2800 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 8:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papańca_[again] Dear Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > > > > > Thanks for this clarification. I am relieved to > hear > > that the original reference was to recitals rather > > than a mantras! (I don't know about dictionary > > definitions, but I believe the 2 terms are > generally > > understood as having distinctly different > meanings). > > > Dear Jonothan, > > Could you elaborate? Well it's conditioned a lot of thinking about my one experience of mantra chanting and I'm scratching my head (as Mike would say) trying unsuccesfully to remember the words. Back 25yrs to those Bodh Gaya days, I had gone for a retreat from the retreat to Rajghir. One day I climbed Vulture's Peak and at the top there was a beautiful and very simple white Japanese temple. I decided to stay a couple of days and remember the lovely noodles and little dishes and of course everything was spotlessly clean. The only rule seemed to be that we had to rise early early (o.k. no problem for me), but while half asleep, we had to beat drums and gongs to a rhythm while chanting the mantra...sth rae sth sth sth sth sth (sorry, maybe there was more lobha for the noodles which I could describe exactly!). Anyway, I tried hard but I was quite hopeless at putting it all together, especially when we started beating the drums and gongs and repeating the mantra WHILST climbing a steep, rocky path to the very top! Mike or someone else may remember the mantra. I JUST found out that Jonothan had a similar experience staying there with Phra Dhammadharo (who didn't need to follow the ritual). Jonothan did and remembers the drums but not the mantra either. Amara, the Hare Krishna and T-M people also use mantras composed of a few words repeated over and over again (not necessarily with any meaning) to bring about some change of consciousness. I had thought at the time that the mantra at the Japanese temple was in Japanese, but now I know a little more about Chinese and Japanese, I doubt it, as they were all monosyllabic sounds. I never checked whether there was any meaning. Actually it was quite fun and I'd happily repeat the experience! You know about recitals as you were brought up with them! Sarah > 2801 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 8:54pm Subject: Mahasi and Goenka Anumodana, Goenkaji! Anumodana, Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw! I rejoice at the wondrous work you have done spreading Dhamma and goodwill to thousands and thousands of people for their lasting benefit. If only we could all be such magnificent knights of Dhamma, helping people liberate themselves from suffering. 2802 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:New year resolution Shin Good post, and anumodana in your kusala. Just a reminder to you and others. When replying to an incoming message, please remember to delete non-relevant material. Your message came with the whole of today's daily digest attached! Jonothan --- shinlin wrote: > Dear Dhamma friends, > It is already New Years. Usually before meeting > and hearing dhamma, I > would usually think of new year resolutions for the > next year. BUT things > has changed after understanding the dhamma. At the > beginning, I thought > Dhamma would change my life for the better. BUT all > that was the wrong view > of learning dhamma. I have realized that learning > the dhamma is not > expecting or wanting for a change but understanding > the truth of everything > and realities, which enhance the understanding of > anattaness of everything > and development of the right view. Lately, Archan > Sujin taught us how to > really understand and contemplate the realities as > it is. And from there, I > have realized that I have been only understanding > dhamma at the level of > thinking, and not the real contemplating and > understanding of realities. > From these past lessons, I have realized that many > of our dhamma friends are > in the same situation as me. Therefore today, I have > decided on advising > everyone my misunderstanding of dhamma, in hoping > this can allow you to > ponder yourself whether if it is really > understanding the realities or you > think you understand the realities. This is very > important because thinking > that you understand, includes a big self in there. I > am not here to attack > anybody or cause any akusula citta for anyone, and > if my letter has attack > any of you, pls forgive me because my intentions are > not to offend you in > any ways. > with metta, > 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 : - www.zebra.co.th 2803 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:24pm Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" > From time to time, I find it interesting to compare Theravada > teachings with Christian teachings. By and large, I've found a large > degree of concord between the two traditions, although the language > and approaches are strikingly dissimilar. Dear Dan, As usual, we are in direct opposition, or almost, and I look forward to more stimulating discussion. Christianity is focused on God, from the very first sentence in the Bible, when God created light, the universe, men etc. The motivation for men is to fear and love God and total obeissance, 'his will be done', disobedience and loving other Gods are punishable by hell, unless the lost sheep repents. Well, God does not exist in Buddhism, everything arises because of conditions, the universe is formed and destroyed by conditions over and over, and men are born and reborn of their own kamma, even brahma who are considered gods by some, or deva who can perform miracles, could not create a man, or kill him, if it were not his kamma to die or be born that way. With the right conditions, however, anything is possible, the Buddha taught that we have all been born evrywhere from the lowest hell to the highest brahma heavens (except for one where only the anagami would be reborn, if I remember correctly). But the most important difference between Buddhism and any other teachings is that he taught that the soul is not one continuous consciousness that arise at birth and passes to heaven/hell/purgatory but what are normally imperceptible, extremely rapidly arising and falling away instants of intelligence/consciousness in what is called khanika marana (the death that occurs each instant of citta), over which no one has control whatever. Instants of seeing and hearing at this moment could never last, they change and can never be brought back in exactly the same way again. Because of the rapidity of the succession of the citta, we think we see and hear at the same time, in fact they are interposed by instants of citta through the mind door, and that is what the first, weakest and lowest vipassana nana manifests: the differences between the rupa that arise through the five dvara and the mind dvara, as the nama-rupa-paricheda-nana (the complete separation of the nama and the rupa). This Knowledge could only come from a very highly developed degree of knowledge of things as they really are, accumulated little by little through satipatthana. Satipatthana is also taught in no other religion in the world- how could they, since they regard the soul as an entity, not instants of succeeding citta? But it can be proven by anyone for himself, (ehipassiko- come try it out, or 'check it out!', as Betty would say,) we all have eyes, ears, noses, tongues, body sense and minds. We would never be able to experience anything at all without them. But our kamma created them and we are presently their slaves, thinking that they are our selves. By knowing them as they really are, as well as their individual kinds of aramana, we could come to see them as they really are: conditioned realities that arise and fall away, then where is the beloved, unique and interesting selves? And though we might think we understand the theories, it is only the right level of understanding that could really bring the real instant of knowledge that lessen the clinging to the self, starting with the knowlege that will leave no more uncertainty that we are indeed only nama and rupa, experiencing the normally hidden nama of the mano dvara. But that knowledge could only be reached by studying realities as they really are, as they arise at this moment around us, the real characteristics of visible objects before us, so different from sound, sight, touch. These tiny instants of knowledge would accumulate and grow towards the strength when realization could arise, although one could never know when that will happen. But without the study, the knowledge would never grow to that level at all and we would still be clinging to the self even though we understood the theory on the intellectual level perfectly. > ... we are almost > assured to misunderstand and misrepresent others' views. Interesting that you should mention this, here is a passage from an article in the advanced section of you might like: Anguttara Nikaya, Dasaka Nipata, Samatha-Sutta: on habits to be formed or avoided. 'Behold Bhikkhu: Should the bhikkhu not be knowledgeable in the instants of citta of others, then he should study to be knowledgeable in the instants of his own citta. Behold, bhikkhu, he should study thus.' Sujin: Perhaps we should already begin the discussion now. While the Buddha's words might seem brief but in reality there is much to consider and examine, for example the phrase ' Should the bhikkhu not be knowledgeable in the instants of citta of others '. This applies not only to bhikkhus, but to anyone who thinks they know what other people think. Do they really know, or could they only guess without being able to tell whether the other person's citta might be thinking, seeing or performing any of the functions involving the citta. 'Then he should study to be knowledgeable in the instants of his own citta.' This is already a reminder, which is the most important thing for those who like to criticize others, who are preoccupied with others, but are not mindful of their own citta whether the thinking is kusala or akusala. Therefore the highest beneficence is not to be able to change other's akusala thoughts but one's own at that moment of thinking of others as kusala and akusala of which there can be mindfulness to know the truth, until there can be change from akusala to more kusala. Such bits of sayings may not seem like much, but those who read with discernment for the beneficence of the dhamma would greatly profit from it and remind themselves with it. This is from the beginning of a longish discussion about the 'Samatha Sutta', which is the title of the article. Amara 2804 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:31pm Subject: Re:_Papańca_[again] > Well it's conditioned a lot of thinking about my one > experience of mantra chanting and I'm scratching my > head (as Mike would say) trying unsuccesfully to > remember the words. > > Back 25yrs to those Bodh Gaya days, I had gone for a > retreat from the retreat to Rajghir. One day I climbed > Vulture's Peak and at the top there was a beautiful > and very simple white Japanese temple. I decided to > stay a couple of days and remember the lovely noodles > and little dishes and of course everything was > spotlessly clean. The only rule seemed to be that we > had to rise early early (o.k. no problem for me), but > while half asleep, we had to beat drums and gongs to a > rhythm while chanting the mantra...sth rae sth sth sth > sth sth (sorry, maybe there was more lobha for the > noodles which I could describe exactly!). > > Anyway, I tried hard but I was quite hopeless at > putting it all together, especially when we started > beating the drums and gongs and repeating the mantra > WHILST climbing a steep, rocky path to the very top! > > Mike or someone else may remember the mantra. I JUST > found out that Jonothan had a similar experience > staying there with Phra Dhammadharo (who didn't need > to follow the ritual). Jonothan did and remembers the > drums but not the mantra either. > > Amara, the Hare Krishna and T-M people also use > mantras composed of a few words repeated over and over > again (not necessarily with any meaning) to bring > about some change of consciousness. I had thought at > the time that the mantra at the Japanese temple was in > Japanese, but now I know a little more about Chinese > and Japanese, I doubt it, as they were all > monosyllabic sounds. I never checked whether there was > any meaning. Actually it was quite fun and I'd happily > repeat the experience! Dear Sarah, Thanks for this lovely explanation! I really needed all that laughter, (I know, lobha!) and now I also know what 'mantra' is to a westerner! Did you know that the recitals I used to do in my young and obedient days were called in Thai 'suad mon' (reciting mantra) which is why to my mind they are sort of synonyms. Thanks for everything, Amara 2805 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Precepts - Intoxicants Metta Jon Welcome to the list, and thank you for this very informative post. I am impressed by your obvious familiarity with the suttas. Your citations are directly on point. I particularly like the reference to digging up one's own roots in this world. --- Metta Jon wrote: > Jonathan, > > You asked for scriptural references? > > The first one that comes to mind is Dhammapada > 247-248 (Chapter 18, > [Impurities], verses 12-13): > > "Whosoever in this world destroys life, tells lies, > takes what is > not given, goes to another's wife, and is given to > the use of > intoxicants, such a one digs up his own roots in > this world." > > A reference that really spells things out is in the > Dhammika Sutta > of the Sutta Nipata (Sn.398-399): > > "The layman who joyfully abides in self-control, > knowing that the > use of intoxicants results in loss of self-control, > should not > indulge in taking intoxicants, nor should he cause > others to do so, > nor approve of others so doing. Fools commit evil > deeds as a result > of intoxication, and cause others who are negligent > to do the same. > One should avoid this occasion for evil, this > madness, this delusion, > this joy of fools." > > Also from the Sutta Nipata (Maha Mangala Sutta, > Sn.264): > > "...to abstain from intoxicants, and to be diligent > in virtue, > these are the Highest Blessings." As you point out, there are any number of excuses and contrivances by those who don't see the danger in intoxicants. > There are some Westerners who are attracted to > Buddhism, but who > wish to believe that the precept is to abstain from > intoxication, > but the wording of the precept clearly says that one > abstains > from the use of intoxicants, which are the occasion > for heedlessness. > > One or two people tried to tell me that if someone > is a "Bodhisattva > with a high level of realization" that they could > drink alcohol and > not be affected." My response to that is: if they > have such a high > level of realization, then they would have no > attachment to or > craving for alcohol, and thus would not drink it. > One man said to > me: "But the Buddha was enlightened, and he still > ate food." To > which i responded: "Food is necessary for life; > alcohol is not. The > Buddha ate food so that he could support his body > and mind to teach > the Dhamma (Dharma) to others." Had i been in a > sarcastic frame of > mind, i could have said, "When YOU become a > Bodhisattva with a high > level of realization, then talk to me about it." > > Some Buddhists will tell you that enlightened beings > don't need to > follow precepts. This is true, but ONLY because > their behavior > automatically conforms to the Dhamma. When your > character is such > that killing, stealing, lying, etc., are IMPOSSIBLE > for you to > commit, then you don't need the precepts to tell you > not to do those > things--because you wouldn't do them anyway. The > great sage named > Bodhidharma was quoted as saying: "Buddhas don't > keep precepts; > Buddhas don't break precepts." > > i hope that this helps anyone who is interested in > this subject. I'm sure it does > Sukhita hotha, > > Metta Jon Maslow Thanks Jonothan 2806 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:35pm Subject: Re: Mahasi and Goenka > Anumodana, Goenkaji! Anumodana, Ven. Mahasi Sayadaw! I rejoice at the > wondrous work you have done spreading Dhamma and goodwill to thousands > and thousands of people for their lasting benefit. If only we could > all be such magnificent knights of Dhamma, helping people liberate > themselves from suffering. Dear Dan, Perhaps they should also compare them to the Tipitaka/Commentaries also or is that out of the question? Amara 2807 Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re:New year resolution Dear Ms. Shin Lin, What are you talking about? Was someone's feeling hurt? Anyway, thank you for the note. You wrote: "Lately, Archan Sujin taught us how to really understand and contemplate the realities as it is. And from there, I have realized that I have been only understanding dhamma at the level of thinking, and not the real contemplating and understanding of realities. " Please repeat what Archan Sujin taught because I'm sure that it's important and helpful to a lot of us. Thank you. Best New Year Wishes, Alex Tran 2808 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert and Jonothan, > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > Thanks for your comments and for reposting > Jonothan's > extraordinary post. This is the best post I've seen > yet on this topic (& item #10 even hints strongly at > the 'robes' issue--and a hidden connection between > these issues), I think. I am glad you found it useful I went to save it in my > 'Jonothan' directory, and found it was already > there--it was the first response Jonothan sent to me > when I was still quite new to the list. > > I think it would be good to post this as a file on > the > e-groups page--especially with as many references to > the tipitaka as possible--as a quick response to > curious newcomers who are bound to bring up this > question again and again. I agree it needs references (and further working on). The idea was to collect references as I came across them for later inclusion. Hasn't happened, I'm afraid. Any suggestions from any direction gratefully received. Jonothan > So many of us came into the Theravada by way of > modern > meditation schools which tend to present their > approaches--often (if not always) reductionistic and > rather radical as to interpretation--as being the > true, original buddhadhamma and a kind of solution > to > modern misconceptions. With this as a background, > our > first look at understanding by way of the > abhidhamma-pitaka often gives the impression of a > really radical and intellectual approach. > > It's no wonder that so many of us look askance, at > first, at at a truly ancient approach with its roots > in ALL of the dhamma-vinaya--not just a few selected > suttas--as one that turns 'the dhamma' > upside-down--instead of setting it upright, as I > believe it actually does. > > I hope the two of you have developed paramis number > five and six, viriya and khanti, sufficiently to > continue repeating these points for the benefit of > those (I forget what we're called), who find the > path > slow and difficult. > > Saadhu! > > mike PS I'm impressed at your organizational skills as reflected in your folder system. I would be interested to know how you get text from your email program to your hard drive - by copy and paste, or as an actual file? I haven't worked out a satisfactory system yet! Please share a few tips. 2809 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:28pm Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" Dear Amara, Christianity is indeed focused on "God," but getting past some of the superficialities of the words and thinking about what could Christians possibly mean by the use of such a word, it becomes clear that not many envision a white-bearded traffic director in the sky. Instead, "God" makes much more sense if thought of as "law of nature." Reading the Christian Bible with this notion of what "God" is (and why not?!) reveals that many of the Judeo-Christian prophets had a fairly good understanding of Dhamma--including the Four Noble truths as central to Christian doctrine (although they are not real clear about the fourth) and forming a current running through much of the scriptures and anatta-anicca-dukkha are discussed frequently in beautiful descriptions of the concepts (although the language is quite different from the Buddhist). I don't have enough time to get into any detail about this right now, but I'm glad your interested in hearing a little more. It is a very interesting topic. I do want to leave you with an interesting idea to ponder. Buddha said something like (paraphrase): "Even if bandits savagely sever you limb by limb, he whose mind gives rise to hatred towards them is not following my teachings" (MN 21). Now, Jesus was tortured to death, but as he was being killed he displayed nothing but compassion for his assailants (paraphrase): "Father forgive them for they have no idea what they are doing." Jesus was not a follower of Buddha (he most likely had never heard of Buddha), but a man who feels only compassion for the men who torture him to death IS a follower of the Buddha's teachings. Even though he wasn't at all fluent in the language of Abhidhamma, Jesus displayed an incredible amount of wisdom. Can this man, who never heard even heard the word "Buddha", be more strongly grounded in Dhamma and wisdom than we who know hundreds or thousands of Pali words and can cogently discuss intricacies of Abhidhamma? Christians call him "Son of God" for the force of his metta and karuna. I'd prefer to call him "Student of Dhamma." 2810 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:50pm Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" > Christianity is indeed focused on "God," but getting past some of the > superficialities of the words and thinking about what could Christians > possibly mean by the use of such a word, it becomes clear that not > many envision a white-bearded traffic director in the sky. Instead, > "God" makes much more sense if thought of as "law of nature." Reading > the Christian Bible with this notion of what "God" is (and why not?!) > reveals that many of the Judeo-Christian prophets had a fairly good > understanding of Dhamma--including the Four Noble truths as central to > Christian doctrine (although they are not real clear about the fourth) > and forming a current running through much of the scriptures and > anatta-anicca-dukkha are discussed frequently in beautiful > descriptions of the concepts (although the language is quite different > from the Buddhist). I don't have enough time to get into any detail > about this right now, but I'm glad your interested in hearing a little > more. It is a very interesting topic. Dear Dan, Very, indeed! Although the Ursuline nuns at the Mater Dei School I attended as a child would probably say countless prayers for your soul if they heard your view of their God to whom they are married! If you have time, do elaborate. I may even show some of the things you said to my Christian friends. > I do want to leave you with an interesting idea to ponder. Buddha said > something like (paraphrase): "Even if bandits savagely sever you limb > by limb, he whose mind gives rise to hatred towards them is not > following my teachings" (MN 21). Now, Jesus was tortured to death, but > as he was being killed he displayed nothing but compassion for his > assailants (paraphrase): "Father forgive them for they have no idea > what they are doing." Jesus was not a follower of Buddha (he most > likely had never heard of Buddha), but a man who feels only compassion > for the men who torture him to death IS a follower of the Buddha's > teachings. I doubt that anyone who knows 'kammasakata' (each person having his own kamma' would ask 'law of nature' to 'forgive' anyone, since forgiveness is for the kusala citta of the person who forgives, nothing to do with what the perpetrator of the kamma who must receive the vipaka (result of kamma) whether anyone forgives him or not. By the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great personal favorite of mine, in the advance section of , which might be of interest. Hope you find the time to read it someday, Amara Even though he wasn't at all fluent in the language of > Abhidhamma, Jesus displayed an incredible amount of wisdom. Can this > man, who never heard even heard the word "Buddha", be more strongly > grounded in Dhamma and wisdom than we who know hundreds or thousands > of Pali words and can cogently discuss intricacies of Abhidhamma? > Christians call him "Son of God" for the force of his metta and > karuna. I'd prefer to call him "Student of Dhamma." 2811 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Mon Jan 8, 2001 11:57pm Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dear Jonathon, I don't find anything contradictory between Mahasi's and Buddhagosa's comments. Buddhagosa does not discuss consciousnesses immediately before bhaya-nana arises. Instead, he describes the experience of bhaya-nana itself. Mahasi's comments apparently refer to an instant of real fear which immediately spins into bhaya-nana as the mind reacts wisely to the incipient "fear" before it develops into full-fledged dosa. He does use the phrase "At that time...", but everything happens very quickly... His "at that time" may be a slip into everyday language and not a real confusion of the significance of each individual thought moment. I believe that Mahasi was wise enough to understand that panna does not arise coincident with domanassa. > Dhd5 > > I am coming in here without having read all the later > posts – I know from experience that if I wait until I > am up-to-date I won't get to post anything – so > apologies in advance if I am going over ground already > covered. > > > Mahasi clearly > > indicated that the > > bhaya-nana is knowledge of a directly experienced > > fear: "[The yogi's] > > mind itself is gripped by fear and seems helpless." > > This accords more > > closely to my reasoning and experience than do your > > deviations from > > Tipitaka. Your deviation from Tipitaka is writing > > that the bhaya-nana > > is not derived from a real, directly experienced > > fear, that it > > is not wisdom regarding a real, directly experienced > > fear. Please note > > that I do not say that you contradict Tipitaka, only > > that you are > > extrapolating or deviating from Tipitaka. Your > > extrapolation differs > > from Mahasi's, and it differs from mine, but to the > > best of my > > knowledge, none of the extrapolations contradicts > > Tipitaka. > > I don't know if you would agree, but it seems to me > that the 2 commentaries – Buddhaghosa's and Mahasi > Sayadaw's – are mutually exclusive, ie they can't both > be right. So it is perhaps a question as to which of > the 2 accords more fully with the Tipitaka. As far as > I know, Buddhaghosa has never been faulted on this > score in the 1500 years or so that the Visuddhimagga > has been around. But it will be interesting to see > what Amara comes up with in her search of the > Attasalini. > > Jonothan > > 2812 Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:19am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" Dear Amara and Dan, This topic sounds interesting. I've enjoyed Dan's posts very much. Now, at our temple, there's a visiting monk who's very very gentle. He was trained to be a Catholic priest. Right after graduating to be a priest, he studied Theravada Buddhism because his great grandmother warned him that those Buddhis monks were only a bunch of beggars! He got curious about them. Then, he became one himself. And he's stayed with the Sangha since early 1960s. A few weeks ago, he said that on the surface, perhaps even on the intermediate level of understanding, Christianity and Buddhism appear the same, but on the higher level, they are completely different. Thank you, Dan, for sharing. I'm looking forward to read Amara's posts about her learning experience about Catholicism and Christianity in the eyes of a Buddhist. Anumodana, Alex Tran 2813 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:39am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" > Now, at our temple, there's a visiting monk who's very very > gentle. He was trained to be a Catholic priest. Right after > graduating to be a priest, he studied Theravada Buddhism because his > great grandmother warned him that those Buddhis monks were only a > bunch of beggars! He got curious about them. Then, he became one > himself. And he's stayed with the Sangha since early 1960s. A few > weeks ago, he said that on the surface, perhaps even on the > intermediate level of understanding, Christianity and Buddhism appear > the same, but on the higher level, they are completely different. Dear Alex, Thank you for the story, it's so interesting how each individual come to Buddhism, isn't it? All the different accumulations, each and everyone. Amara 2814 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:01am Subject: Re: Three types of wisdom Dear Jonathon, You wrote: > I would not agree that it is necessary to deviate from > the Tipitaka. Deviation surely connotes inconsistency > with. Deviation need not connote inconsistency. There are a lot of things that Tipitaka simply does not discuss. For example, there is not a single word about integral calculus or internal combustion engines. I don't think anyone would argue that these things are inconsistent with Tipitaka. Of course, these things don't have much to do with the Dhamma that Buddha taught. By the same token, Buddha himself said that what he could teach about Dhamma in the short span of 45 years amounted to no more than a handful of leaves in a forest full of trees. The commentaries fill in some of the blanks (like Buddhagosa's comments on bhaya-nana), but we are left to filling in the vast blanks with wisdom garnered from our own experiences (like Mahasi's pre-bhaya-nana description: "The mind itself is gripped by fear..."). It is important that we be sure our deviations--whether dealing with internal combustion or "pre-bhaya-nana"--are not inconsistent with Tipitaka, but we deviate from Tipitaka very frequently and necessarily so. If you disagree, that's fine, but I don't think you will find in the Tipitaka any contradiction to my point. 2815 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:12am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" Dear Alex, Thanks for the insightful post. I especially like your comment: > A few weeks ago, he said that on the surface, perhaps even on the > intermediate level of understanding, Christianity and Buddhism appear the same, but on the higher level, they are completely different. I agree for the most part. However, I'd say that on a superficial level, they appear completely different. On a more intermediate level (once we get beyond the obvious differences in language and methods of expressing truth), they appear very similar. On a deeper level, though, they are once again very different. Part of the difference is that Christianity does not have a detailed description of the path. When pressed on what the path is, the response is that "faith is a gift from the Holy Spirit," which is quite a different from Buddha's [paraphrase of Rhys David's translation]: "Work out your own salvation with diligence"--and then explicit instructions on how to do it! Another, less important but critical difference is the different emphasis on Jesus' two commandments: 1. Love God with all your heart; and 2. Love your neighbor as yourself. Theravada Buddhists put greater emphasis on the former (internal, spiritual), and Christianity puts more emphasis on the latter. Both traditions do emphasize both "commandments," but the weight put on each is different. 