2201 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Dec 3, 2000 10:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 213 Dear betty, thanks for the message and good to have your participation. Glad to hear you met with Nina and sarah and Jon and others. Look forward to any bits you can pass on from the discussions now happening in bangkok and cambodia. One little technical point. This last post included all the other posts for the day, a total of 60somethingb or whatever. Could you chop off any non relevant stuff before posting. Thanks robert 2202 From: Michael Olds Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 2:33am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Robert, You first in that my dialog with you began first: RK: . . . I have a feeling we see, or will see, a sizeable portion in much the same light. Not necessary that we have to agree about everything; what we should do though is clearly explain our interpretations so that we and anyone listening can fully understand our positions. Hopefully we all learn something that improves our understanding of Dhamma. MO: I have been discussing the dhamma with people since the early sixties. I have always found that putting myself out there and taking the battering that usually resulted was one of the most effective learning tools for me. I look to the suttas and how most of them came to be as my model. Debate in the old days was a lively art. The problem, as I see it is that there are one or two key concepts which if taken in the wrong way can alter one’s entire understanding of the Dhamma. I cit-a um . . . Letting Go for one. If one does not grasp the idea that the key to the entire structure is letting go, [sammaa Sankappa #1: nekkhamma] then the purpose of every other teaching is lost. So my response to this is: Agree on anything or not, I wish you nothing but the best, but the key for me is seeing a few things correctly whether or not anyone agrees with me. MO: . . .but just let me tell you where my doubting mind has immediately focused: On this business of needing to "think about" in order to see not-self, and this breaking this thinking up into right Thinking [and wrong thinking] RK: Were you thinking about Dhamma when you composed this reply? Do you think about Dhamma when you study the suttas? There are so many levels of understanding but if there has never been consideration of the Dhamma - and that is thinking - then higher levels cannot arise. Imagine telling someone to sit and meditate but never teaching them any Dhamma- what could they understand? MO: It is possible for an individual who has never heard the Dhamma to attain the goal by careful observation. This is the condition of the Buddha, this is the condition of “Silent” Buddhas. Putting those to one side as being the case for beings of extraordinary determination; for the rest hearing [what we can conclude is essential key concepts of] the Dhamma is needed. We do have the case of individuals who have heard extremely little of the Dhamma who have grasped it’s meaning. That this must be the case is dictated by simple logistics: most people in the Buddha’s day will have heard no more than one sutta (pick one). There was no writing in the general population. Not everyone could follow the Buddha around. If you examine the suttas you will notice that even broken into parts they almost always hold up as complete “Dhammas” in the sense of having the essential ingredients in them to lead an energetic, determined individual to the goal. I recall one case where a Bhikkhu was taught only that “whatever it is, if it has anything to do with Tanha, know that to be Not-Dhamma.” My point in terms of studying the dhamma is that this study must be aimed correctly. If we are going to be “thinking about” then we should approach this thinking about as a matter of comprehending that which will most readily facilitate letting go. Thinking should be done expeditiously. Study dhamma to grasp the basic idea of dhamma – for this you will not find any better vehicle than the Four Truths. “He who grasps the Four Truths Grasps Dependent Origination.” Study Dhamma with the idea that by studying Dhamma you are not making trouble for yourself elsewhere. Study Dhamma to develop focus of mind so that when you have achieved Vision you will be able to see what you see, not because studying dhamma will bring about vision. If you study dhamma because you think that by understanding the detailed meaning of each of its constituent parts in detail you will have in any way advanced your progress toward freedom over and above what you could have got from the Four Truths and you are doomed. RK: Certainly if we believe that thinking about dhammas is the same as directly experiencing them then that is a delusion which must obstruct direct insight. MO: Agreed – I believe this is the point I was making above in different words. RK: The moments of direct insight are not a matter of thinking in words -for instance if understanding vedana as vedana (feeling as feeling)there is simply sati-sampajanna (mindfulness and clear comprehension)for those brief moments. MO: Here I see the first building block of a misunderstanding of the Satipatthana: that Insight is it’s goal. We all study the words between the refrains of the Satipatthana; few of us notice the refrain that ends each section: . . . thus he lives without self, downbound to nothing at all in the world. Insight too is a passing phenomena. Insight if grasped incorrectly, as the gain of some “right” view, is just leaping from one bound up condition to another. It becomes an intellectual phenomena. Without “letting go” as the guiding principle behind one’s effort, insight is useless. RK: However, I would suggest that if we believe thinking must obstruct insight into dhammas then that shows that one does not see that thinking" is simply different namas (mental phenomena)including citta(consciousness) and cetana(volition) arising because they are conditioned to arise. MO: First I see thinking as obstructing insight into Dhammas; and second I do not see how thinking this way shows that one does not see that thinking is simply different namas. While one is thinking one is certainly not seeing the rise and fall of mental phenomena. “Thinking” almost by definition, is identification of “Self” with these cittas and cetanas. RK: If we wish to stop thinking isn't that moving away from that very moment when thinking arises? MO: We do not “wish” to stop thinking. We train ourselves not to think about. Thoughts arise, but not to “us.” They are not “our” thoughts. RK: Why not be aware of any moment just as it is. You see there can be direct awareness even while thinking. MO: If you were to say this like this: “There can be direct awareness while thoughts are rising and falling.” I would agree. RK: Panna (wisdom) slips in and insights any of the many paramattha dhammas(realities) that are always arising. MO: This may be an Abhidhamma thing: the word “realities” has implications of realness. To hold that any phenomena has realness is to hold the ditthi: “it is”. My reading: PARAMATTHA = PARA pas around up overa sun – um; ATTHA attaining; DHAMMA thing. To avoid the problems associated with “ultimate realities” I would go with something like “fundamental phenomena.” MO: I am not sure about this “insighting” that Panna does. I don’t see pa~n~na out there busy doing anything that isn’t conditioned by the prior preparation of the individual in his letting go of low views. RK: This happens very quickly. This is one of the differences between samattha and satipatthana vipassana. MO: That these phenomena are occurring at an incredible speed is not in question to my mind. The question is: to what degree is it necessary to think about it to know how the details of it work in order to be able to see that identification with it is the recipe for a bad end, and that therefore it should be let go. When I hear people comparing “samattha” and “satipatthana” vipassana, what I am hearing is the discussion of the points of view of certain schools of Buddhist thought. In my reading I see the satipatthana sutta as encompassing both samattha and vipassana, and my tendency is to go with the sutta and forget about the schools. I believe up past the learning of the theory of how the system works, the proper practice as described in the suttas is to develop samattha and vipassana equally. Just let me conclude by restating my original thought: whether we agree completely or only on a point or two or not at all, I have nothing but the greatest respect, admiration, and affection for you and the others in the community in that you are all doing something that I see is extraordinary and rare in this effort to get to the bottom of things. Best Wishes! Michael Olds California www.BuddhaDust.org ICQ#94992160 2203 From: Michael Olds Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 4:41am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Kom: Next! Thank you for your welcome, and thank you again for taking the time and effort to produce a well-thought-out and articulate document. KT: Buddha taught about realities as they truly are. Even without him, the realities exist as they are. So ultimately, when someone teaches about the truth (the four noble truths), they are teaching what Buddha taught. This is regardless of where the teaching comes from, the vinayana, the sutta, the abhidhamma, the atthagatha, and from other sources. MO: I completely agree with this and I stated as much in my original post. KT: The question then becomes: without knowing about the truth, how do we know who is speaking the truth. What is the authenticity of each source? The Theravada tradition is obviously holding the tipitika as the most authentic source of the truth, holding that the teachings come directly from the Buddha himself. Now, as you and other people have mentioned, there are controversies about some sections of the tipitika, as well as the commentaries added on to it. Logically, don't we have some doubts here about the ENTIRE tipitika itself? MO: This much doubt is in fact healthy and is an aspect of learning recommended by the Buddha in his instructions to test the truth. KT: Do you believe that one man can remember, accurately, 82,000 different teachings as heard from the Buddha and the Buddha's disciples? MO: Absolutely. As Jim mentioned in a previous post, and as I know for myself, there are Bhikkhus out there even today that hold the complete Sutta Pitaka and Vinaya Pitaka in memory. Think about it: eliminate your need to hunt for food, shelter, clothing, and medicine; eliminate computers, TV, Radio, and Books and Other writings; eliminate pursuit of sexual pleasure and how much of your mind to you see is freed up for retaining suttas in memory? Add to that the extraordinary uniformity in the Pali of both word and idea throughout the entirety of the Sutta and Vinaya pitakas and you have a document that has a quality which works greatly towards its accurate retention over time: self correction through redundancy. [Look at the idea of “compression” used for saving space when transmitting images over the computer as an example of how redundancy can be used to advantage.] KT: Do you believe that after a few hundred years of oral transmission of teachings, that the teachings were written down accurately as the Buddha himself had taught? MO: This argument is made moot by your earlier argument that if what is taught is the truth, it is what the Buddha taught. The first thing one needs to do in this case is to ask one’s self what it is that one is, one’s self, attempting to gain from studying this Dhamma. Then one needs to examine the claims made by the various teachers out there. Then one needs to examine the method suggested for accomplishing the goal. Then one needs to follow that method. If that method accomplishes the stated goal, then one can ask no more. Asking more one could ask if the Entire teaching of this teacher who has taught something that does accomplish that goal also is consistent with that part of that teaching that does accomplish that goal. If it does, it doesn’t matter if the words are exactly those of the original teacher or not. But in the case of This System, comprehending the difficulty of the goal and the uniqueness in the world of it’s method, we would necessarily have to come to the conclusion (having had all the above experiences) that what we have in front of us in the Suttas is in fact the word of the Buddha . . . or, if it isn’t, then the words we have in front of us in the Suttas and Vinaya ARE the Buddha. “He who sees the Four Truths, Beggars, sees Dependant Origination; he who sees Dependant Origination sees Dhamma; he who sees Dhamma sees me.” Finally: A few hundred years of oral transmission is only five or so generations, many of those will have overlapped, allowing the older generation to correct the younger. Given the freedom of mind I described concerning the things of the world, it seems entirely plausible to me that an oral tradition could have preserved largely intact, a document such as we have in the Suttas. But further, we have evidence in the Vinaya, in the case of the Brahmans who wished to translate the suttas into Vedic that writing was in fact in existence at the time. I argue that those of weak minds then would have found the idea of writing down the dhamma irresistible. That we have no evidence that this was the case doesn’t matter. This is an issue that will never be resolved in a way provable to those without the Eye of Dhamma. KT: Are there any rigorous verifications of the different sources (as you might see in bible studies) and are those verifications enough to ensure the truth? MO: I thought that was what this Abhidhamma and Commentaries thing was all about. KT: I think the answer lies in the fact that the truth is provable, in every single moment of our life. I think we are all in agreement here that the core teachings in the tipitika are provable truth, at least to oneself. MO: Complete agreement. KT: The problem then becomes, how do we know when the truth appears to us, that it is the truth, and it is not just our delusion about the truth. I notice that I certainly have the liking of the moment when I think I discover the truth. Because of that, I sometimes hold on to the idea as being the truth just because it makes sense, and I like the idea. So, the advice that I have for myself is that, the best I can possibly do, is to learn about the provable truth as much as I can, look for the consistency and inconsistency, and see it for myself if they make any sense, if the truth as taught appears as the truth as experienced. MO: Excellent technique. So the question is: If the Abhidhamma is the superior dhamma (although, a hum, not in any way meaning to denigrate the suttas), and all of the schools of Buddhism out there acknowledge at least the suttas and Vinaya as authentic whereas there is differing opinion about the Abhidhamma, would it not prove to be a wiser technique to begin with the more fundamental dhamma and progress on through it to the point where it is mastered? Have you mastered the lesser Dhamma of the Suttas? I am not asking you to respond. I am asking you if you have asked yourself this question. But this is the heart of your question: The Truth, so called, is not something you “get.” The Truth is what is left when you get rid of Low Views. The evaluation is not “Do I have the Truth?” it is: “Do I have any Low Views left?” Is there anything there that I regard as Me or Mine? Is there anything there that, if it changed by death or injury or some other calamity would cause me grief and lamentation? Is there anything there that I still hold to be “real” or to have an ultimate existence or no existence at all?, is there anything there that I hold to be “The One True way of seeing things and all other ways are false.” KT: There is a sutta about the four great references (4 mahapradesh?) that regardless of where the teaching comes from, we need to always cross-reference with somewhere else. It is not a waste of time: in fact, it is the only way to come closer to the truth without knowing the truth our self. MO: I believe this technique is described in the Vinaya, and is worded: Check Sutta with Sutta and Vinaya with Vinaya. This is to eliminate those places where there is inconsistency. Work with those places where there is internal consistency. Again, I don’t think the idea here is that one should, just because there is consistency, accept the truth of the thing without testing. KT: Why do we need to understand (and think about it as it truly is) the truth as it is before we can know what it truly is? This is because when the truth appears, it will be known as such and not otherwise. Not knowing the truth, we will undoubtedly mistake the truth as non-truth, and the non-truth as truth. Hence, learning about the truth is the pre-requisite to developing the knowledge about truth. Without it, we will be only lost in the non-truth even if sometimes we may experience the truth. MO: Well here I can only partly agree. As I mentioned in my reply to Robert, there is the case of determining the truth without prior contact with the dhamma. And see my answer just above for determining “The Truth.” My issue is: When the Truth can be found in the Four Truths, and No Truth is Higher than these Truths, And these truths encompass all the other Truths of this system, at what point does studying the Dhamma contradict those truths: That to end DUKKHA one must end Thirst – and that includes Thirst for Dhamma knowledge. MO: Can someone place the citanas for me in terms of the pancakkhandhas? KT: As Robert has mentioned, citta is vinnanakhanndas Thank you. MO: What is a citana? KT: Citta is the element that is the chief in cognizing an object. Although the conascent cetasikas also cognizes the same object, their functions differ from the citta in that citta's only and chief function is to cognize the object. MO: So we are talking about divisions in the “consciousness element” here? One of the Six Great Elements. MO: What is the origin of a citana? KT: As any sankharadhamma, when there are conditions causing the element to arise, it will arise. I believe Buddha explicitly refused to answer the question about the original arising of citta in the rebirth cycles, as it does not aid in learning about the truth. MO: I do not need to know about the original arising of citta; but in fact when pressed he does say that it is TANHA. What I am asking is what are the conditions that cause it to arise? MO: What sustains a citana? What is the end of a citana? What is the way that leads to the end of a citana? KT: AS any sankharadhamma, when there is no condition for the element to arise, it does not arise. In the case of citta, there is no citta following cuti citta of the arahat as there is no more condition for the next citta to arise. MO: None of this addresses my questions. MO: Is the citana of the Past or of the Present or of the Future? KT: As citta rises and falls, a particular citta can be classified into past, present, and future. MO: But you have said that cittas are conditioned. If cittas are conditioned, how can they be anything but of the Past? And has not the Buddha said: The Eye, Beggars, is of the Past. That which is of the Past, put it away. Putting it away will be for your good and benefit for many a long day. MO: Is a citana the self? Does citana belong to the self? Is citana derived of the self? Is the self an aspect of citana? KT: There is no self in all realities (abhidhammas). MO: Accepting with qualification concerning the word “realities”; Well said! MO: experience is with modern psychiatry where clearly focusing on one's problems is something that the mind delights in; delighting in it, it goes out to recreate those problems; KT: My conditions that could have used psychological help in the past have been mostly attachments to the non-truth. Our cittas are experts at cognizing the non-truth: learning about the non-truth doesn't help anybody. Our suffering can be only eliminated by learning about the truth. MO: My point is that simply learning about the Truth is not enough: One must remember the Truth; one must test the truth; one must evaluate what one has tested; one must, relying on one’s conclusions continue on in ones effort until one has achieved the final goal. MO: The second view is sit down meditation and the particular saying of The Buddha which is called "Resolve" which I have used as a guide . . . KT: My observation in this area is that Buddha knows the accumulations of his pupils and can teach a pupil exactly as the pupil needs to progress: he has the ability to teach the most efficient way that the pupil can progress. However, he did not teach everybody the same way. Not every ariya disciple becomes enlightened in that way. Are you sure you have the accumultations to progress in learning the truth in that manner? MO: I am sure you mean here to say: “One must make sure one has the accumulations to progress in learning the truth in that manner.” I am suggesting that at the least one must give this method a try! And as a second place, to bite off what one can chew: if the Abhidhamma is for superior minds, then surely one should begin with the suttas and stay with them until they have been mastered before progressing on to that superior (certainly more difficult to penetrate) doctrine. MO: I have a hard time (a very hard time) catching the distinction between the two in spite of the dictionary. KT: The citta is briefly described above. Cetana is a cetasikas, a sankhara khanndas, arising with all cittas. The most-readily-understandable interpretation is "intention". When we intend to do something (kill, lie, give, keep sila, etc.), there is intention at work. MO: Ok. Please bear with me: We have eye and visual object; with the contact of the two [as I understood it] consciousness arises [sanna, vedana, vinnana as one continuous process described by Sariputta as not being capable of being perceived in distinctive units, i.e., this is a sanna, this is a vedana, this is a vinnana]. An Element of that is a Unit called a citta. That this element is confounded (sankhara) is clear. But it is arising as a consequence of past action. It may carry with it the consequences of the Intent with which that past action was made, but if it carries with it the Intent for future action there is no escape from kamma by modification of intent. Please help me understand the mechanism of action here. Best Wishes! Michael Olds California www.BuddhaDust.org ICQ#94992160 2204 From: Michael Olds Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 5:29am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request -- Samma Ditthi Amara, Thank you for your response: >MO: One thing I note about just this: Whereas the Suttas are presented in what I would call "2nd hand" form; this quote comes down 4th hand. When we hear Evam me sutam, we are hearing Ananda say that he either heard this as it was spoken or heard it repeated to him by the Buddha at a later time. What I hear in these lines is "What I hear is that Ananda heard this was the Buddha's word from Sariputta." AC: Evam me sutam means this is what I heard, it does not specify whether it is second, third or fourth hand. In fact several suttas are recounted as accounts heard from another party to whom that event was told by one of the original participants. MO: Well Amara, I wasn’t trying to be scientifically accurate here. I was trying to describe the distinction in the way the two documents present themselves. I have found that the truth (not ultimate truth here but the honest truth) or untruth of a thing often comes out as an inadvertent statement by the speaker. Here I am suggesting that the two presenters are presenting their documents in very different ways. As I understand the tradition, the “Evam me Sutam”, while surely meaning what you say, is intended in the special case of the Suttas to indicate that it is, in fact, Ananda who is speaking. After that we are repeating and should technically be saying: Evam me Sutam, (what I have read is that so and so wrote down what was passed down through so and so many generations of memorizers from a time when Ananda is said to have said Evam Me Sutam: . . . “ But then, the same would have to be said about these words about the Abhidhamma, which, essentially leaves us where we started. AC: And the Buddhist teachings were first passed on by rote, several hundred arahanta recited exactly the same words without deviation, since there were no self or mana of any degree in the persons concerned, their memories were not like anything anyone thick with the self and kilesa could understand or imagine. MO: Surely you mean to say: “As I have heard, the Buddhist teachings were . . .” Just pulling your leg. This is also what I have heard and believe. AC: It is not like the Bible where the apostles, however few they were in the New Testament, for example, each told different details about the birth of Christ, etc. Here every syllable was the same. Whether the teachings are true has to be proven by the individual and their accumulations, MO: As I have now stated a couple of times, I agree with this and so stated in my original post [see below]. AC: what remains universal is that each being has eyes, ears, noses, tongues, body-sense and mind, and that is what the Buddha taught about that no other religion does. Whether he talked about them or not these realities exist and whether we live in ignorance taking them for the self some God created or know them as they really are, realities that are impermanent that should not be taken for the self depends very much on the individual's accumulations. MO: OK, no problem. I say again I have difficulty with that word “realities” which has a meaning contradictory to the way it is being used here. Also, I see this word “accumulations” coming up quite frequently. While I can imagine the meaning of this word, it’s use here looks a lot like “predestination.” I hope I have misunderstood and that what is intended is not something that is hopelessly stuck in the Past? >MO: In the end it doesn't matter in that if there is no incongruity with the suttas it is Dhamma. On the other hand if this work were to show itself to have been put into the public view under false pretences, it would not reflect well on the knowledge of the Dhamma of those who perpetrated the hoax, and one would need to exercise extra special scrutiny of every proposition, comparing each line to the suttas, and, as such, would constitute a monumental waste of time. AC: I am sure that if you could prove that this were true you would not be asking any questions here. MO: It is not my purpose here to be proving or disproving the authenticity of the Abhidhamma. By asking the questions I have asked I will be able, by the answers to determine if there is anything going on here that is worth deeper examination by and for myself. If, in the process, I can see that there is in the orthodox Abhidhamma that which is Not Dhamma according to what I can see is orthodox dhamma in the suttas, then I will have my own opinion and will keep it to myself. I have no wish to upset anyone’s belief system. If, in the process of this investigation, some thing comes out that proves the Abhidhamma to be an unorthodox document and there are others who are taken from not-dhamma to dhamma, where is the harm? >MO: So let me ask a question concerning dhamma of you or of anyone else who cares to reply. There was talk here about citanas. Can someone place the citanas for me in terms of the pancakkhandhas? What is a citana? What is the origin of a citana? What sustains a citana? What is the end of a citana? What is the way that leads to the end of a citana? Is the citana of the Past or of the Present or of the Future? Is a citana the self? Does citana belong to the self? Is citana derived of the self? Is the self an aspect of citana? AC: As Robert said, citanas do not exist. The citta is vinnana khandha. The cetana cetasika is sankhara khandha. You take both for the self, plus a lot of other realities, because of ignorance. MO: I do not thing Robert said anywhere that citanas do not exist (provided we have the correct spelling). And, I think, given the understanding that I have been given thus far, that to say that the cittanas/cetanas do not exist would be incorrect. I hope you are saying “One takes both for the self . . .”? >MO: Would you say it was true or not that Penetrating Knowledge of Citanas constituted knowing that citanas were changeable, not-self, and in-so-far-as they were not self carried potential danger of causing Pain to the degree one was attached to them? Would you say that it was true or not that as seekers we should be training ourselves not to think about "citanas"; not to think "I am citanas"; not to think "citanas are mine"; not to think "I am made of citanas" or "citanas are made of me"? If the answer to this is that it is not true that as seekers this should be our practice, then what is the release from citanas? I am just asking. I would like to know. This is the essence of my inquiry into the Abhidhamma. Not simply the inquiry concerning citanas, for sure, but this is the pattern of my concern. I see in those who study the Abhidhamma an obsession with Dhamma that is to my mind contrary to Dhamma. I have joined this group to learn if this conception of mine is just a bias. My questions are structured but not argumentative. I am sincere. AC: I would suggest that you read the book Summary of Paramatthadhamma in the advanced section of for more precise terminology on which to base our discussions and perhaps a more solid understanding of the abhidhamma, then if you have any more questions we could discuss them more clearly. MO: Thank you for this reference which I will add to Roberts list of suggested reading and will get to in time. Meanwhile I hope you are not saying that I must understand what you are talking about before you are able to teach me about what you are talking about? As I understand it, what we are learning here was an oral trdition. Best Wishes! Michael Olds California www.BuddhaDust.org ICQ#94992160 2205 From: amara chay Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 8:03am Subject: Re: Request -- Samma Ditthi > MO: Well Amara, I wasn't trying to be scientifically accurate here. I was > trying to describe the distinction in the way the two documents present > themselves. I have found that the truth (not ultimate truth here but the > honest truth) or untruth of a thing often comes out as an inadvertent > statement by the speaker. Here I am suggesting that the two presenters are > presenting their documents in very different ways. > > As I understand the tradition, the "Evam me Sutam", while surely meaning > what you say, is intended in the special case of the Suttas to indicate that > it is, in fact, Ananda who is speaking. After that we are repeating and > should technically be saying: Evam me Sutam, (what I have read is that so > and so wrote down what was passed down through so and so many generations of > memorizers from a time when Ananda is said to have said Evam Me Sutam: . . . > " But then, the same would have to be said about these words about the > Abhidhamma, which, essentially leaves us where we started. Dear MO, It seems that the way that Sariputta did not repeat the words Evam me Sutam throughoout the abhidhamma teachings confused your reasoning. In fact Sariputta was very precise and when he spoke of the cetasika for example and having finished describing the sappa-citta-satarana-cetasika as universal and accompanying all citta he did not repeat this as he described all the 89 major kinds of citta. This may leave you where he started but not the serious student. > AC: what remains universal is that each being has eyes, ears, noses, > tongues, body-sense and mind, and that is what the Buddha taught about that > no other religion does. Whether he talked about them or not these realities > exist and whether we live in ignorance taking them for the self some God > created or know them as they really are, realities that are impermanent that > should not be taken for the self depends very much on the individual's > accumulations. > > MO: OK, no problem. I say again I have difficulty with that word "realities" > which has a meaning contradictory to the way it is being used here. Also, I > see this word "accumulations" coming up quite frequently. While I can > imagine the meaning of this word, it's use here looks a lot like > "predestination." I hope I have misunderstood and that what is intended is > not something that is hopelessly stuck in the Past? Realities are what exist and appear at this very instant to be proven, if one has the understanding of the dhamma as taught by the Buddha. Here in front of the computer screen does sight exist? It is a vipaka citta arising from conditions accumulated in the past, as well as that which is accumulating now. It is a dhatu of element that knows or experiences, whereas your eyes, ehen this dhatu is not there, would be like that of a dead persons or even the eyes being transplanted to another person, lying in ice somewhere. Only when the transplant is finished and the receiver has the right accumulations, would the dhatu that sees arise in that eye again, as it does in yours the moment that you see. What you see on the other hand is vanno, the visible object, whose characteristics are different from seeing, from sound, etc. It is the only aramana of the eye dvara. Yet each instant of vanno is different, the combinations are infinite and once that instant falls away you would never see that vanno again. No two instants of vanno are identical, and they arise and fall away very rapidly, like the rotation of electrons and splitting of quarks. Yet the citta or whatever you choose to call or spell them is 17 times faster than that. They arise through the bodysense as you type or use the mouse, they do not exist only in rote form or in huge books and treatises but right under your nose, so to speak, but only if you studied them as the Buddha and Sariputta and the rest of the abhidhamma teachers teach you to understand how they work. But the practical side is completely up to your accumulations whether to apply them or not, not even the Buddha can do that for you. > MO: It is not my purpose here to be proving or disproving the authenticity > of the Abhidhamma. By asking the questions I have asked I will be able, by > the answers to determine if there is anything going on here that is worth > deeper examination by and for myself. If, in the process, I can see that > there is in the orthodox Abhidhamma that which is Not Dhamma according to > what I can see is orthodox dhamma in the suttas, then I will have my own > opinion and will keep it to myself. I have no wish to upset anyone's belief > system. If, in the process of this investigation, some thing comes out that > proves the Abhidhamma to be an unorthodox document and there are others who > are taken from not-dhamma to dhamma, where is the harm? I agree, none but to yourself. > MO: Thank you for this reference which I will add to Roberts list of > suggested reading and will get to in time. Meanwhile I hope you are not > saying that I must understand what you are talking about before you are able > to teach me about what you are talking about? As I understand it, what we > are learning here was an oral trdition. Thank you for the dialog, which conditioned some moments of study to arise in me as I wrote. I do not think I have the qualifications to teach you anything but we could discuss the dhamma which is always useful and if it does not benefit you in any way, I will have tried my best and heve been forced to think of the truth and satipatthana and accumulated a little more right conditions for myself in the process! So anumodana in your interest, Amara PS. Signing off for Cambodia, where I do not know if there would be any internet connections, we'll see what vipaka brings! Am picking up Nina and Lodevijk up at 8.30 for the trip to the airport, Robert! They are in good hands! (actually my chauffeur's, all of us) Yesterday I also explained in front of all concerned about the translations, and I think the VGs are all clear on my account, I am very happy about that!!! 2206 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 9:22am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Michael, --- Michael Olds wrote: > MO: I completely agree with this and I stated as much in my original > post. > MO: This argument is made moot by your earlier argument that if what > is > taught is the truth, it is what the Buddha taught. Thanks for your patience in reading through what we have already agreed on: it gives me the confidence that we are on the same page. > The first thing one needs to do in this case is to ask one’s self > what it is > that one is, one’s self, attempting to gain from studying this > Dhamma. Then > one needs to examine the claims made by the various teachers out > there. Then > one needs to examine the method suggested for accomplishing the goal. > Then > one needs to follow that method. If that method accomplishes the > stated > goal, then one can ask no more. Asking more one could ask if the > Entire > teaching of this teacher who has taught something that does > accomplish that > goal also is consistent with that part of that teaching that does > accomplish > that goal. >If it does, it doesn’t matter if the words are exactly > those of > the original teacher or not. But in the case of This System, > comprehending > the difficulty of the goal and the uniqueness in the world of it’s > method, > we would necessarily have to come to the conclusion (having had all > the > above experiences) that what we have in front of us in the Suttas is > in fact > the word of the Buddha . . . or, if it isn’t, then the words we have > in > front of us in the Suttas and Vinaya ARE the Buddha. Totally agreed. I think that we can now discuss why learning the teachings in Abhidhammas is important. > the Abhidhamma is the superior dhamma The Buddha taught only the truth that will aid becoming free of all the sufferrings. If the truth helps one becoming free, that is the superior truth for the person. Hence, in this sense, the abhidhammas is not superior to the sutta: they all teach the truths that help a person becoming free. > the Abhidhamma, would it not prove to be a wiser technique to begin > with the > more fundamental dhamma and progress on through it to the point where > it is > mastered? I think we are in agreement here that knowing the fundamentals about dhammas is the only way to proceed. I think the difference here is whether the Sutta and the Abhidhammas are "better" ways to know the fundamentals. I would like to present the following comments based on my understandings: 1) The suttas are concise teachings exactly fitting the accumulations/outlooks of the recipient. It is deep, profound, intricate, and subtle, as all the Master's teachings are. The receiver that became an ariya disciple succeeded not because of that teaching alone, but because of the dhamma/panna accumulations done in countless previous lives. The Buddha himself had accumulations for the englightenment for 4 asangayas (sp?) 100,000 kappa. Maha-mogalana and Sali-puttra each accumulated for 1 asangayas, 100,000 kappa. 2) Without the needed accumulations, just a few short and medium teaching alone cannot get a person to become an ariya disciple. 3) The abhidhammas are the books where all the deep, profound, intricate, and subtle details are expounded upon. This is for the venuyasatta (slow learner, one who needs lengthy study) and other people with no hope to become enlightend in this life, who, without the explicit details, cannot grasp even the most fundamentals of dhammas. The abhidhammas are thus for the persons who did not have enough accumulations to understand the truth based on the short teachings, without the explicit details, alone. In this sense, people who need to study abhidhammas to correctly understand dhammas have in fact "inferior" accumulations than the people who can understand it based on the suttas alone. 4) Because of the explicitness of the abhidhammas, there are less leeway to interpret dhammas as one pleases. Because of this reason, if the abhidhammas in fact teach the truth, it may lead a person with certain kind of accumultations less astrayed from the truth. Because the suttra is not as explicit, we have more tendency to interpret it anyway we like. 5) The elements of abhidhammas are in fact within the sutta itself. I have only personally seen a section of the sutta which explicitly mentions the dhammas in the abhidhammas manner. However, I have heard that the abhidhammas are in fact, extracts from the suttas. 6) The main teacher from whom we quote frequently, Tan A. Sujin, repeated time and time again that what we must compare the teachings from all the three tipitikas: the meanings of the teachings must match in order for us to have any kind of confidence that what we understand is the truth. We, as somebody who studies abhidhammas, do not hold abhidhammas to be the ultimate authority: we hold all three tipitikas to be the authority. 7) Hence, I think the main argument for studying the Abhidhammas first, is to make sure that we correctly grasp the fundamentals of buddhism (anicca, dukkha, and perhaps most importantly, anatta) before we wander on from there. 8) I agree with you that learning and understanding the intricate details of the teachings alone doesn't allow one to progress toward becoming enlightened. In fact, I am sure other people in this group agreed to this as well. Only directly knowing the truth can one progress. A. Sujin said as much. However, we still need to differentiate what is the truth and what isn't. > Have you mastered the lesser Dhamma of the Suttas? I am not asking > you to > respond. I am asking you if you have asked yourself this question. I have neither mastered the vinaya, the sutta, nor the abhidhamma. I am actively engaging in the studies of both the sutta and the abhidhammas. In fact, I totally agree that if I can master the teachings based on the sutta alone, there is no need for me to study abhidhammas. > But this is the heart of your question: The Truth, so called, is not > something you “get.” The Truth is what is left when you get rid of > Low > Views. The evaluation is not “Do I have the Truth?” it is: “Do I have > any > Low Views left?” Is there anything there that I regard as Me or Mine? > Is > there anything there that, if it changed by death or injury or some > other > calamity would cause me grief and lamentation? Is there anything > there that > I still hold to be “real” or to have an ultimate existence or no > existence > at all?, is there anything there that I hold to be “The One True way > of If I interpret what you mean by the high view (samma-dithi) and the low views (micha-ditthi) right, then I think my position would be that I need to both acquire the right views AND eliminate the wrong view. There are elements that are ultimate realities: they do exist, even though they are not-self. However, their existence are so brief, and all arise only because there are conditions for them to arise, that they are not worth "holding on" to. How do we let go of them? By directly knowing them as they truly are: brief, non-significant, rising only because there are conditions, not-self, that we can let go. Simply repeating to ourself that this is not me, it is not mine, I am not in it, it is not in me, it is not self doesn't improve our direct knowledge of the elements. And again, this is a gross misunderstandings of the "practice": I am by no way suggesting that anyone in this group suffers it. However, there are more subtle such misconceptions. How do we know which one is? >My issue is: When the Truth can be found in the Four Truths, and No >Truth is >Higher than these Truths, And these truths encompass all the other >Truths of >this system, at what point does studying the Dhamma contradict those >truths: >That to end DUKKHA one must end Thirst – and that includes Thirst for >Dhamma >knowledge I think we are in agreement here. On the other hand, we can also consider the purpose of studdying the tipitikas at the first place. Do we study it to: know it better than other people? To teach other people? To show off? These are of course the gross incorrect purpose of studying it. We study dhamma to relief ignorance, and to create conditions causing panna to arise knowing the truth as it truly is. If we directly know the truth as it truly is, letting go happens automatically (as a nana --- a step toward the maggha) when the conditions are riped. >MO: So we are talking about divisions in the “consciousness element” here? Yes, there are 89 (or 121) cittas classifications and 54 cetasikas. The characteristics of the citta is all the same: its chief and only function is to cognize an object. The cetasikas, although also cognizing objects, have other functions and characteristics conditioning the citta. Lobha, Dosa, Moha, Alobha, Adosa, Amoha, stinginess, jealousy are all cetasikas. >What I am asking is what are the conditions that cause it to arise? According to an interpretation of patthana, seeing consciousness requires 72 (???) conditions for the seeing consciousness to arise. Other cittas have the different set of conditions for arising. However, if you are coming from the view point of paticchasamutpadha, avicca (ignorance) is the common cause of the rising of cittas. Only total elimination of avicca can a citta stop (permanently) arising. >MO: But you have said that cittas are conditioned. If cittas are >conditioned, how can they be anything but of the Past? And has not the >Buddha said: The Eye, Beggars, is of the Past. That which is of the >Past, >put it away. Putting it away will be for your good and benefit for many >a >long day. The conditioning dhammas for a conditioned dhamma can be the past, the present, and in a slightly different sense, in the future. The conditioning dhammas causes the conditioned dhamma to arise, as well as sustaining the conditioned dhamma. Eliminating the conditions will stop the arising of the dhamma. >MO: Ok. Please bear with me: We have eye and visual object; with the >contact >of the two [as I understood it] consciousness arises [sanna, vedana, >vinnana >as one continuous process described by Sariputta as not being capable of >being perceived in distinctive units, i.e., this is a sanna, this is a >vedana, this is a vinnana]. An Element of that is a Unit called a citta. >That this element is confounded (sankhara) is clear. But it is arising as a >consequence of past action. It may carry with it the consequences of the >Intent with which that past action was made, but if it carries with it the >Intent for future action there is no escape from kamma by modification of >intent. Please help me understand the mechanism of action here. Not all cetana causes future consequences. Cetana of seeing consciousness doesn't cause future consequences. Cetana of an arahat doesn't cause future consequences. In order to understand this, we need to expound on the details of patthana. Again, my intention is not really to answer all questions, as there is not enough time to explain everything in an email. However, I hope that you will see the truth and decide for yourself if studying abhidhammas is a worthwhile endeaver or not. kom 2207 From: wewynal Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 9:46am Subject: Blessed One Hi, When Buddhist literature refers to Buddha as the Blessed One, I wonder who blessed him? 2208 From: Michael Olds Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 9:59am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request -- Samma Ditthi Amara, AC: It seems that the way that Sariputta did not repeat the words Evam me Sutam throughout the abhidhamma teachings confused your reasoning. In fact Sariputta was very precise and when he spoke of the cetasika for example and having finished describing the sappa-citta-satarana-cetasika as universal and accompanying all citta he did not repeat this as he described all the 89 major kinds of citta. This may leave you where he started but not the serious student. MO: On two issues in this one paragraph, Amara, you have both misunderstood what was written in previous posts and, taking your misunderstanding as fact, have formulated offensive opinions as to me personally and have taken the further step of actually posting those opinions. My reasoning in this matter is not confused. I have no reasoning whatsoever. I was responding to a statement made by Jim who was reporting what he had observed. I have read, to this point, nothing of the Abhidhamma. Second, my statement was: As I understand the tradition, the “Evam me Sutam”, while surely meaning what you say, is intended in the special case of the Suttas to indicate that it is, in fact, Ananda who is speaking. After that we are repeating and should technically be saying: Evam me Sutam, (what I have read is that so and so wrote down what was passed down through so and so many generations of memorizers from a time when Ananda is said to have said Evam Me Sutam: . . . “ But then, the same would have to be said about these words about the Abhidhamma, which, essentially leaves us where we started. This did not say that it left anyone where Sariputta started. It said that your argument, that the words did not precisely indicate the path of transmission, was irrelevant to the comparison I made between the two stated paths. The remark that the serious student would not be left at such a place was a gratuitous crack at my seriousness. I have a sense of humor and display it probably too frequently. As to how serious a student I am, I believe that that is an issue for me to reconcile with myself. >AC: what remains universal is that each being has eyes, ears, noses, tongues, body-sense and mind, and that is what the Buddha taught about that no other religion does. Whether he talked about them or not these realities exist and whether we live in ignorance taking them for the self some God created or know them as they really are, realities that are impermanent that should not be taken for the self depends very much on the individual's accumulations. >MO: OK, no problem. I say again I have difficulty with that word "realities" which has a meaning contradictory to the way it is being used here. Also, I see this word "accumulations" coming up quite frequently. While I can imagine the meaning of this word, it's use here looks a lot like "predestination." I hope I have misunderstood and that what is intended is not something that is hopelessly stuck in the Past? AC: Realities are what exist and appear at this very instant to be proven, if one has the understanding of the dhamma as taught by the Buddha. MO: This is blind reliance on authority and is unacceptable as an answer. AC: Here in front of the computer screen does sight exist? MO: This is the “it is” view. This is not-Dhamma. If this is the meaning of these “Realities” and these “realities” are being taught by the Abhidhamma then the Abhidhamma is teaching not-dhamma. I do not yet come to a conclusion here. You have proven to be a person who will misunderstand and attack personally without careful consideration or fact checking. I have no confidence whatsoever in your understanding of the Abhidhamma. There must be a thousand suttas in the sutta Pitaka where someone comes up to the Buddha and says: “How is it Gotama? Does the self exist?” and the answer is “Not this!” [And, just to be on the safe side here, this line of argument is not restricted to ideas concerning the self, but applies to any phenomena whatsoever.] And that is as it should be for the case is that for one who sees the constructed nature of things it is not possible to hold the view that any confounded thing exists; and for one who sees the ordinary world it is not possible to hold the view that a thing does not exist. Therefore one abstains from views and explains things in terms of their dependant origination. AC: It is a vipaka citta arising from conditions accumulated in the past, as well as that which is accumulating now. It is a dhatu of element that knows or experiences, whereas your eyes, when this dhatu is not there, would be like that of a dead persons or even the eyes being transplanted to another person, lying in ice somewhere. Only when the transplant is finished and the receiver has the right accumulations, would the dhatu that sees arise in that eye again, as it does in yours the moment that you see. What you see on the other hand is vanno, the visible object, whose characteristics are different from seeing, from sound, etc. It is the only aramana of the eye dvara. Yet each instant of vanno is different, the combinations are infinite and once that instant falls away you would never see that vanno again. No two instants of vanno are identical, and they arise and fall away very rapidly, like the rotation of electrons and splitting of quarks. Yet the citta or whatever you choose to call or spell them is 17 times faster than that. They arise through the body-sense as you type or use the mouse, . . . they do not exist only in rote form or in huge books and treatises but right under your nose, so to speak, but only if you studied them as the Buddha and Sariputta and the rest of the abhidhamma teachers teach you to understand how they work. MO: They exist only if I have studied them? In fact I think that modern physics has come up with something like that in the Heisenberg theory. I would not ridicule your English here except that it has revealed again your reliance on authority [you are not telling me something you know for yourself, you are reciting doctrine], something explicitly advised against in the suttas. AC: But the practical side is completely up to your accumulations whether to apply them or not, not even the Buddha can do that for you. MO: There is that “accumulations” word again, and used in exactly this way that indicates predestination. The meaning is one’s previous kamma? This is not something that is so much out of one’s control as I am being lead to believe it is from the way I am seeing this word being used here. MO: It is not my purpose here to be proving or disproving the Authenticity of the Abhidhamma. By asking the questions I have asked I will be able, by the answers to determine if there is anything going on here that is worth deeper examination by and for myself. If, in the process, I can see that there is in the orthodox Abhidhamma that which is Not Dhamma according to what I can see is orthodox dhamma in the suttas, then I will have my own opinion and will keep it to myself. I have no wish to upset anyone's belief system. If, in the process of this investigation, some thing comes out that proves the Abhidhamma to be an unorthodox document and there are others who are taken from not-dhamma to dhamma, where is the harm? AC: I agree, none but to yourself. MO: If in the course of this investigation something comes out that proves the Abhidhamma to be an unorthodox document and there are others who are taken from not-dhamma to dhamma there is no harm. Period. Not to them, not to me. Good is done. “Those Beggars, Beggars, who explain not-dhamma as not-dhamma; following these Beggars, Beggars, a great many beings are well lead and put on the right track. Put on the right track a great many beings experience happiness. And gain, service, and pleasure is brought to gods and men. Furthermore Beggars, such Beggars create great good kamma and lead to the preservation of the True Word.” On the other hand: “Those Beggars, Beggars, who explain not-dhamma as dhamma; following these Beggars, Beggars, a great many beings are lead astray and thrown off track. Thrown off, a great many beings experience unhappiness. And Loss, disservice, and pain is brought to gods and men. Furthermore, Beggars, such Beggars create great bad kamma and lead to the disappearance of the True Word.” Both from the Book of the Ones. >MO: Thank you for this reference which I will add to Roberts list of suggested reading and will get to in time. Meanwhile I hope you are not saying that I must understand what you are talking about before you are able to teach me about what you are talking about? As I understand it, what we are learning here was an oral tradition. >AC: Thank you for the dialog, which conditioned some moments of study to arise in me as I wrote. I do not think I have the qualifications to teach you anything but we could discuss the dhamma which is always useful and if it does not benefit you in any way, I will have tried my best and have been forced to think of the truth and satipatthana and accumulated a little more right conditions for myself in the process! So anumodana in your interest, MO: Well, if insulting people is the kind of “accumulations” you are looking for this little exchange has credited your account with something today. Additionally, you did not respond to many of the issues which I addressed to you. TO THE REST: Well that was fast. I was sure such a time as this would quickly arrive, but this is a record. I stay on one of these forums only until such a time as I suffer a personal attack. At that time I respond to the open issues and concluding that unsubscribe from the board. This is a policy and is impersonal as regards the rest of the board. I do not stay because to thoroughly deal with personal attacks on a board owned by someone else would be impossible and even an attempt would be a lengthy and serious disruption of another persons property [yours and the list owners]. "When bad conditions increase and good condiditions decrease, depart, even if it means having to get up and go without saying goodbye." Best Wishes! Michael Olds California www.BuddhaDust.org ICQ#94992160 2209 From: shinlin Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 11:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Blessed One Dear Wewynal, The teaching of the Lord Buddha is all about Dhamma or elements which are real and exist. When we realized or understood the Dhamma, gradually we will know that there is no Self and that everything is Dhamma, including ourself. The moment of understanding, is Panna or wisdom in understanding the truth or dhamma. Therefore in the Tipitaka, everything which the Lord Buddha said, was all about dhamma and the characteristic of it. So from here, we can understand that the Blessed One means that the elements of which the Lord Buddha has accumulated through Parami 10, is pure and omniscience. In the teaching of the Lord Buddha, everything are only dhatu or dhamma or elements, it is not a being or person or anything by assumptions. Therefore in your question, the Blessed One doesn't mean that someone bless the Lord Buddha. BUT he is the Blessed One with full omniscience of purified elements like Panna(wisdom). I hope this can help you. If there is anything you need to understand, pls let me know. with metta, Shin From: wewynal To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com Sent: Monday, December 04, 2000 8:46 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Blessed One Hi, When Buddhist literature refers to Buddha as the Blessed One, I wonder who blessed him? 2210 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 11:26am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request -- Samma Ditthi Dear Michael, I was just about to reply to your last post to me when I saw your letter to Amara. See my comments below. --- Michael Olds wrote: > Amara, > > TO THE REST: Well that was fast. I was sure such a time as > this would > quickly arrive, but this is a record. I stay on one of these > forums only > until such a time as I suffer a personal attack. At that time > I respond to > the open issues and concluding that unsubscribe from the > board. This is a > policy and is impersonal as regards the rest of the board. I > do not stay > because to thoroughly deal with personal attacks on a board > owned by someone > else would be impossible and even an attempt would be a > lengthy and serious > disruption of another persons property [yours and the list > owners]. "When > bad conditions increase and good condiditions decrease, > depart, even if it > means having to get up and go without saying goodbye." > > Best Wishes! > Michael Olds California As Jonothon pointed out recently to another member a fair number of the current members of this group have had an email lashing from Amara. I had a mild one myself and it does sting. This is an unmoderated group so we do rely on each other to keep order. I hope you will reconsider and carry on as an active member. Amara is usually very amiable once she has made her position clear; and as much as she is overly blunt when disagreeing with someone she is also full of praise when one posts something that she feels is genuinely useful (perhaps you remember her first post to you where she said it was delicious or something). It is her nature - a very frank person. I personally have no problem with anything you said, although I disagree with some of it. As I said earlier we don't have to agree but we all benefit by hearing each others interpretations. best wishes Robert 2211 From: shin lin Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 3:05pm Subject: set a time in the chat room for dhamma talk Dear Dhamma Friends, There is a chat room in the egroup. Would it be good if we set a GMT time for everyone to meet on the net and chat dhamma together on the net. It would be nice. suggestion, Shin 2212 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 3:38pm Subject: letter from Nina Dear group, I thought you might like to hear some extracts from a letter I got from Nina Van Gorkom today. “It is a great asset for the internet group that Pali scholars like Jim have joined. And it is very useful that Gayan gave explanations to the Vancaka text (the Pali is so compact) which I shall study. I really appreciate the efforts for translating the commentary and tika to the Patthana.” She later writes “I find when reading the Pali commentary I have to go very slowly because of the amount of words I have to look up in the dictionary”. robert 2213 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 6:33pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Dear michael, As I am not sure you are still on the list I just reply very briefly. If anyone would like any detail on any aspect please ask. I earlier wrote RK: However, I would suggest that if we believe thinking must obstruct insight into dhammas then that shows that one does not see that thinking" is simply different namas (mental phenomena)including citta(consciousness) and cetana(volition) arising because they are conditioned to arise..