was on the point of writing to you. You should receive Khun Kanchana's book, she also writes about Alan and the accident. It is in Thai, but I think that you can read Thai? Kamma: we do not know how it works exactly, but it does work, produces results. In that sense we could say that it is not visible, only to Buddhas. A hand: it works, it guides our life, no matter we understand it or not. Why did I marry a diplomat who was assigned to Thailand where I learnt Thai and met Acharn Sujin? So many things in our life happen, strange things, and we do not know exactly how it all comes to pass. Nina. Op 29-mrt-2013, om 18:08 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende geschreven: > Hi Everyone > > I do not know if it is Kun Sujin's own metaphor or not, but she > says that "Kamma is an invisible hand". I CANNOT visualize the > metaphor. Can anyone help me understand in what sense "Kamma is an > invisible hand"? > > tadao > > #129619 From: Lukas Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 7:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? szmicio Dear Nina, Or some takes drugs...This is also a result of kamma isnt it? Best wishes Lukas ________________________________ From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2013 8:35 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? Dear Tadao, I thought of you when reading about the commemoration of the calamities in Japan and was on the point of writing to you. You should receive Khun Kanchana's book, she also writes about Alan and the accident. It is in Thai, but I think that you can read Thai? Kamma: we do not know how it works exactly, but it does work, produces results. In that sense we could say that it is not visible, only to Buddhas. A hand: it works, it guides our life, no matter we understand it or not. Why did I marry a diplomat who was assigned to Thailand where I learnt Thai and met Acharn Sujin? So many things in our life happen, strange things, and we do not know exactly how it all comes to pass. Nina. Op 29-mrt-2013, om 18:08 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende geschreven: > Hi Everyone > > I do not know if it is Kun Sujin's own metaphor or not, but she > says that "Kamma is an invisible hand". I CANNOT visualize the > metaphor. Can anyone help me understand in what sense "Kamma is an > invisible hand"? > > tadao > > ------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links #129620 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:06 pm Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member t.sastri Hi Sarah, - I appreciate your friendly welcome. Old friendship does not die easily, I guess. You're right to stress that the main purpose of a group like DSG is to "share our ideas and understandings with friends". >S: I know you always consider the Teachings deeply and study carefully, so always a pleasure to discuss with you, Tep. I know no other hosts sweeter or more persuasive than Sarah Proctor! Truly, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > Glad to welcome back an old friend and again, good to hear from you again! > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > > following Sarah's encouragement. > .... > S: You mentioned that some of your viewpoints might not be appreciated by some here, but I'd like to stress that we're all just here to share our ideas and understandings with friends, so share any views or comments you like! > > I know you always consider the Teachings deeply and study carefully, so always a pleasure to discuss with you, Tep. > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > #129621 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member t.sastri Dear Nina, - I am happy to read your kind words. Thanks for always be available and ready to help others. Looking back at your dedication to Dhamma discussions and publication records, I do not find anyone else today who contributes more to Buddhism than you. Yours truly, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > I am glad to see you here again. I always found discussions with you > worth while, a lot to consider. > Nina. > Op 29-mrt-2013, om 14:08 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > y name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. > > > > > #129622 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? tadaomiyamot... Hi Kun Nina: Thank you for your response. As for the book by Khun Kanchana, I will obtain its copy. I had some idea of Kamma being "invisible", so it was not a difficult part to understand. However, the "hand" part was difficult to grasp. I imagined it to be a kind of "controller", waving its hand on the top of my head, telling me to take this direction but not the other. (Of course, this is a wrong understanding, but it was my image of the "hand".) I like your use of the phrase, "[to] guide our life". Whatever happens on us, we ought to be ease with our own Kamma and do not get too upset even when their results are not so pleasant. And as you said, we could appreciate when their results are so marverous as our encountering of the Dhamma in this life. tadao <...> > ________________________________ > From: Nina van Gorkom > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2013 8:35 AM > Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? > > Dear Tadao, > I thought of you when reading about the commemoration of the > calamities in Japan and was on the point of writing to you. > You should receive Khun Kanchana's book, she also writes about Alan > and the accident. It is in Thai, but I think that you can read Thai? > Kamma: we do not know how it works exactly, but it does work, > produces results. In that sense we could say that it is not visible, > only to Buddhas. A hand: it works, it guides our life, no matter we > understand it or not. <...> #129623 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > Or some takes drugs...This is also a result of kamma isnt it? .... S: Result of kamma - we need to be specific: - vipaka cittas, such as bhavanga cittas, seeing, hearing etc - kammaja rupas, such as eye-sense, ear-sense, etc Metta Sarah ====== #129624 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 11:05 pm Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member t.sastri Hello Howard, - Thank you very much for welcoming me back to DSG. You don't seem to write as much now as in the past. What has changed? Be well, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Welcome back, Tep!!! > > With metta, > Howard > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > Hi old & new DSG members, - > > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > > following Sarah's encouragement. [She wrote in an email: Maybe you can > > drop by to say 'hi' sometime :-)] So I thought : why not? Why don't I > > go there to renew friendship with old members (some are young, though) > > and get to meet new members too? Thanks to Sarah's friendly suggestion. > > So, guys, how are y'll doing? > > Truly,Tep=== > > > > > > > > > > > #129625 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Mar 30, 2013 11:26 pm Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member t.sastri Hi Phil, - I like your stonewall analogy! Give me more! You're right, very right about the purposeless debating. Even a friendly discussion with a purpose to win approvals of others is not fruitful either, I think. Was I "good" in the past at banging my head against "the stone wall", in your opinion? But, so much has changed since those active-posting years of mine, Phil. The purpose of coming back to visit DSG this time is just to socialize a little. ... On a second thought, maybe a few selective & low-key Dhamma discussions per week won't hurt. :-) Be happy, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Tep > > I try to limit my participation here to posting things I have heard in the audio discussions because I personally don't believe in the value of hitting the head against the stone wall ( debating for the end purpose of agree to disagree.) But I'm glad that you are well. And I hope the stone wall is fruitful for you and others. Just doesn't work for me and what works for me naturally (nobody more important!) comes first. > > Phil > > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > Hi old & new DSG members, - > > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > > following Sarah's encouragement. [She wrote in an email: Maybe you can > > drop by to say 'hi' sometime :-)] So I thought : why not? Why don't I > > go there to renew friendship with old members (some are young, though) > > and get to meet new members too? Thanks to Sarah's friendly suggestion. > > So, guys, how are y'll doing? > > Truly,Tep=== > > > > > > > > > > > #129626 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 12:02 am Subject: Trim Reminder! dsgmods Hi All, When replying to another post, please remember to trim any part of the other post that is not necessary for your reply. If the post you are replying to is a recent one, you may assume that other members will have seen it. Trimming saves time and work for those who kindly back up the archives and makes it more convenient for all of us to read posts. It also assists those who print out messages, have limited bandwidth or receive messages in digest form. We appreciate your co-operation. Jon and Sarah PS The full guidelines can be found easily at the link on the home-page. Comments or questions off-list only. Thanks #129627 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 2:00 am Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hello Howard, - > > Thank you very much for welcoming me back to DSG. > You don't seem to write as much now as in the past. What has changed? > > Be well, > Tep ================================ You're correct. Much of my time is devoted these days to "personal practice," the nature of which has shifted more than a bit, a matter I don't choose to discuss at this point, and also to an increase in study and contemplation. I also tire of debates, especially fruitless ones. I do, however, highly esteem wonderful friends, of whom there are so many here, most of whom, BTW, I have differences with as regards beliefs! Beliefs are just that! ;-) I'm very grateful for these wonderful friendships!! With metta, Howard > === > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > Welcome back, Tep!!! > > > > With metta, > > Howard #129628 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 2:23 am Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member t.sastri Dear Howard, - >H: I'm very grateful for these wonderful friendships!! Lucky you! Even a single wonderful friendship is not easy for me to find. Be happy, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Tep - > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > Hello Howard, - > > > > Thank you very much for welcoming me back to DSG. > > You don't seem to write as much now as in the past. What has changed? > > > > Be well, > > Tep > ================================ > You're correct. Much of my time is devoted these days to "personal practice," the nature of which has shifted more than a bit, a matter I don't choose to discuss at this point, and also to an increase in study and contemplation. I also tire of debates, especially fruitless ones. I do, however, highly esteem wonderful friends, of whom there are so many here, most of whom, BTW, I have differences with as regards beliefs! Beliefs are just that! ;-) I'm very grateful for these wonderful friendships!! > > With metta, > Howard > #129629 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 6:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 30-mrt-2013, om 9:49 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > Or some takes drugs...This is also a result of kamma isnt it? ----- N: This is new kamma, and it will give result later on. ----- Nina. #129630 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 11:54 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. thomaslaw03 Hi Ken H - "... Does it mean `itself' (as in: a dhamma is devoid of itself)? Or does it mean `a self' (as in: a dhamma is devoid of a self)? ... If, like Howard and Alex you believe a dhamma is devoid of itself, perhaps you could explain what that means. We hear people saying a dhamma exists "but not in its own right" or "but not in and of itself" or " but not with its own being." Can you explain what that means? It seems like doubletalk to me." According to the SN 22. 90 (= SA 262), to say a dhamma (dharma) exists, this is one extreme; to say a dhamma does not exist, this is the other extreme. Not approaching either extreme, the Buddha teaches the dhamma by the middle. As I said before, it "means to be devoid (empty) of the two extremes: the self-based view of existence and the self-based view of non-existence. Thomas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > --- > <. . .> > T: > > > I think according to SN 22.90 (the Channa Sutta), to say "there are only dhammas", this is one extreme. > --- > > KH: Perhaps you would like to join join Howard, Alex and me in answering the question: what is the meaning of 'self' (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? > > Does it mean `itself' (as in: a dhamma is devoid of itself)? Or does it mean `a self' (as in: a dhamma is devoid of a self)? > > So far we have Howard saying both meanings are intended, Alex saying only the former is intended, and me saying only the latter is intended. > > If, like Howard and Alex you believe a dhamma is devoid of itself, perhaps you could explain what that means. We hear people saying a dhamma exists "but not in its own right" or "but not in and of itself" or " but not with its own being." Can you explain what that means? It seems like doubletalk to me. > > Ken H > #129631 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 1:43 pm Subject: "Wish" jagkrit2012 Dear friends Yesterday in Thai Dhamma discussion, Than Acharn Sujin asked one question. "Do you fulfill your wish?" The answer is very interesting and very useful for reminder. Hopefully, this question brings valuable discussion among DSG friends. Anumodhana Jagkrit #129632 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 2:26 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" philofillet Hi Jagkrit > > "Do you fulfill your wish?" > > The answer is very interesting and very useful for reminder. I would say that since wishes are almost invariably rooted in lobha (occasional moments of kusala chanda may possibly arise amoung all the greed, I suppose) the fulfillment of one wish conditions the arising of more, therefore a never ending chain of dissatisfaction. But I guess that isn't news to anyone! Phil > > Hopefully, this question brings valuable discussion among DSG friends. > > Anumodhana > > Jagkrit > #129633 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 2:35 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Thomas, --- <. . .> > T: According to the SN 22. 90 (= SA 262), to say a dhamma (dharma) exists, this is one extreme; --- KH: I am sure I have the right sutta; it's the Channa Sutta, isn't it? You have quoted it to me several times and I have quoted it back to you. The one I am reading does not say what you have said it says. It does not call "a dhamma exists" an extreme view. ------- > T: to say a dhamma does not exist, this is the other extreme. Not approaching either extreme, the Buddha teaches the dhamma by the middle. ------- KH: A capital D for Dhamma in that second sentence would have confirmed that you were talking about the Buddha's teaching, (A small d dhamma usually denotes a nama or rupa.) And yes, the Buddha did teach the Dhamma by the middle way. He taught the way of conditioned dhammas – fleeting, impersonal, mental and physical phenomena that exist absolutely. ------------ > T: As I said before, it "means to be devoid (empty) of the two extremes: the self-based view of existence and the self-based view of non-existence. ------------ KH: Thanks, but that doesn't help. I asked if you could clarify the doubletalk "a dhamma exists but not in its own right," "not with its own being" etc. What you have given me is just more of the same. A dhamma can't be empty of the two extremes. In fact, the two extremes are, themselves, dhammas. They are sakkaya-ditthi. I earnestly recommend you ditch all modern interpretations of the Dhamma; they rely on smoke and mirrors. And they all leave the way open for sakkaya-ditthi. That's their attraction. Ken H #129634 From: "azita" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 4:24 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. gazita2002 Hallo Jon, certainly don't feel like you hijacked the thread, I thought that's how we work here at DSG. If someone comes up with a point from a different angle then go for it, I say. Will resume when I pick up where I left off, if thats possible:) It all gets beyond me when I'm not 'at the coal face' so to speak, for a few days. Cittas, cetasikas and rupas - what could be more simple than that - HA! Live for understanding azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Azita (and Rob E) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > > > hallo Rob and Jon, > > > > I see Jon has asked an important question here Rob and given important information re dhammas. > > > > I agree with what Jon has written about nama and rupa and would like to add that if there were no nama dhaammas and rupa dhammas then there would be no 'us' > > > > Cittas have realities as objects e.g. other namas or rupas, or citta can have concept as object, e.g. earth kasina which can be object of jhana citta. > > =============== > > J: Good observations. > > Hope you don't feel I've hijacked your thread with Rob E; I certainly didn't mean to! But I thought you sensed a difference of view on a fundamental point that needed to be brought up, to avoid the discussion being at cross-purposes. > > Looking forward to your resumption of the discussion with Rob E soon. > > Jon > #129635 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 6:25 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" jagkrit2012 Dear Phil >P: I would say that since wishes are almost invariably rooted in lobha (occasional moments of kusala chanda may possibly arise amoung all the greed, I suppose) the fulfillment of one wish conditions the arising of more, therefore a never ending chain of dissatisfaction. But I guess that isn't news to anyone! JJ: Yes, it is. Fulfilling one brings more satisfaction and wish for more. This is one good reminder : "do not heedless with your fulfillment". But the question is do you fulfill your wishes? Jakrit #129636 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 3:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? tadaomiyamot... Hi Kun Nina This may be an irrational and rather optimistic expression, but I would like to regard "an invisible hand" not as a "cold-blooded control-freak", but as a "warm-hearted guiding hand". tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tadao, > I thought of you when reading about the commemoration of the > calamities in Japan and was on the point of writing to you. > You should receive Khun Kanchana's book, she also writes about Alan > and the accident. It is in Thai, but I think that you can read Thai? > Kamma: we do not know how it works exactly, but it does work, > produces results. In that sense we could say that it is not visible, > only to Buddhas. A hand: it works, it guides our life, no matter we > understand it or not. > Why did I marry a diplomat who was assigned to Thailand where I > learnt Thai and met Acharn Sujin? So many things in our life happen, > strange things, and we do not know exactly how it all comes to pass. <...> #129637 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:27 pm Subject: Re: Invisible hand? szmicio Dear Nina, > > Or some takes drugs...This is also a result of kamma isnt it? > ----- > N: This is new kamma, and it will give result later on. L: What about environment one lives or friends one lives with? Best wishes Lukas #129638 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:31 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" philofillet Hi Jagkrit > But the question is do you fulfill your wishes? > Temporarily. As we know, the Buddha taught that we worldlings know no escape from displeasure except by seeking pleasure. For example, the bath water is tepid, we reach out to raise the temperature. And in countless other ways. So temporarily fulfilled. (Of course it is dhammas at work, no "you"...) but the fulfillment is through vipalassas, so delusionary... That's the best I can do, Jagkrit. :) Phil #129639 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:33 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" szmicio Dear Jagkrit and Phil, 'Not getting what one wishes for is dukkha'. Best wishes Lukas > Temporarily. As we know, the Buddha taught that we worldlings know no escape from displeasure except by seeking pleasure. For example, the bath water is tepid, we reach out to raise the temperature. And in countless other ways. So temporarily fulfilled. (Of course it is dhammas at work, no "you"...) but the fulfillment is through vipalassas, so delusionary... #129640 From: Lukas Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:40 pm Subject: dosa szmicio Dear friends, I feel sadness to the big extent. It pierce my body and I feel domanassa vedana in my body. Best wishes Lukas #129641 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 7:47 pm Subject: Asubha of all conditioned realities philofillet Hello all I heard Ajahn Sujin say that all conditioned realities have the aspect of asubha. She said "I think the asubha of rising and falling away is better than the dead body." I guess she might mean that for us there is unlikely to be kusala reflection on the dead body... Phil #129642 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 8:01 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: You are worried about the terminology that is used in the texts to describe dhammas, because you feel the terms used (e.g., `own being', Pali: sabhava) may conduce to attachment rather than to detachment. > > > > Now choice of terminology is what I would call a presentational matter. > > RE: Well the choice of the type of terminology is presentational, but the meaning of the terminology is not presentational, but substantial. I am still trying to find out what the meaning and implications of own-being are. What does it mean exactly, and what does it say about the nature of a dhamma? If that is clarified, then we could talk about presentation, which also can indeed lend itself to misunderstand and attachment to properties that are imagined because of the implications of the terms. > =============== J: Thanks for these comments. I think you're suggesting we discuss meaning first then presentation, and I agree with that approach (without clarity regarding meaning views on presentation have little relevance). I'd also go further and say it's better not to mix the two, since this can result in confusion over meaning. So I suggest we discuss meaning and presentation in separate threads. > =============== > RE: Paramatha dhammas is like that too. When I try to get a good idea of the implications of the term it seems to slip away. I am told that it just means that dhammas are the true unit of existence and experience and therefore are "ultimate." Since they actually do arise they are called "realities," and if that is all there is to it, then I would say the presentational terminology still has problems for me, but at least I would understand that the basic meaning is okay. > =============== J: Regarding the meaning of `sabhava' and `paramattha dhamma', CMA has the following in notes to Ch. I #2: << << << Ultimate realities are things that exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhaava). These are the dhammas: the final, irreducible components of existence, the ultimate entities which result from a correctly performed analysis of experience. Such existents admit of no further reduction, but are themselves the final terms of analysis, the true constituents of the complex manifold of experience. Hence the word `paramattha' is applied to them, which is derived from `parama' = ultimate, highest, final, and `attha' = reality, thing." >> >> >> Now, presentational issues aside, is there anything about this explanation that is not clear? Jon #129643 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 8:38 pm Subject: Re: dosa philofillet Hi Lukas Thankfully we have this precious human birth, as you know it is only in the human realm with its mix of pleasant and unpleasant objects of citta that understanding can develop. Let's be encouraged by that. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > > Dear friends, > I feel sadness to the big extent. It pierce my body and I feel domanassa vedana in my body. > > Best wishes > Lukas > > > #129644 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Mar 31, 2013 11:43 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Thomas) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > --- > <. . .> > > T: According to the SN 22. 90 (= SA 262), to say a dhamma (dharma) exists, this is one extreme; > --- > > KH: I am sure I have the right sutta; it's the Channa Sutta, isn't it? You have quoted it to me several times and I have quoted it back to you. The one I am reading does not say what you have said it says. It does not call "a dhamma exists" an extreme view. > > ------- > > T: to say a dhamma does not exist, this is the other extreme. Not > approaching either extreme, the Buddha teaches the dhamma by the middle. > ------- > > KH: A capital D for Dhamma in that second sentence would have confirmed that you were talking about the Buddha's teaching, (A small d dhamma usually denotes a nama or rupa.) And yes, the Buddha did teach the Dhamma by the middle way. He taught the way of conditioned dhammas – fleeting, impersonal, mental and physical phenomena that exist absolutely. > > ------------ > > T: As I said before, it "means to be devoid (empty) of the two extremes: the self-based view of existence and the self-based view of non-existence. > ------------ > > KH: Thanks, but that doesn't help. I asked if you could clarify the doubletalk "a dhamma exists but not in its own right," "not with its own being" etc. What you have given me is just more of the same. > > A dhamma can't be empty of the two extremes. In fact, the two extremes are, themselves, dhammas. They are sakkaya-ditthi. > > I earnestly recommend you ditch all modern interpretations of the Dhamma; they rely on smoke and mirrors. And they all leave the way open for sakkaya-ditthi. That's their attraction. > > Ken H > ============================== Ken, in the Channa Sutta there is the following quoted from the Kaccayanagota Sutta: <'By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one.>. What is this "world" other than "the all," consisting of all dhammas? Neither true existence nor non-existence holds, but emptiness of self-existence does hold, and both in paramattha dhammas and in every aggregate of dhammas called "a person." The latter absence is the non-existence of personal self. (My understanding.) With metta, Howard /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) _______________________________ /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #129645 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 12:21 am Subject: Direct Knowing of Visible Object t.sastri Hi Sarah (and Antony H.), - You wrote: >I'm not really interested in applying any logic. I'm just interested in the understanding of realities, dhammas, which can be directly known now, such as visible object, sound or hearing. >If it were not possible to directly know realities, it would only be possible to think about concepts. Impossible then to become enlightened as the Buddha taught. I do not know if the meaning of "direct knowing" in the Theravada literature is the same as that understood by Mahayanists. More important, I would appreciate your thought on how you directly know a visible object in the present moment such that it may lead to enlightenment. I have seen plenty of visible objects for many decades without having gone near enlightenment! So it is time to learn the right way. Be well, Tep === #129646 From: Tambach Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 12:23 am Subject: Ayatana tambach Dear all, A friend is looking for documents on Ayatana. Sources on the net on the specific subject seems to be quite limited. She'd appreciate your help. Metta & Anumodana Tam #129647 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 12:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ayatana nilovg Dear Tambach, I quote from my Abh in Daily lIfe. The source is mainly the VIsuddhimagga and also the Vibhanga: Book of Analysis, Vibhaňnga, II, Analysis of Bases. Also in other parts of the scriptures, including the suttas, there is reference to this classification. Op 31-mrt-2013, om 15:23 heeft Tambach het volgende geschreven: > A friend is looking for documents on Ayatana. Sources on the net on > the specific subject seems to be quite limited. > ------ N: The sense-bases, citta and the objects experienced by citta can be classified as twelve ĺyatanas, translated sometimes as ``sense- fields'' (Vis. XV, 1-17) . There are six inward ĺyatanas and six outward ĺyatanas. They are classified as follows: six inward ĺyatanas six outward ĺyatanas eyesense visible object earsense sound smelling-sense odour tasting-sense taste bodysense tangible object mind-base (manĺyatana) mind-object (dhammĺyatana) When we see, hear or think we believe that a self experiences objects, but in reality there is the association of the inward ĺyatana and the outward ĺyatana, the objects ``outside''. This classification can remind us that all our experiences are dependent on conditions. We read in the Visuddhimagga (XV, 15), in the section on the ĺyatanas, about conditioned realities: ... they do not come from anywhere previous to their arising, nor do they go anywhere after their falling away. On the contrary, before their arising they had no individual essence, and after their falling away their individual essences are completely dissolved. And they occur without power (being exercisable over them) since they exist in dependence on conditions... Likewise they should be regarded as incurious and uninterested. For it does not occur to the eye and visible object, etc., ``Ah, that consciousness might arise from our concurrence''. And as door, physical basis, and object, they have no curiosity about, or interest in, arousing consciousness. On the contrary, it is the absolute rule that eye-consciousness, etc., come into being with the union of eye with visible object, and so on. So they should be regarded as incurious and uninterested... Mind-base, manĺyatana, includes all cittas; mind-object, dhammĺyatana, includes cetasikas, subtle rúpas and nibbĺna. -------- Remember what Acharn said: they pertain to this moment. There are only aaayatanas at the moment they associate. ----- Nina. #129648 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 1:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Direct Knowing of Visible Object nilovg Dear Tep, good remark. Op 31-mrt-2013, om 15:21 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > More important, I would appreciate your thought on how you directly > know a visible object in the present moment such that it may lead > to enlightenment. > I have seen plenty of visible objects for many decades without > having gone near enlightenment! So it is time to learn the right way. ----- N: no, not in one day. Litle by little by little we come to understand what visible object is, different from shape and form or persons we believe we see. Doesn't it seem that we see them? So it takes long to distinguish seeing from thinking of concepts. Listening and considering again and again as you often heard here. When there is real detachment, no trying with an idea of self, there are conditions for awareness, not only of visible object but also of other realities that appear. We can come to know them as "just a dhamma", but that is not easy at all. We always take them for something or someone. Patience! We have to encourage each other to be patient. Nina. #129649 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 1:51 am Subject: Re: "Wish" jagkrit2012 Dear Lukas > L: 'Not getting what one wishes for is dukkha'. JJ: Yes, it is but getting what one wishes is not dukkha? Jagkrit #129650 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 2:23 am Subject: Re: "Wish" jagkrit2012 Dear Phil > > But the question is do you fulfill your wishes? > > > P: Temporarily. As we know, the Buddha taught that we worldlings know no escape from displeasure except by seeking pleasure. For example, the bath water is tepid, we reach out to raise the temperature. And in countless other ways. So temporarily fulfilled. (Of course it is dhammas at work, no "you"...) but the fulfillment is through vipalassas, so delusionary... > > That's the best I can do, Jagkrit. :) JJ: Thank you very much Phil. This shows that we always wish for pleasure most of the time. Sometime, we fulfill. Sometimes, we don't. And yes most of fulfillment is through wrong understanding. This is the answer of big wishes or story wishes. Come back to Than Acharn question: Do you fulfill your wishes? The answer is we fulfill our wishes all the time when we are seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. Because seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching arise follow our wishes. We fulfill our wishes and wish more of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. We, in fact, don't know that we wish and we don't know we've fulfill our wishes and we don't know that we wish again and again. Than Acharn said when we blink our eyes, we already wish. When we walk, we already wish. When we move our hands, we already wish. This wishes are so subtle and hard to be aware of and they are arising almost all the time without noticing. Anumodhana Jagkrit #129651 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 4:16 am Subject: Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities truth_aerator Hello Phil, all, >I heard Ajahn Sujin say that all conditioned realities have the aspect >of asubha. She said "I think the asubha of rising and falling away is >better than the dead body." I guess she might mean that for us there >is unlikely to be kusala reflection on the dead body... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For me, contemplation of death brought to seeking and eventually Dhamma. I have never seen asubha of instanteneous mental moments mentioned in the suttas. But asubha of dead and decaying human body, which is our certain future (unless one is cremated), was mentioned in... satipatthana sutta. Loss of momentary dhammas is not as bad as loss of the body which can last up to, approximately 80-120 years. With best wishes, Alex #129652 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 4:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Direct Knowing of Visible Object t.sastri Dear Nina, - >N: Listening and considering again and again as you often heard here. >Patience! We have to encourage each other to be patient. Yes, patience and courage are needed when the path is not yet clear, otherwise one might give it up. It also takes a steady mind with confidence in the Teachings to develop understanding, I think. Thanks. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > good remark. > Op 31-mrt-2013, om 15:21 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > More important, I would appreciate your thought on how you directly > > know a visible object in the present moment such that it may lead > > to enlightenment. > > I have seen plenty of visible objects for many decades without > > having gone near enlightenment! So it is time to learn the right way. > ----- > N: no, not in one day. Litle by little by little we come to > understand what visible object is, different from shape and form or > persons we believe we see. Doesn't it seem that we see them? So it > takes long to distinguish seeing from thinking of concepts. Listening > and considering again and again as you often heard here. When there > is real detachment, no trying with an idea of self, there are > conditions for awareness, not only of visible object but also of > other realities that appear. We can come to know them as "just a > dhamma", but that is not easy at all. We always take them for > something or someone. Patience! We have to encourage each other to be > patient. > > Nina. > > > > > #129653 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 5:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Direct Knowing of Visible Object tadaomiyamot... Hi Tep One of my most favourite Pali phrases is "Kantiyo paramag na vijjati (There is nothing superior to patient)." What we've been aspiring to attain could be attained just in the matter of days, months, years, several lives, then, it might not be deserved to be what we aspire for. tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Dear Nina, - > > >N: Listening and considering again and again as you often heard here. > >Patience! We have to encourage each other to be patient. > > Yes, patience and courage are needed when the path is not yet clear, otherwise one might give it up. It also takes a steady mind with confidence in the Teachings to develop understanding, I think. > > Thanks. > Tep > === <...> #129654 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 11:10 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. thomaslaw03 Hi Ken H, -"It does not call "a dhamma exists" an extreme view." Yes it is, according to the text, SN 22. 90 (= SA 292). Read and study the meaning of the terms, sabbam atthiiti, sabbam natthiiti, loke natthitaa, loke atthitaa, shown in the text (cf. also SN 35.23 = SA 319). - "... I earnestly recommend you ditch all modern interpretations of the Dhamma; ... " I really do not see your view is particularly 'modern'. Thomas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > --- > <. . .> > > T: According to the SN 22. 90 (= SA 262), to say a dhamma (dharma) exists, this is one extreme; > --- > > KH: I am sure I have the right sutta; it's the Channa Sutta, isn't it? You have quoted it to me several times and I have quoted it back to you. The one I am reading does not say what you have said it says. It does not call "a dhamma exists" an extreme view. > > ------- > > T: to say a dhamma does not exist, this is the other extreme. Not > approaching either extreme, the Buddha teaches the dhamma by the middle. > ------- > > KH: A capital D for Dhamma in that second sentence would have confirmed that you were talking about the Buddha's teaching, (A small d dhamma usually denotes a nama or rupa.) And yes, the Buddha did teach the Dhamma by the middle way. He taught the way of conditioned dhammas – fleeting, impersonal, mental and physical phenomena that exist absolutely. > > ------------ > > T: As I said before, it "means to be devoid (empty) of the two extremes: the self-based view of existence and the self-based view of non-existence. > ------------ > > KH: Thanks, but that doesn't help. I asked if you could clarify the doubletalk "a dhamma exists but not in its own right," "not with its own being" etc. What you have given me is just more of the same. > > A dhamma can't be empty of the two extremes. In fact, the two extremes are, themselves, dhammas. They are sakkaya-ditthi. > > I earnestly recommend you ditch all modern interpretations of the Dhamma; they rely on smoke and mirrors. And they all leave the way open for sakkaya-ditthi. That's their attraction. > > Ken H > #129655 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 11:46 am Subject: Re: Direct Knowing of Visible Object t.sastri Hello Tadao - Thank you for the conversation. >Tadao: What we've been aspiring to attain could be attained just in the matter of days, months, years, several lives, then, it might not be deserved to be what we aspire for. There is always the risk, unless we know exactly what we are doing and why. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "tadaomiyamoto@..." wrote: > > Hi Tep > > One of my most favourite Pali phrases is "Kantiyo paramag na vijjati (There is nothing superior to patient)." > > What we've been aspiring to attain could be attained just in the matter of days, months, years, several lives, then, it might not be deserved to be what we aspire for. > > tadao > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > Dear Nina, - > > > > >N: Listening and considering again and again as you often heard here. > > >Patience! We have to encourage each other to be patient. > > > > Yes, patience and courage are needed when the path is not yet clear, otherwise one might give it up. It also takes a steady mind with confidence in the Teachings to develop understanding, I think. > > > > Thanks. > > Tep > > === > <...> > #129656 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 12:46 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > RE: Well the choice of the type of terminology is presentational, but the meaning of the terminology is not presentational, but substantial. ... > > =============== > > J: Thanks for these comments. I think you're suggesting we discuss meaning first then presentation, and I agree with that approach (without clarity regarding meaning views on presentation have little relevance). Well, I agree with the emphasis - but not sure that questions of terminology do not come into play in determining meaning, esp. when questions of alternate translations come into play. I think that terminology can be put in the service of meaning, and only discussed initially when necessary for clarification. Then the best presentation of terms can be discussed in its own right afterwards, if all that makes any sense. > I'd also go further and say it's better not to mix the two, since this can result in confusion over meaning. So I suggest we discuss meaning and presentation in separate threads. Sounds good, but may be difficult, as mentioned above. > > =============== > > RE: Paramatha dhammas is like that too. When I try to get a good idea of the implications of the term it seems to slip away. I am told that it just means that dhammas are the true unit of existence and experience and therefore are "ultimate." Since they actually do arise they are called "realities," and if that is all there is to it, then I would say the presentational terminology still has problems for me, but at least I would understand that the basic meaning is okay. > > =============== > > J: Regarding the meaning of `sabhava' and `paramattha dhamma', CMA has the following in notes to Ch. I #2: > > << << << > Ultimate realities are things that exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhaava). > These are the dhammas: the final, irreducible components of existence, the ultimate entities which result from a correctly performed analysis of experience. > Such existents admit of no further reduction, but are themselves the final terms of analysis, the true constituents of the complex manifold of experience. > Hence the word `paramattha' is applied to them, which is derived from `parama' = ultimate, highest, final, and `attha' = reality, thing." > >> >> >> > > Now, presentational issues aside, is there anything about this explanation that is not clear? Well I can't say "presentational issues aside" because it has a major influence. For instance, if savhaava is translated as above as "existing by reason of their own intrinsic nature" that may be quite different than it having its "own being," which I still don't quite understand - being has a much broader implication than nature, so I would still appreciate an explanation of what you think is involved in term "own being" and why it is one of the choices for translation. With the translation above, however, I have other questions: 1. What is meant by "intrinsic?" 2. What is meant be "nature?" 3. What is the implication of 'existing by reason of..." In other words, is that saying that dhammas arise because of their intrinsic nature, and if so, what is this nature that causes them to arise? If it is saying that they are distinct as a particular dhamma because of its specific intrinsic nature/characteristic, that is a bit more of a local meaning - that they can be specifically identified. Can you say a bit about how you feel these components are meant, and what these terms mean to convey? For paramatha dhammas, the definition seems pretty straightforward up to a point. However, I have a small problem with them being final irreducible components of experience, since they exist with accompanying cetasikas in order to exist as they do, how these configurations of components affect their nature or characteristic, and how it can be said that they are irreducible while going through three phases of "becoming?" Does their irreducibility apply to all phases, and to the changes they thus undergo, or only to such characteristics of theirs which is transcendent to such change? Thanks, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #129657 From: Tam Bach Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 1:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ayatana tambach Thank you Nina! Anumodana! Tam B  I quote from my Abh in Daily lIfe. The source is mainly the VIsuddhimagga and also the Vibhanga: Book of Analysis, Vibhaònga, II, Analysis of Bases. Also in other parts of the scriptures, including the suttas, there is reference to this classification. #129658 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 1:56 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Howard, if there is a visible object followed by a sound object are you saying that we don't know whether they are in fact facets of the same object, experienced at separate moments, or whether they are indeed separate realities? > -------------------------- > HCW: > I'm not clear on your question. What "same object" are you hypothesizing? Consciousness functions for a bit as seeing consciousness and then moves right on to hearing consciousness. We clearly note the qualitative difference but then, IMO, go too far in conceiving a "sight entity" followed by a separate "sound entity". I think of waves in the ocean: Through thinking they are distinguished, but they are not separate entities except as a matter of convention. > ------------------------------ I think you answered my question better than the way I asked it, so I'll just stick with what you said in response! I do understand what you are saying - and the important point, that the postulating of a discrete separate arising object for each instance of sensory experience [eg visual object] may be mentally creating an object that does not exist in its own right. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129659 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 5:14 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Robert E (and Thomas), --- <. . .> > RE: may be mentally creating an object that does not exist in its own right. --- KH: Since Thomas was unable to tell me, I might as well ask you (again): How would "mentally creating an object that does not exist in its own right" be any different from "mentally creating an object that does not exist in ultimate reality?" In other words, how does a dhamma (as you understand it) differ from a concept? Ken H #129660 From: Linh Hong Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 6:05 pm Subject: Re: Question on Parami honglinhftu It's much clearer. Thanks a million, Nina, Sarah & Jagkrit & all. Anumodhana! Linh #129661 From: "Ai Dinh Le" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 5:41 pm Subject: Re: Feelings and Dreams buddhism_2010 The Minds that have already disappeared are no more existent, and the Minds that are not yet born are still non-existent. Mind Consciousness exists at the present moment only, though the object it takes can be of the past, present or future, real or imaginary. http://www.palikanon.com/english/intro-abhidhamma/chapter_i.htm Before I return to my ideas (correct or incorrect) about the above quote, I would like to say: Hi, My name is Ai Le. I was searching for Milindapanha on the internet, and stumbled on this dream discussion somehow. I have seen this group before, though I never joined it in the past (even only for a while, as far as I know). I know of your member Christine also from E-Sangha (was it the one called E-Sangha?). Because of how I was before ... I replied badly, very angrily, after her moderatoring one of my posts then (won't mention what my post was). It just so happens this dream discussion is hers. I come to this group, not to be a member for any planned length of time, but to say I'm sorry for my speech towards her (as my written reply to her moderatoring at E-Sangha then). And though I hardly know much anything about Abhidhamma, maybe this could help her (I was searching for stuff about what Christine said that "future things do not exist" according to Abhidhamma, to see if it was what Abhidhamma said): The Minds that have already disappeared are no more existent, and the Minds that are not yet born are still non-existent. Mind Consciousness exists at the present moment only, though the object it takes can be of the past, present or future, real or imaginary. Now my comment: it mentions something about the future being able to be an object, REAL or imaginary (I capitalize the word REAL to emphasize it). So a real future object can exist (if the author correctly wrote the sentence to include future objects as being real or imaginary)? I don't know what all this means (like I said, I don't really know anything much about Abhidhamma), but maybe it will solve Christine's dilemma/problem(if she never had the dilemma/problem solved yet). Those quoted sentences are the end sentences of sub-section '12. The Subjective Mind' of Section '1 - Preliminaries' of the the text 'INTRODUCING BUDDHIST ABHIDHAMMA' at this URL: http://www.palikanon.com/english/intro-abhidhamma/chapter_i.htm That's all. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear group, > > I was thinking about citta being one moment of consciousness. My > understanding of the Teachings is that the whole world consists of > just those realities that are experienced through the sense doors in > each brief moment of citta - that there is no future lying waiting, > and no past stored up anywhere - only the present cittas. I realised > that something has been bothering me about this ever since hearing > the Teachings. > > > This is where I have a difficulty. I occasionally experience things > that have a connection with future happenings for myself and for > others. I can't see any explanation of these things I know to be > true, within my present understanding of Buddhism. And yet they do > happen. These things fall into two categories - feelings, and > dreams. They are not particularly earthshaking - there seems to be > no purpose served by having them. > > The feelings consist of occasionally (often only yearly or less > frequently) being suddenly affected by a feeling of such great > strength, with a certain 'flavour' that I have come to recognise as > making it 'one of those' feelings. The pattern I have developed > through my life is to think over each of my loved ones until a > change in the feeling indicates it is connected to that person. I > wait. Within a day, maybe two, a significantly unhappy (most often) > or happy event unexpectedly and unpredictably happens to that > person. Nothing clearer than that. It is never anyone I am worrying > about or about whom I have any information that would lead to an > expectation that they would experience this significant event. > > Dreams happen at about the same frequency and seem to have no > significance whatsoever. An example from the past: Once, just > after I finished high school, and before I started work, I had a > dream. In the dream I saw a workplace and various men and women who > I liked or disliked or was anxious about. It was quite a boring > dream, with one person being particularly unpleasant. There was > something about the 'flavour' of the dream that imprinted it on my > memory, that felt unusual, not like the feel of 'ordinary' > dreams. Six months later, I obtained a position in the Government, > and started work in exactly that workplace It was literally 'a > seeing into the future'. Everything in the dream, the layout and > furnishings of the physical surroundings, and the faces and > physical appearance of the people, and their characters, was exactly > as in real life. I never saw them until six months after the > dream. > > How does this integrate with Teachings of the Abhidhamma and > Buddhism generally? And if it doesn't ....? > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > #129662 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 7:25 pm Subject: Re: Ayatana szmicio Dear Nina and Tam, > When we see, hear or think we believe that a self experiences > objects, but in reality there is the association of the inward > ĺyatana and the outward ĺyatana, the objects ``outside''. This > classification can remind us that all our experiences are dependent > on conditions. We read in the Visuddhimagga (XV, 15), in the section > on the ĺyatanas, about conditioned realities: L: I would not call ayatanas as inward or outward. They are ayatana, while they are there. The meeting place or union is one aspect of them. While 'something' appears, this is the meaning of ayatana. They are there. For example while there is seeing now, there are visible object, eye-base, citta and cetasikas. This are four ayatanas at that moment of arising seeing. While berely thinking, there are only two ayatanas. Manayatana(characteristic of experiencing) and dhammaayatana, like phassa or manasikara. So there are two or four ayatanas, depending on a moment. Ayatana is each moment of experiencing. But we are forgetful to know that. Many different ayatanas right now. Nothing special at all. Like hearing a sound of music or experiencing berely sadness throught mind. Two or four. Nothing more. Best wishes Lukas #129663 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 7:41 pm Subject: Re: Direct Knowing of Visible Object szmicio Dear Tep and Nina, > N: no, not in one day. Litle by little by little we come to > understand what visible object is, different from shape and form or > persons we believe we see. Doesn't it seem that we see them? So it > takes long to distinguish seeing from thinking of concepts. L: Cira kala bhavana, long long time developement. As Acharn says: 'A penny a day'. No control. Best wishes Lukas #129664 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 8:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Invisible hand? nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 31-mrt-2013, om 10:27 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > L: What about environment one lives or friends one lives with? ------ N: Yes, association with the right friends or wrong friends? The same elements attract one another, this is a matter of accumulated inclinations. Thus, accumulation of kusala or akusala. Nina. #129665 From: Tam Bach Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 8:35 pm Subject: Akusala dhamma conditions kusala by way of Upanissaya Paccayo tambach Dear friend, Our friend Linh has spotted that in a translation of the Patthana into Vietnamese. After doing some search, I come upon the passage below, written by Mr. Htoo Naing, who posts here sometime. I would like to hear more comments about this from you all, and from Mr Htoo Naing also of course. Thank you! "Purimaa purimaa akusalaa dhammaa pacchimaanam pacchimaanam kusalaanam dhammaanam kesanci upanissaya paccayena paccayo. Foregoing akusala dhamma may in a way condition the following kusala dhamma. This is upanissaya paccaya and as it is not anantara paccaya these akusala dhamma and kusala dhamma do not have to be proximate each other. Example can be seen in the following case. The foregoing cittas may be dosa cittas or lobha cittas. But after a while when the next following cittas become kusala cittas like offering then this may well be upanissaya paccaya. One may want something with expectation. With the expectation he or she may offer something to someone. But when he or she really offer something there may arise real kusala dhamma. In this case foregoing lobha conditions the following kusala dhamma." #129666 From: "philip" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 9:10 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" philofillet Hi Jagkrit > The answer is we fulfill our wishes all the time when we are seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. Because seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching arise follow our wishes. We fulfill our wishes and wish more of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. We, in fact, don't know that we wish and we don't know we've fulfill our wishes and we don't know that we wish again and again. > > Than Acharn said when we blink our eyes, we already wish. When we walk, we already wish. When we move our hands, we already wish. > > This wishes are so subtle and hard to be aware of and they are arising almost all the time without noticing. > Great reminders, thank you. I also remember either reading in one of Nina's books or hearing in a discussion that we *like* it when we see visible object and know it is a tree. All those moments of liking satisfied constantly through the six doors, all that accumulation of lobha. phil #129667 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 9:18 pm Subject: Re: Akusala dhamma conditions kusala by way of Upanissaya Paccayo szmicio Dear Tam, I also join the question. I would like to hear Mr Htoo, since his posts are very deep and helpful. Personally I think all conditions always goes to the hetupaccaya, that is the first one. Since we must learn more and more what hetu dhammas are now. Like when sadness there must be dosa hetu dhamma. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Tam Bach wrote: > > Dear friend, > Our friend Linh has spotted that in a translation of the Patthana into Vietnamese. After doing some search, I come upon the passage below, written by Mr. Htoo Naing, who posts here sometime. > I would like to hear more comments about this from you all, and from Mr Htoo Naing also of course. Thank you! > "Purimaa purimaa akusalaa dhammaa pacchimaanam pacchimaanam kusalaanam dhammaanam kesanci upanissaya paccayena paccayo. > Foregoing akusala dhamma may in a way condition the following kusala dhamma. This is upanissaya paccaya and as it is not anantara paccaya these akusala dhamma and kusala dhamma do not have to be proximate each other. Example can be seen in the following case. > The foregoing cittas may be dosa cittas or lobha cittas. But after a while when the next following cittas become kusala cittas like offering then this may well be upanissaya paccaya. One may want something with expectation. With the expectation he or she may offer something to someone. But when he or she really offer something there may arise real kusala dhamma. In this case foregoing lobha conditions the following kusala dhamma." > > > #129668 From: "philip" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 9:21 pm Subject: When you are thinking about a deep topic.... philofillet Hi all I heard this today. "When you are thinking about a deep topic there is not understanding of seeing" and the other realities that are appearing now. Someone pointed out that there can be right understanding of the thinking involved. But it is good to be reminded that when we are fascinated with deep topics we are oblivious to many realities that are appearing for the development of understanding *now*... I guess this is why Ajahn Sujin often says things like "is there seeing now?" and "visible object now" and so on. They don't lead themselves to a lot of debate and speculation (well, I guess they did in that long thread) but they are always appearing for the development of understanding, the first small steps towards liberation that must be taken, no short cuts. phil #129669 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 9:26 pm Subject: Re: When you are thinking about a deep topic.... szmicio Dear Phil, > I guess this is why Ajahn Sujin often says things like "is there seeing now?" and "visible object now" and so on. They don't lead themselves to a lot of debate and speculation (well, I guess they did in that long thread) but they are always appearing for the development of understanding, the first small steps towards liberation that must be taken, no short cuts. L: Yes, Acharn stresses that this 10 dvipancavinnanas are only one that does not arises with vitakka, so they are called uppati. The rest cittas are nibbati taking that object with vitakka. Best wishes Lukas #129670 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 9:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question on Parami tadaomiyamot... Hi Linh and Nina, A couple of weeks ago, I asked Kun Sujin about parami and I got very much the same answer as what Kun Nina explained below. One thing which I learned new was that unlike in Mahayana, in Theravada the significance is placed on "non-self". So it is not I who have been accumulating the ten paramis. Also Kun Sujin said that when the Buddha had been accumulating paramis in his countless previous lives, he had done so with understanding of non-self. In other words, it is not at his final moment of enlightenment when he penetrated the characteristic of non-self, but the notion of non-self had always been with his endevour. Again, conforming to what Kun Nina said below, Kun Sujin emphasized the importance of accumulating all kinds of kusala, saying that sati and panna would not grow if one is not sincere about developing all kinds of kusala. tadao <....