2816 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:19am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" > I doubt that anyone who knows 'kammasakata' (each person having his > own kamma' would ask 'law of nature' to 'forgive' anyone, since > forgiveness is for the kusala citta of the person who forgives, > nothing to do with what the perpetrator of the kamma who must receive > the vipaka (result of kamma) whether anyone forgives him or not. Excellent point! I see two wholesome functions of asking the 'law of nature' for 'forgiveness'. One is to generate compassion towards others. The other is to attentuate the tendency to roll in unproductive, akusala brooding about your own guilty feelings. >By > the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great personal > favorite of mine, in the advance section of > , which might be of interest. I do hope to read it. [I keep thinking I don't have much time, but I keep posting on this board! It may be time to take a disciplined Holiday, following Robert's lead.] 2817 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:28am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" > > I doubt that anyone who knows 'kammasakata' (each person having his > > own kamma' would ask 'law of nature' to 'forgive' anyone, since > > forgiveness is for the kusala citta of the person who forgives, > > nothing to do with what the perpetrator of the kamma who must > receive > > the vipaka (result of kamma) whether anyone forgives him or not. > Excellent point! I see two wholesome functions of asking the > 'law of nature' for 'forgiveness'. One is to generate compassion > towards others. The other is to attentuate the tendency to roll > in unproductive, akusala brooding about your own guilty feelings. Dear Dan, I think a Buddhist would be more interested in realities and wisdom rather than some god and even less in guilt. > >By > > the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great personal > > favorite of mine, in the advance section of > > , which might be of interest. > I do hope to read it. [I keep thinking I don't have much time, but I > keep posting on this board! It may be time to take a disciplined > Holiday, following Robert's lead.] We shall miss you, as we do him. Amara 2818 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:04am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" Dear Amara, I agree that the Buddhists are very concerned about "realities" and "wisdom". One aspect of wisdom is the generate compassion; another is to cultivate right effort to dissipate unwholesome thoughts about past actions. Properly done, forgiveness can accomplish this. Maybe 'forgiveness' could be a cetasika in an alternative formulation of abhidhamma! [Really, I don't think this is worth thinking about for more than a moment or two because we already have a wonderful abhidhamma, and none of us has the wisdom to create another, even if it is possible!] > > 'law of nature' for 'forgiveness'. One is to generate compassion > > towards others. The other is to attentuate the tendency to roll > > in unproductive, akusala brooding about your own guilty feelings. > I think a Buddhist would be more interested in realities and wisdom > rather than some god and even less in guilt. > > > > >By > > > the way, there is an article on 'Kammasakata-nana', a great > personal > > > favorite of mine, in the advance section of > > > , which might be of interest. > > I do hope to read it. [I keep thinking I don't have much time, but I > > keep posting on this board! It may be time to take a disciplined > > Holiday, following Robert's lead.] > > > We shall miss you, as we do him. > > Amara 2819 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:17am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" > I agree that the Buddhists are very concerned about "realities" and > "wisdom". One aspect of wisdom is the generate compassion; another is > to cultivate right effort to dissipate unwholesome thoughts about past > actions. Properly done, forgiveness can accomplish this. Maybe > 'forgiveness' could be a cetasika in an alternative formulation of > abhidhamma! Dear Dan, Forgiveness, abhaya in Pali, I think, litterally means a=no bhaya=harm, that is to say no harm is intended toward the person you forgive. It is adosa, accompanied sometimes by metta or friendship and is kusala citta of course. It is so described in the abhidhamma, as are all major citta and cetasika. Well, thanks for your interesting posts, I will have to go now, see you tomorrow, I hope, Amara 2820 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" Hi Dan, From the sila stand point, I think Buddhism looks similar to other religions at the most superficial level. Beyond that there aren't many similarities. from a non-specific standpoint, all Buddha teachings are beautiful at the beginning, beautiful in the middle, and beautiful at the end. His teachings are profound refined, and his panna about realities is unmatched. I can't certainly say the same thing about other religions. In the more specific standpoints, here's what I found: 1) Sila in Buddhism has many levels: from sila without panna, sila with panna, sila with Satipatthana, and sila with maggha. Now, if you have sila because it's the will/teaching of god. Is that Sila with or without panna? 2) People with different levels of panna perform sila for different purposes: because it's good, because it will bring you good things in return, or because it contributes to the path to Nibhanna. In Christianity, isn't it true that even if you perform sila, the result is still uncertain. It depends on god to make the judgement whether or not you are worthy. The results of sila are subjective at best, but the results of sila in Buddhism are certain: it is simply how things work. --- Dan Dalthorp <> wrote: > I agree for the most part. However, I'd say that on a superficial > level, they appear completely different. On a more intermediate level > > (once we get beyond the obvious differences in language and methods > of > expressing truth), they appear very similar. On a deeper level, > though, they are once again very different. I would love to hear more specific details of why you say this. Exception for the wordings and the outside appearances of person performign sila (not killing, not lying, etc.), I see no similarity. > Part of the difference is > > that Christianity does not have a detailed description of the path. > When pressed on what the path is, the response is that "faith is a > gift from the Holy Spirit," which is quite a different from Buddha's > [paraphrase of Rhys David's translation]: "Work out your own > salvation > with diligence"--and then explicit instructions on how to do it! The Buddha teaches realities as things really are. I see huge differences between Buddhism and other religion, betwen truths and non-truths. What are the similarities? > > Another, less important but critical difference is the > different emphasis on Jesus' two commandments: 1. Love God with all > your heart; and 2. Love your neighbor as yourself. Theravada > Buddhists > put greater emphasis on the former (internal, spiritual), and > Christianity puts more emphasis on the latter. Both traditions do > emphasize both "commandments," but the weight put on each is > different. I also don't see how you say the first view point is a Buddhist view point? That's certainly not matching any of the Buddha's teachings, perhaps not even matching to the teachings by Mahasi! There is no god: it's not a person, and it's not animal: there can be no Metta toward god. kom 2821 Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 2:24am Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" Dear Dan, I think that the main point is not about the differences and similarities between religions. BTW, I cannot think of Buddhism as a religion. I believe that Buddhism is a study, similar to physics, biology,... with the Buddha as the Supreme Teacher, teaching us how to get out of suffering by showing us realities and concepts. I cannot say the same thing about other religions such as Christianity though. We appreciate the Buddha and His Teachings according to our accumulations. Some of us appreciate the Buddha and his Teachings so well that they are Sotapannas or higher. Some of us are walking half way on the Path, with deep appreciation of other teachings as well. Some of us even follow cults whole heartedly. We all do our best in our current ability and understanding to advance ourselves. We cannot realize our wrong view easily because of our avijja (ignorance). Only with right view and wisdom, we can really distinguish what is right and what is wrong. I always remind my students at my temple that Buddhism is the Teachings of Loving-Kindness and Wisdom. That's why I rely on the Suttas such as the Kalama, the Brahmajala as well as other "reliable" sources to judge if whatever I hear is in harmony with the Buddha's Teachings or not. Please forgive me if I offend you or some of our members in the list. Anumodana, Alex Tran 2822 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 5:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Dear Jonothan, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I am glad you found it useful Much more than useful. I do think it contains the answer to both the 'vs.' and the 'robes' issue. The more I reflect on it, the clearer these issues seem. > I agree it needs references (and further working > on). > The idea was to collect references as I came across > them for later inclusion. Hasn't happened, I'm > afraid. Any suggestions from any direction > gratefully > received. I'm just thinking that a sceptic would be likely to ask for provenance--I'm afraid I wouldn't know where to begin to look. > PS I'm impressed at your organizational skills as > reflected in your folder system. I would be > interested to know how you get text from your email > program to your hard drive - by copy and paste, or > as > an actual file? I haven't worked out a satisfactory > system yet! Actually, I'm much to stingy of space on my hard drive--I keep these 'folders' on Yahoo's server. While you have a message open, there's a little window in the upper right corner of you screen reading, 'Choose Folder'. If you select 'New Folder' from that list, then click on 'Move', you'll be prompted for a name for the new 'folder'. Once you've filled that in, the message will be saved in that folder indefinitely. After that, you can click on the '+' sign next to 'Folders' (to the left of your message window), and select the 'folder' you'd like to view. Hope this is of some use! mike 2823 Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 5:33am Subject: Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas --- "m. nease" wrote: > > PS I'm impressed at your organizational skills as > > reflected in your folder system. > > Actually, I'm much to stingy of space on my hard > drive--I keep these 'folders' on Yahoo's server. > While you have a message open, there's a little window > in the upper right corner of you screen reading, > 'Choose Folder'. If you select 'New Folder' from that > list, then click on 'Move', you'll be prompted for a > name for the new 'folder'. Once you've filled that > in, the message will be saved in that folder > indefinitely. After that, you can click on the '+' > sign next to 'Folders' (to the left of your message > window), and select the 'folder' you'd like to view. > > Hope this is of some use! > > mike Dear Jonothan and Mike, Good Question, Good Answer! Thank you, Alex 2824 Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 5:40am Subject: Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramatth --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks for bringing up this important point. I've > only just recently read about it in Abhidhamma in > Daily Life. This surely requires more understanding > on my part. Dear Mike, On which page that you found this information in the ADL, may I ask? I haven't started reading the ADL yet. Like Robert and Amara said, even if we are born with 3 hetus, we may not realize it for years, or even for lives in the future. Moreover, it's very easy to make a mistake and be lost in wrong view. It all depends on accumulations and conditions. A few months ago, when browsing the archive, I discovered that the list also discuss about the hetus. With Metta, AT 2825 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 6:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramatth Dear Alex, --- wrote: > On which page that you found this information in > the ADL, may I > ask? I haven't started reading the ADL yet. I think the discussion of hetus begins earlier in the book than this, but I was thinking of Chapter 8, 'Ahetuka Cittas'--which doesn't really deal with this particular issue, as I recall. So, not sure where the first mention of hetus begins! A great book, though, hope you enjoy it... mike 2826 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 10:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] perception/memory, consciousness Just thinking aloud--could the flaw in translation be that of cognition vs. REcognition? --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear amara, > See my comments below: > --- amara chay wrote: > > > > > Visuddhimagga XIV3 "the state of knowing is > equally present > > in > > > perception(sanna) in consciousness > (vinnana)(synonym for > > citta) > > > and in panna. Nevertheless perception is only > the mere > > > perceiving of an object as, say,'blue' or > 'yellow';it cannot > > > bring about the penetration of its > characteristics as > > > impermanent painful and not-self. Consciousness > knows the > > > objects as blue or yellow, and it brings about > the > > penetration > > > of its characteristics, but it cannot bring > about by > > > endeavouring, the manifestation of the path. > Panna knows the > > > object in the way already stated, it brings > about the > > > penetration of the characteristics and it brings > about, by > > > endeavoring, the manifestation of the path" > > > > > > This explains 'the state of knowing' very clearly. > Except for > > the > > translation of perception as '(sanna)', which > whomever did the > > > > translation did not specify that 'sanna' is memory > and > > therefore > > cognition, as in recognition. > > Could you give us the Thai version (translated); > this may be an > important error in the English as usually sanna is > translated as > perception. They do exlain also that it has the > function of > memory but this is not stressed usually by > translators. I would > love to know more about this. > > > > > > Otherwise this is a good differentiation of panna > as right > > understanding from common memory and knowledge; > and > > experiencing daily > > life from moments when panna arises. > > Glad you approve. > > > > > Who did the translation, by the way? > > Venerable nanamoli an English monk who lived in sri > lanka. > > > On your last post you wrote: > ">>From the 'Summary', the citta is explained more > as an > intelligence > than a consciousness since it arises when one is > alive, even in > a coma > or deep sleep, as the bhavanga citta (or life > continuum)." >>> > > I see in your translation of Summary of Paramattha > Dhammas by > Khun sujin that you you translate Citta as > consciousness not > intelligence: > > >>>... with the power of a dhamma, it is citta. > This > demonstrates the importance of citta, which is > consciousness, > which experiences and knows, which is eminent in > experiencing > whatever appears>>>> > > Also the glossary on your web page has this > definition for > >>>>>>citta: > consciousness, the reality which knows, or cognizes > an object. > >>>> > > Robert > 2827 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Vipassana meditation Dear Robert, For a guy on holiday, this is some pretty heavy work. I don't mean to be flippant--there's a tremendous amount to consider here. Thanks... mike 2828 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Precepts - Intoxicants Thanks and well said, sir... mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Dear All > > Some time ago there was discussion here about the > reason for the inclusion of the avoidance of > intoxicants in the 5 precepts. > > Recently I came across an old BPS Newsletter with an > article by Bhikkhu Bodhi on the subject of sobriety. > > In it he explains the reason for the laying down of > the precept. He says- > > To dispel any doubt about his reasons for > prescribing > this precept, the Buddha has written the explanation > into the rule itself: one is to refrain from the > use > of intoxicating drinks and drugs because they are > the > cause of heedlessness (pamaada). Heedlessness means > moral recklessness, disregard for the bounds between > right and wrong. It is the loss of heedfulness > (appamaada), moral scrupulousness based on a keen > perception of the dangers in unwholesome states. … > [ends] > > Bh Bodhi goes on to say that to indulge in > intoxicating drinks is to risk falling away from > each > of the 3 stages of the path – morality, > concentration > and wisdom [ie sila, samadhi and panna]. > > If anyone comes across any actual Tipitaka > references, > please share with us. > > By the way, I believe that ‘moral recklessness, > disregard for the bounds between right and wrong’ in > the passage quoted above is a reference to the > absence > of the cetasikas (mental factors) hiri and ottappa, > which have been the subject of discussion recently. > > Jonothan > 2829 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:06am Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness > Just thinking aloud--could the flaw in translation be > that of cognition vs. REcognition? Dear Mike, You mean that cognition is to learn something new, as opposed to recognition as to knowing what is seen intellectually? Amara P.S. I forgot to ask, where is the flaw, do you mean in my translation? Because if you find something wrong, it could be easily rectified. 2830 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Dear Jonothan, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Kom > > I have a slightly different understanding on this > subject than Robert (Mike, but there is no discord > between us!), (Genuine thanks for the reassurance, but 'I' seem to have overcome clinging to concord, for the moment...!) > and I hope you don't mind if I give my > thoughts here. I don't think that could ever be the case (for long, at least...!) > > wrote: > > > Almost always breath is concept when we are > aware > > of it. > > > Especially when it is used as an object for > > samattha and a > > > nimitta arises this is obviously concept. > > You are saying here that in the beginning, the > > meditator (samatha > > bhavana) may have poramattha as aramana. However, > > since to develop the > > samatha bhanvana further, nimita must appear, and > > therefore, at this > > point, it becomes pannati. Is this about right? > > Breath, it seems to me, is a concept. Like with the > concept ‘body’, it is possible that there can be > awareness of one of the realities that we normally > take for breath/body, and at such moments no concept > of breath/body appears. But there is no paramattha > dhamma ‘breath’, just as there is no paramattha > dhamma > ‘body’. I was instructed, for this reason, to focus on 'the rise and fall of the abdomen', rather than the breath at the tip of the nose. The rationale was that, if one focused on the sensation of the breath at the tip of the nose, one's attention might be taken instead by the wind element, or the fire (coolness?) element, or the wind (motion?) element--so, better to focus on the "rise and fall of the abdomen"--which I'm now certain is pańńati, at best--as least the way *I* did it... > Breath as object of samatha is a concept. Breath as > object of satipatthana, however, is a reference to > awareness of one of the realities that we take for > breath. Do you think that this was what, specifically, was meant in the Anapanasati Sutta? > > > And even during > > > vipassana when there is awareness of the > different > > namas and > > > rupas that arise almost simultaneoulsy with > breath > > - the breath > > > itself is not an object for satipatthana. > However > > breath is > > > actually composed of rupas that are conditioned > > ONLY by citta > > > (citta-samutthana-rupa). Only special type of > > wisdom can > > > actually distinguish between the rupas that are > > citta-samutthana > > > -rupa and say those that are utu > -samutthana-rupa. > > Thus we might > > > think we are experiencing the rupas that are > > conditioned by > > > citta but actually be observing other types - it > > is exceedingly > > > hard to know. > > Do you know of anyone who actually try to > "observe" > > the differences > > between citta-samutthana and utu-samutthana rupa? > > Are the differences > > actually observable via Satipatthana? This is > where > > I can understand > > how being unwise studying Abhidhamma could cause > > insanity... > > I think what Robert is saying here is that one > reason > why samatha bhavana with breath as object is so > difficult is that it is easy to take what is not > breath for breath, since there are all sorts of > things > happening around the tip of the nose. Sure--or the abdomen... > Knowledge of > the difference between the 2 kinds of rupa > (conditioned by citta vs. conditioned by utu) would > be > panna of the level of samatha bhavana, I suppose. > > The difference between these 2 kinds of rupa is of > no > significance in the development of satipatthana, > since > satipatthana does not require the arising of > awareness > in relation to any particular reality. But doesn't satipańńaa require the arising of awareness in relation to a paramattha dhamma? I was beginning to think that this is the difference between paramattha and non-paramattha dhammas (e.g. pańńati) ... > And as far > as > I know, the characteristic of, say, hardness, is the > same whenever it appears to sati ie it does not > differ > according to its conditioning factor/s. > > This is a very complex area. I have only ever tried > to understand the basics, because these are > confusing > enough! Tell me about it...! mike 2831 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma - Then & now Dear Jonothan, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > O.K. But isn't an affinity for impermanence and > the > > other characterisics, one of the things that > > attracts > > us to the Dhamma now? > > Yes. But our 'affinity for impermanence' is at a > relatively superficial level. It is not the panna > which experiences, for example, seeing as seeing and > at the same time has penetrated the true nature of > that reality to the degree that the characteristic > of > impermanence is known. I guess what I had in mind here was, If 'we' have an affinity for the tilakkhana now, doesn't that suggest some previous 'accumulation'? If it's true that we don't carry 'stories' from one life to the next, but only pańńaa? Or is this just sankharuppadana (or something like that)? > For those listening to the Buddha, developed panna > was > arising through the different doorways as he spoke. > They had accumulated levels of panna in previous > lives, Have we not? If not, why are we interested today? > and had me the right conditions for those > accumulations to become manifest during the lifetime > of the Buddha. > I appreciate that there are many people today who > claim to understand impermanence, I promise you, I make no claim to this! I only wonder why some of us are attracted by the tilakkhana in this life, while most of us (even if we hear of it) are repulsed. Maybe I'm just being a little superstitious here... > but they do so > without having studied the realities appearing > through > the different doorways. So I believe they are > talking > about something different. I'm sure that's true. mike 2832 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papańca_[again] Dear Khun Sujin, --- amara chay wrote: > But the nama sati and panna, as > you also observed, > could study the characteristics of other nama, when > they arise > strongly enough, the ones being as fast as the > other. The thing is > not to attach so much importance to the individual > moments so as to > keep thinking about this and that aspect of it > afterwards, not > realizing they are just thoughts. Right! > Moments of sati > arise to know the > paramatthadhamma with the right conditions, Nama AND rupa... > for just > that fleeting > instant when one reality appears at a time, not the > whole body or a > hand which are concepts, but as visible object, > touch, seeing, which > you can test for yourself even in front of the > computer. ...or pańńaa can... > Khun Sujin > says that right understanding can arise anywhere, > without exception, > so all we have to do is let it happen, ...and hope for kusala 'accumulations'... > no matter > what others say. > Only we could know our own experiences, in the end. > > > Anumodana in your studies, as usual, Thanks, as always, Ma'am... mike 2833 From: Jim Anderson Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology Dear Sarah, You wrote: >I had 2 older Abhidhamatthasangaha translations & had >also found it tough going. The translation by B.Bodhi >I find a real treat by comparison; beautifully laid >out and in good English w/gd notes. But then you're >probably reading it in Pali. do you have the comm.note >in Pali too? The 2 older translations of Abhidh-s (CPD abbr.) you mention are probably the same 2 I have by Narada and S.Z. Aung. I don't have Bodhi's translation but have been thinking about ordering a copy. I most often use Narada's translation and notes but only for reference and have not tried to work my way through it from cover to cover. However, the Abhidh-s does contain a lot of useful information that helps me to understand some of the messages on this list. Some recent examples were those concerning the hetus of individuals which Alex and Amara posted and also in my reading of 'Realities and Concepts' there is much in it that is coming from Abhidh-s and its tika. So I'm interested in becoming better acquainted with these texts in Pali. I have four versions of Abhidh-s and two versions of its tika to work with plus the two translations mentioned above. >Good to have you back on 'board'...you certainly >caught up quickly! Glad to be back on board! Normally, whenever I leave my cottage I also leave behind my access to the internet and I would have quite a bit of catching up to do when I got back. But this time while in the city I bought a laptop computer and was able to connect online from it while there and keep up with reading the messages. I also felt that it was a good idea to have a laptop as a backup in case my desktop computer fails to work as it did several times last year. Best wishes, Jim A. 2834 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:51am Subject: Re:_Papańca_[again] > Dear Khun Sujin, Dear Mike, I hope this was an 'honest mistake' and not irony! Sorry, just couldn't resist, Amara 2835 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology Dear Sarah, --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > So what is meant by 'holy life' and what is meant > here > by 'monk'? I knew I was equivocating a little, here, and deliberately so. No wrong speech was intended... > I'd need to read the commentary notes to > be > quite sure, but in many suttas, we are told that the > holy life refers to the eightfold path and those who > have followed the eightfold path (and reached stages > of enlightenment) are those that have followed the > holy life. This reminds me of the ultimate meaning > of > sangha which also refers to the same individuals. This WAS the sort of think I had in mind... > In the same way, we need to consider what is meant > by > 'bhikkhu' when it seems so often that it is only > monks > that are being referred to. I'm just looking at the > commentary notes to the Satipatthana Sutta. Here it > says 'Bhikkhu is a term to indicate a person who > earnestly endeavours to accomplish the practice of > the > teaching. Others, gods and men, too, certainly > strive > earnestly to accomplish the practice of the > teaching, > but because of the excellence of the bhikkhu-state > by > way of prctice, the master said 'Bhikkhu'....'He who > practises this practice of the Arousing of > Mindfulness > is called a bhikkhu'....'Accordingly it is said: > > "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm, > Tamed, humble,pure,a man who does no harm > To aught that lives, that one's a brahmin true. > An ascetic and mendicant too'Dhp142 Nice citation! Especially in the context of the 'robes' thread. As you may recall, I have yet to read the commentaries--so you may be engaging in a duel of wits with an unarmed opponent... > In the comm notes to the Samannaphala Sutta (Fruit > of > recluseship) (one of my favorites!) > which I'm reading along with many other > books, in my grasshopper fashion, it talks about the > meaning of recluseship: > > 'in the ultimate sense, recluseship is the path and > the fruit of recluseship is the noble fruit. As it > is > said: 'What , bhikhus, is recluseship? It is this > Noble Eightfold Path...' ' > > It also talks here about the 3 kinds of solitude, > i.e. > bodily (kayaviveka), mental (cittaviveka) and > ultimate > solitude (upadhiviveka) for those persons 'who have > gone beyone formations' (i.e. attained Nibbana). > > The reason I'm mentioning these is not because > anyone > has implied anything to the contrary but just to > reflect how carefully we need to read the Suttas. > When > it seems that the Buddha is only talking to the > monks, > it MAY not be the case. Sarah, I'm NOT disagreeing with you. But the distinction comes not from reading the suttas, but from reading the commentaries. I hope you know that, by now, I'm convinced of the value of that. > Even with commentary notes and the Pali it is not > always easy and the reading will very much depend on > one's understanding at the time. Ages(?) ago there > was > some discussion on the list (after a death in O's > family) on the Bhaddekaratta Sutta (A Single > Excellent > Night), Maj Nik 131. It talks about how death can > come at any time, but one who 'dwells' ardently can > be > said to have had an excellent night. I'd read all > the > comm notes and checked the pali and still didn't > understand why it should just refer to the night and > not the day. In Bangkok they checked the Thai and > here > it referred to night and day and K.Sujin explained > that night refers to a 24hr period as in booking a > hotel for 2nts! Not surprising at all. Same expression is common around the ancient world, in the form of 'moons' rather than 'suns'. > I don't expect this to be of any > interest to many (except perhaps Jim A), but it's > just > an example of how suttas are not as easy to read as > some may think and a reason why it can be hard to > read > correctly without some knowledge of abhidhamma! Well, it's of great interest to me, in particular, but more to the point, as an example of the value of approaching the dhammavinaya by way of the commentaries, and therefore of the great benefit of having the members of this group as 'admirable friends... Happy New Year again... mike 2836 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dear Sarah, --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > On the subject of concord or lack of it (Mike this > post may not be to your liking in this regard!), (I think I'm beginning to get over this particular bug, thanks to you...!) > p.s (I always seem to have one) Mike, some humour > and > lighter side would have been a big improvement all > around at that time! Unfortunately, I was engaged in an underwater struggle with a HUGE papańca-beast at the time. If you hadn't thrown me that knife, I wouldn't be here to thank you even now... mike 2837 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papańca_[again] I've done it again... No irony intended, Khun