>>>> MO: First I see thinking as obstructing insight into Dhammas; and second I do not see how thinking this way shows that one does not see that thinking is simply different namas. While one is thinking one is certainly not seeing the rise and fall of mental phenomena. "Thinking" almost by definition, is identification of "Self" with these cittas and cetanas.>>>>> Robert: Did the Buddha ever think? Did the arahants think? I would suggest they did but they were not identified with cittas and cetanas. Does a fly think? I would guess not in words but they have concepts, they have papanca- tanha, ditthi and mana. I earlier wrote RK: If we wish to stop thinking isn't that moving away from that very moment when thinking arises?>> MO: We do not "wish" to stop thinking. We train ourselves not to think about. Thoughts arise, but not to "us." They are not "our" thoughts.>>>> Robert: Two sentences ago you said "Thinking almost be definition is identification of "self" with these cittas and cetasikas" Now you say "they are not our thoughts" I earlier wrote RK: Why not be aware of any moment just as it is. You see there can be direct awareness even while thinking.>>>> MO: If you were to say this like this: "There can be direct awareness while thoughts are rising and falling." I would agree. RK: Panna (wisdom) slips in and insights any of the many paramattha dhammas(realities) that are always arising. MO: This may be an Abhidhamma thing: the word "realities" has implications of realness. To hold that any phenomena has realness is to hold the ditthi: "it is". My reading: PARAMATTHA = PARA pas around up overa sun - um; ATTHA attaining; DHAMMA thing. To avoid the problems associated with "ultimate realities" I would go with something like "fundamental phenomena.">>>>>>> Robert: Yes fundamental phenomena is a better term but it is clumsy that is why most translators opt for realities. Either way we have to go into some detail to define the term. <>> Robert: It is so important to see that there is no individual, no us. There are simply khandas, dhatus, ayatanas arising and passing away at enormous speed. It can so easily be a hidden self who is letting go. I earlier wrote RK: This happens very quickly. This is one of the differences between samattha and satipatthana vipassana. MO: That these phenomena are occurring at an incredible speed is not in question to my mind. The question is: to what degree is it necessary to think about it to know how the details of it work in order to be able to see that identification with it is the recipe for a bad end, and that therefore it should be let go.>>>> Robert: Well we could argue about exactly how much detail. Some people might need less than others. For some no matter how much they get it doesn't seem to help much. The Mahagopalaka sutta (majjhima nikaya): "And how bhikkhus does a Bhikkhu know the ford? In this sasana, a Bhikkhu who occasionally vistits those monks who are well-informed and who have learnt DhammaVinaya and patimokkha by heart asks 'What is the etymology of this word sirs? What is the meaning of this word Sirs?' Then those venerable monks disclose to him what is to be disclosed, make clear what is to be made clear, and on various points of the doctrine they set his doubts at rest" Then the atthakattha says that "the monk who does not know the ford" even when he approaches these learned monks does not ask in the right way.For example "Having approached one who is learned in Abhidhamma he asks questions about as to what should be done according to the rules of the Vinaya" or he doesn't ask anything. MO:When I hear people comparing "samattha" and "satipatthana" vipassana, what I am hearing is the discussion of the points of view of certain schools of Buddhist thought. In my reading I see the satipatthana sutta as encompassing both samattha and vipassana, and my tendency is to go with the sutta and forget about the schools. I believe up past the learning of the theory of how the system works, the proper practice as described in the suttas is to develop samattha and vipassana equally.>>> Robert: I went to your website (Buddhadust) and looked up the satipatthana sutta and commentary. I cut and pasted this: "In regard to the pair of the dull-witted and the keen-witted minds among tamable persons of the craving type and the theorizing type, pursuing the path of quietude [samatha] or that of insight [vipassana]" Robert 2214 From: Date: Mon Dec 4, 2000 7:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Request -- Samma Ditthi Dear Jim, so as in loka sutta --> yena yenahi ma~n~nati , tato tam hoti a~n~nata and then --> a~n~natabhavi bhavasatto loko, bhavapareto, bhavamevabhinandati so the 'otherwise' happens because of this 'ma~n~nana' so when no ma~n~nana exists ( as in an arahant ) theres no 'thus' and 'otherwise' Thanks 2215 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 1:09am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Dear Mo, Robert and Kom, Thanks to you all: MO, for your excellent questions and Robert and Kom for your excellent replies. I look forward to more. Mike 2216 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 1:28am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Bravo, MO and Robert--this keeps getting better. Please continue! --- Michael Olds wrote: > Robert, > > You first in that my dialog with you began first: > > RK: . . . I have a feeling we see, or will see, a > sizeable > portion in much the same light. Not necessary that > we have to agree about > everything; what we should do though is clearly > explain our interpretations > so that we and anyone listening can fully understand > our positions. > Hopefully we all learn something that improves our > understanding of Dhamma. > > MO: I have been discussing the dhamma with people > since the early sixties. I > have always found that putting myself out there and > taking the battering > that usually resulted was one of the most effective > learning tools for me. I > look to the suttas and how most of them came to be > as my model. Debate in > the old days was a lively art. > > The problem, as I see it is that there are one or > two key concepts which if > taken in the wrong way can alter one’s entire > understanding of the Dhamma. I > cit-a um . . . Letting Go for one. If one does not > grasp the idea that the > key to the entire structure is letting go, [sammaa > Sankappa #1: nekkhamma] > then the purpose of every other teaching is lost. So > my response to this is: > Agree on anything or not, I wish you nothing but the > best, but the key for > me is seeing a few things correctly whether or not > anyone agrees with me. > > MO: . . .but just let me tell you where my doubting > mind has immediately > focused: On this business of needing to "think > about" in order to see > not-self, and this breaking this thinking up into > right > Thinking [and wrong thinking] > > RK: Were you thinking about Dhamma when you composed > this reply? Do > you think about Dhamma when you study the suttas? > There are so > many levels of understanding but if there has never > been > consideration of the Dhamma - and that is thinking - > then > higher levels cannot arise. Imagine telling someone > to sit and > meditate but never teaching them any Dhamma- what > could they > understand? > > MO: It is possible for an individual who has never > heard the Dhamma to > attain the goal by careful observation. This is the > condition of the Buddha, > this is the condition of “Silent” Buddhas. Putting > those to one side as > being the case for beings of extraordinary > determination; for the rest > hearing [what we can conclude is essential key > concepts of] the Dhamma is > needed. We do have the case of individuals who have > heard extremely little > of the Dhamma who have grasped it’s meaning. That > this must be the case is > dictated by simple logistics: most people in the > Buddha’s day will have > heard no more than one sutta (pick one). There was > no writing in the general > population. Not everyone could follow the Buddha > around. If you examine the > suttas you will notice that even broken into parts > they almost always hold > up as complete “Dhammas” in the sense of having the > essential ingredients in > them to lead an energetic, determined individual to > the goal. I recall one > case where a Bhikkhu was taught only that “whatever > it is, if it has > anything to do with Tanha, know that to be > Not-Dhamma.” > > My point in terms of studying the dhamma is that > this study must be aimed > correctly. If we are going to be “thinking about” > then we should approach > this thinking about as a matter of comprehending > that which will most > readily facilitate letting go. Thinking should be > done expeditiously. Study > dhamma to grasp the basic idea of dhamma – for this > you will not find any > better vehicle than the Four Truths. “He who grasps > the Four Truths Grasps > Dependent Origination.” Study Dhamma with the idea > that by studying Dhamma > you are not making trouble for yourself elsewhere. > Study Dhamma to develop > focus of mind so that when you have achieved Vision > you will be able to see > what you see, not because studying dhamma will bring > about vision. If you > study dhamma because you think that by understanding > the detailed meaning of > each of its constituent parts in detail you will > have in any way advanced > your progress toward freedom over and above what you > could have got from the > Four Truths and you are doomed. > > RK: Certainly if we believe that thinking about > dhammas is the same > as directly experiencing them then that is a > delusion which must > obstruct direct insight. > > MO: Agreed – I believe this is the point I was > making above in different > words. > > RK: The moments of direct insight are not a matter > of thinking in > words -for instance if understanding vedana as > vedana (feeling as > feeling)there is simply sati-sampajanna (mindfulness > and clear > comprehension)for those brief moments. > > MO: Here I see the first building block of a > misunderstanding of the > Satipatthana: that Insight is it’s goal. We all > study the words between the > refrains of the Satipatthana; few of us notice the > refrain that ends each > section: > > . . . thus he lives without self, downbound to > nothing at all in the world. > > Insight too is a passing phenomena. Insight if > grasped incorrectly, as the > gain of some “right” view, is just leaping from one > bound up condition to > another. It becomes an intellectual phenomena. > Without “letting go” as the > guiding principle behind one’s effort, insight is > useless. > > RK: However, I would suggest that if we believe > thinking must obstruct > insight into dhammas then that shows that one does > not see that thinking" is > simply different namas (mental phenomena)including > citta(consciousness) and > cetana(volition) arising because they are > conditioned to arise. > > MO: First I see thinking as obstructing insight into > Dhammas; and second I > do not see how thinking this way shows that one does > not see that thinking > is simply different namas. While one is thinking one > is certainly not seeing > the rise and fall of mental phenomena. “Thinking” > almost by definition, is > identification of “Self” with these cittas and > cetanas. > > > RK: If we wish to stop thinking isn't that moving > away from that very moment > when thinking arises? > > MO: We do not “wish” to stop thinking. We train > ourselves not to think > about. Thoughts arise, but not to “us.” They are not > “our” thoughts. > > RK: Why not be aware of any moment just as it is. > You see there can be > direct awareness even while thinking. > > MO: If you were to say this like this: “There can be > direct awareness while > thoughts are rising and falling.” I would agree. > > RK: Panna (wisdom) slips in and insights any of the > many paramattha > dhammas(realities) that are always arising. > > === message truncated === 2217 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 3:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] set a time in the chat room for dhamma talk Dear Khun Shin, I've thought of this myself--so naturally, I think it's an excellent suggestion! Why not propose a few GMT's and see what kind of response you get? Mike --- shin lin wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > There is a chat room in the egroup. Would it be good > if we set a GMT time > for everyone to meet on the net and chat dhamma > together on the net. It > would be nice. > suggestion, > Shin > > > 2218 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 4:49am Subject: Hello all Kia ora koutou (hello all), My name is Jody Pirret and I am pleased to introduce myself to other members of this email group. In addition to the personal information made available through the egroups registration, I would just like to elaborate on my interests. Through university study, I have come to be very interested in the development of Western culture, philosophically, materially, and, scientifically. I feel I am coming to know how I have been conditioned to view myself within such paradigms as biomedicine, psychology, physics, and, economics. Presently, I question the way in which such paradigms promote their truths above all other ways of doing things. Through philosophy, I have enjoyed discussing mind and reality. Such topics have inevitably opened my eyes to the truths of the East in the form of confucianism, taoism, and, Buddhism. Therefore, it is with an empty cup that I seek to learn from such treasures through such things as martial arts and meditation. I feel all forms of buddhism have much to offer Western culture. In terms of Theravada Buddhism, I read a book by Nina Van Gorkom. It had an old contact address of Robert Kirkpatrick's in it, and I was able to track him down. Thankfully, he put me on to this egroup. Therefore, I look forward to receiving comments from this, the Dhamma study egroup. Regards, Jody. 2219 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 7:36am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Dear group, I wrote to Michael O privately and he politely wrote back confirming that he was definitly staying off the list, not only because of Amara's letter but also because: <<>>> Needless to say I do not think Abhidhamma is "not-dhamma". Back in april I had a discussion with a Mahayana monk and wrote this (I think post 285- by the way searching the files is easy using the search engine on egroups): <<<<<<"Now a few words on the nature of dhammas (cittas, cetasikas and rupas). The word dhamma is often translated as reality. But the word reality has connotations of something substantial whereas dhammas , are too evanescent to imagine. As I said recently on this list. Any words we use to describe the nature of realities –impermanent, momentary, temporary, instant by instant- cannot convey the rapidity of the arising and passing away. Take a moment of seeing: For seeing to arise there must be cakkhu pasada (seeing base). This is the extremely refined rupa that arises in the center of the eye. This special rupa is the result of kamma. But it only lasts for the briefest moment before falling away . The reason we can keep seeing is that at this moment the force of the kamma is still working to continue replacing the cakkhu pasada. The visible eye, the eyeball, and the surrounding matter, the rest of the body, are also conditioned by different conditions - not only kamma- and these rupas also only last for a moment before vanishing forever. Every conditioning factor is simarly evanescent as is every conditioned moment. The reason I added this is to highlight the Theravada understanding of dhammas. While the theravada is not quite as radical in its interpretation of reality as the Prajna- parimita sutta, it does nevertheless demolish any ideas of substantiality. I think this needs consideration as we(I mean Theravada people) are prone to talk about "moments" of mind, and so on. However what we mean by moments is rather open to interpretation. Some might have an idea of a moment as a self-contained unit- sort of like a box that contains things but that is prone to disappear rather quickly. However from the Patthana - the last book of the abhidhamma - we learn that "moments" are highly dynamic with influences from past and present factors. The dhammas themselevs are not different form the quality they posses. In fact the subcommentary to the Dhammasangani says that "there is no other thing than the quality born by it" . And no moment is identical with another-It is true that such dhammas as sanna or vedana are classified under the same heading but the actual quality is influenced by so many diverse factiors that not even one moment of feeling is exactly the same. I write all this as I want to emphasize that any idea of cittas or cetasikas being like some mental atom (This is sort of how I saw things in my early days) is not correct"".>>>>>> I add this in case any of you are having the same concerns as MO. As always if anyone wants elaboration on any point please ask. Robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Bravo, MO and Robert--this keeps getting better. > Please continue! > --- Michael Olds wrote: > > Robert, 2220 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 8:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello all Dear Jody, thanks for joining in! A number of the regular members, including the list owners, are now in Cambodia meeting to discuss Dhamma. Nina van gorkom and her husband as well as Sujin Boriharnwanaket and other teachers of Dhamma are also there. Hopefully someone will be able to get to a computer and pass on a little of their discussions. robert --- "JODY PAUL,PIRRET" wrote: > Kia ora koutou (hello all), > > My name is Jody Pirret and I am pleased to introduce myself > to other members of this email group. In addition to the > personal information made available through the egroups > registration, I would just like to elaborate on my > interests. > > Through university study, I have come to be very interested > in the development of Western culture, philosophically, > materially, and, scientifically. I feel I am coming to know > how I have been conditioned to view myself within such > paradigms as biomedicine, psychology, physics, and, > economics. Presently, I question the way in which such > paradigms promote their truths above all other ways of doing > > things. > > Through philosophy, I have enjoyed discussing mind and > reality. > Such topics have inevitably opened my eyes to the truths of > the East in the form of confucianism, taoism, and, Buddhism. > > Therefore, it is with an empty cup that I seek to learn from > > such treasures through such things as martial arts and > meditation. > > I feel all forms of buddhism have much to offer Western > culture. > In terms of Theravada Buddhism, I read a book by Nina Van > Gorkom. > It had an old contact address of Robert Kirkpatrick's in it, > and > I was able to track him down. Thankfully, he put me on to > this egroup. > Therefore, I look forward to receiving comments from this, > the > Dhamma study egroup. > > Regards, Jody. > > -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor > > > 2221 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 11:40am Subject: Dana to Myanmar? Dear group, I sent a parcel of books (30 copies of Realities and Concepts, Boriharnawanaket) to Burma (Bhikkhu Bodhi gave me the address and said they would appeciate it). It was to the International Buddhist University in Rangoon. I got a nice letter back today. "thank you for the valuable package. We are now teaching vipassana and satipatthana and the subject of 'Realities and concepts' is very informative and useful to us. As we are teaching Nuns and bhikkhus also at the "sukra Theravada university" we can also distribute these books there. This book helps us with mental development in daily life. many thanks!" They then ask if we have other English titles and whether we could send them copies of those as well as more copies of R and C. So for those of you who are now in Bangkok and would like to make merit take your chance! The Address is U Han Htay International Buddhist University NO.98 , 46th street Yangoon Myanmar 2222 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 4:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 214 Dear Robert, Yes, I realized my mistake right after I sent it, so I apologize for any inconvenience caused. Anumodhana, Betty __________________________ Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 2223 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 9:47pm Subject: Cambodia update dear Robert & friends, just a quick check in from Pnom Penh to pick up on yr hint! So glad to see all the messages, but we're all behind on reading them! We've all been quite overwhelmed by the reception from our Cambodian dhamma friends. Busloads came to meet us at the airport and talks given by A.Sujin at the temples are attended by several hundred Cambodians each time and a lot of monks also. They are really, really apprciative and they seem to ask very intelligent questions which reflect their abhidhamma studies and the time they have been listening to her radio programs and the teachings of one of her students who now teaches here. We also had a very nice English discussion today and the last part was concerning the details of the abhidhamma and the purpose of studying these and how much it was necessary to know. I may report in detail later. Pnom Penh is very peaceful and members in our group who were last here 30 yrs ago say that apart from one or two new hotels, there are no apparent changes from that time! Jody, a big welcome and thankyou for giving us some details about yourself. I look forward to more discussion with you when I return to Hong Kong. Best rgds to all...short of time for now. Sarah p.s. (again!) JOE, I forgot to add your name last time- do hope you can also join us in Bkk next weekend. Pls check Amara's 2nd Schedules message about a week ago for the details. IVAN we also hope you're back for this! --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Jody, > thanks for joining in! A number of the regular > members, > including the list owners, are now in Cambodia > meeting to > discuss Dhamma. Nina van gorkom and her husband as > well as Sujin > Boriharnwanaket and other teachers of Dhamma are > also there. > Hopefully someone will be able to get to a computer > and pass on > a little of their discussions. > robert 2224 From: SELAMAT Date: Tue Dec 5, 2000 11:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cambodia update Dear Sarah, Just want to say "how are you" to Mrs Nina van Gorkom. May she always be happy and healthy. Would you please pass it to her. anumodana, selamat rodjali dhamma study group bogor. 2225 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 6:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] letter from Nina Thanks, Robert, for posting these extracts from the letter. I'm the same when it comes to reading Pali commentaries as I too have to spend a lot of time looking up words in dictionaries and checking with other commentaries. It can be quite a tedious process. I have been taking my time working on the translation of the Patthana commentaries. It is something I'm not doing everyday as I often get diverted to other areas of Pali & dhamma study, partly due to the influence of this discussion group. I probably won't have anything ready from the commentary to post to the group until after the new year as the holiday season is coming up shortly and I'll be away for about two weeks starting in about 10 days or so. With best wishes, Jim A. >Dear group, >I thought you might like to hear some extracts from a letter I >got from Nina Van Gorkom today. >“It is a great asset for the internet group that Pali scholars >like Jim have joined. And it is very useful that Gayan gave >explanations to the Vancaka text (the Pali is so compact) which >I shall study. I really appreciate the efforts for translating >the commentary and tika to the Patthana.” She later writes “I >find when reading the Pali commentary I have to go very slowly >because of the amount of words I have to look up in the >dictionary”. >robert 2226 From: jaran jai-nhuknan Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 9:36am Subject: Cambodia Hello from Cambodia: This is Jaran along with Nina, Amara, Sarah, Jonathan, Jack, Oii, Ell and O (and her husband Chai). We are on a Dhamma trip to Cambodia with Tan A. Sujin. We have been , to say the least, overwhelmed by the enthusiasm of the Cambodians and the Dhamma we heard from the mouth of Tan A. Sujin. Questions for the audience and Tan A. Sujin's answers are profound. On the first session with Cambodians (more than thousand of them), she talks about the three kinds of dhukka: physical suffering and unhappiness, the changing of happiness and the impermanence of all dhamma. These three and realized by different level of panna. (more later). I met Nina, Jonathan, Sarah and Amara for the first time. They are great! We are holding English sessions daily. Yesterday, we talked about something very important (for me at least): the ''right study". The key is one has to know what will help the arise of the awareness of THIS moment here and now. And one has to know one's limit of understanding HERE and NOW. Hope you all are well. My lobha wishes Kom was here, so I could learn more. Full reports will come later. I have to go now. 2227 From: shinlin Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 11:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello all Welcome Jody !! One thing you would learn from this group is definitely the realities. Oh !! forgot, you will probably learn some Pali here too. with regards, shin Ms.Shin Lin Zebra Computer Company Limited 1091/71-73, Petchburi 33, New Petchuri Rd Rajathavee, Phayathai, Bangkok, Thailand 10400 Tel : 66-2-6516000 ( 35 lines ) Fax : 66-2-6516001 company website : - http://www.zebra.co.th/ 2228 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 1:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] letter from Nina Dear Jim, --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Thanks, Robert, for I have been taking my time > working on the > translation of the Patthana commentaries. It is something I'm > not doing > everyday as I often get diverted to other areas of Pali & > dhamma study, > partly due to the influence of this discussion group. Don't feel any time pressure from us. Somehow it is comforting just knowing you are working on them. I > probably won't have > anything ready from the commentary to post to the group until > after the new > year as the holiday season is coming up shortly and I'll be > away for about > two weeks starting in about 10 days or so. Off to paint the town red, eh. (just joking) Best wishes Robert 2229 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 5:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dana to Myanmar? Dear group, I have taken the chance to do merit as suggested by Robert, by visiting the foundation today and obtaining some books and sent them to U Han Htay in Myanmar. Fearing that I might be taking too many copies from a limited amount of stock, I chose to take and send the following:- 10 copies of 'Realities and concepts'. 20 copies each of the 'Mental development' series. 10 copies of 'Abhidhamma in Daily life'. 20 copies of the 'Letters' 20 copies of the thin grey book the name of which I don't remember. This I mention in case if anyone who might have a better estimate of the stock of books at the foundation, might see the possibility of sending more copies and do it. Sukin. Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear group, > I sent a parcel of books (30 copies of Realities and Concepts, > Boriharnawanaket) to Burma (Bhikkhu Bodhi gave me the address > and said they would appeciate it). > It was to the International Buddhist University in Rangoon. > I got a nice letter back today. > "thank you for the valuable package. We are now teaching > vipassana and satipatthana and the subject of 'Realities and > concepts' is very informative and useful to us. As we are > teaching Nuns and bhikkhus also at the "sukra Theravada > university" we can also distribute these books there. This book > helps us with mental development in daily life. many thanks!" > They then ask if we have other English titles and whether we > could send them copies of those as well as more copies of R and > C. > So for those of you who are now in Bangkok and would like to > make merit take your chance! > The Address is > U Han Htay > International Buddhist University > NO.98 , 46th street > Yangoon > Myanmar > > 2230 From: shinlin Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 6:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dana to Myanmar? Anumodana Khun Sukin and Khun Robert. Ms.Shin Lin Zebra Computer Company Limited 1091/71-73, Petchburi 33, New Petchuri Rd Rajathavee, Phayathai, Bangkok, Thailand 10400 Tel : 66-2-6516000 ( 35 lines ) Fax : 66-2-6516001 company website : - http://www.zebra.co.th/ ----- Original Message ----- From: Sukinderpal Narula To: dhammastudygroup@egroups.com Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 4:25 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dana to Myanmar? Dear group, I have taken the chance to do merit as suggested by Robert, by visiting the foundation today and obtaining some books and sent them to U Han Htay in Myanmar. Fearing that I might be taking too many copies from a limited amount of stock, I chose to take and send the following:- 10 copies of 'Realities and concepts'. 20 copies each of the 'Mental development' series. 10 copies of 'Abhidhamma in Daily life'. 20 copies of the 'Letters' 20 copies of the thin grey book the name of which I don't remember. This I mention in case if anyone who might have a better estimate of the stock of books at the foundation, might see the possibility of sending more copies and do it. Sukin. Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear group, > I sent a parcel of books (30 copies of Realities and Concepts, > Boriharnawanaket) to Burma (Bhikkhu Bodhi gave me the address > and said they would appeciate it). > It was to the International Buddhist University in Rangoon. > I got a nice letter back today. > "thank you for the valuable package. We are now teaching > vipassana and satipatthana and the subject of 'Realities and > concepts' is very informative and useful to us. As we are > teaching Nuns and bhikkhus also at the "sukra Theravada > university" we can also distribute these books there. This book > helps us with mental development in daily life. many thanks!" > They then ask if we have other English titles and whether we > could send them copies of those as well as more copies of R and > C. > So for those of you who are now in Bangkok and would like to > make merit take your chance! > The Address is > U Han Htay > International Buddhist University > NO.98 , 46th street > Yangoon > Myanmar > > 2231 From: Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 8:50pm Subject: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... An uncle of mine died a few weeks ago. Such events prompt sadness, which is an unpleasant mental sensation. It SEEMS to be rooted in craving for something that isn't there, but Abhidhammatha Sangaha indicates that cittas rooted in greed are either pleasant or neutral. Is mourning rooted in ill-will? How so? I can see how aversion to the new conditions without the loved one might arise, but the feeling really seems to be more rooted in craving than aversion. Am I reading Abhidhammatha Sangaha correctly? Because the Abhidhamma presents such complex ideas in such a clear, simple way, there are bound to be other ways to organize and classify the same information that might be equally valid. However, part of what makes Abhidhamma work so well is that it has the imprimature of Buddha himself. Other Abhidhammas--even ones that were equally valid--would not be such worthy vehicles for faith. So, help me to understand "craving for things not present" as "aversion." 2232 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 9:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Dear dhd5, Your questions and comments (in all your correspondence incl. t.gem) shows your sincerity, confidence, understanding AND your wish to understand more. I think these qualities are shared by others on this forum and when I see it I am inspired too. Thank you. I hope Kom, Mike and others will also reply to this most useful post. --- wrote: > An uncle of mine died a few weeks ago. Condolences on your loss. Such events prompt > sadness, > which is an unpleasant mental sensation. Unpleasant mental sensation - dukkha vedana can be grouped into two types. The first type is bodily unpleasant feeling and is actually akusala vipaka (unpleasant result) through the body sense. This can be very slight(eg sitting on slightly hard chair) or extremely severe painful feeling. The other type is not vipaka (result) but is the unpleasant feeling (domanassa vedana) that accompanies the different types of dosa -mula -citta (consciousness rooted in aversion). It SEEMS to be rooted > in > craving for something that isn't there, but Abhidhammatha > Sangaha > indicates that cittas rooted in greed are either pleasant or > neutral. > Is mourning rooted in ill-will? How so? Yes, mourning is always rooted in dosa(ill-will). It is in fact dosa - mula-citta which is always accompanied by domanassa vedana (unpleasant feeling). > > I can see how aversion to the new conditions without the loved > one > might arise, but the feeling really seems to be more rooted in > craving > than aversion. Am I reading Abhidhammatha Sangaha correctly? Craving is a strong condition that supports the dosa (ill-will) to arise. You want your uncle back - this is craving but because this cannot happen there is immediate ill-will. It happens so fast - during the actual moments of craving there is no unpleasant feeling but in a split second there can be so many processes. Craving, ill-will, craving, ill-will, craving, ill-will. The ill-will (dosa), if it is strong, is accompanied by equally strong unpleasant feeling. And this feeling will be dominant and the neutral feeling (mostly)that is arising intermittantly with the craving will not be noticed. However, our "job" is to learn about these matters, even under these difficult circumstances. There can be direct study now of these dhammas (eg dosa, unpleasant feeling, craving) and if this is done in the right way (without looking for any results) you may begin to see this, to some extent, as it really is. Then your confidence in Abhidhamma with grow even firmer. > > Because the Abhidhamma presents such complex ideas in such a > clear, > simple way, there are bound to be other ways to organize and > classify > the same information that might be equally valid. However, > part of > what makes Abhidhamma work so well is that it has the > imprimature of > Buddha himself. Other Abhidhammas--even ones that were equally > > valid--would not be such worthy vehicles for faith. So pleased to hear this expression of confidence in the Buddha's Dhamma. (I don't know if there could be other equally valid ones though?) anumodana Robert 2233 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 10:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dana to Myanmar? Dear sukin, `I read in a commentary that one should not delay when doing good. We should think "let me be first to do it" and one should take every opportunity. You are like that. I don't know about other books but I know they have over a thousand copies of Realities and Concepts left at the foundation. So if anyone else wants to send more these might be the book to go for. It is so expensive to send though. I was amazed that it costs the same to send a parcel to Burma (neighbour to Thailand) as it does to England! Still they appreciate Abhidhamma there and English books on Dhamma are scarce and much appreciated. Also very few people have internet so they can't read the material on the web. I think it is very worthwhile to send them to this address where they are likely to be distributed in a most useful way. Robert ps Sukin - I hope you are can meet with sarah and the group when they get back from cambodia. --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear group, > I have taken the chance to do merit as suggested by Robert, by > visiting the foundation today and obtaining some books and > sent > them to U Han Htay in Myanmar. > Fearing that I might be taking too many copies from a limited > amount of stock, I chose to take and send the following:- > 10 copies of 'Realities and concepts'. > 20 copies each of the 'Mental development' series. > 10 copies of 'Abhidhamma in Daily life'. > 20 copies of the 'Letters' > 20 copies of the thin grey book the name of which I don't > remember. > This I mention in case if anyone who might have a better > estimate of > the stock of books at the foundation, might see the > possibility of > sending more copies and do it. > > Sukin. > > Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > Dear group, > > I sent a parcel of books (30 copies of Realities and > Concepts, > > Boriharnawanaket) to Burma (Bhikkhu Bodhi gave me the > address > > and said they would appeciate it). > > It was to the International Buddhist University in Rangoon. > > I got a nice letter back today. > > "thank you for the valuable package. We are now teaching > > vipassana and satipatthana and the subject of 'Realities and > > concepts' is very informative and useful to us. As we are > > teaching Nuns and bhikkhus also at the "sukra Theravada > > university" we can also distribute these books there. This > book > > helps us with mental development in daily life. many > thanks!" > > They then ask if we have other English titles and whether we > > could send them copies of those as well as more copies of R > and > > C. > > So for those of you who are now in Bangkok and would like to > > make merit take your chance! > > The Address is > > U Han Htay > > International Buddhist University > > NO.98 , 46th street > > Yangoon > > Myanmar > > > > > 2234 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 10:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cambodia Dear jaran, Lovely to hear from you and thanks for the informative letter. I hope you will be a regular contributor to the list. Yes, Acharn sujin is so helpful to let us understand that Abhidhamma is not in the book - it is happening right now at this moment. Whether we feel happy, sad, restless, calm, confused or clear- it is simply dhammas and can be comprehended as it is, as conditioned phenomena, not us. Robert --- jaran jai-nhuknan wrote: > Hello from Cambodia: > > This is Jaran along with Nina, Amara, Sarah, Jonathan, Jack, > Oii, Ell and O > (and her husband Chai). We are on a Dhamma trip to Cambodia > with Tan A. Sujin. > > We have been , to say the least, overwhelmed by the enthusiasm > of the > Cambodians and the Dhamma we heard from the mouth of Tan A. > Sujin. Questions > for the audience and Tan A. Sujin's answers are profound. > > On the first session with Cambodians (more than thousand of > them), she talks > about the three kinds of dhukka: physical suffering and > unhappiness, the > changing of happiness and the impermanence of all dhamma. > These three and > realized by different level of panna. (more later). > > I met Nina, Jonathan, Sarah and Amara for the first time. They > are great! We > are holding English sessions daily. Yesterday, we talked about > something very > important (for me at least): the ''right study". The key is > one has to know > what will help the arise of the awareness of THIS moment here > and now. And one > has to know one's limit of understanding HERE and NOW. > 2235 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 10:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Hi, As Robert mentioned, the mental unpleasantness (domanassa vedana) can only arise with aversion (dosa). Dosa has the characteristic of being coarse, inflexible, unbending, not a suitable condition for kusala citta to be arising with it. Dosa arise because of the attachments toward the 5 senses and their objects (kamakun 5): seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and touching. Only when there is no attachment to the kamakun 5 that dosa will have no condition for arising (for Anagami pugala, for arupa brahma). Mourning is most likely a diverse set of cittas: one that cognizes the good of the person who passes away (kusala), one that is attached to the person's sight, sound, smell, and touch (akusala) or other that we are associated as the person's, one that rises with dosa because of the attachment (akusala), etc. If we remember what abhidhamma is: the truth, then there is no other way to explain an event. That's simply how it works. It's only the question of whether or not the explainer can explain the truth as it truly is: the way the Buddha does. Anumoddhana for your search of the truth. kom --- wrote: > An uncle of mine died a few weeks ago. Such events prompt sadness, > which is an unpleasant mental sensation. It SEEMS to be rooted in > craving for something that isn't there, but Abhidhammatha Sangaha > indicates that cittas rooted in greed are either pleasant or neutral. > > Is mourning rooted in ill-will? How so? > > I can see how aversion to the new conditions without the loved one > might arise, but the feeling really seems to be more rooted in > craving > than aversion. Am I reading Abhidhammatha Sangaha correctly? > > Because the Abhidhamma presents such complex ideas in such a clear, > simple way, there are bound to be other ways to organize and classify > > the same information that might be equally valid. However, part of > what makes Abhidhamma work so well is that it has the imprimature of > Buddha himself. Other Abhidhammas--even ones that were equally > valid--would not be such worthy vehicles for faith. So, help me to > understand "craving for things not present" as "aversion." 