> --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: As Sarah explained to you, we need all paramis, we have so many > defilements. These makes one too weak to reach the other shore. The > paramis are like medicine and food for us on the long, long way. They > go together with pa~n~naa, our goal is not to "have" them for > ourselves, but to lessen defilements. > You asked about saddhaa, etc. Acharn explained that we do not have to > think of the names of the paramis, but the meaning is: the > development of all kinds of kusala through body, speech and mind. And > as Sarah explained, all paramis support each other and are together. > All good qualities are being developed, saddhaa, confidence, > included. This cetasika arises with each kind of kusala. The ten > paramis are mentioned to help us and encourage us while developing > satipa.t.thaana. Otherwise we may forget certain aspects of kusala, > like patience, khanti. Or equanimity, upekkhaa. Or viriya, effort, > energy or courage. <...> #129671 From: "philip" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 10:10 pm Subject: Re: When you are thinking about a deep topic.... philofillet Hi Lukas > L: Yes, Acharn stresses that this 10 dvipancavinnanas are only one that does not arises with vitakka, so they are called uppati. The rest cittas are nibbati taking that object with vitakka. > Interesting, thanks. Can you say a little bit more about this? What do the "u" and "ni" prefixes mean, and what is bati/pati? Thanks. If the topic wasn't dvipancavinnanas I wouldn't ask... Phil #129672 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 11:25 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Robert & Thomas) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E (and Thomas), > > --- > <. . .> > > RE: may be mentally > creating an object that does not exist in its own right. > --- > > KH: Since Thomas was unable to tell me, I might as well ask you (again): > How would "mentally creating an object that does not exist in its own right" be any different from "mentally creating an object that does not exist in ultimate reality?" In other words, how does a dhamma (as you understand it) differ from a concept? ---------------------------- If I may butt in: IMO *as a separarate reality with own-being/self-existence" it does NOT differ from a concept but exists as such only as a matter of convention. What is single our thinking carves up into a particulate pluality and adopts that our "reality". -------------------------- > > Ken H > =========================== With metta, Howard /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) _______________________________ /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) _______________________________ /Now suppose a man, when dreaming, were to see delightful parks, delightful forests, delightful stretches of land, & delightful lakes, and on awakening were to see nothing. In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: 'The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a dream, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.' Seeing this with right discernment, as it actually is, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace./ (From the Potaliya Sutta) #129673 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Mon Apr 1, 2013 11:49 pm Subject: Re: When you are thinking about a deep topic.... jagkrit2012 Dear Phil > P: I heard this today. "When you are thinking about a deep topic there is not understanding of seeing" and the other realities that are appearing now. Someone pointed out that there can be right understanding of the thinking involved. But it is good to be reminded that when we are fascinated with deep topics we are oblivious to many realities that are appearing for the development of understanding *now*... JJ: It is so true. Than Acharn once said that sometimes "a word" can be hindrance to understand reality. Even just a normal word (not a deep topic) like "dhamma". When one think about dhamma, does it lead to reality that appears right now? or just a word we know only the meaning of it. If it is that way, the word "dhamma" is definitely hindrance to understanding. This is why when one think about sophisticate teaching, it is very difficult to actually understand their realities but thinking about wording. However, if one aware of study dhamma for only understanding, intellectual understanding can clarify more about how dhamma functions without self. That way, one can recall back to right this moment. =================== >P: I guess this is why Ajahn Sujin often says things like "is there seeing now?" and "visible object now" and so on. They don't lead themselves to a lot of debate and speculation (well, I guess they did in that long thread) but they are always appearing for the development of understanding, the first small steps towards liberation that must be taken, no short cuts. JJ: I can't agree more. Thank you Jagkrit #129674 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 12:13 am Subject: Re: Feelings and Dreams sarahprocter... Dear Ai Le, Welcome to DSG! So now you've taken 'the plunge' here, why not tell us where you live and a little more about your background and interest in the Teachings. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ai Dinh Le" wrote: > > The Minds that have already disappeared are no more existent, and the Minds that are not yet born are still non-existent. Mind Consciousness exists at the present moment only, though the object it takes can be of the past, present or future, real or imaginary. > > http://www.palikanon.com/english/intro-abhidhamma/chapter_i.htm .... S: In other words, there is only ever the present moment of consciousness (citta), no matter the object. It helps a lot to know there is only ever one world through one door-way at a time. ... > > Now my comment: it mentions something about the future being able to be an object, REAL or imaginary (I capitalize the word REAL to emphasize it). So a real future object can exist (if the author correctly wrote the sentence to include future objects as being real or imaginary)? .... S: Like now, there is just a moment of seeing visible object, hearing sound or thinking about an object. When thinking thinks, it can think about anything. It can think about the visible object or sound or it can think about a red rose or a flying elephant. It can think about the past, future or present. At the moment of thinking about a the future, the (present) thinking is real, but the concept about the future is not real. It is imagined. There can be direct understanding of seeing, visible object, hearing, sound or thinking, but concepts, such as those about the future, can only be thought about. Only realities can be directly known. ... >I don't know what all this means (like I said, I don't really know anything much about Abhidhamma), .... S: I hope you'll continue this useful discussion which I'm sure others will appreciate as well. Please let me know what is clear and unclear so far. Metta Sarah ====== #129675 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 12:25 am Subject: Re: Direct Knowing of Visible Object t.sastri Hello Lukas, - Thank you for the comment: >L: Cira kala bhavana, long long time developement. As Acharn says: 'A penny a day'. No control. > T: Heedfulness is the determining factor that reduces the time of mental development. "All fabrications (sankhaara) are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." Those were the Tathagata's last words. [Parinibbana Sutta] Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > > Dear Tep and Nina, > > > N: no, not in one day. Litle by little by little we come to > > understand what visible object is, different from shape and form or > > persons we believe we see. Doesn't it seem that we see them? So it > > takes long to distinguish seeing from thinking of concepts. > > L: Cira kala bhavana, long long time developement. As Acharn says: 'A penny a day'. No control. > > Best wishes > Lukas > #129676 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 12:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Akusala dhamma conditions kusala by way of Upanissaya Paccayo nilovg Dear Tam Bach, Op 1-apr-2013, om 11:35 heeft Tam Bach het volgende geschreven: > "Purimaa purimaa akusalaa dhammaa pacchimaanam pacchimaanam > kusalaanam dhammaanam kesanci upanissaya paccayena paccayo. > Foregoing akusala dhamma may in a way condition the following > kusala dhamma. This is upanissaya paccaya and as it is not anantara > paccaya these akusala dhamma and kusala dhamma do not have to be > proximate each other. Example can be seen in the following case. > The foregoing cittas may be dosa cittas or lobha cittas. But after > a while when the next following cittas become kusala cittas like > offering then this may well be upanissaya paccaya. One may want > something with expectation. With the expectation he or she may > offer something to someone. But when he or she really offer > something there may arise real kusala dhamma. In this case > foregoing lobha conditions the following kusala dhamma." ----- N: In addition, I quote from my Conditions: The natural decisive support-condition, pakatúpanissaya paccaya, includes many different aspects. Kusala citta that arose before can be a natural decisive support-condition for akusala citta arising afterwards; we may cling to the kusala we performed or we may have conceit about it. We read in the “Paěěhĺna” ( same section, § 423, II b): “Confidence, precept, learning, generosity, wisdom is related to lust, hate, delusion, conceit, wrong views, wish, by (natural) strong dependence-condition.” Knowledge of the Dhamma may be a natural decisive support-condition for conceit or for wrong view. Someone may have studied the Dhamma but he may not consider nĺma and rúpa appearing in daily life and have wrong understanding of the practice of vipassanĺ. Or someone may have confidence in a teacher who practises in the wrong way and thus he may follow the wrong practice. Kusala can lead to aversion, it can be a natural decisive support- condition for aversion. When we make an effort to help someone else, that person may not appreciate our help and then we are likely to have aversion. If we do not study the different conditions we may not understand that the performing of good deeds can be a condition for the arising of akusala citta. If we do not develop satipatthĺna with the purpose of eradicating akusala, the kusala we perform can, without our noticing it, be a natural decisive support-condition for akusala citta. ------- Nina. #129677 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 12:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities nilovg Dear Alex, Op 31-mrt-2013, om 19:16 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > >I heard Ajahn Sujin say that all conditioned realities have the > aspect >of asubha. She said "I think the asubha of rising and > falling away is >better than the dead body." I guess she might mean > that for us there >is unlikely to be kusala reflection on the dead > body... ------ N:No, she did not mean that. I also heard her say: is that which arises and falls away beautiful? No. It is so short, it does not last, where is the beauty? Nothing to enjoy. ---- Nina. #129678 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 12:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] dosa nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 31-mrt-2013, om 10:40 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > I feel sadness to the big extent. It pierce my body and I feel > domanassa vedana in my body. ------ N: Bodily feeling is dukkha vedanaa and it accompanies vipaakacitta, body-consciousness. It is true that sadness can condition unpleasant bodily feeling, when the loss is so great. I know. But remember what Acharn said: what is now today will be yesterday tomorrow. Then you attach less importance to such moments, it is gone, gone, as you said yourself several times. ------ Nina. #129679 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 1:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? nilovg Dear Tadao, Op 31-mrt-2013, om 6:53 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende geschreven: > This may be an irrational and rather optimistic expression, but I > would like to regard "an invisible hand" not as a "cold-blooded > control-freak", but as a "warm-hearted guiding hand". ----- N: It helps to think of it as one's own kamma of the past, and that may be akusala kamma, not very warmhearted. It is not like a deity. ---- Nina. #129680 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 3:15 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hi Nina, Alex - >N: I also heard her say: is that which arises and falls away beautiful? No. It is so short, it does not last, where is the beauty? Nothing to enjoy. Allow me to say a few words. I think there are two issues. 1. That which arises and falls away is dukkha. Whatever thing that is dukkha, it should not be perceived as 'this is mine', 'this is what I am' or 'this is my self'. [MN 22] 2. Perceiving asubha as subha is a vipallaasa. [Vipallaasa Sutta. AN 4.49] Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Op 31-mrt-2013, om 19:16 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > > >I heard Ajahn Sujin say that all conditioned realities have the > > aspect >of asubha. She said "I think the asubha of rising and > > falling away is >better than the dead body." I guess she might mean > > that for us there >is unlikely to be kusala reflection on the dead > > body... > ------ > N:No, she did not mean that. I also heard her say: is that which > arises and falls away beautiful? No. > It is so short, it does not last, where is the beauty? Nothing to enjoy. > ---- > Nina. > > > > > #129681 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 4:52 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > hallo Rob and Jon, > > I see Jon has asked an important question here Rob and given important information re dhammas. > > I agree with what Jon has written about nama and rupa and would like to add that if there were no nama dhaammas and rupa dhammas then there would be no 'us' I agree with that - there is no "us," just consciousness [citta] arising and experiencing nama and rupa at specific moments. I hope that generally accords with your understanding, though we may differ on specifics. > Cittas have realities as objects e.g. other namas or rupas, or citta can have concept as object, e.g. earth kasina which can be object of jhana citta. That was a good addition that I left out, and I agree that as citta also engages thoughts, it can have concept as object as well. If concepts are not known to be concepts, the citta that engages them and takes them for realities will be deluded. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #129682 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 5:06 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E (and Thomas), > > --- > <. . .> > > RE: may be mentally > creating an object that does not exist in its own right. > --- > > KH: Since Thomas was unable to tell me, I might as well ask you (again): > How would "mentally creating an object that does not exist in its own right" be any different from "mentally creating an object that does not exist in ultimate reality?" In other words, how does a dhamma (as you understand it) differ from a concept? Although snipping unnecessary writing is next to godliness, I would appreciate a larger segment of the post to see the context of what I was saying. The idea of "creating a concept that does not exist" in general does not give me a great idea of what I was referring to. I will guess for now that I was talking about one's view of a dhamma as a discrete frozen object which lives for a tiny moment with its "characteristic" intact the entire time it exists, which makes it a kind of absolute object that can be identified and have all its attributes clearly listed and understood, as though there were no changes taking place during its momentary existence, which is not accurate. That view creates a view of a dhamma that is false, because a dhamma is constantly changing. The idea that anicca, for instance, is a "frozen characteristic" that somehow appears in a single frozen moment of a dhamma's existence, is not correct, because the dhamma is changing, demonstrating anicca in action, during its entire brief existence. According to Abhidhamma and commentary, there are three phases of existence for a dhamma. This both contradicts the idea that the dhamma is the absolute smallest measure of reality that cannot be further broken down -- because it is being broken down into three smaller phases each one of which is different by virtue of its phase, and thus has a differently composed dhamma within its existence -- and that the dhammas components are frozen and definite. The dhamma may not be further broken down in commentary, but the fact is that it could be specified when a particular cetasika is acting and how that action coordinates with other cetasikas and how this coordinates with the three phases. In other words, there are micro-actions taking place within the dhamma's existence that are smaller than the dhamma as a single unit, and do break it down further. In addition the actions of these cetasikas is phased as well and break down into the three phases of arising, change while standing, falling away, just as the dhamma does, and so there is no moment at which the dhamma is "fixed in place" and can be defined as x or y. In addition, the three phases cannot be static either. The arising of a dhamma does not happen in a single "jump" and then "jump" again to change while standing. The three phases of arising, change while standing/functioning and falling away also undergo constant change in order to live out their conditional existence. The three phases is also a convenient breakdown that represents constant change, so the whole idea of a single definable dhamma that has a definite existence at a given moment is just not accurate. It is a more-or-less accurate summary but does not fully describe the nature of the dhamma as it is either in a constant state of arising change, functioning change or falling away change until it is completely gone. Anicca is continuous and absolute and denies the existence of any static object at all. That's it's entire point. How is this different from imagining a concept and mistaking it for a dhamma? It doesn't differ at all! It is another false concept mistaken for a reality. Instead of mistaking a "car" for a reality instead of a concept, you are mistaking a "dhamma" for a reality when it is really a concept as well. The dhamma that exists in a state of constant change is not a concept, it is a reality, but the description of it as a static entity is not accurate, and is just another false concept. It is even denied by the Abhidhamma and commentary descriptions themselves, and yet the idea of a static dhamma with a fixed, unchanging characteristic persists in the mind of those who want a convenient model to refer to. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #129683 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 9:50 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Robert E (and Thomas), --- <. . .> > RE: Although snipping unnecessary writing is next to godliness, I would appreciate a larger segment of the post to see the context of what I was saying. The idea of "creating a concept that does not exist" in general does not give me a great idea of what I was referring to. --- KH: That's an interesting point about snipping being next to godliness. :-) Snipping a DSG post is, of course, a concept and so neither inherently kusala nor akusala, but it is an indication, isn't it? It indicates that the snipper probably knows the difference between kusala and akusala. But I apologise for excessive snipping in this case. Here is the full text (from you to Howard): ----- > RE: I think you answered my question better than the way I asked it, so I'll just stick with what you said in response! I do understand what you are saying – and the important point, that the postulating of a discrete separate arising object for each instance of sensory experience [eg visual object] may be mentally creating an object that does not exist in its own right. ----- KH: My question was how can something exist, but not exist in its own right? ----------- > RE: I will guess for now that I was talking about one's view of a dhamma as a discrete frozen object which lives for a tiny moment with its "characteristic" intact the entire time it exists, which makes it a kind of absolute object that can be identified and have all its attributes clearly listed and understood, as though there were no changes taking place during its momentary existence, ----------- KH: Yes, that is what you were talking about: a conditioned paramattha dhamma (absolute reality). -------------- > RE: which is not accurate. ------------- KH: I am always happy to discuss definitions of "paramattha dhamma" but on this occasion I am asking about *your* preferred definition. You say a dhamma "exists but not in its own right." What does that mean? Can you give a simile? ------------------- > RE: That view creates a view of a dhamma that is false, because a dhamma is constantly changing. ------------------- KH: When you say a dhamma is constantly changing what do you mean by "dhamma" in that instance? I prefer to say a conditioned dhamma is a reality that "bears the anicca characteristic," I think the term "constantly changing" might be more suited to conventional understanding. But even in the conventionally known world, what sort of "thing" could be constantly changing? --------------------------- > RE: The idea that anicca, for instance, is a "frozen characteristic" that somehow appears in a single frozen moment of a dhamma's existence, is not correct, because the dhamma is changing, demonstrating anicca in action, during its entire brief existence. -------------------------- KH: So you say, but that doesn't explain how there can be some "thing" (something that exists) that doesn't exist for even one, single, moment. Don't you mean there is nothing at all? Don't you mean there is only change? But even if there was "only change" what would that mean? Change from what? To what? ---------- > RE: According to Abhidhamma and commentary, there are three phases of existence for a dhamma. This both contradicts the idea that the dhamma is the absolute smallest measure of reality that cannot be further broken down – <. . .> ---------- KH: I think you will find from the texts that it is still the same dhamma. To give a simile: a person goes from youth to middle age to old age, but he is still the same person. It's the same with a dhamma, except ultimately so. It is the same dhamma, in three phases. ----------------- > : <. . .> so the whole idea of a single definable dhamma that has a definite existence at a given moment is just not accurate. <. . .> ----------------- KH: As I have said, you will always find someone at DSG ready to discuss the Tipitaka's definition of "dhamma." Meanwhile, however, I would like to discuss your definition. When you concede that there are such things as dhammas, but add that they do not exist absolutely ("in and of themselves" etc) what do you mean? Ken H #129684 From: "willthlong" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 7:39 am Subject: Looking for a dhamma group in Hanoi willthlong Hello everyone, I came across DSG by chance when I was googling for a Buddhist group in Hanoi. I found a topic of someone who was planning to go to Hanoi to learn about Buddhism, and in the reply someone mentioned about BSG members in Hanoi. So I hoping maybe some of you, if you're on this forum actively, can help me in search for a Theravada Buddhist center, if there is any in Hanoi. I've been making some research on Buddhism in Vietnam and found out that most traditions are Mahayana. I don't discriminate the traditions, but once I went to a Mahayana temple with couple of my friends. I spent half a day there taking part in activities: ceremonies, meditation session, dhamma talks, and a group lunch with monks. The retreat didn't appeal to me. I felt it was lacking practicality and genuineness - of course this is quite subjective of me. But then, I never had chance to go to a Theravada temple, so I'm not sure about my own expectations. Well anyways, what I'm looking for is a place in Hanoi, where I can go and listen to the teachings, and learn more about meditation, preferably in English. I'm probably picky here regarding English, but it's never harm to ask (maybe some English speaking teachers come visit sometimes?). I'm actually a Vietnamese, and I speak "everyday" Vietnamese fluently, but English is my first choice when it comes to learning. Though I'd be happy with Vietnamese teaching as well, as long as they come from a good teacher. Can someone advise? I also welcome the idea of meeting like-minded people in the area, with whom I can discuss Dhamma from time to time. And if we click perhaps we can organize or go on retreats together, to temples or meditation retreats etc. So please let me know if any of you would like to connect. I'm a 30-year old easy going guy with a somewhat westernized mindset. I'd appreciate any advise. -Tung #129685 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 8:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Invisible hand? tadaomiyamot... Hi Nina, Of course, I do understand what you are saying, but it's better face one's daily life positively than negatively, fearing what would happen next moment in our daily life. tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tadao, > Op 31-mrt-2013, om 6:53 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende > geschreven: > > > This may be an irrational and rather optimistic expression, but I > > would like to regard "an invisible hand" not as a "cold-blooded > > control-freak", but as a "warm-hearted guiding hand". > ----- > N: It helps to think of it as one's own kamma of the past, and that > may be akusala kamma, not very warmhearted. It is not like a deity. > ---- > Nina. > > > > > #129686 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 12:21 pm Subject: Re: dosa jagkrit2012 Dear Lukas >L: I feel sadness to the big extent. It pierce my body and I feel domanassa vedana in my body. JJ: I always think about what Wojtech has said "Sorry, it is not "your" problem". No you who were sad. No your body which was torn apart. And again no "you" who feel domanassa vadana (it should be dukka vadana) in "no your" body. Sorry, that's reality. There is dukka but no one's dukka. Sincerely Jagkrit #129687 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 12:50 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. kenhowardau Hi Howard, -------- > H: If I may butt in: IMO *as a separate reality with own-being/self-existence" it does NOT differ from a concept but exists as such only as a matter of convention. What is single our thinking carves up into a particulate plurality and adopts that our "reality". -------- KH: Thanks for giving a straight answer. I think you believe there is ultimately only nibbana and anything else is just a mistaken view of nibbana. There's not much else to say, is there? :-) We are talking about two totally different teachings with totally different goals. The teaching I am interested in says there is dukkha, and dukkha should be understood, and there is the cause of dukkha, etc. Yours says there is only nibbana. I think you have quoted "Look! Look" as being the path. I, of course, would ask what exactly is "looking" and who is it that looks? But I suppose you would answer "ultimately nibbana." (?) Ken H #129688 From: Tam Bach Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 1:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Akusala dhamma conditions kusala by way of Upanissaya Paccayo tambach Dear Nina, Thank you for your reply! The  reason I asked the question is because I am inclined to think there must be a difference in the way kusala dhammas condition other kusala dhammas- especially understanding, and the away kusala dhammas condition akusala and vice-versa. If the dependence-condition on both case  were exactly the same, there would be no point of talking about the right path, where only moments of right understanding lead to other moments of right understanding. Then one would be able to say: I might be practicing with lobha, but it can condition moment of understanding later, by way of upanissaya paccayo, which doesn't seem right to me. May be there is something to do with major condition and supportive condition? Any further comment ? Metta, Tam “Confidence, precept, learning, generosity, wisdom is related to lust, hate, delusion, conceit, wrong views, wish, by (natural) strong dependence-condition.” #129689 From: Tam Bach Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 1:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Looking for a dhamma group in Hanoi tambach Hello Tung, Very glad to know you are interested in the Buddha's teaching as preserved in the Theravada tradition. Our group is indeed in Hanoi, many are DSG members  whose posts you might see here sometime. We meet several times a week and discuss the Dhamma together, in Vietnamese :-). I will write you off list to let you know how to meet us, and it will be a pleasure for us all to welcome a new Dhamma friend. You should also keep posting on the list here, it is a great place to learn as there are many knowledgeable and skillful people who are always ready to share their understanding, and in English :-). Metta, Tam B  I came across DSG by chance when I was googling for a Buddhist group in Hanoi. I found a topic of someone who was planning to go to Hanoi to learn about Buddhism, and in the reply someone mentioned about BSG members in Hanoi. So I hoping maybe some of you, if you're on this forum actively, can help me in search for a Theravada Buddhist center, if there is any in Hanoi. #129690 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 3:39 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > KH: That's an interesting point about snipping being next to godliness. :-) Snipping a DSG post is, of course, a concept and so neither inherently kusala nor akusala, but it is an indication, isn't it? It indicates that the snipper probably knows the difference between kusala and akusala. That's an interesting point in its own right [in and of itself. :-) ] If one knows the difference between kusala and akusala on that sort of conceptual level of "snipping" does it carry over into understanding momentary kusala and akusala when they arise? > But I apologise for excessive snipping in this case. Here is the full text (from you to Howard): > ----- > > RE: I think you answered my question better than the way I asked it, so I'll just stick with what you said in response! I do understand what you are saying – and the important point, that the postulating of a discrete separate arising object for each instance of sensory experience [eg visual object] may be mentally creating an object that does not exist in its own right. > ----- > > KH: My question was how can something exist, but not exist in its own right? That is a bit of a misreading of what I said. I am certainly not saying that a dhamma does not exist. I have stated positively that a dhamma does exist. What I am saying is that the way in which dhammas