Amara! mike --- amara chay wrote: > > > Dear Khun Sujin, > > > Dear Mike, > > I hope this was an 'honest mistake' and not irony! > > Sorry, just couldn't resist, > > Amara > > 2838 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:New year resolution Dear Khun Shin, Well said! --- shinlin wrote: > Dear Dhamma friends, > It is already New Years. Usually before meeting > and hearing dhamma, I > would usually think of new year resolutions for the > next year. BUT things > has changed after understanding the dhamma. At the > beginning, I thought > Dhamma would change my life for the better. BUT all > that was the wrong view > of learning dhamma. I have realized that learning > the dhamma is not > expecting or wanting for a change but understanding > the truth of everything > and realities, which enhance the understanding of > anattaness of everything > and development of the right view. Lately, Archan > Sujin taught us how to > really understand and contemplate the realities as > it is. And from there, I > have realized that I have been only understanding > dhamma at the level of > thinking, and not the real contemplating and > understanding of realities. Ditto! It struck me recently that I've expended a great deal of (wrong) effort trying to justify a lot of 'coarse' understanding based on pańńati (mostly papańca). > From these past lessons, I have realized that many > of our dhamma friends are > in the same situation as me. (Count me 'in'). > Therefore today, I have > decided on advising > everyone my misunderstanding of dhamma, in hoping > this can allow you to > ponder yourself whether if it is really > understanding the realities or you > think you understand the realities. This is very > important because thinking > that you understand, includes a big self in there. I > am not here to attack > anybody or cause any akusula citta for anyone, and > if my letter has attack > any of you, pls forgive me because my intentions are > not to offend you in > any ways. On the contrary, Ma'am, THANK you for 'attacking' 'my' moha! and a very happy new year... mike 2839 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 0:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness Dear Khun Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > > Just thinking aloud--could the flaw in translation > be > > that of cognition vs. REcognition? > > Dear Mike, > > You mean that cognition is to learn something new, > as opposed to > recognition as to knowing what is seen > intellectually? I meant to 'know' it for the first time rather than to perceive it as something previously known. I was really just throwing that out as a possibility. > Amara > > P.S. I forgot to ask, where is the flaw, do you > mean in my > translation? No, that wasn't what I meant. I should have kept more of the post I was responding to--I'll look it up and refresh my memory. > Because if you find something wrong, > it could be easily > rectified. I certainly didn't to criticise your translation. I don't know the original language! Please excuse my recklessness. I've been going a little too fast, trying to catch up--I'll have a look back and try to clarify my meaning. No offense, Ma'am! mike 2840 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:07pm Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness > I meant to 'know' it for the first time rather than to > perceive it as something previously known. Dear Mike, Both the words 'cognition' and 'recognition' are the functions of sanna, if I remember correctly, sanna 'marks' or 'notes' whatever the citta is experiencing as aramana so that it recognizes it again, even when it could not place a 'name' on it yet, such as in a baby without linguistic abilities. The which is why right sanna of the experiencing of realities could accumulate and panna grow, mutually assisting one cetasika the other, with the right conditions. Hope this helps, Amara > No offense, Ma'am! > > mike 2841 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:10pm Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness > > No offense, Ma'am! > > > > mike Dear Mike, I meant to say also, no offense taken, especially from you! Amara 2842 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:31pm Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness > Both the words 'cognition' and 'recognition' are the functions of > sanna, if I remember correctly, sanna 'marks' or 'notes' whatever the > citta is experiencing as aramana so that it recognizes it again, even > when it could not place a 'name' on it yet, such as in a baby without > linguistic abilities. The which is why right sanna of the > experiencing of realities could accumulate and panna grow, mutually > assisting one cetasika the other, with the right conditions. I also would like to add that this is why the 'wrong' sanna is also accumulated in ordinary everyday life, when we take nama and rupa for the self and others as well as animals, entities and objects. Without the teachings of the Buddha, right sanna would never be able to start, even on the intellectual level, and we would always live in the world of pannatti, as we have for innumerable lifetimes. Amara 2843 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness Dear Khun Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > > I meant to 'know' it for the first time rather > than to > > perceive it as something previously known. > Dear Mike, > > Both the words 'cognition' and 'recognition' are the > functions of > sanna, if I remember correctly, sanna 'marks' or > 'notes' whatever the > citta is experiencing as aramana so that it > recognizes it again, even > when it could not place a 'name' on it yet, such as > in a baby without > linguistic abilities. The which is why right sanna > of the > experiencing of realities could accumulate and panna > grow, mutually > assisting one cetasika the other, with the right > conditions. > > Hope this helps, > > Amara Excellent! Thanks for the clarification. mike 2844 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 1:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I'd just like to chip in here with a comment on one > of > the references to 'fear' quoted by Sarah. > > > Just one more short quote from Ang Nik bk of 6s: > > > > 'Fear (bhaya), pain, disease, blain (?), bondage, > > bog > > (?) are names > > For sense-desires to which the worldlings cling. > > They who see fear in grasping (upadana)- source of > > birth > > And death - grasp not and, ending both, are freed; > > Won is the peace, blissful in perfect cool > > They dwell here now, all fear and hate long gone, > > All ill surpassed.' > > Good quote. Is it possible that the reference to > 'those who see fear in grasping (upadana)' is a > reference to seeing fear without experiencing fear > of > the dosa type? > > Jonothan > Dear J, Yes I think you're right. Both the first fear (bhaya)in the first line and the fear as in see fear in grasping (upadana- Comy. the fourfold-i.e. kama,ditthi, silabbata, attavada) obviously refer to the 'fearsomeness' in sense pleasures and grasping. Those who see this dwell with all fear and hate (both are kinds of dosa) removed. Thanks for pointing this out. I've found the many reminders about the fear or fearsomeness of sense pleasures to be very sobering and useful (even if at an intellectual level!). Thanks to Amara & Dan for raising the topic. Sarah Really looking f/w to a good translation of Ang Nik w/comm notes by B.Bodhi.....! The collected Wheel publication didn't include this verse. 2845 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 3:11pm Subject: Giving and Taking Offence Dear Kom, Amara, Alex, Shin, Mike Kom wrote: > I am glad to see you don't seem to take offense to > labeling subjective. > I think all each of us can do is to explain our > understanding in the > open, and point out to each other good sources of > information. Whether > one who reads the messages understand dhamma the > right way or not, that > depends on many conditions and accumulations. I think we've all been concerned about giving offence recently and perhaps it's useful to consider this a little. As we know, those cheating dhammas (vancaka) slip in all the time and the reason they're cheating is because we usually don't recognize them because we're so busy justifying our kusala (wholesome) thoughts, speech and action. Amara referred recently to a couple of these. One was the condemning with harsh words, focusing on the person and not the deed (no.21). I am only too painfully aware of how often this slips in while I'm teaching. It's so easy to justify the stern words (and dosa) as being for the student's welfare. The other Amara mentioned was the one that 'searches for others' wrong doings' and liking to 'condemn others'. Again, it can be quite subtle and it's very easy to kid ourselves that it doesn't arise. In reality, I find, even when my overall concern is to help others such as when I am teaching or even here on the list, akusala cittas of all kinds slip in all the time. After all, teachers and listies are not arahats! Amara & Dan have recently been sharing some useful thought on 'judging others' and while I was checking back in the Bk of 6s in Ang Nik for my last post, I was side-tracked into reading the useful passages 'on being considerate' and 'judging others'. In 'judging others' (bk of 6s, 45), the Buddha discusses different types of persons. He starts by talking about one who is pleasant, friendly and lives gladly with others, but doesn't develop much understanding. Then he talks about another person with the same personality, but in this case becomes enlightened. When they die, people judge them the same and only the Buddha can know all the differences: 'Therefore, Ananda, you should not be a (hasty) critic of people, should not (lightly) pass judgement on people. He who passes judgement on people harms himself. I alone, Ananda, or one like me, can judge people.' I've rather lost my thread... The point is, as Kom expressed a lot more succinctly, all we can do on the list (as that was the topic of his post) is offer our help and understanding and even questioning as best as we can at any given time, keeping in mind our limitations. We cannot always send a perfect post or one that won't cause offence, but at least we're trying and learning, hopefully, by our mistakes. No one means to cause offence. Whether offence is taken will depend on many other conditions which are quite outside our control. Some were offended by even the Buddha's own words. While we cling to ourselves, don't we all take offence from time to time? Mana (conceit) rears its ugly head only too easily! > > Mispellings of pali terms, for examples, are > understandably a hindrance > to understanding the discussions. Clearly akusala > vipaka for those who > endure them, and possibly akusala kamma for those > who propagate them. > My apology to all. I wouldn't put it so seriously, Kom... I really wouldn't see this as akusala kamma for a start! The vipaka will have to wait for another post! What about all my typo mistakes? > > Misunderstood statements about dhamma are also an > even harder hindrance > to overcome. I personally propagate some recently, > and will no doubt > propagate more (maybe less and less???) in the > future. We ALL make mistakes..we're all here to learn...As always, appreciating all your great posts this month..Many times we discussed how we were sorry not to have you with us in Cambodia. With (mostly) good intentions!! Sarah 2846 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 3:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papańca_[again] Dear Amara, Glad you enjoyed it....I've never been good at telling amusing stories, so I'm flattered (o.k. there's the mana) by your laughter! One little more twist to this story. Yesterday morning I went to see my acupuncturist for my weekly 'hit' with the needles for my throat problem. He suggested I take up early morning chanting! When I remember the words of the mantra, maybe I can try to juggle it with my early morning posts to this list! Sarah --- amara chay wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for this lovely explanation! I really needed > all that > laughter, (I know, lobha!) and now I also know what > 'mantra' is to a > westerner! Did you know that the recitals I used to > do in my young > and obedient days were called in Thai 'suad mon' > (reciting mantra) > which is why to my mind they are sort of synonyms. > > Thanks for everything, > > Amara > 2847 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 3:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papańca_[again] --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Amara, > When I remember the > words of the mantra, maybe I can try to juggle it > with > my early morning posts to this list! ..and with sati OF COURSE! ..and right now i'm juggling this, with a quick lunch snack, & answering tel calls! MUST sign off! > > Sarah > > > > --- amara chay wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah, > > > > Thanks for this lovely explanation! I really > needed > > all that > > laughter, (I know, lobha!) and now I also know > what > > 'mantra' is to a > > westerner! Did you know that the recitals I used > to > > do in my young > > and obedient days were called in Thai 'suad mon' > > (reciting mantra) > > which is why to my mind they are sort of synonyms. > > > > Thanks for everything, > > > > Amara > > 2848 From: tikmok Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 4:08pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Giving and Taking Offence Dear Sarah, Thanks for your well thought-out reponse to my message, and thanks for attempting to mend any rift. -----Original Message----- > Mispellings of pali terms, for examples, are > understandably a hindrance > to understanding the discussions. Clearly akusala > vipaka for those who > endure them, and possibly akusala kamma for those > who propagate them. > My apology to all. >I wouldn't put it so seriously, Kom... I really >wouldn't see this as akusala kamma for a start! The >vipaka will have to wait for another post! >What about all my typo mistakes? Can't help it. I am a serious guy. Seriously, though, I took no offence on the suggestion that I had many slips of mispellings. Besides the fact that it is true, sometimes I am just lazy, or ran out of time, to make sure that the spellings are all right. If I am lazy, that is certaily akusala. It may have no malice intention, but that's akusala nonetheless. Anumoddhana for reminding yet once again that even while doing something that can be superficially thought of kusala "deed", it may be, in fact, akusala or kusala may be alternately rising with akusala. kom 2849 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 6:06pm Subject: Re:_Papańca_[again] > Glad you enjoyed it....I've never been good at telling > amusing stories, so I'm flattered (o.k. there's the > mana) by your laughter! > > One little more twist to this story. Yesterday morning > I went to see my acupuncturist for my weekly 'hit' > with the needles for my throat problem. He suggested I > take up early morning chanting! When I remember the > words of the mantra, maybe I can try to juggle it with > my early morning posts to this list! Dear Sarah, Thanks for another 'hit' of laughter, maybe I could pass on to you my old recital to chant! Might be better to chant the beneficence of the Buddha than some unintelligible syllables, even if it's for your throat! Do take care of yourself, Anumodana for all the kusala, Amara 2850 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 9:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:_Papańca_[again] --- amara chay wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for another 'hit' of laughter, maybe I could > pass on to you my > old recital to chant! Might be better to chant the > beneficence of the > Buddha than some unintelligible syllables, even if > it's for your > throat! Do take care of yourself, > > Anumodana for all the kusala, > > Amara > ....ah, but chanting an intelligible and useful recital, reflecting on it AND sending out posts at the same time could be even more challenging than the mantra, drums and climbing up the mountain routine! 2851 From: kelvin liew peng chuan Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 9:23pm Subject: Dan's view I have a similar view with Dan but I'm quite clear about the distance that sets the Dhamma appart frm others.I wonder if any of you guys read an article on the net condemming the Dhamma?(eg.Catholic Appologetics)Frm there you can see the striking difference .I believe the Dhamma as proclaimed by the Teacher is the most unique as every phenomenon is explainable and there are no hidden unfigured out things like mysteries.This is also the only teaching that challenges humans to face suffering straight in the face. 2852 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 9:54pm Subject: Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" Dear Kom, Thanks for your excellent comments and questions. This is a topic that I find fascinating, and I hope to write more extensively about it on this forum. However, right now I do not have enough time to do the topic justice, so I am postponing it to a later date. > Hi Dan, > > From the sila stand point, I think Buddhism looks similar to other > religions at the most superficial level. Beyond that there aren't many > similarities. from a non-specific standpoint, all Buddha teachings > are beautiful at the beginning, beautiful in the middle, and beautiful > at the end. His teachings are profound refined, and his panna about > realities is unmatched. I can't certainly say the same thing about > other religions. > > In the more specific standpoints, here's what I found: > 1) Sila in Buddhism has many levels: from sila without panna, sila with > panna, sila with Satipatthana, and sila with maggha. Now, if you have > sila because it's the will/teaching of god. Is that Sila with or > without panna? > > 2) People with different levels of panna perform sila for different > purposes: because it's good, because it will bring you good things in > return, or because it contributes to the path to Nibhanna. In > Christianity, isn't it true that even if you perform sila, the result > is still uncertain. It depends on god to make the judgement whether or > not you are worthy. The results of sila are subjective at best, but > the results of sila in Buddhism are certain: it is simply how things > work. > > --- Dan Dalthorp <> wrote: > > I agree for the most part. However, I'd say that on a superficial > > level, they appear completely different. On a more intermediate level > > > > (once we get beyond the obvious differences in language and methods > > of > > expressing truth), they appear very similar. On a deeper level, > > though, they are once again very different. > I would love to hear more specific details of why you say this. > Exception for the wordings and the outside appearances of person > performign sila (not killing, not lying, etc.), I see no similarity. > > > Part of the difference is > > > > that Christianity does not have a detailed description of the path. > > When pressed on what the path is, the response is that "faith is a > > gift from the Holy Spirit," which is quite a different from Buddha's > > [paraphrase of Rhys David's translation]: "Work out your own > > salvation > > with diligence"--and then explicit instructions on how to do it! > The Buddha teaches realities as things really are. I see huge > differences between Buddhism and other religion, betwen truths and > non-truths. What are the similarities? > > > > > Another, less important but critical difference is the > > different emphasis on Jesus' two commandments: 1. Love God with all > > your heart; and 2. Love your neighbor as yourself. Theravada > > Buddhists > > put greater emphasis on the former (internal, spiritual), and > > Christianity puts more emphasis on the latter. Both traditions do > > emphasize both "commandments," but the weight put on each is > > different. > I also don't see how you say the first view point is a Buddhist view > point? That's certainly not matching any of the Buddha's teachings, > perhaps not even matching to the teachings by Mahasi! There is no god: > it's not a person, and it's not animal: there can be no Metta toward > god. > > kom > > > 2853 From: Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: Giving and Taking Offence Dear Kom and Sarah, "Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not ill- spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five? "It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of good-will. "A statement endowed with these five factors is well-spoken, not ill- spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people." Anguttara Nikaya V.198 Vaca Sutta - A Statement Translated by Thanissaro Bhikku Please note that 'well-spelled' is not included here. As I've never known (either of) you to violate any of the other injunctions above, I think you're off the hook, Khun Kom! mike p.s. Wish I spelled HALF as well in a second or third language... --- "tikmok" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for your well thought-out reponse to my message, and thanks for > attempting to mend any rift. > > -----Original Message----- > > Mispellings of pali terms, for examples, are > > understandably a hindrance > > to understanding the discussions. Clearly akusala > > vipaka for those who > > endure them, and possibly akusala kamma for those > > who propagate them. > > My apology to all. > >I wouldn't put it so seriously, Kom... I really > >wouldn't see this as akusala kamma for a start! The > >vipaka will have to wait for another post! > >What about all my typo mistakes? > > Can't help it. I am a serious guy. Seriously, though, I took no offence on > the suggestion that I had many slips of mispellings. Besides the fact that > it is true, sometimes I am just lazy, or ran out of time, to make sure that > the spellings are all right. If I am lazy, that is certaily akusala. It > may have no malice intention, but that's akusala nonetheless. > > Anumoddhana for reminding yet once again that even while doing something > that can be superficially thought of kusala "deed", it may be, in fact, > akusala or kusala may be alternately rising with akusala. > > kom > > 2854 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jan 9, 2001 11:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha Kom > Although the > understanding about Satipathanna was exact, but the > samatha > understanding I had before was derived from an > exposure to an > anapanasati technique, which could be way off from > the technique that > may actually work. The concentration on breath, as > taught by the > school, certainly does not separate the porathamatha > characteristics as > different dhatus. Rather, it was taught as a whole > aggregate: you > concentrate on the breath however way you can > observe it: contact > (hardness), warmth (dejo), and motion (apo). As I understand it, the practice of samatha is not undertaken by deciding to concentrate on the object in question. There is far more to it than this. Nor is the practice, as described in the Visuddhimagga, a matter of concentrating on the breath as hardness, warmth etc. (Here again, I may differ from Robert. But then he’s off list for the time being …) > However, I am willing to take Robert's explanation > as a hypothesis. > Obviously, in order for this to be samatha, there > must be panna > arising. Now this gets slightly more interesting. > There is panna > rising with the citta cognizing a paramatha > arammana, but the panna is > not at the satipatthana level, i.e., the fact that > it is just a dhatu > and not self is not penetrated. I didn't consider > the possibility of > panna arising with citta cognizing a paramatha > arammana not being > Satipatthana before. Now, I ask you two (and > anybody else), is this > possible? If one is focussing on, for example, the hardness that is breath, with a view to developing samatha, that would be thinking about hardness, just as is focusing on the hardness that appears at the body-door now. Accordingly, the arammana is pannati (object of citta that thinks). As to whether there would be any level of panna, I would think not, in either case (speaking for myself, at least). > After the breath becomes nimita (how does breath > become nimita? I > don't think anybody has answered this question yet, > although I don't > need an answer anyway), the arammana is obviously > pannati. Also, as I > understand it, the breath becomes so fine that the > paramatha > charactertics cannot be "observed" at some stage in > the development > anyway. The breath does not become nimitta. The breath becomes more and more subtle, until it no longer manifests. Later, a nimitta appears. The nimitta may appear in one of many forms. (Vis VIII 208-216). This is an extremely advanced stage of samatha, at least by today’s standards. We know so little about the beginning stages of samatha. > > Knowledge of > > the difference between the 2 kinds of rupa > > (conditioned by citta vs. conditioned by utu) > would be > > panna of the level of samatha bhavana, I suppose. > Don't understand how one can differentiate the two > without any kind of > "special" nana, as Robert has said. The dejo dhatu > in the rupa kalapa > conditioned by citta (citta samuthana) almost > immediately conditions > the rupa kalapa (utu-samuthana) to arise. The > poramatha > characteristics are identical. How can you tell > the differences? I agree with your observations on this. I think I meant to say that panna of the level of samatha could tell whether the object is breath (or something we normally take for breath) or is, for example, something we usually taken for the nose or lip. What I am trying to say is that panna of the level of samatha does not allow any confusion as to the meditation object. But as you say, that level of panna would not know anything about the conditioning factors at play. > > The difference between these 2 kinds of rupa is of > no > > significance in the development of satipatthana, > since > > satipatthana does not require the arising of > awareness > > in relation to any particular reality. And as far > as > > I know, the characteristic of, say, hardness, is > the > > same whenever it appears to sati ie it does not > differ > > according to its conditioning factor/s. > Now, this is expounded on so many time that this > "appears" easy. Whew, > at least there is no controversy. Yes, it’s a relief, isn’t it! Thanks for your perceptive comments and challenging questions. Jonothan 2855 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:00am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dhd5 --- Dan Dalthorp <> wrote: > Dear Jonathon, > I don't find anything contradictory between Mahasi's > and Buddhagosa's > comments. Thanks for clarifying this, and my apologies for misreading your post by inferring that you did. Buddhagosa does not discuss > consciousnesses immediately > before bhaya-nana arises. Instead, he describes the > experience of > bhaya-nana itself. Mahasi's comments apparently > refer to an instant of > real fear which immediately spins into bhaya-nana as > the mind reacts > wisely to the incipient "fear" before it develops > into > full-fledged dosa. He does use the phrase "At that > time...", but > everything happens very quickly... His "at that > time" may be a slip > into everyday language and not a real confusion of > the significance of > each individual thought moment. I believe that > Mahasi was wise enough > to understand that panna does not arise coincident > with domanassa. I would like to look more closely at the 2 texts before commenting. On the question discussed in our other exchange, if there is no inconsistency with the Tipitaka, I’m not sure why you refer to it/them as ‘deviation’. This is strong language! Why not ‘interpretation’ or some other less perjorative term? Jonothan 2856 Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:24am Subject: Re: Giving and Taking Offence Dear Sarah, Thank you for a very nice and gently post. Anumodana to your kusala citta, Alex --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > > Dear Kom, Amara, Alex, Shin, Mike 2857 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 1:12am Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Jonathon wrote: > On the question discussed in our other exchange, if > there is no inconsistency with the Tipitaka, I'm not > sure why you refer to it/them as `deviation'. This is > strong language! Why not `interpretation' or some > other less perjorative term? I sure don't mean my 'deviation' to have any pejorative connotations. I am using it in a strictly neutral sense of a "deviation" from Tipitaka is an idea that is "not included" in Tipitaka. This quasi-definition of 'deviation' comes very close to the dictionary sense and close enough to the meaning that I wish to convey that I am comfortable with the word. If you can help me find a more suitable alternative that you won't read as pejorative, I'd be happy to use it. 'Interpretation' wouldn't work. For example, I don't think the workings of internal combustion engines can be explained by anyone's interpretation of Tipitaka. I think you need to go outside Tipitaka (i.e. deviate from Tipitaka) to find such an explanation. 2858 From: Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 10:27am Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness Mike I must say I have learnt a lot from reading your posts about inter- personal relations, a skill in which I am rather lacking. Would you mind if I copy your formula for use with my own posts? > I certainly didn't mean to criticise. > Please excuse my recklessness. > I've been going a little too fast, trying to catch up-- > I'll have a look back and try to clarify my meaning. > No offense, Ma'am! I think I am getting the hang of it. I just append this, suitably modified, to any post which might seem to question anything Amara has said. Sort of a `thanks in advance' for sensitive situations. Jonothan BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for Robert? 2859 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:01am Subject: Re: Dan's view > I have a similar view with Dan but I'm quite clear about the distance that > sets the Dhamma appart frm others.I wonder if any of you guys read an > article on the net condemming the Dhamma?