2236 From: m. nease Date: Wed Dec 6, 2000 11:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Friends, Would a simple way to express this be that the domanassa vedana here accompanies dosa *conditioned by* lobha? Thanks in advance for corrections. Dhd5, may you and your family be well and happy and free from suffering, and know peace. mn --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Hi, > > As Robert mentioned, the mental unpleasantness > (domanassa vedana) can > only arise with aversion (dosa). Dosa has the > characteristic of being > coarse, inflexible, unbending, not a suitable > condition for kusala > citta to be arising with it. Dosa arise because of > the attachments > toward the 5 senses and their objects (kamakun 5): > seeing, hearing, > tasting, smelling, and touching. Only when there is > no attachment to > the kamakun 5 that dosa will have no condition for > arising (for Anagami > pugala, for arupa brahma). > > Mourning is most likely a diverse set of cittas: one > that cognizes the > good of the person who passes away (kusala), one > that is attached to > the person's sight, sound, smell, and touch > (akusala) or other that we > are associated as the person's, one that rises with > dosa because of the > attachment (akusala), etc. > > If we remember what abhidhamma is: the truth, then > there is no other > way to explain an event. That's simply how it > works. It's only the > question of whether or not the explainer can explain > the truth as it > truly is: the way the Buddha does. > > Anumoddhana for your search of the truth. > > kom > > --- wrote: > > An uncle of mine died a few weeks ago. Such events > prompt sadness, > > which is an unpleasant mental sensation. It SEEMS > to be rooted in > > craving for something that isn't there, but > Abhidhammatha Sangaha > > indicates that cittas rooted in greed are either > pleasant or neutral. > > > > Is mourning rooted in ill-will? How so? > > > > I can see how aversion to the new conditions > without the loved one > > might arise, but the feeling really seems to be > more rooted in > > craving > > than aversion. Am I reading Abhidhammatha Sangaha > correctly? > > > > Because the Abhidhamma presents such complex ideas > in such a clear, > > simple way, there are bound to be other ways to > organize and classify > > > > the same information that might be equally valid. > However, part of > > what makes Abhidhamma work so well is that it has > the imprimature of > > Buddha himself. Other Abhidhammas--even ones that > were equally > > valid--would not be such worthy vehicles for > faith. So, help me to > > understand "craving for things not present" as > "aversion." > > > 2237 From: Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 2:15am Subject: Re: Mulapariyaya sutta Dear Gayan et al.: Copies of Bhikku Bodhi's 'Mulapariyaya' with commentary are on the way to Gayan, Alex and myself. If anyone else would like a copy, please send your mailing address to: ProtectID If you've already sent me your address and I've mislaid it, my apologies. Please send it again and I'll get off a copy to you right away. p.s. --- wrote: > when it comes to papanca, its a perversion of vitakkas, > ['advanced' version of vitakkas] is 'papanca' the word sometimes translated as 'proliferation(s)'? Thanks again... mn 2238 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 4:34am Subject: Some thoughts Hello everybody, Thank you for the welcome's. I thought to make some comments as a way to begin some input into any discussions. It seems Cambodia is a wholesome place! In this lifetime, I have had experiences which have caused the questioning of what it is to be in this world. I was not born into comfort and acceptance, and so I did not become contented into a fixed identity that a family can provide, for example. Of course, I did develop attachments to a "self" that were promoted through my upbringing, but these were not very productive- the word akusala seems fitting. In reality, no attachment seems productive, though is it right to say that some produce better results towards achieving nibbaana? For many years, I assumed I was a substantial unity, an autonomous individual with reason and unreason. I struggled to find something to explain my humanity, my psychology. I looked towards religions, self-development philosophies, etc, but all seemed to promote a "self" to be attained and to be practiced in certain ways. It seemed as if I was trapped within "games of truth". They all seemed to say that they knew how to play the "game of life", and that it had to be played by their rules to win. How confusing! Actually, if I was to elaborate on these "selves" with the use of an ancient Greek concept: logos. All promoted a logos, a "master of truth" within that is developed, which commands, and silences the "barking dogs" of fear and doubt. Then I discovered "social construction". This is the recognition of how humans are shaped by the time they live in, as well as by the culture, the body, the society, the community, the social institutions, the geographic location, the family, the technologies, the language, and the social relationships they are a part of.In short, their accumulated conditions. Therefore, even our experiences of the six-doors vary, for example, aquired tastes. Studying ideas related to such things as social construction, I have come to realise how I have been conditioned to take things for granted for the mere fact that they were all I had known, such as the view of myself as a substantial unity. The history of many things that are taken for granted as natural, upon examination, creates an awakening. It seems that throughout my life I have been docile to what it has presented. With this awareness, I have been lead to this moment in the present which promotes the grappling of Dhamma study, or Thervada buddhism.Although, I have come to be quite lobha to critical thinking, almost to the point of skeptism, I sense that this will dissipate the more I Dhamma study. I'm not overstating when I say "lead" either. In recent academic work, I grappled with ultimate realities. With the hybrid of information I had accumulated, I presented two: the discursive and the non-discursive. Having never read any books by Nina, I was astounded by the parallels between the above in relation to nama and rupa. Yet, I don't proclaim to have grasped nama and rupa, but from the basic introduction as far, there are definite similarities between nama and the discursive mentioned above, and rupa- and the non- discursive. Well that's all for now, its been pleasant sitting here and trying to be aware of the citta, cetasika, and the nama which have been and gone! Be wholesome, Jody. 2239 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 11:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some thoughts Dear jody, Thanks for the comments that help us to understand you a little. See my comments below yours. > Thank you for the welcome's. I thought to make some > comments as a way to begin some input into any discussions. > It seems Cambodia is a wholesome place! Does seem that way. They are so poor but the Buddha once noted that such things as loss of wealth, loss of health, even loss of children and spouse are trifling matters. But loss of wisdom is a great loss. Those in cambodia are gaining; accumulating that which is priceless. > In this lifetime, I have had experiences which have caused > the questioning of what it is to be in this world. I > was not born into comfort and acceptance, and so I did not > become contented into a fixed identity that a family > can provide, for example. Of course, I did develop attachments > to a > "self" that were promoted through my upbringing, but > these were not very productive- the word akusala seems > fitting. In reality, no attachment seems productive, though > is it right to say that some produce better results towards > achieving nibbaana? The only way that attachment (tanha and upadana) helps is as a pakatupanissaya paccaya (natural-decisive support condition). So, for example, someone sees there life is "shit" and wants to find a way out. So they look for paths that will help. There may be much desire(tanha), but by looking they might come across the Buddha's teaching. However, conditions are never singular, there are other factors such as kamma-paccaya and vipaka- paccaya, that are needed before it can come about that one will meet Saddhamma (true Dhamma). If these conditions are not present one will search with great energy and tanha and settle for either a non- buddhist path or an imitation of dhamma. Further than this once one does find correct teaching if it is not seen that tanha, desire, hinders the path, one is liable to cling to subtle wrong practice and views; always studying and practising with a sense of self and control. Thus tanha(atachment, desire) is a major danger, is samudaya -sacca, the cause of dukkha(suffering). > For many years, I assumed I was a substantial unity, > an autonomous individual with reason and unreason. I struggled > to find something to explain my humanity, my psychology. > I looked towards religions, self-development philosophies, > etc, > but all seemed to promote a "self" to be attained and to > be practiced in certain ways. It seemed as if I was trapped > within "games of truth". They all seemed to say that they > knew how to play the "game of life", and that it had to be > played > by their rules to win. How confusing! Actually, if I was to > elaborate on these "selves" with the use of an ancient Greek > concept: logos. All promoted a logos, a "master of truth" > within that is developed, which commands, and silences the > "barking dogs" of fear and doubt. Yes it is all simply concepts, mannati, papanca. > > Then I discovered "social construction". This is the > recognition > of how humans are shaped by the time they live in, as well as > by the culture, the body, the society, the community, the > social institutions, the geographic location, the family, > the technologies, the language, and the social relationships > they are a part of. In short, their accumulated conditions. Yes, this helps people realise that even their ideas and thinking are simply conditioned phenomena. It is still too limited because they only think about this brief life and that cannot explain the differences that we see. It has all being going on for countless aeons. It is not simply chance happenings. You were born in new zealand and so accumulated some of the ideas existent in that culture, but because of experiences and development also in other lives it happens that you are now intrigued by Buddhism. And this will condition future interest and experiences. I was reading over the Therigatha yesterday, this is the stories of the leading Nuns in the Buddha's time. It says in the therigatha-atthakatha talking about Theri sundari nanda that at the time of the Buddha Padumuttara "she heard the doctrine preached...she accumulated merit for one hundred thousand aeons (one aeon is billions of years or more) journeying on among devas and men." Finally she attained under this Buddha. The Theri Sukkha heard the Buddha Vipassi. She gained faith, went forth, was one of great learning, expert in the doctrine and possessed of intelligence. Similarly at the time of the Blessed one Sikhi and the Blessed one Vessabhu she observed virtuous conduct and was one of great learning and one expert in the Dhamma. Similarly she went forth in the teaching of Kakusandha, Konagama and Kassapa Buddha's, and she was one of pure virtuos conduct, one of great learning, and one who preached the doctrine..In this buddha era she went forth under Dhammadina and finally became arahant." The time between even one buddha is immense but conditions are carried on citta to citta. > Therefore, > even our experiences of the six-doors vary, for example, > aquired tastes. There are three rounds : kamma-vatta(action), vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements such as greed, aversion ignorance). the actual moments of experience through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there is reaction (partly by "acquired taste") which is defilement and this conditions kamma. These rounds are all spinning now, continually, as they always have in samasara. The Buddha's path analyses and untangles these rounds and eventually brings them all to a halt. > > Studying ideas related to such things as social construction, > I have come to realise how I have been conditioned to take > things > for granted for the mere fact that they were all I had known, > such as the view of myself as a substantial unity. The history > of > many things that are taken for granted as natural, upon > examination, > creates an awakening. It seems that throughout my life I have > been > docile to what it has presented. With this awareness, I have > been > lead to this moment in the present which promotes the > grappling > of Dhamma study, or Thervada buddhism.Although, I have come to > be > quite lobha to critical thinking, almost to the point of > skeptism, I sense that this will dissipate the more I Dhamma > study. In the end it is not so much critical thinking that is needed as direct study of paramattha dhammas, the physical(rupa) and mental(nam) phenomena that are arising now. But right contemplation helps us to differentiate and understand what these namas and rupas are. > > I'm not overstating when I say "lead" either. In recent > academic work, > I grappled with ultimate realities. With the hybrid of > information I had > accumulated, I presented two: the discursive and the > non-discursive. > Having never read any books by Nina, I was astounded by the > parallels > between the above in relation to nama and rupa. Yet, I don't > proclaim > to have grasped nama and rupa, but from the basic introduction > as far, > there are definite similarities between nama and the > discursive mentioned > above, and rupa- and the non- discursive. Well that's all for > now, its > been pleasant sitting here and trying to be aware of the > citta, cetasika, > and the nama which have been and gone! > keep up the good work Jody! Best wishes Robert 2240 From: Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 11:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some thoughts Dear Jodi, Thanks for your compassionate post.. rgds 2241 From: Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 11:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Mulapariyaya sutta Dear Mike u asked -> " is 'papanca' the word sometimes translated as 'proliferation(s)'? " Yes sir rgds. 2242 From: Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 7:26pm Subject: Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Robert, you wrote: > So pleased to hear this expression of confidence in the Buddha's > Dhamma. (I don't know if there could be other equally valid ones > though?) I'm confident that there could be equally valid expressions of abhidhamma. After all, abhidhamma is just a description of some extraordinarily complex phenomena. On top of that, it is a short and simple description [yes, I know it sometimes may seem like a long and complicated description, especially given the length and intracacy of the Patthana, but it really is like a handful of leaves in a forest :) ]. In my experience, complicated phenomena can always be described adequately in a number of different ways. Buddha was famous for giving descriptions and lessons tailored to meet the needs of the people he was teaching at the time. If he were alive today, would his Abhidhamma be the same as the one he taught 2500 years ago? Or would his handful of leaves look different? I think there is little doubt it would look different, but we can't know what "our" abhidhamma would look like. People's understanding of the Dhamma decays as the time of the Buddha gets farther and farther away. Perhaps this is in part due to the teachings being geared toward the ears that abounded 2500 years ago... 2243 From: Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 7:31pm Subject: Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... > Would a simple way to express this be that the > domanassa vedana here accompanies dosa *conditioned > by* lobha? Thanks in advance for corrections. Thank you for your kind words. If the dosa is "conditioned by" lobha, wherefore dosa as "root"? 2244 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 7:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Dear dhd5, I think I read a passage somewhere that indicates all the buddhas of the past teach basically the same things (although some taught less vinaya because there disciples were ones who so quickly became enlightened that the patimokkha wasn't necessary). When it comes to the Abhidhamma in particular, which describes actual fundamental phenomena, how could it be taught in a different way? Dosa, aversion is dosa. We could call it by a diferent name but it is still the same thing. Lobha, moha etc., and also the physical phenomena cannot be divided into anything more basic or have their characteristics changed. I don't know what others think about this. You wrote that he Dhamma was geared for ears 2500 years ago. But those ears had the same experience- various sounds - as ours right now. Anyone who could understand sound as sound and penetrate the difference between sound (rupa) and hearing (nama) could become enlightened. It is the same now and will be in the future too. Many of the sutta are teachings tailored specifically for the listener but I think the Abhidhamma, because it deals in fundamental phenomenena, is suited for all who wish to listen. Robert --- wrote: > Robert, you wrote: > > So pleased to hear this expression of confidence in the > Buddha's > > Dhamma. (I don't know if there could be other equally valid > ones > > though?) > I'm confident that there could be equally valid expressions of > > abhidhamma. After all, abhidhamma is just a description of > some > extraordinarily complex phenomena. On top of that, it is a > short and > simple description [yes, I know it sometimes may seem like a > long and > complicated description, especially given the length and > intracacy of > the Patthana, but it really is like a handful of leaves in a > forest > :) ]. In my experience, complicated phenomena can always be > described > adequately in a number of different ways. Buddha was famous > for > giving descriptions and lessons tailored to meet the needs of > the > people he was teaching at the time. If he were alive today, > would his > Abhidhamma be the same as the one he taught 2500 years ago? Or > would > his handful of leaves look different? I think there is little > doubt it > would look different, but we can't know what "our" abhidhamma > would > look like. People's understanding of the Dhamma decays as the > time of > the Buddha gets farther and farther away. Perhaps this is in > part due > to the teachings being geared toward the ears that abounded > 2500 years > ago... > 2245 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 8:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Dear Robert, Digha Nikaya, Sampasadaniya Sutta also talks about the teachings of Buddhas, past, present, and future. I didn't see the English translation on the web. kom --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > I think I read a passage somewhere that indicates all the > buddhas of the past teach basically the same things (although > some taught less vinaya because there disciples were ones who so > quickly became enlightened that the patimokkha wasn't > necessary). 2246 From: Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 8:53pm Subject: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Asserting that there can be other, different, but equally valid expressions of Abhidhamma is not at all the same thing as speculating on what they might look like. I could envision some value to such a discussion: Talk and talk and think about what an alternative might be. Come up with some possibilities. Shoot those down. Put forth some more. Have some people accept some and others accept others and some accept none. Rancor and division arise. Then: Some who did not realize it before then realize that we already have a rich and beautiful abhidhamma and feel regret that they wasted time looking for an alternative. I can't imagine that the value of this would offset the costs in speculation about things non-path. I will resist the temptation. It may be useful to think about the POSSIBILITY of alternative abhidhammas, though. Abhidhamma is just a description--albeit, a wondrous description, but a description nonetheless. As a biologist/statistician, I build models to describe complex phenomena is simpler language. What has become crystal clear is that no model can be a complete description of complex phenomena, and that different models can always be invoked to describe the same thing (provided that "thing" is something "real" and is inherently complex). One message that I get from Mulapariyaya sutta is that our words and conceptions of the world are models of the realities we experience. We note some phenomenon and create words to describe it. Then we keep adding layers of description and conception to it, all the while heaping more and more layers of interpretation onto it, making the original vision of it cloudier and cloudier. At the same time, our CONCEPTIONS become clearer and clearer, and we put more and more faith in the conceptions, cling to the conceptions, and become blind to the reality we originally experienced. The mind is so adept at this process that it does it with great rapidity, constantly, and we are usually not even aware that this is what we are doing. Our conceptions get in the way of seeing reality as it truly is. The words of the abhidhamma are ultimately words, models of the reality that we experience. The reality is sufficiently complex that alternative models and formulations are certainly possible. So what? I certainly can't create a decent alternative to our abhidhamma, and I don't think any non-Buddha can. However, at times it can be very helpful to note that the abhidhamma descibes a conception of dhammas (a la Mulapariyaya), and we must be on guard against letting the model get in the way of progress on the path. At some points in the practice, it is necessary to set aside the abhidhamma concepts because they can cloud the vision of reality as it really is. This is not to say that abhidhamma is not a beautiful model (it most decidedly is--the best I've seen by far), but that it is indeed just a model. Other, equally valid formulations are possible. Knowing that may make it easier to transcend the words and formulation of abhidhamma so that we may actually and directly understand "our" experience of the realities that abhidhamma describes. What might an alternative formulation of abhidhamma look like? It doesn't matter. The formulation we have is very helpful in elucidating the path, but in the end, any formulation must be suspended for vipassana to arise. I hope this helps. > I think I read a passage somewhere that indicates all the > buddhas of the past teach basically the same things (although > some taught less vinaya because there disciples were ones who so > quickly became enlightened that the patimokkha wasn't > necessary). > When it comes to the Abhidhamma in particular, which describes > actual fundamental phenomena, how could it be taught in a > different way? Dosa, aversion is dosa. We could call it by a > diferent name but it is still the same thing. Lobha, moha etc., > and also the physical phenomena cannot be divided into anything > more basic or have their characteristics changed. > > I don't know what others think about this. > > You wrote that he Dhamma was geared for ears 2500 years ago. But > those ears had the same experience- various sounds - as ours > right now. Anyone who could understand sound as sound and > penetrate the difference between sound (rupa) and hearing (nama) > could become enlightened. It is the same now and will be in the > future too. > > Many of the sutta are teachings tailored specifically for the > listener but I think the Abhidhamma, because it deals in > fundamental phenomenena, is suited for all who wish to listen. 2247 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 9:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Dear Mike (MN), I think you would be right with the simplification. When I was reading your reply, I started to wonder: what kind of conditions (pacaya)? Lobha can be a pakatupanissaya pacaya for dosa; Robert talked about lobha as a pakatupanissaya pacaya (not for dosa) recently. Lobha can also be aramana pacaya (sense-object) for the lobha. There are most likely others. It is not clear to me what pacaya(s), specifically, apply to the case of attachment (lobha) toward kamakun 5 being a conditioning dhamma to dosa. On the other hand, there is also an answer in the way of patichasamudpada (the rebirth cycle), i.e., avijja (ignorance) -> sankhara (cetana in javana citta) -> vinyana (vinyana khandda [all cittas]/ patisanti [birth] citta) -> ayatana (conditioning dhammas causing citta to arise) -> nama rupa -> phassa (phassa cetasika: contact of nama and aramana) -> vedana (feeling cetasika) -> tanha (lobha) -> upadana (attachments to the khandas) -> plane of existence (level of citta?) -> jati (birth in a plane) -> birth, old age, death, sorrow, ???, domanassa, lamentation. And also in the Four Noble Truths: dukkha (citta, cetasikas, and rupa, as results, including domanassa and dosa) dukkha samudaya (lobha, as cause) dukkha niroda (nibhana, as "result" [not in the way of being conditioned]) dukkha niroda kamanipatipada (the 8-fold paths, cetasikas, as cause) I am just parroting here, without much understanding... kom --- "m. nease" wrote: > Friends, > > Would a simple way to express this be that the > domanassa vedana here accompanies dosa *conditioned > by* lobha? Thanks in advance for corrections. > > Dhd5, may you and your family be well and happy and > free from suffering, and know peace. > > mn > 2248 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 9:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Dear Kom and dhd5, Kom, thanks for the reminder about Sampasadaniya Sutta. I don't have it to hand but in this Sariputta expressed his absolute confidence that none could be wiser than the Buddha and explained that although he had no direct knowledge of past buddha's that they must all have developed the very same path via satipatthana, the factors of enlightenment and so on. dhd5, I pretty much agree with what you said so will just highlight a few points: --- wrote: > > > > abhidhammas, though. Abhidhamma is just a description--albeit, > a > wondrous description, but a description nonetheless. YES. So true. This is sometimes forgotton by we Abhidhamma aficianado's. One > message > that I get from Mulapariyaya sutta is that our words and > conceptions > of the world are models of the realities we experience. We > note some > phenomenon and create words to describe it. Then we keep > adding layers > of description and conception to it, all the while heaping > more and > more layers of interpretation onto it, making the original > vision of > it cloudier and cloudier. At the same time, our CONCEPTIONS > become > clearer and clearer, and we put more and more faith in the > conceptions, cling to the conceptions, and become blind to the > > reality we originally experienced. The mind is so adept at > this > process that it does it with great rapidity, constantly, and > we are > usually not even aware that this is what we are doing. Our > conceptions > get in the way of seeing reality as it truly is. > > The words of the abhidhamma are ultimately words, models of > the > reality that we experience. The reality is sufficiently > complex that > alternative models and formulations are certainly possible. So > what? I > certainly can't create a decent alternative to our abhidhamma, > and I > don't think any non-Buddha can. However, at times it can be > very > helpful to note that the abhidhamma descibes a conception of > dhammas > (a la Mulapariyaya), and we must be on guard against letting > the model > get in the way of progress on the path. At some points in the > practice, it is necessary to set aside the abhidhamma concepts > because > they can cloud the vision of reality as it really is. This is > not to > say that abhidhamma is not a beautiful model (it most > decidedly > is--the best I've seen by far), but that it is indeed just a > model. So far I basically agree. > Other, equally valid formulations are possible. I still don't see how. The abhidhamma talks about many different dhammas that they say are fundamental. If we look at just one for example, dosa (aversion). How can we formulate it differently. I think all we can do is descibe it in different ways (as the commenatries do) but the actual reality is simply what is- that dhamma that is averse. Whether we call it by different names, whether it happens now or a thousand years in the future it is simply that dhamma. The Abhidhamma, at least as I see it, is not so much book knowledge as a very precise description of such dhammas. I don't think it can be any simpler than it is because it describes these basic dhammas. I agree we can take the Abhidhamma in the wrong way and use it to build up a conceptual scheme, and that would certainly fit within the mulapariyaya sutta. But this is not necessarily so. Knowing that > may make > it easier to transcend the words and formulation of abhidhamma > so that > we may actually and directly understand "our" experience of > the > realities that abhidhamma describes. > > What might an alternative formulation of abhidhamma look like? > It > doesn't matter. The formulation we have is very helpful in > elucidating > the path, but in the end, any formulation must be suspended > for > vipassana to arise. The moments of insight are beyond any concept for sure but do we need to suspend anything? Some might hear this and think they had to stop thinking or make their mind "blank" before insight can arise. I think the various cetasikas (mental factors) of the eightfactored path work their way and penetrate the true nature of dhammas only if "we" are out of the way. Are we really out of the way if we have an idea of suspending any ideas "we" have? There might still be an idea of control, a slight idea that we can arrange this to happen. I am not saying you mean this and in fact I do think for most of us(abhidhmamma people) some of the time, and some of us all of the time, there is real attachment to the concepts of Abhidhamma. This must hinder direct insight especially if one imagines such thinking is real insight. robert 2249 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 9:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... If I understand this correctly, it would be dosa-mula (rooted) citta conditioned by lobha-mula citta. That is, the dosa would arise because of the impermanence of the object of clinging. Does this sound right? mn --- wrote: > > Would a simple way to express this be that the > > domanassa vedana here accompanies dosa > *conditioned > > by* lobha? Thanks in advance for corrections. > Thank you for your kind words. > > If the dosa is "conditioned by" lobha, wherefore > dosa as "root"? > > 2250 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 7, 2000 10:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Dear dhd5 and Robert, dhd5, thanks for this elucidating argument about modeling and realities. Robert, let me take dhd5's viewpoint here. Let me make an analogy for non-abhidhamma realities first. A model is something you conceive about how things work. A model, more often than not, simplifies how things work. For example, the Newtonian law models how objects behave with each other's presence. However, it doesn't fully capture how that really works: it starts breaking down in very small and very fast objects. If you hold in you mind that Newtonian laws are infallible, when you see the evidence of its breaking down, you may not recognize it as realities (well, not the abhidhamma). Newtonian laws are precise mathematical laws. Things get worse when you model something that is non-mathematical (using words to describe the model). Not only the model may mistakenly describe the realities (again, non-abhidhamma), people understand the model (as intended by the person describing it) differently. In this case, you suffer double inaccuracies, the model doesn't describe all situations, and people can misunderstand the model. If people hold on to the model, they may not be able to accept realities as they truly are. Now, let's talk about abhidhamma realities. The buddha in fact described many models about the realities: the pancakanddha, ayatana, dhatu, poramatttha dhammas, paticasumudpaddah, the Four Noble Truths, and others fitting the accumulations of the audience. The models capture the different details of the realities, and shine different lights on the realities. The system is very complex, but taking the buddha models, at face value, a person may oversimplify how things truly work. Holding on to the model, he may disregard realities even when it appears to him. The example I can see in this is even with the most detailed model of realities. 89 cittas, 54 cetasikas, 28 rupa, 1 nibhana. If I take this model, without fully understanding it, I may misunderstand these elements as sort of an atomic building block (with discrete values or worse yet, binary values) with identical characteristics. I may not realize that the single cetasika (take upeka vedana) actually has different (minute) characteristics from moment to moment. Holding on to such a view, the realization of the truth is prevented. On the other end of mistaking the model is that the model is too complexed for verifications. Although all the realities may not appear to a person, it is possible for the person to become enlightened. An unwise person may start having strange misconceptions (wrong-thinking) because some realities don't appear to him. All in all, the minute characteristics of the realities are infinite. It takes the panna of a sammasambuddha to put it into understandable models that aid a person toward the path. There is nothing in the model that doesn't represent realities: we don't suffer a double inaccuracies here. On the other hand, we need to be on-guard about the misunderstanding of the model because it may prevents realities from being known. kom > I still don't see how. The abhidhamma talks about many different > dhammas that they say are fundamental. If we look at just one > for example, dosa (aversion). How can we formulate it > differently. I think all we can do is descibe it in different > ways (as the commenatries do) but the actual reality is simply > what is- that dhamma that is averse. Whether we call it by > different names, whether it happens now or a thousand years in > the future it is simply that dhamma. The Abhidhamma, at least as > I see it, is not so much book knowledge as a very precise > description of such dhammas. I don't think it can be any simpler > than it is because it describes these basic dhammas. I agree we > can take the Abhidhamma in the wrong way and use it to build up > a conceptual scheme, and that would certainly fit within the > mulapariyaya sutta. But this is not necessarily so. > 2251 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 0:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Dear kom, This is very good. I hope dhd5 will comment on this too. robert --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear dhd5 and Robert, > > dhd5, thanks for this elucidating argument about modeling and > realities. > > Robert, let me take dhd5's viewpoint here. Let me make an > analogy for > non-abhidhamma realities first. A model is something you > conceive > about how things work. A model, more often than not, > simplifies how > things work. For example, the Newtonian law models how > objects behave > with each other's presence. However, it doesn't fully capture > how that > really works: it starts breaking down in very small and very > fast > objects. If you hold in you mind that Newtonian laws are > infallible, > when you see the evidence of its breaking down, you may not > recognize > it as realities (well, not the abhidhamma). > > Newtonian laws are precise mathematical laws. Things get > worse when > you model something that is non-mathematical (using words to > describe > the model). Not only the model may mistakenly describe the > realities > (again, non-abhidhamma), people understand the model (as > intended by > the person describing it) differently. In this case, you > suffer double > inaccuracies, the model doesn't describe all situations, and > people can > misunderstand the model. If people hold on to the model, they > may not > be able to accept realities as they truly are. > > Now, let's talk about abhidhamma realities. The buddha in > fact > described many models about the realities: the pancakanddha, > ayatana, > dhatu, poramatttha dhammas, paticasumudpaddah, the Four Noble > Truths, > and others fitting the accumulations of the audience. The > models > capture the different details of the realities, and shine > different > lights on the realities. The system is very complex, but > taking the > buddha models, at face value, a person may oversimplify how > things > truly work. Holding on to the model, he may disregard > realities even > when it appears to him. > > The example I can see in this is even with the most detailed > model of > realities. 89 cittas, 54 cetasikas, 28 rupa, 1 nibhana. If I > take > this model, without fully understanding it, I may > misunderstand these > elements as sort of an atomic building block (with discrete > values or > worse yet, binary values) with identical characteristics. I > may not > realize that the single cetasika (take upeka vedana) actually > has > different (minute) characteristics from moment to moment. > Holding on > to such a view, the realization of the truth is prevented. > > On the other end of mistaking the model is that the model is > too > complexed for verifications. Although all the realities may > not appear > to a person, it is possible for the person to become > enlightened. An > unwise person may start having strange misconceptions > (wrong-thinking) > because some realities don't appear to him. > > All in all, the minute characteristics of the realities are > infinite. > It takes the panna of a sammasambuddha to put it into > understandable > models that aid a person toward the path. There is nothing in > the > model that doesn't represent realities: we don't suffer a > double > inaccuracies here. On the other hand, we need to be on-guard > about the > misunderstanding of the model because it may prevents > realities from > being known. > > kom > > > > I still don't see how. The abhidhamma talks about many > different > > dhammas that they say are fundamental. If we look at just > one > > for example, dosa (aversion). How can we formulate it > > differently. I think all we can do is descibe it in > different > > ways (as the commenatries do) but the actual reality is > simply > > what is- that dhamma that is averse. Whether we call it by > > different names, whether it happens now or a thousand years > in > > the future it is simply that dhamma. The Abhidhamma, at > least as > > I see it, is not so much book knowledge as a very precise > > description of such dhammas. I don't think it can be any > simpler > > than it is because it describes these basic dhammas. I agree > we > > can take the Abhidhamma in the wrong way and use it to build > up > > a conceptual scheme, and that would certainly fit within the > > mulapariyaya sutta. But this is not necessarily so. > > > > 2252 From: Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 2:46am Subject: Re: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Dear Robert, you thoughtfully wrote: > I still don't see how. The abhidhamma talks about many different > dhammas that they say are fundamental. If we look at just one > for example, dosa (aversion). How can we formulate it > differently. As for me: I'm satisfied with Buddha's/Sariputta's formulation, and I don't think a non-Buddha can convincingly argue a particular different formulation. A run-of-the-mill Arahant (my apologies to all you venerable Arahants reading this; you know what I mean by "run-of-the-mill" here) is so strongly guided by the wisdom as taught by our Buddha that it may not be possible even for him to break free of the familiar formulation. More importantly, it is not necessary to propose a particular alternative formulation. The possibility that other formulations (formulations of the whole system, not just an isolated word) could exist serves at least two functions: First, it facilitates tolerance and patience with those who APPARENTLY disagree with us. Second, it makes it a little easier to pierce some of the mind clutter that can veil the clean vision of dhamma. I find that when my mind is filled with a fresh infusion of book knowledge, it is difficult not to perceive, say, dosa as "dosa," to conceive dosa as "dosa," and to conceive Myself in "dosa." With effort and with (temporal) distance from the conceiving that naturally arises with reading, the tendency to pile conception on conception is weakened, thereby making the arising of insight more likely. On the other hand, without occasional infusions of book knowledge, there is the danger of losing sight of the direction of practice. > The moments of insight are beyond any concept for sure but do we > need to suspend anything? Some might hear this and think they > had to stop thinking or make their mind "blank" before insight > can arise. I think the various cetasikas (mental factors) of the > eightfactored path work their way and penetrate the true nature > of dhammas only if "we" are out of the way. Are we really out of > the way if we have an idea of suspending any ideas "we" have? "We" certainly don't "suspend" anything, but insight arises only when the conceptions are momentarily suspended. In review of the suspensions after the fact, the value of abhidhamma is clearly seen. However, it is also very helpful in directing us toward "suspension" (whether the insights are mundane vipassana nyana or supramundane). But maintaining a proper attitude toward abhidhamma and guarding against the proliferation of conceptions it can inspire is important. For some, knowing that other formulations are possible might help. For others, it might have the opposite effect by generating either doubt or dosa. > There might still be an idea of control, a slight idea that we > can arrange this to happen. > I am not saying you mean this and in fact I do think for most of > us(abhidhmamma people) some of the time, and some of us all of > the time, there is real attachment to the concepts of > Abhidhamma. This must hinder direct insight especially if one > imagines such thinking is real insight. I think we are in full agreement, with only minor differences. 2253 From: Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 4:18am Subject: Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... I don't know exactly what "root"(mula) means. In everyday language a mournful citta that arises after the passing away of a desired object would seem to have lobha as a "root" instead of dosa. But obviously this is not Abhidhamma. I understand the lobha-dosa-lobha-dosa/neutral-unpleasant-neutral-unpleasant conception, but where does "root" come in? Any Patthana afficionados out there that can help us? > If I understand this correctly, it would be dosa-mula > (rooted) citta conditioned by lobha-mula citta. That > is, the dosa would arise because of the impermanence > of the object of clinging. Does this sound right? > > mn > > --- wrote: > > > Would a simple way to express this be that the > > > domanassa vedana here accompanies dosa > > *conditioned > > > by* lobha? Thanks in advance for corrections. > > Thank you for your kind words. > > > > If the dosa is "conditioned by" lobha, wherefore > > dosa as "root"? > > 2254 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 4:27am Subject: RE: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Kia koutou (hello everyone), I find this discussion referring to the Abhidhamma interesting indeed. It is alluding to fundamental questions: can a priori speculations be made? Or is all perspective, relational and relative? It seems that there are many possibilities to the shape that reality can take, and that things will manifest according to our a priori assumptions and consequenting actions. I can see how some would believe that all is mind, and others would be extreme materialists! I agree, ultimately, any version of Abhidhamma would have to be relinquished for vipassana to arise. Otherwise, a person would be attached to the operations that the Abhidhamma entail. Simply operating within its confines, not transcending it to attain nibbaana, to become a araahat. Remember, I'm just a beginner so please excuse any moha. Just a question to the person from Cornell, the biologist. Have you investigated the workings of the Mandebrot set, etc. Now that's an interesting mathmatical phenomena! That's all. 2255 From: Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 4:57am Subject: Re: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Dear kom. I enjoyed reading your post. I'd like to add a little. You wrote: > Now, let's talk about abhidhamma realities. The buddha in fact > described many models about the realities: the pancakanddha, ayatana, > dhatu, poramatttha dhammas, paticasumudpaddah, the Four Noble Truths, > and others fitting the accumulations of the audience. The models > capture the different details of the realities, and shine different > lights on the realities. We are so strongly tied to these particular models that we fail to see that in another time Buddha may have taught Five or Three noble truths, 15 links in paticca-samuppada, 7 pancakhandha, and 127 dhatu. It's fine to note this, but we can quickly get into trouble if we speculate too much on just what those "other" noble truths, links, etc. are. Some of the dangers would include developing obsession, getting it wrong, wasting time, and sowing seeds of doubt among others. > All in all, the minute characteristics of the realities are infinite. > It takes the panna of a sammasambuddha to put it into understandable > models that aid a person toward the path. Yup, and we feel deep gratitude to our Buddha and his loyal trooper Sariputta for giving us the gift of dhamma models in the Tipitika. 2256 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 4:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Dear Dhd5, As I understand it, each citta is individually 'rooted', and arises and subsides completely with incredible rapidity (along with it's 'root')--the appearance of continuity due to each citta's conditioning of the next citta and so on. So, again, the aversion-rooted citta is, I think, conditioned (in part) by the impermanence (or loss, or absence) of the object of the clinging-rooted citta. Make sense? mn --- wrote: > I don't know exactly what "root"(mula) means. In > everyday language a > mournful citta that arises after the passing away of > a desired object > would seem to have lobha as a "root" instead of > dosa. But obviously > this is not Abhidhamma. I understand the > lobha-dosa-lobha-dosa/neutral-unpleasant-neutral-unpleasant > > conception, but where does "root" come in? Any > Patthana afficionados > out there that can help us? > > > > If I understand this correctly, it would be > dosa-mula > > (rooted) citta conditioned by lobha-mula citta. > That > > is, the dosa would arise because of the > impermanence > > of the object of clinging. Does this sound right? > > > > mn > > > > --- wrote: > > > > Would a simple way to express this be that the > > > > domanassa vedana here accompanies dosa > > > *conditioned > > > > by* lobha? Thanks in advance for corrections. > > > Thank you for your kind words. > > > > > > If the dosa is "conditioned by" lobha, wherefore > > > dosa as "root"? > > > > > > > > > 2257 From: Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 5:29am Subject: Re: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Dear Jody Paul, Pirret. I'm am enjoying your fluid posts. Thanks! Our vision is ordinarily clouded by delusion. We experience phenomena through Self-colored goggles, and it takes extraordinary wisdom to take those goggles off in order to understand the world as it really is. There is great danger in speculating about what the world would look like if only we weren't wearing the goggles. Therein lies the value of the Abhidhamma. It is a description of the world when the goggles are removed. We can study it, think about it, discuss it, write about it, and learn about it, but before we actually take the goggles off, it is all akin to looking at a map of Africa and watching a slide show of lions instead of going to Krueger and watching a lion as it stalks us from the tall grass. As Robert so clearly stated, relinquishing Abhidhamma is not something that we just "do." Why would we throw away such a great roadmap before arriving at the destination? Trying to would be a mistake. Instead, we just practice, practice, practice diligently and calmly, guided by Dhamma, by Abhidhamma, by suttas, by good friends, by insight, and by understanding. (Don't feel shy about moha, and don't feel bad if you get some blistering responses to your posts. Moha is something that we all share, and we are trying to help each other along. [My apologies to Arahants reading this--I wrongly assumed you would be doing something other than reading my posts :) ]). > I agree, ultimately, any version of Abhidhamma would have to be relinquished > for vipassana to arise. Otherwise, a person would be attached to the > operations > that the Abhidhamma entail. Simply operating within its confines, not > transcending > it to attain nibbaana, to become a araahat. > > Remember, I'm just a beginner so please excuse any moha. > > Just a question to the person from Cornell, the biologist. Have you > investigated > the workings of the Mandebrot set, etc. Now that's an interesting > mathmatical > phenomena! > > That's all. 2258 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 8:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? dear Jody, I was thinking, with difficulty, on how to reply to your letter. Fortunately I checked this post before vexing myself for long. Apposite and well written. I applaud it. Robert --- wrote: > Dear Jody Paul, Pirret. > I'm am enjoying your fluid posts. Thanks! > > Our vision is ordinarily clouded by delusion. We experience > phenomena > through Self-colored goggles, and it takes extraordinary > wisdom to > take those goggles off in order to understand the world as it > really > is. There is great danger in speculating about what the world > would > look like if only we weren't wearing the goggles. Therein lies > the > value of the Abhidhamma. It is a description of the world when > the > goggles are removed. We can study it, think about it, discuss > it, > write about it, and learn about it, but before we actually > take the > goggles off, it is all akin to looking at a map of Africa and > watching > a slide show of lions instead of going to Krueger and watching > a lion > as it stalks us from the tall grass. > > As Robert so clearly stated, relinquishing Abhidhamma is not > something > that we just "do." Why would we throw away such a great > roadmap before > arriving at the destination? Trying to would be a mistake. > Instead, we > just practice, practice, practice diligently and calmly, > guided by > Dhamma, by Abhidhamma, by suttas, by good friends, by insight, > and by > understanding. > > (Don't feel shy about moha, and don't feel bad if you get > some blistering responses to your posts. Moha is something > that we all > share, and we are trying to help each other along. [My > apologies to > Arahants reading this--I wrongly assumed you would be doing > something > other than reading my posts :) ]). > > > I agree, ultimately, any version of Abhidhamma would have to > be > relinquished > > for vipassana to arise. Otherwise, a person would be > attached to the > > operations > > that the Abhidhamma entail. Simply operating within its > confines, > not > > transcending > > it to attain nibbaana, to become a araahat. > > > > Remember, I'm just a beginner so please excuse any moha. > > > > Just a question to the person from Cornell, the biologist. > Have you > > investigated > > the workings of the Mandebrot set, etc. Now that's an > interesting > > mathmatical > > phenomena! > > > > That's all. > 2259 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 9:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: was teaching resources & vipassana Dear Robert, I'm FINALLY getting around to cleaning up a backlog of correspondence. Thanks (all) for your patience, hope you don't mind returning to some old issues... --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > The Visuddhimagga says that this object [the breath]> is not > for ordinary > people but only for Mahapurisa - great ones such as > Rahula and > the other 80 great disciples of the Buddha. It says > that > mindfulness of breathing appears easy but is the > probably the > hardest of the 38 objects of samattha. This doesn't > mean that > ordinary people can't develop it but it needs a lot > of care and > background and prior development in past lives. When > it is > developed as an object of samattha there will come a > time when a > nimitta appears and that is taken as the object - > this is a > concept as Sarah notes. This is really interesting. It would seem to suggest a source of the differences of opinion between devotees of abhidhamma and anapanasati-based meditation...! > This is the way vipassana develops no matter whether > in daily > life or whether one lives under a tree. No matter > whether breath > is the object or not. Right... > Avijja is always darting among > concepts > but in between panna is arising and seeing > paramattha dhammas as > they are, little by little. Right--but only if the panna has previously 'accumulated' in cittas to be passed on to other cittas etc., I presume (or rather accept as a working hypothesis)... > Try and force it though > and it is > sure to be done with an idea of self. Yes, I think so too. And I think this is major obstacle for some people, that is, clinging to the idea of 'free will' vs. aversion to the idea of 'determinism'. In a way, I think this 'I am free to choose to act in this way or that' is the very nut of sakkaya-ditthi. People will sometimes go to great lengths to avoid the (I think) glaring and undeniable fact that this view and anatta are mutually exclusive. This is more than just a conventional expression, I think. A pity. Kamma and paticcasamuppada are really much more liberating than 'free will', arent' they, even for a couple of dumb puthujanas like us... You know, off-hand I can't think of anyplace in the suttapitaka where the Buddha told anyone s/he had a choice (corrections welcomed!) Do you remember him ever saying or even implying, as a rhetorician might, '...it's up to you! It's your choice!'