exist/occur may be inaccurately understood. I am further saying that such a misunderstanding would create a false idea of a dhamma and that such a conceptual object would not exist. I would further say that the idea that a dhamma exists as a static object is wrong, and thus "such a dhamma" - that is, one that is misunderstood in that way, does not exist. But certainly actual dhammas do exist. The question is how they actually exist as opposed to how we think they exist. I am arguing that they exist in constant change and action, and that they never stand still to be pinned down, even for a micro-moment. I think the texts support the view that the dhamma is in a state of constant change and activity, from the time it arises until it falls away completely. As for how something can exist and not exist "in and of itself," it would be possible to say that a dhamma exists completely dependent on conditions and not independently in any way shape or form, and such a formulation would postulate that the dhamma does indeed exist -- subject to, controlled by, arisen from and driven by -- conditions; but that it does not exist on its own, of its own, from its own, or containing or owning its "own being" or "own nature." It may indeed have a specific nature, ie, a way of functioning that is specific to it, but it does not own or control such nature. Such nature is just part of the way it arises due to conditions. It is not self-enclosed, independent, or ever free of conditions, so how can it *have, contain or own* its nature, being or way of behaving? In other words, I am exercising caution in attributing characteristics to dhammas in a way that seems to ascribe will or ownership. I think their characteristics are also given by conditions, not by themselves, as if they have some inherent nature prior to arising, or that such nature is anything other than fully conditional. I hope at least that clarifies the intent of my objections and clarifications. > ----------- > > RE: I will guess for now that I was talking about one's view of a dhamma as a discrete frozen object which lives for a tiny moment with its "characteristic" intact the entire time it exists, which makes it a kind of absolute object that can be identified and have all its attributes clearly listed and understood, as though there were no changes taking place during its momentary existence, > ----------- > > KH: Yes, that is what you were talking about: a conditioned paramattha dhamma (absolute reality). > > -------------- > > RE: which is not accurate. > ------------- > > KH: I am always happy to discuss definitions of "paramattha dhamma" but on this occasion I am asking about *your* preferred definition. You say a dhamma "exists but not in its own right." What does that mean? Can you give a simile? I think that what I meant was that a false image of a paramatha dhamma does not exist, but it is also true that a dhamma exists fully conditionally and not "in its own right," as if it were produced independently by itself and enjoyed some sort of personal existence apart from continuously developing conditions which give it a temporary appearance before it disappears into the continued changes in conditions. > ------------------- > > RE: That view creates a view of a dhamma that is false, because a dhamma is constantly changing. > ------------------- > > KH: When you say a dhamma is constantly changing what do you mean by "dhamma" in that instance? I mean a momentarily arising function or event that really exists and then falls away. I prefer not to call it an "object" since that gives it a kind of fixedness I don't think it has. > I prefer to say a conditioned dhamma is a reality that "bears the anicca characteristic," I think the term "constantly changing" might be more suited to conventional understanding. I think that the dhamma really is constantly changing and that this is the evidence of the anicca characteristic. There is nothing conventional about a direct description that is either true or not true. Are you saying a dhamma does not undergo constant change? I reference scripture when I say that it partakes of three phases of existence and these all represent changes in the dhamma's momentary life-span, so I don't see this as conventional, but in fact more specific than saying it "bears the anicca characteristic' which really doesn't say how such a characteristic is expressed by the dhamma, or even what the anicca characteristic is. Do you have a handy definition of the anicca characteristic to compare with mine of "constant change?" > But even in the conventionally known world, what sort of "thing" could be constantly changing? All of them. Nothing is unchanging for even a moment. The sense that it stays the same is just an illusion born of lack of careful inspection. Ever see an electron stand still? They don't. > --------------------------- > > RE: The idea that anicca, for instance, is a "frozen characteristic" that somehow appears in a single frozen moment of a dhamma's existence, is not correct, because the dhamma is changing, demonstrating anicca in action, during its entire brief existence. > -------------------------- > > KH: So you say, but that doesn't explain how there can be some "thing" (something that exists) that doesn't exist for even one, single, moment. It exists alright, as a constantly changing specific process. Visual object is still object of seeing, but it just doesn't sit still being the same the whole time - it rises, performs its function and falls away - all of these are changes and are themselves filled with micro-changes in order to complete each phase. It's like taking a walk - if I am walking am I still me? Am I still performing the "walking" function? Do I still exist? Am I not constantly changing - walking from one place to the next, stepping, moving etc.? I can be in a state of change and still exist. So do dhammas. They are not static, but they do exist, for a moment, and during that moment they enjoy changes due to micro-moments in their arising, functioning and falling away. Why do you think the commentaries say the middle phase is "change while standing?" That is about a dhamma - what do you think it means? > Don't you mean there is nothing at all? Don't you mean there is only change? No - I mean what I say. If a rocket ship shoots up to Mars and is moving the whole time, losing some parts that burn up in the atmosphere, etc., does that mean it doesn't exist? Of course not. So you are making up some weird stuff out of what I am saying, which is all perfectly normal. I am talking about *change,* not nonexistence. > But even if there was "only change" what would that mean? Change from what? To what? > I didn't say there was only change. I said that the dhamma, which is a functional reality, is in a state of constant change, doesn't stand still. That doesn't mean it is "made out of change" or any other weird stuff like that. It is just changing at all times, moving, functioning, getting older, then disappearing, just like us. :-) > ---------- > > RE: According to Abhidhamma and commentary, there are three phases of existence for a dhamma. This both contradicts the idea that the dhamma is the absolute smallest measure of reality that cannot be further broken down – <. . .> > ---------- > > KH: I think you will find from the texts that it is still the same dhamma. Yeah? What exactly does that mean. Of course it's the same dhamma, just like you are still the same person if you get old or if you lose a leg; but your actual substance and structure are different from one phase to the next, even if you are more or less the same guy. And a dhamma is the same dhamma, but different at each stage as it undergoes its changes as well. I'm not saying it switches to some other dhamma or suddenly becomes something else, just that it is undergoing changes at all times and is not *exactly* the same at any given time. > To give a simile: a person goes from youth to middle age to old age, but he is still the same person. To say that is really just a convention. "The same person" is a very inaccurate concept. Sure, the person is continuous and identifiable, but not actually *the same* as before. Are you really the same as you were 20 years ago? Not really. > It's the same with a dhamma, except ultimately so. It is the same dhamma, in three phases. That's partly true, but not very accurate. I'm talking more microscopically about the changes, not the sameness. If the same dhamma goes through radical changes, how same is it? it's a matter of degree. It does undergo changes through its brief career, that is what I am saying. When it finishes functioning and is falling away, it's not doing the same stuff at that point it was a micro-moment ago. It's different. > ----------------- > > : <. . .> so the whole idea of a single definable dhamma that has a > definite existence at a given moment is just not accurate. <. . .> > ----------------- > > KH: As I have said, you will always find someone at DSG ready to discuss the Tipitaka's definition of "dhamma." Meanwhile, however, I would like to discuss your definition. When you concede that there are such things as dhammas, but add that they do not exist absolutely ("in and of themselves" etc) what do you mean? I think I've explained pretty well. I'm more interested in the details than the word "dhamma" but I don't think my definition is different than yours, except that I don't think it is "the exact same" at any point, nor is it "something else," it is just a functional reality that undergoes change until it falls away. We could be more specific in a simile and I think I could make the point, but I'll wait til next round. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #129691 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 3:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities epsteinrob Hi Tep and Nina. What about the sobhana dhammas? Are they not defined as beautiful? Thanks, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi Nina, Alex - > > >N: I also heard her say: is that which arises and falls away beautiful? No. > It is so short, it does not last, where is the beauty? Nothing to enjoy. > > Allow me to say a few words. I think there are two issues. > 1. That which arises and falls away is dukkha. Whatever thing that is dukkha, it should not be perceived as 'this is mine', 'this is what I am' or 'this is my self'. [MN 22] > 2. Perceiving asubha as subha is a vipallaasa. [Vipallaasa Sutta. AN 4.49] > > Tep > === > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > > Dear Alex, > > Op 31-mrt-2013, om 19:16 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > > > > >I heard Ajahn Sujin say that all conditioned realities have the > > > aspect >of asubha. She said "I think the asubha of rising and > > > falling away is >better than the dead body." I guess she might mean > > > that for us there >is unlikely to be kusala reflection on the dead > > > body... > > ------ > > N:No, she did not mean that. I also heard her say: is that which > > arises and falls away beautiful? No. > > It is so short, it does not last, where is the beauty? Nothing to enjoy. > > ---- > > Nina. > > > > > > > > > > > #129692 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 4:04 pm Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member epsteinrob Hi Tep! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi old & new DSG members, - > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > following Sarah's encouragement. [She wrote in an email: Maybe you can > drop by to say 'hi' sometime :-)] So I thought : why not? Why don't I > go there to renew friendship with old members (some are young, though) > and get to meet new members too? Thanks to Sarah's friendly suggestion. > So, guys, how are y'll doing? > Truly,Tep=== Great to see you here, Tep - I have known you on three different groups, and always appreciate your discussions. I hope your own group is still going well - I still owe you some more visits over there! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #129693 From: "philip" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 5:37 pm Subject: Re: When you are thinking about a deep topic.... philofillet Hi Lukas, Jagkrit, all I rec'd the following very helpful note off list: Achan spoke of uppati and nibbati several times when I was at Thai and English sessions at the Foundation in Feb. They are another way of classifying cittas. As Lukas said, uppati refers to the 10 (5 pairs) dvipancavinnanas. These are vipakka cittas and do not require vitakka to arise with them. This is because they arise with kamma as a condition. All of the other cittas are nippati. They arise with vitakka - they need it in order to experience their object. In other words uppati and nippati cittas arise because of different conditions. The various classifications of dhammas can help us to think of them in different ways. All of the classifications are only for the purpose of helping us to understand. They can all be understood now as they are constantly arising and falling away. (End of note) Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: #129694 From: Nguyen Thanh Tam Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 1:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "Wish" thanhtaam Hi Jagkrit, ​​Come back to Than Acharn question: Do you fulfill your wishes? The answer is we fulfill our wishes all the time when we are seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. Because seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching arise follow our wishes. We fulfill our wishes and wish more of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. We, in fact, don't know that we wish and we don't know we've fulfill our wishes and we don't know that we wish again and again. Than Acharn said when we blink our eyes, we already wish. When we walk, we already wish. When we move our hands, we already wish. ​ ​=> This is very good reminder. Does the word "wish" mentioned here mean the cetasika "chanda" or "cetana" (intention)? All the best, Jr. Tam​ #129695 From: "Lukas" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 7:38 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" szmicio Dear Jr.Tam, > Than Acharn said when we blink our eyes, we already wish. When we walk, we > already wish. When we move our hands, we already wish. > ​ > ​=> This is very good reminder. Does the word "wish" mentioned here mean > the cetasika "chanda" or "cetana" (intention)? L: All of them. With lobha hetu dhamma, comes chanda(a wish-to do) and cetana(intention to do). The 3 of them are dhammaayatana, not ours. Best wishes Lukas #129696 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 7:39 pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Books sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > I am interested to do dhamma books dana. If you want it, please indicate to me off list and what book you want and the mailing address. I will then reply to you. Please note the books should be Theravada books that are translation of suttas or ancient commentaries or Abhidhamma. .... S: This is a very generous offer - anumodana! I remember that before you sent out some of the BPS Bodhi translations of suttas with commentaries to members here. Highly recommended if anyone would like to benefit and has limited means or doesn't know how to find these precious resources. Metta Sarah ==== #129697 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 7:57 pm Subject: Re: Question on Parami sarahprocter... Dear Linh, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Linh Hong wrote: > > Thank Sarah for such quick help! > > I share the same ideas that developing panna is a long long process and when we all were born with kilesas, if there is no support from other qualities: dana, sila,nekkhama,...,it will so hard to achieve panna parami. However, i'm still little confused. Somewhat i still think that panna is the only thing that we need to develop, and others come later. Seems i've mixed all qualities in one panna. Can we make it clearer? .... S: The most important aspect of the development of panna is the relinquishment of the idea of self, the giving up of the idea that it is *we* who develops panna or can *do* anything at all. For such understanding to develop, there has to be a lot of listening to and careful consideration of all kinds of dhammas, all kinds of realities. Usually, there's too much impatience for results, too much attachment, a lack of honesty about what is conditioned at the present moment, not enough determination or resolution with regard to following the path, not enough confidence in the value of just understanding what is conditioned already. So, we can see that panna needs the support of all these other qualities, paramis, to support its growth, otherwise there's no way to overcome the great accumulation of unwholesome tendencies and, in particular, the very strong idea of a Self that can achieve results and direct life, in addition to the strong ideas of what is seen, heard and so on as being people and things. ... > > One more question! > > Why we don't have some other paramis such as sati parami, saddha parami,...etc...I mean we have all 19 sobha cetasikas. When sobha one arises, then akusala cannot arise, and with panna eqquiped, it can be parami? ... S: Actually, *we* don't have any parami (perfections). When there are conditions for awareness, confidence and other beautiful factors to arise, they arise. That's all. So the "why?" questions all come down to conditions, many complex conditions. ... > > Hope you can understand my "clumsy English". ... S: No problem at all..... :-) I really appreciate the questions and considerations. Metta Sarah ==== #129698 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 8:04 pm Subject: Re: "Is that enough to develop understanding?" sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > >S: Just visible object now appearing. Just seeing now which sees it. That's all! ... >P: It is enough, if left alone, but so many accumulated kilesa that condition the demanding of more from understanding,the needing of more. As Nina pointed out, I mention the possibility/probability that we seek comfort from Dhamma. I am in that situation at the moment. Went to see the film Amour, about the elderly couple going through the "indignities" of old age, illness and death together. It was too soon after seeing my mother's last hardships, and too close to my recurring worries about what is to come for Naomi and I. ... S: I also watched in on my flight here from Sydney (but the end got chopped off by arrival announcements!). Whatever happens, just dhammas, just very ordinary, as Ajahn Sujin would say. Yes, not for everyone, but we never know when sati and panna will arise unexpectedly. Anytime at all. ... > > Only Nama and rupa, Ven Dhammadaro talks about how people can say this with confidence, saddha. If there is saddha, understanding must be kusala, therefore with alobha. Like all kusala, saddha is occasional, arising due to conditions. I am grateful to have friends who speak of the true Dhamma. No feelgood falseties of the kind propagated by Mahayana (in Japan at least.) > > Only Nama and rupa, with a capital N because this damn phone won't allow me to write it otherwise. .... S: Yes, only nama and rupa, even when cursing about the phone:-)) Always back to this moment, whatever is conditioned now is real and can be known. Any chance of joining us, Annie & Lan in KK beg June? Metta Sarah ===== #129699 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 8:20 pm Subject: Re: Question on Parami sarahprocter... Dear Jagkrit & Linh, A good sutta to quote in this context. Thank you. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: > JJ: Linh's question about panna's quality reminds me to one sutta directing to heedfulness which is the development of panna and its supreme quality. > > AN 10.15 PTS: A v 21 > Appamada Sutta: Heedfulness <...> > "Just as the great rivers — such as the Ganges, the Yamuna, the Aciravati, the Sarabhu, & the Mahi — all go to the ocean, incline to the ocean, slope to the ocean, tend toward the ocean, and the ocean is reckoned the foremost among them; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them." > > ............ > > When come back to Linh's question of mixing all quality in one panna, this smile somehow shall clarify in comparison that other paramis which is kusala dhamma or skillful quality do not mix in one panna but these paramis are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness which is the development of panna. ... S: Well said. Metta Sarah ===== #129700 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 8:21 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" jagkrit2012 Dear Tam > T: Does the word "wish" mentioned here mean the cetasika "chanda" or "cetana" (intention)? JJ: In this particular word "wish" is rooted from attachment (lobha cetasika). When there is attachment, there is desire or hope or wish to experience those objects we attach again and again. In this case, do you attach to seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching? If there is attachment to those, there're always wishes to see, hear, smell, taste and touch more. In Citta of wishing, there are moha and lobha cetasikas as roots. Chanda cetasika (I prefer the meaing of "satisfying to do" more than "wish to do") may be or may be not arise with this citta. Cetana cetasika (intention) always arise with every citta as usual. Anumodhana Jagkrit #129701 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 9:01 pm Subject: Re: A "Self" Introduction of a Reborn Member t.sastri Hi Rob E. - I am happy to read many active conversations you have here. Really, it does not matter whether you post your discussion here or "there", Rob. :-) Be well, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Tep! > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > Hi old & new DSG members, - > > My name is Tep Sastri -- I was an active DSG member during , > > approximately, the years 2003 - 2008. Today I am reborn (in the sense > > of "emotionally regenerated" rather than spiritually regenerated) > > following Sarah's encouragement. [She wrote in an email: Maybe you can > > drop by to say 'hi' sometime :-)] So I thought : why not? Why don't I > > go there to renew friendship with old members (some are young, though) > > and get to meet new members too? Thanks to Sarah's friendly suggestion. > > So, guys, how are y'll doing? > > Truly,Tep=== > > Great to see you here, Tep - I have known you on three different groups, and always appreciate your discussions. I hope your own group is still going well - I still owe you some more visits over there! > > Best, > Rob E. > > = = = = = = = = = = = > #129702 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Apr 2, 2013 9:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hi Robert, (Nina) - By definition 'sobhana' denotes all states of consciousness excepting the unwholesome and those without roots. On the other hand, 'subha' means beautiful or attractive. An attractive object can cause sense-desire to arise. Subha-sanna is one of the four perversions (vipallaasa). Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Tep and Nina. > What about the sobhana dhammas? Are they not defined as beautiful? > > Thanks, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - #129703 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 12:01 am Subject: Re: Question on Parami tadaomiyamot... Hi Sarah, Thank you for citing an appropriate sutta. tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Dear Jagkrit & Linh, > > A good sutta to quote in this context. Thank you. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: > > > JJ: Linh's question about panna's quality reminds me to one sutta directing to heedfulness which is the development of panna and its supreme quality. > > > > AN 10.15 PTS: A v 21 > > Appamada Sutta: Heedfulness > <...> > > "Just as the great rivers  such as the Ganges, the Yamuna, the Aciravati, the Sarabhu, & the Mahi  all go to the ocean, incline to the ocean, slope to the ocean, tend toward the ocean, and the ocean is reckoned the foremost among them; in the same way, all skillful qualities are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness, and heedfulness is reckoned the foremost among them." > > > > ............ > > > > When come back to Linh's question of mixing all quality in one panna, this smile somehow shall clarify in comparison that other paramis which is kusala dhamma or skillful quality do not mix in one panna but these paramis are rooted in heedfulness, converge in heedfulness which is the development of panna. > ... > > S: Well said. > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > #129704 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 12:28 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > -------- > > H: If I may butt in: IMO *as a separate reality with own-being/self-existence" it does NOT differ from a concept but exists as such only as a matter of convention. What is single our thinking carves up into a particulate plurality and adopts that our "reality". > -------- > > KH: Thanks for giving a straight answer. I think you believe there is ultimately only nibbana and anything else is just a mistaken view of nibbana. ----------------------------- HCW: Yes, a mistaken view due to ignorance and craving. -------------------------------- > > There's not much else to say, is there? :-) We are talking about two totally different teachings with totally different goals. ------------------------------ HCW: "My" goal is awakening to reality andn thereby removing ignorance, craving, and suffering. ------------------------------ > > The teaching I am interested in says there is dukkha, and dukkha should be understood, and there is the cause of dukkha, etc. ------------------------------- HCW: As is "mine". ---------------------------------- Yours says there is only nibbana. I think you have quoted "Look! Look" as being the path. ---------------------------------- HCW: I have certainly said "Look! Look!", but did not describe that as being the path. The Dhamma is not a one-tick pony. -------------------------------- > > I, of course, would ask what exactly is "looking" and who is it that looks? --------------------------------- HCW: By "looking," I mean seeing through illusion to reality, and, BTW, I would NOT ask "Who looks?" ---------------------------------- But I suppose you would answer "ultimately nibbana." (?) -------------------------------- HCW: Incorrect supposition: There is looking but no one who looks. --------------------------------- > > Ken H > =============================== With metta, Howard /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) - - - - - - - /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) - - - - - - - - Look! Look! /What's the need for a well if water is everywhere? Having cut craving by the root, One would go about searching for what?/ (From the Udapana Sutta) #129705 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 1:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 2-apr-2013, om 6:48 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Hi Tep and Nina. > What about the sobhana dhammas? Are they not defined as beautiful? ------- N: I agree with Tep that seeing what is asubha as subha is a vippallasa. The original point was: is that which arises and falls away beautiful? Also sobhana dhammas are arising and falling away. Are they worth clinging to? ---- Nina. #129706 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 1:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Akusala dhamma conditions kusala by way of Upanissaya Paccayo nilovg Dear Tam Bach, Op 2-apr-2013, om 4:00 heeft Tam Bach het volgende geschreven: > Then one would be able to say: I might be practicing with lobha, > but it can condition moment of understanding later, by way of > upanissaya paccayo, which doesn't seem right to me. > > May be there is something to do with major condition and supportive > condition? ------ N: The natural supportive condition is very wide and it includes many aspects. We do not have to think of major condition or supportive condition. Saying, I might be practicing with lobha... The I is already a wrong beginning. Nina. #129707 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 1:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: books. nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 28-mrt-2013, om 8:30 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > S: Excellent! I think that "The Buddha's Path" is the best > introduction to the Teachings, too. > I think you read my mind as I had wanted to give you a copy of it, > but didn't have a spare one, so am delighted that you've found it. > > (Nina, I do hope we get this book re-printed soon - I meet so many > people I'd like to give copies of it too.) ------ N: I think that Alan is mainly interested in having things on line. Is this not the trend nowadays, less and less books? The printing is not such a problem, but getting it to the people. Before, Alan sent packs, Lodewijk did such a lot: going to the postoffice with lots of packs, and quite an administration. He did an enormous load of work. I could not cope with this. ------ Nina. #129708 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 2:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: books. tadaomiyamot... Hi Nina, Anumodaami. It looks like that everything ought to be converted into PDF files. tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > Op 28-mrt-2013, om 8:30 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > > > S: Excellent! I think that "The Buddha's Path" is the best > > introduction to the Teachings, too. > > I think you read my mind as I had wanted to give you a copy of it, > > but didn't have a spare one, so am delighted that you've found it. > > > > (Nina, I do hope we get this book re-printed soon - I meet so many > > people I'd like to give copies of it too.) > ------ > N: I think that Alan is mainly interested in having things on line. > Is this not the trend nowadays, less and less books? The printing is > not such a problem, but getting it to the people. Before, Alan sent > packs, Lodewijk did such a lot: going to the postoffice with lots of > packs, and quite an administration. He did an enormous load of work. > I could not cope with this. > ------ > Nina. > > > > > #129709 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 3:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, >N:The original point was: is that which arises and falls away >beautiful? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IMHO, perception of beauty or ugliness is mental interpretation of perception. I don't believe that subha/asubha is absolutely mind independent reality. What looks beautiful to someone is not beautiful to someone else. Same with reverse. >Also sobhana dhammas are arising and falling away. Are they worth >clinging to? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is very tough question: One point of view is that we should let go of clinging to anything. Another POV is that In the beginning, yes. We need to cling to higher rung of the ladder, and when its usefulness is gone, let it go. Remove certain defilement with certain good quality, and then later on, stop clinging to that good quality. IMHO. With best wishes, Alex #129710 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 4:41 am Subject: Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hi Nina and Rob E, - >N: The original point was: is that which arises and falls away beautiful? Also sobhana dhammas are arising and falling away. Are they worth clinging to? T: It is according to the Buddha that dhammas that arise and fall away (anicca) are not worth clinging to. That has been clear. However, some of those which arise and fall away can be indeed beautiful, e.g. sun-rise and sun-set; roses; diamonds, etc. But they don't last forever. http://www.lespierresdejulie.com/pierre-du-mois/rubis-03/;download Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 2-apr-2013, om 6:48 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > Hi Tep and Nina. > > What about the sobhana dhammas? Are they not defined as beautiful? > ------- > N: I agree with Tep that seeing what is asubha as subha is a > vippallasa. The original point was: is that which arises and falls > away beautiful? Also sobhana dhammas are arising and falling away. > Are they worth clinging to? > ---- > Nina. > > > > > #129711 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 5:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities nilovg Dear Alex, Op 2-apr-2013, om 18:38 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > One point of view is that we should let go of clinging to anything. > Another POV is that In the beginning, yes. We need to cling to > higher rung of the ladder, and when its usefulness is gone, let it go. > > Remove certain defilement with certain good quality, and then later > on, stop clinging to that good quality. IMHO. ------ N: It is good to see the uselesness of clinging, and especially clinging to self. It will not get one anywhere. When we see that that is not the way there are conditions for a right beginning. Nina. #129712 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:18 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, >N:It is good to see the uselesness of clinging, and especially >clinging to self. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course clinging leads to dukkha. But there is certain POV that says that since we cannot normally get rid of all clinging at once, we need to start somewhere first, and then gradually reduce all clinging. As a certain sutta (AN4.159, SN51.15) suggests one can use conceit at a certain stage, until of course it has to be let go off. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn51/sn51.015.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html IMHO. With best wishes, Alex #129713 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 7:24 am Subject: Re: What atta is denied? epsteinrob Hi Howard, Ken H. and Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > >KH:I think that is the question we need to answer: what is the >meaning of self (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > Good question. Buddha denied Upanishadic or Hindu conception of Atman. > > > > Buddha has not spoken a single English word such as "self". So we must be very careful not to conflate ancient Hindu concepts and modern western ones. > > Howard: > I have seen suttas that vary from each other on emphasis. IMO, the general emptiness that is central to Mahayana has its roots in the Pali suttas. Mahayana deals both with the lack of self-identity/own-being in dhammas as well as in persons, though still putting the anatta of persons first. Theravada concentrates on the selflessness of persons. The Pali suttas don't explain in much detail what 'anatta' means with regard to "individual" namas and rupas, and most often the explanation relates to ownerlessness and uncontrollability. But the emptiness/lack-of-own-being in dhammas is also expressed there in many suttas. Yes, I don't see why we have to choose a type of "self" that is denied by anatta. Obviously one may skew it to fit a particular philosophy and say that anatta means there is no self in dhammas; but if there is no self in dhammas there is also no self anywhere else, so why restrict the meaning of anatta one way or the other? I have seen the Buddha say both that there is no soul or Atman, and also that the personal self is composed of kandhas which are ever-changing and perishable, and so in both cases *there is not substantial or permanent* self, but only a mass of functional activities which go along their way and eventually cease, within which is included our everyday consciousness and thought - the awareness of seeing, hearing etc., and our mental activity -- all provisional and temporary. In addition I believe the Buddha has stated pretty clearly that there is no central controller or entity that "owns" the consciousness that experiences the world of sensory phenomena and thought, and so there is no *internal self* of any kind, though thought creates the illusion that there is a thinker/see-er. I don't see a problem with excluding *all* these versions of self, which I believe are all denied by the Buddha and which all reduce to the fact that there is only phenomena, both conscious and physical, ie, nama and rupa, and nothing else - no soul or self. The heart of this understanding is that all phenomena are conditional, caused by outside forces that come together and cause them to arise, and thus, and only thus, can we understand that there is no self causing anything to happen, or any self needed to cause anything to happen. This is as true for a tiny dhamma as it is for a person. A person could never have a self in the first place, since a personal self would be a concept within a concept. Still that does not stop us from saying that no such self exists. Howard, I think your quotes are very suggestive and would like to comment on a couple of excerpts: > /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. ... > (From the Phena Sutta) This strongly suggests that there is no object on any level that has "is-ness" or specific demarcation, thus no "own-being" or static nature which would have a static characteristic. Rather, such characteristics are part of the laws that govern it, but it does not "own" them. Such objects make appearances within the continuity of changing phenomena. ___________________ > /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being ... > > (From the Uraga Sutta) This clearly suggests that there is no internal being to any realm of being, including the most absolute - dhammas - and thus "own-being" seems a misplaced term. > _____________________ Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #129714 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 7:27 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities epsteinrob Hi Tep, and Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Robert, (Nina) - > > By definition 'sobhana' denotes all states of consciousness excepting the unwholesome and those without roots. On the other hand, 'subha' means beautiful or attractive. An attractive object can cause sense-desire to arise. Subha-sanna is one of the four perversions (vipallaasa). Well I guess there are two types of "beauty" being identified - one, the sobhana - "beautiful" for a detached consciousness that is purified? And another that causes attachment...? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - #129715 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 7:27 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities epsteinrob Hi Tep, and Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Robert, (Nina) - > > By definition 'sobhana' denotes all states of consciousness excepting the unwholesome and those without roots. On the other hand, 'subha' means beautiful or attractive. An attractive object can cause sense-desire to arise. Subha-sanna is one of the four perversions (vipallaasa). Well I guess there are two types of "beauty" being identified - one, the sobhana - "beautiful" for a detached consciousness that is purified? And another that causes attachment...? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - #129716 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 7:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 2-apr-2013, om 6:48 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > Hi Tep and Nina. > > What about the sobhana dhammas? Are they not defined as beautiful? > ------- > N: I agree with Tep that seeing what is asubha as subha is a > vippallasa. The original point was: is that which arises and falls > away beautiful? Also sobhana dhammas are arising and falling away. > Are they worth clinging to? I guess I just find that slightly confusing. I do understand and agree with the point that all dhammas are ephemeral and don't cause happiness and not worth attaching to - but don't quite understand why some of these should then be given a "positive report" and seen as sobhana. Is there attachment in that view/labeling of these dhammas? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #129717 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 7:33 am Subject: Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hello Alex and Nina, - Thank you for your different opinions which motivate me to reflect on the application of the Dhamma. > >N: It is good to see the uselesness of clinging, and especially clinging to self. >Alex: since we cannot normally get rid of all clinging at once, we need to start somewhere first, and then gradually reduce all clinging. Alex got a valid idea, I believe. Similar to his suggestion, I can see "gradual" effacement of tanhá-rága in the supra-mundane path as follows: 1. Through the sakadágámi-magga the Ariyan works on reducing sensuous craving (káma-rága), but he/she cannot yet abandon it. 2. Next, through the anágámi-magga he/she becomes fully free from the sensuous craving. 3. But it takes the power of the arahatta-magga for the Ariyan to become free from the rúpa-rága and arúpa-rága, and therefore completely abandons all kinds of rága. [See Nyanatiloka Dictionary.] Truly, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear Nina, all, > > >N:It is good to see the uselesness of clinging, and especially > >clinging to self. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Of course clinging leads to dukkha. But there is certain POV that says that since we cannot normally get rid of all clinging at once, we need to start somewhere first, and then gradually reduce all clinging. > > As a certain sutta (AN4.159, SN51.15) suggests one can use conceit at a certain stage, until of course it has to be let go off. > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn51/sn51.015.than.html > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.159.than.html > IMHO. > > With best wishes, > > Alex > #129718 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 8:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hi Rob E., (Nina) - I think your question is terminological. Allow me to reply with limited Abhidhamma knowledge as follows. According to the Compendium of Consciousness (I, 12) this type of sobhana cittas is called the "beautiful", because it is accompanied by beautiful mental factors (e.g. faith, mindfulness, tranquillity, non-delusion). Not all of the beautifuls are without attachment. Some sobhana cittas do not arise in the Arahants; although they are wholesome, they are not yet free from attachment. The Pali word 'subha' is not used to describe cittas; only used in the Suttas to describe mind-objects that can cause sense-desire. It is not an Abhidhammic term. The opposite 'asubha' means "anything repulsive, disgusting or unpleasant" (see PTS Dictionary). Be free, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Tep, and Nina. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > > > Hi Robert, (Nina) - > > > > By definition 'sobhana' denotes all states of consciousness excepting the unwholesome and those without roots. On the other hand, 'subha' means beautiful or attractive. An attractive object can cause sense-desire to arise. Subha-sanna is one of the four perversions (vipallaasa). > > Well I guess there are two types of "beauty" being identified - one, the sobhana - "beautiful" for a detached consciousness that is purified? And another that causes attachment...? > > Best, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - > #129719 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 4:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities epsteinrob Hi Tep. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi Rob E., (Nina) - > > I think your question is terminological. Allow me to reply with limited Abhidhamma knowledge as follows. According to the Compendium of Consciousness (I, 12) this type of sobhana cittas is called the "beautiful", because it is accompanied by beautiful mental factors (e.g. faith, mindfulness, tranquillity, non-delusion). Not all of the beautifuls are without attachment. Some sobhana cittas do not arise in the Arahants; although they are wholesome, they are not yet free from attachment. > The Pali word 'subha' is not used to describe cittas; only used in the Suttas to describe mind-objects that can cause sense-desire. It is not an Abhidhammic term. The opposite 'asubha' means "anything repulsive, disgusting or unpleasant" (see PTS Dictionary). Thanks, Tep, that is helpful. > Be free, > Tep > === I appreciate this signature line, Tep - may we all be free! Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129720 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:07 pm Subject: Re: Invisible hand? sarahprocter... Hi Tadao, Good to read your comments! Did you join the trip to Myanmar? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "tadaomiyamoto@..." wrote: > I do not know if it is Kun Sujin's own metaphor or not, but she says that "Kamma is an invisible hand". I CANNOT visualize the metaphor. Can anyone help me understand in what sense "Kamma is an invisible hand"? ... S: I think that she simply means that we have no idea what results kamma will bring now or in future. Do we know what will be seen, heard or experienced through the body-sense in a moment, let alone tomorrow, next year or next life? So it is invisible in the sense of unknown - we have no idea what kamma was performed in the past. It's a reminder to be aware now of whatever appears and to accept whatever kamma brings by way of result. It's all conditioned and all so very fair! Metta Sarah p.s If by any chance you are free to join us during the first week June, pls let Jon or I know. ======= #129721 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:32 pm Subject: Re: dosa sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > I feel sadness to the big extent. It pierce my body and I feel domanassa vedana in my body. .... S: You raise an interesting point. As you know, there are four possible causes of rupas in the body: nutriment, temperature, kamma and citta. You are suggesting here that the cause of the painful bodily feeling is citta with dosa. You call this domanassa, but actually, domanassa (unpleasant mental feeling) does not arise with bodily experience, it only arises with dosa (aversion) arising with akusala cittas. In other words, when we feel so much sadness (dosa), the mental feeling accompanying this dosa is unpleasant (domanassa). The cittas can condition bodily rupas, such as when we grimace, blush or cry, but the feeling is always mental. In between the processes of kusala and akusala cittas, there are bound to be kusala and akusala vipaka cittas arising in the sense door processes, such as at moments of seeing, hearing and bodily experience. Such bodily experience is always accompanied by pleasant or unpleasant feeling. This pleasant/unpleasant bodily feeling is the result of kamma and there is no sadness/dosa at such moments. The unpleasant feelings at such moments is dukkha vedana. The dosa arises afterwards. If we don't like to experience unpleasant bodily feeling, we should see the harm in all kinds of akusala now, especially the akusala which is strong enough to lead to actions which will bring more painful bodily experiences in future. Metta Sarah ===== #129722 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:15 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" sarahprocter... Dear Jagkrit & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: > Yesterday in Thai Dhamma discussion, Than Acharn Sujin asked one question. > > "Do you fulfill your wish?" > > The answer is very interesting and very useful for reminder. .... S: Yes, she often asks this in English discussion too. It reminds me of the 3 rounds (vatta) of kamma vatta, vipaka vatta and kilesa vatta. Deeds have been performed now on account of our wishes for experiencing various sense objects. As a result, now there is the experiencing of visible objects, sounds, smells, tastes and tangible objects - everything that has been wished for. On account of such experiences there are more kilesa (defilements) arising - more wishing and desire, aversion and ignorance - all leading to the performing of more kamma......on and on and on, round and round in circles. No way out except through the development of understanding. Very helpful when you raise comments and qus from the discussions. Anumodana too! Metta Sarah p.s for newcomers, 'anumodana' means the rejoicing in the other's good deeds or words. ====== #129723 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:40 pm Subject: Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > I heard Ajahn Sujin say that all conditioned realities have the aspect of asubha. She said "I think the asubha of rising and falling away is better than the dead body." I guess she might mean that for us there is unlikely to be kusala reflection on the dead body... ... S: She means that the understanding of the asubha (foulness) of realities which arise and fall away is far more precious that the understanding of the asubha of the dead body. Before the Buddha's time, there could be wise reflection and the development of samatha (calmness) with the asubha of the dead body as object. Only a Buddha can help us to understand that all conditioned dhammas are asubha. Only an anagami has completed eradicated the perversion of thinking about what is asubha as subha. For the anagami, no more attachment to sense objects, no more clinging to the beauty of sunrises or rainbows! Metta Sarah ==== #129724 From: "philip" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:42 pm Subject: Re: "Is that enough to develop understanding?" philofillet Hi Sarah > .... > S: Yes, only nama and rupa, We can say this with any variety of dhammas arising, any variety of degrees of understanding, saddha and other kusala factors. Of course we are more likely to say it with akusala, moments of kusala are very rare. But if it is akusala to say "only nama and rupa" without real undestanding and with clinging, so be it. At least we are not falling into really serious wrong practices. > Always back to this moment, whatever is conditioned now is real and can be known. I like that "real and can be known." I like it. Lobha. And perhaps in there a moment of understanding arising with alobha, but that is not likely to be an object of understanding itself, as far as I ... understand. > Any chance of joining us, Annie & Lan in KK beg June? I'm afraid not, hopefully another KK someday. For now extra holiday time must be reserved for another bereavment trip, which lurks somewhere in the not distant future... Thanks as always for the great recordings. Phil #129725 From: "philip" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:50 pm Subject: Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities philofillet Hi Sarah We were writing at the same time.. > S: She means that the understanding of the asubha (foulness) of realities which arise and fall away is far more precious that the understanding of the asubha of the dead body. > > Before the Buddha's time, there could be wise reflection and the development of samatha (calmness) with the asubha of the dead body as object. Only a Buddha can help us to understand that all conditioned dhammas are asubha. Only an anagami has completed eradicated the perversion of thinking about what is asubha as subha. For the anagami, no more attachment to sense objects, no more clinging to the beauty of sunrises or rainbows! > I would also add that reflection on corpses done by modern householders like us is unlikely to be kusala. If are motivated to get into Dhamma by fear and aversion we will seek greedy lobha/ditthi rooted measures to escape that fear and aversion. (i.e the meditation industry, which is fuuelled by the fear of its devotees.) We talk about "courage" to consider presesnt realities, it is really the courage not to take the comfort seeking route that is provided to modern "practicioners" who seek to imitate suttas and follow misleading (through no ill intent, of course) teachers in order to escape their fear of illness, old age, death and separation. But we have to remain honest with ourselves to see how much comfort seeking there is involved in our reflections. Over and out on this topic, thanks. Phil #129726 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:51 pm Subject: Re: Direct Knowing of Visible Object sarahprocter... Hi Tep (& Antony), Thank you for joining in this and other threads. I appreciate your contributions. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > You wrote: > >S: I'm not really interested in applying any logic. I'm just interested in the understanding of realities, dhammas, which can be directly known now, such as visible object, sound or hearing. > >If it were not possible to directly know realities, it would only be possible to think about concepts. Impossible then to become enlightened as the Buddha taught. .... >T: I do not know if the meaning of "direct knowing" in the Theravada literature is the same as that understood by Mahayanists. .... S: No matter what our name is, if there is no knowing about realities (paramattha dhammas) such as seeing and visible object in theory first, there can be no direct understanding of them when they appear now. This is why it's so important to appreciate that there isn't just one "ultimate reality", but there are an uncountable number of namas and rupas arising and falling away even now as we speak. ... >T: More important, I would appreciate your thought on how you directly know a visible object in the present moment such that it may lead to enlightenment. .... S: The most important point to understand is that there really is no "you" or "me" to know anything. There are just realities being experienced now, such as visible object which is experienced by seeing. It depends entirely on conditions whether or not understanding arises now. If there is any clinging to the idea that it is me or you who can know anything, there won't be any understanding of visible object or any other reality. .... >T: I have seen plenty of visible objects for many decades without having gone near enlightenment! So it is time to learn the right way. ... S: It seems as though it's "I" who sees and has seen visible object for decades (and lifetimes), but in fact there has never been and never will be an I to experience anything, It's an illusion at a moment of thinking only. So the right way to consider realities, such as visible object, is as dhammas which arise by conditions and fall away. Never anyone to experience them and never a person or thing to be experienced. This understanding is the way that gradually the idea of self is eliminated and what appears now can be directly understood with detachment. Very good points and questions to raise! Metta Sarah ==== #129727 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:54 pm Subject: Re: Ayatana sarahprocter... Dear Tam, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Tambach wrote: > A friend is looking for documents on Ayatana. Sources on the net on the specific subject seems to be quite limited. She'd appreciate your help. ... S: In addition to the other helpful responses, please also suggest your friend look in Useful Posts under "ayatana". A lot more detail can be found there. (I've seen a lot of errors in dictionaries and modern texts on this topic, so beware!) Metta Sarah ===== #129728 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 6:59 pm Subject: Re: "Wish" sarahprocter... Dear Jagkrit & Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: > > L: 'Not getting what one wishes for is dukkha'. > > JJ: Yes, it is but getting what one wishes is not dukkha? ... S: Definitely! Sabbe sankhara dukkha! Well pointed out. Metta Sarah ===== #129729 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 7:09 pm Subject: Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities sarahprocter... Dear Alex (& Phil), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >I heard Ajahn Sujin say that all conditioned realities have the aspect >of asubha. She said "I think the asubha of rising and falling away is >better than the dead body." I guess she might mean that for us there >is unlikely to be kusala reflection on the dead body... > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >A: For me, contemplation of death brought to seeking and eventually Dhamma. > > I have never seen asubha of instanteneous mental moments mentioned in the suttas. But asubha of dead and decaying human body, which is our certain future (unless one is cremated), was mentioned > in... satipatthana sutta. .... S: Whatever is taught in the Satipatthana Sutta concerns the development of satipatthana. Even whilst reflecting on the "asubha of dead and decayig human body", there can be understanding of realities, understanding of such realities as impermanent and asubha in the deepest sense. ... > Loss of momentary dhammas is not as bad as loss of the body which can last up to, approximately 80-120 years. .... S: What we learn is that there are only elements which are changing all the time. There is no lasting body or anything else. Each conditioned element is dukkha, anatta and asubha too. Metta Sarah http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.049.olen.html Sensing no change in the changing, Sensing pleasure in suffering, Assuming "self" where there's no self, Sensing the un-lovely as lovely — Gone astray with wrong views, beings Mis-perceive with distorted minds. Bound in the bondage of Mara, Those people are far from safety. They're beings that go on flowing: Going again from death to birth. But when in the world of darkness Buddhas arise to make things bright, They present this profound teaching Which brings suffering to an end. When those with wisdom have heard this, They recuperate their right mind: They see change in what is changing, Suffering where there's suffering, "Non-self" in what is without self, They see the un-lovely as such. By this acceptance of right view, They overcome all suffering. ==== #129730 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 7:38 pm Subject: Re: dosa szmicio Dear Sarah, > > I feel sadness to the big extent. It pierce my body and I feel domanassa vedana in my body. > .... > > S: You raise an interesting point. As you know, there are four possible causes of rupas in the body: nutriment, temperature, kamma and citta. > > You are suggesting here that the cause of the painful bodily feeling is citta with dosa. You call this domanassa, but actually, domanassa (unpleasant mental feeling) does not arise with bodily experience, it only arises with dosa (aversion) arising with akusala cittas. > > In other words, when we feel so much sadness (dosa), the mental feeling accompanying this dosa is unpleasant (domanassa). The cittas can condition bodily rupas, such as when we grimace, blush or cry, but the feeling is always mental. L: Sadness? I can change it. And this is the point. I can change it for pleasant experiences. Easily. Just go for drugs or alcohol and they are gone. This is my real problem. Best wishes Lukas #129731 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 9:58 pm Subject: Re: dosa sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Lukas" wrote: > L: Sadness? I can change it. And this is the point. I can change it for pleasant experiences. Easily. Just go for drugs or alcohol and they are gone. This is my real problem. ... S: More clinging to the idea of self. When there is understanding that at each moment there are only dhammas, only elements, which cannot be taken for self, it's much more useful. Otherwise there are just more and more stories as object of attachment and strong desire and there is forgetting about everything we've read and considered in the Abhidhamma and how Abhidhamma is this moment, the dhammas arising now - all conditioned and anatta. Metta Sarah ==== #129732 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 11:46 pm Subject: Re: Direct Knowing of Visible Object t.sastri Hi Sarah, - I admire your wise replies to all DSG members over the long years that have been so good that they keep coming back for more! Allow me to sum up your reply on "direct knowing" of realities as follows: 1. >Sarah: .. if there is no knowing about realities(paramattha dhammas) such as seeing and visible object in theory first, there can be no direct understanding of them when they appear now. 2. >Sarah: There are just realities being experienced now, such as visible object which is experienced by seeing. It depends entirely on conditions whether or not understanding arises now. If there is any clinging to the idea that it is me or you who can know anything, there won't be any understanding of visible object or any other reality. 3. >Sarah: So the right way to consider realities, such as visible object, is as dhammas which arise by conditions and fall away. Never anyone to experience them and never a person or thing to be experienced. This understanding is the way that gradually the idea of self is eliminated and what appears now can be directly understood with detachment. T: Khun Sujin has taught you well. It is true in principle that when (and who cares how long it may take?) the idea of self is eliminated, then "what appears now can be directly understood with detachment". Always be well, nice and wise, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Tep (& Antony), > > Thank you for joining in this and other threads. I appreciate your contributions. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > You wrote: > > >S: I'm not really interested in applying any logic. I'm just interested in the understanding of realities, dhammas, which can be directly known now, such as visible object, sound or hearing. > > >If it were not possible to directly know realities, it would only be possible to think about concepts. Impossible then to become enlightened as the Buddha taught. > .... > >T: I do not know if the meaning of "direct knowing" in the Theravada literature is the same as that understood by Mahayanists. > .... > S: No matter what our name is, if there is no knowing about realities (paramattha dhammas) such as seeing and visible object in theory first, there can be no direct understanding of them when they appear now. > > This is why it's so important to appreciate that there isn't just one "ultimate reality", but there are an uncountable number of namas and rupas arising and falling away even now as we speak. > ... > >T: More important, I would appreciate your thought on how you directly know a visible object in the present moment such that it may lead to enlightenment. > .... > S: The most important point to understand is that there really is no "you" or "me" to know anything. There are just realities being experienced now, such as visible object which is experienced by seeing. It depends entirely on conditions whether or not understanding arises now. If there is any clinging to the idea that it is me or you who can know anything, there won't be any understanding of visible object or any other reality. > .... > >T: I have seen plenty of visible objects for many decades without having gone near enlightenment! So it is time to learn the right way. > ... > S: It seems as though it's "I" who sees and has seen visible object for decades (and lifetimes), but in fact there has never been and never will be an I to experience anything, It's an illusion at a moment of thinking only. > > So the right way to consider realities, such as visible object, is as dhammas which arise by conditions and fall away. Never anyone to experience them and never a person or thing to be experienced. This understanding is the way that gradually the idea of self is eliminated and what appears now can be directly understood with detachment. > > Very good points and questions to raise! > > Metta > > Sarah > ==== > #129733 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Apr 3, 2013 11:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hi Rob E., - >I appreciate this signature line, Tep - may we all be free! How about this : Be wise, nice and free? :-) Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Tep. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob E., (Nina) - > > > > I think your question is terminological. Allow me to reply with limited Abhidhamma knowledge as follows. According to the Compendium of Consciousness (I, 12) this type of sobhana cittas is called the "beautiful", because it is accompanied by beautiful mental factors (e.g. faith, mindfulness, tranquillity, non-delusion). Not all of the beautifuls are without attachment. Some sobhana cittas do not arise in the Arahants; although they are wholesome, they are not yet free from attachment. > > The Pali word 'subha' is not used to describe cittas; only used in the Suttas to describe mind-objects that can cause sense-desire. It is not an Abhidhammic term. The opposite 'asubha' means "anything repulsive, disgusting or unpleasant" (see PTS Dictionary). > > Thanks, Tep, that is helpful. > > > Be free, > > Tep > > === > > I appreciate this signature line, Tep - may we all be free! > > Best, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > #129734 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 12:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities nilovg Dear Alex, Op 2-apr-2013, om 22:33 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Of course clinging leads to dukkha. But there is certain POV that > says that since we cannot normally get rid of all clinging at once, > we need to start somewhere first, and then gradually reduce all > clinging. -------- N: Instead of thinking of getting rid of clinging I would say: why not just attend to seeing now? This is right at hand, there is seeing time and again. It is useful to understand more its characteristic, it sees what is visible, it does not see a person. Even when it is understood intellectually that there is no one in the visible object, you can prove that this leads to a degree of detachment. That is better than *thinking* of reducing clinging, because such thinking is likely to be done by an idea of my thinking. ------ Nina. #129735 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 12:26 am Subject: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, In Memory of Lodewijk. The Cycle of Birth and Death by Nina van Gorkom Preface Soon after Lodewijk’s passing away I decided to undertake alone a journey to Thailand. In January 2013 Acharn[1] Sujin, Sarah and other friends had organized a three weeks sejourn in Thailand for a group of Vietnamese friends and other friends from different countries whom I have known for a long time. There were three different trips outside Bangkok: to Hua Hin which is near the sea, to Wang Nam Khiao or Korat, in the North East, and to Kaeng Krachan, a place where Acharn Sujin and Khun [2] Duangduen regularly stay and where we often had visited them before. I had never thought that I would come to Thailand again, but it all happened according to conditions. Thanks to Sarah’s encouragement I could undertake this journey, and I am most grateful for the kind concern and moral support of Sarah, Jonothan and the other friends. I was surrounded by a group of sympathetic friends who were always ready to give me assistance. When I was young and I married my beloved one I did not think that there must be an ending too. That seemed so far away. When the end comes it is so hard to accept the unavoidable. We keep on thinking of stories, beautiful ones and sad ones. Thinking is a reality, it arises for a moment and then falls away. The stories we think of are not realities, they are imaginations. Throughout our journey Acharn Sujin was never tired of explaining again and again the true nature of what appears right now, at this moment, like seeing, visible object, hearing, sound or thinking. I am very grateful to her that she time and again reminded us of the present moment, the reality appearing now. That is the only moment the true nature of a reality can be investigated. This helped me to understand that the truth in the ultimate sense (in Pali: paramattha dhamma) is quite different from concepts and stories which are made up by our imagination and which we find so important. We may think for a long time about what happened in the past, about other people, what they did and said, but such moments are different from developing understanding of realities that appear now, one at a time. The whole of the Buddha’s teachings deal with the present moment. It is beneficial to constantly hear about seeing, visible object, hearing or thinking that can be directly known when they appear. Otherwise we forget what is reality and what is not and we spend our days dreaming about what is not reality. A great lesson I learnt while in Thailand. These constant reminders were most helpful to me. ----------- 1 Acharn is the Thai word for teacher. In Pali: aacariya. 2 Khun is the Thai word for Mr. or Mrs. ******* #129736 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 2:03 am Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. philofillet Dear Nina You wrote: "It is beneficial to constantly hear about seeing, visible object, hearing or thinking that can be directly known when they appear. Otherwise we forget what is reality and what is not and we spend our days dreaming about what is not reality. A great lesson I learnt while in Thailand. These constant reminders were most helpful to me." Wonderful, looking forward to following this series. I talk about lobha and clinging to seeking comfort and this and that but the simple truth is that seeing, visible object, hearing, thinking etc are dhammas performing functions, they are real, and they can be known, as taught by the Buddha. And helpfully explained by good Dhamma friends (I.e cittas with right understanding, not "Nina",) Thank you! Phil --- #129737 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 5:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities philofillet Hi Nina > N: Instead of thinking of getting rid of clinging I would say: why > not just attend to seeing now? This is right at hand, there is seeing > time and again. It is useful to understand more its characteristic, > it sees what is visible, it does not see a person. Even when it is > understood intellectually that there is no one in the visible object, > you can prove that this leads to a degree of detachment. That is > better than *thinking* of reducing clinging, because such thinking is > likely to be done by an idea of my thinking. > ------ Well said. But why isn't " just attend to seeing now" likely to be done by an idea of my seeing? Isn't it also likely to be thinking if it is something we are advised to do? Phil #129738 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 5:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities nilovg Dear Phil, Op 3-apr-2013, om 20:43 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Well said. But why isn't " just attend to seeing now" likely to be > done by an idea of my seeing? Isn't it also likely to be thinking > if it is something we are advised to do? ------ N: When it is understood even intellectualy that seeing is only a dhamma, arisen because visible object impinges on the eyesense, not because we made up our mind to see, it will cure us of the idea of my seeing, but very, very gradually. We need a lot of listening. Thinking has a characteristic different from seeing. We can learn the difference. Nina. #129739 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 6:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities philofillet - Hello Nina > ------ > N: When it is understood even intellectualy that seeing is only a > dhamma, arisen because visible object impinges on the eyesense, not > because we made up our mind to see, it will cure us of the idea of my > seeing, but very, very gradually. We need a lot of listening. > Thinking has a characteristic different from seeing. We can learn the > difference. > Nina. I see. Thank you. Phil #129740 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 8:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hi Nina, Sarah, and Phil - >Sarah (message #129726): So the right way to consider realities, such as visible object, is as dhammas which arise by conditions and fall away. Never anyone to experience them and never a person or thing to be experienced. This understanding is the way that gradually the idea of self is eliminated and what appears now can be directly understood with detachment. >N (message #129738): When it is understood even intellectualy that seeing is only a dhamma, arisen because visible object impinges on the eyesense, not because we made up our mind to see, it will cure us of the idea of my seeing, but very, very gradually. We need a lot of listening. Thinking has a characteristic different from seeing. We can learn the difference. T: Essentially, Sarah and Nina speak with one voice, i.e., it takes a long time to develop pa~n~naa, through lots of listening, to abandon the "idea of self" with regard to realities such as seeing and the visible object. As the result, "what appears now can be directly understood with detachment". But why is listening enough to transform such intellectual understanding into the ariyan wisdom: 'this is not mine', 'this is not I', 'this is not my self'? Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Phil, > Op 3-apr-2013, om 20:43 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > Well said. But why isn't " just attend to seeing now" likely to be > > done by an idea of my seeing? Isn't it also likely to be thinking > > if it is something we are advised to do? > ------ > N: When it is understood even intellectualy that seeing is only a > dhamma, arisen because visible object impinges on the eyesense, not > because we made up our mind to see, it will cure us of the idea of my > seeing, but very, very gradually. We need a lot of listening. > Thinking has a characteristic different from seeing. We can learn the > difference. > Nina. ............................... #129741 From: "Ai Dinh Le" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 9:09 am Subject: Re: Feelings and Dreams buddhism_2010 I live in Vancouver, BC, Canada. I was born in Vung Tau, Vietnam, in 1970, in a family with the last name Le; to be honest radically my way , about my birth details, I would like to add: that's what people, a document I used to have, tell me; I could have been switched with another baby at birth -- that's funny sounding, crazy, but I don't know for certain. I'm 42 years old, will be 43 later this year. I may look younger than my age. My family is Mahayana Buddhism, but I left it in about 1999 or 2000, due to something I won't say, and found my refuge in theravada buddhism's teachings (as written in english, and also as translated into english; my Vietnamese is pretty lousy). Due to my suffering (that's the something I wouldn't mention above, and still do not get into telling about), I wanted to escape to Nibbana. I never attained any life-changing great Enlightenment, like Stream-winnership ("sottapana") or higher (once-returner, never-returner, arahantship), up to this point in my life, though, but I have much greater knowledge since 2000 about Theravada Buddhism, and it had translated into more practice in my present life. I am still a Theravada buddhist. That's all the details I will give. Oh, I sometimes do not go on the internet for a day, a few days, or even longer. And also, I won't say why, I apologize if I do not reply in the future to your reply to my reply, Sarah, or to anyone else's reply (if any of you rely)... I just came here to say sorry to Christine, and give a Dhamma teaching that might help her, for a reason... If anyone wants to, they can phone me at +16043389743, but we don't know each other (at least in this life, according to Theravada buddhism), so I don't expect any call from any of you. But anyone can call if they want, even if they don't know me. From, Ai --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Dear Ai Le, > > Welcome to DSG! So now you've taken 'the plunge' here, why not tell us where you live and a little more about your background and interest in the Teachings. <...> #129742 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 1:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities epsteinrob Hi Tep. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Rob E., - > > >I appreciate this signature line, Tep - may we all be free! > > How about this : Be wise, nice and free? :-) > > Tep I don't know about being 'nice,' Tep - that could be difficult! :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129743 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 3:51 pm Subject: Re: Feelings and Dreams sarahprocter... Dear Ai, Thank you very much for your informative intro. I do hope you'll 'hang around' and study and consider more about the (Theravada) Teachings with us all. Many people start with an idea of an "escape to Nibbana" and then we begin to learn more about life as it is and about how much ignorance has been accumulated. So best to forget about enlightenment and future goals and learn more about 'what is' - the present conditioned realities now. I appreciate your apology and kind efforts to share Dhamma. It's not always easy, but we give up a little more attachment to self at time of giving (especially the Dhamma) and trying to help others feel more comfortable. Metta Sarah p.s. If any newcomers (or oldcomers) have photos to put in the Members' photo album, always appreciated by everyone. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ai Dinh Le" wrote: > > I live in Vancouver, BC, Canada. I was born in Vung Tau, Vietnam, in 1970, in a family with the last name Le; to be honest radically my way , about my birth details, I would like to add: that's what people, a document I used to have, tell me; I could have been switched with another baby at birth -- that's funny sounding, crazy, but I don't know for certain. #129744 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 3:58 pm Subject: Re: Looking for a dhamma group in Hanoi sarahprocter... Dear Tung, Glad to welcome you as well to DSG! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "willthlong" wrote: > I came across DSG by chance when I was googling for a Buddhist group in Hanoi. ... S: Tam Bach as already replied and I'm sure you'll be meeting her and other friends in Hanoi soon. Some of us were there with Ajahn Sujin at the end of last year for discussions. It was wonderful! We will also be in Saigon/Ho Chi Minh for discussions in September, if you have a chance to join us. I think you'll also meet Annie in Hanoi soon - she's from Australia, so there will have to be some English discussion! Let us know how it goes. Meanwhile, please do join any of the discussions here or start your own new thread. Also, I think you may like to listen to some of the (edited) English discussions held with Ajahn Sujin which can be found here: www.dhammastudygroup.org. You may like to start with listening to the most recent set in Hua Hin, Thailand which we're uploading at the moment. They're under 'work in progress' and many of our Vietnamese friends joined us for these discussions. Look forward to more chat with you later. Metta Sarah ===== #129745 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 5:20 pm Subject: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 1. What is Life? In the “Kindred Sayings”, II, 180 (Nidĺna, Ch XV, § 4, Tears) we read that the Buddha said at Sĺvatthí: “Incalculable is the beginning, brethren, of this faring on. The earliest point is not revealed of the running on, faring on, of beings cloakedd in ignorance, tied to craving. As to that, what think you, brethren? Which is greater:- the flood of tears shed by you crying and weeping as you fare on, run on this long while, united as you have been with the undesirable, sundered as you have been from the desirable, or the waters in the four seas?” “As we allow, lord, that we have been taught by the Exalted One, it is this that is greater: the flood of tears shed by us crying and weeping as we fare on, run on this long while, united as we have been with the undesirable, sundered as we have been from the desirable- not the waters in the four seas.” “Well said! Well said, brethren! Well do you allow that so has been the doctrine been taught by me. Truly the flood of tears is greater... For many a long day, brethren, have you experienced the death of mother, of son, of daughter, have you experienced the ruin of kinsfolk, of wealth, the calamity of disease... Why is that? Incalculable is the beginning, brethren, of this faring on. The earliest point is not revealed of the running on, faring on, of beings cloakedd in ignorance, tied to craving. Thus far enough is there, brethren, for you to be repelled by all the things of this world, enough to lose all passion for them, enought to be delivered therefrom.” We are born, we die and then we are born again, this goes on and on so long as we are in the cycle of birth and death. Each life is very short, before we ralize it it comes to an end. When we are reborn we do not remember our life as it is at present, just as at this moment we do not remember our past life. What has fallen away never comes back and this is true of each moment of consciousness, and each physical reality. Each moment will be immediately past, but we are deluded and take mental phenomena and physical phenomena for permanent and self. The Buddha taught about realities in detail so that they can be understood as non-self (in Pali: anattĺ). For a few days I stayed in the same hotel as my friends Sarah and Jonothan, the Peninsula hotel in Bangkok. I spent a happy time in their company and throughout my journey they gave me kind advice when I was in trouble. From my window I looked across the river to the Oriental Hotel where Lodewijk and I had enjoyed many pleasant days. These belong to the past now. --------- Nina. #129746 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 5:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities nilovg Dear Tep, Op 3-apr-2013, om 23:23 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > Essentially, Sarah and Nina speak with one voice, i.e., it takes a > long time to develop pa~n~naa, through lots of listening, to > abandon the "idea of self" with regard to realities such as seeing > and the visible object. As the result, "what appears now can be > directly understood with detachment". But why is listening enough > to transform such intellectual understanding into the ariyan > wisdom: 'this is not mine', 'this is not I', 'this is not my self'? -------- N: Not only listening, also deeply considering again and again is necessary. In this way what one heard becomes clearer and clearer. One has to verify the truth for oneself. When listening and considering each time just a little of the great amount of ignorance we have accumulated wears away. For example, we hear:' No one owns anything in this life because what arises passes away instantly. There is no self, only realities appear and disappear.' This may not mean so much in the beginning. But gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. Different realities. Their arising and falling away, which is a stage of insight, cannot yet be realized. But still there can be a beginning of understanding that we cannot control or hold on to all these dhammas. As Acharn said, we are in the baby class of Dhamma. But that is a beginning. Step by step, we do not have to think of the ariyan wisdom now. ------ Nina. #129747 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 6:22 pm Subject: Dhamma-anupassana t.sastri Dear Nina, - I asked: >T: why is listening enough to transform such intellectual understanding into the ariyan > wisdom: 'this is not mine', 'this is not I', 'this is not my self'? And you kindly & patiently answer the question (that probably was asked many times before): N: Not only listening, also deeply considering again and again is necessary. In this way what one heard becomes clearer and clearer. One has to verify the truth for oneself. When listening and considering each time just a little of the great amount of ignorance we have accumulated wears away. ... gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. Different realities. Their arising and falling away, which is a stage of insight, cannot yet be realized. T: I see, it is the dhamma-anupassana in the Satipatthaana Sutta. It's all clear now. Thank you very much for the patience. Truly, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > Op 3-apr-2013, om 23:23 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > Essentially, Sarah and Nina speak with one voice, i.e., it takes a > > long time to develop pa~n~naa, through lots of listening, to > > abandon the "idea of self" with regard to realities such as seeing > > and the visible object. As the result, "what appears now can be > > directly understood with detachment". But why is listening enough > > to transform such intellectual understanding into the ariyan > > wisdom: 'this is not mine', 'this is not I', 'this is not my self'? > -------- > N: Not only listening, also deeply considering again and again is > necessary. In this way what one heard becomes clearer and clearer. > One has to verify the truth for oneself. When listening and > considering each time just a little of the great amount of ignorance > we have accumulated wears away. > For example, we hear:' No one owns anything in this life because what > arises passes away instantly. There is no self, only realities appear > and disappear.' This may not mean so much in the beginning. But > gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and > hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. > Different realities. Their arising and falling away, which is a stage > of insight, cannot yet be realized. But still there can be a > beginning of understanding that we cannot control or hold on to all > these dhammas. > As Acharn said, we are in the baby class of Dhamma. But that is a > beginning. Step by step, we do not have to think of the ariyan wisdom > now. > ------ > Nina. > ......................... #129748 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 6:28 pm Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. jagkrit2012 Dear Nina > In Memory of Lodewijk. > > The Cycle of Birth and Death > > by > > Nina van Gorkom > > Preface > > Throughout our journey Acharn Sujin was never tired of explaining > again and again the true nature of what appears right now, at this > moment, like seeing, visible object, hearing, sound or thinking. I am > very grateful to her that she time and again reminded us of the > present moment, the reality appearing now. That is the only moment > the true nature of a reality can be investigated. This helped me to > understand that the truth in the ultimate sense (in Pali: paramattha > dhamma) is quite different from concepts and stories which are made > up by our imagination and which we find so important. jj: This reminds me of this sutta: Dhp XIV PTS: Dhp 179-196 Buddhavagga: Awakened translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu © 1997–2013 182 Hard the winning of a human birth. Hard the life of mortals. Hard the chance to hear the true Dhamma. Hard the arising of Awakened Ones. This is how lucky we are. Anumodhana Jagkrit #129749 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 6:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. nilovg Dear Jagkrit, Op 4-apr-2013, om 9:28 heeft jagkrit2012 het volgende geschreven: > Hard the winning of a human birth. > Hard the life of mortals. > Hard the chance to hear the true Dhamma. > Hard the arising of Awakened Ones. > > This is how lucky we are. --------- N: THank you for the sutta. It is good to be reminded that we have an unique opportunity in this plane to develop understanding. Nina. #129750 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 6:53 pm Subject: Re: What atta is denied? kenhowardau Hi Robert E, Howard and Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > Hi Howard, Ken H. and Alex. <. . .> > > >KH: I think that is the question we need to answer: what is the >meaning of self (atta) that is denied in the doctrine of anatta? > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > > > Good question. Buddha denied Upanishadic or Hindu conception of Atman. > > > > Buddha has not spoken a single English word such as "self". So we must be very careful not to conflate ancient Hindu concepts and modern western ones. > > > Howard: > I have seen suttas that vary from each other on emphasis. IMO, the general emptiness that is central to Mahayana has its roots in the Pali suttas. <. . .> > RE: Yes, I don't see why we have to choose a type of "self" that is denied by anatta. Obviously one may skew it to fit a particular philosophy and say that anatta means there is no self in dhammas; but if there is no self in dhammas there is also no self anywhere else, so why restrict the meaning of anatta one way or the other? ------------- KH: At the risk of sounding like a evangelist I would like you to consider this recent quote from Nina: > N: For example, we hear:' No one owns anything in this life because what arises passes away instantly. There is no self, only realities appear and disappear.' This may not mean so much in the beginning. But gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. Different realities. Their arising and falling away, which is a stage of insight, cannot yet be realized. But still there can be a beginning of understanding that we cannot control or hold on to all these dhammas. As Acharn said, we are in the baby class of Dhamma. But that is a beginning. Step by step, we do not have to think of the ariyan wisdom now.> (end quote) KH: If people could just listen to those words and absorb their meaning, I think we would all be of one mind, Talk about alternative interpretations etc., would no longer interest us. It's not likely to happen but . . . happy days! :-) Ken H #129751 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 7:18 pm Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 2. jagkrit2012 Dear Nina > The flood of tears shed by crying and weeping as faring on, running on this long while, united as we have been with the undesirable, sundered as we have been from the desirable is much greater that the waters in the four seas. JJ: I just like this sutta reminder of how long we've been in indefinite faring on of endless circling. And how further we have to carry on life after life after life. And you explanation is pictured especially when you played back the past. However, I also like this follow sutta which providing another good reminder. SN 7.12 PTS: S i 173 CDB i 268 Udaya Sutta: Breaking the Cycle translated from the Pali by Andrew Olendzki © 2005–2013 [The Buddha:] Over and over, the seeds all get planted; Over and over, the rain-god sprinkles rain. Over and over, the farmer farms the field; Over and over, the food grows in the realm. Over and over, beggars do their begging; Over and over, the givers give out gifts. Over and over, the giver who has given; Over and over, goes to a better place. Over and over, he tires and he struggles; Over and over, the fool goes to the womb. Over and over, he's born and he dies; Over and over, they bear him to his grave. *But one who's wisdom is wide as the earth Is not born over and over, For he's gained the path Of not becoming over again.