(eg.Catholic Appologetics)Frm there > you can see the striking difference .I believe the Dhamma as proclaimed by > the Teacher is the most unique as every phenomenon is explainable and there > are no hidden unfigured out things like mysteries.This is also the only > teaching that challenges humans to face suffering straight in the face. Dear Kelvin, I think that the main difference between Buddhism and other religions is that most others do not have bhavana. All religions have dana (giving) and sila (rules to behave in society) to some extent, but without the knowledge of what the citta is bhavana cannot be rightly developed. Before the Buddha bhavana as in samatha bhavana was taught since they knew the difference between kusala and akusala but not that there was no self doing the practice, so the moments of doing the samatha are exempt from kilesa of any kind, but having attained the jhana of different levels, they have the belief of the self who had attained with such purity, and mana and all the latent kilesa would still be there, so when the conditions come, they would be cause for the coarser kilesa to arise again, so that they are always prisoners of samsara, they could not end rebirth, though as the result of the jhana they might be born a brahma for an eternity in time. After the vipaka (result of kamma, here the jhana citta) of being born in the brahma world had finished giving results, one could be born a human again, and have to begin over again, but with the Buddha's teachings, vipassana, bhavana was taken to the ultimate level, where rebirth is completely ended. The self is shown not to exist and the 'practice' is towards the realization of this truth, no matter with samatha or any kusala activities occurring simultaneously or not. Without the self, dana is not only giving for the good of others, but not to be attached to what is 'ours' as well. Sila is not only to refrain from ill deeds (physical and mental) but to see our accumulations more clearly (mental) as well. And bhavana need not be for those who live in the conditions favorable to the jhana arising such as live in the right place, wear the right clothing and eat the right food, etc. (in order to avoid the hindrances that keep the jhana from arising) which could only exist in an ascetic or recluse's life, but for anyone who studies realities as they really are. The hindrances to vipassana are far fewer, and it can be practiced anywhere, unlike samatha, so that in a way the physical conditions are much easier to fulfil. But the self could be much harder to eradicate, depending on the individual's accumulations. For some individuals avid of results, sitting still might seem more peaceful than moving about, such as going to work, but vipassana is such a personal practice that people moving about might be more mindful than sitting with lobha expecting things to happen. And when the jhana do arise, they could be cause for more lobha, clinging to such refined states of the citta. The higher level of accumulated satipatthana also automatically bring the jhana citta with the arising of the nana, without ever practicing samatha bhavana (except as momentary development along with vipassana in daily life, when sati also arises with ekaggata cetasika in the citta). In other words, vipassana encompasses samatha, but not the other way around, otherwise the Buddha's teachers, Aralatapas ans Utakatapas (spelling?) would have attained as well. As it is they were born in the brahma plane and are there to this day. This is why the Buddha's teachings could never be the same as any other teaching on earth, it is unique because of the provability, profundity as well as the person who taught it, whose accumulations towards the teaching was accumulated over zillions of centuries. His teachings always remind us to study the present moment as realities arise through the six dvara no matter where we are. Studying his teachings are more interesting to me more than trying to read between the lines for other teachings similitude to Buddhism, personally. But we all have our individual accumulations, so whatever helps one understand the Dhamma better, Anumosana in your studies, Amara 2860 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:08am Subject: Re: Giving and Taking Offence > "Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not ill- > spoken. > It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five? > > "It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken > affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of > good-will. > > "A statement endowed with these five factors is well-spoken, not ill- > spoken. It > is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people." > > Anguttara Nikaya V.198 > Vaca Sutta - A Statement > Translated by Thanissaro Bhikku > > Please note that 'well-spelled' is not included here. As I've never > known (either of) you to violate any of the other injunctions above, > I think you're off the hook, Khun Kom! Dear Mike, Thanks for the passage, which also lets me off the hook, having made my share of typos as everyone knows. Amara 2861 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:22am Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness > > No offense, Ma'am! > > I think I am getting the hang of it. I just append this, suitably > modified, to any post which might seem to question anything Amara has > said. Sort of a `thanks in advance' for sensitive situations. > > Jonothan > > BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for Robert? Jonothan, I hoope you do not mean to imply that I am above being questioned, after all the mistakes and appologies I have made to everyone! In fact I think I enjoy questions, especially when they open up new fields of discussions, but corrections that are unfounded can get a little tiresome, most of all when the person should know the facts better than I do. Amara 2862 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:39am Subject: Re: perception/memory, consciousness > > BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for Robert? I also meant to give you Robert's e-mail, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=194233250056127134213056109067021253018143238218134229182055166127046249149006227237009204035181 Amara 2863 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:58am Subject: Bangkok Post Dear all, A little piece of good news about the website, this in the January 10, 2001 Bangkok Post newspaper the website review column, Dot.co.th Highlights, gave really good review of our site and mentioned this discussion group as well! Anumodana in all the kusala cetana, Amara 2864 From: Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Precepts - Intoxicants dear metta jon,---> --->"One or two people tried to tell me that if someone is a "Bodhisattva with a high level of realization" that they could drink alcohol and not be affected." My response to that is: if they have such a high level of realization, then they would have no attachment to or craving for alcohol, and thus would not drink it. One man said to me: "But the Buddha was enlightened, and he still ate food." To which i responded: "Food is necessary for life; alcohol is not. The Buddha ate food so that he could support his body and mind to teach the Dhamma (Dharma) to others." Had i been in a sarcastic frame of mind, i could have said, "When YOU become a Bodhisattva with a high level of realization, then talk to me about it."<-------- :o) !! ----> "Some Buddhists will tell you that enlightened beings don't need to follow precepts. This is true, but ONLY because their behavior automatically conforms to the Dhamma. When your character is such that killing, stealing, lying, etc., are IMPOSSIBLE for you to commit, then you don't need the precepts to tell you not to do those things--because you wouldn't do them anyway. The great sage named Bodhidharma was quoted as saying: "Buddhas don't keep precepts; Buddhas don't break precepts."<-------- Right! "keep precepts cos you break precepts." :o) Thanks. 2865 From: Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re:New year resolution Dear Shin, >>"I am not here to attack anybody or cause any akusula citta for anyone, and if my letter has attack any of you, pls forgive me because my intentions are not to offend you in any ways."<< this is obvious, Thanks :o) 2866 From: Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 0:11pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: "He thinks THIS! He conceives THAT!" dear Dan , you said >> "Jesus was not a follower of Buddha (he most likely had never heard of Buddha), but a man who feels only compassion for the men who torture him to death IS a follower of the Buddha's teachings. Even though he wasn't at all fluent in the language of Abhidhamma, Jesus displayed an incredible amount of wisdom. Can this man, who never heard even heard the word "Buddha","<< But I think some recent studies suggest otherwise, Eventhough I cant mention any links or facts here , If I remember correctly I have read some articles about,. 1. Jesus having some connections with buddist monasteries in middle east, 2. Jesus actually being a some sort of a buddhist monk for some short period of time. etc.. [ but of course , having read the holy bible and other scriptures , I personally think that even if Jesus did hear some buddhist teaching at some point of time he did not grasp it well or propagate it well to his followers..] I know that this is not directly connected with this discussion thread , but felt like telling this Thanks 2867 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 2:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness Amara This was really rather naughty of me, but I just couldn't resist! I do hope you will see it as a liberty on my part that is born of our 25-plus years of dhamma-friendship. I believe you are already aware of the waggish tendencies lurking under my otherwise serious exterior. Amara, let me say how much I have appreciated the many helpful posts you have been putting out lately. There has obviously been much kusala thought put into them. I look forward to reading many more. Jonothan --- amara chay wrote: > > > No offense, Ma'am! > > > > I think I am getting the hang of it. I just > append this, suitably > > modified, to any post which might seem to question > anything Amara > has > > said. Sort of a `thanks in advance' for sensitive > situations. > > > > Jonothan > > > > BTW, does anyone have an off-list address for > Robert? > > > Jonothan, > > I hoope you do not mean to imply that I am above > being questioned, > after all the mistakes and appologies I have made to > everyone! In > fact I think I enjoy questions, especially when they > open up new > fields of discussions, but corrections that are > unfounded can get a > little tiresome, most of all when the person should > know the facts > better than I do. > > Amara 2868 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 2:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness Dear Friends, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Amara > > This was really rather naughty of me, but I just > couldn't resist! > .....and if any of you have any advice on how I can moderate the moderator, please let me know! Sarah 2869 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 2:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Precepts - Intoxicants Dear metta Jon, Firstly, another welcome to the group and what a useful post to enter with. --- Metta Jon wrote: > > One should avoid this occasion for evil, this > madness, this delusion, > this joy of fools." > When I was a child, my father was a bright, popular, Cambridge educated lawyer and a very affectionate father who loved reading Bertrand Russell. He used to drink socially and occasionally to excess but was never abusive in anyway and I never knew him to tell a lie. He died at 60 as an alcoholic and in the last few years lost everything: his wife, his family, his work, his wealth, his health, his reputation..... So these are poignant reminders. On a lighter note, we (usually I) always invite new members to share a little background (or a lot is fine too) so that we can get to 'know' you a little more and hear how you've come to join us. Look forward to hearing more of your excellent, well-researched posts. Sarah 2870 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 3:05pm Subject: List Housekeeping Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear > > Actually, I'm much to stingy of space on my hard > drive--I keep these 'folders' on Yahoo's server. > While you have a message open, there's a little > window > in the upper right corner of you screen reading, > 'Choose Folder'. If you select 'New Folder' from > that > list, then click on 'Move', you'll be prompted for a > name for the new 'folder'. Once you've filled that > in, the message will be saved in that folder > indefinitely. After that, you can click on the '+' > sign next to 'Folders' (to the left of your message > window), and select the 'folder' you'd like to view. > > Hope this is of some use! > > mike > Thanks for this (will try it when I'm not posting or reading). Actually there's so much useful information in the archives after only a year and none of us ever have time to go back and trace messages for any newbies. What we really need (I think) is some sort of index system to help us all, but I've no idea how this is done. Any volunteers out there? Another (smallish) problem is that s'times the threads lead away from the original subject headings.... I'm sure other groups (perhaps the longer established Christian groups) have sorted out these difficulties and have some tips we could 'borrow'! Thanks Sarah 2871 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 3:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology Dear Jim, --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear > The 2 older translations of Abhidh-s (CPD abbr.) you > mention are > probably the same 2 I have by Narada and S.Z. Aung. exactly > I don't have Bodhi's > translation but have been thinking about ordering a > copy. I highly recommend this.....it's made the others quite redundant for us. I most often use > Narada's translation and notes but only for > reference and have not tried to > work my way through it from cover to cover. I think this is the best way....I'm not sure how much one gains from reading books like this cover to cover but we all have different ways. However, > the Abhidh-s does > contain a lot of useful information that helps me to > understand some of the > messages on this list. Some recent examples were > those concerning the hetus > of individuals which Alex and Amara posted and also > in my reading of > 'Realities and Concepts' there is much in it that is > coming from Abhidh-s > and its tika. So I'm interested in becoming better > acquainted with these > texts in Pali. I'm impressed. Pls share any points of particular interest (although I know it's much easier to do this if the translation is on line and one can just put a link..) I have four versions of Abhidh-s and > two versions of its tika > to work with plus the two translations mentioned > above. Your cabin begins to sound like a large dhamma library, (a cosy one of course with that fire burning!) > > Glad to be back on board! Normally, whenever I leave > my cottage I also leave > behind my access to the internet and I would have > quite a bit of catching up > to do when I got back. But this time while in the > city I bought a laptop > computer and was able to connect online from it > while there and keep up with > reading the messages. I'm beginning to think we're going to have to do the same (i.e. invest in a laptop) for travels just to keep up with the reading here! I also felt that it was a good > idea to have a laptop > as a backup in case my desktop computer fails to > work as it did several > times last year. Glad to hear you won't have any excuses for dropping out at those times! I can't stress enough how glad we are to have your Pali expertise (not to mention 8 copies of Abhid-s w/ tikas) to refer to. Best wishes too, Sarah 2872 From: kelvin liew peng chuan Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:23pm Subject: Re:re:Dan's view Saddhu Amara for the insight shared on the diference between the Dhamma and other religious teaching.Thank you for the explanation. with metta ~ Kelvin 2873 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ordering tapes and books from Bangkok Mike > Just to update you on my efforts to digitize the > tapes > Robert sent me: I still haven't overcome the > technological hurdles to getting these onto the web. > > As it turns out, the sound card needed to run the > software to re-master the recordings is not > compatible > with my computer. I think the answer will be a new > computer, so it may be a little while yet. I'll > keep > you posted... In Bangkok (at the Foundation) they have put Khun Sujin's talks into MP3 format on CD-ROM's. If you think this experience might be helpful to you, I am told that the person to contact is Khun Unnop whose email address is the one given as the cc addressee for tapes and books orders (I will post it as soon as i manage to locate it) Jonothan 2874 From: shinlin Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 6:59pm Subject: ACCOUNT has been OPEN Dear Dhamma Friends, Today we have opened an account at the BANGKOK BANK under the name of K.Sukin. M.Betty and myself. At least, two people will have to sign the account together to be abke to withdrawal the money from the account. To make things easier to understand, I will make write it clearly at the below for your future process of the contribution to the printing of the Paramattadhamma Book and the handling charges for the books to be sent to you. 1. The account name is LIN,SHIAU-IN Bangkok Bank, Bangkapi Branch Account name:-105-4-368194 Swift Address :-BKKBTHBK 2. Pls convert all the donation and handling charges into Thai currency from your side. So to reduce the banking charges here in Thailand which in the end will leave your donation to nothing because every charge will take at least 250 baht for the convertion in Thailand( example:- if you transfer US$ 5 dollar for the postage, this will not be enough for the postage charges). So we suggest you to convert the contributions and charges into Thai currency from your side. Pls kindly talk to the International or currency transfer at your bank in your country. 3. All the postage charges will be posted on the website very soon. We are going to find out about the charges through courier and post. So anyone can use either of these services. 4. Once you have transfered the donation or charges into the account, pls kindly inform me or email me (and cc M. Betty, K.Amara,in case my mail server is down), so I can keep an accurate record and account of it. This is a very sensitive issue so we would not like to make any mistakes. 5. Once we get the hang of it, we will post the balance of the account monthly onto the website for your reference. If there is anything, you would like to suggest in this matter. Pls feel free to do so. Thankyou. with metta, Shin 2875 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 10:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] ACCOUNT has been OPEN Dear Shin & Amara. Congratulations on your work towards the printing of Amara’s translation of 'Summary'. While there may be some list members who would like to contribute, we feel that the subject of printing and donations generally is not really appropriate for this list. Some other members have commented on this too. We notice that you plan to use Amara’s website to post the information. By all means feel free to post a link to the website here from time to time. But as a general rule, messages regarding the printing and donations should be exchanged off this list. Good luck with your efforts. Jonothan & Sarah (Moderators) --- shinlin wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > Today we have opened an account at the BANGKOK > BANK under the name of > K.Sukin. M.Betty and myself. At least, two people > will have to sign the > account together to be abke to withdrawal the money > from the account. 2876 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 10, 2001 11:22pm Subject: Re: ACCOUNT has been OPEN > While there may be some list members who would like to > contribute, we feel that the subject of printing and > donations generally is not really appropriate for this > list. Some other members have commented on this too. > > We notice that you plan to use Amara's website to post > the information. By all means feel free to post a > link to the website here from time to time. But as a > general rule, messages regarding the printing and > donations should be exchanged off this list. Dear all, Actually it is my fault that Shin posted the information on this list, probably out of the Thai custom where it is considered presenting others with the opportunities to anumodana (have empathic joy) which in Buddhism is considered kusala citta. This aspect of accumulating kusala is discussed a little in the article, 'The Master Avengers' in the the intermediate section in , by the way. In one of the sutta, there is even the possibility of the person who anumodanas to accumulate an even greater kusala than the person who did the deed, as in one where a newly born deva is visited by another who was from a higher plane. The latter told the newcomer that they had been sisters in their last lifetimes and that they had married the same person. The newly arrived deva then recalled that she had been the first wife and had done much dana in that life and could not understand why the minor wife who did not have much possessions was reborn in a higher plane than herself, but the former sister/minor wife explained that it was because she had anumodana with mudita the kusala that her former sister had done, and the kusala resulted in her higher rebirth. I will ask for the proper references if you wish, unless someone could please find it for us. Betty and I talked about anumodana just yesterday, I think, and it does not mean 'thank you' as some might think, it is mudita in others' kusala, therefore it is for the person who has the kusala citta arising in seeing other's good deeds. As kusala is sometimes hard to find, most people avid of kusala citta like to hear of others' kusala so they could have a moment where their citta evolves in dana, sila or bhavana, and to anumodana is bhavana, peace from lobha, dosa, and moha, in momentary peace. I am sorry we seem to have caused the opposite reaction and will therefore ask Shin not to post them on the list any more. Just to explain the situation more clearly about the announcement on the website, there will be none about the printing. We are in fact only considering placing an order form for the free books with the difference that on the web so many people asked for them that some people are not sure if they really wanted to read them or just ordered out of curiosity, so we are considering setting up an order form where the reader participates in the shipping and handling costs, nothing to do with the printing of this new book in the least. We have not discussed the pros and cons of announcing the printing in the website, so far. We certainly will at our next meeting. In short it was not our intention to cause dosa in anyone, nor do we think we did anything wrong, having never asked for any contributions of any kind. Rather we thought some people might like the opportunity to anumodana, the directly opposite feeling. Since it has turned out this way, there will be no further mention of the printings or donations. Again, Shin was only doing what I had asked her to do and I think my intentions were entirely altruistic, sorry if some are offended, Amara 2877 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jan 11, 2001 0:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > >...'He > > who > > practises this practice of the Arousing of > > Mindfulness > > is called a bhikkhu'....'Accordingly it is said: > > > > "Well-dressed one may be, but if one is calm, > > Tamed, humble,pure,a man who does no harm > > To aught that lives, that one's a brahmin > true. > > An ascetic and mendicant too'Dhp142 > > Nice citation! Especially in the context of the > 'robes' thread. As you may recall, I have yet to > read > the commentaries--so you may be engaging in a duel > of > wits with an unarmed opponent... Mike, you're a LOT more familiar with the suttas than I am and really I've read preciously little of the commentaries, but sometimes the extra notes and maps do help! > Sarah, I'm NOT disagreeing with you. But the > distinction comes not from reading the suttas, but > from reading the commentaries. I hope you know > that, > by now, I'm convinced of the value of that. Well I think it comes from the way the suttas are read...as we've discussed before, the suttas can be read with many different kinds of understanding. As Robert said in a post, how he reads the Visuddhimagga now is completely different from when he read it the first time. The commentaries just give a little extra help or a few tips but can also be misread. Same with the abhidhamma: it can be the best friend or the worst foe depending on how it is understood and the purpose it is read. > > > it referred to night and day and K.Sujin explained > > that night refers to a 24hr period as in booking a > > hotel for 2nts! > > Not surprising at all. Same expression is common > around the ancient world, in the form of 'moons' > rather than 'suns'. There you go...yu have some extra tips that I don't hape from your wider knowledge in these areas!! > > Well, it's of great interest to me, in particular, > but > more to the point, as an example of the value of > approaching the dhammavinaya by way of the > commentaries, and therefore of the great benefit of > having the members of this group as 'admirable > friends... Yes, I agree on both accounts. BTW, I meant to thank you for also posting the link and comments on Piyajatika Sutta (From One Who is Dear). It's been a condition for some useful reflection even though I had nothing to add because the Sutta really said it all! Sarah 2878 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jan 11, 2001 11:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dan > I sure don't mean my 'deviation' to have any > pejorative > connotations. I am using it in a strictly neutral > sense of a > "deviation" from Tipitaka is an idea that is "not > included" in > Tipitaka. This quasi-definition of 'deviation' comes > very close to the > dictionary sense and close enough to the meaning > that I wish to convey > that I am comfortable with the word. If you can help > me find a more > suitable alternative that you won't read as > pejorative, I'd be happy > to use it. Thanks for the explanation. But I would be interested to know what terms you would use to distinguish, in the case of writings on the dhamma, those ‘deviations’ that are consistent with the Buddha’s teaching from those that are not. I appreciate that in one sense it doesn’t really matter what label we attach to things. But I’m intrigued by your choice of terms. I seem to recall the Buddha saying in one sutta that dhamma is dhamma in whatever form it is found or from whatever source – but is it your position that anything not actually from the mouth of the Buddha falls into the category of a ‘deviation’? Would you, for example, refer to the commentaries to the Tipitaka also as ‘deviations’? Jonothan 2879 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jan 11, 2001 11:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Mike This is not an easy area to discuss, but I will do the best I can. ---------------------------- > > Breath, it seems to me, is a concept. Like with > the > > concept ‘body’, it is possible that there can be > > awareness of one of the realities that we normally > > take for breath/body, and at such moments no > concept > > of breath/body appears. But there is no > paramattha > > dhamma ‘breath’, just as there is no paramattha > > dhamma > > ‘body’. > > I was instructed, for this reason, to focus on 'the > rise and fall of the abdomen', rather than the > breath > at the tip of the nose. The rationale was that, if > one focused on the sensation of the breath at the > tip > of the nose, one's attention might be taken instead > by > the wind element, or the fire (coolness?) element, > or > the wind (motion?) element--so, better to focus on > the > "rise and fall of the abdomen"--which I'm now > certain > is pańńati, at best--as least the way *I* did it... ----------------------------------------------- ‘Breath at the tip of the nose’ and ‘rise and fall of the abdomen’ are both pannati. One is mentioned in the Visuddhimagga in the description of samatha with breath as object while the other is not. (Also, one is a reference to breath as we know it, while the other is an indicator of breathing but not what would normally be thought of as breath.) ----------------------------------------------- > > Breath as object of samatha is a concept. Breath > as > > object of satipatthana, however, is a reference to > > awareness of one of the realities that we take for > > breath. > > Do you think that this was what, specifically, was > meant in the Anapanasati Sutta? ------------------------------------------ Yes, that is how I would understand it ------------------------------------------ > > Knowledge of > > the difference between the 2 kinds of rupa > > (conditioned by citta vs. conditioned by utu) > would > > be > > panna of the level of samatha bhavana, I suppose. > > > > The difference between these 2 kinds of rupa is of > > no > > significance in the development of satipatthana, > > since > > satipatthana does not require the arising of > > awareness > > in relation to any particular reality. > > But doesn't satipańńaa require the arising of > awareness in relation to a paramattha dhamma? I was > beginning to think that this is the difference > between > paramattha and non-paramattha dhammas (e.g. pańńati) ------------------------------------------------- Yes, satipatthana is the awareness of a reality (paramattha dhamma) that appears now. So while ‘breath’ could not be the object of satipatthana, either of the 2 kinds of rupas mentioned could. ----------------------------------------------- > > This is a very complex area. I have only ever > tried > > to understand the basics, because these are > > confusing > > enough! > > Tell me about it...! ---------------------------------------------- I prefer actually to talk about satipatthana, since the opportunities to do so with like-minded friends are so very limited (unlike the opportunities to learn more about samatha). But I am of course happy to discuss any kind of kusala in the context of satipatthana. Thanks for prompting the consideration. Jonothan 2880 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 0:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Jonothan, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > This is not an easy area to discuss, but I will do > the > best I can. Actually, I think your comments make it quite clear, especially together with the other excellent posts on this topic. Maybe your discussion is improving with practice--or maybe I'm just benefitting from repitition, as usual... I've just reached the chapters in AIDL that discuss rupa. I'm finding that difficult too, but it's beginning to make sense. I think this will all be a lot clearer when I understand (conceptually) the characteristics of rupa and its relationship to nama better than I do now. I'm glad we have abhidhamma for this purpose--I don't think I would've ever figured out these distinctions from the suttas or by (especially confused!) meditation. Thanks again... mike 2881 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 1:07am Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta In response to my use of the word "deviation", Jonathon wrote: > But I would be interested to know what terms you would > use to distinguish, in the case of writings on the > dhamma, those `deviations' that are consistent with > the Buddha's teaching from those that are not. Gosh, I don't know. How about those that are "consistent with" vs. "not consistent with"? Or those that "accord with" vs. "contradict"? > but is it your position that > anything not actually from the mouth of the Buddha > falls into the category of a `deviation'? I hesitate to answer because I don't know how you interpret the word "deviation". In my discussion with Amara, I referred to things not in the Tipitaka as "deviations" from the Tipitaka. Thus, the words of Buddhagosa, Mahasi, Amara, and Dan are all "deviations." Sometimes those deviations are "interpretations"; sometimes the deviations are "consistent with" Tipitaka but are not interpretations; and sometimes the deviations "contradict" Tipitaka. Sometimes deviations are not inconsistent with Tipitaka, but are just plain wrong (e.g., claiming that grape juice works just as well as gasoline in an internal combustion engine). I must reaffirm that this is a wholly neutral use of the term "deviation," and I do not intend any negative connotations. I think Amara understood what I meant by the term. >Would you, > for example, refer to the commentaries to the Tipitaka > also as `deviations'? Sure, I would call them "deviations" from Tipitaka. In addition, from what I've seen, they are consistent with Tipitaka and merely fill in some details that Tipitaka leaves out. Where did I come up with the idea to use that word? I thought of using the word "deviation" with the picture and dots analogy in mind. Tipitaka paints a picture of the landscape of the mind, but it contains only a bare outline; a simple, short, and concise summary of some of the important features. A slightly more refined version of the picture and dots analogy probably won't satisfy you any more than original version, but it may be helpful to someone else trying to follow this discussion (e.g. me!): In drawing a picture of the landscape of the mind, Tipitaka takes a black pen and draws the shape of the picture--like in a coloring book. The commentaries take color crayons and draw between the lines. That helps us see what it looks like, but to see the full picture in all its glory, we need to pick up the crayons ourselves. Sometimes we go outside the lines or use the wrong colors ("not consistent with Tipitaka"), but sometimes we are able to successfully and accurately add detail to the picture. When we are not drawing right on the lines, we are deviating from them. We can draw either inside the lines or outside the lines. We can use either the right colors or the wrong colors. 