? Though he constantly instructed people in what to think, say and do (and what not to) I believe that he was simply planting seeds (always the right seeds for the right cittas) to be transmitted on to the next citta and so on to germinate when the time was right (usually pretty darned quick, in his case!). I think there's a subtle but crucial difference here. > It is panna > (wisdom) that > arises and knows-that is its function. The > essential conditions > for this (re;your post yesterday) is profound and > repeated > reflection about dhammas which conditions yoniso > manasikara (wise > attention) to the various objects that are arising. Exactly, assuming the paññá has previously accumulated. And no one wisely attending--just wise attention... > Being in a > quiet place can be a supporting condition for this > to occur, but > it is not at all an essential condition. Definitely not--but the previous accumulation of paññá IS--I THINK. mike 2260 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 9:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... dear mike and dhd, Perhaps a little more theory (do I hear groans out there?)will help. I wrote to Jody yesterday about the three rounds - kamma-vatta (action) vipaka-vatta (result of kamma) and kilesa-vatta (defilements). The round of vipaka(result)is ahetuka citta(no root). Thus the moments of seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling are all rootless, they are simply the results of past good or bad kamma. However, immediately after these brief sense-impressions there are other cittas that arise in a series and during this series javanna cittas occur. These javanna cittas are sahetuka(accompanied by hetu, root). The six roots are three unwholesome ones, dosa, lobha(desire) moha(ignorance) and three wholesome, alobha(non-attachment),adosa (non-aversion), and amoha (panna, wisdom). The javanna cittas must be rooted in some of these and is thus always either kusala(wholesome) or akusala (unwholesome). Cittas rooted in lobha are always also rooted in moha (ignorance), as also are citas rooted in Dosa(also rooted in moha) . However dosa and moha cannot arise at the same time or even in the same process. But they can arise shortly after each other. I think of dosa as like the other side of the same coin that has lobha on the face. Robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Dhd5, > > As I understand it, each citta is individually > 'rooted', and arises and subsides completely with > incredible rapidity (along with it's 'root')--the > appearance of continuity due to each citta's > conditioning of the next citta and so on. > > So, again, the aversion-rooted citta is, I think, > conditioned (in part) by the impermanence (or loss, or > absence) of the object of the clinging-rooted citta. > Make sense? > > mn > --- wrote: > > I don't know exactly what "root"(mula) means. In > > everyday language a > > mournful citta that arises after the passing away of > > a desired object > > would seem to have lobha as a "root" instead of > > dosa. But obviously > > this is not Abhidhamma. I understand the > > > lobha-dosa-lobha-dosa/neutral-unpleasant-neutral-unpleasant > > > > conception, but where does "root" come in? Any > > Patthana afficionados > > out there that can help us? > > > > > > > If I understand this correctly, it would be > > dosa-mula > > > (rooted) citta conditioned by lobha-mula citta. > > That > > > is, the dosa would arise because of the > > impermanence > > > of the object of clinging. Does this sound right? > > > > > > mn > > > > > > --- wrote: > > > > > Would a simple way to express this be that the > > > > > domanassa vedana here accompanies dosa > > > > *conditioned > > > > > by* lobha? Thanks in advance for corrections. > > > > Thank you for your kind words. > > > > > > > > If the dosa is "conditioned by" lobha, wherefore > > > > dosa as "root"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2261 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 9:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] correctionRe: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Iwrote: --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > . However dosa and moha cannot arise at the same time > or even in the same process. But they can it should be "However dosa and LOBHA cannot arise at the same.." Robert > 2262 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 9:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Translation Dear Khun Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > By the way if anyone would like to see the > half-translation as is > without waiting for the completed book, please > contact me off list, Thanks, yes--I'd very much like to see it! Whang wa khun kohng sabai dee, Ma'am, mike 2263 From: Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 10:37am Subject: Re: Request -- Samma Ditthi --- wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > I was wondering if there is any reason, other than "similar tastes" > as you mention above, for one to study the Abhidhamma if everything > one needs is already in the Suttas? > > Thank you and kindest regards, > Veronica Ma. Dear Veronica, I can't give you an authoritative answer, but would like to tell you what has caught my interest in abhidhamma. For nearly thirty years I've wandered around in various schools of Buddhism, the last ten or so in the Theravada. I was very glad when this meandering led me to the sutta-pitaka. I bought the PTS edition and read all of it, some more than once or even twice. Why I appreciate having had the great good fortune of discovering this group (and with it abhidhamma): MANY ideas I had developed individually, intellectually and intuitively and with the help of others, good monks among them, were simply mistaken. So much was clarified in such a short time! And all of it from the same suttas I'd read and contemplated and embraced. Maybe, if I'd had the time, I would've figured out the inconsistencies in my own understanding eventually, but I don't think so. The way this information has been carefully gleaned from the suttas and laid out, cross-referenced and so on, is incredibly helpful. So, from my point of view, why re-invent the eight-spoked wheel? I can always measure my own intuition and reasoning against the abhidhamma and the suttas and frankly, it's always the former, not the suttas or the abhidhamma (which always agree), that come up short. I hope that you won't pass up this opportunity to investigate this wonderful material for yourself. Mike 2264 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 10:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... I think you meant dosa and lobha cannot arise at the same time. --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > in moha) . However dosa and moha cannot arise at the same time > or even in the same process. But they can arise shortly after > each other. I think of dosa as like the other side of the same > coin that has lobha on the face. 2265 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 8, 2000 11:00am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: was teaching resources & vipassana Dear Sarah, FINALLY getting back to you--I've had a lot of irons in the fire of late. --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Mike, > > I’m sorry I confused you by correcting the one > sentence in my very long post to Michael J that you > picked up on! Hey--I don't need YOUR help to get confused... > Well, this is the important distinction that needs > to > be made because most of the time when there is > concentrating or focussing on an object there is no > understanding of a reality and hence no vipassana > development taking place. The small correction that > follows doesn't change this. Right... > >sarah... wrote: > > > >> I made a mistake in the para below. I meant to > say > >> that the concept of breath cannot be the object > of > >> insight or vipassana. Of course there can be > >> understanding or vipassana whilst focussing on > breath > >> or any other concept, but the object must be a > reality > >> such as softness/hardness or thinking. > > > > >Well! Having previously applauded the sentence > you've > corrected > >here, I'm doubly curious. Is it true that > understanding or insight > >may arise while the mind is 'darting among > unrealities'? Seems I > >need to look at this a little more closely. > > Yes, except that technically speaking, they are > different moments. Yes, that't the answer of course. Kusala cittas popping up occasionally among the akusala... > One moment there may be thinking > about breath (a concept), another moment there can > be > awareness of thinking, hardness or softness, or any > other reality which appears. So while darting (or to > be precise, in between the darting), there can be > moments of understanding. Right... > Whilst breathing, > standing, > walking, sitting, there are realities which can be > known. This is in essence what the Satipatthana > Sutta > is discussing. Breathing, sitting, standing, walking > are concepts which cannot be known. But this is our > daily life. This is what we do. That's the way I understand this too. > Whilst following > these > activities, awareness can be developed naturally of > any realities appearing without any special > focussing. By focussing, you mean ekagata? Because I think yoniso manasikara needs to be present, wise attention, no? > >I guess that, given that only one citta can arise > at > a time, with > >only one object, the problem is with the > expression. > Not really > >a 'mind darting'...still, this does bring to mind > the > simile of > >trying to get milk by twisting a cow's horn. > > > >Please excuse my rambling. Maybe I'm just mixed up > in > semantics. > >Any thoughts? > > No, I think you understood the essence of the > original > post perfectly (and my subsequent minor alteration > didn't change this). Thanks--that's reassuring. > Thanks for urging me to clarify further too. Always a pleasure, Ma'am...mn 2266 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 0:55am Subject: Re: message from a friend Dear Sarah, --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Thankyou for yr reasons you may take robes...we'll > consider & may take up some points for discusssion > in > Bkk in a non-personal sort of way.. I hope this doesn't displace more important issues, but I'll be interested to hear the result... > Thank you for the footnote (not in front of me). Of > course those complications, papancas, have nothing > to > do with the 'outer appearance'....we can't avoid our > accumulations for ever... Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of my original message and can't remember what this is in reference to... > The best monk I ever knew in terms of keeping > strictest vinaya etc was Phra Dhammadharo/Alan > Driver > (as on the tapes). Is this the same man you mentioned earlier, who published 'Cetasikas', etc.? Also, is it his voice on the Colombo tapes or am I confusing him with another monk? > After many years in robes, when > he > disrobed and went to live in Jonothan's house. > Within > 2 days he had more clothes in his closet than > Jonothan > who'd lived in Bkk and worked there for 7 yrs! Not > only that, but they were specific colours, > tailor-made, special fabrics etc. Sure, why not? All perfectly appropriate for a layman. The Buddha never recommended monkish garb or manners for householders. In fact, I not only find the stark double-standard in vinaya between the lay and bhikkhu to be a fascinating feature, but I also think it's absolutely essential--the sangha couldn't have existed without it. > Nothing wrong in > any > of this and not an indicator at all of any level of > kusala or akusala, but just an indicator of > accumulations which are not affected by taking > robes. No, of course nothing (except sati and paññá?) will affect past accumulations. However, new accumulations after one has begun observing the 226 precepts will certainly change--most obviously, one will be protected from akusala kamma-pathas and their vipaka--right? > I might make similar comments with regard to your > comments about the chores & drudgery in daily > life....isn't this thinking? To be sure! And I'm not actually complaining about these things. In fact, I have a great job, good friends, a nice place to live and all that sort of thing. I'm also just as picky about my clothes as Alan was, in my own way. More to the point, > What about awareness > while getting on the bus, having inane > conversations, > doing boring work etc...realities which are just as > real at these times! Of course! And by the way, a monk's life is just as full of dosa, lobha and moha as a layman's. Contrary to the opinions of my old Ajahn, I don't believe that simply living the 'holy life' does much of anything to eradicate kilesas which, as I see it, is one way of expressing the whole point of the dhammavinaya. This brings me back to my other (rather unclearly stated) motives: That it's a great job that needs to be done, and that it DOES protect one from akusala kamma-pathas. By the way, as Robert pointed out in a recent off-list message, we WILL justify anything we want to do. I realize that this intention is conditioned almost entirely by the three unwholesome roots. That's the way it has to be and, I assume, has been true for nearly everyone who's ordained since the days of the arahats. However, I don't think that this is a reason not to perform a wholesome act, do you? If I waited until my motives were completely pure, I would never have performed any act of dana, sila or bhavana. > I must stop & PACK! 8a.m. flight tomorrow. This is so late, your might already be back--hope you had a good flight. > If you feel you can put any of yr comments on list, > you may get some useful responses & then I can add > ones from Bkk....maybe a general qu on these points. I'll consider this--hard to convert a personal conversation into a general discussion. However, do please feel free to post any of this you'd like to get something going. Talk to you soon, and, welcome back? p.s. You probably got the same message from Egroups that I did (I moderate some work-groups) about Yahoo taking over. This adds some interesting possibilities, notably increased 'chat' capability. What do you think of Shin's recent suggestion that we try a little real-time chat sometime? 2267 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 3:38am Subject: Dhamma study Kia ora Koutou, Thank you for the kind words and feedback regarding any comments made. One thing that has captured my attention regarding the Dhamma, is that it does not entail a single path towards nibbaana. It can be adapted, as the Buddha demonstrated, to suit the various inclinations of people's spiritual levels and accumulations, that is, whether they are puthujjana, sekha, or asekha. Therefore, it reinforces that sammaaditthi is individual and relative to the one's path. Which means that anyone can be on the path, be it mundane or supermundane, according to their lifestyle. Of course, there are advantages to living certain ways over others, but each life time is short and the path is gradual. This flexibility is realistic and wise, and is far from the attitudes I have come across. However, I need not worry about that, instead realise the gradual nature of the path and that all will comprehend the freedom which is possible from the suffering of samsaara. At the moment, I'm reading the book: "Paali Buddhism", edited by Frank Hoffman and Deegalle Mahinda. It seems a good read. That's all for now. 2268 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 11:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dhamma study Dear Jody, I don't know the book you mentioned but if there are any interesting or doubtful points you are welcome to bring them up. If you want to read other books by Nina van Gorkom the NZ libary service will be able to get them for you through a request at your local library (small charge). I know they have "THE world in the Buddhist Sense" and "Buddhism in daily LIfe" at Auckland Public Lib. They might also have "Cetasikas". Good comments you made about how the path can suit any lifestyle. Yes, there were monks and nuns- and among those some lived in the forest and some stayed close to the city. Some took on the dhutanga (ascetic practices), some didn't. All types could attain nibbana. Among layfollowers there were those who kept 8 or sometimes 10 precepts and some lived fairly secluded lives. Others were attached to their wealth and woman and children, and lived lives of luxury; but both types attained stages of enlightenment. On this list too you will find many variations in lifestyles. So good that you see that this life is short and the path is very gradual. Yes in this way we have a sense of urgency - our human life will soon end, we must strive. On the other hand knowing the path is so long one stops looking for results and instead studies the present moment; as this is the only way to come to see. When the time is right, when enough understanding has accumulated, nibbana will be experienced - it will happen whether we want it to or not. No one could stop it. Robert --- "JODY PAUL,PIRRET" wrote: > Kia ora Koutou, > > Thank you for the kind words and feedback regarding any > comments made. > > One thing that has captured my attention regarding the Dhamma, > is > that it does not entail a single path towards nibbaana. It can > be > adapted, as the Buddha demonstrated, to suit the various > inclinations > of people's spiritual levels and accumulations, that is, > whether they > are puthujjana, sekha, or asekha. Therefore, it reinforces > that > sammaaditthi is individual and relative to the one's path. > Which means > that anyone can be on the path, be it mundane or supermundane, > according > to their lifestyle. Of course, there are advantages to living > certain > ways over others, but each life time is short and the path is > gradual. > > This flexibility is realistic and wise, and is far from the > attitudes > I have come across. However, I need not worry about that, > instead > realise the gradual nature of the path and that all will > comprehend > the freedom which is possible from the suffering of samsaara. > > At the moment, I'm reading the book: "Paali Buddhism", edited > by > Frank Hoffman and Deegalle Mahinda. It seems a good read. > > That's all for now. > > -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor > > > 2269 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 0:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: message from a friend Dear Mike, I'll make a few comments on your letter to sarah, which you posted to the group. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > > > The best monk I ever knew in terms of keeping > > strictest vinaya etc was Phra Dhammadharo/Alan > > Driver > > (as on the tapes). > > Is this the same man you mentioned earlier, who > published 'Cetasikas', etc.? Also, is it his voice on > the Colombo tapes or am I confusing him with another > monk? Phra Dhammdharo was a longtime student of Khun sujin until his untimely death when he was the pasenger in a van that crashed. I think he was on the way to give a Dhamma talk at a airforce base at the time. His name was alan driver. Alan weller in England is the publisher of Cetasikas and other books. > > > After many years in robes, when > > he > > disrobed and went to live in Jonothan's house. > > Within > > 2 days he had more clothes in his closet than > > Jonothan > > who'd lived in Bkk and worked there for 7 yrs! Not > > only that, but they were specific colours, > > tailor-made, special fabrics etc. > > Sure, why not? All perfectly appropriate for a > layman. The Buddha never recommended monkish garb or > manners for householders. In fact, I not only find > the stark double-standard in vinaya between the lay > and bhikkhu to be a fascinating feature, but I also > think it's absolutely essential--the sangha couldn't > have existed without it. I completely agree. Sometimes laypeople think that they should try to imitate the lifestyle of a monk but this doesn't seem to be the intention of the Buddha. > > > Nothing wrong in > > any > > of this and not an indicator at all of any level of > > kusala or akusala, but just an indicator of > > accumulations which are not affected by taking > > robes. > > No, of course nothing (except sati and paññá?) will > affect past accumulations. However, new accumulations > after one has begun observing the 226 precepts will > certainly change--most obviously, one will be > protected from akusala kamma-pathas and their > vipaka--right? Monks have different sila to laypeople and if they break these it is a serious matter too. We can live life as a layperson and not make any akusala kamma-patha (completed bad action). However one who lives the life of a monk correctly, and that is only possible with good understanding, is very protected. They are guarding the 6 sense doors. They see danger in the slightest fault. Of course this is also possible for the layman; it is how we should live. > > > I might make similar comments with regard to your > > comments about the chores & drudgery in daily > > life....isn't this thinking? > > To be sure! And I'm not actually complaining about > these things. In fact, I have a great job, good > friends, a nice place to live and all that sort of > thing. I'm also just as picky about my clothes as > Alan was, in my own way. More to the point, > > > What about awareness > > while getting on the bus, having inane > > conversations, > > doing boring work etc...realities which are just as > > real at these times! > > Of course! And by the way, a monk's life is just as > full of dosa, lobha and moha as a layman's. Contrary > to the opinions of my old Ajahn, I don't believe that > simply living the 'holy life' does much of anything to > eradicate kilesas which, as I see it, is one way of > expressing the whole point of the dhammavinaya. Good comments! Only understanding of satipatthana can gradually erase kilesa. This > brings me back to my other (rather unclearly stated) > motives: That it's a great job that needs to be done, > and that it DOES protect one from akusala > kamma-pathas. By the way, as Robert pointed out in a > recent off-list message, we WILL justify anything we > want to do. I realize that this intention is > conditioned almost entirely by the three unwholesome > roots. That's the way it has to be and, I assume, has > been true for nearly everyone who's ordained since the > days of the arahats. However, I don't think that this > is a reason not to perform a wholesome act, do you? > If I waited until my motives were completely pure, I > would never have performed any act of dana, sila or > bhavana. I agree. As i said to sarah and you off list I think you could do a LOT of good as a monk. Please think of me as a supporter for requisites if you do take the robes. Robert 2270 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 1:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 217 Dear Dhd5, First, heartfelt condolences for the loss of your uncle. This is probably the hardest dukkha to face in life, the loss of someone well loved. Fortunately, knowing that, the Lord Buddha concentrated on this topic quite a bit in the Tipitika, if I am not mistaken. Though I don't have references at my fingertips, I think you are correct in seeing that loss in death is dhosa which comes when that for which we still have lobha has been removed, not by the development of panna, but because of vipaka. When we study the realities (the Paramatha dhammas) as they come up in daily life (sorry, I don't have the various marks to put on the Pali words on my machine), the conditions are being developed for panna to arise later, when it is ready. What does panna, a cetasika, then realize? An ever increasing, and ever deeper, understanding that all conditioned realities are anatta, anicca and dukkha. I had heard these words for years, but never had any real, or even minimal, understanding of them until I started studying Abhidhamma with Achaan Sujin. When panna arises, it increases understanding of these, gradually, and a great feeling of comfort, also a cetasika, will also arise as well. But, a question: is that feeling of comfort, which arises with panna, really lobha in disguise? How could lobha arise with panna? Or is that feeling something else? Perhaps Robert can help answer that. With metta, Betty PS: I see by your address that you are based in Ithica, NY. Lovely countryside there. Am originally from NYC and my sister lives in Syracuse, so when I come to the States, am usually in that area as well. __________________________ Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 2271 From: Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 2:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 218 Dear Dhd5, In regard to your comments on Abhidhamma, I agree wholeheartedly that it is the reality that counts and that all our words and explanations are merely concepts, models, as you call them, to explain those realities. Yes, we need to see the realities behind the concepts, and that is the process of satipatthana: as phenomena arise, see them in terms of paramatha dhammas. This then sets the conditions for sati and panna to arise later. Panna will then understand the realiities with a depth that no explanations can ever achieve. But the discussion, reading and writing about those explanations can often act as triggers for satipatthana to happen. with metta, Betty PS: please excuse my poor spelling: Ithaca, not Ithica. __________________________ Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 2272 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 4:23pm Subject: levels of panna Digest Number 217 Dear betty, Thanks for the inspiring letter. See my comments after yours. --- "Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala" When > we study the > realities (the Paramatha dhammas) as they come up in daily > life (sorry, I > don't have the various marks to put on the Pali words on my > machine), the > conditions are being developed for panna to arise later, when > it is ready. > What does panna, a cetasika, then realize? An ever increasing, > and ever > deeper, > understanding that all conditioned realities are anatta, > anicca and dukkha. > I had heard these words for years, but never had any real, or > even minimal, > understanding of them until I started studying Abhidhamma with > Achaan Sujin. > When panna arises, it increases understanding of these, > gradually, and a > great feeling > of comfort, also a cetasika, will also arise as well. There are levels upon levels of panna (wisdom). When we think about impermanence, for instance, that nothing lasts even for a split second, that every moment is conditioned, this is a level of panna. However it is not the same as direct understanding. Another level is when we consider and see as realities are arising and passing away. So we realize, as it is happening, that dhammas are changing rapidly and that there is no self involved. We see that citta takes sound for an object and the next moment colour and then concept and there is understanding of how uncontrollable it is. Some people imagine this is now direct undstanding of rise and fall but I call this "thinking in the present moment." There is not yet penetration of the visesa-lakkhana, characteristics of nama and rupa. Direct awareness can come in between the moments of thinking or it can come even without such thinking. Until the first stage of vipasssana nana though, the difference between nama and rupa is not properly understood. For vipassana to arise there must be a firm intellectual understanding of anatta and this comes about by considering the teachings carefully and wisely and also by repeated testing and study of dhammas in the present moment. As these levels of understanding develop there is certainly more comprehension of anicca, dukkha and anatta but not until later stages are they clearly seen. The process is a very gradual one that reduces self to one moment only. Now I have a slight cramp in my leg, that is the concept, the story, the thinking. The realities, the dhammas, include akusala vipaka through the bodysense (painful feeling) and there are cittas that experience heat, hardness, vibration. When we think about such painful or pleasant feelings is it "me' who is having pain or is self reduced to one moment? Do we think cittas(moments of consciousness) arise in the brain? I am now reading a book by John Searle, a leading Philosopher of mind. He says that when we have a pain in the foot that actually the experience of pain must arise in the brain and it just appears to arise at the foot. This is not so. But see for yourself. We have so much attachment to the idea that "we" are thinking, "we" are seeing, feeling, hearing. If we can learn to see that at a moment of pain in the leg that "we"(by this I mean citta), for that moment arise somewhere in the vicinity of the leg (and no leg in that moment), this helps to break down the idea of a whole, a person. The next moment is a new 'we' at a new location at the eyedoor or eardoor. So uncontrollable and temporary. This is understanding at the level of thinking. > But, a question: is that feeling of comfort, which arises with > panna, really > lobha in disguise? How could lobha arise with panna? Or is > that feeling > something else? Lobha (attachment)can never arise with panna but alobha, non-attachment, always does. Whenever there is panna the feeling associated with it is always either neutral or pleasant. We can see a dead body and feel very pleasant if panna arises. We can even be in a deadly situation and have pleasant feeling with panna(wisdom). Last year my daughter was run over by a car. I got a rather hysterical phone call to go to the hospital where she was in intensive care. When I got there my son told me to stop smiling as it was such a serious matter. I hadn't noticed I was smiling as I was concentrated on considering kamma and result and other aspects of Dhamma. This was only thinking about Dhamma but it is still with a level of panna and conditions pleasant feeling.(She wasn't too badly hurt as it turnned out). However, pleasant feeling also arises with lobha(attachment) and so it can be taken for panna. Usually, when we have kusala such as panna , immediately afterwards and also in between the moments with panna, there is lobha that attaches: to the pleasant feeling or to the kusala(panna) itself. This is natural, lobha has been accumulated and so it must arise. Learning about this as it happens is good to do. Robert 2273 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 7:17pm Subject: Re: Request -- Samma Ditthi > AC: It seems that the way that Sariputta did not repeat the words Evam me > Sutam throughout the abhidhamma teachings confused your reasoning. > In fact Sariputta was very precise and when he spoke of the cetasika > for example and having finished describing the sappa-citta-satarana-cetasika > as universal and accompanying all citta he did not repeat this as he > described all the 89 major kinds of citta. This may leave you where he > started but not the serious student. > > MO: On two issues in this one paragraph, Amara, you have both misunderstood > what was written in previous posts and, taking your misunderstanding as > fact, have formulated offensive opinions as to me personally and have taken > the further step of actually posting those opinions. Dear All, I am glad that this list has an archive so that we could, if we wanted, go back to earlier messages to see what actually was said. Since this person has left the group, I would prefer not to criticize someone who is not there to defend himself. I would just like to say some one who writes (in message 2189): "One thing I note about just this: Whereas the Suttas are presented in what I would call "2nd hand" form; this quote comes down 4th hand. When we hear Evam me sutam, we are hearing Ananda say that he either heard this as it was spoken or heard it repeated to him by the Buddha at a later time. What I hear in these lines is "What I hear is that Ananda heard this was the Buddha's word from Sariputta." In the end it doesn't matter in that if there is no incongruity with the suttas it is Dhamma. On the other hand if this work were to show itself to have been put into the public view under false pretences, it would not reflect well on the knowledge of the Dhamma of those who perpetrated the hoax, and one would need to exercise extra special scrutiny of every proposition, comparing each line to the suttas, and, as such, would constitute a monumental waste of time." (end quote) and then attributes it to his sense of humor, I would also like to attribute what he considers offensive to my own brand of sense of humor. Besides, as he said, > My reasoning in this matter is not confused. I have no reasoning whatsoever. It is hard to reason with anyone who does not have any, so I will go no further. > >AC: Thank you for the dialog, which conditioned some moments of study to > arise in me as I wrote. I do not think I have the qualifications to > teach you anything but we could discuss the dhamma which is always > useful and if it does not benefit you in any way, I will have tried my > best and have been forced to think of the truth and satipatthana and > accumulated a little more right conditions for myself in the process! > So anumodana in your interest, > > MO: Well, if insulting people is the kind of "accumulations" you are looking > for this little exchange has credited your account with something today. I stand by what I said and I say to each his accumulations anyway. > TO THE REST: Well that was fast. I was sure such a time as this would > quickly arrive, but this is a record. I stay on one of these forums only > until such a time as I suffer a personal attack. At that time I respond to > the open issues and concluding that unsubscribe from the board. This is a > policy and is impersonal as regards the rest of the board. I do not stay > because to thoroughly deal with personal attacks on a board owned by someone > else would be impossible and even an attempt would be a lengthy and serious > disruption of another persons property [yours and the list owners]. "When > bad conditions increase and good condiditions decrease, depart, even if it > means having to get up and go without saying goodbye." Just wanted to add that this is probably another tongue in cheek humor since MO did say his goodbye to everyone, though perhaps not to me! But I won't take that personally, Amara 2274 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 8:00pm Subject: Re: Hello all > Kia ora koutou (hello all), Dear Jody, A belated welcome to the list, I hope you will find it useful or at least interesting. As the word dhamma translates as the truth, realities and the Buddha's teachings, any questions or topics of discussions are most welcome, especially the ones you mentioned below, I really look forward to your posts very much, Amara > My name is Jody Pirret and I am pleased to introduce myself > to other members of this email group. In addition to the > personal information made available through the egroups > registration, I would just like to elaborate on my interests. > > Through university study, I have come to be very interested > in the development of Western culture, philosophically, > materially, and, scientifically. I feel I am coming to know > how I have been conditioned to view myself within such > paradigms as biomedicine, psychology, physics, and, > economics. Presently, I question the way in which such > paradigms promote their truths above all other ways of doing > things. > > Through philosophy, I have enjoyed discussing mind and reality. > Such topics have inevitably opened my eyes to the truths of > the East in the form of confucianism, taoism, and, Buddhism. > Therefore, it is with an empty cup that I seek to learn from > such treasures through such things as martial arts and meditation. > > I feel all forms of buddhism have much to offer Western culture. > In terms of Theravada Buddhism, I read a book by Nina Van Gorkom. > It had an old contact address of Robert Kirkpatrick's in it, and > I was able to track him down. Thankfully, he put me on to this egroup. > Therefore, I look forward to receiving comments from this, the > Dhamma study egroup. > > Regards, Jody. 2275 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 8:06pm Subject: Re: Dana to Myanmar? > They then ask if we have other English titles and whether we > could send them copies of those as well as more copies of R and > C. > So for those of you who are now in Bangkok and would like to > make merit take your chance! > The Address is > U Han Htay > International Buddhist University > NO.98 , 46th street > Yangoon > Myanmar Dear Robert, Anumodana and thanks, will print your letter out for Khun Sujin, Amara 2276 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 8:18pm Subject: Re: Cambodia > Hello from Cambodia: (...) > Full reports will come later. I have to go now. Dear JJ, So very happy to finally hear from you!!! Looking forward VERY MUCH to hearing more soon, Amara 2278 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 8:41pm Subject: Re: Dana to Myanmar? --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear group, > I have taken the chance to do merit as suggested by Robert, by > visiting the foundation today and obtaining some books and sent > them to U Han Htay in Myanmar. > Fearing that I might be taking too many copies from a limited > amount of stock, I chose to take and send the following:- > 10 copies of 'Realities and concepts'. > 20 copies each of the 'Mental development' series. > 10 copies of 'Abhidhamma in Daily life'. > 20 copies of the 'Letters' > 20 copies of the thin grey book the name of which I don't remember. > This I mention in case if anyone who might have a better estimate of > the stock of books at the foundation, might see the possibility of > sending more copies and do it. > > Sukin. Dear Sukin, Anumodana for everything!!! Now we know we everything is in good hands and can go off anywhere in the world, unless of course you come with us the next time! It was one of the most unforgetable experiences in my life, by the way, in Cambodia. You must really come next time. Thanks again and really anumodana, will print out your letter too, Amara 2279 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 8:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dana to Myanmar? Dear amara, Since you are discussing this with Sujin you might want to add that I think Realities and Concepts especially meet for this university. Maybe someone could arrange regular parcels to be sent there? I reason they will take great care of Abhidhamma books in Burma because English books are such an expensive commodity there and because of the subject. I sent a couple of books to a man I met on a train while in India. He sent me a letter this week thanking me for "the golden books, which will remain in my family as an honoured treasure for all our lives". Robert ps. Could you let nina know too, if you see her, as she translated the book. --- amara chay wrote: > --- Sukinderpal Narula > > wrote: > > Dear group, > > I have taken the chance to do merit as suggested by Robert, > by > > visiting the foundation today and obtaining some books and > sent > > them to U Han Htay in Myanmar. > > Fearing that I might be taking too many copies from a > limited > > amount of stock, I chose to take and send the following:- > > 10 copies of 'Realities and concepts'. > > 20 copies each of the 'Mental development' series. > > 10 copies of 'Abhidhamma in Daily life'. > > 20 copies of the 'Letters' > > 20 copies of the thin grey book the name of which I don't > remember. > > This I mention in case if anyone who might have a better > estimate of > > the stock of books at the foundation, might see the > possibility of > > sending more copies and do it. > > > > Sukin. > > > Dear Sukin, > > Anumodana for everything!!! Now we know we everything is in > good > hands and can go off anywhere in the world, unless of course > you > come with us the next time! It was one of the most > unforgetable > experiences in my life, by the way, in Cambodia. You must > really > come next time. > > Thanks again and really anumodana, will print out your letter > too, > > Amara > 2280 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 9:05pm Subject: Re: Translation > > By the way if anyone would like to see the > > half-translation as is > > without waiting for the completed book, please > > contact me off list, > > Thanks, yes--I'd very much like to see it! Dear Sir, Please look for attachment off list, and would appreciate any corrections and comments, Amara 2281 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 9, 2000 9:48pm Subject: Re: Dana to Myanmar? > Since you are discussing this with Sujin you might want to add > that I think Realities and Concepts especially meet for this > university. Maybe someone could arrange regular parcels to be > sent there? I reason they will take great care of Abhidhamma > books in Burma because English books are such an expensive > commodity there and because of the subject. > I sent a couple of books to a man I met on a train while in > India. He sent me a letter this week thanking me for "the golden > books, which will remain in my family as an honoured treasure > for all our lives". > Robert > ps. Could you let nina know too, if you see her, as she > translated the book. Dear Robert, Will also print your letter above out for both Nina and Khun Sujin, Thank you and anumodana for everything, I am enjoying in particular your wonderful posts these last few days, Amara 2282 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 7:38am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Citta and Abhidhamma (was Request -- Samma Ditthi Dear Kom, I've spent most of the day catching up on old correspondence that I've left because of insufficient time to give it due attention. I think this reply is so excellent that I'm saving it as a reference for how to look at abhidhamma and why to study it. Saadhu! mn --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Michael, > > --- Michael Olds wrote: > > MO: I completely agree with this and I stated as > much in my original > > post. > > MO: This argument is made moot by your earlier > argument that if what > > is > > taught is the truth, it is what the Buddha taught. > Thanks for your patience in reading through what we > have already agreed > on: it gives me the confidence that we are on the > same page. > > > The first thing one needs to do in this case is to > ask one’s self > > what it is > > that one is, one’s self, attempting to gain from > studying this > > Dhamma. Then > > one needs to examine the claims made by the > various teachers out > > there. Then > > one needs to examine the method suggested for > accomplishing the goal. > > Then > > one needs to follow that method. If that method > accomplishes the > > stated > > goal, then one can ask no more. Asking more one > could ask if the > > Entire > > teaching of this teacher who has taught something > that does > > accomplish that > > goal also is consistent with that part of that > teaching that does > > accomplish > > that goal. > >If it does, it doesn’t matter if the words are > exactly > > those of > > the original teacher or not. But in the case of > This System, > > comprehending > > the difficulty of the goal and the uniqueness in > the world of it’s > > method, > > we would necessarily have to come to the > conclusion (having had all > > the > > above experiences) that what we have in front of > us in the Suttas is > > in fact > > the word of the Buddha . . . or, if it isn’t, then > the words we have > > in > > front of us in the Suttas and Vinaya ARE the > Buddha. > Totally agreed. I think that we can now discuss why > learning the > teachings in Abhidhammas is important. > > > the Abhidhamma is the superior dhamma > The Buddha taught only the truth that will aid > becoming free of all the > sufferrings. If the truth helps one becoming free, > that is the > superior truth for the person. Hence, in this > sense, the abhidhammas > is not superior to the sutta: they all teach the > truths that help a > person becoming free. > > > the Abhidhamma, would it not prove to be a wiser > technique to begin > > with the > > more fundamental dhamma and progress on through it > to the point where > > it is > > mastered? > I think we are in agreement here that knowing the > fundamentals about > dhammas is the only way to proceed. I think the > difference here is > whether the Sutta and the Abhidhammas are "better" > ways to know the > fundamentals. I would like to present the following > comments based on > my understandings: > 1) The suttas are concise teachings exactly fitting > the > accumulations/outlooks of the recipient. It is > deep, profound, > intricate, and subtle, as all the Master's teachings > are. The receiver > that became an ariya disciple succeeded not because > of that teaching > alone, but because of the dhamma/panna accumulations > done in countless > previous lives. The Buddha himself had > accumulations for the > englightenment for 4 asangayas (sp?) 100,000 kappa. > Maha-mogalana and > Sali-puttra each accumulated for 1 asangayas, > 100,000 kappa. > 2) Without the needed accumulations, just a few > short and medium > teaching alone cannot get a person to become an > ariya disciple. > 3) The abhidhammas are the books where all the deep, > profound, > intricate, and subtle details are expounded upon. > This is for the > venuyasatta (slow learner, one who needs lengthy > study) and other > people with no hope to become enlightend in this > life, who, without the > explicit details, cannot grasp even the most > fundamentals of dhammas. > The abhidhammas are thus for the persons who did not > have enough > accumulations to understand the truth based on the > short teachings, > without the explicit details, alone. In this sense, > people who need to > study abhidhammas to correctly understand dhammas > have in fact > "inferior" accumulations than the people who can > understand it based on > the suttas alone. > 4) Because of the explicitness of the abhidhammas, > there are less > leeway to interpret dhammas as one pleases. Because > of this reason, if > the abhidhammas in fact teach the truth, it may lead > a person with > certain kind of accumultations less astrayed from > the truth. Because > the suttra is not as explicit, we have more tendency > to interpret it > anyway we like. > 5) The elements of abhidhammas are in fact within > the sutta itself. I > have only personally seen a section of the sutta > which explicitly > mentions the dhammas in the abhidhammas manner. > However, I have heard > that the abhidhammas are in fact, extracts from the > suttas. > 6) The main teacher from whom we quote frequently, > Tan A. Sujin, > repeated time and time again that what we must > compare the teachings > from all the three tipitikas: the meanings of the > teachings must match > in order for us to have any kind of confidence that > what we understand > is the truth. We, as somebody who studies > abhidhammas, do not hold > abhidhammas to be the ultimate authority: we hold > all three tipitikas > to be the authority. > 7) Hence, I think the main argument for studying the > Abhidhammas first, > is to make sure that we correctly grasp the > fundamentals of buddhism > (anicca, dukkha, and perhaps most importantly, > anatta) before we wander > on from there. > 8) I agree with you that learning and understanding > the intricate > details of the teachings alone doesn't allow one to > progress toward > becoming enlightened. In fact, I am sure other > people in this group > agreed to this as well. Only directly knowing the > truth can one > progress. A. Sujin said as much. However, we still > need to > differentiate what is the truth and what isn't. > > > Have you mastered the lesser Dhamma of the Suttas? > I am not asking > > you to > > respond. I am asking you if you have asked > yourself this question. > I have neither mastered the vinaya, the sutta, nor > the abhidhamma. I > am actively engaging in the studies of both the > sutta and the > abhidhammas. In fact, I totally agree that if I can > master the > teachings based on the sutta alone, there is no need > for me to study > abhidhammas. > > > But this is the heart of your question: The Truth, > so called, is not > > something you “get.” The Truth is what is left > when === message truncated === 2283 From: Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 8:18am Subject: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person I cited this recently in a post to Robert and Gayan. Because of its pertinence to the subject of papañca, Robert asked me to post it to the group for comments. So, excerpted from Access to Insight at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an8-30.html, Eight Thoughts of a Great Person As he was sitting there the Blessed One said to him, "Good, Anuruddha, very good. It's good that you think these thoughts of a great person: 'This Dhamma is for one who is modest, not for one who is self-aggrandizing. This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is discontent. This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, not for one who is entangled. This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy. This Dhamma is for one whose mindfulness is established, not for one whose mindfulness is confused. This Dhamma is for one whose mind is centered, not for one whose mind is uncentered. This Dhamma is for one endowed with discernment, not for one whose discernment is weak.' Now then, Anuruddha, think the eighth thought of a great person: 'This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-complication, who delights in non- complication, not for one who enjoys & delights in complication.' Anguttara Nikaya VIII.30 Anuruddha Sutta To Anuruddha ________________________ 2284 From: Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 4:08am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 217 Dear friends Just came back from Cabodia trip yesterday. We were so overwhelm about the hospitality and the enthusiastic of the Cambodian friends It was an unforgetable experience to see at least couple thousands people came and geet us at the airport and the at the temple. I got to meet sara, jonaton, sukin(at the foundation) and see khun Amara,nina,ursula and many more. we all had a really nice time and real intensive study. Kom had me pass on the question to A. sujin "can satipattana arises at the senses door"? yes, it can,because if maha kusolajitta (four with panna,four without)can arises at the senses door!!! so can satipattana. actually satipattana can arises through the six doors. Kom, I hope this will answer your question, I wish everyone could be here with me so we'd have more interact between our group. for now, thanks to the internet and the web team and especially Tarn A. sujin. more later,now we'r going to the foundation for more study. with metta, O 2285 From: amara chay Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 10:45am Subject: Re: Digest Number 217 > Kom had me pass on the question to A. sujin > "can satipattana arises at the senses door"? > yes, it can,because if maha kusolajitta > (four with panna,four without)can arises > at the senses door!!! so can satipattana. > actually satipattana can arises through > the six doors. Dear Khuns O and Kom, In her hurry to get to the discussions Khun O probably forgot to add that it always starts through the mind dvara, but since the citta arise and fall away so rapidly that by the time the tiny instant of study is over, many citta has arisen in between, including the sense doors in alternations with the mind doors, so it is impossible to stop the train of sati either, as imperceptible or infinitessimally short as it is. So sati runs through them all as well. Amara 2286 From: Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 10:46am Subject: Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Friends, Sorry that this got posted twice, I seem to have caught the multiple email problem. This topic originally came up when I was telling Sarah that I tend to over-simplify things. I used to think this was a virtue, and I remembered this sutta where the Buddha praises 'delighting in non- complication', which I always took to support this ditthi of mine. One of the many wise cautions that the Ajahn of my old monastery made frequently was against 'proliferations'. (I'm reminded of Jody's recent mention of Mandlebrot Sets). I never really knew what he was talking about, except in a vague sense, and just learned recently from Gayan that this is the word usually used to translate 'papañca'. Now I'm sure that simplicity of thought can be kusala or akusala--but what, if anything, has this to do with papañca? Thanks in advance, Mike 2287 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 11:15am Subject: Re: 8thoughts Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Mike, > Memory jog: > You commented (in an private letter to sarah) on > where i had > said to gayan that it is so amazing that anyone > could decipher > such a complex mess of happenings (or words to that > effect). You > said to sarah that you wondered whether it was > simpler than we > think or words to that effect. > look forward to your comments. I do remember that, now you mention it! Gayan had been talking about the incredible flood of vangcetis(?) vangchaka akusala dhammas(?) and how the Buddha had had the keys to decipher them all. My comment to Sarah was something to the effect that, rather than having a great many keys, that maybe he only had one key that worked on all the ciphers, and that maybe it was thus simpler than you and Gayan had suggested--this led to the subject of simplicity. So, had the Buddha accumulated detailed paññá of all the cittas and cetasikas before his enlightenment, so that avijja couldn't arise in regard to them? Or had he acquired some other, simpler kind of paññá that conditioned the non-arising of avijja in a more general way? Thanks again...mike 2288 From: amara chay Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 11:16am Subject: Re: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? > Just a question to the person from Cornell, the biologist. Have you > investigated > the workings of the Mandebrot set, etc. Now that's an interesting > mathmatical > phenomena! Dear Jody, I have been trying to catch up with the group mail since my absence and came across your question on Mandelbrot, to which I seemed to have seen no answer, unless I am mistaken. I hope you won't mind a few comments. Having just returned from Cambodia which has some of the finest stone carvings in the world, especially at Ban Taey Srei (around 9-10th century AD), built of pink sandstone and with fine layered carvings with paper thin edges going up to six inches deep, I couldn't help relating the visual renderings of the mathematical calculations of Mandelbrot especially the intricate extremities, to Asian art, whether Indian, Burmese, Thai, Laotian, Cambodian or Indonesian. (etc.) I also have always wondered at how mathematicians and physicians often have an ear for music and frequently play or sing very well. Is the sense of proportion and scales mathematical to a certain degree? What distinguishes the really beautiful creations from the mediocre? In the end I think it is the individual's touch, the accumulations of the person's proficiency as well as taste and judgement, not all the mandelbrot visualizations on the web are beautiful, though all are intriguing, because of the very nature of the calculations. Still, I am reminded that true beauty (in the Buddhist sense) is something truthful and useful, knowing or appreciating art or even mathematics is not as useful to me, as attractive and pleasing to the senses as they are, as being mindful that they really are: what appears through the six dvara- generally the eye and the ear and the mind, sometimes through the body-sense, tongue and nose, such as the culinary arts, etc., and we are not only attached to our selves but to all that is pleasing to us. In reality Cambodia is only in the memory, now, but still so real although it doesn't appear through any senses but the mind dvara. It is only a concept at the moment, as is Mandelbrot's calculations, while what is true beauty is the truth before us because it is useful and completely harmless: mindfulness of the characteristics of realities before us, which could gradually accumulate knowledge of sight, visual objects, touches, even as we sit in front of the computer. And long trains of thought that brought us to Cambodia, Mandelbrot, art and the dhamma, which, if the characteristics of thought were studied as well, would bring us that much closer to the truth and true beauty. Because even the loveliest art must perish through time, (I really felt dosa to see the destruction left by war and vandalism at the ancient ruins) only true knowledge could remain your personal treasure through samsara, if you knew how to accumulate it. None could take that from you no matter where or what your next lives will be, and you could increase it at all times whenever there is study of realities before you and gradually the knowledge will grow so that once it is strong enough there would be no more mistaking anything for what it is not: calculations are organization of thoughts in a pattern, appearing through the mind dvara, remembered by the sanna (memory), another reality to be studied as such. I don't know if what your friend wanted to discuss has anything to do with what I said, please tell us what you think, Amara 2289 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 11:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Digest Number 217 Dear Amara, thanks for clarifying this! I had been pondering it since O posted it. Robert --- amara chay wrote: > > > Kom had me pass on the question to A. sujin > > "can satipattana arises at the senses door"? > > yes, it can,because if maha kusolajitta > > (four with panna,four without)can arises > > at the senses door!!! so can satipattana. > > actually satipattana can arises through > > the six doors. > > > Dear Khuns O and Kom, > > > In her hurry to get to the discussions Khun O probably forgot > to add > that it always starts through the mind dvara, but since the > citta > arise and fall away so rapidly that by the time the tiny > instant of > study is over, many citta has arisen in between, including the > sense > doors in alternations with the mind doors, so it is impossible > to > stop the train of sati either, as imperceptible or > infinitessimally > short as it is. So sati runs through them all as well. > > Amara > > 2290 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 0:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] But Abhidhammatha Sangaha told me... Thanks, Kom, I think this makes sense in the context of paticcasammupada and the Four Noble Truths also. Thanks