* Thank you and anumodhana Jagkrit #129752 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 8:54 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities t.sastri Hi Rob E., - You've been nice enough to me! But if you want to be nicer, maybe this WikiHow helps? :-) http://www.wikihow.com/Be-Nice Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > ... > > I don't know about being 'nice,' Tep - that could be difficult! :-) > > Best, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > #129753 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 10:19 pm Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - A wonderful teaching, and a lovely tribute to a lovely man! Much metta, Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > In Memory of Lodewijk. > > The Cycle of Birth and Death > > by > > Nina van Gorkom > > Preface > > Soon after Lodewijk's passing away I decided to undertake alone a > journey to Thailand. In January 2013 Acharn[1] Sujin, Sarah and other > friends had organized a three weeks sejourn in Thailand for a group > of Vietnamese friends and other friends from different countries whom > I have known for a long time. There were three different trips > outside Bangkok: to Hua Hin which is near the sea, to Wang Nam Khiao > or Korat, in the North East, and to Kaeng Krachan, a place where > Acharn Sujin and Khun [2] Duangduen regularly stay and where we often > had visited them before. > > I had never thought that I would come to Thailand again, but it all > happened according to conditions. Thanks to Sarah's encouragement I > could undertake this journey, and I am most grateful for the kind > concern and moral support of Sarah, Jonothan and the other friends. I > was surrounded by a group of sympathetic friends who were always > ready to give me assistance. > > When I was young and I married my beloved one I did not think that > there must be an ending too. That seemed so far away. When the end > comes it is so hard to accept the unavoidable. We keep on thinking of > stories, beautiful ones and sad ones. Thinking is a reality, it > arises for a moment and then falls away. The stories we think of are > not realities, they are imaginations. > > Throughout our journey Acharn Sujin was never tired of explaining > again and again the true nature of what appears right now, at this > moment, like seeing, visible object, hearing, sound or thinking. I am > very grateful to her that she time and again reminded us of the > present moment, the reality appearing now. That is the only moment > the true nature of a reality can be investigated. This helped me to > understand that the truth in the ultimate sense (in Pali: paramattha > dhamma) is quite different from concepts and stories which are made > up by our imagination and which we find so important. > > We may think for a long time about what happened in the past, about > other people, what they did and said, but such moments are different > from developing understanding of realities that appear now, one at a > time. The whole of the Buddha's teachings deal with the present moment. > > It is beneficial to constantly hear about seeing, visible object, > hearing or thinking that can be directly known when they appear. > Otherwise we forget what is reality and what is not and we spend our > days dreaming about what is not reality. A great lesson I learnt > while in Thailand. These constant reminders were most helpful to me. > > ----------- > 1 Acharn is the Thai word for teacher. In Pali: aacariya. > 2 Khun is the Thai word for Mr. or Mrs. > > > ******* > > > > > #129754 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 11:18 pm Subject: Re: What atta is denied? truth_aerator Hello RobertE, KenH, all, >RE: Yes, I don't see why we have to choose a type of "self" that is >denied by anatta. Obviously one may skew it to fit a particular >philosophy and say that anatta means there is no self in dhammas; >but if there is no self in dhammas there is also no self anywhere >else, so why restrict the meaning of anatta one way or the other? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Buddha didn't speak English. Atta is a Hindu concept that may not be what we, modern westerners, refer to as self. Judging by some definitions of atta, I don't think that even Christian idea of a soul is denied. Self in pali is not atta. It is "sayam". sayamkata= done by oneself saymvara= self choice. asayamvasi = not under one's control. Interestingly, this word is mentioned only twice in tipitaka and both are in DN#20 With best wishes, Alex #129755 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 12:13 am Subject: Sati in the five sense doors? tadaomiyamot... Hi Nina, It's said that sati arises not only through the mind door but also through the five sense doors. I'm wondering if you do not mind explaining how it is possible for sati to arise even at any one of the sense doors. (For me, it sounds very counterintuitive.) tadao #129756 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 12:50 am Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Rob E wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: Regarding the meaning of `sabhava' and `paramattha dhamma', CMA has the following in notes to Ch. I #2: > > > > << << << > > Ultimate realities are things that exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhaava). > > These are the dhammas: the final, irreducible components of existence, the ultimate entities which result from a correctly performed analysis of experience. > > Such existents admit of no further reduction, but are themselves the final terms of analysis, the true constituents of the complex manifold of experience. > > Hence the word `paramattha' is applied to them, which is derived from `parama' = ultimate, highest, final, and `attha' = reality, thing." > > >> >> >> > > > > Now, presentational issues aside, is there anything about this explanation that is not clear? > > RE: Well I can't say "presentational issues aside" because it has a major influence. For instance, if savhaava is translated as above as "existing by reason of their own intrinsic nature" that may be quite different than it having its "own being," which I still don't quite understand - being has a much broader implication than nature, so I would still appreciate an explanation of what you think is involved in term "own being" and why it is one of the choices for translation. > =============== J: As far as I know, "own being" is not used as a translation of "sabhava" by anybody within the Theravada tradition. I have seen it included in a list of *possible* translations, probably because of the literal meaning of the component terms sa/saha and bhaava. But the generally preferred translation seems to be "individual essence". > =============== > RE: With the translation above, however, I have other questions: > > 1. What is meant by "intrinsic?" > 2. What is meant be "nature?" > 3. What is the implication of 'existing by reason of..." In other words, is that saying that dhammas arise because of their intrinsic nature, and if so, what is this nature that causes them to arise? If it is saying that they are distinct as a particular dhamma because of its specific intrinsic nature/characteristic, that is a bit more of a local meaning - that they can be specifically identified. > =============== J: In answer to your questions above: Q1. What is meant by "intrinsic?", and Q2. What is meant be "nature?" A. In the context, I take "intrinsic nature" to mean something that is an integral part of a dhamma and which gives actual existence to the dhamma, in contradistinction to the situation pertaining to concepts, which are mind-created. Q3. What is the implication of 'existing by reason of..." In other words, is that saying that dhammas arise because of their intrinsic nature, and if so, what is this nature that causes them to arise? If it is saying that they are distinct as a particular dhamma because of its specific intrinsic nature/characteristic, that is a bit more of a local meaning - that they can be specifically identified. A. The statement is, "Ultimate realities are things that exist by reason of their own intrinsic nature (sabhaava)". I take this to mean that having an intrinsic nature signifies that there is existence. In other words, that these things are not mind-created. > =============== > RE: For paramatha dhammas, the definition seems pretty straightforward up to a point. However, I have a small problem with them being final irreducible components of experience, since they exist with accompanying cetasikas in order to exist as they do, how these configurations of components affect their nature or characteristic, ... > =============== J: You are again falling into the habit of speaking as though only cittas are dhammas, whereas also rupas and cetasikas are dhammas (as is nibbana). And while 2 of the kinds of dhammas, namely cittas and cetasikas, always arise together and fall away together, this also requires the arising of rupas (as base). I see no conflict between this interdependence and the notion of irreducibility. > =============== > RE: and how it can be said that they are irreducible while going through three phases of "becoming?" Does their irreducibility apply to all phases, and to the changes they thus undergo, or only to such characteristics of theirs which is transcendent to such change? > =============== J: It is the rising, persisting and falling of a citta that constitutes the change, not a change in its nature of characteristic. Again, this has no implications for the notion of irreducibility. Hoping this helps clarify. Jon #129757 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 4:50 am Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. epsteinrob Hi Phil, Nina and all. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Dear Nina > > You wrote: "It is beneficial to constantly hear about seeing, visible object, > hearing or thinking that can be directly known when they appear. > Otherwise we forget what is reality and what is not and we spend our > days dreaming about what is not reality. A great lesson I learnt > while in Thailand. These constant reminders were most helpful to me." > > Wonderful, looking forward to following this series. > > I talk about lobha and clinging to seeking comfort and this and that but the simple truth is that seeing, visible object, hearing, thinking etc are dhammas performing functions, they are real, and they can be known, as taught by the Buddha. And helpfully explained by good Dhamma friends (I.e cittas with right understanding, not "Nina",) I am interested in how "helpful explanations" actually take place. I don't think you can really say that "cittas with right understanding" explain anything, as cittas do not speak or take on physical actions. So when we are given wise advice by Dhamma friends, it has to take place through kusala kamma patha. Rupas of speech have to arise, spurred on by kusala cetana, and the "listener" has to have citta which is aware of these rupas as "object of hearing." How rupas produced by kamma patha transmit action or information from one set of namas to another is of much interest to me, since this is how the "wise friend" communicates. I would be interested in any details on how this takes place, as it is necessary for the path. Just to repeat, it cannot be "Nina" nor "wise cittas" that communicate directly. Rupas have to be produced, perceived and thought about before anything is communicated or understood. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #129759 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 5:13 am Subject: Re: Dhamma-anupassana epsteinrob Hi Tep, and Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > N: Not only listening, also deeply considering again and again is necessary. In this way what one heard becomes clearer and clearer. One has to verify the truth for oneself. When listening and considering each time just a little of the great amount of ignorance we have accumulated wears away. ... gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. Different realities. Their arising and falling away, which is a stage of insight, cannot yet be realized. > > T: I see, it is the dhamma-anupassana in the Satipatthaana Sutta. It's all clear now. > Thank you very much for the patience. Thanks for bringing this up, Tep, with reference to the Satipatthana Sutta. The subject of Dhammanupassana has also been difficult for me, as it seems to have a broad range. However, I think it is fair to say that it involves the direct contemplation of the understandings that make up the Dhamma. I found an interesting discussion of this. The first comment shows the confusion over Dhammanupassana. The second comment I think shows greater clarity. Then there are several quotes from Sati Sutta which sort of give the range of Dhammanupassana. I will give excerpts below and hope that you may help clarify what Dhammanupassana consists of. Here are the excerpts, starting with the "confused" comment, then the "clarifying" comment, then the direct quotes from Sati Sutta: Confused comment: "...there is a fourth foundation of mindfulness regarding Dhamma, translated as mental objects. This fourth foundation of mindfulness is more general and there are different interpretations of what it means. Generally, there are two types of interpretations. One interpretation is that Dhamma means certain aspects of the teachings, whereby when we contemplate on it—insight ie vipassana may arise. The other meaning is mental objects. Concerning this, it may also be interpreted as Dhamma in the sense of phenomena because all phenomena can be made the object of the mind. Therefore, the field is very wide; it stretches beyond the fields of the other three forms of objects." Clarifying comment: "Meditation on the Dhamma objects, seeing how they arise, how they come about. It is a meditation and contemplation on the Dhamma itself and the factors of the Dhamma and how they come into be, both the wholesome factors and the unwholesome fetters." [Rob comment: This seems to be saying that Dhammanupassana is the contemplation of how "dhammas" arise from the point of view of the "Dhamma."] Excerpts from the Satipatthana sutta on the range of Dhammanupassana: Re: Mindfulness Of Mental Objects (dhammanupassana) Postby David N. Snyder » Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:17 pm Meditation on the Dhamma objects, seeing how they arise, how they come about. It is a meditation and contemplation on the Dhamma itself and the factors of the Dhamma and how they come into be, both the wholesome factors and the unwholesome fetters. Five Hindrances: "There is the case where a monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five hindrances? There is the case where, there being sensual desire present within, a monk discerns that 'There is sensual desire present within me.' Or, there being no sensual desire present within, he discerns that 'There is no sensual desire present within me.' ... "Five Aggregates: "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging? There is the case where a monk [discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. ... "Sixfold Internal and External Sense Media: "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal and external sense media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal and external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter... Seven Factor of Awakening: "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the seven factors of awakening. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the seven factors of awakening? There is the case where, there being mindfulness as a factor of awakening present within, he discerns that 'Mindfulness as a factor of awakening is present within me.' Or, there being no mindfulness as a factor of awakening present within, he discerns that 'Mindfulness as a factor of awakening is not present within me.' ... Here is the link for the full discussion on Dhamma Wheel with the complete excerpts from the Sutta: http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=1923 I would be very appreciative of your comments and views of this material, to clarify the range and nature of Dhammanupassana. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #129760 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 5:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. nilovg Hi Howard, You are always so kind! Nina. Op 4-apr-2013, om 13:19 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > A wonderful teaching, and a lovely tribute to a lovely man! #129761 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 5:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati in the five sense doors? nilovg Dear Tadao, Op 4-apr-2013, om 15:13 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende geschreven: > It's said that sati arises not only through the mind door but also > through the five sense doors. > I'm wondering if you do not mind explaining how it is possible for > sati to arise even at any one of the sense doors. (For me, it > sounds very counterintuitive.) ------ N: Also in the sense-door processes kusala javanacittas arise, and these are accompanied by sati. But I think that your question deals with sati of the level of satipa.t.thaana. When a stage of insight arises, there are several processes through sense-door and mind-door. When the difference between naama and ruupa is clearly distinguished, at the first stage of insight which is still tender insight, ruupa appars through a sense-door and through the minddoor. As I understood from Acharn Sujin, nobody can stop sati and pa~n~naa at the sense- door, the sense-door process and mind-door process alternate so rapidly. Sense-door /mind-door/sense-door/mind-door. But no thinking about which doorway it is at a given moment, no time. Nina. #129762 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 6:19 am Subject: Re: What atta is denied? epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > RE: Yes, I don't see why we have to choose a type of "self" that is denied by anatta. Obviously one may skew it to fit a particular philosophy and say that anatta means there is no self in dhammas; but if there is no self in dhammas there is also no self anywhere else, so why restrict the meaning of anatta one way or the other? > ------------- > > KH: At the risk of sounding like a evangelist I would like you to consider this recent quote from Nina: > > > N: For example, we hear:' No one owns anything in this life because what arises passes away instantly. There is no self, only realities appear and disappear.' This may not mean so much in the beginning. But > gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and > hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. > Different realities. Their arising and falling away, which is a stage > of insight, cannot yet be realized. But still there can be a > beginning of understanding that we cannot control or hold on to all > these dhammas. ... > KH: If people could just listen to those words and absorb their meaning, I think we would all be of one mind, Talk about alternative interpretations etc., would no longer interest us. There's no alternate interpretation. No one disagrees with the non-self of dhammas, as they arise and pass away. But to quibble about which self Buddha denied, as if there is one self he denied and another that he does not deny, seems really ridiculous to me. If you want to talk about the technical existence of anatta as a property of dhammas, there is no problem with that. There's no "alternate interpretation." I am simply saying that there is no kind of self of any kind, period, and it is kind of silly to argue with that. I have simply said that if there is no self, control etc. in dhammas, there is certainly no other kind of self either. Problem with that? Why? There is no self of any kind, period, esp. of course, the lack of self of arising dhammas. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129763 From: "willthlong" Date: Thu Apr 4, 2013 11:49 pm Subject: Re: Looking for a dhamma group in Hanoi willthlong Hi Sarah, Thank you for your welcome message! Indeed, Tam Bach already contacted and told me about the Dhamma discussion group in Hanoi (thank you once again chi Tam). Currently I'm out of town, but I'm looking forward to meeting the group next month when I'm back. I probably won't get to meet Annie by then, but I hope there'll be other occasions. Thanks for letting me know about the September event in HCM city. I might be able to join. Since I joined DSG, I've been trying to follow some of the posts here. I found that there are lots of topics I'm not familiar with. Or maybe it's due to a common use of Pali terms that I find a bit intimidating :). Then, I'm pretty new to Buddhism. I've been learning for 2 years, which is barely anything . But I'll be stopping by here from time to time, keep on learning, and try to contribute to the topics about which I have some understanding. Also, thanks for the other tips. I'll check out some of the talks. -Tung --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Dear Tung, > > Glad to welcome you as well to DSG! > > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > #129764 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 7:51 am Subject: Re: Dhamma-anupassana t.sastri Hi Rob E., (Nina, others)- Based on Nina's excellent explanation ("...gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. Different realities. Their arising and falling away,..."), I commented: "I see, it is the dhamma-anupassana in the Satipatthaana Sutta". >Rob E. : I found an interesting discussion of this. ... I will give excerpts below and hope that you may help clarify what Dhammanupassana consists of. Here are the excerpts, starting with the "confused" comment, then the "clarifying" comment, then the direct quotes from Sati Sutta: (etc.) ... I would be very appreciative of your comments and views of this material, to clarify the range and nature of Dhammanupassana. T: Thank you very much for giving wise attention to the above dialogue. Being well aware of my own limitations, I can only give some non-expert thoughts for your consideration. First let me make a distinction between Dhamma and dhamma as I see it. The word 'Dhamma' is the whole teachings of the Buddha, and 'dhamma' is a reality or a phenomenon (e.g. ruupa, vedanaa, vinnaana, sense object, hindrance, etc.), or a mental quality as object for contemplation (anupassana). In the dhamma-anuapssana of the Satipatthaana Sutta the dhammas being investigated (contemplated, or discerned) are the following: the 5 hindrances, 5 aggregates of clinging, 6 sense-objects (form, sound, ..., mind-object), 6 sense-doors (eye, ear, ..., mind) and the fetters that bind together the external and internal sense media, 7 factors for awakening (mindfulness, ..., equanimity), and the four noble truths (this is missing from your list). The basic definition of dhamma-anupssana is given in MN 10: "he remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves --ardent, alert, and mindful-- putting aside greed and distress with reference to the world". 'Remaining focused on' is in the sense of establishing no-slipping attention on the mind object. Being mindful, he pays due attention to the object of contemplation. With such a noble mind state, being freed from the hindrances, the phenomena will manifest: the non-deluded meditator sees/knows those dhammas the way they really are. In other words he clearly sees with discernment those arising-and-passing-away mental qualities and their abandonment (letting go) . [pajaanaati]. And equanimity is established. SN 54.13 also gives the same message: "He who sees clearly with discernment the abandoning of greed and distress is one who oversees with equanimity, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves -- ardent, alert, and mindful-- putting aside greed and distress with reference to the world." ............ Rob, please let me know if there is anything that is missing, not clear or inaccurate. Truly, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Tep, and Nina. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > N: Not only listening, also deeply considering again and again is necessary. In this way what one heard becomes clearer and clearer. One has to verify the truth for oneself. When listening and considering each time just a little of the great amount of ignorance we have accumulated wears away. ... gradually we become used to consider seeing that appears now, and hearing that is another dhamma, and thinking, another dhamma again. Different realities. Their arising and falling away, which is a stage of insight, cannot yet be realized. > > > > T: I see, it is the dhamma-anupassana in the Satipatthaana Sutta. It's all clear now. > > Thank you very much for the patience. > > Thanks for bringing this up, Tep, with reference to the Satipatthana Sutta. The subject of Dhammanupassana has also been difficult for me, as it seems to have a broad range. However, I think it is fair to say that it involves the direct contemplation of the understandings that make up the Dhamma. > > I found an interesting discussion of this. The first comment shows the confusion over Dhammanupassana. The second comment I think shows greater clarity. Then there are several quotes from Sati Sutta which sort of give the range of Dhammanupassana. I will give excerpts below and hope that you may help clarify what Dhammanupassana consists of. Here are the excerpts, starting with the "confused" comment, then the "clarifying" comment, then the direct quotes from Sati Sutta: > > Confused comment: > "...there is a fourth foundation of mindfulness regarding Dhamma, translated as mental objects. This fourth foundation of mindfulness is more general and there are different interpretations of what it means. Generally, there are two types of interpretations. One interpretation is that Dhamma means certain aspects of the teachings, whereby when we contemplate on it—insight ie vipassana may arise. The other meaning is mental objects. Concerning this, it may also be interpreted as Dhamma in the sense of phenomena because all phenomena can be made the object of the mind. Therefore, the field is very wide; it stretches beyond the fields of the other three forms of objects." > > Clarifying comment: > "Meditation on the Dhamma objects, seeing how they arise, how they come about. It is a meditation and contemplation on the Dhamma itself and the factors of the Dhamma and how they come into be, both the wholesome factors and the unwholesome fetters." > [Rob comment: This seems to be saying that Dhammanupassana is the contemplation of how "dhammas" arise from the point of view of the "Dhamma."] > > Excerpts from the Satipatthana sutta on the range of Dhammanupassana: > > Re: Mindfulness Of Mental Objects (dhammanupassana) > > Postby David N. Snyder » Mon Jul 27, 2009 8:17 pm > Meditation on the Dhamma objects, seeing how they arise, how they come about. It is a meditation and contemplation on the Dhamma itself and the factors of the Dhamma and how they come into be, both the wholesome factors and the unwholesome fetters. > > > Five Hindrances: > "There is the case where a monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five hindrances. And how does a monk remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five hindrances? There is the case where, there being sensual desire present within, a monk discerns that 'There is sensual desire present within me.' Or, there being no sensual desire present within, he discerns that 'There is no sensual desire present within me.' ... > > "Five Aggregates: > "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging? There is the case where a monk [discerns]: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. ... > > "Sixfold Internal and External Sense Media: > "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal and external sense media. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the sixfold internal and external sense media? There is the case where he discerns the eye, he discerns forms, he discerns the fetter that arises dependent on both. He discerns how there is the arising of an unarisen fetter. And he discerns how there is the abandoning of a fetter... > > Seven Factor of Awakening: > "Furthermore, the monk remains focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the seven factors of awakening. And how does he remain focused on mental qualities in and of themselves with reference to the seven factors of awakening? There is the case where, there being mindfulness as a factor of awakening present within, he discerns that 'Mindfulness as a factor of awakening is present within me.' Or, there being no mindfulness as a factor of awakening present within, he discerns that 'Mindfulness as a factor of awakening is not present within me.' ... > > Here is the link for the full discussion on Dhamma Wheel with the complete excerpts from the Sutta: > http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=1923 > > I would be very appreciative of your comments and views of this material, to clarify the range and nature of Dhammanupassana. > > Best, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - > #129765 From: "philip" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 8:22 am Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. philofillet Dear Rob E Citta in the sense of citta and cetasika so cetana etc included in "cittas with right understanding." Phil #129766 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 2:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati in the five sense doors? jagkrit2012 Dear Tadao and Nina > N: Also in the sense-door processes kusala javanacittas arise, and > these are accompanied by sati. > But I think that your question deals with sati of the level of > satipa.t.thaana. > When a stage of insight arises, there are several processes through > sense-door and mind-door. > When the difference between naama and ruupa is clearly distinguished, > at the first stage of insight which is still tender insight, ruupa > appars through a sense-door and through the mind-door. JJ: I check with Thai Dhamma discussion board and found same type of question. Khun Paderm who has duty to answer questions in the board gave the same explanation as Nina's that satipa.t.thaana can arise in five sense-doors. And in those sense-doors, satipa.t.thaana only experiences characteristic of ruupa as the object of understanding. In mind-door, satipa.t.thaana can experience both characteristic of naama and ruupa. However, satipa.t.thaana in mind door in the 3rd session (vaara) after sense-door session fall away can not experience ruupa as the object because the ruupa does not appear. But only thinking (vitakka) deems of idea of ruupa (pannatti) instead. He further comment that satipa.t.thaana in vipassana.na.na only arises in mind-door. Anumodhana Jagkrit #129767 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 3:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities epsteinrob Hi Tep. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi Rob E., - > > You've been nice enough to me! But if you want to be nicer, maybe this WikiHow helps? :-) > http://www.wikihow.com/Be-Nice Thanks, Tep - I will study these excellent instructions. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #129768 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 3:13 pm Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Dear Rob E > > Citta in the sense of citta and cetasika so cetana etc included in "cittas with right understanding." I appreciate that, cetana is included - but my point was that citta even with cetana does not communicate anything. In order to hear the Dhamma there must be rupas produced by kamma patha, otherwise the "wise friend" would just be thinking and not speaking. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #129769 From: "annieaqua" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 2:08 pm Subject: Re: Discussion with Annie & Pt annieaqua Dear Sarah, Jon & Jagkrit Thank you for your replies regarding my questions. I appreciate the time taken to respond. I will reflect on these answers when I have more time on my travels. Best wishes, Annie #129770 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 3:55 pm Subject: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, The next day I heard that a good friend, Ivan Walsh, had died suddenly. We went to the temple where rituals were performed and where later on the cremation would take place. Here Acharn Sujin and several friends were present. In the morning Acharn’s sister, Khun Sujid, and Khun Sujid’s daughter had still seen Ivan on the street, and now he is another person. It can all happen so suddenly. The departing from this life is similar to the departing from last life. When we passed away from last life and we were born into this life, all that happened in the past is forgotten. It is difficult to accept this because of our clinging. We do not like the idea of being forgotten by our beloved one who passed away to another life. Acharn explained to me that it is also difficult to accept the truth of this moment: “Whom do you see? There is always someone, even now.” In reality there is no person, there is no one who can stay. What we take for a person is consciousness (in Pali:citta), mental factor arising with consciousness (in Pali: cetasika) and physical phenomena (in Pali: rúpa). These are only fleeting mental phenomena and physical phenomena which arise and then fall away immediately. Seeing-consciousness is a moment of consciousness, a citta, that sees only what is visible, visible object, which is a physical phenomenon, a rúpa. It sees visible object just for an extremely short moment, and then it falls away. After the seeing has fallen away we think with attachment about things and persons we believe we see. It seems that we see them, but in reality we do not see them, seeing has fallen away already. Because of remembrance, sańńĺ, a cetasika (mental factor) arising with each citta, we think of persons and things and we believe that they stay. In reality seeing, visible object or thinking arise for a very short moment and then fall away. They are mere elements and nobody can change their nature. Acharn said: “What has fallen away never comes back again, never, never.” I said that it is so sorrowful when I think about Lodewijk, that he never comes back. Acharn answered: “Think of yesterday. Where were you yesterday? And think of this morning, where were you? There is no one at all, just this moment. We have to be very courageous to know that this is true. Even when there is unpleasant feeling, it is just a moment. It has arisen, and if it had not arisen it could not be here right now.” Nina: “Right understanding is so weak.” Acharn: “Yes, because of the self, because of you. But when it is not you it is only the nature of an element. So, we do not mind how many lives will come because we cannot force the ending of the cycle without conditions. It has to be like this. But pańńĺ (understanding of realities) develops and develops. That is why the Buddha taught us the Jĺtakas, the stories of his previous lives as a Bodhisatta. Each reality has gone, sound, sight, nothing is left. Is one attached to someone in one's thoughts? But actually there are only seeing, thinking, visible object.” --------- Nina. #129771 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 4:09 pm Subject: Nina: Many Happy Returns sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Very best wishes on your birthday! We sincerely hope that your good group of friends here can help bring some celebration cheer and Dhamma reminders on this day for you. We are all so fortunate that you continue to share the Teachings with us all and give such an excellent example of tireless and selfless dedication to the development of understanding in daily life and help to spread this to all those who may benefit. Your recent series from Thailand is an example of this. In spite of your personal difficulties and sadness, you never waver in confidence in what is really important in life. Wishing you many, many happy returns. With respect and appreciation Sarah (& Jon) ====== #129772 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 4:54 pm Subject: Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns t.sastri Dear Nina (and Sarah),- Happy Birthday to you! Is it April 5? (Mine is April 4.) May your strength and wisdom continue to be strong so that more useful work can be done. Thanks to Sarah for telling the group. Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Nina, > > Very best wishes on your birthday! We sincerely hope that your good group of friends here can help bring some celebration cheer and Dhamma reminders on this day for you. > > We are all so fortunate that you continue to share the Teachings with us all and give such an excellent example of tireless and selfless dedication to the development of understanding in daily life and help to spread this to all those who may benefit. > > Your recent series from Thailand is an example of this. In spite of your personal difficulties and sadness, you never waver in confidence in what is really important in life. > > Wishing you many, many happy returns. > > With respect and appreciation > > Sarah (& Jon) > ====== > > > #129773 From: Tam Bach Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 4:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nina: Many Happy Returns tambach Dear Nina, I also join John and Sarah in their birthday wishes to you. Anumodana to all the great work you have done to spread the Dhamma. With best wishes and metta, Tam   We are all so fortunate that you continue to share the Teachings with us all and give such an excellent example of tireless and selfless dedication to the development of understanding in daily life and help to spread this to all those who may benefit. Your recent series from Thailand is an example of this. In spite of your personal difficulties and sadness, you never waver in confidence in what is really important in life. Wishing you many, many happy returns. #129774 From: Tam Bach Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 5:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nina: Many Happy Returns tambach PS to Nina We are so glad to know you plan to join the September discussions. Looking forward to seeing you!   Dear Nina, I also join John and Sarah in their birthday wishes to you. Anumodana to all the great work you have done to spread the Dhamma. With best wishes and metta, Tam   We are all so fortunate that you continue to share the Teachings with us all and give such an excellent example of tireless and selfless dedication to the development of understanding in daily life and help to spread this to all those who may benefit. Your recent series from Thailand is an example of this. In spite of your personal difficulties and sadness, you never waver in confidence in what is really important in life. Wishing you many, many happy returns. #129775 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 5:46 pm Subject: Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns sarahprocter... Dear Tep, Happy Birthday to you for yesterday too! You were sharing Dhamma reminders and discussing and considering more - the best way to spend a birthday or any day, developing more understanding of present realities. Thank you for sharing part of your day with us! A birthmoment each moment and a deathmoment each moment too! Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > Happy Birthday to you! Is it April 5? (Mine is April 4.) > May your strength and wisdom continue to be strong so that more useful work can be .... #129776 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 5:48 pm Subject: Re: Direct Knowing of Visible Object sarahprocter... Hi Tep, I remember you have good summary skills and thank you for extracting the main points from what I wrote to you and others here: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > Allow me to sum up your reply on "direct knowing" of realities as follows: > > 1. >Sarah: .. if there is no knowing about realities(paramattha dhammas) such as seeing and visible object in theory first, there can be no direct understanding of them when they appear now. > > 2. >Sarah: There are just realities being experienced now, such as visible object which is experienced by seeing. It depends entirely on conditions whether or not understanding arises now. If there is any clinging to the idea that it is me or you who can know anything, there won't be any understanding of visible object or any other reality. > > 3. >Sarah: So the right way to consider realities, such as visible object, is as dhammas which arise by conditions and fall away. Never anyone to experience them and never a person or thing to be experienced. This understanding is the way that gradually the idea of self is eliminated and what appears now can be directly understood with detachment. ... Metta Sarah ===== #129777 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 6:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Akusala dhamma conditions kusala by way of Upanissaya Paccayo sarahprocter... Dear Tam, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Tam Bach wrote: > The reason I asked the question is because I am inclined to think there must be a difference in the way kusala dhammas condition other kusala dhammas- especially understanding, and the away kusala dhammas condition akusala and vice-versa. > > If the dependence-condition on both case were exactly the same, there would be no point of talking about the right path, where only moments of right understanding lead to other moments of right understanding. > > Then one would be able to say: I might be practicing with lobha, but it can condition moment of understanding later, by way of upanissaya paccayo, which doesn't seem right to me. .... S: Although it is true, as you and as the texts point out, that akusala can condition kusala and vice versa by this condition, it would be very wrong to suggest that practising lobha is the way to develop understanding or that understanding just leads to more lobha. Understanding now is the main condition (by pakatu upanissaya paccaya) for more understanding in future and lobha now is the main condition (in the same way) for more lobha in future. The fact that, in truth, any akusala state can condition understanding and any kusala state can condition attachment doesn't alter the fact that what arises now leads to more of the same. If this were not so, the Buddha wouldn't have bothered to share the Dhamma and there'd be no point in listening and carefully considering what's been heard. The question also touches on a point that Phil often stresses about how often when listening or discussing the Dhamma there is bound to be attachment arising. It doesn't matter! It's just how it is and any kind of dhamma can be known at this or any other time. The understanding being accumulated in spite of such attachment will lead to more understanding. When there is minding or caring or trying to work out whether in fact there is attachment or 'seeking comfort' at such times, there's likely to be just more clinging to self and 'my' mind-states. Metta Sarah ======= #129778 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 6:30 pm Subject: Re: Asubha of all conditioned realities sarahprocter... Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > >N: The original point was: is that which arises and falls away beautiful? Also sobhana dhammas are arising and falling away. Are they worth clinging to? > > T: It is according to the Buddha that dhammas that arise and fall away (anicca) are not worth clinging to. That has been clear. > However, some of those which arise and fall away can be indeed beautiful, e.g. sun-rise and sun-set; roses; diamonds, etc. But they don't last forever. > http://www.lespierresdejulie.com/pierre-du-mois/rubis-03/;download .... S: t's an illusion, a mirage, Tep. All that is ever seen is visible object. There is thinking about what is seen and sanna marks and remembers what is seen and thought about at each moment. It's citta and sanna vipallasa (perversion) again when there is the taking of what is non-beautiful (asubha) for beautiful (subha). SN 22:95 A Lump of Foam, (Bodhi transl.)" "Suppose, bhikkhus, that in the last month of the hot season, at high noon, a shimmering mirage appears. A man with good sight would inspect it, ponder it, and carefully investigate it, and it would appear to him to be void, hollow, insubstantial. For what substance could there be in a mirage? So too, bhikkhus, whatever kind of perception there is , whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near: a bhikkhu inspects it, ponders it, and carefully investigates it, and it would appear to him to be void, hollow, insubstantial. For what substance could there be in perception?" "Spk: Perception is like a mirage (marichikaa) in the sense that it is insubstantial, for one cannot grasp a mirage to drink or bathe or fill a pitcher. As a mirage deceives the multitude, so does perception, which entices people with the idea that the colourful object is beautiful, pleasurable, and permanent." **** Metta Sarah ===== #129779 From: "philip" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 7:35 pm Subject: Re: The Cycle of Birth and Death, no 1. philofillet Dear Rob E Ok, throw in rupas if you'd like. You can conceptualize to the person with the name as well if you'd like. But the starting point is the accumulated understanding of Dhamma. (I.e panna rooted cittas.) Over and out for me on this, thanks. Phil. #129780 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 7:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns nilovg Dear Sarah, Tep, Tambach, Thank you very much for your kind wishes to me. Sarah said: A birthmoment each moment and a deathmoment each moment too! That is a real good one! Citta arises and falls away. Also my best wishes to Tep who just had his birthday. My sister is coming for lunch and music. I am happily cooking for her. Appreciating your kindness, Nina. #129781 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 7:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma-anupassana nilovg Dear Tep, Op 4-apr-2013, om 9:22 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > T: I see, it is the dhamma-anupassana in the Satipatthaana Sutta. > It's all clear now. ------ N: All objects of satipa.t.thaana are actually dhammas, realities. Also those classified under the first three applications of mindfulness. This fourfold classification is just a means to help us to see that all realities, all dhammas, can be objects of mindfulness and right understanding. As Acharn Sujin always says: we should not focus on the names and terms. It is best to be aware now of whatever dhamma presents itself, kusala or akusala, pleasant or unpleasant. The translations use the word focussing, but this may lead to confusion. It is not a matter of remaining concentrated on a dhamma, it has fallen away already before we can think of it. ------- Nina. #129782 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 9:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati in the five sense doors? tadaomiyamot... Dear Jagrit Thank you for your clear explanation. But I have to say "logically acceptable, but intuitively not." tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jagkrit2012" wrote: > > Dear Tadao and Nina > > > > N: Also in the sense-door processes kusala javanacittas arise, and > > these are accompanied by sati. > > But I think that your question deals with sati of the level of > > satipa.t.thaana. > > When a stage of insight arises, there are several processes through > > sense-door and mind-door. > > When the difference between naama and ruupa is clearly distinguished, > > at the first stage of insight which is still tender insight, ruupa > > appars through a sense-door and through the mind-door. > > JJ: I check with Thai Dhamma discussion board and found same type of question. > > Khun Paderm who has duty to answer questions in the board gave the same explanation as Nina's that satipa.t.thaana can arise in five sense-doors. And in those sense-doors, satipa.t.thaana only experiences characteristic of ruupa as the object of understanding. In mind-door, satipa.t.thaana can experience both characteristic of naama and ruupa. > > However, satipa.t.thaana in mind door in the 3rd session (vaara) after sense-door session fall away can not experience ruupa as the object because the ruupa does not appear. But only thinking (vitakka) deems of idea of ruupa (pannatti) instead. > > He further comment that satipa.t.thaana in vipassana.na.na only arises in mind-door. > > Anumodhana > > Jagkrit > #129783 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 9:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati in the five sense doors? tadaomiyamot... Hi Nina Thank you for your explanation. In fact, this was one of the questions I asked Kun Sujin in March. Even though she explained it to me, I wasn't able to grasp the gist of her answer. The take-home-message seems to be that one shouldn't be worry about in which door sati arises. When it arises it does its function regardless of doorways. Mettaaya, tadao --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tadao, > Op 4-apr-2013, om 15:13 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende > geschreven: > > > It's said that sati arises not only through the mind door but also > > through the five sense doors. > > I'm wondering if you do not mind explaining how it is possible for > > sati to arise even at any one of the sense doors. (For me, it > > sounds very counterintuitive.) > ------ > N: Also in the sense-door processes kusala javanacittas arise, and > these are accompanied by sati. > But I think that your question deals with sati of the level of > satipa.t.thaana. > When a stage of insight arises, there are several processes through > sense-door and mind-door. > When the difference between naama and ruupa is clearly distinguished, > at the first stage of insight which is still tender insight, ruupa > appars through a sense-door and through the minddoor. As I understood > from Acharn Sujin, nobody can stop sati and pa~n~naa at the sense- > door, the sense-door process and mind-door process alternate so > rapidly. Sense-door /mind-door/sense-door/mind-door. But no thinking > about which doorway it is at a given moment, no time. > Nina. > > > > > #129784 From: "tadaomiyamoto@..." Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 9:39 pm Subject: Sacca Parami tadaomiyamot... Hi Kun Nina I'm wondering if you do not mind commenting on "Sacca Parami". Could you tell me why Sacca in important for the development of sati/pannaa? (One important realization I had in March in Bangkok was that one has to be "sincere" in the sense that Dhamma ought to practiced, not part-time, full-time. For lay-followers there would be many excuses of not devoting oneself to Dhamma, but these excuses are very much against the sprit of Sacca.) Mettaaya, tadao #129785 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 9:41 pm Subject: Re: Question about Mahayana. jonoabb Hi Azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "azita" wrote: > > Hallo Jon, > > certainly don't feel like you hijacked the thread, I thought that's how we work here at DSG. If someone comes up with a point from a different angle then go for it, I say. > > Will resume when I pick up where I left off, if thats possible:) > It all gets beyond me when I'm not 'at the coal face' so to speak, for a few days. > =============== J: I know what you mean! To help, here's a link to the post of Rob E that you were going to reply to after eliciting his understanding of "dhammas": http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/129490 > =============== > > Cittas, cetasikas and rupas - what could be more simple than that - HA! > =============== J: Sounds so simple, doesn't it! Jon #129786 From: han tun Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 10:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns hantun1 Dear Nina,  I join Sarah, Tep and others in wishing you Happy Birthday! May you be happy and healthy and continue to provide us with your guidance in Dhamma matters.  with my highest respect, Han  From: Tep Sastri To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 5, 2013 12:54 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns  Dear Nina (and Sarah),- Happy Birthday to you! Is it April 5? (Mine is April 4.) May your strength and wisdom continue to be strong so that more useful work can be done. Thanks to Sarah for telling the group. Tep === --- In mailto:dhammastudygroup%40yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Nina, > > Very best wishes on your birthday! We sincerely hope that your good group of friends here can help bring some celebration cheer and Dhamma reminders on this day for you. > > We are all so fortunate that you continue to share the Teachings with us all and give such an excellent example of tireless and selfless dedication to the development of understanding in daily life and help to spread this to all those who may benefit. > > Your recent series from Thailand is an example of this. In spite of your personal difficulties and sadness, you never waver in confidence in what is really important in life. > > Wishing you many, many happy returns. > > With respect and appreciation > > Sarah (& Jon) > ====== > > > #129787 From: "philip" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 10:52 pm Subject: Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns philofillet Happy Birthday, Nina. We are all very fortunate to have you as a Dhamma friend. Phil #129788 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 11:02 pm Subject: It Is An Illusion, a Mirage ... t.sastri Hi Sarah, - It is great to discuss the Abhidhamma with you, but my conventional-language-habit is still a little too difficult to switch off. ............... > > > > T: It is according to the Buddha that dhammas that arise and fall away (anicca) are not worth clinging to. That has been clear. > > However, some of those which arise and fall away can be indeed beautiful, e.g. sun-rise and sun-set; roses; diamonds, etc. But they don't last forever. > > http://www.lespierresdejulie.com/pierre-du-mois/rubis-03/;download > .... > S: t's an illusion, a mirage, Tep. > > All that is ever seen is visible object. There is thinking about what is seen and sanna marks and remembers what is seen and thought about at each moment. It's citta and sanna vipallasa (perversion) again when there is the taking of what is non-beautiful (asubha) for beautiful (subha). > T: You're absolutely right, Sarah. Constantly reflecting, pondering, and carefully investigating like that should add more power to the perception of impermanence --no question about it. > S: SN 22:95 A Lump of Foam, (Bodhi transl.)" > > "Suppose, bhikkhus, that in the last month of the hot season, at high noon, a > shimmering mirage appears. A man with good sight would inspect it, ponder it, > and carefully investigate it, and it would appear to him to be void, hollow, > insubstantial. For what substance could there be in a mirage? So too, bhikkhus, > whatever kind of perception there is , whether past, future, or present, > internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near: a > bhikkhu inspects it, ponders it, and carefully investigates it, and it would > appear to him to be void, hollow, insubstantial. For what substance could there > be in perception?" > > "Spk: Perception is like a mirage (marichikaa) in the sense that it is > insubstantial, for one cannot grasp a mirage to drink or bathe or fill a > pitcher. As a mirage deceives the multitude, so does perception, which entices > people with the idea that the colourful object is beautiful, pleasurable, and > permanent." > **** > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== T: Thanks for the sutta quote. I appreciate it a lot. BTW Have you got rid of your ruby, pearl and diamond collections yet? :-) Be free, Tep === #129789 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 11:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma-anupassana t.sastri Dear Nina (Sarah, Rob E.), - I appreciate this opportunity to discuss the Dhamma and learn more. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Tep, > Op 4-apr-2013, om 9:22 heeft Tep Sastri het volgende geschreven: > > > T: I see, it is the dhamma-anupassana in the Satipatthaana Sutta. > > It's all clear now. > ------ > N: All objects of satipa.t.thaana are actually dhammas, realities. > Also those classified under the first three applications of > mindfulness. This fourfold classification is just a means to help us > to see that all realities, all dhammas, can be objects of mindfulness > and right understanding. As Acharn Sujin always says: we should not > focus on the names and terms. It is best to be aware now of whatever > dhamma presents itself, kusala or akusala, pleasant or unpleasant. > The translations use the word focussing, but this may lead to > confusion. It is not a matter of remaining concentrated on a dhamma, > it has fallen away already before we can think of it. > T: Many thanks for pointing out that kaya, vedana, citta, and dhamma are "actually dhammas, realities". It is true! However, I think the reason why our Greatest Teacher, the Buddha, groups these realities for anupassana into kaya-anupassana, vedana-anupassana, citta-anupassana, and dhamma-anupassana is because each anupassana has its advantages that would not be fully realized if they are lumped together in one 'dhamma-anupassana'. For example, anapanasati (only the first tetrad) and kayagatasati are under kaya-anupassana; yet, rupakkhandha is under dhamma-anupassana. Vedana-anupassana is separated from the anupassana of vedana-khandha that is under dhamma-anupassana. Truly, Tep === #129790 From: Lukas Date: Fri Apr 5, 2013 11:41 pm Subject: What is fear? szmicio Dear friends, What is fear? Best wishes Lukas #129791 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 12:12 am Subject: Re: What is fear? sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, >L: What is fear? .... S: Dosa cetasika Metta Sarah ====== #129792 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 12:31 am Subject: Re: It Is An Illusion, a Mirage ... sarahprocter... Hi Tep, Just like old times..... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > It is great to discuss the Abhidhamma with you, but my conventional-language-habit is still a little too difficult to switch off. ... S: No need to "switch off" or not use conventional language! We have to use it. However, the point was just that sun-rises, roses and diamonds are not dhammas and don't have the characteristic of anicca. > ............... > T: Thanks for the sutta quote. I appreciate it a lot. > BTW Have you got rid of your ruby, pearl and diamond collections yet? :-) ... S: Ha, ha! Actually, I've never a collector of jewellery to my mother's disappointment! Seriously, whether or not I had such a collection would make no difference to the truth about realities. Appreciating that only visible object is seen and only tangible object is touched doesn't mean one has to give away all material goods (unless one becomes a monk) or that there is no more clinging to diamonds! > Be free, ..... S: Being free of wrong view about present realities is most precious of all, don't you think? Metta Sarah ===== #129793 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 12:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma-anupassana sarahprocter... Dear Tep, Good topic! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > For example, anapanasati (only the first tetrad) and kayagatasati are under kaya-anupassana; yet, rupakkhandha is under dhamma-anupassana. .... S: kayanupassana refers to awareness and understanding of rupas, the rupas we take for the body that we're so very attached to. Each rupa is rupa khandha. .... >Vedana-anupassana is separated from the anupassana of vedana-khandha that is under dhamma-anupassana. .... S: Again each vedana is vedana khandha. We find feelings so very, very important throughout the day, so vedananupassana is emphasised. Many realities, such as rupas and vedana are repeated in different contexts. As you suggest, when the 5 khandhas are mentioned later under dhammanupassana, these include all conditioned realities, all objects of satipatthana. So now, what appears? Hardness, softness, visible object, pleasant or unpleasant feeling? There can be awareness and understanding now. Just ordinary dhammas, khandhas, realities in daily life. Metta Sarah ====== #129794 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 1:50 am Subject: Re: What is fear? upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Nina)- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > > >L: What is fear? > .... > > S: Dosa cetasika ----------------------------- HCW: Ahhh! I didn't know what fear was before, but now it is cleared up! ;-)) [Sorry - I just couldn't resist my evil inclination! LOL!] ----------------------------- > > Metta > > Sarah > ====== > ============================= With metta, Howard P. S. As the Bard said: "What's in a name? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet." P.P.S. Belated birthday wishes, Nina! #129795 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 2:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns nilovg Dear Han and Phil, Thanks for your thoughtfulness. It is so nice to receive birthday mail. Nina. Op 5-apr-2013, om 13:47 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Dear Nina, > > I join Sarah, Tep and others in wishing you Happy Birthday! > May you be happy and healthy and continue to provide us with your > guidance in Dhamma matters. > > #129796 From: "jagkrit2012" Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 2:07 am Subject: Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns jagkrit2012 Dear Nina For this special occation of your birthday comes around, I and my family sincerely wish you have good health and enjoy studying, teaching and sharing dhamma among friends for long long posible time. Warmest regards, Jagkrit #129797 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 2:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati in the five sense doors? nilovg Dear Tadao, Op 5-apr-2013, om 12:31 heeft tadaomiyamoto@... het volgende geschreven: > In fact, this was one of the questions I asked Kun Sujin in March. > Even though > she explained it to me, I wasn't able to grasp the gist of her answer. > > The take-home-message seems to be that one shouldn't be worry about > in which door sati arises. When it arises it does its function > regardless of doorways. ----- N: Yes, sati manages. Thinking does not help, it is not a matter of thinking. As Jagkrit said: Vipassanaa ~naa.na realizes in mind-door processes the difference between naama and ruupa. Clear, because naama is only experienced through the mind-door. As to the sense- doors, it is a matter of a stream that just continues, no worry about it. I see whether I can find what Acharn said in Cambodia. Nina. #129798 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 2:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Nina: Many Happy Returns nilovg Dear Jagkrit, Op 5-apr-2013, om 17:07 heeft jagkrit2012 het volgende geschreven: > > For this special occation of your birthday comes around, I and my > family sincerely wish you have good health and enjoy studying, > teaching and sharing dhamma among friends for long long posible time. > ------ N: Thank you, it is very nice to receive good wishes from Dhamma friends. I always enjoy reading your mail they contain such good points. Nina. #129799 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Sat Apr 6, 2013 4:50 am Subject: HAPPY BIRTHDAY.... To Nina yawares1 Dear Nina, Happy Birthday to you..I have a dhammapada story and a picture for you. Please click: http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=16431&p=239253#p239253 Miss you, yawares