2882 From: amara chay Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 11:08am Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta > A slightly more refined version of the > picture and dots analogy probably won't satisfy you any more than > original version, but it may be helpful to someone else trying to > follow this discussion (e.g. me!): In drawing a picture of the > landscape of the mind, Tipitaka takes a black pen and draws the shape > of the picture--like in a coloring book. The commentaries take color > crayons and draw between the lines. That helps us see what it looks > like, but to see the full picture in all its glory, we need to pick up > the crayons ourselves. Sometimes we go outside the lines or use the > wrong colors ("not consistent with Tipitaka"), but sometimes we are > able to successfully and accurately add detail to the picture. When we > are not drawing right on the lines, we are deviating from them. We can > draw either inside the lines or outside the lines. We can use either > the right colors or the wrong colors. Dear Dan, Thank you for the clear explanation of your view of the Tipitaka, I think I understand even better now. From this perspective the Tipitaka is so all encompassing that everything is included in its comprehensive outline, since nothing can escape being a dhamma (reality, truth, what exists), either nama (intelligence/consciousness) or rupa (that which is not intelligence/conscioousness), or one of the four paramattha-dhamma (citta, cetasika, rupa or nibbana), etc. I would like to remark that in this analysis your internal combustion engine would also be included as a rupa too, you know. In the details, as you explained, many things cannot be found in the Tipitaka, especially modern things that did not exist in the Buddha's time. But I must maintain that some of the things you consider deviations, such as the Commentaries, are taken more seriously than most of the later explanations, especially if they differ in any way, at least by me. The teachings must be coherent and logical, otherwise they might lead us to misunderstandings and be a danger as Mike remarked, or at least a monumental waste of time. Which is why I think we should study to know the logic of any teaching before 'practicing' it on faith. And any teachings should be always be compared to the teachings in the Tipitaka and comentaries as much as possible, to my mind. Of course you still wouldn't find things like your engine in dhamma teachings, unless you talked to Ivan (who is also on this list, but so far has written us only one letter if I remember correctly! But then he is so busy...) who often compares the citta to an internal combustion engine and the cetasika as the different parts, and very logically too, I might add. Anyway, I would like to tell you about a new product recently marketed in Thailand, called 'gasohol', a mixture of gasoline and alcohol, which made me think that if you fermented your grape juice a little... =^_^= Thanks for everything, Amara 2883 From: amara chay Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 11:15am Subject: Dear all, We've put up 2 messages from this list in the Q&A section in , about Biddhism/other religions, If anyone would like to edit or add anything please contact me off-list. You can do so by clicking on my underlined e-mail address at the head of the messages I wrote, instead of clicking on the 'reply' button as you would normally do. I would like to invite you to suggest any other messages you would like to see added to the Q&A section to facilitate future references, and I will ask the author's permission to put it there for us all. Thanks in advance, as always, Amara 2884 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 0:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology Dear Sarah, Jim: >> I don't have Bodhi's >> translation but have been thinking about ordering a >> copy. Sarah: >I highly recommend this.....it's made the others quite >redundant for us. Okay, you have me convinced! I will go ahead and order a copy. And thanks for your reply to my message. It was a pleasure to read. Best wishes, Jim A. 2885 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 2:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Mike In an earlier post I said- ------------------------------------------ Knowledge of the difference between the 2 kinds of rupa (conditioned by citta vs. conditioned by utu) would be panna of the level of samatha bhavana, I suppose. The difference between these 2 kinds of rupa is of no significance in the development of satipatthana, since satipatthana does not require the arising of awareness in relation to any particular reality. ------------------------------------------- In my later post to you on this subject believe I overlooked a point you were making about the reference to satipatthana not requiring the arising of awareness in relation to any particular reality. What I was trying to say was that the object of satipatthana does not have to be any particular reality, in the sense that it can be any reality whatsoever. This is in contrast to samatha where, as we have discussed, only certain objects (the 40 objects of samatha) are appropriate. Sorry to have missed this in my last response. Jonothan 2886 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 3:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Dear Dan, --- Dan Dalthorp <> wrote: > In > ..... but to see the full picture in all its glory, > we need to pick up > the crayons ourselves. Sometimes we go outside the > lines or use the > wrong colors ("not consistent with Tipitaka"), but > sometimes we are > able to successfully and accurately add detail to > the picture. When we > are not drawing right on the lines, we are deviating > from them. We can > draw either inside the lines or outside the lines. > We can use either > the right colors or the wrong colors. > WE can? Are you sure? Sarah 2887 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 3:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Dan's view --- amara chay wrote: > > Studying his > teachings are more interesting to me more than > trying to read between > the lines for other teachings similitude to > Buddhism, personally. But > we all have our individual accumulations, so > whatever helps one > understand the Dhamma better, > I agree with Amara here. Although it may be interesting to study psychology, philosophy, science, or other religions and to detect any similarities, studying the Buddha's teachings themselves are a lot more useful. In these, we learn about anatta. Sarah 2888 From: Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 5:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta dear dan, eventho buddha has given us a handful of leaves thats because that IS what he really intended to do...not because he got a 'time out'....he has said that in the dhamma he preached that nothing is there to be added and nothing is there to be removed. the other leaves are the knowledges which are irrelevent for the cessession of dukkha. Being samma sambuddha he knew every possible thing and knew what will cause cessession of dukkha and what will not. rgds 2889 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 9:07pm Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta Amara wrote: > But I must maintain that some of the things you consider > deviations, such as the Commentaries, are taken more seriously than > most of the later explanations, especially if they differ in any way, > at least by me. The teachings must be coherent and logical, > otherwise they might lead us to misunderstandings and be a danger as > Mike remarked, or at least a monumental waste of time. Which is why > I think we should study to know the logic of any teaching before > 'practicing' it on faith. And any teachings should be always be > compared to the teachings in the Tipitaka and comentaries as much as > possible, to my mind. I agree. The Commentaries are to the best of my knowledge wholly consistent with Tipitaka. They have been well-established as "authoritative" and certainly should be taken more seriously than most of the later explanations. > Of course you still wouldn't find things like your engine in dhamma > teachings, unless you talked to Ivan (who is also on this list, but so > far has written us only one letter if I remember correctly! But then > he is so busy...) who often compares the citta to an internal > combustion engine and the cetasika as the different parts, and very > logically too, I might add. The internal combustion engine is not at all mentioned in the Tipitaka. It is wholly a deviation from Tipitaka. It is not inconsistent with Tipitaka. >Anyway, I would like to tell you about a > new product recently marketed in Thailand, called 'gasohol', a mixture > of gasoline and alcohol, which made me think that if you fermented > your grape juice a little... Wouldn't the engine then be breaking the precept against consuming intoxicants? That would be an akusala citta for the engine rupa. Now, THERE'S a deviation for you! 2890 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 9:15pm Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta In response to my: > > We can > > draw either inside the lines or outside the lines. > > We can use either > > the right colors or the wrong colors. > > Sarah, writes: > WE can? Are you sure? Oh dear, Sarah. I'm not sure what you are asking. Using everyday language in this thoroughly conventional discussion, of course WE can paint, and we do so all the time. The hard part is making sure we draw inside the lines using the right colors. We are not Buddhas, so sometimes we screw up, sometimes not. 2891 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Fri Jan 12, 2001 9:27pm Subject: Re: Dan's view Amara writes: > > Studying his > > teachings are more interesting to me more than > > trying to read between > > the lines for other teachings similitude to > > Buddhism, personally. But > > we all have our individual accumulations, so > > whatever helps one > > understand the Dhamma better, Sarah responds: > I agree with Amara here. Although it may be > interesting to study psychology, philosophy, science, > or other religions and to detect any similarities, > studying the Buddha's teachings themselves are a lot > more useful. In these, we learn about anatta. I think it is by and large more useful and interesting to study Buddhism too. However, cultivating an understanding of other traditions can help foster tolerance (khanti) and appreciation (mudita) toward people whose views differ from ours. Also, a study of other traditions can help us break the temptation to develop a rigid adherence to precise forms of words and descriptions. That rigidity can too easily lead to not being able to see the forest because we look too intently at the leaves and can result in intolerance and ill-will toward people who think differently. 2892 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jan 13, 2001 1:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Jonothan, Thanks for the further clarification. This is helpful. mike Jonothan Abbott wrote: Mike In an earlier post I said- ------------------------------------------ Knowledge of the difference between the 2 kinds of rupa (conditioned by citta vs. conditioned by utu) would be panna of the level of samatha bhavana, I suppose. The difference between these 2 kinds of rupa is of no significance in the development of satipatthana, since satipatthana does not require the arising of awareness in relation to any particular reality. ------------------------------------------- In my later post to you on this subject believe I overlooked a point you were making about the reference to satipatthana not requiring the arising of awareness in relation to any particular reality. What I was trying to say was that the object of satipatthana does not have to be any particular reality, in the sense that it can be any reality whatsoever. This is in contrast to samatha where, as we have discussed, only certain objects (the 40 objects of samatha) are appropriate. Sorry to have missed this in my last response. Jonothan 2893 From: amara chay Date: Sat Jan 13, 2001 8:40pm Subject: Re: Dan's view > I think it is by and large more useful and interesting to study > Buddhism too. However, cultivating an understanding of other > traditions can help foster tolerance (khanti) and appreciation > (mudita) toward people whose views differ from ours. Also, a study of > other traditions can help us break the temptation to develop a rigid > adherence to precise forms of words and descriptions. That rigidity > can too easily lead to not being able to see the forest because we > look too intently at the leaves and can result in intolerance and > ill-will toward people who think differently. Dear Dan, On the contrary, when we know the cause of things as taught in Buddhism, we would understand people more, and never underestimate anyone in any way. As the Buddha taught, we have all been born all things immaginable, through the innumerable lifetimes we have lived. There is nothing we have not done at one time or another, so that we should always sympathize and try to help others: who knows that our help might not be just what was meant to happen to alleviate their suffering? or their ignorance? Even Devadatta, now in hell for trying to murder the Buddha, was predicted to be a paccega buddha one day in the distant future. From hell to buddhahood, what could be impossible in comparison, in time? Buddhism, however, does not teach people to insist that others listen to their views. Even the bhikkhus should not preach unless he is asked to, so that normally even though it is not wrong for a lay person to teach the dhamma, generally it should be to people who express interest. Then there is nothing that could force others who are not interested to listen, much less understand, especially since the Dhamma is such an intricate matter. But this does not keep Buddhists from understanding other religions, even if they do not believe in them. Buddhism teaches mostly about one's own nature, but most human nature have the same basic behavior, so that if one understands oneself, one would know that all humans seek happiness and want to escape unhappiness. We are lucky to have the Buddha's teachings to guide us, and we should share that as we are able. The rest depends on each individual's accumulations, which none but the Buddha could tell, but just in case they could understand, if anyone asks, we should try to help them, and gain the highest merit in dana along the way: dhamma dana. Amara 2894 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Sat Jan 13, 2001 8:41pm Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta --- "amara chay" wrote: > Thank you for the clear explanation of your view of the Tipitaka, I > think I understand even better now. From this perspective the > Tipitaka is so all encompassing that everything is included in its > comprehensive outline, since... I don't recall mentioning anything about the scope of Tipitaka. In the discussion with Jonathon, I simply tried to explain what I meant when I used the word "deviation", viz. things that are not in the Tipitaka deviate from it. Here, I use the term more in the sense of "digress" and not at all in the sense of "contradict." Is the Tipitaka "all-encompassing"? I don't think the question is in any way relevant to the discussion. 2895 From: Dan Dalthorp <> Date: Sat Jan 13, 2001 9:00pm Subject: Re: Dan's view Dear Amara, I agree wholeheartedly when you write: "when we know the cause of things as taught in Buddhism, we would understand people more, and never underestimate anyone in any way." However, for those of us who do not have a full experiential, understanding (bhanvanmayapanna) of Buddhadhamma and still know bounds to our understanding, it is sometimes helpful to explicitly cultivate tolerance and appreciation of other people (even Christians). You wrote: > Buddhism, however, does not teach people to insist that others listen > to their views. This is an important difference between Christianity and Buddhism that bears reflecting on. Jesus talked about "making disciples of all nations," about "making fishers of men", about "shouting the good news from the housetops", etc. [all paraphrased], whereas Buddhadhamma is offered as a gift. If someone doesn't want to listen to Dhamma, that's thier choice. This is one way in which Christianity seems impoverished: If the teachings are pure, how can they be offered as anything other than a gift? Are there any Christians out there that can help us out on this? 2896 From: amara chay Date: Sat Jan 13, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Re: Vedana associated with contemplating anatta > I don't recall mentioning anything about the scope of Tipitaka. (.....) > Is the Tipitaka "all-encompassing"? I don't think the question is in > any way relevant to the discussion. Dear Dan, I was referring to what you wrote in another message: In drawing a picture of the landscape of the mind, Tipitaka takes a black pen and draws the shape of the picture--like in a coloring book. The commentaries take color crayons and draw between the lines. That helps us see what it looks like, but to see the full picture in all its glory, we need to pick up the crayons ourselves. Which I (mis-?)interpreted as the Tipitaka being the out line of things, hence all encompassing. Which I think in terms of nama and rupa, everything is encompassed. Wrong views are also described in the Tipitaka, as are right understanding. So in a way everything is in there, including the study of realities, which is the main theme. So I guess I misunderstood you after all! Amara 2897 From: amara chay Date: Sat Jan 13, 2001 10:29pm Subject: Re: Dan's view > However, for those of us who > do not have a full experiential, understanding (bhanvanmayapanna) of > Buddhadhamma and still know bounds to our understanding, it is > sometimes helpful to explicitly cultivate tolerance and appreciation > of other people (even Christians). Dear Dan, Even at the intellectual level of understanding the dhamma we could see that people have different accumulations and that even as about half your life is receiving vipaka (result of past kamma), the other half is performing kamma that will produce results in future lives, therefore anyone could become anything in time and with the right accumulations. But in order to develop right accumulations we must also be able to tell right from wrong, therefore knowing whether others are right or wrong also. Only then could we really appreciate the good qualities in anyone, Christians or others, or have tolerance, and better yet have metta for them, and even karuna if possible. Buddhism never encourages enemity, not even to those who are non Buddhists, no onw is ever encouraged to 'kill the infidel' or burn witches or even have inquisitions of any kind, the only one who could change anyone's beleif is the person himself. Buddhism's only weapon is right understanding, logical reasoning and the only thing one is taught to do away with is kilesa. No holy wars or crusades possible! Amara 2898 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 14, 2001 8:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Lee I am interested to hear that you have studied Dhamma in Chinese (Mandarin). I have oftern wondered whether many of the Theravadin texts been translated into Chinese, or whether the available writings mostly by present-day teachers. --- wrote: > Hi Bruce and others, > > First of all, though I have followed hundreds of > achieves yet I still > cannot pick up terms like aramana, poramatha and so > on. I must admit > that I use to learn dhamma in mandarin.(That is why > my english is > weak too). But I will try and perhaps someone can > correct me if I > misinterpret something and I can learn from here. Some of us have been very slow to realise that these terms are difficult even for those who are familiar with the Pali words commonly in use elsewhere. And a simple definition is not enough to make their meaning clear. However, as others have found, the meaning gradually becomes clearer over time. So don't be discouraged! > > -- i've heard it mentioned several times on the > list that samatha > can be > > condition for satipathana to arise....can anyone > explain why and > how? > > > ========================== > I'd say, with a "still mind", one can have a better > focus for deeper > vipassana practice. Of course, you can insight with > focus on all > dvaras if you have a high "still mind". > ========================== This kind of approach is of course widely taught. It tends to appeal to our innate sense of what spiritual development is all about. However, is it the way as taught by the Buddha? The answer to that question lies in a detailed study of the Tipitaka and commentaries. There are, for example, many, many discourses in which no reference is made to any particular connection between samatha and vipassana. It seems to me that having the idea that a calm mind means deeper understanding can be an obstacle to progress. It tends to distract us from the possibility of paying attention to the dvaras (doorways) at other times, and this cuts out the major part of the day (like right now). But the dvaras themselves don't change according to the level of calmness of the mind, or whether or not one has practised samatha. The possibility of studying or reflecting on the dvaras is there all the time. So as long as we hold to the idea of a particular time, place or situation as being advantageous to the development of awareness, we will not be inclined to pay attention to the doorways in the ordinary, everyday situations that constitute the greatest part of our lives. Thanks for your contributions on this topic. Jonothan 2899 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 15, 2001 0:06am Subject: updated 'Buddhism Compared' Dear group, Have added two of Dan's latest messages and their replies to Q&A6 in the Q&A section in , please take a look and tell us what you think. Dan, as usual, if there are any changes you might like to make, please feel free to tell me, corrections are easily done in the website. Amara 2900 From: Date: Mon Jan 15, 2001 0:41am Subject: Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, Jonothan, > Lee > > I am interested to hear that you have studied Dhamma > in Chinese (Mandarin). I have oftern wondered whether > many of the Theravadin texts been translated into > Chinese, or whether the available writings mostly by > present-day teachers. There are translated Theravadin texts and writings of present-day teachers. The VSM is one of the translated Theravadin texts. After following achieves in this egroup, I think, the understanding of the texts is different. > > > -- i've heard it mentioned several times on the > > list that samatha > > can be > > > condition for satipathana to arise....can anyone > > explain why and > > how? > > > > > ========================== > > I'd say, with a "still mind", one can have a better > > focus for deeper > > vipassana practice. Of course, you can insight with > > focus on all > > dvaras if you have a high "still mind". > > ========================== > > This kind of approach is of course widely taught. It > tends to appeal to our innate sense of what spiritual > development is all about. However, is it the way as > taught by the Buddha? The answer to that question > lies in a detailed study of the Tipitaka and > commentaries. There are, for example, many, many > discourses in which no reference is made to any > particular connection between samatha and vipassana. > > It seems to me that having the idea that a calm mind > means deeper understanding can be an obstacle to > progress. It tends to distract us from the > possibility of paying attention to the dvaras > (doorways) at other times, and this cuts out the major > part of the day (like right now). But the dvaras > themselves don't change according to the level of > calmness of the mind, or whether or not one has > practised samatha. The possibility of studying or > reflecting on the dvaras is there all the time. So as > long as we hold to the idea of a particular time, > place or situation as being advantageous to the > development of awareness, we will not be inclined to > pay attention to the doorways in the ordinary, > everyday situations that constitute the greatest part > of our lives. I shall reserve my view point until I'd understand what samatha and vipassana are all about. Thanks for sharing. Lee 2902 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 15, 2001 8:31pm Subject: October in India Dear all, Khun Sujin is heading another pilgrimage to India for two weeks this October, (2001). Details are not yet settled, as soon as we know of them we shall add them to the newsletter9, newsletter section, . Anyone interested should please contact the foundation at the addresses in the newsletter page. Amara 2903 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Jan 15, 2001 8:52pm Subject: List Bulletin Dear Friends Unwelcome messages Please do not post chain letters, virus alerts or any other similar messages to the list. They are off-topic for our purposes. Just dhamma-related postings, please! Some other reminders: Posts to the list Please use an appropriate subject heading for messages and replies. This makes it easier to follow different threads, or to browse the archives later. For replies, delete any part of the original message that is not directly relevant to your reply. This saves the reader from having to scroll through large chunks of text. New members Welcome. If you haven't yet posted to the list, please consider a short Hello. Other members would like to know who you are. Invitations to join the list If you would know anyone who would like to join the group, please tell them to send a (blank) message to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=114015113213038031090057228208100015039145163254024027013117194194210025154176117182195013035049209110050229241215 Host website To access the list on the eGroups website, go to and log in. You will need to supply your email account and the password you gave when first registering. Then you should be able to see the group's list. If not, click on the "My space" button Archives To browse old messages in the group's archives, follow the instructions under "Host website" above. Open the list and go to "Messages". Your subscription You can change the way you receive postings from the list. Follow the instructions under "Host website" above. Go to "group info", then click on "Modify Subscription". Links Members Amara and Alan both manage websites with heaps of materials and information and stunning pics. Visit them at www.dhammastudy.com www.zolag.co.uk We hope you are all finding the list useful and interesting. Jonothan & Sarah (List Moderators) 2904 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:41pm Subject: Re: October in India > Khun Sujin is heading another pilgrimage to India for two weeks this > October, (2001). Details are not yet settled, as soon as we know of > them we shall add them to the newsletter9, newsletter section, > . Anyone interested should please contact > the foundation at the addresses in the newsletter page. Dear friends, The India trip newletter is number 10, sorry for the mix up. Dear Moderators, I think you should let up on this rules things a bit, no need to worry about the volume of the posts, there's practically no one left with all the limitation of subjects. Some common consideration such as deleting excess messages should be nice for others, and information about how the list opperates is fine, otherwise I think you should let people judge for themselves. Amara 2905 From: amara chay Date: Mon Jan 15, 2001 11:55pm Subject: Re: October in India > Dear Moderators, > > I think you should let up on this rules things a bit, no need to > worry about the volume of the posts, there's practically no one left > with all the limitation of subjects. Some common consideration such > as deleting excess messages should be nice for others, and > information about how the list opperates is fine, otherwise I think > you should let people judge for themselves. And on the subject of spelling, everyone is aware of the American/English set of dictionaries, such as for words like offense/offence. We are not holding language classes and Pali or Sanskrit for example are no ones' mother tongue that I know of. So I really think you should not ask for people to be academically correct om the list, people who are uncertain of how a word is spelt or used should be able to ask for help here and not have to pass a test each time they write something. I for one would never remember all the vocabulary necessary for such high standards. Amara 2906 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2001 7:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: sitting "vs" non-sitting; vitakka, vicara and samatha, pannati and paramattha dhammas Bruce > but why does it *feel* like i'm spinning out so much > more panatti when i'm > sitting in front of the computer than when i'm > sitting attempting samatha > bhavana?? A good question. We would all instinctively be inclined to agree with this observation. But the problem is, our instincts are driven by the same lobha, dosa and (especially) moha that drive the rest of our lives. Is there in fact a qualitative difference between the citta (consciousness) at these 2 different times? We should not assume so. Kilesa (defilements) come in many different forms. Some of the most insidious forms masquerade as a kind of bhavana, and are accompanied by extremely subtle forms of lobha (attachment). So the fact that there is quite a contrast between the 2 situations does not mean that one of them must be kusala. But more importantly, as far as the development of satipatthana goes, need we be concerned about this difference anyway? Even at the moments we are ‘spinning out’ a lot of pannati there are still realities appearing that can be the object of satipatthana. There is, for example, the actual thinking (that has as its object the pannati), as well as the seeing and other sense-door experiences occurring at (more or less) the same time. Perhaps we are not as clear about this as we should be. That is why it is useful to learn more about the theory of satipatthana and to consider how the theoretical understanding can be applied to the present moment. Whether we have a sitting practice or not, we will to continue to spin out lots of pannati. If we think of the pannati as an obstacle to progress, we are going to find the development of awareness very difficult indeed. Jonothan 2907 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2001 7:10am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma - Then & now Mike Thanks as usual for your thoughtful comments. > > Yes. But our 'affinity for impermanence' is at a > > relatively superficial level. It is not the panna > > which experiences, for example, seeing as seeing > and > > at the same time has penetrated the true nature of > > that reality to the degree that the characteristic > > of > > impermanence is known. > > I guess what I had in mind here was, If 'we' have an > affinity for the tilakkhana now, doesn't that > suggest > some previous 'accumulation'? Yes, indeed it does. But is it understanding that is derived direct knowledge of realities? Or is it understanding mostly at an intellectual level, from considering and reflecting on the teachings generally and the tilakkhana (the characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta) in particular? > If it's true that we > don't carry 'stories' from one life to the next, but > only pańńaa? Or is this just sankharuppadana (or > something like that)? But even though there is panna, panna of what level and stage of development? > > For those listening to the Buddha, developed panna > > was > > arising through the different doorways as he > spoke. > > They had accumulated levels of panna in previous > > lives, > > Have we not? If not, why are we interested today? Yes, our interest in this life is because of panna accumulated in previous lives. But this does not mean we are ready for enlightenment, even if we were to have the extreme good fortune of listening to the Buddha himself. > > and had the right conditions for those > > accumulations to become manifest during the > lifetime > > of the Buddha. > I wonder > why some of us are attracted by the tilakkhana in > this > life, while most of us (even if we hear of it) are > repulsed. As you say, it must be because of accumulated panna. But there is still, for all of us, heaps of accumulated wrong view also! > Maybe I'm just being a little > superstitious > here... (Sorry, but I’m not with you on this one...) Thanks for the opportunity to reflect. Jonothan 2908 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 16, 2001 8:05am Subject: List etiquette Dear Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > > > > Dear Moderators, > > > > I think you should let up on this rules things a > bit, no need to > > worry about the volume of the posts, there's > practically no one left > > with all the limitation of subjects. Perhaps a little exaggeration here, don't you think? Some common > consideration such > > as deleting excess messages should be nice for > others, and > > information about how the list opperates is fine, > otherwise I think > > you should let people judge for themselves. > No one is worrying about the volume as far as I know. As you mention, the guidelines are for consideration of others and to keep posts relevant to dhamma discussion. I'm sorry you object. The guidelines have not changed. > > And on the subject of spelling, everyone is aware of > the > American/English set of dictionaries, such as for > words like > offense/offence. We are not holding language > classes and Pali or > Sanskrit for example are no ones' mother tongue that > I know of. So I > really think you should not ask for people to be > academically correct > om the list, people who are uncertain of how a word > is spelt or used > should be able to ask for help here and not have to > pass a test each > time they write something. I for one would never > remember all the > vocabulary necessary for such high standards. For your reference, we as moderators have never mentioned corect spelling, use of vocabulary, or good English. Our aim is to encourage everyone to write about dhamma. I think you must be mixing moderator bulletins with comments other members have made. We all make plenty of mistakes (including me) and no one should be unduly concerned about these either. We just do our best out of consideration again. Thankyou for your interest. Sarah 2909 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 16, 2001 10:52am Subject: Re: List etiquette > > And on the subject of spelling, everyone is aware of > > the > > American/English set of dictionaries, such as for > > words like > > offense/offence. We are not holding language > > classes and Pali or > > Sanskrit for example are no ones' mother tongue that > > I know of. So I > > really think you should not ask for people to be > > academically correct > > om the list, people who are uncertain of how a word > > is spelt or used > > should be able to ask for help here and not have to > > pass a test each > > time they write something. I for one would never > > remember all the > > vocabulary necessary for such high standards. > > For your reference, we as moderators have never > mentioned corect spelling, use of vocabulary, or good > English. Our aim is to encourage everyone to write > about dhamma. I think you must be mixing moderator > bulletins with comments other members have made. We > all make plenty of mistakes (including me) and no one > should be unduly concerned about these either. We just > do our best out of consideration again. Dear moderators, Thank you for clarifying your position, Amara 2911 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 16, 2001 9:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Vipassana meditation Dear Robert, I don't have much to add to this excellent (rather old) post. But you asked some (rhetorical, I think) questions that I think deserve attention. --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > From the Mulapariyaya sutta (BPS BODHI) > p40 AN UNINSTRUCTED WORLDLING "Herein he needs to > be taught > because he posseses neither learning (agama) nor > spiritual > achievement (adhigama)...Because he has neglected > to study, > question and discriminate the aggegates (khandas), > elements(dhatus) sense bases(ayatanas), truths, laws > of > conditionality and foundations of mindfulness > etc...” I take this to be true of everyone short of sotapatti. > The khandas, > dhatus and > ayatanas are in us and around us. Yet do we really > see them as > they are? 'We' can't, can we? I don't mean to split hairs, but isn't it true that only pańńaa can do this, and (for most of us) for such brief series of processes that we may well be unaware of its having happened at all? And if so, are these 'mahákusala cittas' kamma that 'accumulates'? > The type of mahakusala citta (wholesome > citta) that is > satipatthana can only arise after having heard the > teachings of > a Buddha (except for pacceka Buddhas). It seems that > sati, of > satipatthana, is something a little different from > what we > usually think of as awareness. That seems clear. Even the phrase 'what we usually think of as awareness' pretty plainly suggests pańńati, doesn't it? If I understood our earlier discussions on the subject, pańńati might be a satipatthana (dhammanupassana?), but much more likely not...? > I don't feel that I am against meditation. At night > sometimes I > am sitting in bed and naturally rest my eyes. At > those times the > rupas in the body and feelings associated with them > naturally > become prevalent. Sometimes the body feels like a > mass of heat > and vibration. It must (feel that way) because this > is what it > is. Is this awareness? If it is is it at the level > of vipassana? Probably mixed (alternating) processes, don't you think? The real danger would be, I think, in mistaking pańńati for vipassana, but also not safe to assume that no moments of insight are arising and subsiding. > What is the first level, nataparinna? The commentary > to the > mulapariyaya sutta says P57 “He fully understands > the earth > element thus “this is the internal earth element. > This is its > characteristic, this its function, this its > manifestation, and > proximate cause”. > > This first stage is not so easy. If we get this far > it means > that we have distinguished many realities and seen > them as they > are. We see them as only nama and only rupa. Have > we reached > even this first stage yet? Well, no--but isn't 'I' just a 'story' anyway? Speaking for myself, 'my' lack of progress is not a very kusala reflection. > Well, check yourself. Do > you still > think there are tables and chairs? Of course I do, when I think--but doesn't reflecting, even at the level of pańńati, that this is an illusion, help to condition the arising of (even if imperceptible) moments of sati? Or is this just wishful thinking? More later... mike 2912 From: Leonardo Neves Date: Wed Jan 17, 2001 11:14am Subject: Fw: TEST Sorry, It is only a test Leonardo 2914 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 17, 2001 11:34am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > > The type of mahakusala citta (wholesome > > citta) that is > > satipatthana can only arise after having heard the > > teachings of > > a Buddha (except for pacceka Buddhas). It seems that > > sati, of > > satipatthana, is something a little different from > > what we > > usually think of as awareness. > > That seems clear. Even the phrase 'what we usually > think of as awareness' pretty plainly suggests > pańńati, doesn't it? If I understood our earlier > discussions on the subject, pańńati might be a > satipatthana (dhammanupassana?), but much more likely > not...? Dear Mike, I was just thinking of you! I know you were writing Robert, but I hope you won't mind a few comments. Pannati can only be the object of the mind dvara, which is not pannati itself and therefore can be object of awareness, of satipatthana. One could be aware of thinking at the moment of thinking, and therefore at the moment or after one could experience the characteristics of thinking which are completely different from those of an instant of seeing, even at this moment when there are both going on, plus hearing, touching, and innumerable bhavangas interposing. > > This first stage is not so easy. If we get this far > > it means > > that we have distinguished many realities and seen > > them as they > > are. We see them as only nama and only rupa. Have > > we reached > > even this first stage yet? > > Well, no--but isn't 'I' just a 'story' anyway? > Speaking for myself, 'my' lack of progress is not a > very kusala reflection. It certainly is not, especially since there are only citta and cetasika, this 'I' is just this attachment to the self. We should have confidence in conditions, as long as we are accumulating the right ones, the results must come, which is why the Buddha exhorted us to be brave and cheerful in the dhamma, not to think akusala thoughts which are 'bad' accumulations. Why waste the precious time we could be studying the dhamma (realities) with? > > Well, check yourself. Do > > you still > > think there are tables and chairs? > > Of course I do, when I think--but doesn't reflecting, > even at the level of pańńati, that this is an > illusion, help to condition the arising of (even if > imperceptible) moments of sati? Or is this just > wishful thinking? This only you could answer yourself, but theoretically you're on the right track, for which I anumodana, Amara 2915 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2001 2:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Vipassana meditation Mike Just a quick comment on one of your points- > If I understood our earlier > discussions on the subject, pańńati might be a > satipatthana (dhammanupassana?), but much more > likely > not...? Pannati is counted as one of the 'dhammarammana' ie. objects of experience through the mind door. The other dhammarammana are all realities, as are the objects experienced through all the other doorways. This might be the earlier reference you had in mind, I believe. Jonothan 2916 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 17, 2001 2:32pm Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > > If I understood our earlier > > discussions on the subject, pańńati might be a > > satipatthana (dhammanupassana?), but much more > > likely > > not...? > > Pannati is counted as one of the 'dhammarammana' ie. > objects of experience through the mind door. The > other dhammarammana are all realities, as are the > objects experienced through all the other doorways. Dear Mike, Although pannati are dhammarammana, they cannot be objects of dhammanupassana since they do not have real characteristics that could be experienced as arising and falling away, which leads to realization of the tilakhana, according to Khun Sujin. Only paramatthadhamma could be objects of satipatthana. Amara 2917 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 17, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Dear Khun Amara and Jon, Thanks for the (dhammanupassana/dhammarammana) corrections. Seems I can't hear these points often enough--as usual! mike 2918 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jan 17, 2001 11:11pm Subject: Realities, concepts and dhammas Dear Friends There has been quite a lot of discussion lately about these terms. Following a suggestion, I think by Mike, I thought it might be useful to post some authoritative textual extracts, both to look at now and to have for future reference. The following are from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi and published by the BPS. (Numbers preceded by # are the numbers of sections in the original text. ‘Guide’ refers to the commentarial writings on the original text. The short headings are mine.) Ultimate realities are what the Abhidhamma is all about- #2: The things contained in the Abhidhamma are fourfold from the standpoint of ultimate reality (paramatthato): consciousness (citta), mental factors (cetasika), matter (rupa), and Nibbana. Ultimate realities are distinguished from so-called ‘conventional’ realities- #2 Guide: According to the Abhidhamma philosophy, there are 2 kinds of realities—the conventional (sammuti) and the ultimate (paramattha). What are ‘conventional realities’? #2 Guide: Conventional realities are the referents of ordinary conceptual thought (pannatti) and conventional modes of expression (vohaara). They include such entities as living beings, men, women, animals, and the apparently stable persisting objects that constitute our unanalyzed picture of the world. How are conventional realities different from ultimate realities?- #2 Guide: The Abhidhamma philosophy maintains that these notions do not possess ultimate validity, for the objects which they signify [ie. the living beings, men, women, animals etc] do not exist in their own right as irreducible realities. Their mode of being is conceptual, not actual. They are products of mental construction (parikappanaa), not realities existing by reason of their own nature. What are ultimate realities?- #2 Guide: Ultimate realities, in contrast, are things that exist by reason of their own extrinsic nature (sabhaava). These are the dhammas: the final, irreducible components of existence, the ultimate entities which result from a correctly performed analysis of experience. Hence the word ‘paramattha’ is applied to them, which is derived from ‘parama’ = ultimate, highest, final, and ‘attha’ = reality, thing. I hope this is useful. There is more, if there is interest in this area. Jonothan 2919 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 17, 2001 11:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Realities, concepts and dhammas Thanks, Jon, this is great. I'm at work now but will respond at length when time permits. mike 2920 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 18, 2001 10:56am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > Although pannati are dhammarammana, they cannot be objects of > dhammanupassana since they do not have real characteristics that could > be experienced as arising and falling away, which leads to realization > of the tilakhana, according to Khun Sujin. Only paramatthadhamma > could be objects of satipatthana. Dear Mike, According to the 'Summary' chapter on Vipassana, , satipatthana comprises: Realities that appear through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind are categorized as the 4 sati-patthana. When sati arises to be mindful of the characteristics of distinct realities as 1) Kayanupassana-satipatthana: whenever sati arises to be mindful of the characteristics of rupa through the bodysense, it is kayanupassana-satipatthana. 2) Vedananupassana-satipatthana: whenever sati arises to be mindful of the characteristics of feelings that appear, it is vedananupassana-satipatthana. 3) Cittanupassana-satipatthana: whenever sati arises to be mindful of the characteristics of distinct kinds of citta, it is cittanupassana-satipatthana. 4) Dhammanupassana-satipatthana: whenever sati arises to be mindful of the characteristics of the rupa-dhamma or nama-dhamma, it is dhammanupassana-satipatthana. (end quote) Dhammanupassana encompasses all dvara because the manodvara experiences all the arammana in sequence to the other dvara as well as through the manodvara proper. Amara 2921 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jan 18, 2001 6:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Excellent, Khun Amara, thanks. Must remember this resource, now that my vocabulary's BEGINNING to catch up to it...! mike 2922 From: Jinavamsa Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 4:58am Subject: Foremost analyst . hello all, and greetings, I have come across lists in the past of descriptions of various individuals from the time of the Buddha in which each was identified as foremost or best in this or that. For example, Moggallana was foremost in powers. Or Sariputta was foremost in wisdom. (I believe these two are correct.) These lists were in the Tipi.taka and more specifically, in the Suttapi.taka. Would anyone know exactly where such lists are given? In particular, could anyone direct me to where the Buddha is described as best in making distinctions? (references esp. to Tipi.taka, but also to atthakathâ or .tîkâ, incl. VmM and VsM would be welcome.) Finally, what would the Pali of these terms be? For 'best', I thought it would be se.t.t.ho or some variation (or possibly pâmokkha), and for 'distinction-maker', something made up out of the root bhaj (or perhaps something more like vematta, pa.tisambhida, vivecana). But my memory is not clear about these. I did notice that vibhajjavâdî is sometimes taken not as a description in particular of the Buddha, but of Theravâda teachings overall. I did find in the Visuddhimagga-mahâ.tîkâ, the phrase vibhajjavâdî mahârâjâ, King of the Distinction-makers, or, Great King amongst the Analysts, etc. (in chap. 17, Sect. 581), referring to the Buddha (the sammâsambuddho), but that's a few degrees away from the Tipi.taka itself .... well, thank you for all help. Jinavamsa ========= 2923 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 7:38am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Taking robes [again!] Lee It was only when I was going through my uncleared messages that I realised your point when you said - > Just to be pondered: > > 1. Are arahants referred as wise people? > 2. Why arahants, I would say, insist to enter the > sangha order as > they have all done? > 3. What makes the monkhood so special that they, the > arahants, have > no second thought of it? > 4. We are encourage to follow the wise, are we? If I may paraphrase, all arahants (wise people) become monks. So if we want to follow the wise, shouldn’t we become monks also? To think so would be to miss the point. The question we need to ask is, how do we ‘follow the wise’? In other words, how did the arahant become a wise person? Was it by becoming a monk? Or was it by listening to, considering and following the Buddha’s instruction about understanding the realities appearing at the present moment? An arahant’s wisdom is the wisdom of the true characteristics of the ultimate realities, the paramattha dhammas, that we take for ourselves and the world we live in So we can ‘follow the wise’, right now, by reflecting on the teachings and by considering how they apply to the present moment. The arahant’s wisdom is the wisdom that has eradicated all the kilesa. With no more kilesa, the arahant has no affinity for the household life. He becomes a monk, if not one already. But we should not see the monk’s life as a sort of path to enlightenment. Rather, we should realise that the monk’s can be lived properly and fully only by one who has developed wisdom of the arahant. It is easy to be awed by the idea of the arahant as the ‘perfect monk’. But that is the pinnacle, not the path, much less the starting point! Jonothan 2924 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 7:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Foremost analyst Hello Jinavamsa, I will only answer some of your questions. You wrote: << hello all, and greetings, I have come across lists in the past of descriptions of various individuals from the time of the Buddha in which each was identified as foremost or best in this or that. For example, Moggallana was foremost in powers. Or Sariputta was foremost in wisdom. (I believe these two are correct.) These lists were in the Tipi.taka and more specifically, in the Suttapi.taka. Would anyone know exactly where such lists are given? In particular, could anyone direct me to where the Buddha is described as best in making distinctions? (references esp. to Tipi.taka, but also to atthakathâ or .tîkâ, incl. VmM and VsM would be welcome.) >> Jim: The list that I'm familiar with is the one in the Ekanipaata of the Anguttaranikaaya (A i 23ff) where each of some 80 disciples of the Buddha are noted for being foremost (agga) in a particular area eg. Sariputta for great wisdom (mahaapa~n~naa), Mahaamoggallaana for those possessing powers (iddhimanta), and so on. << Finally, what would the Pali of these terms be? For 'best', I thought it would be se.t.t.ho or some variation (or possibly pâmokkha), and for 'distinction-maker', something made up out of the root bhaj (or perhaps something more like vematta, pa.tisambhida, vivecana). But my memory is not clear about these. I did notice that vibhajjavâdî is sometimes taken not as a description in particular of the Buddha, but of Theravâda teachings overall. I did find in the Visuddhimagga-mahâ.tîkâ, the phrase vibhajjavâdî mahârâjâ, King of the Distinction-makers, or, Great King amongst the Analysts, etc. (in chap. 17, Sect. 581), referring to the Buddha (the sammâsambuddho), but that's a few degrees away from the Tipi.taka itself .... >> Jim: At MN 99 (M ii 197) the Buddha refers to himself as a vibhajjavaada (Vibhajjavaado kho aham ettha, naaham ettha eka.msavaado). See also AN X.94 (A v 190) where the Buddha is similarly called a vibhajjavaada by Vajjiyamaahita, the housefather. Just from reading your message I believe you are the same person I corresponded with in the middle part of last year on d-l. I joined this list late last October and this is the first time I have read a message from you here. Welcome to the list if you are a new subscriber. Best wishes, Jim Anderson 2925 From: Jinavamsa Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 10:13am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst hello Jim, thank you for the excellent suggestions. Yes, I just learned about this group and subscribed this very week. We might well have talked (virtually) in the past. I did once subscribe to D-L I think, but that was several years ago. I'm not sure: was it Dhamma-L or Buddhist-L (the second sounds more familiar to me); in either case, I no longer have their address. Maybe I'll do a search and find it again. I knew I had gotten that idea from the Suttas, I just couldn't find my way back! so; in appreciation, Jinavamsa > Jim: > At MN 99 (M ii 197) the Buddha refers to himself as a vibhajjavaada > (Vibhajjavaado kho aham ettha, naaham ettha eka.msavaado). See also AN X.94 > (A v 190) where the Buddha is similarly called a vibhajjavaada by > Vajjiyamaahita, the housefather. > > Just from reading your message I believe you are the same person I > corresponded with in the middle part of last year on d-l. I joined this list > late last October and this is the first time I have read a message from you > here. Welcome to the list if you are a new subscriber. > > Best wishes, > Jim Anderson 2926 From: amara chay Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 11:24am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > I have come across lists in the past of descriptions of various > individuals from the time of the Buddha in which each was > identified as foremost or best in this or that. For example, > Moggallana was foremost in powers. Or Sariputta was foremost > in wisdom. (I believe these two are correct.) These lists were > in the Tipi.taka and more specifically, in the Suttapi.taka. > > Would anyone know exactly where such lists are given? In > particular, could anyone direct me to where the Buddha is > described as best in making distinctions? (references esp. > to Tipi.taka, but also to atthakathâ or .tîkâ, incl. VmM and > VsM would be welcome.) > > Finally, what would the Pali of these terms be? For 'best', > I thought it would be se.t.t.ho or some variation (or possibly > pâmokkha), and for 'distinction-maker', something made up out > of the root bhaj (or perhaps something more like vematta, > pa.tisambhida, vivecana). Hello and welcome, Jinavamsa! Thank you for the interesting question and the reply from Jim, to which I would like to add a little thought. The Buddha had accumulated parami to attain supremacy in all fields through 4 assankhaya and a hundred thousand kappa, since the day he was predicted by the Buddha Dipankara to become a Buddha himself. His great disciples took only hundreds of thousand kappa only, in comparison, from the time of their individual predictions. You can read about part of the Buddha's accumulation of conditions for his Buddhahood in the article, 'Viriya Parami' in the advanced section of . Enjoy, Amara 2927 From: amara chay Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 11:59am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > Must remember this > resource, now that my vocabulary's BEGINNING to catch > up to it...! Dear Mike, My pleasure, so long as you know where some of the clearest explanations are. Amara 2928 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 0:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Dear Jinavamsa, You wrote: >hello Jim, >thank you for the excellent suggestions. >Yes, I just learned about this group and subscribed this >very week. >We might well have talked (virtually) in the past. I did >once subscribe to D-L I think, but that was several years >ago. I'm not sure: was it Dhamma-L or Buddhist-L (the >second sounds more familiar to me); in either case, I no >longer have their address. Maybe I'll do a search and find >it again. >I knew I had gotten that idea from the Suttas, I just couldn't >find my way back! >so; in appreciation, >Jinavamsa By D-L, I meant dhamma-list. Also, under your other name Mitchell Ginsberg, I have saved a few of your messages from D-L up into August 2000 before you left to go on a trip to Israel. I find it interesting that the Buddha would contrast vibhajjavaada with eka.msavaada. I looked up eka.msavaada in the CPD which translates this as: one whose speech is definite. Sounds rather doubtful to me. I've been thinking that the contrast might be between pluralism and monism. Perhaps the Buddha was saying he's a pluralist, not a monist. If you are interested in a long list of synonyms of Pali words for best, foremost, etc. (at least two dozens) check out the Abhidhaanappadiipikaa, vv. 694-6. Best wishes, Jim A. 2929 From: Jinavamsa Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 1:03pm Subject: Re: Foremost analyst hi Jim, and all, I took eka.msa (Skt. ekâ.msa, eka + a.msa) to have the base image of one shoulder (as in a monk's robe that goes over just one shoulder), and that relatedly, one who speaks that way is just giving what we would call a one-sided view of things. (a.msa in Skt. means not only shoulder but one corner of a quadrangle). So the contrast is more like carefully looking over an issue (related to sammâ-, samyak-) vs. just getting one perspective or bias on it. well, that's how these questions strike me. But a scholar of these issues might say something else. thank you. Yes, I did get to Israel back last August, after a wonderful few days as well in Amsterdam. Just my son and I, on that trip. So I'll take your word for it, that it was dhamma-L last year! Glad to hear some of my messages seemed worth saving..... Jinavamsa aka Jinava.msa .../Mitchell --- "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Dear Jinavamsa, > > You wrote: > > >hello Jim, > >thank you for the excellent suggestions. > >Yes, I just learned about this group and subscribed this > >very week. > >We might well have talked (virtually) in the past. I did > >once subscribe to D-L I think, but that was several years > >ago. I'm not sure: was it Dhamma-L or Buddhist-L (the > >second sounds more familiar to me); in either case, I no > >longer have their address. Maybe I'll do a search and find > >it again. > >I knew I had gotten that idea from the Suttas, I just couldn't > >find my way back! > >so; in appreciation, > >Jinavamsa > > By D-L, I meant dhamma-list. Also, under your other name Mitchell Ginsberg, > I have saved a few of your messages from D-L up into August 2000 before you > left to go on a trip to Israel. > > I find it interesting that the Buddha would contrast vibhajjavaada with > eka.msavaada. I looked up eka.msavaada in the CPD which translates this as: > one whose speech is definite. Sounds rather doubtful to me. I've been > thinking that the contrast might be between pluralism and monism. Perhaps > the Buddha was saying he's a pluralist, not a monist. > > If you are interested in a long list of synonyms of Pali words for best, > foremost, etc. (at least two dozens) check out the Abhidhaanappadiipikaa, > vv. 694-6. > > Best wishes, > Jim A. 2930 From: shin lin Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 8:28pm Subject: Patigha arise when seeing the corpses Dear Dhamma Friends, Today I have encountered something which really made me pondered and understood the teaching of the Lord Buddha better. Today there was a gas explosion near my office, which killed 5 people. Unfortunately I was on my way to the Police Station and saw the dead corpses. At the first moment of seeing the death bodies, Dosa arise which enhance the thought of throwing up. It took a while for Sati to arise, that Death( Cuti Citta) can arise any time according to Akusula kamma and we never know when it will come, which is why, we should think of Morana Sati most of the time, after hearing the teaching. After this thought of Dhamma, it allowed me to think that we should really develop the right thinking and know the realities of Dhamma as much as possible and we should develop more Kusula Kamma whenever it is possible because everything is really Dhamma and it's Dukkha, Anicca, Anatta. After this thought of the teaching, I realized that I was still scared or dosa is still arising. Then I realized that I was too disgusted with the sight of the corpses. It was very ugly, especially seeing one corpse without the head because it was scattered everywhere during the explosion. Then Sati arised with the teaching that everything is Dukkha, impermant and Ugly. But due to Self, Tanha, Dhitti, we tend to cover everything to see Sukkha, permanent and Beautiful in Dhitti 20. Once these thought of the teaching arise, everything becomes so clear. There was the sense of liberation and freedom of how luck I was, to have listened to the Dhamma. I didn't know this until today. I don't like to sound like a Christian but I have realized how much one has accumulated Self, like longing for living, sense desires and etc... It is not easy to see the truth when everything is covered up so beautifully and we tend to take it for granted of its real existence of dhamma that everything is only citta, cestika, rupa and it rises and