for your detailed analyis of just how. This is often the case, isn't it--that an explanation in one model works just as well in apparently very different ones. I always favor the simpler model, I think, just because I'm lazy! -- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > I am just parroting here, without much > understanding... Could've fooled me (though that's not saying much!) mike 2291 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 1:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: message from a friend Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Phra Dhammdharo was a longtime student of Khun sujin > until his > untimely death when he was the pasenger in a van > that crashed. I > think he was on the way to give a Dhamma talk at a > airforce base > at the time. His name was alan driver. Alan weller > in England is > the publisher of Cetasikas and other books. Thanks for the clarifiction. Sometimes laypeople think that > they should > try to imitate the lifestyle of a monk but this > doesn't seem to > be the intention of the Buddha. Yes, I've done this myself. It's stupid. It shows a serious view-problem, usually with lots of mana... > Monks have different sila to laypeople and if they > break these > it is a serious matter too. True! I read an interesting post on triple-gem(?) from a Burmese layman, who seemed scholarly. He said that ordaining actually increases your chances of being reborn in a lower realm, because with more precpts, you have more opportunities to break them. Actually I have my doubts about this, but it's an interesting thought. > We can live life as a > layperson and > not make any akusala kamma-patha (completed bad > action). Neat trick! For a monk OR a layperson... > However > one who lives the life of a monk correctly, and that > is only > possible with good understanding, An important point... > is very protected. > They are > guarding the 6 sense doors. They see danger in the > slightest > fault. Of course this is also possible for the > layman; it is how > we should live. You're right, but MUCH more difficult, living in the world. The influences that bind us into the rounds are FAR more pervasive. > I agree. As i said to sarah and you off list I think > you could > do a LOT of good as a monk. Please think of me as a > supporter > for requisites if you do take the robes. Thanks again for your encouragement. I think this would be great, for both of us... mn 2292 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Dec 10, 2000 8:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Mike wrote: --- wrote: > Dear Friends, This topic originally came up when I was telling Sarah that I > tend to over-simplify things. I used to think this was a virtue, and I remembered this sutta where the Buddha praises 'delighting in > non-complication', which I always took to support this ditthi of mine.One of the many wise cautions that the Ajahn of my old > monastery made frequently was against 'proliferations'. (I'm reminded of Jody's recent mention of Mandlebrot Sets). I never really knew what he was talking about, except in a vague sense, and just learned recently from Gayan that this is the word usually used to translate 'papañca'. Now I'm sure that simplicity of thought can be kusala or akusala--but > what, if anything, has this to do with papañca?">>> As we have said before papañca, translated either as complication or proliferation is actually tanha, ditthi and mana. Even when we are not thinking these kilesa may be present . Animals don't think in complicated ways but they have a full dose of papanca. How then can we understand it? Let me go a little off the topic, humour me if you like, and see if any of this makes sense. It is easy enough to think about anatta and believe that there is no self but until dhammas are seen as they are it is still intellectual. Until nama is seen as nama and rupa as rupa there is a latent idea of a self. Now hardness appears but does it directly appear to panna? Hardness is rupa but the experience of hardness is nama- completely different, yet aren't they mixed up?. This is because it is hidden by papanca, there is still complication and proliferation but at a more subtle level than thinking in words. To wear away these proliferations needs direct awareness again and again, and that done without wanting results. It is no simple matter. Even when we study abhidhamma the tendency is to grasp that too, as a system, but it should be fundamentally an aid for studying the present moment in the right way. Applied correctly it goes directly against complication and proliferation. The details help us to see the different aspects and functions of nama and rupa so that they can be distinguished so that there can be seeing things as they are, without the overlay, the complication (papanca) of self. I have heard khun sujin tell new people too, who say they are to busy to study that when they wake in the middle of the night they should take the opportunity. It is certainly not that anyone would say don't go to a quiet place. They can be a supporting condition for awareness and insight. However, the essential basis is right understanding and we need to check and see if that is firm intellectually. When we are rushed, perhaps in some small crisis at work does sati and panna keep arising, and here I am talking only about the intellectual understanding (although very deep levels can arise too), that remembers that there is no one. That understands that it is only nama and rupa arising and performing their functions. Do you feel like a puppet? One that is tugged and pulled by desire. This is what we are. When we breath this is simply rupa conditioned by citta, no self. When we stand up it is only because certain types of nama arise that condition certain types of rupa. These reflections can become normal - and they support direct awareness. All through the day there is touch - hardness, heat, cold and vibration. We might think we are having satipatthana just by noticing them. But usually this is merely sanna (perception) and vinnana (consciousnness)which have as their function knowing. They can be associated with tanha or ditthi or mana (the papanca). Panna (wisdom) arises with detachment, and experiences the very same dhammas, their characteristics don't change but they are perceived, to some degree as simply nama and rupa. So many levels of this before vipassana can arise. Do we sometimes have a headache during the day- this is simply namas and rupas again. If it is seen with panna it is simply that - not "my headache" Do you have the idea that mindprocesses are taking place in the brain? This is simply concept based on avijja. Citta arises all over the body, even at the feet, as does feeling and other cetasikas when dhammas are experienced through the body door. Gradually these different levels of understanding become our way of life and little by little rub self and ignorance away. And then life changes, as it must, we become involved: in career, have an affair, get bored with studying dhammas or Dhamma. This is the way it always goes, and then the wave breaks and again the priority is understanding of the moment. This too is all anatta, conditioned. Do we think that we made it happen, "we" have to put in the effort? Then we are still caught up in atta-sanna. A persistent theme on this list is how easily and often we take akusala (unwholesome) to be kusala (wholesome). For instance, why do we take wrong view and wrong practice for their opposites? This is because the view of self, sakkyaditthi pervades our very existence, it is the post to which we are tethered and we run around it -sometimes to the north, sometimes to the south, and sometimes to the east and the west. We tend to assume that now we live in the north, (since we came across Buddhism) we are better off than when we were in the cold south, and we might think we are free of that terrible restraint. However, it may still be as strong as ever but concealed by our improved existence. This relates to how we define papanca as those who develop samadhi, which tends to reduce thinking (in words) are more likely to see large changes in their life and so equate this with deep wisdom. In different ways akusala claims itself as kusala. In Japan when Aum shinrkyo cult were at their peak, just before they released the sarin gas, there were several complaints about their activities. One well known professor at a Buddhist university actively defended them against any criticism. He wasn't a member but, as he explained after the subway attack, he felt that as a Buddhist sect "I must protect them". And it looks like kusala (wholesomeness) doesn't it: we are saying in effect that all religion has the right to grow as it wishes. This is a tolerant attitude. The akusala side (vancaka) is not been willing to look at any bad points or wrongviews. The other extreme is suppressing any dissident views - and we saw this happen in China and Russia and Cambodia. This seems to be benevolence; protecting the people from their opium. I use these obvious examples but we are sometimes at fault too. We look down on the members of other religions or those we think have wrong view within Buddhism: this is conceit, or refined dosa, maybe we criticize them but without any compassion. On the other hand maybe we are very tolerant in our attitude to what others say or think, but this can simply mean that we do not really distinguish rightview from wrong - we are then vulnerable to the siren calls of those who misapprehend. Those who study Abhidhamma are not immune. For some it is so removed from daily life that they see it as an academic subject; it has minimal effect on removing wrong view, Even if we believe in not-self this can be hiding an idea of self (who believes). We can see this when we consider anatta- sometimes the contemplation seems to cut to the bone- and other times it is pedestrian, just going through the motions. It is good to know these things. This is wisdom too. Panna at the level of considering should not be disdained. In the 'Majjhima nikaya' I (no. 43, Mahavedallasutta) that Kotthita asked Sariputta: "'But what is intuitive wisdom for, your reverence?' 'Your reverence, intuitive wisdom is for super-knowledge, for apprehending, for getting rid of.' 'But how many conditions are there, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence?' 'There are two conditions, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence: the utterance of another (person) and wise attention. Your reverence, there are the two conditions for bringing wise attention into existence.'" The other person is the Buddha or his disciples, by listening carefully to the right person, by considering and applying what we have heard are the conditions for right understanding built up. It is a slow process but I can't see a faster way. Robert 2293 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 4:24am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person -----Original Message----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: 12/11/00 1:52 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person It is easy enough to think about anatta and believe that there is no self but until dhammas are seen as they are it is still intellectual. Until nama is seen as nama and rupa as rupa there is a latent idea of a self. Now hardness appears but does it directly appear to panna? Hardness is rupa but the experience of hardness is nama- completely different, yet aren't they mixed up?. This is because it is hidden by papanca, there is still complication and proliferation but at a more subtle level than thinking in words. To wear away these proliferations needs direct awareness again and again, and that done without wanting results. ___________________________ This answered my question regarding the experience of trying to classify and identify nama and rupa. ___________________________ It is no simple matter. Even when we study abhidhamma the tendency is to grasp that too, as a system, but it should be fundamentally an aid for studying the present moment in the right way. Applied correctly it goes directly against complication and proliferation. The details help us to see the different aspects and functions of nama and rupa so that they can be distinguished so that there can be seeing things as they are, without the overlay, the complication (papanca) of self. ____________________________ Thanks, this is helpful to my study ____________________________ I have heard khun sujin tell new people too, who say they are to busy to study that when they wake in the middle of the night they should take the opportunity. It is certainly not that anyone would say don't go to a quiet place. They can be a supporting condition for awareness and insight. However, the essential basis is right understanding and we need to check and see if that is firm intellectually. When we are rushed, perhaps in some small crisis at work does sati and panna keep arising, and here I am talking only about the intellectual understanding (although very deep levels can arise too), that remembers that there is no one. That understands that it is only nama and rupa arising and performing their functions. ____________________________ People who are engaged for every passing moment of the day! Now that's busy! ____________________________ Do you feel like a puppet? One that is tugged and pulled by desire. This is what we are. When we breath this is simply rupa conditioned by citta, no self. When we stand up it is only because certain types of nama arise that condition certain types of rupa. These reflections can become normal - and they support direct awareness. All through the day there is touch - hardness, heat, cold and vibration. We might think we are having satipatthana just by noticing them. But usually this is merely sanna (perception) and vinnana (consciousnness)which have as their function knowing. They can be associated with tanha or ditthi or mana (the papanca). Panna (wisdom) arises with detachment, and experiences the very same dhammas, their characteristics don't change but they are perceived, to some degree as simply nama and rupa. So many levels of this before vipassana can arise. Do we sometimes have a headache during the day- this is simply namas and rupas again. If it is seen with panna it is simply that - not "my headache" Do you have the idea that mindprocesses are taking place in the brain? This is simply concept based on avijja. Citta arises all over the body, even at the feet, as does feeling and other cetasikas when dhammas are experienced through the body door. Gradually these different levels of understanding become our way of life and little by little rub self and ignorance away. __________________________ The more I comprehend this existence as said above, the more I feel at ease with where I am and want to go. In the same fashion as stated by the four noble truths. __________________________ And then life changes, as it must, we become involved: in career, have an affair, get bored with studying dhammas or Dhamma. This is the way it always goes, and then the wave breaks and again the priority is understanding of the moment. This too is all anatta, conditioned. Do we think that we made it happen, "we" have to put in the effort? Then we are still caught up in atta-sanna. ____________________________ I have been contemplating this very passage. ____________________________ A persistent theme on this list is how easily and often we take akusala (unwholesome) to be kusala (wholesome). For instance, why do we take wrong view and wrong practice for their opposites? This is because the view of self, sakkyaditthi pervades our very existence, it is the post to which we are tethered and we run around it -sometimes to the north, sometimes to the south, and sometimes to the east and the west. We tend to assume that now we live in the north, (since we came across Buddhism) we are better off than when we were in the cold south, and we might think we are free of that terrible restraint. However, it may still be as strong as ever but concealed by our improved existence. This relates to how we define papanca as those who develop samadhi, which tends to reduce thinking (in words) are more likely to see large changes in their life and so equate this with deep wisdom. ____________________________ Yes, attachment is attachment no matter what form it takes. ____________________________ In different ways akusala claims itself as kusala. In Japan when Aum shinrkyo cult were at their peak, just before they released the sarin gas, there were several complaints about their activities. One well known professor at a Buddhist university actively defended them against any criticism. He wasn't a member but, as he explained after the subway attack, he felt that as a Buddhist sect "I must protect them". And it looks like kusala (wholesomeness) doesn't it: we are saying in effect that all religion has the right to grow as it wishes. This is a tolerant attitude. The akusala side (vancaka) is not been willing to look at any bad points or wrongviews. The other extreme is suppressing any dissident views - and we saw this happen in China and Russia and Cambodia. This seems to be benevolence; protecting the people from their opium. I use these obvious examples but we are sometimes at fault too. We look down on the members of other religions or those we think have wrong view within Buddhism: this is conceit, or refined dosa, maybe we criticize them but without any compassion. On the other hand maybe we are very tolerant in our attitude to what others say or think, but this can simply mean that we do not really distinguish rightview from wrong - we are then vulnerable to the siren calls of those who misapprehend. _____________________________ This kind of situation has been my problem in the recent past, as a self- professed "sitter on the fence". How does one mediate between these extremes with wisdom and compassion? Do as the Lord Buddha said. _____________________________ Those who study Abhidhamma are not immune. For some it is so removed from daily life that they see it as an academic subject; it has minimal effect on removing wrong view, Even if we believe in not-self this can be hiding an idea of self (who believes). We can see this when we consider anatta- sometimes the contemplation seems to cut to the bone- and other times it is pedestrian, just going through the motions. It is good to know these things. This is wisdom too. Panna at the level of considering should not be disdained. In the 'Majjhima nikaya' I (no. 43, Mahavedallasutta) that Kotthita asked Sariputta: "'But what is intuitive wisdom for, your reverence?' 'Your reverence, intuitive wisdom is for super-knowledge, for apprehending, for getting rid of.' 'But how many conditions are there, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence?' 'There are two conditions, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence: the utterance of another (person) and wise attention. Your reverence, there are the two conditions for bringing wise attention into existence.'" The other person is the Buddha or his disciples, by listening carefully to the right person, by considering and applying what we have heard are the conditions for right understanding built up. It is a slow process but I can't see a faster way. Robert _______________________________ Thanks, Robert. At present, I'll have to do with the study of books until nama and rupa present otherwise. Jody. 2294 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 4:37am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas ? -----Original Message----- From: amara chay Sent: 12/10/00 4:16 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Mulapariyaya and different abhidhammas? Dear Jody, I have been trying to catch up with the group mail since my absence and came across your question on Mandelbrot, to which I seemed to have seen no answer, unless I am mistaken. I hope you won't mind a few comments. Having just returned from Cambodia which has some of the finest stone carvings in the world, especially at Ban Taey Srei (around 9-10th century AD), built of pink sandstone and with fine layered carvings with paper thin edges going up to six inches deep, I couldn't help relating the visual renderings of the mathematical calculations of Mandelbrot especially the intricate extremities, to Asian art, whether Indian, Burmese, Thai, Laotian, Cambodian or Indonesian. (etc.) I also have always wondered at how mathematicians and physicians often have an ear for music and frequently play or sing very well. Is the sense of proportion and scales mathematical to a certain degree? What distinguishes the really beautiful creations from the mediocre? In the end I think it is the individual's touch, the accumulations of the person's proficiency as well as taste and judgement, not all the mandelbrot visualizations on the web are beautiful, though all are intriguing, because of the very nature of the calculations. ______________________________ Hello Amara, I know of a local guitar teacher who teaches mathematics, at the same time as teaching to play the guitar. For example, spanish and classic guitar playing and the performance of scales. I also pondered the similarities of design between the Mandebrot and existing cultural manifestations. Actually, this was aided by the documentary which was narrated by Arthur, C. Clarke. ______________________________ Still, I am reminded that true beauty (in the Buddhist sense) is something truthful and useful, knowing or appreciating art or even mathematics is not as useful to me, as attractive and pleasing to the senses as they are, as being mindful that they really are: what appears through the six dvara- generally the eye and the ear and the mind, sometimes through the body-sense, tongue and nose, such as the culinary arts, etc., and we are not only attached to our selves but to all that is pleasing to us. In reality Cambodia is only in the memory, now, but still so real although it doesn't appear through any senses but the mind dvara. It is only a concept at the moment, as is Mandelbrot's calculations, while what is true beauty is the truth before us because it is useful and completely harmless: mindfulness of the characteristics of realities before us, which could gradually accumulate knowledge of sight, visual objects, touches, even as we sit in front of the computer. And long trains of thought that brought us to Cambodia, Mandelbrot, art and the dhamma, which, if the characteristics of thought were studied as well, would bring us that much closer to the truth and true beauty. ________________________________ Yes, thanks. ________________________________ Because even the loveliest art must perish through time, (I really felt dosa to see the destruction left by war and vandalism at the ancient ruins) only true knowledge could remain your personal treasure through samsara, if you knew how to accumulate it. None could take that from you no matter where or what your next lives will be, and you could increase it at all times whenever there is study of realities before you and gradually the knowledge will grow so that once it is strong enough there would be no more mistaking anything for what it is not: calculations are organization of thoughts in a pattern, appearing through the mind dvara, remembered by the sanna (memory), another reality to be studied as such. I don't know if what your friend wanted to discuss has anything to do with what I said, please tell us what you think, Amara ________________________________ This was perfect. Many thanks, Jody. 2295 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 4:45am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eight Thoughts of a Great Person -----Original Message----- From: Sent: 12/10/00 1:18 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eight Thoughts of a Great Person I cited this recently in a post to Robert and Gayan. Because of its pertinence to the subject of papañca, Robert asked me to post it to the group for comments. So, excerpted from Access to Insight at http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an8-30.html, Eight Thoughts of a Great Person As he was sitting there the Blessed One said to him, "Good, Anuruddha, very good. It's good that you think these thoughts of a great person: 'This Dhamma is for one who is modest, not for one who is self-aggrandizing. This Dhamma is for one who is content, not for one who is discontent. This Dhamma is for one who is reclusive, not for one who is entangled. This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy. This Dhamma is for one whose mindfulness is established, not for one whose mindfulness is confused. This Dhamma is for one whose mind is centered, not for one whose mind is uncentered. This Dhamma is for one endowed with discernment, not for one whose discernment is weak.' Now then, Anuruddha, think the eighth thought of a great person: 'This Dhamma is for one who enjoys non-complication, who delights in non- complication, not for one who enjoys & delights in complication.' Anguttara Nikaya VIII.30 Anuruddha Sutta To Anuruddha ________________________ In other words, is this stating that the Dhamma will not appear to those that have not accumulated the right conditions? And is the "great person" an araahant? Jody. 2296 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 4:56am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dhamma study -----Original Message----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: 12/9/00 4:40 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dhamma study Dear Jody, I don't know the book you mentioned but if there are any interesting or doubtful points you are welcome to bring them up. If you want to read other books by Nina van Gorkom the NZ libary service will be able to get them for you through a request at your local library (small charge). I know they have "THE world in the Buddhist Sense" and "Buddhism in daily LIfe" at Auckland Public Lib. They might also have "Cetasikas". Good comments you made about how the path can suit any lifestyle. Yes, there were monks and nuns- and among those some lived in the forest and some stayed close to the city. Some took on the dhutanga (ascetic practices), some didn't. All types could attain nibbana. Among layfollowers there were those who kept 8 or sometimes 10 precepts and some lived fairly secluded lives. Others were attached to their wealth and woman and children, and lived lives of luxury; but both types attained stages of enlightenment. On this list too you will find many variations in lifestyles. __________________________ Hello Robert, The university has "Buddhism in Daily life", I'll look into the others as soon as I've finished with the lot I've got now. __________________________ So good that you see that this life is short and the path is very gradual. Yes in this way we have a sense of urgency - our human life will soon end, we must strive. On the other hand knowing the path is so long one stops looking for results and instead studies the present moment; as this is the only way to come to see. When the time is right, when enough understanding has accumulated, nibbana will be experienced - it will happen whether we want it to or not. No one could stop it. Robert __________________________ This view is still very intellectual, I'm afraid. I am far from a "great person" and my attachments are great. However, I feel confident that the present is becoming clearer, gradually... Jody. 2297 From: Lloyd Field Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 7:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dana to Myanmar? Hello: What a great idea. Do you have an e-mail or web address for the International Buddhist University? Thanks........................Lloyd ----- Original Message ----- From: Sukinderpal Narula Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 4:25 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dana to Myanmar? > Dear group, > I have taken the chance to do merit as suggested by Robert, by > visiting the foundation today and obtaining some books and sent > them to U Han Htay in Myanmar. > Fearing that I might be taking too many copies from a limited > amount of stock, I chose to take and send the following:- > 10 copies of 'Realities and concepts'. > 20 copies each of the 'Mental development' series. > 10 copies of 'Abhidhamma in Daily life'. > 20 copies of the 'Letters' > 20 copies of the thin grey book the name of which I don't remember. > This I mention in case if anyone who might have a better estimate of > the stock of books at the foundation, might see the possibility of > sending more copies and do it. > > Sukin. > > Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > Dear group, > > I sent a parcel of books (30 copies of Realities and Concepts, > > Boriharnawanaket) to Burma (Bhikkhu Bodhi gave me the address > > and said they would appeciate it). > > It was to the International Buddhist University in Rangoon. > > I got a nice letter back today. > > "thank you for the valuable package. We are now teaching > > vipassana and satipatthana and the subject of 'Realities and > > concepts' is very informative and useful to us. As we are > > teaching Nuns and bhikkhus also at the "sukra Theravada > > university" we can also distribute these books there. This book > > helps us with mental development in daily life. many thanks!" > > They then ask if we have other English titles and whether we > > could send them copies of those as well as more copies of R and > > C. > > So for those of you who are now in Bangkok and would like to > > make merit take your chance! > > The Address is > > U Han Htay > > International Buddhist University > > NO.98 , 46th street > > Yangoon > > Myanmar > > > > > > > > > 2298 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 8:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Dana to Myanmar? Sorry Lloyd, The letter didn't give any email address but you might be able to do a web search and see whether they have a homepage. robert --- Lloyd Field wrote: > Hello: What a great > idea. Do you have an e-mail or web address for the > International Buddhist > University? > Thanks........................Lloyd > > 2299 From: amara chay Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 11:33am Subject: Re: Dana to Myanmar? > Hello: What a great > idea. Do you have an e-mail or web address for the International Buddhist > University? Hello, and welcome, Lloyd, and anumodana with your kusala cetana!!! Amara 2300 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 11:39am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Jody, Thanks for your reply, which showed your careful consideration. It's always nice to know that someone is reading what I write. Robert --- "JODY PAUL,PIRRET" wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Kirkpatrick > > Sent: 12/11/00 1:52 AM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great > Person > > It is easy enough to think about anatta and believe that there > is no self but until dhammas are seen as they > are it is still intellectual. Until nama is seen > as nama and rupa as rupa there is a latent idea of a > self. Now hardness appears but does it directly appear > to panna? Hardness is rupa but the experience of hardness > is nama- completely different, yet aren't they mixed up?. > This is because it is hidden by papanca, there is still > complication and proliferation but at a more subtle level than > thinking in words. To wear away these proliferations needs > direct awareness again and again, and that done without > wanting > results. > > ___________________________ > > This answered my question regarding the experience of trying > to classify and identify nama and rupa. > > ___________________________ > > 2301 From: Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 1:03pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear jodi, No , this was not refering to an 'arahant' the pali phrase is 'maha(great) purisa(man/person) vitakka(thoughts)' If I remember correctly , after this guidence by Buddha , the ven.anuruddha became an arahant. When the great thoughts came to him he was not an arahant. And again it displays the 'anatta'-ness of dhammas. Only because of the conditions were there, the 'great thoughts' occured. They were not really made up by a thinking process done by ven.anuruddha. rgds. In other words, is this stating that the Dhamma will not appear to those that have not accumulated the right conditions? And is the "great person" an araahant? Jody. 2302 From: Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 5:38pm Subject: Re: message from a friend >>Sometimes laypeople think that they should try to imitate the lifestyle of a monk but this doesn't seem to be the intention of the Buddha. > Yes, I've done this myself. It's stupid. It shows a serious view- problem, usually with lots of mana... Sometimes it is true... But being fortunate to be a good monk is meritoruos deed accumulated from the pass and present. > > Monks have different sila to laypeople and if they break these it is a serious matter too. > True! I read an interesting post on triple-gem(?)from a Burmese layman, who seemed scholarly. He said that ordaining actually increases your chances of being reborn in a lower realm, because with more precepts, you have more opportunities to break them. Actually I have my doubts about this, but it's an interesting thought. It might seem to be true. But when come to the point that regards Sila as the protection for a practitioner like monk, he has a better chance to purify himself and protected from defilements. I remember that there was a layperson during the Buddha's time renounced as a monk for one day and died immediately afterward. When was asked where was him after the death, Buddha told that he had been born in a deva realm.(I hope someone have come across this story too) Besides, I have read an article of an Ajahn that told a monk practise only those precepts that he has no doubt and clear. > > We can live life as a layperson and not make any akusala kamma- patha (completed bad action). > > Neat trick! For a monk OR a layperson... I think the point is not being a layperson or monk, but of self- awareness > > However > > one who lives the life of a monk correctly, and that > > is only > > possible with good understanding, > > An important point... > > > is very protected. > > They are > > guarding the 6 sense doors. They see danger in the > > slightest > > fault. Of course this is also possible for the > > layman; it is how > > we should live. 100% agree ^^~ > You're right, but MUCH more difficult, living in the world. The influences that bind us into the rounds are FAR more pervasive. You will not afraid of these if you have enough confidence in you and the dhamma you've insighted. > > I agree. As i said to sarah and you off list I think you could do a LOT of good as a monk. Please think of me as a supporter for requisites if you do take the robes. >Thanks again for your encouragement. I think this would be great, for both of us... I wish you with full hearted. Sadhu! 2303 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 6:10pm Subject: Living alone (was message from a friend Dear dasoka, Thanks for your useful and kind remarks and welcome to the discussion. I found it especially helpful where you wrote: --- wrote: MIKE: > You're right, but MUCH more difficult, living in the world. > The > influences that bind us into the rounds are FAR more > pervasive. > > DASOKA:You will not afraid of these if you have enough confidence in > you and > the dhamma you've insighted. I think this is difficult to comprehend but true. We know the laylife is one of dust and busyness but insight can develop at any time, even while we are busy. This is not to deny that the monks life is the superior one if lived with insight, but we should not feel that we are hindered by our life in the world. The quintessence of buddhism is not lifestyle but panna (wisdom). The Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.63 Migajala Sutta Ven. Migajala went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "'A person living alone. A person living alone,' thus it is said. To what extent, lord, is one a person living alone, and to what extent is one a person living with a companion?" "Migajala, there are forms cognizable via the eye -- agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing -- and a monk relishes them, welcomes them, & remains fastened to them. As he relishes them, welcomes them, & remains fastened to them, delight arises. There being delight, he is impassioned. Being impassioned, he is fettered. A monk joined with the fetter of delight is said to be a person living with a companion. ......and a monk does not relish them, welcome them, or remain fastened to them. As he doesn't relish them, welcome them, or remain fastened to them, delight ceases. There being no delight, he is not impassioned. Being not impassioned, he is not fettered. A monk disjoined from the fetter of delight is said to be a person living alone. "A person living in this way -- even if he lives near a village, associating with monks & nuns, with male & female lay followers, with king & royal ministers, with sectarians & their disciples -- is still said to be living alone. A person living alone is said to be a monk. Why is that? Because craving is his companion, and it has been abandoned by him. Thus he is said to be a person living alone." Robert 2304 From: amara chay Date: Mon Dec 11, 2000 9:16pm Subject: Re: message from a friend > I remember > that there was a layperson during the Buddha's time renounced as a > monk for one day and died immediately afterward. When was asked where > was him after the death, Buddha told that he had been born in a deva > realm.(I hope someone have come across this story too) Besides, I > have read an article of an Ajahn that told a monk practise only those > precepts that he has no doubt and clear. Dear Dasoka, Welcome to the list and thank you for the interesting story above. If you ever come across the references again please tell us about it, I would be interested in seeing the details. Thanks in advance, Amara 2307 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 4:34am Subject: Question? Kia ora koutou, I will begin letter writing to a family in Thailand. Could someone tell me how to appropriately address the family in the letter, ie. how to start and finish the letter, and maybe some everyday thai phrases. Any help would be much appreciated, Jody. 2308 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 9:14am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Gayan, A 'maha' answer, sir! Saadhu. mike --- wrote: > > > > > Dear jodi, > > No , this was not refering to an 'arahant' > the pali phrase is 'maha(great) purisa(man/person) > vitakka(thoughts)' > If I remember correctly , after this guidence by > Buddha , the ven.anuruddha > became an arahant. > When the great thoughts came to him he was not an > arahant. > > And again it displays the 'anatta'-ness of dhammas. > Only because of the conditions were there, the > 'great thoughts' occured. > They were not really made up by a thinking process > done by ven.anuruddha. > > > rgds. > > > > > > > In other words, is this stating that the Dhamma will > not appear to > those that have not accumulated the right > conditions? And is the > "great person" an araahant? > > Jody. > 2309 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 9:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: message from a friend Dear Dasoka, Nice to meet you! I found your response admirable. And I think I know the (wonderful) sutta you referred to. --- wrote: > I remember > that there was a layperson during the Buddha's time > renounced as a > monk for one day and died immediately afterward. > When was asked where > was him after the death, Buddha told that he had > been born in a deva > realm. If this is the sutta you referred to, he was reborn once in one of the Brahma Viharas (I think!). I love this sutta, as one of those that start so down-to-earth. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn140.html > (I hope someone have come across this story > too) Besides, I > have read an article of an Ajahn that told a monk > practise only those > precepts that he has no doubt and clear. There's a challenge! > > > We can live life as a layperson and not make any > akusala kamma- > patha (completed bad action). > > > > Neat trick! For a monk OR a layperson... > > I think the point is not being a layperson or monk, > but of self- > awareness Excellent! But I assume you mean awareness of what arises at the dvaras at this moment--I know that you know these are not self... > > > However > > > one who lives the life of a monk correctly, and > that > > > is only > > > possible with good understanding, > > > > An important point... > > > > > is very protected. > > > They are > > > guarding the 6 sense doors. They see danger in > the > > > slightest > > > fault. Of course this is also possible for the > > > layman; it is how > > > we should live. > > 100% agree ^^~ [Me too!] > > > You're right, but MUCH more difficult, living in > the world. The > influences that bind us into the rounds are FAR more > pervasive. > > You will not afraid of these if you have enough > confidence in you and > the dhamma you've insighted. An extremely important point, and one I'm closely examining thanks to all of you and your comments. > > > I agree. As i said to sarah and you off list I > think you could > do a LOT of good as a monk. Please think of me as a > supporter for > requisites if you do take the robes. > > >Thanks again for your encouragement. I think this > would be great, > for both of us... > > I wish you with full hearted. Sadhu! Thank you Dasoka. Your sadhu (to the cetana) is justified if these motives are kusala. I'm honestly not sure. Much to examine, and very closely. He pai te koorero! Mike 2310 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 9:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Living alone (was message from a friend Excellent, Robert, thanks! Here's a link to the text: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-63.html Allow me to repeat that, I think the advantage is protection from present (new) akusala kamma--NOT greater opportunity for insight. Mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear dasoka, > Thanks for your useful and kind remarks and welcome > to the > discussion. I found it especially helpful where you > wrote: > > --- wrote: > MIKE: > You're right, but MUCH more difficult, > living in the > world. > > The > > influences that bind us into the rounds are FAR > more > > pervasive. > > > > DASOKA:You will not afraid of these if you have > enough > confidence in > > you and > > the dhamma you've insighted. > > I think this is difficult to comprehend but true. We > know the > laylife is one of dust and busyness but insight can > develop at > any time, even while we are busy. This is not to > deny that the > monks life is the superior one if lived with > insight, but we > should not feel that we are hindered by our life in > the world. > The quintessence of buddhism is not lifestyle but > panna > (wisdom). > The Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.63 > Migajala Sutta > Ven. Migajala went to the Blessed One and on > arrival, having > bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was > sitting there he > said to the Blessed One: "'A person living alone. A > person > living alone,' thus it is said. To what extent, > lord, is one a > person living alone, and to what extent is one a > person living > with a companion?" > "Migajala, there are forms cognizable via the eye -- > agreeable, > pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, > enticing -- and > a monk relishes them, welcomes them, & remains > fastened to them. > As he relishes them, welcomes them, & remains > fastened to them, > delight arises. There being delight, he is > impassioned. Being > impassioned, he is fettered. A monk joined with the > fetter of > delight is said to be a person living with a > companion. > > ......and a monk does not relish them, welcome them, > or remain > fastened to them. As he doesn't relish them, welcome > them, or > remain fastened to them, delight ceases. There being > no delight, > he is not impassioned. Being not impassioned, he is > not > fettered. A monk disjoined from the fetter of > delight is said to > be a person living alone. > > "A person living in this way -- even if he lives > near a village, > associating with monks & nuns, with male & female > lay followers, > with king & royal ministers, with sectarians & their > disciples > -- is still said to be living alone. A person living > alone is > said to be a monk. Why is that? Because craving is > his > companion, and it has been abandoned by him. Thus he > is said to > be a person living alone." > Robert > 2311 From: amara chay Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 10:59am Subject: Re: message from a friend > > I remember > > that there was a layperson during the Buddha's time > > renounced as a > > monk for one day and died immediately afterward. > > When was asked where > > was him after the death, Buddha told that he had > > been born in a deva > > realm. > > If this is the sutta you referred to, he was reborn > once in one of the Brahma Viharas (I think!). I love > this sutta, as one of those that start so > down-to-earth. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn140.html Dear Mike, Thank you for the rapid references and links! This is so great, anumodana, Amara 2312 From: Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:01am Subject: Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Friends, The distinction has been made here between dhamma and concept (and eloquently). I'd be grateful for a little further clarification on this point. (a) How is concept specifically different from vitakka? (b) Is there a pali word for concept? (c) Doesn't a concept arise at the mind-door? (d) Is it not taken as an object by citta? (e) If not, how is it cognized or perceived? I expect that these questions might stimulate some very erudite abhidhamma explanations. I have a feeling the answers will have a lot to do with the topic, already present, of papañca. I look forward to reading and trying to comprehend them! But, and maybe most importantly (for the present need), (f) can someone please cite a clear, direct instruction on this topic from the sutta-pitaka? I think this would be incredibly valuable, not only for my own understanding but for the benefit of others new to abhidhamma and to this list. Thanks in advance, Mike 2313 From: amara chay Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:21am Subject: Re: Question? > Kia ora koutou, > > I will begin letter writing to a family in Thailand. > Could someone tell me how to appropriately address > the family in the letter, ie. how to start and finish > the letter, and maybe some everyday thai phrases. Dear Jody, Thai greetings both for meeting and parting would be 'sawad dee' litterally translated as good or auspicious time, (+'kha' for lady speakers or writers and +'krub' for gentlemen.) For letters the endings the usage is 'duaie kwam nubthueh' (lit. = respectfully or with consideration). As Mike will tell you, 'whang wa khun kong sabai dee' means I hope you are well, and in fact he might be able to teach you some other phrases, or you could post the ones you would like to learn about in a private mail to me or Khun O, or 'Rinriver' in this list, who would be happy to teach you, I am sure. Looking forward to hearing from you off-list, Amara 2314 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: message from a friend Dear Khun Amara, It's interesting, isn't it, that he had such INCREDIBLE good fortune, followed by such harsh vipaka, then (after one rebirth), freedom. No wonder the arahats smile at the results of kamma... Mike --- amara chay wrote: > > > > I remember > > > that there was a layperson during the Buddha's > time > > > renounced as a > > > monk for one day and died immediately afterward. > > > When was asked where > > > was him after the death, Buddha told that he had > > > been born in a deva > > > realm. > > > > If this is the sutta you referred to, he was > reborn > > once in one of the Brahma Viharas (I think!). I > love > > this sutta, as one of those that start so > > down-to-earth. > > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn140.html > > > Dear Mike, > > Thank you for the rapid references and links! This > is so great, > anumodana, > > Amara > > 2315 From: amara chay Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:42am Subject: Re: Concept vs. Dhamma > The distinction has been made here between dhamma and concept (and > eloquently). I'd be grateful for a little further clarification on > this point. > > (a) How is concept specifically different from vitakka? Dear Mike, Vitakka is thinking, concept is non paramatthadhamma and therefore any distinction between the self and all other non paramatthadhamma aramana. > (b) Is there a pali word for concept? I think 'pannati' would cover it. > (c) Doesn't a concept arise at the mind-door? Yes. > (d) Is it not taken as an object by citta? Yes it could be, but the word 'take' here could be misleading, it either is or is not, according to conditions, not through any arrangement or volition. Not by choice, you see? > (e) If not, how is it cognized or perceived? Uniquely through the mind door: you think and remember former thoughts about the paramattha dhamma that appear without realizing that in fact only what appears through the different dvara is the reality of the moment, after which long trains of thought take over and lead to moments of kusala and akusala (mainly the latter) at each instant. Only when one studies the aramana as it really is are we free from concepts and arive at the true characteristics of what appears and add to the knowledge of things as they really are. > I expect that these questions might stimulate some very erudite > abhidhamma explanations. I have a feeling the answers will have a > lot to do with the topic, already present, of papañca. I look > forward to reading and trying to comprehend them! But, and maybe > most importantly (for the present need), > > (f) can someone please cite a clear, direct instruction on this > topic from the sutta-pitaka? I'm sure Robert could help here, Thanks for your precise and penetrating questions, anumodana, Amara 2316 From: Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 4:20pm Subject: Re: message from a friend Dear all, I am a new and slow learner and know nothing much about any abhidhamma but I enjoy very much on all your postings. Thanks. ------------------------ Dear Robert, >The quintessence of buddhism is not lifestyle but panna(wisdom). I do agree what you mentioned above. But panna need a proper condition and environment such as a proper lifestyle to explore. A better and superior lifestyle can promote the arising of panna. I hope I am right. ---------------------------- Dear Mike, Nice to meet you too. Actually this is not the sutta that I referred to. Anyway, it is another good story four us. I can't check up the reference of the sutta I refered at the moment and perhaps I can do it after new year. ------------------------- Dear Amara, I think you are asking for the reference of the precepts story and this is the link: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha088.htm 2317 From: Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 5:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: message from a friend Dear asoka, u said --> "Dear all, I am a new and slow learner and know nothing much about any abhidhamma but I enjoy very much on all your postings. Thanks." well, we all are slow. we still have not done what we should have done. 'we' are still 'here' because we are slow. so lets help each other. :o) rgds 2318 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma --- wrote: > Dear Friends, > a) How is concept specifically different from vitakka? Vittaka is a paramattha dhamma. The usual translation is applied thinking. Howeer it is not exactly the same as what we usually meaqn by thinking. Even when we are in deep, dreamless sleep vittaka arises. Nevertheless we can say it is or may be predominant when we are thinking (in the conventional sense). When we are thinking about some idea one of the dhammas that is arsing and passing away during those moments is vittaka. If sati of satipatthana takes vittaka as an object, or any other dhamma, then the concept will disappear for the moments that this is happening. This is because sati, of this type, only takes paramattha dhamma for object. > > (b) Is there a pali word for concept? Pannatti is the pali for concept. As Acharn Sujin explains in 'Realities and concepts' there are different types of concept. Such words as dosa, lobha, metta, colour, hatred, sound are concepts that designate paramattha dhammas, they are vijjamana pannatti. Words such as person, animal, computer, Robert, Mike do not refer to paramattha dhammas and are called avijjamana pannati. > > (c) Doesn't a concept arise at the mind-door? Concepts are dhammarammana(mental object) and they appear at the mind-door. The mind-door has many different objects including citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbana which are all paramattha dhamma. It also has concept as an object. > > (d) Is it not taken as an object by citta? Yes but not in the same way that paramattha dhammas are taken as object. How could it as it is not real. The cittas and cetasikas are arising and passing away at great speed and forming up concepts but these concepts have no existence, although they give the illusion of existence. It is so hard to talk about this -- we are using concepts to discuus it-- and yet this is all happening right now. Can we see it? By the development of satipatthana the difference between concept and paramattha dhamma must gradually becomes clearer. Now you are reading this so it might be worthwhile analysing what is actually happening. There is visible object, the different colours making up the computer screen. The colours are real (but arising and passing away rapidly) the computer screen is not real, however the various rupas that make up the screen are real,(and arising and passing away ceaselessly). There is cakkhuvinnana, seeing consciousness which is real (and ephemeral) which arises due to the contact of the eyebase (real, conditioned by kamma done in the past, evanescent). Then there are processes of citta which experience the same object and then there are mind-door processes which think about what was seen and so concepts are formed up. Yet these concepts do not actually exist. There must be this process occuring, no one can stop it occuring. If it didn't occur we would be utterly vacuos, know nothing at all, much less than a new born baby. Thus it is the most natural thing that concepts arise. Unfortunately, though, throughout samasara we have given these concepts special staus that they don't deserve, namely we think they exist. This mistaken notion means that we will do all sorts of evil to protect these illusionary figments such as self. When we see that concepts are simply concept, and that even parammattha dhammas are so temporary, would we still get so upset when we are critisised? Would we hate the man who steals our wife once we know that both are only idea? I think we would not kill, steal, lie or cheat over distintergrating colours, sounds or tastes. We can only get angry because of the distorted vision that can't fully penetrate these matters. Thus papanaca and mannati are working. > > > (f) can someone please cite a clear, direct instruction on > this > topic from the sutta-pitaka? The Buddha said that the all includes the 6 doors and there objects and the sense bases. There are many suttas classifying dhammas in different ways, the ayatanas, the khandas, the dhatus, so that they can be understood, so that concept is not mistaken for paramattha dhamma. The satipatthana sutta elucidates different dhammas that can be insighted. Anger is one of the objects listed in the satipatthana sutta- it should be understood. When we are angry do we see that we are angry with an illusion? Do we understand that what is really happening is simply cittas arising and passing away that are roooted in dosa. By studying our "lives", which are only these brief moments of anger and lust and doubt and fear and pleasure and pain, and seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, by applying the satipatthana sutta, we are beginning to separate paramattha dhamma from concept. robert > 2319 From: Bruce Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 9:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma hello group members i was going to wait until i had read all the posts online before introducing myself and joining in any discussions, but this thread seems to be addressing some points i had brought up in a post to the d-list, which post robert read and answered; he then graciously introduced me to *this* list... my original post to the d-list asked about mental images and mental sounds, which can be conjured at will or may appear unasked for....eg: we can decide to picture, mentally, a flower or a face or an image of the Buddha, or one may just pop into the mind seemingly at random; we can imagine conversations that have not taken place or may suddenly, vividly "hear" music we once heard in the past....what i wanted to know is: are these objects rupa? they are phenomena that do not, cannot know; and as objects they are knowable....or they at least seem to be knowable objects.... after reading the last several posts on this topic, i think now that these mental phenomena can be categorized simply as "concept": pannati....please correct me if i'm wrong....example: the chrysanthemum on my altar right now is rupa *only* as i look at it and its colors and shapes impinge on the eye-dvara and concurrently visual consciousness arises, ie it is a paramattha dhamma....but the chrysanthemums you may well be imagining as you read this are not rupa, are not a paramattha dhamma: they are a concept....the image of a chrysanthemum i can conjure up when i close my eyes, or that may come unasked for in the middle of a sitting is not rupa, it is a concept, panatti; i am proliferating this concept by considering it, by naming it, by imagining it a white or orange chysanthemum or making it into several chrysanthemums...and all this of course is akusala.... mental manifestations of any of the 5 bodily senses that appear in the mind are not the same as those that appear at the 5 sense-doors....they are imagined sensory experiences...what is impinging on the mind-door when i imagine a chrysanthemum is only the *idea* of a chrysanthemum, a concept....and concepts, whether they are visual or auditory or olfactory are not rupa, are not paramattha dhammas.....is this correct? so now what i would like to ask is this: is pannati a kind of citta, or is it something else....? it couldn't be citta because it is not a paramattha dhamma, right?...what is it composed of, and how can it be the object of attention? what exactly are these ideas/fabrications objects *of*, what knows them? is it sanna? can it be sati? thanks in advance for enduring my concept-proliferation, and please forgive my lack of knowledge in these matters...i've just recently discovered ajahn sujin's works on the web and am amazed at her capacity to bring about understanding: i read her lectures and think "yes! exactly!" and feel that this must be a tiny inkling of what it may have been like to listen to the Buddha....of course that doesn't mean i truly *know* what she's discussing; panna is indeed a long way off...i have a lot of catching up to do in terms of pali and scriptural study before i'll feel comfortable doing more than just asking questions and checking to see if my conceptual undertstanding is correct.... mettacittena bruce 2320 From: amara chay Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 10:38pm Subject: Re: message from a friend > I think you are asking for the reference of the precepts story and > this is the link: > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha088.htm Dear Dasoka, Thank you for the link, actually I was referring to the story about the bhikkhu who disrobed, I couldn't think of a sutta about that, and would appreciate the reference, Thanks again, Amara 2321 From: amara chay Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:04pm Subject: Re: Concept vs. Dhamma > i've just recently discovered ajahn > sujin's works on the web and am amazed at her capacity to bring about > understanding: i read her lectures and think "yes! exactly!" and feel that > this must be a tiny inkling of what it may have been like to listen to the > Buddha....of course that doesn't mean i truly *know* what she's discussing; > panna is indeed a long way off...i have a lot of catching up to do in terms > of pali and scriptural study before i'll feel comfortable doing more than > just asking questions and checking to see if my conceptual undertstanding > is correct.... Hi and welcome, Bruce, I almost envy the feeling of discovering her teachings for the first time, and the more one reads the more one appreciates the Buddha's wisdom and compassion, I think. I was just about to sign off for three more days away from the list when I caught your message, I look forward to reading all the discussions that ensue, Anumodana in your study, Amara 2322 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: message from a friend > > I think you are asking for the reference of the precepts > story and > > this is the link: > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha088.htm > > Dear dasoka, thanks for the link. Some very good reflections there about the vinaya. Robert 2323 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Bruce, Thanks for joining up Bruce and your first letter is a good one. --- Bruce wrote: > hello group members > my original post to the d-list asked about mental images and > mental sounds, > which can be conjured at will or may appear unasked for....eg: > we can > decide to picture, mentally, a flower or a face or an image of > the Buddha, > or one may just pop into the mind seemingly at random; we can > imagine > conversations that have not taken place or may suddenly, > vividly "hear" > music we once heard in the past....what i wanted to know is: > are these > objects rupa? ----------- Not rupa, as you note later. ----------- they are phenomena that do not, cannot know; and > as objects > they are knowable....or they at least seem to be knowable > objects.... > after reading the last several posts on this topic, i think > now that these > mental phenomena can be categorized simply as "concept": > pannati.... --------------- Yes, these examples are all pannati. -------------- please > correct me if i'm wrong....example: the chrysanthemum on my > altar right now > is rupa *only* as i look at it and its colors and shapes > impinge on the > eye-dvara and concurrently visual consciousness arises, ie it > is a > paramattha dhamma..but the chrysanthemums you may well be > imagining as > you read this are not rupa, are not a paramattha dhamma: they > are a > concept....the image of a chrysanthemum i can conjure up when > i close my > eyes, or that may come unasked for in the middle of a sitting > is not rupa, > it is a concept, panatti; i am proliferating this concept by > considering > it, by naming it, by imagining it a white or orange > chysanthemum or making > it into several chrysanthemums...and all this of course is > akusala.... --------------------------------- This is where we need to dissect further. When you were looking at the crysanthenum the paramattha dhammas (fundamental phenomena, realities) were: 1. Different colours (vanayatana) 2. cakkhupasada (the special sensitive matter that is in the center of the eye). This type of matter is conditioned by kamma only and does not exist in a dead person. 3. Cakkhuvinnana, seeing consciousness. This type of citta can only experience visible object, colours. It actually doesn't even experience shape, the idea of shape comes in later mind-door processes that happen immediately after the seeing. There was never any chrysanthenum as such. The reason, however, that we know the difference between, say an orchid and a crysanthenum is that there are different rupas that make up each object. These rupas are paramattha dhammas but crysanthenum is not. Odour is paramattha and there are many different odours the odour of crysanthenum is not the same as orchid odour, so too the colours (and tastes) are varied. Because of this we are able to make distinctions and, quite naturally concepts are formed based on these distinctions. This occurs even at a preverbal level, animals know the diference between a flower they can eat and one that they can't. In the atthakattha they call pannati of this type, the shadows of dhammas. We, until dhamma is understood, live our many lives chasing shadows. -------------------------------- > mental manifestations of any of the 5 bodily senses that > appear in the mind > are not the same as those that appear at the 5 > sense-doors....they are > imagined sensory experiences...what is impinging on the > mind-door when i > imagine a chrysanthemum is only the *idea* of a chrysanthemum, > a > concept....and concepts, whether they are visual or auditory > or olfactory > are not rupa, are not paramattha dhammas.....is this correct? ------------ Correct! --------- > > so now what i would like to ask is this: is pannati a kind of > citta, or is > it something else....? -------------------------- Not citta, not cetasika, not rupa, and not nibbana. These are the 4 types of parammatha dhammas, there are no others. Anything else is simply concept. The atthakattha also classifies concepts in different ways, as you will see in Realities and Concepts. ---------------------- it couldn't be citta because it is not > a paramattha > dhamma, right?...what is it composed of, and how can it be the > object of > attention? what exactly are these ideas/fabrications objects > *of*, what > knows them? is it sanna? can it be sati? --------------------- Sanna and sati are cetasika, paramattha dhamma. At the same time there is thinking of a concept there is also sanna (and sometimes sati but not of the level of satipatthana). There is also citta and many other cetasikas. These paramattha dhammas are all actually happening but they are changing, arising and passing away rapidly. The concept is not real and yet concepts do condition dhammas in certain ways. When we hear correct Dhamma, for instance, the sound is paramattha dhamma, the hearing is kusala vipaka , the result of wholesome kamma (a paramattha dhamma). While listening concepts are formed up that support kusala citta. And kusala citta is co-nascent paccaya with certain concepts. Complex stuff. ------------------------> > thanks in advance for enduring my concept-proliferation, ------------------------ These type of concepts are necessary to understand Dhamma. They point us towards paramattha dhammas. They are most helpful for all of us. If we want to get to see this deeply we know that there is only one way, by satipatthana. Satipatthana is not the same as samattha bhavana, the development of calm. Although it can go together with samattha bhavana it is different. Satipatthana dissects our world of people, children, cars, computers into its actual components. We come out of the cave of shadows and see what is really there, and what there is, according to the Buddha, is simply a flux of fundamental phenomena conditioned by many causes and in turn conditioning other phenomena. I think we do not need to go anywhere or take a special posture or concentrate to see this. If we want to do these things, fine, but we also need to comprehend all the different dhammas that arise in our life constantly. If we are averse to seeing dhammas such as greed or hate or fear or colour then we will not understand them as they are. When we have great agitation can we see the underlying dhammas that are arising and how they are conditioned by certain concepts- if we can we will learn much. Likewise if we do meditation and we think we have to stop doing that and stand up and walk around before we can comprehend then we won't come to understand the dhammas that arise at that time. I think there is no time or place, provided we are awake, when we can say "no, this is not the right time for understanding". I don't know if anyone has an example of such a time? On the other hand we can't have sati often because it is sankhara dhamma, it is conditioned, anatta, not under anyone's power. I guess Kom might have some good ideas on these matters. Robert 2324 From: m. nease Date: Tue Dec 12, 2000 11:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: message from a friend Dear Dasoka, Khun Amara et al., --- wrote: > Actually this is not the sutta > that I referred > to. Anyway, it is another good story four us. I > can't check up the > reference of the sutta I refered at the moment and > perhaps I can do > it after new year. My apologies for the wrong sutta! I wasn't reading very carefully, was I...if anyone can remind me of any more details or of the title, I'll try to find the right one...mn 2325 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Dec 13, 2000 0:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Mike, You wrote: <<(f) can someone please cite a clear, direct instruction on this topic from the sutta-pitaka? I think this would be incredibly valuable, not only for my own understanding but for the benefit of others new to abhidhamma and to this list.>> I did a search on 'pa~n~natti' and found an interesting sutta where this word occurs a lot in relation to the 5 aggregates. It is the Niruttipathasutta, SN XXII.62 (22.2.1.10). Niruttipatha, adhivacanapatha, and pa~n~nattipatha are also found in the suttantika couplets of the Dhammasangani. Pa~n~natti (in that form, by itself) occurs 5 times in each of DN & MN, 12 times in SN (the sutta just mentioned), once in AN, & 70 times in KN. Best wishes, Jim A. 2326 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 0:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Hi Bruce, Welcome to the group. I hope you will find many useful information here in the group. I am not answering all the questions in this email: I am just adding to the conversation that is already in progress. --- Bruce wrote: > example: the chrysanthemum on my altar > right now > is rupa *only* as i look at it and its colors and shapes impinge on > the > eye-dvara and concurrently visual consciousness arises, ie it is a > paramattha dhamma.... Chrysanthemum is not paramatha dhamma at any time, not while we are looking at it, not while we are not looking at it. What we call Chrysanthemum is just a collection of rupas that rise and fall away extremely rapidly. The rupa, such as vanna, the visible object, is there regardless of whether or not there is a citta cognizing it. The sound of a tree falling in the forest where there is nobody to hear is still there (very briefly). Regardless of whether there is a citta to cognize the rupa or not, it is insignificant and is not worth being attached to. > eyes, or that may come unasked for in the middle of a sitting is not > rupa, Doesn't this remind us of the anatta characteristic of all sankhara dhammsa (in this case, citta and cetasikas?)? Regardless of whether or not we like it or dislike it, a dhamma rises because of there are conditions for it to rise. It doesn't rise because the conditions are not all there. Satipatthana is also sankhara dhamma: it doesn't arise if there are no conditions. > mental manifestations of any of the 5 bodily senses that appear in > the mind > are not the same as those that appear at the 5 sense-doors....they > are > imagined sensory experiences...what is impinging on the mind-door > when i > imagine a chrysanthemum is only the *idea* of a chrysanthemum, a > concept....and concepts, whether they are visual or auditory or > olfactory > are not rupa, are not paramattha dhammas.....is this correct? Imagining the 5 sensory experiences (or any other objects) would certainly fall in the category of concepts. However, the mano-dhavara cittas experience all poramatha dhammas (citta, cetasikas, rupa, and nibhanna) and pannati. The vanna experienced through the eye-dvara will also be experienced through the mano-dvara. This happens very rapidly. I was told that you can't tell the differences, even when satipatthana is rising, that if the characteristics of poramatha dhamma is appearing through the 5-sense door, or through the mano-dvara. 2327 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 0:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Robert, > I think there is no time or place, provided we are awake, when > we can say "no, this is not the right time for understanding". I > don't know if anyone has an example of such a time? Is it not possible for Satipatthana to arise cognizing the chracteristics of the bhavanga citta (the sleeping citta)? Even though then you won't be technically sleeping while satipathana arises... Satipatthana can certainly arises cognizing the characteristics of dreaming cittas (mano-dvara, again, technically not sleeping). kom 2328 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 7:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma dear kom, Right. Satipatthana can arise intermitantly during light sleep. Sometimes while dreaming we are thinking about Dhamma with kusala citta; so other levels of kusala are also possible. But in deep sleep we are aware of nothing. Immediately before falling into deep sleep it is theoretically possible. Robert --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Robert, > > > I think there is no time or place, provided we are awake, > when > > we can say "no, this is not the right time for > understanding". I > > don't know if anyone has an example of such a time? > > Is it not possible for Satipatthana to arise cognizing the > chracteristics of the bhavanga citta (the sleeping citta)? > Even though > then you won't be technically sleeping while satipathana > arises... > Satipatthana can certainly arises cognizing the > characteristics of > dreaming cittas (mano-dvara, again, technically not sleeping). > > kom > > 2329 From: Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 9:29am Subject: Re: Fonts for Pali Dear Pinna Lee, It's been a while since you posted this, but I hope this might still do you some good--courtesy of our friend, Michael Olds: http://www.microsoft.com/typography/web/embedding/weft3/weft00.htm?fna me=%20 Michael's done quite a nice little font of his own, so I hope you'll find this useful. Anumodana, MO, mn --- "Indorf,Pinna Lee" wrote: > Dear DSSFB Group, > I'm getting set to retype Nina van Gorkom's letters from about 1975 onward > for placement on the web (and perhaps eventually other forms of > distribution) with her approval and permission. I would like to use a font > that will show the diacritical marks for Pali words on the web. > For my coursework (on Hindu-Buddhist architecture) which went on the web, > the I.T. unit here at NUS (Singapore) used a program 'embedded fonts' which > was able to display the fonts on I.Explorer 5. The font I used was one I > created with Fontographer (for mac and pc) which I can send to Amara (or > others who need such a font) and maybe it will work in the same way our NUS > web works, but only through Explorer 5. I also have something called > 'Dtimes' which works on mac (but I don't know if it is around for pc). The > Word font Amara uses (Tahoma) for her own work is not available on mac. > Does anyone have suggestions for solving this problem? > Pinna > p.s. I much appreciate the lively discussions, especially on abhidhamma, and > grapbling with 'reality.' > > > 2330 From: Bruce Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 1:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma hi kom thanks very much for your reply; just one question.... At 08:17 2000/12/13 -0800, you wrote: > Chrysanthemum is not paramatha dhamma at any time, not while we are > looking at it, not while we are not looking at it. What we call > Chrysanthemum is just a collection of rupas that rise and fall away > extremely rapidly. The rupa, such as vanna, the visible object, is > there regardless of whether or not there is a citta cognizing it. of course "chrysanthemum" is just pannatti, but the collection of rapidly arising and falling away rupas (which compose what we conceptualize as/name "chrysanthemum") is paramattha dhamma, correct? > Imagining the 5 sensory experiences (or any other objects) would > certainly fall in the category of concepts. However, the mano-dhavara > cittas experience all poramatha dhammas (citta, cetasikas, rupa, and > nibhanna) and pannati. The vanna experienced through the eye-dvara > will also be experienced through the mano-dvara. This happens very > rapidly. I was told that you can't tell the differences, even when > satipatthana is rising, that if the characteristics of poramatha dhamma > is appearing through the 5-sense door, or through the mano-dvara. thanks for this explanation....this makes me wonder: if one can't distinguish the difference between characteristics of paramattha dhamma that arise (*seemingly* simultaneously) at the 5 sense doors and the mind door) then how is it possible to differentiate pannatti, which are only experienced by mano-dvara cittas, from rupa, which are experienced through 5-sense dvaras *and* mano-dvara? thanks in advance for your responses... mettacittena bruce 2331 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 3:00pm Subject: catching up - slowly! hi everyone, Well, we're back in Hong Kong and trying to catch up with all the excellent posts in between busy work schedules for us both and visits to doctors in my case as I've been rather sick with a nasty cough....so a little slower than usual at getting back into the 'swing'. Firstly a big welcome to newcomers. Bruce, I was very impressed with your first post. Understanding the defference between concepts and realities is really the key and the only way to understand realities as anatta. Welcome too to Dasoka. I'm going to be making more comments on the theme of the monk's way of life, following up Mike's points, SOON! We had a long discussion on this theme on our last day in Bkk with Nina and K.Sujin. Welcome to any other newcomers I've neglected to mention too! Mike & Shin asked about the chatroom facility. As far as I know, this doesn't need the moderator to do anything. in otherwords, I believe you (any anyone else interested) can just go ahead! If I'm wrong and we need to do anything first, p'haps you'll let us know. With all the time differences and work commitments, it can be hard to coordinate and for myself I prefer not to be tied to times for the list, but I think it's fine for those who can arrange it. As Jaran & O have mentioned, the trip to Cambodia was excellent in many regards. I was the only non-Thai speaking member of the group (oh, also Lodevick, Nina VG's husband) and A.Sujin kindly arranged plenty of English discussions both there and in Bangkok at either end. These have all been recorded by the Foundation (Dhamma Study Group Centre) and we (Jonothan & I) have left funds so that if anyone from the list wishes to have any copies made (and posted) of these or any other tapes or of any of Nina's books at the Centre, this should be possible soon. We're just finalising arrangements and I'll post the details of what you should do. This will be for samll individual orders rather than for large orders. Nina VG was very enthusiastic about this list and was recommending it to everyone. She herself plans to join once she is 'hooked up' in the New Year... Will get back to some of the other issues when i have time and am not too 'drugged out' from the Chinese medicine I'm taking! Best wishes, Sarah 2332 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 3:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Bruce, --- Bruce wrote: > but the collection of > rapidly > arising and falling away rupas (which compose what we conceptualize > as/name > "chrysanthemum") is paramattha dhamma, correct? Yes, an "object" arising from Utu as the samuthana comprises of many kalapas (the smallest collection of rupas), each kalapa comprises of 12 paramatha dhammas including pattawee (earth), apo (water), dejo (fire), vayo (wind), vanna (color), rassa (taste), ??? (smell), ocha (nutrition), and 4 lakkhana rupas. They are all paramatha dhammas. > if one can't > distinguish the difference between characteristics of paramattha > dhamma > that arise (*seemingly* simultaneously) at the 5 sense doors and the > mind > door) then how is it possible to differentiate pannatti, which are > only > experienced by mano-dvara cittas, from rupa, which are experienced > through > 5-sense dvaras *and* mano-dvara? Thanks for asking this very fundamental (and very hard) question. I will attempt to give you an answer, and throw in another question. Pannatti doesn't really exist, i.e., it has no poramatha characteristics that can be experienced. It doesn't have any of the three common paramatha characteristics: anicca, dukha, anatta. It doesn't have any specific characeristics, unlike all the poramatha dhammas. One crude way to explain this is, take anger for example, regardless of who you are (nationality, race, origins, even animal), anger exists for all. Now take some concept that is not paramatha, say freedom: now this concept is not universally understood (even in the worldly way). Why? Because it doesn't really exist: it has no paramatha characteristics. Another example would be a musical instrument. When you look at an unfamiliar musical instrument, do you even know that it is a musical instrument? However, you certainly can know that you see an object. Again, regardless of who you are (baby, poor-sighted person, insane person), the cita sees this aramana (vanna) which is paramatha. There are more complications: there are dhammas that we call paramatha that don't have their own characteristics. Specifically, they are the 10 anibbhana rupa (lakhana rupa 4, vikara rupa 3, vinyatti 2, paricheta 1). They can be known because they change the characteristics of the rupas they arise with, but they by themselves neither have the 3 common characteristics (???), nor the specific characteristics (???). Overall, though, paramatha dhammas are real: they have characteristics that can be experienced. Pannati doesn't. Anibbhana rupas are not suitable for "studying" anyway. There are poramatha dhammas that cannot be understood (by some) because they don't appear to them. The ability to experience the dhammas depend on the accumulations. On the other hand, there are dhammas that seem to be experienced by all (take the 14 akusala cetasikas, for example). By learning about the characteristics of the paramatha dhamma and by noticing the nama and rupa that arise, I think one would gain more understanding why some dhammas (with the evasnescent meaning) are paramatha and why some aren't. kom 2333 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 9:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear bruce, Another good question, I think they don't come any deeper. Khun sujin described the experience of vipassana. At those moments the sense door and mindoor are known as they are. Now we are experiencing colour and sound but the sense door is hidden. During the minddoor processes when vipassana nana occur the sense-door is revealed, at those moments there is the deep understanding of the difference between rupa and nama. This is nama-rupa paricchedda nana. She says that the theory is completely true. This experience of vipassana is not, as some think, just knowing in a vague way that rupa is rupa and nama is nama. Vipassana actually distinguishes. It cannot be made to happen; imagine how fast the processes are changing. Even when we think we are feeling tyhe actual rupas in the body they have long since passed away. But when vipassana arises, which includes the cetasikas of panna(wisdom) sati, concentration and other factors of the eightfold path panna supported by the other factors is able to distinguish. So completely anatta. After that there is no doubt about nama and rupa but there has to be more development before there can be understanding of the arising and passing away. Now concept, nama, and rupa are mixed up and they remain this way until vipassana occurs. Nevertheless, there is some untangling taking place at every moment of satipatthana, every time that sati and panna take a paramattha dhamma as object. The difference between concept and paramattha dhamma does become clearer; but not clear until vipassana. When will vipassana happen? When the conditions are fulfilled, this life or future lives. When it is the right time it will occur even if we don't want it. We might be surprised. I think it is not something to wish for so much- it means one will see, really see, that there is no one. Not only no friends or relatives, there is not even us. How can we have faith that this is the right way if we have to wait, maybe until next life, before true vipassana occurs to make it clear? I think a little understanding of the moment goes a long way. It is like being at the bottom of the ocean looking up at the light. It is hazy and yet we know that as we get closer to the surface the light becomes brighter. Robert --- Bruce wrote: > hi kom > > thanks very much for your reply; just one question.... > > At 08:17 2000/12/13 -0800, you wrote: > > > Chrysanthemum is not paramatha dhamma at any time, not while > we are > > looking at it, not while we are not looking at it. What we > call > > Chrysanthemum is just a collection of rupas that rise and > fall away > > extremely rapidly. The rupa, such as vanna, the visible > object, is > > there regardless of whether or not there is a citta > cognizing it. > > of course "chrysanthemum" is just pannatti, but the collection > of rapidly > arising and falling away rupas (which compose what we > conceptualize as/name > "chrysanthemum") is paramattha dhamma, correct? > > > > Imagining the 5 sensory experiences (or any other objects) > would > > certainly fall in the category of concepts. However, the > mano-dhavara > > cittas experience all poramatha dhammas (citta, cetasikas, > rupa, and > > nibhanna) and pannati. The vanna experienced through the > eye-dvara > > will also be experienced through the mano-dvara. This > happens very > > rapidly. I was told that you can't tell the differences, > even when > > satipatthana is rising, that if the characteristics of > poramatha dhamma > > is appearing through the 5-sense door, or through the > mano-dvara. > > thanks for this explanation....this makes me wonder: if one > can't > distinguish the difference between characteristics of > paramattha dhamma > that arise (*seemingly* simultaneously) at the 5 sense doors > and the mind > door) then how is it possible to differentiate pannatti, which > are only > experienced by mano-dvara cittas, from rupa, which are > experienced through > 5-sense dvaras *and* mano-dvara? > > > thanks in advance for your responses... > > mettacittena > bruce > > 2334 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 9:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Jim, thanks for the references. I looked up the nirutti-patha sutta (Mode of reckoning) which explains that we can talk about past, present and future dhammas (the khandas). Robert --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Mike, > > You wrote: > <<(f) can someone please cite a clear, direct instruction on > this > topic from the sutta-pitaka? > > I think this would be incredibly valuable, not only for my own > understanding but for the benefit of others new to abhidhamma > and to > this list.>> > > I did a search on 'pa~n~natti' and found an interesting sutta > where this > word occurs a lot in relation to the 5 aggregates. It is the > Niruttipathasutta, SN XXII.62 (22.2.1.10). Niruttipatha, > adhivacanapatha, > and pa~n~nattipatha are also found in the suttantika couplets > of the > Dhammasangani. Pa~n~natti (in that form, by itself) occurs 5 > times in each > of DN & MN, 12 times in SN (the sutta just mentioned), once in > AN, & 70 > times in KN. > > Best wishes, > Jim A. > 2335 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 9:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Bruce, Kom et al., I've pretty much stayed out of this since asking my original question, partly because of time restraints and partly because most of the exchange has been somewhat over my head. Bruce, all of your posts have gone straight to the heart of my questions, but with greater clarity and precision than I could have managed. I think we're on the same track, but you're running some way ahead. Kom, your responses have been so well-informed and detailed that I know they'll be of great help--once I've got much better grounded in the theory and terminology of cittas and cetasikas. This will be a while...! Khun Amara, Robert, and Jim, thanks also for your wonderful replies. I'll respond to these individually as time permits. I just want to respond to a couple of points in this post briefly: --- Bruce wrote: hi kom thanks very much for your reply; just one question.... At 08:17 2000/12/13 -0800, you wrote: > I was told that you can't tell the > differences, even when > > satipatthana is rising, that if the > characteristics of poramatha dhamma > > is appearing through the 5-sense door, or through > the mano-dvara. > > thanks for this explanation....this makes me wonder: > if one can't > distinguish the difference between characteristics > of paramattha dhamma > that arise (*seemingly* simultaneously) at the 5 > sense doors and the mind > door) then how is it possible to differentiate > pannatti, which are only > experienced by mano-dvara cittas, from rupa, which > are experienced through > 5-sense dvaras *and* mano-dvara? As usual, Bruce, you're anticipating and articulating my questions for me. A possible answer occurred to me regarding this persistent problem of the brevity of all of these moments. It seems to me that this differentiation is only possible because sati and paññá arise and subside just as rapidly--and that the conceptual understanding of these maybe only arises with retrospection of moments informed by many arisings and subsidings of sati an paññá. If this is true (maybe even if it isn't), then the desire for insight and the aversion to the lack of it are (a) painful (this I know for sure) and (b) irrelevant, in that sati and paññá will arise in spite of them when the conditions exist for their arising. I don't pretend to have managed even this conceptual understanding yet and have no sense at all of 'being able' to make the distinction above. I'm really grasping at this idea just as a sort of 'way out' of a morass of papañca surrounding these issue. I hope it might have some merit and welcome any corrections/refutations/elucidations. It's early and I'm rambling, and I'm sure I've dragged down the level of this exchange by several notches! Thanks for the occasion to 'think out loud' for a minute. Thanks again to you all for your help. mike 2336 From: Bruce Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 9:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma to be honest, i didn't realize until after i had hit the send button that the question i'd asked was simply: how do we distinguish pannatti from paramattha dhamma?....i guess that's what it all comes down to, and practice really does make perfect.... thanks, robert for a very illuminating post...and to be honest again, everything seems completely different after having read it...but everything always is completely different, again and again, isn't it... anumodana, mettacittena bruce At 05:03 2000/12/14 -0800, you wrote: > Dear bruce, > Another good question, I think they don't come any deeper. > Khun sujin described the experience of vipassana. At those > moments the sense door and mindoor are known as they are. Now we > are experiencing colour and sound but the sense door is hidden. > During the minddoor processes when vipassana nana occur the > sense-door is revealed, at those moments there is the deep > understanding of the difference between rupa and nama. This is > nama-rupa paricchedda nana. She says that the theory is > completely true. This experience of vipassana is not, as some > think, just knowing in a vague way that rupa is rupa and nama is > nama. Vipassana actually distinguishes. It cannot be made to > happen; imagine how fast the processes are changing. Even when > we think we are feeling tyhe actual rupas in the body they have > long since passed away. But when vipassana arises, which > includes the cetasikas of panna(wisdom) sati, concentration and > other factors of the eightfold path panna supported by the other > factors is able to distinguish. So completely anatta. > After that there is no doubt about nama and rupa but there has > to be more development before there can be understanding of the > arising and passing away. > Now concept, nama, and rupa are mixed up and they remain this > way until vipassana occurs. Nevertheless, there is some > untangling taking place at every moment of satipatthana, every > time that sati and panna take a paramattha dhamma as object. The > difference between concept and paramattha dhamma does become > clearer; but not clear until vipassana. > When will vipassana happen? When the conditions are fulfilled, > this life or future lives. When it is the right time it will > occur even if we don't want it. We might be surprised. I think > it is not something to wish for so much- it means one will see, > really see, that there is no one. Not only no friends or > relatives, there is not even us. > How can we have faith that this is the right way if we have to > wait, maybe until next life, before true vipassana occurs to > make it clear? I think a little understanding of the moment goes > a long way. It is like being at the bottom of the ocean looking > up at the light. It is hazy and yet we know that as we get > closer to the surface the light becomes brighter. > Robert > --- Bruce wrote: > hi kom > > > > thanks very much for your reply; just one question.... > > > > At 08:17 2000/12/13 -0800, you wrote: > > > > > Chrysanthemum is not paramatha dhamma at any time, not while > > we are > > > looking at it, not while we are not looking at it. What we > > call > > > Chrysanthemum is just a collection of rupas that rise and > > fall away > > > extremely rapidly. The rupa, such as vanna, the visible > > object, is > > > there regardless of whether or not there is a citta > > cognizing it. > > > > of course "chrysanthemum" is just pannatti, but the collection > > of rapidly > > arising and falling away rupas (which compose what we > > conceptualize as/name > > "chrysanthemum") is paramattha dhamma, correct? > > > > > > > Imagining the 5 sensory experiences (or any other objects) > > would > > > certainly fall in the category of concepts. However, the > > mano-dhavara > > > cittas experience all poramatha dhammas (citta, cetasikas, > > rupa, and > > > nibhanna) and pannati. The vanna experienced through the > > eye-dvara > > > will also be experienced through the mano-dvara. This > > happens very > > > rapidly. I was told that you can't tell the differences, > > even when > > > satipatthana is rising, that if the characteristics of > > poramatha dhamma > > > is appearing through the 5-sense door, or through the > > mano-dvara. > > > > thanks for this explanation....this makes me wonder: if one > > can't > > distinguish the difference between characteristics of > > paramattha dhamma > > that arise (*seemingly* simultaneously) at the 5 sense doors > > and the mind > > door) then how is it possible to differentiate pannatti, which > > are only > > experienced by mano-dvara cittas, from rupa, which are > > experienced through > > 5-sense dvaras *and* mano-dvara? > > > > > > thanks in advance for your responses... > > > > mettacittena > > bruce > > > > > > > > -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor > 2337 From: m. nease Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 9:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma --- Bruce wrote: > to be honest, i didn't realize until after i had hit > the send button that > the question i'd asked was simply: how do we > distinguish pannatti from > paramattha dhamma? Again the heart of my question too, Bruce--though, also, what's the real difference (though I know this is a matter of record)? Would another way of saying this that paramattha dhammas are all satipatthana and paññati isn't? If so, does this mean that even crude understanding can't really arise from reflection on paññati? Or rather, that neither pañña nor sati can arise with paññati? Sorry if this is getting circular or repetitive, or if these questions are too elementary. ....i guess that's what it all > comes down to, and > practice really does make perfect.... Here's hoping...mike 2338 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 10:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > --- Bruce wrote: > is a matter of record)? Would another way of saying > this that paramattha dhammas are all satipatthana and > paññati isn't? Satipatthana has at least 3 meanings: 1) Aramana of sati (of Satipatthana citta) 2) Satipatthana citta 3) The path that the Buddha and Ariyas disciple have walked. I believe you are referring to meaning 1), and the answer is yes, only poramatha dhammas can be an object of satipatthana. > If so, does this mean that even crude > understanding can't really arise from reflection on > paññati? Or rather, that neither pañña nor sati can > arise with paññati? There are different levels of panna. Panna at the satipatthana level is different from the panna at other levels: it knows the paramatha dhamma as it is, and it must grow in order for the maggha to be reached. However, panna may arise for any kind of kusala citta (dana, sila, samatha and vipassana bhawana, regardless if the citta's aramana is paramatha dhamma or not. When you are reading and understanding dhammas (the correct dhamma, of course), at the pannati level, another level of panna is arising. When you are giving dana, having some vague sense that giving is good, there is another level of panna rising. It's possible to develop other levels of panna without listening to Buddha: it is not with Satipatthana. kom 2339 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 10:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear mike, These make a fine field of inquiry. Sati of the type that is satipatthana can only take a paramatthaa dhamma for object, never a concept. However, we can focus, for instance, on paramattha dhammas and experience them but this is not necessarily satipatthana. Ususally it will be simply citta and sanna but not satipatthana. There are still concepts, pannati cvoming in, there is still a subtle idea of control and self and 'thing'but we may not be aware of this. There are other types of panna (wisdom) that can arise even at the moments when the object is pannati, concept. These are also useful, they accumulate, and assist the arising of satipatthana later. At this moment there might be no awareness of a paramattha dhamma but if there is understanding of this letter, which is about Dhamma, then there are moments of maha-kusala citta nana-sampayuttam (great wholesome consciousness associated with knowledge). There is a huge range of levels of this type of citta but even at the level of intellectual comprehension it is accumulating, it brings benefits. Robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > --- Bruce <> > Again the heart of my question too, Bruce--though, > also, what's the real difference (though I know this > is a matter of record)? Would another way of saying > this that paramattha dhammas are all satipatthana and > paññati isn't? If so, does this mean that even crude > understanding can't really arise from reflection on > paññati? Or rather, that neither pañña nor sati can > arise with paññati? > > Sorry if this is getting circular or repetitive, or if > these questions are too elementary. > > ....i guess that's what it all > > comes down to, and > > practice really does make perfect.... > > Here's hoping...mike > 2340 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Dec 14, 2000 11:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear mike, More worthy questions. Thank you. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Bruce, Kom et al., > As usual, Bruce, you're anticipating and articulating > my questions for me. A possible answer occurred to me > regarding this persistent problem of the brevity of > all of these moments. It seems to me that this > differentiation is only possible because sati and > paññá arise and subside just as rapidly-- ______ Yes. Paññá comes in so fast and its function is to understand. "We" can't help it to understand; "we" can only hinder. Paññá is sobhana, beautiful, while avijja (ignorance) is very asobhana; but panna is not something we should worship or desire because it is also only sankhara dhamma, conditioned phenomenena. _______ and that the > conceptual understanding of these maybe only arises > with retrospection of moments informed by many > arisings and subsidings of sati an paññá. ________ Yes, the deep conceptual understanding is informed by the direct experience. And it in turn supports deeper levels of direct understanding. ________ If this is > true (maybe even if it isn't), then the desire for > insight and the aversion to the lack of it are (a) > painful (this I know for sure) and (b) irrelevant, in > that sati and paññá will arise in spite of them when > the conditions exist for their arising. __________ Right, although Khun Sujin insists that desire to have it actually stops satipatthana. I think this is because even a little desire always moves us, albeit ever so slightly, away from the present moment. You see paramattha dhammas are arising right now, they never stop. We don't have to go anywhere to find them. _________ > > It's early and I'm rambling, and I'm sure I've dragged > down the level of this exchange by several notches! > Thanks for the occasion to 'think out loud' for a > minute. _____________> Well I can't speak for anyone else but your ideas conditioned some useful reflection for me. Robert 2341 From: Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 1:21am Subject: If a tree falls in a forest... If a tree falls in a forest and crushes a meditating anagami's legs, did he deserve it? Putting the everyday connotations of "deserve" aside, by my reading of Abhidhammattha Sangaha the unpleasant physical sensations arising from crushed legs are unwholesome-resultant cittas. Inevitably, I find the Sangaha and Abhidhamma and Suttas very helpful, but sometimes it takes a little work. Without an external agency (a la God effecting divine retribution) causing the tree to fall on the bhikku, how can the collision between the two be caused by unwholesome thoughts in his past? Can someone help me see this as something other than superstition? Often, the Abhidhamma explanations are clear upon reflection, but in this case, I'd like to find some sutta explanation too. Does anyone have any suggestions? 2342 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 1:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Robert, I also looked over the Nirutti-patha-sutta (SN XXII.62) which seems to be worth studying to get a better idea of the Buddha's use of the word 'pa~n~natti'. It hasn't quite come clear to me yet, but the part about not confusing a past dhamma with a present dhamma, etc. is clear enough although it makes me wonder about actually being able to be conscious of present arupino dhammas as they occur -- in view of their phenomenal rate (17 trillions per second?). I'm still struggling with the meaning of 'pa~n~natti' which is explained in the Dhammasangani and the Atthasalini. As far as I can gather, the names for the paramattha dhammas are pa~n~nattis. I also see similar words alongside 'pa~n~natti' such as nirutti and abhilaapo which suggests a connection to the nirutti-patisambhida, the third of the 4 discriminations. The objects of the discrimination of nirutti (linguistic usage) are attha (the meaning of what is spoken, the signified) and dhamma (what is spoken, the signifier). There is also the meaning of 'naama' (arupino dhammas and nibbana) to consider as the word 'naama' is also in the same list with 'pa~n~natti'. I will be departing any day now, possibly today, depending on when the person coming to drive me to my destination (Orillia) is free to do so. I'll be away for two weeks and will be taking K. Sujin's Realities and Concepts to read over the Christmas holidays. We got wallopped here in Ontario by a major snowstorm in the past few days with about 30cm of snow (another area nearby got 66cm). Best wishes, Jim A. >Dear Jim, >thanks for the references. I looked up the nirutti-patha sutta >(Mode of reckoning) which explains that we can talk about past, >present and future dhammas (the khandas). >Robert 2343 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 2:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Kom, Thanks, this is really excellent: --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Mike, > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > --- Bruce wrote: > > is a matter of record)? Would another way of > saying > > this that paramattha dhammas are all satipatthana > and > > paññati isn't? > Satipatthana has at least 3 meanings: > 1) Aramana of sati (of Satipatthana citta) > 2) Satipatthana citta > 3) The path that the Buddha and Ariyas disciple have > walked. > I believe you are referring to meaning 1), and the > answer is yes, only > poramatha dhammas can be an object of satipatthana. I THINK this is what I meant--I meant a 'foundation of mindfulness, which seems slightly different from 'aramanna' in the dsg glossary. > > If so, does this mean that even crude > > understanding can't really arise from reflection > on > > paññati? Or rather, that neither pañña nor sati > can > > arise with paññati? > There are different levels of panna. Panna at the > satipatthana level > is different from the panna at other levels: it > knows the paramatha > dhamma as it is, and it must grow in order for the > maggha to be > reached. However, panna may arise for any kind of > kusala citta (dana, > sila, samatha and vipassana bhawana, regardless if > the citta's aramana > is paramatha dhamma or not. Are these different levels also true of sati? That is, can a low level of sati arise with with a 'non-paramattha' dhamma--that is, for example, paññati? > When you are reading > and understanding > dhammas (the correct dhamma, of course), at the > pannati level, another > level of panna is arising. Another level of sati, also? > When you are giving > dana, having some vague > sense that giving is good, there is another level of > panna rising. > It's possible to develop other levels of panna > without listening to > Buddha: it is not with Satipatthana. Thanks for your patience! mn 2344 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 9:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma dear jim, Thanks for the very interesting letter. See my comments betwen yours. --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Robert, > > I also looked over the Nirutti-patha-sutta (SN XXII.62) which > seems to be > worth studying to get a better idea of the Buddha's use of the > word > 'pa~n~natti'. It hasn't quite come clear to me yet, but the > part about not > confusing a past dhamma with a present dhamma, etc. is clear > enough although > it makes me wonder about actually being able to be conscious > of present > arupino dhammas as they occur -- in view of their phenomenal > rate (17 > trillions per second?). >____________________ Mike brought this up yesterday. "We" could never be aware of such dhammas due to this incredible rapididy which never slows down, even in the Brahma realm. However, as mike said, panna is also arising and passing away at this same speed. It comes in, when sufficient conditions have been fulfilled during the javanna prcocess, and its function is to comprehend nama and rupa. So anatta is this path. _________ > I'm still struggling with the meaning of 'pa~n~natti' which is > explained in > the Dhammasangani and the Atthasalini. As far as I can gather, > the names for > the paramattha dhammas are pa~n~nattis. I also see similar > words alongside > 'pa~n~natti' such as nirutti and abhilaapo which suggests a > connection to > the nirutti-patisambhida, the third of the 4 discriminations. _____________ Many different types of paññatti . You will see them explained in Realities and Concepts. The vijjamana paññatti are those words that describe paramattha dhammas such as the khandas. ____________ > The objects of > the discrimination of nirutti (linguistic usage) are attha > (the meaning of > what is spoken, the signified) and dhamma (what is spoken, the > signifier). > There is also the meaning of 'naama' (arupino dhammas and > nibbana) to > consider as the word 'naama' is also in the same list with > 'pa~n~natti'. > > I will be departing any day now, possibly today, depending on > when the > person coming to drive me to my destination (Orillia) is free > to do so. I'll > be away for two weeks and will be taking K. Sujin's Realities > and Concepts > to read over the Christmas holidays. We got wallopped here in > Ontario by a > major snowstorm in the past few days with about 30cm of snow > (another area > nearby got 66cm). __________ Enjoy the book and have a nice time in Orillia (and stay warm). best wishes Robert 2345 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 9:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > > >Would another way of > > saying > > > this that paramattha dhammas are all satipatthana > > and > > > paññati isn't? > > Satipatthana has at least 3 meanings: > > 1) Aramana of sati (of Satipatthana citta) > > 2) Satipatthana citta > > 3) The path that the Buddha and Ariyas disciple have > > walked. > > I believe you are referring to meaning 1), and the > > answer is yes, only > > poramatha dhammas can be an object of satipatthana. > > I THINK this is what I meant--I meant a 'foundation of > mindfulness, which seems slightly different from > 'aramanna' in the dsg glossary. Would you say "foundation of mindfulness" equate "conditions for Satipathana to arise"? > Are these different levels also true of sati? That > is, can a low level of sati arise with with a > 'non-paramattha' dhamma--that is, for example, > paññati? Absolutely. Panna is a sobhana cetasikas, when panna arises, it arises with all 7 sappa-satarana (rising with all citta) cetasikas, some of 6 pakinaka (rising with some cittas) , at least 19 of other sobhana cetasikas, and maybe the other 5 sobhana cetasikas. Panna always rises with Saddha, Sati, alobha, adosa (maybe metta), samathi, and all others. Panna ALWAYS arises with Sati, although Sati may arise without Panna. > Another level of sati, also? Yes. 2346 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 9:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Concept vs. Dhamma Dear Kom, This is extremely helpful. I'll try to respond at length when time permits. Thanks...mike --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Mike, > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > >Would another way of > > > saying > > > > this that paramattha dhammas are all > satipatthana > > > and > > > > paññati isn't? > > > Satipatthana has at least 3 meanings: > > > 1) Aramana of sati (of Satipatthana citta) > > > 2) Satipatthana citta > > > 3) The path that the Buddha and Ariyas disciple > have > > > walked. > > > I believe you are referring to meaning 1), and > the > > > answer is yes, only > > > poramatha dhammas can be an object of > satipatthana. > > > > I THINK this is what I meant--I meant a > 'foundation of > > mindfulness, which seems slightly different from > > 'aramanna' in the dsg glossary. > Would you say "foundation of mindfulness" equate > "conditions for > Satipathana to arise"? > > > Are these different levels also true of sati? > That > > is, can a low level of sati arise with with a > > 'non-paramattha' dhamma--that is, for example, > > paññati? > Absolutely. Panna is a sobhana cetasikas, when > panna arises, it arises > with all 7 sappa-satarana (rising with all citta) > cetasikas, some of 6 > pakinaka (rising with some cittas) , at least 19 of > other sobhana > cetasikas, and maybe the other 5 sobhana cetasikas. > Panna always rises > with Saddha, Sati, alobha, adosa (maybe metta), > samathi, and all > others. Panna ALWAYS arises with Sati, although > Sati may arise without > Panna. > > > Another level of sati, also? > Yes. > > > 2347 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 9:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] If a tree falls in a forest... I'm glad you asked this, as I mentioned off-list. I have an idea I thought I'd throw out. In the Kamma Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-145.html The Buddha referred to all the sense-bases and consciousnesses as 'old kamma'. From that perspective, assuming that all the sense bases are the result of conditioned origination, is the 'old kamma' of all of them akusala by nature? If so, assuming that there's no one to deserve anything, then does that old akusala kamma carry with it the conditions for akusala results? Just a thought...mike --- wrote: > If a tree falls in a forest and crushes a meditating > anagami's legs, > did he deserve it? Putting the everyday connotations > of "deserve" > aside, by my reading of Abhidhammattha Sangaha the > unpleasant > physical sensations arising from crushed legs are > unwholesome-resultant cittas. Inevitably, I find the > Sangaha and > Abhidhamma and Suttas very helpful, but sometimes it > takes a little > work. Without an external agency (a la God effecting > divine > retribution) causing the tree to fall on the bhikku, > how can the > collision between the two be caused by unwholesome > thoughts in his > past? Can someone help me see this as something > other than > superstition? Often, the Abhidhamma explanations are > clear upon > reflection, but in this case, I'd like to find some > sutta explanation > too. Does anyone have any suggestions? > > 2348 From: Bruce Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 11:09am Subject: canon searches (was: Concept vs. Dhamma) mike wrote: > Bruce, all of your posts have gone straight to the > heart of my questions, but with greater clarity and > precision than I could have managed. I think we're on > the same track, but you're running some way ahead. no way mike, i'm the newbie, i don't even know how to search the canon (and if we continue to bow to each other like this we're gonna knock heads!)