fall away accordingly without anyone controlling it. Everything is really Anatta. May I take this opportunity to Anumodana everyone for listening to the Dhamma and taking the triple gem as your guidance. Anumodana, Shin 2931 From: amara chay Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 10:32pm Subject: Latest page Dear friends, Today we uploaded a new page to the section 'A few Words', with the explanation of 'papa and punna' taken from one of the dhamma discussions in Cambodia. Comments will be appreciated, Thanks in advance, Amara 2932 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Realities, concepts and dhammas - 2 Dear Friends Continuing a quick look at Ch I, section 2 from the Abhidhammata Sangaha on realities and concepts: ‘Ultimate’ has a second meaning – the ultimate objects of right knowledge- Guide to #2 Ultimate realities are not only the ultimate existents, they are also the ultimate objects of right knowledge. As one extracts oil from sesame seed, so one can extract the ultimate realities from the conventional realities. Concepts do not possess ultimacy. It is the objective actualities that lie behind our conceptual constructs – the dhammas – that form the ultimate realities of the Abhidhamma. Ultimate realities are knowable only to wisdom- Guide to #2 Ultimate realities are so subtle and profound that an ordinary person cannot see them. His mind is obscured by concepts. Only by means of wise attention to things (yoniso manasikara) can one see beyond the concepts. Thus ‘paramattha’ is described as that which belongs to the domain of ultimate or supreme knowledge. So to summarise this post and the previous one- There are 2 kinds of realities – conventional (sammuti) and ultimate (paramattha). It is the ultimate realities that the Abhidhamma is concerned with. Ordinary people like us see the world in terms of conventional realities (eg people and things). However, these are just concepts (pannatti) and expressions (voharaa), products of mental construction (parikappana). Ultimate realities have their own intrinsic nature (sahaava), they are the dhammas. They are ultimate in 2 senses. First, they cannot be reduced any further, and second, they are things that can be known only by the highest knowledge. As to whether concepts are 'dhammas', the word dhamma has many meanings. When classifying by way of objects of the 6 doorways, the objects of the mind-door are called 'dhammaarammana' (translated as 'mental objects'), and these include concepts. Abhidhammattha Sangaha, Ch III #16 Mental object (dhammarammana) is sixfold: Sensitive matter (pasaadarupa), subtle matter (sukhumarupa), consciousness (citta), mental factors (cetasika), Nibbana, and concepts. Guide to #16 Concepts - the class of convential realities, things which do not exist in the ulitmate sense - also fall into the category of mental object. I hope this helps to clarify some of the references to realities and concepts in the posts on this list. Jonothan 2933 From: amara chay Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 10:40pm Subject: Re: Patigha arise when seeing the corpses > Dear Dhamma Friends, > Today I have encountered something which really > made me pondered and understood the teaching of > the Lord Buddha better. Dear Shin, I think you are luckier than most to have the teachings of the Buddha to remind you of the dhamma in such a situation, which for others must be full of akusala all throughout. Maranasati does help one realize one needs to accumulate knowledge at all levels to transcend the dangers of samsara, doesn't it. Anumodana for your studies as well, Amara 2934 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 10:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Patigha arise when seeing the corpses Shin It must have been a very unpleasant experience. However, it seems to have also been a condition for some very useful reflection on your part. Anumodana in that. Jonothan 2935 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jan 19, 2001 11:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Patigha arise when seeing the corpses Anumodana, Shin! mike 2936 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Jan 20, 2001 1:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Hi Jinavamsa, You wrote: <> Jim: Your definition of eka.msavaada seems plausible to me. I tried to find a commentarial definition without success. The word only shows up three times in the Suttantapitaka (refs. quoted in a previous message) and not at all in any of the commentaries. However, the word 'vibhajjavaadin' seems to be well defined in the .tiikaa to the Samantapaasaadikaa (Sp-p.t i 148 CSCD). I would have to study the .tiikaa comments in more detail to get a better grasp of the term. Yes, I remember you mentioning that you were going with your son and to Amsterdam also. I hope you'll find this discussion list worthwhile and beneficial to your studies. And I'm sure your participation will be much appreciated by many of us here. Best wishes, Jim A. 2937 From: Jinavamsa Date: Sat Jan 20, 2001 6:52am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst hello Jim, thank you for your warm welcome. and thank you for this further reference. Is the Sp-t you mention on the 6th S. CD? I didn't see it listed under Vinaya, nor under Other giving Buddhaghosa VsM and Cmy. Anything else you find would also be of interest to me. Jinavamsa --- "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Hi Jinavamsa, > > You wrote: > > < I took eka.msa (Skt. ekâ.msa, eka + a.msa) to have the base > image of one shoulder (as in a monk's robe that goes over > just one shoulder), and that relatedly, one who speaks > that way is just giving what we would call a one-sided > view of things. (a.msa in Skt. means not only shoulder but > one corner of a quadrangle). So the contrast is more like > carefully looking over an issue (related to sammâ-, samyak-) > vs. just getting one perspective or bias on it. well, that's > how these questions strike me. But a scholar of these issues > might say something else. > thank you. Yes, I did get to Israel back last August, after > a wonderful few days as well in Amsterdam. Just my son and I, > on that trip. So I'll take your word for it, that it was > dhamma-L last year! Glad to hear some of my messages seemed > worth saving..... > Jinavamsa aka Jinava.msa .../Mitchell >> > > Jim: > Your definition of eka.msavaada seems plausible to me. I tried to find a > commentarial definition without success. The word only shows up three times > in the Suttantapitaka (refs. quoted in a previous message) and not at all in > any of the commentaries. However, the word 'vibhajjavaadin' seems to be > well defined in the .tiikaa to the Samantapaasaadikaa (Sp-p.t i 148 CSCD). I > would have to study the .tiikaa comments in more detail to get a better > grasp of the term. > > Yes, I remember you mentioning that you were going with your son and to > Amsterdam also. I hope you'll find this discussion list worthwhile and > beneficial to your studies. And I'm sure your participation will be much > appreciated by many of us here. > > Best wishes, > Jim A. 2938 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2001 1:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Foremost analyst Dear Jinavamsa, Thanks for yr interesting (and difficult qus) and welcome here. Jim has already guided you well to Ang Nik 1 and is helping with the pali terms which are beyond me. Your post was, however, a condition for me to pull out a book I bought over 20 yrs ago in Sri lanka called 'Pen portraits Ninety Three Eminent Disciples of The Buddha'. Unfortunately although it gives more detail than Ang Nik, it doesn't help with the Pali and doesn't give proper references. I also find the Pali Dict of Proper names very helpful for further details. It has plenty of references (inc the Ang Nik one) for each disciple/arahat and for which area they were preeminent in (from Vinaya as well as Suttanta). I know you didn't ask for further details, but if you have access to this Dictionary, you may find it useful to follow the references. Just to give one example: the first mentioned in the list is Anna Kondanna. I'll just quote a few notes from this dict of his 'pre-eminent' points w/refs: 'As he was the first among humans to realise the dhamma the buddha praised him saying "annasi vata bho Kondanno" twice; hence he came to be known as Annata Kondanna." Vin,i.12; UdA.324,371; Mtuiii.333 He was the first to be ordained with the formula "ehi bhikkhu" and the first to receive higher ordination. Later, at jetavana, amidst a large concourse of monks, The Buddha declared him to be the best of those who first comprehended the Dhamma. AA.i.84 He was also declared to be preeminent among disciples of long-standing (rattannunam). A.i.23......' and so on....(there's a lot of useful info, but I've been economical w/the quotes). I'm not sure if this is of any use at all. I'd be interested to know if you have a particular project you are working on and anything else you care to share with us about this area of enquiry. Best regards, Sarah --- Jinavamsa wrote: > . > hello all, and greetings, > > I have come across lists in the past of descriptions > of various > individuals from the time of the Buddha in which > each was > identified as foremost or best in this or that. For > example, > Moggallana was foremost in powers. Or Sariputta was > foremost > in wisdom. (I believe these two are correct.) These > lists were > in the Tipi.taka and more specifically, in the > Suttapi.taka. > > Would anyone know exactly where such lists are > given? In > particular, could anyone direct me to where the > Buddha is > described as best in making distinctions? > (references esp. > to Tipi.taka, but also to atthakathâ or .tîkâ, incl. > VmM and > VsM would be welcome.) > > Finally, what would the Pali of these terms be? For > 'best', > I thought it would be se.t.t.ho or some variation > (or possibly > pâmokkha), and for 'distinction-maker', something > made up out > of the root bhaj (or perhaps something more like > vematta, > pa.tisambhida, vivecana). > > But my memory is not clear about these. I did notice > that > vibhajjavâdî is sometimes taken not as a description > in > particular of the Buddha, but of Theravâda teachings > overall. > > I did find in the Visuddhimagga-mahâ.tîkâ, the > phrase > vibhajjavâdî mahârâjâ, King of the > Distinction-makers, > or, Great King amongst the Analysts, etc. (in chap. > 17, > Sect. 581), referring to the Buddha (the > sammâsambuddho), > but that's a few degrees away from the Tipi.taka > itself .... > > well, thank you for all help. > Jinavamsa > ========= > > > > 2939 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sat Jan 20, 2001 1:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Hello Jinavamsa, >hello Jim, >thank you for your warm welcome. and thank you for this further >reference. Is the Sp-t you mention on the 6th S. CD? I didn't see >it listed under Vinaya, nor under Other giving Buddhaghosa VsM >and Cmy. >Anything else you find would also be of interest to me. >Jinavamsa You gave the correct abbreviation (Sp-.t). My 'Sp-p.t' was a mistake. The passage in question is found in Vol. I of the Saaratthadiipanii by Sariputta in the Vinaya section. The reference I gave is to the volume found on the 6th S. CD (Myanmar i 148). I just checked the Mahaa.tiikaa (also on the CD) to the Visuddhimagga and a very similar passage is found there also (Vol. ii 240). The passage makes it clear that the 'vibhajja' found in 'vibhajjavaadii' is a gerund (also in the PED). When you read the contexts given in the passage, do you think that a translation: '(after) analysing or having analysed' for 'vibhajja' is an acceptable one? Or perhaps another rendering should be considered? There's a passage in the Samantapaasaadikaa, Vol. i 61 (PTS) that may be of interest to you. N.A. Jayawickrama translates it as follows: He [King Asoka] next summoned the remaining monks and asked, "What teaching did the Perfectly Enlightened One expound ?" "Great King, He was an exponent of the analytical doctrine (Vibhajjavaada)." -- The Inception of the Discipline, p. 54 Best wishes, Jim A. 2940 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sat Jan 20, 2001 2:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Patigha arise when seeing the corpses Dear Shin, Thanks for sharing your unexpected experiences with us. We never know what our vipaka has in store for us or what our daily life will be, do we? I'd heard about the explosion on the news and have to say I'm glad you were not any closer! As you have described so well, there are moments of kusala, akusala, kusala, akusala following each other all the time... I'm glad for any reminders about the urgency of developing more understanding. Best wishes, Sarah 2941 From: amara chay Date: Sat Jan 20, 2001 7:15pm Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > I find it interesting that the Buddha would contrast vibhajjavaada with > eka.msavaada. I looked up eka.msavaada in the CPD which translates this as: > one whose speech is definite. Sounds rather doubtful to me. I've been > thinking that the contrast might be between pluralism and monism. Perhaps > the Buddha was saying he's a pluralist, not a monist. Dear Jim, Jinavamsa and friends, I thought you might be interested in what one of our Pali experts said of the two terms: eka.msavaada. means, pretty much as you say, one whose speech is definite, the dhamma is just as the Buddha says it is, it could not be otherwise, no contradictions or second or third words possible (i.e. lobha is what it is, it could never be dosa or moha). vibhajjavaada means the ability to explain things from several angles and in detail: nama can be explained in contrast to rupa, or as comprising citta, cetasika and nibbana, or as components of the different ayatana, or as major types of citta and cetasika, etc. or from as many perspectives as is necessary for the person to understand, for example. I just got back from our Saturday sessions at the foundation, Amara 2942 From: Jinavamsa Date: Sun Jan 21, 2001 10:23am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst . hello Sarah and all, yes, I have the 2-vol. set you refer to. I have the 1974 printing. I had trouble finding the entry, but found it as "Ańńâta-Ko.n.dańńa (v.l. Ańńa-Ko.n.d.ańńa) Thera". In case those extended ASCii characters don't come through, that's A~n~naata-Ko.n.da~n~na etc. Your references have allowed me to get to AN.i.23 and a list of a number of the "highest" in this or that monks. Thank you so much. You ask about the context of my question. To keep it brief here, it was just a remembrance of the Buddha as honored for his ability to make important distinctions that inspired my question to the group. I wanted to cite that recognition in a chapter [of _The Inner Palace_, its present title] respecting the ability to make differentiations (or distinctions) in a book on the link between consciousness and spirituality (in other words, on psychospirituality). thank you for this specific link! with mettâ, jinavamsa --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Jinavamsa, > > Thanks for yr interesting (and difficult qus) and > welcome here. > > Jim has already guided you well to Ang Nik 1 and is > helping with the pali terms which are beyond me. Your > post was, however, a condition for me to pull out a > book I bought over 20 yrs ago in Sri lanka called 'Pen > portraits Ninety Three Eminent Disciples of The > Buddha'. Unfortunately although it gives more detail > than Ang Nik, it doesn't help with the Pali and > doesn't give proper references. > > I also find the Pali Dict of Proper names very helpful > for further details. It has plenty of references (inc > the Ang Nik one) for each disciple/arahat and for > which area they were preeminent in (from Vinaya as > well as Suttanta). I know you didn't ask for further > details, but if you have access to this Dictionary, > you may find it useful to follow the references. > > Just to give one example: the first mentioned in the > list is Anna Kondanna. > > I'll just quote a few notes from this dict of his > 'pre-eminent' points w/refs: > > 'As he was the first among humans to realise the > dhamma the buddha praised him saying "annasi vata bho > Kondanno" twice; hence he came to be known as Annata > Kondanna." Vin,i.12; UdA.324,371; Mtuiii.333 > > He was the first to be ordained with the formula "ehi > bhikkhu" and the first to receive higher ordination. > Later, at jetavana, amidst a large concourse of monks, > The Buddha declared him to be the best of those who > first comprehended the Dhamma. AA.i.84 > > He was also declared to be preeminent among disciples > of long-standing (rattannunam). A.i.23......' > > and so on....(there's a lot of useful info, but I've > been economical w/the quotes). > > I'm not sure if this is of any use at all. I'd be > interested to know if you have a particular project > you are working on and anything else you care to share > with us about this area of enquiry. > > Best regards, > Sarah > 2943 From: Jim Anderson Date: Sun Jan 21, 2001 10:34am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Dear Amara, Jinavamsa, and all I wrote: >> I find it interesting that the Buddha would contrast vibhajjavaada with >> eka.msavaada. I looked up eka.msavaada in the CPD which translates >> this as: one whose speech is definite. Sounds rather doubtful to me. I've >> been thinking that the contrast might be between pluralism and monism. >> Perhaps the Buddha was saying he's a pluralist, not a monist. Amara responded: >Dear Jim, Jinavamsa and friends, > >I thought you might be interested in what one of our Pali experts said >of the two terms: > >eka.msavaada. means, pretty much as you say, one whose speech is >definite, the dhamma is just as the Buddha says it is, it could not >be otherwise, no contradictions or second or third words possible >(i.e. lobha is what it is, it could never be dosa or moha). > >vibhajjavaada means the ability to explain things from several angles >and in detail: nama can be explained in contrast to rupa, or as >comprising citta, cetasika and nibbana, or as components of the >different ayatana, or as major types of citta and cetasika, etc. or >from as many perspectives as is necessary for the person to >understand, for example. > >I just got back from our Saturday sessions at the foundation, > >Amara Thank-you for passing on what the Pali experts said about the two terms which helps put the matter in a better perspective. After further study, I realize that my allusion to pluralism and monism is totally off-base and should be disregarded. I think I have found the key to understanding what the Buddha meant when he used the two terms in the Subhasutta (MN 99). Know that the two terms are found in only three places in the Tipitaka -- twice in this sutta and once in AN X.94. To understand why the two terms are used, one needs to read the Pa~nhavyaakara.nasutta (AN X.42) and then read the commentarial explanation in the Mahaapadesa-kathaa at DA ii 567. A question (pa~nho) is to be answered in one of the following ways: 1. eka.msavyaakara.niiya -- categorically eg. yes/no 2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically 3. pa.tipucchavyaakara.niiya -- with a counter-question 4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside (not to be answered) eg. Is the world eternal? Turning now to the Subhasutta: ... the brahman youth Subha, Todeyya's son, spoke thus to the Lord: "Good Gotama, brahmans speak thus: 'A householder is accomplishing the right path, dhamma, what is skilled; one who has gone forth is not accomplishing the right path, dhamma, what is skilled.' What does the good Gotama say to this?" "On this point I, brahman youth, discriminate, on this point I do not speak definitely. ..." [Vibhajjavaado kho aham ettha, maa.nava, naaham ettha eka.msavaado.] -- translated by I.B. Horner, p.386 In reading the Buddha's reply, I think that it fits no. 2 quite well -- the analytical reply. I'm going to be on the lookout for examples of categorical replies by the Buddha and would appreciate it if anyone could point out some examples. I know there are examples of no. 3 & 4. This sutta seems to be the main source of what vibhajjavaada & eka.msavaada originally meant. From reading the two .tiikaas (Sp-.t & Vsm-mh.t) on the term 'vibhajjavaadin' it appears that extra meanings have been added over time. Best wishe, Jim A. 2944 From: amara chay Date: Sun Jan 21, 2001 11:17am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > I think I have found the key to understanding what > the Buddha meant when he used the two terms in the Subhasutta (MN 99). > Know that the two terms are found in only three places in the Tipitaka -- > twice in this sutta and once in AN X.94. To understand why the two terms are > used, one needs to read the Pa~nhavyaakara.nasutta (AN X.42) and then read > the commentarial explanation in the Mahaapadesa-kathaa at DA ii 567. > > A question (pa~nho) is to be answered in one of the following ways: > 1. eka.msavyaakara.niiya -- categorically eg. yes/no > 2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically > 3. pa.tipucchavyaakara.niiya -- with a counter-question > 4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside (not to be answered) > eg. Is the world eternal? > > Turning now to the Subhasutta: > > ... the brahman youth Subha, Todeyya's son, spoke thus to the Lord: > "Good Gotama, brahmans speak thus: 'A householder is accomplishing the > right path, dhamma, what is skilled; one who has gone forth is not > accomplishing the right path, dhamma, what is skilled.' What does the good > Gotama say to this?" > > "On this point I, brahman youth, discriminate, on this point I do not speak > definitely. ..." > [Vibhajjavaado kho aham ettha, maa.nava, naaham ettha eka.msavaado.] > -- translated by I.B. Horner, p.386 > > In reading the Buddha's reply, I think that it fits no. 2 quite well -- the > analytical reply. I'm going to be on the lookout for examples of categorical > replies by the Buddha and would appreciate it if anyone could point out some > examples. I know there are examples of no. 3 & 4. > > This sutta seems to be the main source of what vibhajjavaada & eka.msavaada > originally meant. From reading the two .tiikaas (Sp-.t & Vsm-mh.t) on the > term 'vibhajjavaadin' it appears that extra meanings have been added over > time. Dear Jim, Thank you for the clear explanations, I have asked someone at the foundation to find the corresponding passages for further study at our next sessions along with your reasonings. This has been most interesting, and thanks to Jinavamsa for his questions, Amara 2945 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Sun Jan 21, 2001 6:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Hello jinavamsa & friends --- Jinavamsa wrote: > . > hello Sarah and all, > > yes, I have the 2-vol. set you refer to. I have the > 1974 > printing. I had trouble finding the entry, but found > it > as "Ańńâta-Ko.n.dańńa (v.l. Ańńa-Ko.n.d.ańńa) > Thera". In > case those extended ASCii characters don't come > through, > that's A~n~naata-Ko.n.da~n~na etc. Sorry about the confusion, I wrote it as Anna Kondanna as written as first on Jim's Ang Nik list w'out the Pali diacritic marks...let me try: A~n~na Konda~n~na as written in my Eng. transl. (PTS) I also had the 2 set 1974 edition of Dict of PPN, but one of the volumes got really mouldy and rotten (too many yrs in the tropics) and I had to throw it out. I planned to just replace this, but now there is a 3 set 1997 edition, so recently we took the plunge (costly) & bought it. As a result we have the 1974 vol2 (N-H) in gd condition looking for a home if anyone wants it (free of course). I couldn't compare the entry for A~n~nata-Ko.n.da~n~na as I no longer I have my old 1st vol, but I compared the entries in both editions for Sariputta (10 pp) and they are identical, so no need to get the new ones! The 3 vols is just for convenience. > > Your references have allowed me to get to AN.i.23 > and a > list of a number of the "highest" in this or that > monks. > Thank you so much. glad to be of a little help anyway! > > You ask about the context of my question. > > To keep it brief here, it was just a remembrance of > the > Buddha as honored for his ability to make important > distinctions that inspired my question to the group. > > > I wanted to cite that recognition in a chapter [of > _The > Inner Palace_, its present title] respecting the > ability > to make differentiations (or distinctions) in a book > on > the link between consciousness and spirituality (in > other > words, on psychospirituality). Thanks for this info and sounds interesting. hope we hear more from you here! Sarah P.S. also looking for a home are the following after some 'restructuring' in our tiny computer rm/dh. library: Childers Pali Dict Abhidhammattha-Sangaha by Aung (PTS) gd cond Abhidhamattha -Sangaha by Narada (BPS) Visuddhimagga (1964ed) Bud Dict by Nyanatiloka Majjhima Nikaya - 4 vols trans by miss Horner (PTS) gd cond The Way of mindfulness, Satipatthana Sutta w/ Comm by Soma Thera Discourse on Fruits of Recluseship- Samannaphala Sutta & Comm by B.Bodhi new 2nd vol (of 2) of Pali Dict of Proper Names if anyone is interested in any of these (free), pls send a note to me OFF-LIST...first come, we'll happily pay shipping costs. 2946 From: amara chay Date: Sun Jan 21, 2001 10:46pm Subject: New chapters Dear all, Nina's 'Abhidhamma' chs 8, 9, 10 and 11 just up, intermediate section, . Enjoy, Amara 2947 From: Jinavamsa Date: Mon Jan 22, 2001 1:06pm Subject: Re: Foremost analyst hello Amara and all, You sent in this explanation, which is just what I was looking for: the focus on being able to explain things from several angles and in detail, as your Pali expert put it. Thanks so much. Were there some prime citations of where the term was used in just that sense that were also mentioned? What is the foundation you mention? and you are quite welcome for my questions. Jinavamsa > I thought you might be interested in what one of our Pali experts said > of the two terms: > > eka.msavaada. means, pretty much as you say, one whose speech is > definite, the dhamma is just as the Buddha says it is, it could not > be otherwise, no contradictions or second or third words possible > (i.e. lobha is what it is, it could never be dosa or moha). > > vibhajjavaada means the ability to explain things from several angles > and in detail: nama can be explained in contrast to rupa, or as > comprising citta, cetasika and nibbana, or as components of the > different ayatana, or as major types of citta and cetasika, etc. or > from as many perspectives as is necessary for the person to > understand, for example. > > I just got back from our Saturday sessions at the foundation, > > Amara 2948 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2001 3:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Dear Jim, Jinavamsa and Amara, O.K. you've got me a little bit 'hooked' here, but at least I'm getting to use those dictionaries...! (Mike- vipassana next, I promise!) First from Questions, Ang Nik ii,46 (PTS transl) just putting Jim's 4 responses to qus into verse: 'Monks, there are these four ways of answering a question. What four? There is the question which requires a categorical reply; that which requires a counter-question; that which requires to be waived: and there is the question which requires a discriminating reply. These are the four. The downright answer first (eka.msa), then qualified (vacanapara.m); The third he'll counter, set the fourth aside. "Skilled in the questions four" they call a monk Who knows to answer fitly thus and thus. Hard to o'ercome, to vanquish hard, profound, Invincible is such an one, and skilled To see the meaning, be it true or false; Wise to reject the false, he grasps the true. "Sage in the grasp of truth" (atthabhisamaya) that wise one's called.' Next is my 'prize' and Jim, I don't mind admitting to being a little pleased w/myself here (lots of akusalsa cittas popping up even now!!). You asked for an example of the categorical (eka.msavayaakara) type response. I'm looking at the Abhayarajakumara Sutta (To Prince Abhaya) in Maj Nik,i,393 no58, transl by B.Bodhi. In short, Prince Abhaya is encouraged by Nigantha Nataputto to refute the Buddha's teachings: ' "Come, prince, go to the recluse Gotama and say: 'Venerable sir, would the Tathagata utter speech that would be unwelcome and disagreeable to others?' " ' If he answers yes, the prince is to point out that there's no difference between him and ordinary people. If he answers no, the prince is to ask why he has said the following: ' "Devadatta is destined for the states of deprivation, Devadatta is destined for hell...." When the recluse Gotama is posed this two-horned question by you, he will not be able eitherto gulp it down or to throw it up......' The prince visits the Buddha: ' "Venerable sir, would a Tathagata utter such speech as would be unwelcome and disagreeable to others?" There is no one-sided (eka.msa, I think) answer to that, prince." "Then, venerable sir, the Nganthas have lost in this.".......' Although the Buddha does not give the categorical, yes-no answer, it explains what these would have been. You also encouraged me to read the Subha Sutta in which the Buddha also refuses to give a yes-no answer. Actually there are some interesting passages in this sutta and I'm just quoting another one which may be of relevance to some other discussions others have had on the list as well. Pls excuse the little deviation from the topic, but others may find it interesting: ' "Here, student, I am one who speaks after making an analysis (vibhajjavado kho aham ettha). I do not speak one-sidedly. I do not praise the wrong way of practice on the part either of a househholder or one one forth; for whether it be a householder or one gone forth, one who has entered on the wrong way of practice, by reason of his wrong way of practice, is not accomplishing the true way, the dhamma that is wholesome. I praise the right way of practice on the part either of a householder or one gone forth; for whether it be a householder or one gone forth, one who has entered on the right way of practice, by reason of his right way of practice, is accomplishing the true way, the Dhamma that is wholesome". ' I'm running out of steam and apologies for already having got too wordy or for any confusions with my Pali spelling or quotation marks! Best wishes, Sarah --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Amara, Jinavamsa, and all I think I have found the key > to understanding what > the Buddha meant when he used the two terms in the > Subhasutta (MN 99). > Know that the two terms are found in only three > places in the Tipitaka -- > twice in this sutta and once in AN X.94. To > understand why the two terms are > used, one needs to read the Pa~nhavyaakara.nasutta > (AN X.42) and then read > the commentarial explanation in the > Mahaapadesa-kathaa at DA ii 567. > > A question (pa~nho) is to be answered in one of the > following ways: > 1. eka.msavyaakara.niiya -- categorically eg. yes/no > 2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically > 3. pa.tipucchavyaakara.niiya -- with a > counter-question > 4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside > (not to be answered) > eg. Is the world eternal? > > Turning now to the Subhasutta: > > ... the brahman youth Subha, Todeyya's son, spoke > thus to the Lord: > "Good Gotama, brahmans speak thus: 'A householder is > accomplishing the > right path, dhamma, what is skilled; one who has > gone forth is not > accomplishing the right path, dhamma, what is > skilled.' What does the good > Gotama say to this?" > > "On this point I, brahman youth, discriminate, on > this point I do not speak > definitely. ..." > [Vibhajjavaado kho aham ettha, maa.nava, naaham > ettha eka.msavaado.] > -- translated by I.B. Horner, p.386 > > In reading the Buddha's reply, I think that it