....seriously, if someone on the list has the time to send a few pointers about running canonical searches i'd be very much obliged....do you all use accesstoinsight plus google? or are there online versions of the canon with internal search engines? mettacittena bruce 2349 From: Bruce Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 11:34am Subject: sitting "vs" non-sitting (was Concept vs. Dhamma) just want to see if i'm getting this... robert wrote: > Khun sujin described the experience of vipassana. At those > moments the sense door and mindoor are known as they are. Now we > are experiencing colour and sound but the sense door is hidden. because just as fast (well, almost as fast) as information enters the sense doors, it's conceptualized by the mind, yes? > During the minddoor processes when vipassana nana occur the > sense-door is revealed, at those moments there is the deep > understanding of the difference between rupa and nama. This is > nama-rupa paricchedda nana. She says that the theory is > completely true. This experience of vipassana is not, as some > think, just knowing in a vague way that rupa is rupa and nama is > nama. Vipassana actually distinguishes. It cannot be made to > happen; imagine how fast the processes are changing. Even when > we think we are feeling tyhe actual rupas in the body they have > long since passed away. and these rupas we think we are experiencing become concepts which we, in our delusion, take for reality ....yes. example: on the train, we see a person, we think: "a person" then we remember the Dhamma, and think no: not a person, just visual information impinging on the eye dvara, but by then it's too late, isn't it?....we've already conceptualized the visual information into "a person" and any attempts at undoing the concept are just a pretense at understanding: "oh no, i actually knew all along that they are only rupas....", really just understanding "in a vague way" as you say....or are these miniscule "corrections", these momentary notings-of-conceptualizations, cumulative? cumulative, in that the moment of noting is actually an instance of the arising of sati and/or sanna, as well as the intuitive knowledge/panna of their arising, all of which --in this case-- are beautiful and will yield beautiful results, and as such will slowly contribute to the process of untangling, as you say below....or am i being too optimistic? > Now concept, nama, and rupa are mixed up and they remain this > way until vipassana occurs. Nevertheless, there is some > untangling taking place at every moment of satipatthana, every > time that sati and panna take a paramattha dhamma as object. The > difference between concept and paramattha dhamma does become > clearer; but not clear until vipassana. this is all leading me to several more topic branches...i'll post my questions once i feel confident in articulating them.... mettacittena bruce 2350 From: Bruce Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 11:36am Subject: Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting (was Concept vs. Dhamma) sorry, i didn't notice that i'd used a title for questions i'm still formulating before i hit send...less concentration, and more mindfulness! bruce 2351 From: Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 0:29pm Subject: Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Bing! Lightbulb! Thanks for your comments. The sense bases are of course dependent on conditions. The wheel revolves to vedana, and a tree crushes the legs. WHICH kamma CAUSED the tree to fall? None, of course. But the kamma generates the existence of the bhikku. SOMEWHERE in "his" deep past there of course was some bad action, and we say that the kammic result of that bad action just happened to ripen when the tree fell. If the tree hadn't fallen quite so soon, so the bhikku was able to attain arahantship as he sat, then do we still say it is akusala-vipaka? Fortunately, most of the time trees don't fall on bhikkus. When they do happen to fall, the kamma ripens. If none happens to fall, then the kamma doesn't ripen. This seems odd, but nonetheless "safe." Since the amount of old kamma is unknown (but large), and the link between specific kamma and specific material phenomena (tree falls) is so obscure, we can always just say "ripening of kamma" and it can't be refuted. On the other hand, such reasoning is weak and tires quickly. Thanks for the sutta reference. I will look it up. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-145.html > > The Buddha referred to all the sense-bases and > consciousnesses as 'old kamma'. From that > perspective, assuming that all the sense bases are the > result of conditioned origination, is the 'old kamma' > of all of them akusala by nature? If so, assuming > that there's no one to deserve anything, then does > that old akusala kamma carry with it the conditions > for akusala results? > 2352 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] canon searches (was: Concept vs. Dhamma) --- Bruce wrote: > mike wrote: > if we continue to bow to each other like this we're > gonna knock > heads!) Right! I'll be more careful! > ...seriously, if someone on the list has the > time to send a few > pointers about running canonical searches i'd be > very much obliged....do > you all use accesstoinsight plus google? or are > there online versions of > the canon with internal search engines? I do use google and a.t.i., but also have copies of the sutta and vinaya pitakas, and a little familiarity with them. So often I'm able to remember a word, line, name or title and cross reference from there. I use a.t.i. when I can just because I like the site and am used to their translations. Watch your head--I really am finding your posts invaluable--thanks again! mike > mettacittena > bruce > 2353 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting (was Concept vs. Dhamma) --- Bruce wrote: > and these rupas we think we are experiencing become > concepts which we, in > our delusion, take for reality ....yes. example: on > the train, we see a > person, we think: "a person" then we remember the > Dhamma, and think no: not > a person, just visual information impinging on the > eye dvara, but by then > it's too late, isn't it? Once again, this is just what I've been trying to get at... > ....we've already > conceptualized the visual > information into "a person" and any attempts at > undoing the concept are > just a pretense at understanding: "oh no, i actually > knew all along that > they are only rupas....", really just understanding > "in a vague way" as you > say....or are these miniscule "corrections", these > momentary > notings-of-conceptualizations, cumulative? ...which is why I've been quite relieved to read, for example, Kom's responses on different levels of sati and paññá (message #2345). I have no memory of having been truly, immediately aware of the distinction between nama and rupa. So it's been my only hope that retrospection and conceptualization might provide some level of understanding. It's all I (consciously) have to work with--thought I accept as a working hypothesis that these factors have arisen for their infinitesimally brief periods and left traces (anusaya?) behind to be passed along from citta to citta...else how could any understanding arise at all? > cumulative, in that the moment > of noting is actually an instance of the arising of > sati and/or sanna, as > well as the intuitive knowledge/panna of their > arising, all of which --in > this case-- are beautiful and will yield beautiful > results, and as such > will slowly contribute to the process of untangling, > as you say below....or > am i being too optimistic? If I understood it correctly, again this is addressed by Kom's #2345. > this is all leading me to several more topic > branches...i'll post my > questions once i feel confident in articulating > them.... Glad to hear it, and looking forward to them...mike 2354 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dan, --- wrote: > Bing! Lightbulb! Thanks for your comments. My pleasure--I hope someone can improve on them... > The sense bases are of course dependent on > conditions. The wheel > revolves to vedana, and a tree crushes the legs. > WHICH kamma CAUSED > the tree to fall? None, of course. But the kamma > generates the > existence of the bhikku. SOMEWHERE in "his" deep > past there of > course was some bad action, and we say that the > kammic result of that > bad action just happened to ripen when the tree > fell. If the tree > hadn't fallen quite so soon, so the bhikku was able > to attain > arahantship as he sat, then do we still say it is > akusala-vipaka? I'm not sure, but I don't think vipaka can arise in an arahant...? Corrections, please! > Fortunately, most of the time trees don't fall on > bhikkus. When they > do happen to fall, the kamma ripens. If none happens > to fall, then the > kamma doesn't ripen. This seems odd, but nonetheless > "safe." That's the way I feel about it... > Since the > amount of old kamma is unknown (but large), and the > link between > specific kamma and specific material phenomena (tree > falls) is so > obscure, we can always just say "ripening of kamma" > and it can't be > refuted. On the other hand, such reasoning is weak > and tires quickly. I think so too. Maybe one reason why the Buddha said, "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone who conjectured about it." Acintita Sutta Unconjecturable http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an4-77.html Nice to hear from you again...mike 2355 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 5:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting (was Concept vs. Dhamma) Dear bruce, Thanks for the comments, see mine under yours: robert wrote: > Khun sujin described the experience of vipassana. At those > moments the sense door and mindoor are known as they are. Now we > are experiencing colour and sound but the sense door is hidden. B:because just as fast (well, almost as fast) as information enters the sense doors, it's conceptualized by the mind, yes? __________________ Yes, we live, until we develop satipatthana, in a world of concept, a shadow world; the development of satipatthana vipassana shows us another world of dhatus, elements, without self or control, without things or people, a world that is crumbling before we even know it. We can’t fully see that yet but we get glimpses that show us that it is so. We can’t stop this process of conceptualisation, even arahants have to live by concepts, in fact it seems to me that the forming of concepts, is an involuntary process. Like the breath we can hold it back for a while and try to stop it happening but how successful is this……….. Before the Buddha’s time wisemen could see how this happened and how it was inevitable that this worked to condition more greed and aversion. They found that only by training the mind to concentrate on certain objects was this process arrested and thus they strived and attained jhana of different levels. Jhana is highly beneficial but it can never understand this complex causal arising. Only the development of vipassana can do so, and that is taught exclusively during a Budddhasasana such as now. ___________ > During the minddoor processes when vipassana nana occur the > sense-door is revealed, at those moments there is the deep > understanding of the difference between rupa and nama. This is > nama-rupa paricchedda nana. She says that the theory is > completely true. This experience of vipassana is not, as some > think, just knowing in a vague way that rupa is rupa and nama is > nama. Vipassana actually distinguishes. It cannot be made to > happen; imagine how fast the processes are changing. Even when > we think we are feeling tyhe actual rupas in the body they have > long since passed away. B:and these rupas we think we are experiencing become concepts which we, in our delusion, take for reality ....yes. example: on the train, we see a person, we think: "a person" then we remember the Dhamma, and think no: not a person, just visual information impinging on the eye dvara, but by then it's too late, isn't it?....we've already conceptualized the visual information into "a person" and any attempts at undoing the concept are just a pretense at understanding: "oh no, i actually knew all along that they are only rupas....", really just understanding "in a vague way" as you say.. _______________ This is simply thinking about nama and rupa. It can be done correctly or not. However, I was especially thinking about more subtle forms of “knowing”. I used to think that when I was very calm and aware of minute sensations in the body that this was satipatthana. But it was simply a level of papanca, mannati, conceptual proliferation, but masked by the apparent lack of thinking. There was still fixed belief in a self and control, even while I was thinking, when I was thinking, that there is no self. I don’t know if this is clear? _______ B:..or are these miniscule "corrections", these momentary notings-of-conceptualizations, cumulative? cumulative, in that the moment of noting is actually an instance of the arising of sati and/or sanna, as well as the intuitive knowledge/panna of their arising, all of which --in this case-- are beautiful and will yield beautiful results, and as such will slowly contribute to the process of untangling, as you say below....or am i being too optimistic? __________ No, I think this is right. The correct understanding of Dhamma is always rooted in actual panna, it is mahakusala nanasampayuttam citta, Wholesome citta associated with wisdom. Especially when considering this topic, untangling concept and reality, the type of cittas that understand, even only intellectually are highly beneficial and as you say cumulative and contribute to direct insight. Nevertheless, intellectual understanding alone can never eradicate wrongview and so it is important not to mistake this level for anything higher. _____________ Dear Sarah and Jonothan, Thank you for your condolences and wishes. I was at the hospital with my mother 24 hours/day most of the time when she was there. She passed away peacefully last Friday, and was cremated the day before yesterday. I'm glad that I was with her most of the time. When things settle down more, I'll review the archive more and spend more time on the Net. Now, most of the time, I'm with my father so that he would not feel lonely and depressed. If you think that it's appropriate to announce it on the list, please do. Thank you for your thoughtfulness. Take care. :-))) Anumodana, Alexandra Tran 2357 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 7:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The loss of a parent Dear Alex, Very sorry to hear about the loss of your mother. I am certain that the best has been done that could have been done. I do not know if I would have the kusala citta to do as you did towards your ma and what you are now doing with regards to your father when and if the time comes for me. However reading about your experience has inspired a need to change my own attitude towards my mother, with whom I have had a quite unhealthy relationship. May you keep well and hope too that your pa passes this perid of time without any harm to his health. Sukin. Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Friends, > > Some of you may be wondering why we haven't been > hearing from Alex recently as we are used to her being > one of our most regular contributors to the list. We > had certainly been wondering if there was any problem > when Mike forwarded me a note about the passing away > of her mother. I asked her permission to let the group > know and she just wrote me this note: > > >Dear Sarah and Jonothan, > > Thank you for your condolences and wishes. I was > at the hospital > with my > mother 24 hours/day most of the time when she was > there. She passed > away > peacefully last Friday, and was cremated the day > before yesterday. I'm > glad > that I was with her most of the time. > > When things settle down more, I'll review the > archive more and spend > more > time on the Net. Now, most of the time, I'm with my > father so that he > would > not feel lonely and depressed. > > If you think that it's appropriate to announce it > on the list, > please do. > Thank you for your thoughtfulness. > > Take care. :-))) > > Anumodana, > Alexandra Tran > > 2358 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 8:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting (was Concept vs. Dhamma) dear Mike and Bruce, --- "m. nease" wrote: > > --- Bruce wrote: > > > and these rupas we think we are experiencing become > > concepts which we, in > > our delusion, take for reality ....yes. example: on > > the train, we see a > > person, we think: "a person" then we remember the > > Dhamma, and think no: not > > a person, just visual information impinging on the > > eye dvara, but by then > > it's too late, isn't it? > > Once again, this is just what I've been trying to get > at... ___________- There are many levels of understanding. When we think in this way, provided it is done with genuine kusala then that is wise contemplation at the thinking level. Before vipassana- nana arises (which deeply distinguishes nama from rupa) there must also have been much direct awareness of nama and rupa; and that is a higher level than thinking. Not just a million moments of direct awareness are needed, much more than that and not during just one life. The different techniques of vipassana that now abound are correct in that they see the need for direct awareness,they rightly explain that simply thinking about dhammas is superficial, and they try to setup the circumstances for repeated direct awareness to occur. However, awareness is not under our power, it is sankhara-dhamma. If we try to have it, it is so very easy to have a type of lobha (desire) and to remain unaware of rarefied papanca (proliferations) that obscure reality. The direct awareness of dhammas is possible but I think no one can tell us exactly how to have it. It is something that has to be seen each for themself. It develops gradually and is supported by intellectual understanding and in turn it supports better intellectual understanding. Sometimes the theory might seem too detailed. And everyone is different as to what helps them; it is not so that everyone has to study all the Abhidhamma before direct awareness comes. I know that the abhidhamma explanation of the way cittas arise with the different jatis and so on used to leave me cold. Last time I was in Bangkok khun sujin stressed on it though and I picked up some knowledge; it started, somehow, to make a difference. Then a month or so back Kom wrote something about this, I had heard it before but later that day it really struck home. Obviously this path can't be something we package up and dispense and viola a few years later get enlightened. The theory and the practice and the ups and downs and our past accumulations and so many other things are all interacting in good and bad ways. There is no self who can do anything but we can't stop listening and considering and studying the moment because this has been conditioned too. To return to my comments about the more than a million moments of sati are needed. Even when we experience dhammas directly with sati if there is only weak understanding the insight cannot be as clear as if understanding, which has accumulated also by listening and considering, is strong. If we make it our life goal to have awareness but we neglect panna then we might have many moments with sati but it still doesn't do much. I don't know if this is useful Robert_________ 2359 Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 9:29pm Subject: Re: The loss of a parent Dear Sukin and friends, Thank you for your wonderful note and wishes. Before the loss of my Mother, I didn't realize that it was that big. Finally, now, I realize that each of us has only one mother and one father. When losing either, no one can fulfill that spot in our life. It's no wonder that the Buddha put our parents in a very high position. I'm glad that I'm a Buddhist since I may take care of my parents to my best ability in Dhamma. Thanks to my parents, I have a chance to be a human being, and learn Dhamma. What a wonderful gift they give me: life, education, love, and an opportunity to study Buddhism. May my Mother be happy... May all mothers be happy... May all parents be happy... With Metta, Alex --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Alex, > Very sorry to hear about the loss of your mother. > I am certain that the best has been done that could have been done. > I do not know if I would have the kusala citta to do as you did towards > your ma and what you are now doing with regards to your father when > and if the time comes for me. > However reading about your experience has inspired a need to change > my own attitude towards my mother, with whom I have had a quite > unhealthy relationship. > May you keep well and hope too that your pa passes this perid of time > without any harm to his health. > > Sukin. 2360 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 9:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting (was Concept vs. Dhamma) Dear Robert, Bruce et al., Robert, your post reminds me of a theme you've returned to more than once, and rightly I think. I can't seem to hear these points often enough--often, I realize I've returned to them after the fact. Here's an excerpt from Robert's post #558: What can be done? I quoted the Kitagiri sutta recently: "And how bhikkhus does the attainment of profound knowledge come by means of a gradual training...?.... he hears Dhamma; having heard Dhamma he remembers it; he tests the meaning of the things he has borne in mind; while testing the meaning, the things are approved of; there being approval of the things, chanda is born; with chanda born he makes an effort; having made the effort, he weighs it up; having weighed it up..." Perhaps we think of this gradual training as a straight line? I think it is more accurate to think of it like a spiral. We hear, we test, we apply, we approve of the meaning.. we make an effort and then we listen again, test again, we apply again, we approve…and then back again for more listening, more testing, more application, again and again and again. Where is the practice and where is the theory? I don’t think we can draw a line between the two. They are closely connected, they build on each other. This seems to me just as appropriate each time I hear it, even though I seem to lose it each time I regard these issues from a different angle. I hope you'll keep refilling this prescription as needed. Anumodana, mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > dear Mike and Bruce, > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > --- Bruce wrote: > > > > > and these rupas we think we are experiencing > become > > > concepts which we, in > > > our delusion, take for reality ....yes. example: > on > > > the train, we see a > > > person, we think: "a person" then we remember > the > > > Dhamma, and think no: not > > > a person, just visual information impinging on > the > > > eye dvara, but by then > > > it's too late, isn't it? > > > > Once again, this is just what I've been trying to > get > > at... > > ___________- > There are many levels of understanding. When we > think in this > way, provided it is done with genuine kusala then > that is wise > contemplation at the thinking level. > Before vipassana- nana arises (which deeply > distinguishes nama > from rupa) there must also have been much direct > awareness of > nama and rupa; and that is a higher level than > thinking. Not > just a million moments of direct awareness are > needed, much more > than that and not during just one life. The > different techniques > of vipassana that now abound are correct in that > they see the > need for direct awareness,they rightly explain that > simply > thinking about dhammas is superficial, and they try > to setup the > circumstances for repeated direct awareness to > occur. > However, awareness is not under our power, it is > sankhara-dhamma. If we try to have it, it is so very > easy to > have a type of lobha (desire) and to remain unaware > of rarefied > papanca (proliferations) that obscure reality. The > direct > awareness of dhammas is possible but I think no one > can tell us > exactly how to have it. It is something that has to > be seen each > for themself. It develops gradually and is supported > by > intellectual understanding and in turn it supports > better > intellectual understanding. > Sometimes the theory might seem too detailed. And > everyone is > different as to what helps them; it is not so that > everyone has > to study all the Abhidhamma before direct awareness > comes. I > know that the abhidhamma explanation of the way > cittas arise > with the different jatis and so on used to leave me > cold. Last > time I was in Bangkok khun sujin stressed on it > though and I > picked up some knowledge; it started, somehow, to > make a > difference. Then a month or so back Kom wrote > something about > this, I had heard it before but later that day it > really struck > home. > Obviously this path can't be something we package > up and > dispense and viola a few years later get > enlightened. The theory > and the practice and the ups and downs and our past > accumulations and so many other things are all > interacting in > good and bad ways. There is no self who can do > anything but we > can't stop listening and considering and studying > the moment > because this has been conditioned too. > To return to my comments about the more than a > million moments > of sati are needed. Even when we experience dhammas > directly > with sati if there is only weak understanding the > insight cannot > be as clear as if understanding, which has > accumulated also by > listening and considering, is strong. If we make it > our life > goal to have awareness but we neglect panna then we > might have > many moments with sati but it still doesn't do much. > I don't know if this is useful > Robert_________ > > > 2361 From: m. nease Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 9:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The loss of a parent Dear Alex, --- wrote: > May my Mother be happy... May all mothers be > happy... May all > parents be happy... May they all have daughters as good as you. Anumodana, Ma'am, mike 2362 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] If a tree falls in a forest... Dear dhd, Questions on kamma are always hard. Being a confident(reckless?) type I will try to explain. You asked about sutta references. The whole of the Jataka, over 550 suttas about the Buddhas prior births, shows the workings of kamma over time. Also the Therigatha and Theragatha gives many examples of kamma and its results. _____________ --- wrote: > If a tree falls in a forest and crushes a meditating anagami's > legs, > did he deserve it? Putting the everyday connotations of > "deserve" > aside, by my reading of Abhidhammattha Sangaha the unpleasant > physical sensations arising from crushed legs are > unwholesome-resultant cittas. _________ Right, through the bodydoor (kayapassada) we experience either pleasant result or unpleasant. The example you gave is unpleasant result, akusala vipaka. It is the result of past bad kamma. However, kamma alone can never bring a result to fruition. It has to be supported by other conditions, these include other paccaya and even our surroundings. If he was in another place that vipaka may not have arisen at that time, maybe it would never have the chance to arise. The bodydoor itself is the result of kamma but because he was in a human realm it is the result of good kamma not bad. Therefore the kamma that is producing the bodydoor rupas is not the same one as that that conditioned the painful feeling. When we think of the story of kamma I think it is hard to see how it could be. The Abhidhamma clarifies because it takes all the self out. In actuality no Bhikkhu, the realities were only moments of mind and matter. Take another example: we are enjoying ourselves in a luxury hotel. Is that the result of good kamma? In an approximate way yes. But, as we know, life is only one moment. We might be eating the most delicious meal but feel an occasional ache somewhere. The moments of taste were kusala vipaka (wholesome result) but the moments of ache were akusala vipaka (unwholesome result). Or we are in the spacious swimming pool. We feel refreshed but they might be moments when the water we are swimming in is a little too cold - again this is akusala, the result of unpleasnant kamma done in the past. Kammapaccaya is not some outside force, it is carried on citta to citta but it cannot bring its result until there are sufficient other conditions to help it. This is all of course simply theory. How can we prove it? Indeed, it is impossible that we could know what kamma conditioned what result. That knowledge is the domain of Buddha's only. We can though, according to the texts, (see Visuddhimagga) see the general way conditions work and go beyond doubt in this matter at the stage of vipassana. This is because there is deep insight into the present moment and so there must be insight into vipaka (resultants) such as seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, and smelling. Khun Sujin gave a talk on this matter that Amara translated: http://www.dhammastudy.com/kammasakata.html Robert ________________ Inevitably, I find the Sangaha > and > Abhidhamma and Suttas very helpful, but sometimes it takes a > little > work. Without an external agency (a la God effecting divine > retribution) causing the tree to fall on the bhikku, how can > the > collision between the two be caused by unwholesome thoughts in > his > past? Can someone help me see this as something other than > superstition? Often, the Abhidhamma explanations are clear > upon > reflection, but in this case, I'd like to find some sutta > explanation > too. Does anyone have any suggestions? > > 2363 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > > fell. If the tree > > hadn't fallen quite so soon, so the bhikku was able > > to attain > > arahantship as he sat, then do we still say it is > > akusala-vipaka? > > I'm not sure, but I don't think vipaka can arise in an > arahant...? Corrections, please! The arahant's javana cittas (javana cittas normally accumulates kamma, anusaya, and vasana) can only be kiriya. Kiriya cittas are neither kusala nor akusala; the cetana cetasikas (kamma) arising with them do not condition vipaka cittas to arise in the future. In pathana explanation, the conascent cetana are not nana-kanika-kamma pacaya (not being accumulated as kamma) for future citta and cetasikas. This is not so if you not an arahant as your jhavana can be only either kusala or akusala. Vipaka dhammas (citta and cetasikas) are the conditioned dhammas of the prior kamma. Vipaka dhammas arise regardless of whether one attains an arahantship or not. The buddha himself had both kusala vipakas and akusala vipakas, even after the enligtenment. Maha-mogallana, despite his arahantship (and parami accumulations after 1 asangaya 100,000 kappa), and his supernatural powers, suffered a gruesome death due to his past kamma. > > Fortunately, most of the time trees don't fall on > > bhikkus. When they > > do happen to fall, the kamma ripens. If none happens > > to fall, then the > > kamma doesn't ripen. This seems odd, but nonetheless > > "safe." > > That's the way I feel about it... In a very technical explanation, the kamma ripens when the vipaka citta arises to cognize the aramana: the prior cetana becomes nana-kanika-kamma pacaya to the arising vipaka citta. Take being cold for example, two person, wearing the same amount of cloth, feel diffrently despite the same temperature. Why? Akusala vipaka cittas may arise in one, and kusala vipaka cittas may arise in the other. I came in contact with an active electrical wire once. I suffered very little, and somehow escaped unscath. Why? Coincidence? Luckiness? Vipakas? > "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is > an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured > about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone > who conjectured about it." Thank you very much, Mike, for this quote. kom 2364 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 10:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dear mike and dhd, thanks for highlighting that sutta mike and thanks to both of you for giving us an idea of the need to understand the sensebases - most important. See my brief comments. ________ --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dan, > > --- wrote: > > Bing! Lightbulb! Thanks for your comments. > > My pleasure--I hope someone can improve on them... > > > The sense bases are of course dependent on > > conditions. The wheel > > revolves to vedana, and a tree crushes the legs. > > WHICH kamma CAUSED > > the tree to fall? None, of course. But the kamma > > generates the > > existence of the bhikku. SOMEWHERE in "his" deep > > past there of > > course was some bad action, and we say that the > > kammic result of that > > bad action just happened to ripen when the tree > > fell. If the tree > > hadn't fallen quite so soon, so the bhikku was able > > to attain > > arahantship as he sat, then do we still say it is > > akusala-vipaka? >___________ The moments of vipaka are arising and ceasing so, so fast. when that monk attained arahatship is a different moment to being crushed. Another example: we are in a hospital critically injured. The moments of pain are akusala but they only last for such a short time. There are also other moments when we are seeing and if the hospital room is attractive (fat chance) then those moments are kusala-vipaka (good resultant). The doctor says kind words, then the moments of hearing are kusala-vipaka too. We might have so many moments of good resultant but not realise it because we are busy thinking of the sad story "I am injured". This story we think is not vipaka, (resultant) at all. It is kilesa, defilements, (dosa,aversion), it is kilesa-vatta, the round of defilement, different from the vipaka-vatta, the round of resultant. ________ > I'm not sure, but I don't think vipaka can arise in an > arahant...? Corrections, please! _________ Oh yes. Arahants, buddhas all have vipaka. The arahants have bought kilesa-vatta (the round of defilement) to a halt. They have also stopped kamma-vatta (the round of kamma). They will stop vipaka-vatta (the round of result) but not until parinibbana. After that there is no more bodysense, no eyesense, no earsense, no tongue, nose, no minddoor. No way, no where for any vipaka to arise. >____Robert __________ > > Fortunately, most of the time trees don't fall on > > bhikkus. When they > > do happen to fall, the kamma ripens. If none happens > > to fall, then the > > kamma doesn't ripen. This seems odd, but nonetheless > > "safe." > > That's the way I feel about it... > > > Since the > > amount of old kamma is unknown (but large), and the > > link between > > specific kamma and specific material phenomena (tree > > falls) is so > > obscure, we can always just say "ripening of kamma" > > and it can't be > > refuted. On the other hand, such reasoning is weak > > and tires quickly. > > I think so too. Maybe one reason why the Buddha said, > > > "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is > an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured > about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone > who conjectured about it." > > Acintita Sutta > Unconjecturable > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an4-77.html > > Nice to hear from you again...mike > 2365 From: amara chay Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 11:03pm Subject: Re: The loss of a parent > Some of you may be wondering why we haven't been > hearing from Alex recently as we are used to her being > one of our most regular contributors to the list. We > had certainly been wondering if there was any problem > when Mike forwarded me a note about the passing away > of her mother. > I was > at the hospital > with my > mother 24 hours/day most of the time when she was > there. She passed > away > peacefully last Friday, and was cremated the day > before yesterday. I'm > glad > that I was with her most of the time. > > When things settle down more, I'll review the > archive more and spend > more > time on the Net. Now, most of the time, I'm with my > father so that he > would > not feel lonely and depressed. Dear Alex, My heartfelt condolences and anumodana for all the wonderful things you have done for your parents and continue to do for your father, Amara 2366 From: Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 11:38pm Subject: Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Mike, Thanks for the apt citation! It made me laugh because it is so right on the mark. > "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is > an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured > about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone > who conjectured about it." > > Acintita Sutta > Unconjecturable > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an4-77.html 2367 From: Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 11:43pm Subject: Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Kom, Thanks for the clarification about arahants and kamma and vipaka. To summarize: arahants do not "generate" new kamma but still bear the fruits of old kamma. (But they bear the fruits with exquisite grace!) > Vipaka dhammas (citta and cetasikas) are the conditioned dhammas of the > prior kamma. Vipaka dhammas arise regardless of whether one attains an > arahantship or not. The buddha himself had both kusala vipakas and > akusala vipakas, even after the enligtenment. Maha-mogallana, despite > his arahantship (and parami accumulations after 1 asangaya 100,000 > kappa), and his supernatural powers, suffered a gruesome death due to > his past kamma. > > > > Fortunately, most of the time trees don't fall on > > > bhikkus. When they > > > do happen to fall, the kamma ripens. If none happens > > > to fall, then the > > > kamma doesn't ripen. This seems odd, but nonetheless > > > "safe." > > > > That's the way I feel about it... > In a very technical explanation, the kamma ripens when the vipaka citta > arises to cognize the aramana: the prior cetana becomes > nana-kanika-kamma pacaya to the arising vipaka citta. Take being cold > for example, two person, wearing the same amount of cloth, feel > diffrently despite the same temperature. Why? Akusala vipaka cittas > may arise in one, and kusala vipaka cittas may arise in the other. > > I came in contact with an active electrical wire once. I suffered very > little, and somehow escaped unscath. Why? Coincidence? Luckiness? > Vipakas? > > > "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is > > an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured > > about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone > > who conjectured about it." > Thank you very much, Mike, for this quote. > > kom > 2368 From: Date: Fri Dec 15, 2000 11:50pm Subject: Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Robert and Mike, Thanks for keeping the attention focused on the essentials, which I was tempting you away from! Sometimes trees do fall on bhikkus, and it hurts. Enlightenment does not mean freedom from unpleasant sensations, it means freedom from unwholesome response to sensations. > The moments of vipaka are arising and ceasing so, so fast. when > that monk attained arahatship is a different moment to being > crushed. Another example: we are in a hospital critically > injured. The moments of pain are akusala but they only last for > such a short time. There are also other moments when we are > seeing and if the hospital room is attractive (fat chance) then > those moments are kusala-vipaka (good resultant). The doctor > says kind words, then the moments of hearing are kusala-vipaka > too. We might have so many moments of good resultant but not > realise it because we are busy thinking of the sad story "I am > injured". This story we think is not vipaka, (resultant) at all. > It is kilesa, defilements, (dosa,aversion), it is kilesa-vatta, > the round of defilement, different from the vipaka-vatta, the > round of resultant. > ________ > > I'm not sure, but I don't think vipaka can arise in an > > arahant...? Corrections, please! > _________ > Oh yes. Arahants, buddhas all have vipaka. The arahants have > bought kilesa-vatta (the round of defilement) to a halt. They > have also stopped kamma-vatta (the round of kamma). They will > stop vipaka-vatta (the round of result) but not until > parinibbana. After that there is no more bodysense, no eyesense, > no earsense, no tongue, nose, no minddoor. No way, no where for > any vipaka to arise. > >____Robert > > > > > > > > __________ > > > Fortunately, most of the time trees don't fall on > > > bhikkus. When they > > > do happen to fall, the kamma ripens. If none happens > > > to fall, then the > > > kamma doesn't ripen. This seems odd, but nonetheless > > > "safe." > > > > That's the way I feel about it... > > > > > Since the > > > amount of old kamma is unknown (but large), and the > > > link between > > > specific kamma and specific material phenomena (tree > > > falls) is so > > > obscure, we can always just say "ripening of kamma" > > > and it can't be > > > refuted. On the other hand, such reasoning is weak > > > and tires quickly. > > > > I think so too. Maybe one reason why the Buddha said, > > > > > > "The [precise working out of the] results of kamma is > > an unconjecturable that is not to be conjectured > > about, that would bring madness & vexation to anyone > > who conjectured about it." > > > > Acintita Sutta > > Unconjecturable > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an4-77.html > > > > Nice to hear from you again...mike > > > > > > -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor > > > > > > > > 2369 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 0:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > The > bodydoor > itself is the result of kamma but because he was in > a human > realm it is the result of good kamma not bad. Thanks for this correction! My attempted explanation was completely incorrect. > Therefore the > kamma that is producing the bodydoor rupas is not > the same one > as that that conditioned the painful feeling. > When we think of the story of kamma I think it is > hard to see > how it could be. The Abhidhamma clarifies because it > takes all > the self out. This was what I was aiming at, but wrongly rather than rightly--must be more careful. Thanks again...mn 2370 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 0:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Kom, --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Mike, > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > I'm not sure, but I don't think vipaka can arise > > in an > > arahant...? Corrections, please! > Vipaka dhammas (citta and cetasikas) are the > conditioned dhammas of the > prior kamma. Vipaka dhammas arise regardless of > whether one attains an > arahantship or not. The buddha himself had both > kusala vipakas and > akusala vipakas, even after the enligtenment. > Maha-mogallana, despite > his arahantship (and parami accumulations after 1 > asangaya 100,000 > kappa), and his supernatural powers, suffered a > gruesome death due to > his past kamma. Thanks very much for this correction. A lot to learn this morning--by making mistakes in the right company, as usual...! mike 2371 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 0:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > This story we think is not vipaka, > (resultant) at all. > It is kilesa, defilements, (dosa,aversion), it is > kilesa-vatta, > the round of defilement, different from the > vipaka-vatta, the > round of resultant. Excellent and highly pertinent--thanks... ________ > > I'm not sure, but I don't think vipaka can arise > in an > > arahant...? Corrections, please! > _________ > Oh yes. Arahants, buddhas all have vipaka. The > arahants have > bought kilesa-vatta (the round of defilement) to a > halt. They > have also stopped kamma-vatta (the round of kamma). > They will > stop vipaka-vatta (the round of result) but not > until > parinibbana. After that there is no more bodysense, > no eyesense, > no earsense, no tongue, nose, no minddoor. No way, > no where for > any vipaka to arise. ...also for this addition to Kom's excellent correction. mike 2372 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 0:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] If a tree falls in a forest... Dear Mike, Thanks for taking my small correction so graciously. Your post was still most helpful though as it reminded us of how we only get the results of kamma because we have a body. We love our body so much but if no body, no eyes, no ears, no tongue....no dukkha. Robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > The > > bodydoor > > itself is the result of kamma but because he was in > > a human > > realm it is the result of good kamma not bad. > > Thanks for this correction! My attempted explanation > was completely incorrect. > > > Therefore the > > kamma that is producing the bodydoor rupas is not > > the same one > > as that that conditioned the painful feeling. > > When we think of the story of kamma I think it is > > hard to see > > how it could be. The Abhidhamma clarifies because it > > takes all > > the self out. > > This was what I was aiming at, but wrongly rather than > rightly--must be more careful. > > Thanks again...mn > > 2373 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 3:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: If a tree falls in a forest... Well said!!! --- wrote: > Enlightenment does not mean freedom from > unpleasant sensations, > it means freedom from unwholesome response to > sensations. 2374 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 4:26am Subject: Questions? Hello all, In regards to the comments made the last couple of days, I began to ponder the following questions: When does the delusion end, and true insight begin? If there is no self, and in our activities there is nothing directing us. Then our initial stages into the study of the lord buddha, dhamma, etc, is filled with delusion, is it not? With the use of a description of citta, cetasika, and rupa, how would the initial stages of insight be described as they arise and shine light, where there was once the darkness of delusion? One other thing, I am struggling to find the usefulness of certain theory in my study, for instance, about the arising and falling away of numerous citta as each moment is born or about nibbaana. It seems that some discussion refers to things that cannot possibly be experienced. What is the intent of such theory. As a new entrant into such discussions, in this life time, would it be best to study in relation to the experiences of every day life? Why would I want to ponder that which seems unexperiable, for instance? Just wondering? Regards, Jody. 2375 From: Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 6:46am Subject: Re: Questions? Dear Jody, You wrote: > One other thing, I am struggling to find the usefulness > of certain theory in my study, for instance, about the arising > and falling away of numerous citta as each moment is born > or about nibbaana. It seems that some discussion refers to > things that cannot possibly be experienced. What is the intent > of such theory. As a new entrant into such discussions, in > this life time, would it be best to study in relation to the experiences > of every day life? Why would I want to ponder that which seems > unexperiable, for instance? There really is not much point in pondering the unexperiable, and the suttas frequently remind us of that. As the meditation practice matures, many things that before SEEMED unexperiable begin to look more real. Then, some of the ponderous inexperiables are in fact experienced, and the dhamma takes on a whole new life in the meditator. To a non-meditator, the Dhamma (Abhidhamma in particular) may have the appearance of being the product of some bright but philosophically ignorant person who likes to ponder things without the benefit of a strong history and culture of logical, systematic, and scientific thought. As practice advances, though, the silly stories in the suttas and the dry bones in Abhidhamma come to life, as the yogi begins to see how well the ancient masters descriptions of reality match what the yogi has EXPERIENCED as reality. Of course, there are some things in the descriptions that remain beyond our own experience; but seeing how utterly reliably the previously mysterious words take on real meaning as the practice matures, the yogi realizes that the phenomena that she or he has not yet experienced or understood experientially but are nonetheless described in Tipitika are indeed experiable and will indeed be understoood experientially as the practice matures. Some things in Tipitaka may appear on the surface to be just the silly ponderings of someone who lived long ago. But the faithful yogi realizes that the apparent silliness is really just a lack of understanding of the meaning behind the words and inquires further into what the words really do mean. Then, an intellectual understanding is developed. That intellectual understanding is reflected in "reviewing" the practice, and then it is reflected on "in" the practice, and the understanding becomes deeper and deeper. At some point it is realized experientially, just like any number of other things in the past that appeared mysterious at first. 2376 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 6:58am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Questions? Hello, Jody, --- "JODY PAUL,PIRRET" wrote: > Hello all, > > In regards to the comments made the last couple of > days, I began to ponder the following questions: > > When does the delusion end, and true insight begin? I've been thinking along these lines (among others) myself. My tentative conclusion, so far, is that insight begins very coarse (conceptual) and ends very fine (sammasati of the eightfold path--direct insight into nama and rupa). > If there is no self, and in our activities there is > nothing > directing us. If there is no us, what could direct us? Just the arising and subsiding of nama and rupa. > Then our initial stages into the study > of the > lord buddha, dhamma, etc, is filled with delusion, > is it > not? I think it has to be. > With the use of a description of citta, > cetasika, > and rupa, how would the initial stages of insight be > described as they arise and shine light, where there > was once the darkness of delusion? > I THINK with something like kusala vs. akusala vitakka...? > One other thing, I am struggling to find the > usefulness > of certain theory in my study, for instance, about > the arising > and falling away of numerous citta as each moment is > born > or about nibbaana. I take the study of citta (and cetasika and the other namas and rupas) to be necessary for the accumulation of sufficient knowledge to know the characteristics of these dhammas when they arise, and especially to not mistake akusala for kusala dhammas. > It seems that some discussion > refers to > things that cannot possibly be experienced. I accept (as a working hypothesis) that these CAN be experienced, but not by 'us'--only by sati and paññá. > What is > the intent > of such theory. Again, to accumulate sufficient knowledge (paññá?) to distinguish the various characteristics of these dhammas. > As a new entrant into such > discussions, in > this life time, would it be best to study in > relation to the experiences > of every day life? Yes! But what are those experiences--the stories our minds create, or the minute impressions at the moments of contact between the sense bases and their objects? > Why would I want to ponder that > which seems > unexperiable, for instance? To condition the arising of understanding, I think. > Just wondering? So am I. These are just a bunch of my opinions, hope you don't mind my sharing them. You'll get much better answers than these! mike 2377 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 9:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person (continued) kusala (wholesomeness) doesn't it: we are saying in effect that all religion has the right to grow as it wishes. This is a tolerant Yes, 'cheats' again... attitude. The akusala side (vancaka) is not being willing to look at any bad points or wrong views. The other extreme is suppressing any dissident views - and we saw this happen in China and Russia and Cambodia. This seems to be benevolence; protecting the people from their opium. I use these obvious examples but we are sometimes at fault too. We look down on the members of other religions or those we think have wrong view within Buddhism: this is conceit, or refined dosa, maybe we criticize them but without any compassion. ...another one to watch out for... On the other hand maybe we are very tolerant in our attitude to what others say or think, but this can simply mean that we do not really distinguish rightview from wrong - we are then vulnerable to the siren calls of those who misapprehend. Those who study Abhidhamma are not immune. For some it is so removed from daily life that they see it as an academic subject; it has minimal effect on removing wrong view, Even if we believe in not-self this can be hiding an idea of self (who believes). Definitely and usually. We can see this when we consider anatta- sometimes the contemplation seems to cut to the bone- and other times it is pedestrian, just going through the motions. True! But it doesn't hurt, does it! Always makes me smile... It is good to know these things. This is wisdom too. Panna at the level of considering should not be disdained. In the 'Majjhima nikaya' I (no. 43, Mahavedallasutta) that Kotthita asked Sariputta: "'But what is intuitive wisdom for, your reverence?' 'Your reverence, intuitive wisdom is for super-knowledge, for apprehending, for getting rid of.' 'But how many conditions are there, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence?' 'There are two conditions, your reverence, for bringing right understanding into existence: the utterance of another (person) and wise attention. Your reverence, there are the two conditions for bringing wise attention into existence.'" This is excellent! And would be good medicine for those who believe it's all 'letting go'. I'd like to see THAT idea supported by a sutta...This 'letting go of everything' was a big idea of mine, too, when I was a zen student. My first inkling that this was one-sided and deluded was the four right efforts (I never seem to be able to cite the location of these). The zen idea that nibbana is the 'mind ground' that merely needs to be uncovered is, I think, unsupportable in buddhadhamma--which is why I'm no longer a zen student. The other person is the Buddha or his disciples, by listening carefully to the right person, by considering and applying what we have heard are the conditions for right understanding built up. Yes, I agree. It is a slow process but I can't see a faster way. I'm still not completely convinced of the correctness of your reticence towards formal meditation--I do understand your reservations, and the real dangers involved--but I think this part of our conversation will have to continue another time, to which I look forward as always.. Have a great weekend! mike 2378 From: Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 10:56am Subject: Re: If a tree falls in a forest...(Robert) Dear Robert, Thanks for your insightful words on kamma and vipaka and rupa. As usual, you are right on target. I do have a few comments on some your contentions, though. > When we think of the story of kamma I think it is hard to see > how it could be. The Abhidhamma clarifies because it takes all > the self out. In actuality no Bhikkhu, the realities were only > moments of mind and matter. Whether there is a bhikku or a confluence of five aggregates sitting in the forest, the collision between the rupa of the tree and the rupa of the confluence naturally gives rise to akusala-vipaka. The collision was caused by the wind that knocked the tree over and the unfortunate choice of seat that the bhikku made next to the tree instead of a few feet away in another direction. The COLLISION was not caused by the kamma, but the bhikku was. The akusala-vipaka arose from the collision between the tree and the bhikku. The kamma just happened to ripen then. The Abhidhamma clarifies it because it returns the focus of the discussion to the experience of the bhikku and away from the natural, random causes of mundane physical phenomena that "we" study so much in our everyday lives. 2379 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 11:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: If a tree falls in a forest...(Robert) Dear dhd, Thank you. This is a perplexing topic that I've often thought about. As mike's sutta showed we can't know all on kamma. There was once a crow flying threw the air when suddenly a flame shot out and engulfed him. And the buddha said this was the result of a past kamma, and discoursed on how one can't esacape the results of kamma by going to a forest, living in a cave, even being in the air. Another time some monks were stuck in a cave for 3 or 4 days when a boulder rolled in front of the entrance. this was the result of them, in a prior life having kept some animals in captivity (if I remember correctly). I guess you must be right that the collision isn't caused by kamma as kamma is something within. When my daughter got knocked off her bike- she flew meters through the air and was knocked out, whilke the car actually flipped over, her injuries were slight. The akusala vipaka was only a few moments of painful feeling. If there were strong kammic conditions for more painful feeling at that time perhaps she would have been badly injured? Really this is a hard subject. The more I learn about kamma, though, the more relaxed I always feel. Flying is so enjoyable for me now, whereas before I was scared. Amara have you heard what Khun sujin says about such things? Robert --- wrote: > Dear Robert, > . > > Whether there is a bhikku or a confluence of five aggregates > sitting > in the forest, the collision between the rupa of the tree and > the rupa > of the confluence naturally gives rise to akusala-vipaka. The > collision was caused by the wind that knocked the tree over > and the > unfortunate choice of seat that the bhikku made next to the > tree > instead of a few feet away in another direction. The COLLISION > was not > caused by the kamma, but the bhikku was. The akusala-vipaka > arose from > the collision between the tree and the bhikku. The kamma just > happened > to ripen then. > > The Abhidhamma clarifies it because it returns the focus of > the > discussion to the experience of the bhikku and away from the > natural, > random causes of mundane physical phenomena that "we" study so > much in > our everyday lives. > > > 2380 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 11:43am Subject: Re: Questions? > When does the delusion end, and true insight begin? Dear Jody, This is a crucial question, for true knowledge to grow and accumulate, it must have a beginning, since panna is not one of the universal cetasikas that arise with all citta like sanna or passa, nor does it arise with all kusala or sobhana citta like sati (awareness that accompanies all citta involved with dana, sila and bhavana) in its weaker, automatic functions. This is where intellectual studies play the most vital role: if you had not learnt about the dhamma or the truth about things, would you have known about the nama (the element tht can know or experience things) and rupa (the element that does not experience anything whatever: space, invisible gasses and light spectrums, a dead person, etc.)? That the nama comprises the citta (the principal factor of experience) and cetasika (memory, like, dislike, study, ), for example? That all the kilesa accumulated through billions of milleniums could be eradicated by the accumulation of knowledge, through studies of realities? That we have always lived in ignorance and will continue to do so if we did not study and accumulate knowlege towards realization of the truth one day? > If there is no self, and in our activities there is nothing > directing us. Then our initial stages into the study of the > lord buddha, dhamma, etc, is filled with delusion, is it > not? With the use of a description of citta, cetasika, > and rupa, how would the initial stages of insight be > described as they arise and shine light, where there > was once the darkness of delusion? Because there is no I it does not mean that there is nothing directing us, because all our accumulations are there throughout the centuries to cause us to cling to the delusion of the self and all our natures and habits, as well as condition every tiny details about this lifetime of ours from the parents and places we were born in to the shape of our faces and feet. It also conditioned our interest in the dhamma and the opportunities to find it. Had we been born a plankton in the Antarctic Ocean we would never have come across any such opportunity. > One other thing, I am struggling to find the usefulness > of certain theory in my study, for instance, about the arising > and falling away of numerous citta as each moment is born > or about nibbaana. It seems that some discussion refers to > things that cannot possibly be experienced. What is the intent > of such theory. As a new entrant into such discussions, in > this life time, would it be best to study in relation to the experiences > of every day life? Why would I want to ponder that which seems > unexperiable, for instance? The Buddha almost decided against teaching it, at first, which shows how complicated, intricate and extremely difficult it is to truly experience. But he did and millions were able to practice what he taught and were able to gain insight and ultimately even complete extinction of the kilesa, therefore it is not just a theory to ponder and not practice (study and experience) - in fact without the practical application, attainment is impossible. To say it is difficult is in fact to praise the Buddha's wisdom, as well as his persistence in teaching it for 45 years! And none could do the study for you, each must find out for himself, if it were possible otherwise or if there were an easier way, he would have manifested it. So since it is so impossibly long and hard, we must begin the journey as fast as we can and why not now as we read this in front of the screen, there are myriad of realities to be studied: sight, color, touch, sounds; all different realities able to add to your knowledge of the characteristics of things as they really are, all around you at each instant. When you get right down to the immediate study, it is not all that complicated, is it? All you need is right understanding which includes the truth that study could arise at any moment when there are conditions for it to. Therefore the theoretical knowledge would form the most solid basis for the practical study to begin. Thank you for the excellent questions, I hope the answer does it some justice, Anumodana in your interest, Amara 2381 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 3:29pm Subject: Cambodia - a personal account Hello again, everyone. As you will have heard, the Cambodia trip was a great experience for those of us who were fortunate enough to be able to join it. I was particularly fortunate to be able to meet for the first time fellow list-members Betty and Sukin (Bangkok) and Jack, Oi, Chai, O and Jaran (California). Thanks to you all, and to Amara and Sarah, for helping to make it such a valuable experience. There was a lot of discussion during the trip. What follow are some random points (as understood by me)that I found particularly useful or interesting. The need for study vs. knowing one’s limits We need to study. We study so that we will be able to develop a clearer understanding of the reality of the present moment. But only certain aspects of what we study can be related to the reality appearing at the present moment. This is because of our limited accumulated understanding. The rest is of value as theoretical knowledge only. So study by all means, but not with the idea that the more we study the more conditions there must necessarily be for direct understanding of realities to arise subsequently. We should know our own limits. Importance of listening vs. reading Listening to/discussion with someone who is able to see our wrong view (ie. who knows our limits) is very valuable and can help us in ways that self study may never be able to. Importance of repeated listening/studying We’ve heard it before, but we need to hear it again. And again and again. This was so in the Buddha’s time, and it is even more so today. The same ‘it’, but heard (and reflected on) with a different level of understanding. Meaning of patipada (pa.tipadaa) The literal meaning of this term is to reach to or touch on an object one at a time. Thus sati or panna reaches to or experiences a particular reality. Patipada does not carry the connotation of a technique of practice. Literal translation in Thai: tyng ch’po. (Comments by our Pali heads would be welcome) Pariyatti vs. patipada - Thinking about dhamma and about how the world really is, as opposed to how we perceive it, will only be pariyatti if it is kusala. There is no rule which says that such thinking *must* be kusala. So there should not be the idea that this is a form of thinking to be developed. - The considering of a reality, for example, the hardness appearing now, would be pariyatti rather than patipada (assuming it is indeed kusala). - Without a clear understanding at an intellectual level of the characteristic of a moment of awareness, it is very difficult to know the moments of pariyatti from the moments of patipada. Thinking in concepts vs. wrong view of self Just because we see the world in terms of objects and concepts does not mean that at such moments there is wrong view of self. Wrong view of self occurs when we take something for self. This is different from seeing the world in terms of concepts. Visible object as just that which appears through the eye-door - The statement above says all there is to be said on the subject. Any attempt to embellish, eg as to whether v-o is simply colour or is with or without shape, depth etc is bound to cloud the issue. - The fact that things still appear as conceptualised objects does not mean that there is or can be no awareness of seeing or visible object. Bhavanga citta Bhavanga cittas have an object from the last moments of the previous life, ie that is not of this world. There are bhavanga cittas arising between all our sense-door and mind-door processes. Understanding this, can there be some level of awareness of there having been moments of consciousness during which no object of this world was experienced? Seeing that there are such moments in our life could help us to understand how conditioned our perception of this world is. If anyone would like to further discuss, please feel free to follow up. To others who were on the trip: if you have any points to share, do send a post Jonothan PS A warm welcome to all the newbies who have joined since my last post. PPS We also met many Thai friends who are interested in joining the list and whose names we hope to see popping up here in the near future. 2382 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 4:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Questions? Dear jody, dhd, mike and amara have already given you excellent answers but I will add something. See my comments after yours. --- "JODY PAUL,PIRRET" wrote: > Hello all, > > In regards to the comments made the last couple of > days, I began to ponder the following questions: > > When does the delusion end, and true insight begin? It began aeons ago, this is the continuation of an ancient path we have trod before, or so I believe. > If there is no self, and in our activities there is nothing > directing us. Then our initial stages into the study of the > lord buddha, dhamma, etc, is filled with delusion, is it > not? With the use of a description of citta, cetasika, > and rupa, how would the initial stages of insight be > described as they arise and shine light, where there > was once the darkness of delusion? My comments over the last few days were to show that the deepest insight, where nama is actaully distinguished from rupa, only comes during vipassana-nana. I wanted to make it plain that vipassana-nana is a brief process that could not be controlled and is not as easy to have as some think. In the beginning, and that is now, we are filled with delusion and so everything we do stinks of self. We can't just sit and concentrate and have insight, there must be the right conditions. However, if those conditions are there you could have vipassana-nana even while reading this, it can happen. We have to understand that this is a long path. Sometimes prodigies come along who get it fast, even in these days, but never without hearing sufficient true dhamma to condition wise attention and samma-ditthi, right view. I happen to be a slowbe but that is Ok, it is conditioned, not "me" in fact. We might envy the quick ones but they had accumulated understanding for aeons, they did the work we are now doing long ago. The Dhamma needs effort. However, not effort of the type that thinks "I will get results quickly I will attain soon, I will work hard to get proof right now". That sort of effort is likely to lead us down paths that supply calm and concentration and pleasant feelings- there are many spiritual ways that can do all these things. True vipassana leads to anatta, to nothingness. I think it is not something to crave for. Ones like sariputta and mogallana heard only a sentence of dhamma and became sotapanna immediately. The hearing of dhamma conditions yoniso manisikara, wise attention, which leads to the eightfold path. Before they attained they had developed the parami, (perfections) for more than 100,000aeons. Thus they were once like us. They must have listened and pondered and even being discouraged at times. Nevertheless they didn't lose heart, they kept on developing. When I hear Dhamma I feel this is a rare chance and think that I am following the same path as all the arahants had to follow. > > One other thing, I am struggling to find the usefulness > of certain theory in my study, for instance, about the arising > and falling away of numerous citta as each moment is born > or about nibbaana. Before vipassana nana there is direct insight into namas and rupas but the insight is not clear enough to distinguish them. It is useful to know about the extreme rapidity because then we will see that we can't simply concentrate on the present moment and 'catch' realities, it is more profound than we might have thought. Now we begin to understand and it is not necessarily only theoretical understanding. But the moments of awareness are brief, we may wonder whether there was any understanding or not. Such a gradual path but somehow one realises that our perspective on life is changing. This is the clearing away of wrongview, it happens at many different levels. We find when we read a passage in the texts we see it differently than a few years ago. Perhaps our grip on life has relaxed a little. We are insulted and it is not taken to heart as much as before. Many little things. Then again there may be a few, or many, dark nights (of the soul) , but these help us to see where we are clinging and going wrong, it is part of it all. We appreciate that too. It seems that some discussion refers to > things that cannot possibly be experienced. What is the intent > of such theory. As a new entrant into such discussions, in > this life time, would it be best to study in relation to the > experiences > of every day life? Why would I want to ponder that which seems > unexperiable, for instance? > Yes, I rarely think of nibbana, what for? There are many dhammas arising now, we should begin to understand them, why think much of something in the future. Robert 2383 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 5:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Mike, glad you got something out of this. --- "m. nease" wrote: > (continued) > > ROBERT:We can see this when we consider anatta- sometimes the > contemplation seems to cut to the bone- and other > times it is > pedestrian, just going through the motions. > > MIKE:True! But it doesn't hurt, does it! Always makes me > smile... ______________ Actually this is a big point. The contemplation of anatta always comes with pleasant feling or neutral feeling, if it is true contemplation. Sometimes we might feel scared thinking there is no self, but this shows that at those moments there is not proper contemplation. Good to know- then we can adjust and learn how to think about it correctly. Even at the intellectual level this can make a big impact on our life; really our problems stem from the idea of self. >_______ > It is good to know these things. This is wisdom too. > Panna at > the level of considering should not be disdained. > In the 'Majjhima nikaya' I (no. 43, Mahavedallasutta) > that > Kotthita asked Sariputta: > "'But what is intuitive wisdom for, your reverence?' > 'Your reverence, intuitive wisdom is for > super-knowledge, for > apprehending, for getting rid of.' > 'But how many conditions are there, your reverence, > for bringing > right understanding into existence?' > 'There are two conditions, your reverence, for > bringing right > understanding into existence: the utterance of another > (person) > and wise attention. Your reverence, there are the two > conditions > for bringing wise attention into existence.'" > _________ Just a correction, I should have written in the last line "for bringing RIGHT UNDERSTANDING into existence" 2384 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 9:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Cambodia - a personal account Welcome Back, Jonothan, It's interesting how many of your points are very pertinent to a discussion in progress regarding concepts vs. dhamma, particularly: --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > But only certain aspects of what we > study can be related to the reality appearing at the > present moment. This is because of our limited > accumulated understanding. The rest is of value as > theoretical knowledge only. So study by all means, > but not with the idea that the more we study the > more > conditions there must necessarily be for direct > understanding of realities to arise subsequently. Good point--no way of knowing how much study or hearing will be needed or how far away is the goal. Better make hay while the sun shines, though... > Importance of listening vs. reading > Listening to/discussion with someone who is able to > see our wrong view (ie. who knows our limits) is > very > valuable and can help us in ways that self study may > never be able to. I've thought about this too--listening to recordings is more like reading. It's surely the result of good past kamma to be where you can hear Buddhadhamma from someone who can tell if you're 'getting' it or not. This list acts in that way, to some extent, don't you think? > Importance of repeated listening/studying > We’ve heard it before, but we need to hear it again. > And again and again. This was so in the Buddha’s > time, and it is even more so today. The same ‘it’, > but heard (and reflected on) with a different level > of > understanding. Just this point came up recently, too. > Meaning of patipada (pa.tipadaa) > The literal meaning of this term is to reach to or > touch on an object one at a time. Thus sati or > panna > reaches to or experiences a particular reality. > Patipada does not carry the connotation of a > technique > of practice. Glad you mentioned this. Otherwise we might have a proliferation of patipada technical schools. Seriously, isn't this pertinent (and easy to forget) of every aspect of bhavana? That is, that it's always citta and cetasika doing the work, conditioned by yoniso manasikara and having heard the dhamma (thanks, Robert)? > Pariyatti vs. patipada > - Thinking about dhamma and about how the world > really is, as opposed to how we perceive it, will > only > be pariyatti if it is kusala. There is no rule > which > says that such thinking *must* be kusala. So there > should not be the idea that this is a form of > thinking > to be developed. > - The considering of a reality, for example, the > hardness appearing now, would be pariyatti rather > than > patipada (assuming it is indeed kusala). > - Without a clear understanding at an intellectual > level of the characteristic of a moment of > awareness, > it is very difficult to know the moments of > pariyatti > from the moments of patipada. This again is perfectly pertinent to our discussion--I'm glad you mentioned it by name, pariyatti, as this hadn't come up. The distinction (and the failure to distinguish) between these two also adds a dimension to the discussion. Though still most important, maybe, is keeping in mind anatta in regard to both? > Thinking in concepts vs. wrong view of self > Just because we see the world in terms of objects > and > concepts does not mean that at such moments there is > wrong view of self. Wrong view of self occurs when > we > take something for self. This is different from > seeing the world in terms of concepts. Thanks, very useful. So the danger isn't in conceptual thinking, but in thinking accompanied by tanha, ditthi and/or mana? Or any other akusala, I suppose... > Visible object as just that which appears through > the > eye-door > - The statement above says all there is to be said > on > the subject. Any attempt to embellish, eg as to > whether v-o is simply colour or is with or without > shape, depth etc is bound to cloud the issue. OK! > - The fact that things still appear as > conceptualised > objects does not mean that there is or can be no > awareness of seeing or visible object. Simultaneously? So is this pariyatti? Awareness with concept? Of concept? > Bhavanga citta > Bhavanga cittas have an object from the last moments > of the previous life, ie that is not of this world. > There are bhavanga cittas arising between all our > sense-door and mind-door processes. Understanding > this, can there be some level of awareness of there > having been moments of consciousness during which no > object of this world was experienced? It always seems that 'I'm experiencing' the past--however recent. > Seeing that > there are such moments in our life could help us to > understand how conditioned our perception of this > world is. Definitely! Thanks for bringing it all back home...mike 2385 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 10:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > The contemplation of > anatta always > comes with pleasant feling or neutral feeling, if it > is true > contemplation. Sometimes we might feel scared > thinking there is > no self, but this shows that at those moments there > is not > proper contemplation. Good to know- then we can > adjust and learn > how to think about it correctly. Even at the > intellectual level > this can make a big impact on our life; really our > problems stem > from the idea of self. This is really interesting, I didn't know--so it's no coincidence. A nice touch-stone...is there a technical-abhidhamma explanation or description of this? That is, something about a citta with anatta as its object always being accompanied by uppekha or somanassa, or something like that? > >_______ > > It is good to know these things. This is wisdom > too. > > Panna at > > the level of considering should not be disdained. > > In the 'Majjhima nikaya' I (no. 43, > Mahavedallasutta) > > that > > Kotthita asked Sariputta: > > "'But what is intuitive wisdom for, your > reverence?' > > 'Your reverence, intuitive wisdom is for > > super-knowledge, for > > apprehending, for getting rid of.' > > 'But how many conditions are there, your > reverence, > > for bringing > > right understanding into existence?' > > 'There are two conditions, your reverence, for > > bringing right > > understanding into existence: the utterance of > another > > (person) > > and wise attention. Your reverence, there are the > two > > conditions > > for bringing wise attention into existence.'" > > _________ > Just a correction, I should have written in the last > line "for > bringing RIGHT UNDERSTANDING into existence" Got that--again, what a great citation. This is a simple answer to a lot of questions--though from an incredibly complex sutta! Thanks again...mike 2386 From: amara chay Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 10:44pm Subject: Nina VG's Abhidhamma in Daily Life Dear all, We have just finished uploading the 1st chapter of Nina VG's 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' in the intermediate section of . Other chapters will be coming soon, enjoy! Pinna is also preparing more of her letters for us, in the meantime the translation of 'Paccaya' has reached p.56 out of 72pp. Anyone interested in the latter work in progress could please contact me off list, Amara 2387 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 10:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > The contemplation of > > anatta always > > comes with pleasant feling or neutral feeling, if it > > is true > > contemplation. Sometimes we might feel scared > > thinking there is > > no self, but this shows that at those moments there > > is not > > proper contemplation. Good to know- then we can > > adjust and learn > > how to think about it correctly. Even at the > > intellectual level > > this can make a big impact on our life; really our > > problems stem > > from the idea of self. > > This is really interesting, I didn't know--so it's no > coincidence. A nice touch-stone...is there a > technical-abhidhamma explanation or description of > this? That is, something about a citta with anatta as > its object always being accompanied by uppekha or > somanassa, or something like that? > > >_______ Yes, all kusala cittas even at the level of thinking can only come with pleasant or unpleasant feeling. And anatta -sanna, even at the thinking level, also always arises with panna (nana-sampayuttam). One caution though. Lobha(desire) also comes with pleasant feeling so it is not an entirely reliable guide, but at least we know if the feeling is unpleasant that at those moments no kusala. When we know more details like this it helps us to compare when the moments are actually occuring and it becomes clearer what is what. (and what is not what) Robert > > 2388 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 10:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nina VG's Abhidhamma in Daily Life Dear Amara, Couldn't have come at a better time. I just sent off my last spare copy of Abhid. in daily life this week. looking forwrad to yuor translation of paccaya when you finish. Robert --- amara chay wrote: > > Dear all, > > We have just finished uploading the 1st chapter of Nina VG's > 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' in the intermediate section of > . Other chapters will be coming > soon, > enjoy! Pinna is also preparing more of her letters for us, in > the > meantime the translation of 'Paccaya' has reached p.56 out of > 72pp. > Anyone interested in the latter work in progress could please > contact > me off list, > > Amara > 2389 From: m. nease Date: Sat Dec 16, 2000 11:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nina VG's Abhidhamma in Daily Life Dear Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > We have just finished uploading the 1st chapter of > Nina VG's > 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life' in the intermediate > section of > . Other chapters will > be coming soon, > enjoy! This is great news. I've been reading this book nearly every day for well over a month and am only to page 90. I can't recommend it highly enough. I'm presently at the chapter on ahetuka cittas. I thought this would be incredibly abstract and difficult to comprehend--not so! It is amazingly intuitive. It's as if I've always known about these and have just been waiting to have them named and explained. > Pinna is also preparing more of her letters > for us, in the > meantime the translation of 'Paccaya' has reached > p.56 out of 72pp. Yes, please do send along the next installment of 'Paccaya'--I have 1-19 (top of page 40) already. Though I don't have 'Word' on my machine, I do have 'Word Viewer', which doesn't allow editing. If you wouldn't mind sending the entire work again, I'll just replace the file I have. Anumodana, Ma'am, mike 2390 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 0:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Robert, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Yes, all kusala cittas even at the level of > thinking can only > come with pleasant or unpleasant feeling. Did you mean pleasant or neutral feeling? > And anatta > -sanna, > even at the thinking level, also always arises with > panna > (nana-sampayuttam). --which is kusala ergo accompanied by pleasant or neutral feeling? > One caution though. > Lobha(desire) also comes > with pleasant feeling so it is not an entirely > reliable guide, > but at least we know if the feeling is unpleasant > that at those > moments no kusala. Right. > When we know more details like > this it helps > us to compare when the moments are actually occuring > and it > becomes clearer what is what. (and what is not what) Right again. By the way, I think NVG mentioned in AIDL that pleasant feeling with kusala 'feels' different from pleasant feeling with lobha. I think she's right, and found the quote from the Visuddhimagga (XIV, 162) to be very descriptive, at least of the experience of coarse lobha: "...lobha has the characteristic of grasping an object, like birdlime (lit. "monkey lime"). [I love that part, clinging like monkey poop to a rock, say--and the next:] Its function is sticking, like meat put in a hot pan. It is manifested as not giving up, like the dye of lampblack. Its proximate cause is seeing enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. Swelling with the current of craving, it should be regarded as taking (beings) with it to states of loss, as a swift-flowing river does to the great ocean." The feeling attending reflections on anatta is very different from this, isn't it? Quite opposite, really, unclinging and unsticking, seeing enjoyment in things leading out of bondage, quite liberating ('lovely in the beginning?) A valuable reflection, I think. (Pariyatti?) mike 2391 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 1:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Hi Mike, I am confused with this post. It appears to have been written by multiple people, but looking back at the threads in the conversation, there was no one else who posted the text. However, the text looks familiar, so it might have been a combination of different posts in the different threads (including the MO thread?). kom --- "m. nease" wrote: > (continued) > > kusala > (wholesomeness) doesn't it: we are saying in effect > that all > religion has the right to grow as it wishes. This is a > tolerant > > Yes, 'cheats' again... > > attitude. The akusala side (vancaka) is not being > willing to look > at any bad points or wrong views. The other extreme is > suppressing any dissident views - and we saw this > happen in > China and Russia and Cambodia. This seems to be > benevolence; > protecting the people from their opium. > I use these obvious examples but we are sometimes at > fault too. > We look down on the members of other religions or > those we think > have wrong view within Buddhism: this is conceit, or > refined > dosa, maybe we criticize them but without any > compassion. > > ...another one to watch out for... > > On the > other hand maybe we are very tolerant in our attitude > to what > others say or think, but this can simply mean that we > do not > really distinguish rightview from wrong - we are then > vulnerable > to the siren calls of those who misapprehend. > > Those who study Abhidhamma are not immune. For some it > is so > removed from daily life that they see it as an > academic subject; > it has minimal effect on removing wrong view, Even if > we believe > in not-self this can be hiding an idea of self (who > believes). > > Definitely and usually. > > We can see this when we consider anatta- sometimes the > contemplation seems to cut to the bone- and other > times it is > pedestrian, just going through the motions. > > True! But it doesn't hurt, does it! Always makes me > smile... > > It is good to know these things. This is wisdom too. > Panna at > the level of considering should not be disdained. > In the 'Majjhima nikaya' I (no. 43, Mahavedallasutta) > that > Kotthita asked Sariputta: > "'But what is intuitive wisdom for, your reverence?' > 'Your reverence, intuitive wisdom is for > super-knowledge, for > apprehending, for getting rid of.' > 'But how many conditions are there, your reverence, > for bringing > right understanding into existence?' > 'There are two conditions, your reverence, for > bringing right > understanding into existence: the utterance of another > (person) > and wise attention. Your reverence, there are the two > conditions > for bringing wise attention into existence.'" > > This is excellent! And would be good medicine for > those who believe it's all 'letting go'. I'd like to > see THAT idea supported by a sutta...This 'letting go > of everything' was a big idea of mine, too, when I was > a zen student. My first inkling that this was > one-sided and deluded was the four right efforts (I > never seem to be able to cite the location of these). > The zen idea that nibbana is the 'mind ground' that > merely needs to be uncovered is, I think, > unsupportable in buddhadhamma--which is why I'm no > longer a zen student. > > > The other person is the Buddha or his disciples, by > listening > carefully to the right person, by considering and > applying what > we have heard are the conditions for right > understanding built > up. > > Yes, I agree. > > It is a slow process but I can't see a faster way. > > I'm still not completely convinced of the correctness > of your reticence towards formal meditation--I do > understand your reservations, and the real dangers > involved--but I think this part of our conversation > will have to continue another time, to which I look > forward as always.. > > Have a great weekend! > > > mike > > 2392 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 1:15am Subject: Re: Accidental Post Sorry, Kom and everyone, this was the second half of a long-winded off-list reply to Robert, posted here by accident. Please feel free to jump in, or disregard as you like... --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Hi Mike, > > I am confused with this post. It appears to have > been written by > multiple people, but looking back at the threads in > the conversation, > there was no one else who posted the text 2393 From: Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 2:21am Subject: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dear Robert, A few comments. You wrote: >>> The contemplation of anatta always comes with pleasant feling or neutral feeling, if it is true contemplation. Sometimes we might feel scared thinking there is no self, but this shows that at those moments there is not proper contemplation. <<< When the realization of the dissolution and slipperiness of the aggregates and the lack of control over the spinning of samsara becomes clear to the meditator, "anatta" may be presented to the mind in a mundane flash of insight. Before the mind can think: "Oh, look! There was a flash of 'anatta'", a sensation of fear may naturally arise. In this context, the 'fear' does not present itself like the ordinary fear associated with, say, hearing the sound of a tree branch cracking just before it crushes the legs. It is more like fear just being presented to the mind as an object, an object like so many others that are presented, but in the presentation it becomes clear that the attachment to Self is strong, that fear is one tool that the Self-notion uses to preserve itself, and that contemplating detachedly the natural fear that arises with insight into anatta is a powerful weapon to wield against that fear and against the Self-notion. In instances like these, some questions that come up might be: Is fear unpleasant? Yes, of course. But when the fear presents itself to the mind and the mind reacts with equanimity (and adhitana), it seems to me to be wholesome. The arising of unpleasant feeling or even fear when contemplating anatta cannot be taken as a reliable indication that the practice has gone astray. [Please be patient with my mangling of technical terms. I'm here to learn about the proper words to put on "ideas". Help in this regard would be greatly appreciated.] > Yes, all kusala cittas even at the level of thinking can only > come with pleasant or unpleasant feeling. And anatta -sanna, > even at the thinking level, also always arises with panna > (nana-sampayuttam). One caution though. Lobha(desire) also comes > with pleasant feeling so it is not an entirely reliable guide, > but at least we know if the feeling is unpleasant that at those > moments no kusala. When we know more details like this it helps > us to compare when the moments are actually occuring and it > becomes clearer what is what. (and what is not what) 2394 From: m. nease Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 2:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dan, I think this is a very interesting topic and I'd like to respond to it. I'm very pressed for time right now and will be for the next week and a half--I will be 'connected' but on a somewhat catch-as-catch-can basis. I will respond ASAP. Thanks for your patience...mike --- wrote: > When the realization of the dissolution and > slipperiness of the > aggregates and the lack of control over the spinning > of samsara > becomes clear to the meditator, "anatta" may be > presented to the mind > in a mundane flash of insight. Before the mind can > think: "Oh, look! > There was a flash of 'anatta'", a sensation of fear > may naturally > arise. In this context, the 'fear' does not present > itself like the > ordinary fear associated with, say, hearing the > sound of a tree branch > cracking just before it crushes the legs. It is more > like fear just > being presented to the mind as an object, an object > like so many > others that are presented, but in the presentation > it becomes clear > that the attachment to Self is strong, that fear is > one tool that the > Self-notion uses to preserve itself, and that > contemplating detachedly > the natural fear that arises with insight into > anatta is a powerful > weapon to wield against that fear and against the > Self-notion. In > instances like these, some questions that come up > might be: Is fear > unpleasant? Yes, of course. But when the fear > presents itself to the > mind and the mind reacts with equanimity (and > adhitana), it seems to > me to be wholesome. The arising of unpleasant > feeling or even fear > when contemplating anatta cannot be taken as a > reliable indication > that the practice has gone astray. > > [Please be patient with my mangling of technical > terms. I'm here to > learn about the proper words to put on "ideas". Help > in this regard > would be greatly appreciated.] 2395 From: JODY PAUL,PIRRET Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 5:26am Subject: Re : Questions Dear Robert, Mike, dh5, and amara, Thank you for the excellent responses! It wasen't so much the teachings of the Lord Buddha I questioned, but some of the interpretations and accompanying elaborations that I've come across. Alot of which seems to be made with the aid of Western knowledges like physics, psychology, biology, and, biochemistry. These seem to be mental constructs that many may be assuming as discovering characteristics of nama and rupa that were not accounted for during the time of the Buddha. I have no doubt that the Dhamma provides a means to nibbaana. That there are three characteristics to existence, dukkha, anicca, and antta. That the middle way will lead to salvation. I believe in kamma. etc. I just wonder sometimes that some engage in intellectualizing the Dhamma with the so- called advanced answers of the present. Thanks again, Jody. 2396 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 9:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eight Thoughts of a Great Person Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > Yes, all kusala cittas even at the level of > > thinking can only > > come with pleasant or unpleasant feeling. > > Did you mean pleasant or neutral feeling? ______ Yes I did, sorry about that. _____ > > > And anatta > > -sanna, > > even at the thinking level, also always arises with > > panna > > (nana-sampayuttam). > > --which is kusala ergo accompanied by pleasant or > neutral feeling? ______ YES ____ > > > One caution though. > > Lobha(desire) also comes > > with pleasant feeling so it is not an entirely > > reliable guide, > > but at least we know if the feeling is unpleasant > > that at those > > moments no kusala. > > Right. > > > When we know more details like > > this it helps > > us to compare when the moments are actually occuring > > and it > > becomes clearer what is what. (and what is not what) > > Right again. By the way, I think NVG mentioned in > AIDL that pleasant feeling with kusala 'feels' > different from pleasant feeling with lobha. I think > she's right, and found the quote from the > Visuddhimagga (XIV, 162) to be very descriptive, at > least of the experience of coarse lobha: ________ Yes it does but refined lobha comes with rather refined pleasant feeling (but still coarse compared to that with kusala) so is hard to distinguish. It needs ever more study and care and panna to do so. > > "...lobha has the characteristic of grasping an > object, like birdlime (lit. "monkey lime"). [I love > that part, clinging like monkey poop to a rock, > say--and the next:] Its function is sticking, like > meat put in a hot pan. It is manifested as not giving > up, like the dye of lampblack. Its proximate cause is > seeing enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. > Swelling with the current of craving, it should be > regarded as taking (beings) with it to states of loss, > as a swift-flowing river does to the great ocean." > > The feeling attending reflections on anatta is very > different from this, isn't it? Quite opposite, > really, unclinging and unsticking, seeing enjoyment in > things leading out of bondage, quite liberating > ('lovely in the beginning?) A valuable reflection, I > think. (Pariyatti?) > ---------- Right! Robert > 2397 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 9:28am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re : Questions Dear Jody, Thanks Jody. Could you specify where the knowledge "like physics, psycholgy, biology and biochemistry" came in during the discussions? Robert --- "JODY PAUL,PIRRET" wrote: > > Dear Robert, Mike, dh5, and amara, > > Thank you for the excellent responses! It wasen't so much > the teachings of the Lord Buddha I questioned, but some of the > interpretations and accompanying elaborations that I've come > across. > > Alot of which seems to be made with the aid of Western > knowledges > like physics, psychology, biology, and, biochemistry. These > seem to be > mental constructs that many may be assuming as discovering > characteristics > of nama and rupa that were not accounted for during the time > of the > Buddha. > > I have no doubt that the Dhamma provides a means to nibbaana. > That > there are three characteristics to existence, dukkha, anicca, > and antta. > That the middle way will lead to salvation. I believe in > kamma. etc. > > I just wonder sometimes that some engage in intellectualizing > the > Dhamma with the so- called advanced answers of the present. > > Thanks again, Jody. > > -------------------------- eGroups Sponsor > > > 2398 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 9:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dear dhd, I agree. The moments change rapidly, one moment akusala fear, due to the clinging to self, immediately or quickly afterwards, there can be insight, detachment and equanamity. Robert --- wrote: > Dear Robert, > A few comments. You wrote: > >>> The contemplation of anatta always comes with pleasant > feling or > neutral feeling, if it is true contemplation. Sometimes we > might feel > scared thinking there is no self, but this shows that at those > moments > there is not proper contemplation. <<< > > When the realization of the dissolution and slipperiness of > the > aggregates and the lack of control over the spinning of > samsara > becomes clear to the meditator, "anatta" may be presented to > the mind > in a mundane flash of insight. Before the mind can think: "Oh, > look! > There was a flash of 'anatta'", a sensation of fear may > naturally > arise. In this context, the 'fear' does not present itself > like the > ordinary fear associated with, say, hearing the sound of a > tree branch > cracking just before it crushes the legs. It is more like fear > just > being presented to the mind as an object, an object like so > many > others that are presented, but in the presentation it becomes > clear > that the attachment to Self is strong, that fear is one tool > that the > Self-notion uses to preserve itself, and that contemplating > detachedly > the natural fear that arises with insight into anatta is a > powerful > weapon to wield against that fear and against the Self-notion. > In > instances like these, some questions that come up might be: Is > fear > unpleasant? Yes, of course. But when the fear presents itself > to the > mind and the mind reacts with equanimity (and adhitana), it > seems to > me to be wholesome. The arising of unpleasant feeling or even > fear > when contemplating anatta cannot be taken as a reliable > indication > that the practice has gone astray. > > [Please be patient with my mangling of technical terms. I'm > here to > learn about the proper words to put on "ideas". Help in this > regard > would be greatly appreciated.] > > > Yes, all kusala cittas even at the level of thinking can > only > > come with pleasant or unpleasant feeling. CORRECTION: pleasant or NEUTRAL feeling And anatta -sanna, > > even at the thinking level, also always arises with panna > > (nana-sampayuttam). One caution though. Lobha(desire) also > comes > > with pleasant feeling so it is not an entirely reliable > guide, > > but at least we know if the feeling is unpleasant that at > those > > moments no kusala. When we know more details like this it > helps > > us to compare when the moments are actually occuring and it > > becomes clearer what is what. (and what is not what) > > 2399 From: Date: Sun Dec 17, 2000 3:35pm Subject: Re: Re : Questions Dear Jody, I'm curious about some interesting but enigmatic comments you made. In particular, you write: > Alot of which seems to be made with the aid of Western knowledges > like physics, psychology, biology, and, biochemistry. These seem to be > mental constructs that many may be assuming as discovering > characteristics > of nama and rupa that were not accounted for during the time of the > Buddha. I have seen very little on this discussion board about physics, biology, and biochemisty, and although there has been a lot of psychology discussed, it has had, let us say, a Buddhist flavor about it, don't you think?