fits > no. 2 quite well -- the > analytical reply. I'm going to be on the lookout for > examples of categorical > replies by the Buddha and would appreciate it if > anyone could point out some > examples. I know there are examples of no. 3 & 4. > > This sutta seems to be the main source of what > vibhajjavaada & eka.msavaada > originally meant. From reading the two .tiikaas > (Sp-.t & Vsm-mh.t) on the > term 'vibhajjavaadin' it appears that extra meanings > have been added over > time. > > Best wishe, > Jim A. > 2949 From: Date: Mon Jan 22, 2001 11:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Patigha arise when seeing the corpses Dear shin, thanks very much for this,.. rgds. 2950 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jan 22, 2001 7:17pm Subject: vipassana meditation Dear Mike, You asked us to add any comments to your comments to a friend (below). I hope you won't mind if I let others enjoy your discussion on list and have a chance to add to it! I'm also keeping an eye on the clock as my students will be arriving shortly, so I won't start pulling out the texts this time! --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Understood. However, the Buddha did often instruct > monks to 'arouse energy'. I'm growing more and more > interesed in this kind of exhortation and its > relevance to our list discussions of pańńati etc. I > mean to start a new thread on this topic soon Looks like I'm helping with that thread! I think we've touched on this area before but it's very useful to keep coming back to it. When someone talks about arousing energy it depends on the understanding of the speaker what is meant. Of course, the Buddha had no misunderstanding of any self and so in no sense did he mean that any self should do anything. Viriya cetasika is annatta, just like all other realities. When the Buddha says this, I understand he means, 'don't waste time by not develolping understanding of realities now'. Viriya cetasika, as you know, can be wholesome or unwholesome. When panna arises, kusala viriya arises automatically without any trying or wrong view of self. It has nothing to do with our conventional idea of making an effort or being more energetic. > Not only that, but sloth, torpor and doubt are > potential objects of sati-pańńaa (same thing you're > saying, probably), so really preferable to ordinary > pańńati even though unpleasant. This ties into the > new thread idea too, and is I think a kind of > fine-tuned way of 'looking at the dosa until it goes > away' Yes, any realities can be the objects of sati and panna. Even while thinking of pannati, they can arise in between and know the thinking as another conditioned reality. Any wishing to have less of one reality or to have fewer pannati is merely lobha with thinking... No kusala viriya at those moments! > > No. But arousing viriya can be a good thing--even, > I > think, with the attendant delusion that 'I am > arousing > it'. My hypothesis is that we have to learn how to > work--warily--with this 'atta' delusion at least > until > sotapatti. The right practice has to start right from the very beginning. It's not a matter of arousing viriya with a view of self and then it turning into something more wholesome. From the beginning (always now!) panna can begin to understand realities as not self and begin to know the arousing of viriya with a view of self as being wrong practice. Akusala (unwholesome) viriya or thinking only leads to more of the same. Sorry if I'm sounding a little too direct... When we feel tired and just want to laze around with a novel (as I sometimes do), there can be viriya at those moments too..anytime, any place! > > That brings up another interesting point. Though > you > may be right, nature isn't always our friend, is it? > > This is another big hurdle for western hippie-dippie > mystics (like myself)--'if it's natural, it feels > good, and if it feels good, do it!' Unfortunately, > all > the nivaranas are perfectly natural too... The best > thing the current lull in activity has done for me > has > been to emphasize the extent to which I've become > dependent on communication with the group (not to > mention my computer, which is making some very > alarming noises this morning) for the arousing of > various paramis. Now, I know these may well be > vangchakas and not paramis, but I still think this > effort is good--separating the wheat from the chaff > is > a further issue, I think? Well, you may get a bit of ribbing about being a western hippie-dippie mystic.... As you say, what feels good and natural cannot be the judge. Wrong view is very natural! I'm also finding the group to be invaluable in terms of conditioning wise refelection and a little understanding and also a lot of lobha! But we don't need to be afraid of our kilesa. They are there anyway, and it's better to be honest and get to know them. Sometimes they seem more apparent to me while I'm studying dhamma (like when I was writing my last post and was quite excited). This is quite natural too. When I'm teaching I often don't see the kilesa, but what about all the moha at those times! As Robert has stressed so often, seeing the danger of wrong view of self is so essential. The more we understand realities as anatta, the less we mind about what is conditioned at any given moment. By separating the wheat from the chaff, I take it you mean understanding the moments of kusala and akusala. More than that, we need to develop understanding of any realities which appear- realities through 6 doorways. I think we all help give each other great reminders about this and the support of good friends can make a big difference as we've all agreed. > . It all depends > on > your emphasis and your intended audience. Reminds > me > a little of Ajahn Chah saying that his instructions > to > his monks often seemed contradictory (I have a vague > idea he borrowed this simile from the canon): He > said > it was if he were trying to keep everyone in the > middle of the road, so, if someone was wandering off > to the left, he'd yell, "Go right, go right!", and > if > someone was wandering off to the right, he'd yell, > "Go > left, go left!" You could see this kind of thing > (and > the resultant confusion) regularly in the monastery > (though he was (mentally) gone by the time I got > there)... I think this is a very helpful analogy. To some it is useful to say 'be more diligent' or 'arouse energy'. To others it may be more useful to say 'don't think there is any self to be diligent or energetic, understand seeing as not self'....To some we may say 'read the Tipitaka', while to others we may say ' just consider what you've read'....only the Buddha knew exactly what to say to whom and still his words weren't always popular! Mike, I've rather rushed through...pls pick me up on anything that isn't clear or doesn't seem correct and pls add any other parts from your discussion which I may have passed over. Your comments always encourage us to consider more. Many thanks, Sarah p.s. just made it w/ 5 mins to go... _______________________________________________________ 2951 From: amara chay Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > Were there some prime citations of where the term was used in > just that sense that were also mentioned? What is the foundation > you mention? Dear Jinavamsa, and friends, As you have seen, Jim and Sarah gave some references, and one of the experts at the Dhamma Study and Support Foundation here in Bangkok said there are several references in the Tipitaka. But as the Thai Tipitaka includes the Commentaries in its volumes, Jim is probably more precise in his references, and the other mentions are more likely to be found in the Commentaries. Amara 2952 From: Date: Mon Jan 22, 2001 9:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 270(Dear Khun Shin) Dear Shin Thank you so much for sharing the story with us. Now we can appreciated even more of Buddha teaching. In our daily life, there are vipaka that happening to us all the time, some are miners some are severe.. as long as we know it's our vipaka. and there is nothing we can do (except study and accumulate more kusala jitta) may be we can reduce dosa jitta a bit? any feed back from someone? anumodana, O 2953 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 7:51am Subject: California group Dear O, I was just thinking about you and the others in California the other day. I so enjoyed our discussions in Cambodia together. Pls let us know (& Jaran too) what you found most valuable from your stay in Thailand and Cambodia this time and how your discussion group is going in the Bay. If you can encourage Jack and Oi to also post the occasional note here, that would also be great. Jaran, thanks also for your help editing the English tapes which I'm about to start listening to. (If anyone else wants this set of 7 tapes made when we, Nina VanG and the California group were in Bkk and Cambodia w/ k.Sujin, just send an email to the add we gave out before at the Foundation. If you can't find it, let us know and we'll re-post it.) Best wishes, Sarah --- wrote: > Dear Shin > Thank you so much for sharing the story with us. > Now we can appreciated even more of Buddha teaching. > In our daily life, there are vipaka that happening > to us all > the time, some are miners some are severe.. > as long as we know it's our vipaka. > and there is nothing we can do (except study and > accumulate more kusala > jitta) > may be we can reduce dosa jitta a bit? > any feed back from someone? > anumodana, > O > > > 2954 From: Jim Anderson Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 8:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Dear Sarah, Thank-you for taking the time to type out these passages from the Suttas. Please read my comments below. >Dear Jim, Jinavamsa and Amara, > >O.K. you've got me a little bit 'hooked' here, but at >least I'm getting to use those dictionaries...! (Mike- >vipassana next, I promise!) > >First from Questions, Ang Nik ii,46 (PTS transl) just >putting Jim's 4 responses to qus into verse: > >'Monks, there are these four ways of answering a >question. What four? > >There is the question which requires a categorical >reply; that which requires a counter-question; that >which requires to be waived: and there is the question >which requires a discriminating reply. These are the >four. > > The downright answer first (eka.msa), then qualified > (vacanapara.m); > The third he'll counter, set the fourth aside. > "Skilled in the questions four" they call a monk > Who knows to answer fitly thus and thus. > Hard to o'ercome, to vanquish hard, profound, > Invincible is such an one, and skilled > To see the meaning, be it true or false; > Wise to reject the false, he grasps the true. > "Sage in the grasp of truth" (atthabhisamaya) that > wise one's called.' One point to note: "there is the question which requires a discriminating reply" in the prose part may be in the wrong place at the end in the PTS text version. In my two Burmese versions, the phrase comes in the second place immediately after "categorical reply" and this is the order followed in the verse part too. The Pali for the first line of verse is: "eka.msavacana.m eka.m vibhajjavacanaapara.m". >Next is my 'prize' and Jim, I don't mind admitting to >being a little pleased w/myself here (lots of akusalsa >cittas popping up even now!!). > >You asked for an example of the categorical >(eka.msavayaakara) type response. I'm looking at the >Abhayarajakumara Sutta (To Prince Abhaya) in Maj >Nik,i,393 no58, transl by B.Bodhi. > >In short, Prince Abhaya is encouraged by Nigantha >Nataputto to refute the Buddha's teachings: > >' "Come, prince, go to the recluse Gotama and say: >'Venerable sir, would the Tathagata utter speech that >would be unwelcome and disagreeable to others?' " ' > >If he answers yes, the prince is to point out that >there's no difference between him and ordinary people. >If he answers no, the prince is to ask why he has said >the following: >' "Devadatta is destined for the states of >deprivation, Devadatta is destined for hell...." When >the recluse Gotama is posed this two-horned question >by you, he will not be able eitherto gulp it down or >to throw it up......' > >The prince visits the Buddha: > >' "Venerable sir, would a Tathagata utter such speech >as would be unwelcome and disagreeable to others?" >There is no one-sided (eka.msa, I think) answer to >that, prince." >"Then, venerable sir, the Nganthas have lost in >this.".......' The Pali for 'There is no one-sided (eka.msa, I think) answer to that, prince.' is 'Na kho'ttha, raajakumaara, eka.msenaa ti'. The reference to the 'two-horned question' (ubhato-ko.tiko pa~nho) is quite interesting. >Although the Buddha does not give the categorical, >yes-no answer, it explains what these would have been. I think I see a similarity in the way the Buddha handled the questions in this sutta and the Subha sutta in that he is not drawn into giving a categorical reply, but instead goes on to give an analytical reply. In the case of Prince Abhaya, he gives an analysis of the Tathagata's speech and in the case of Subha, he gives the analysis as you have typed out below. >You also encouraged me to read the Subha Sutta in >which the Buddha also refuses to give a yes-no answer. >Actually there are some interesting passages in this >sutta and I'm just quoting another one which may be >of relevance to some other discussions others have had >on the list as well. Pls excuse the little deviation >from the topic, but others may find it interesting: > >' "Here, student, I am one who speaks after making an >analysis (vibhajjavado kho aham ettha). I do not speak >one-sidedly. I do not praise the wrong way of practice >on the part either of a househholder or one one forth; > for whether it be a householder or one gone forth, >one who has entered on the wrong way of practice, by >reason of his wrong way of practice, is not >accomplishing the true way, the dhamma that is >wholesome. I praise the right way of practice on the >part either of a householder or one gone forth; for >whether it be a householder or one gone forth, one who >has entered on the right way of practice, by reason of >his right way of practice, is accomplishing the true >way, the Dhamma that is wholesome". ' I had typed only the first line from Horner's translation and appreciate your additional lines from Bodhi's translation. His translation of 'vibhajjavaada' as 'one who speaks after making an analysis' is the best translation of the word I've seen so far. I don't have a copy of this new translation of MN. Is this really BB's translation or is it ~Naa.namoli's? >I'm running out of steam and apologies for already >having got too wordy or for any confusions with my >Pali spelling or quotation marks! No need to apologize for your well-intended effort! I have been thinking quite a bit about the four types of questions given in AN IV.42 and this has inspired me to look more seriously at the types of questions and answers in the Tipitaka and how to determine the type. I was curious enough to look in 'A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language' by Quirk et al for any classification of questions from a modern Western perspective. It divides questions into the following three major classes (p.806): 1. YES-NO questions 2. WH- questions 3. ALTERNATIVE questions (multiple choice questions) It is easy to fit no. 1 in with the first of the 4 Buddhist types of questions but I'm unsure about nos.2 & 3 which are also abundant in the Tipitaka. I think that if you ask: 'What time is it?' I think this would be a Buddhist type 1 (I'm inclined to think this type includes more than just the yes-no type), but if you ask:'Which dhammas are wholesome?' I'm sure this would be a Buddhist type 2 question requiring an analytical answer. Best wishes, Jim A. 2955 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 9:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Abhidhamma - Then & now Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > Yes. But our 'affinity for impermanence' is at > a > > > relatively superficial level. It is not the > panna > > > which experiences, for example, seeing as seeing > > and > > > at the same time has penetrated the true nature > of > > > that reality to the degree that the > characteristic > > > of > > > impermanence is known. Well, no, I'm convinced of that--partly because of the duration of what we're talking about. Any real dhamma is an oh-my-gosh gazillion times gone before we can possibly reflect on it. So understanding, as the likes of myself can talk about, it is always and only at the conceptual level. Is it reasonable to hope for pariyatti vs. pańńatti, here? Is paritatti not preferrable? Or is this yet another dead end? > > I guess what I had in mind here was, If 'we' have > an > > affinity for the tilakkhana now, doesn't that > > suggest > > some previous 'accumulation'? > > Yes, indeed it does. But is it understanding that > is > derived direct knowledge of realities? Or is it > understanding mostly at an intellectual level, from > considering and reflecting on the teachings > generally > and the tilakkhana (the characteristics of anicca, > dukkha and anatta) in particular? No doubt. What I'm guessing is that understanding at the intellectual level is conditioned by imperceptible specks of real satipańńaa in an ocean of pańńatti. If not, why is there any intellectual understanding at all? Is intellectual understanding no different from intellectual misunderstanding? > > If it's true that we > > don't carry 'stories' from one life to the next, > but > > only pańńaa? Or is this just sankharuppadana (or > > something like that)? > > But even though there is panna, panna of what level > and stage of development? Well, isn't some, at any level, better than none, at any level? > > > For those listening to the Buddha, developed > panna > > > was > > > arising through the different doorways as he > > spoke. > > > They had accumulated levels of panna in previous > > > lives, > > > > Have we not? If not, why are we interested today? > > Yes, our interest in this life is because of panna > accumulated in previous lives. But this does not > mean > we are ready for enlightenment, even if we were to > have the extreme good fortune of listening to the > Buddha himself. Suppose not--didn't seem to do Stick-In-Hand the Brahmin (among many others) much good... > > > and had the right conditions for those > > > accumulations to become manifest during the > > lifetime > > > of the Buddha. > > I wonder > > why some of us are attracted by the tilakkhana in > > this > > life, while most of us (even if we hear of it) are > > repulsed. > > As you say, it must be because of accumulated panna. > > But there is still, for all of us, heaps of > accumulated wrong view also! Sure... Thanks as always for 'your' patience(!) mn 2956 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 3:56pm Subject: The Foundation Dear Jinavamsa, --- Jinavamsa wrote: > hello Amara and all, What is > the foundation > you mention? > > > I just got back from our Saturday sessions at the > foundation, > > > > Amara > Yes, I realise some of us speak about the Foundation and the majority of members here will have no idea what we're talking about. The Foundation is simply the Centre in Bangkok where Khun Sujin and some of her students teach the Dhamma. It has only been built and in operation less than a year. Before that, they would teach at temples and in particular at Wat Bovanives and hold discussions at different venues. Now almost all the activities which include lectures, discussions, distribution of books, preparation of tapes for radio programmes and I'm sure many more that I don't know about, are held at this new Centre/Foundation. The timetable of activities, including regular English discussions, is always posted on Amara's website. I might add that there is a spare room at the Foundation for any men to stay who are visiting Bangkok. Jonothan stayed there last weekend when he went over for a celebration. I hope this clarifies, Sarah 2957 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 4:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Dear Jim --- Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Sarah, > >'Monks, there are these four ways of answering a > >question. What four? > > > >There is the question which requires a categorical > >reply; that which requires a counter-question; that > >which requires to be waived: and there is the > question > >which requires a discriminating reply. These are > the > >four. > > > > The downright answer first (eka.msa), then > qualified > > (vacanapara.m); > > The third he'll counter, set the fourth aside. > > "Skilled in the questions four" they call a monk > > Who knows to answer fitly thus and thus. > > Hard to o'ercome, to vanquish hard, profound, > > Invincible is such an one, and skilled > > To see the meaning, be it true or false; > > Wise to reject the false, he grasps the true. > > "Sage in the grasp of truth" (atthabhisamaya) that > > wise one's called.' > > One point to note: "there is the question which > requires a discriminating > reply" in the prose part may be in the wrong place > at the end in the PTS > text version. In my two Burmese versions, the phrase > comes in the second > place immediately after "categorical reply" and this > is the order followed > in the verse part too. The Pali for the first line > of verse is: > "eka.msavacana.m eka.m vibhajjavacanaapara.m". yes, interesting. I had also noted that the order for the prose part and the verse part were different and the verse part followed the list you had given...We should all encourage B.Bodhi to do a translation of Ang Nik w/Commentary notes (or maybe you could add it to your long list!). thanks for the Pali. > > I think I see a similarity in the way the Buddha > handled the questions in > this sutta and the Subha sutta in that he is not > drawn into giving a > categorical reply, but instead goes on to give an > analytical reply. In the > case of Prince Abhaya, he gives an analysis of the > Tathagata's speech and in > the case of Subha, he gives the analysis as you have > typed out below. I agree and it actually raises a qu for me. In both these contexts and in one or two others I found, eka.msavacana (the categorical yes-no response)seems to have negative connotations of the one-sided bias. We have not yet found an example where the Buddha actually gives an eka.msavacvana reponse with a positive read as explained to Amara by the Thai pali experts (direct, clear-cut, lobha must be lobha and not dosa or moha rather than the one-sided translation), so I'm just wondering.....` > > I had typed only the first line from Horner's > translation and appreciate > your additional lines from Bodhi's translation. His > translation of > 'vibhajjavaada' as 'one who speaks after making an > analysis' is the best translation of the word I've > seen so far. I don't have > a copy of this new translation of MN. Is this really > BB's translation or is > it ~Naa.namoli's? From reading the introduction to the book, BB says 'My aim in editing and revising the material..has not been to reconstruct the suttas in a way that would conform as closely as possible to the intentions of the original translator.' He's used many of Ven Khantipalo's changes, been helped by Ven Nyanaponika and in addition to the PTS translations, he used a Bumese edition in Burmese script and a Sinhala script version. Often these last two were preferred. (This is a v.brief summary) He has a note about Vibhajjavado kho aham ettha at the back w/ no reference to this being anyone else's translation. The note says 'Such statements account for the later designation of Buddhism as vibhajjavada, 'the doctrine of analysis'. I'm also thinking of the Vibhanga as the book of analysis. > I have been thinking > quite a bit about the four types of questions given > in AN IV.42 and this > has inspired me to look more seriously at the types > of questions and answers > in the Tipitaka and how to determine the type. I was > curious enough to look > in 'A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language' > by Quirk et al for any > classification of questions from a modern Western > perspective. It divides > questions into the following three major classes > (p.806): > 1. YES-NO questions > 2. WH- questions > 3. ALTERNATIVE questions (multiple choice questions) > > It is easy to fit no. 1 in with the first of the 4 > Buddhist types of > questions but I'm unsure about nos.2 & 3 which are > also abundant in the > Tipitaka. I think that if you ask: 'What time is > it?' I think this would be > a Buddhist type 1 (I'm inclined to think this type > includes more than just > the yes-no type), but if you ask:'Which dhammas are > wholesome?' I'm sure > this would be a Buddhist type 2 question requiring > an analytical answer. Of course a no I (Buddhist or Quirk) qu can take any of the responses and so on. The Subha and prince Abhaya qus were no 1 expecting a no I respnse but led to a no 2 reply. Actually, before I go on, I think we cannot compare grammatical constructs with an analysis of dhammas........but an interesting linguistic poser! good luck. Sarah> 2958 From: Sukinder Narula Date: Tue Jan 23, 2001 7:14pm Subject: Books Dear Group, For new members and old members who might have not read the original post or who might have forgotten about it, I am reposting the list of books that are available from the foundation, for free distribution. 1. Realities and Concepts. 2. Letters from Nina.(En/Th) 3. Understanding Reality.(En/Th) 4. Abhidhamma in Daily Life. 5. Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka.(En/Th) 6. Mental Development in Daily Life.(En/Th). A set of four books as follows:- a.) The Greatest Blessings. b.) Death c.) The Eighhtfold Path. d.) Tranquil Meditation and Vipassana. The (En/Th) means that these books are half in English and half in Thai (one facing the other side by side). Those of you who might have made the request and have not yet recieved the books, please kindly let me know. Metta, Sukin. PS: Please note that all correspondence regarding this matter is to be made privately to me and not to the group. 2959 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 0:17am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > Know that the two terms are found in only three places in the Tipitaka -- > twice in this sutta and once in AN X.94. To understand why the two terms are > used, one needs to read the Pa~nhavyaakara.nasutta (AN X.42) and then read > the commentarial explanation in the Mahaapadesa-kathaa at DA ii 567. > > A question (pa~nho) is to be answered in one of the following ways: > 1. eka.msavyaakara.niiya -- categorically eg. yes/no > 2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically > 3. pa.tipucchavyaakara.niiya -- with a counter-question > 4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside (not to be answered) > eg. Is the world eternal? > > Turning now to the Subhasutta: > > ... the brahman youth Subha, Todeyya's son, spoke thus to the Lord: > "Good Gotama, brahmans speak thus: 'A householder is accomplishing the > right path, dhamma, what is skilled; one who has gone forth is not > accomplishing the right path, dhamma, what is skilled.' What does the good > Gotama say to this?" > > "On this point I, brahman youth, discriminate, on this point I do not speak > definitely. ..." > [Vibhajjavaado kho aham ettha, maa.nava, naaham ettha eka.msavaado.] > -- translated by I.B. Horner, p.386 Dear Jim, Sarah and all, I think that the answers might fit in the four major categories, but the real intention would probably still be to use whichever means fit the clarification of the problem best to the person who asked the question. In the case above the question is too general and does not take into consideration the individual's accumulations, therefore the answer requires another level of understanding, and more thorough explanations. The examples given by Sarah also poses questions that require consideration of circumsatances and accumulations of the individuals involved, for example what is agreable to some might be the opposite for others. In short, I think that the answers were given to help people understand through different and most suitable means for the individuals involved rather that categorizing the questions to find the right answers. I think it's interesting that the classification you found in ''A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language' by Quirk et al for any classification of questions from a modern Western perspective. It divides questions into the following three major classes (p.806): 1. YES-NO questions 2. WH- questions 3. ALTERNATIVE questions (multiple choice questions)' did not include answering a question with a question (3. pa.tipucchavyaakara.niiya -- with a counter-question), one of the most dreaded and yet most effective methods of teaching to me personally and one of Khun Sujin's favorite methods. You are forced to reason and remember in ways that are most instructive, although the wrong use could confuse the student in ways that must be full of akusala! As for the most difficult to use to my mind, without thoroughly understanding the person who asks and their questions, is not to answer at all (4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside): unless the person asked couldn't answer anyway, how would one know when not to answer dhamma question? Granted, some people or questions in some situations are better not being answered, but I think the Buddha was probably alone to be able to distinguish those, to me almost all questions lead to dhamma, somehow. Just some thoughts, as are all analysis anyway! Amara 2960 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 0:27am Subject: Re: Digest Number 270(Dear Khun Shin) > In our daily life, there are vipaka that happening to us all > the time, some are miners some are severe.. > as long as we know it's our vipaka. > and there is nothing we can do (except study and accumulate more kusala > jitta) > may be we can reduce dosa jitta a bit? Dear Khun O, I think that knowledge must automatically be of some help, especially if we realize that it's our vipaka at that instant, because the citta arise one at a time and when the citta considers the truth it is not involved with lobha, dosa or moha. Therefore at least at that instant it is not involved with the dosa of the situation, making at least that much citta without akusala. Then the sight, sound and smell of the circumstances might condition akusala to arise again, but at least while there was right thinking the akusala could not arise with that particular citta, so a little less akusala accumulated, as well as a little more right understanding! What do you think? Amara 2961 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 8:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ordering tapes and books from Bangkok Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > In Bangkok (at the Foundation) they have put Khun > Sujin's talks into MP3 format on CD-ROM's. If you > think this experience might be helpful to you, I am > told that the person to contact is Khun Unnop whose > email address is the one given as the cc addressee > for > tapes and books orders (I will post it as soon as i > manage to locate it) Still plugging away at this project haltingly, and in my spare time. Maybe making a little progress. Do you know if Khun Unnop speaks/reads English? I would like to contact him about this. Thanks...mn 2962 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 9:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] List Housekeeping Dear Sarah, --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > What we really need (I think) is some sort of index > system to help us all, but I've no idea how this is > done. Any volunteers out there? Another (smallish) > problem is that s'times the threads lead away from > the > original subject headings.... I've been looking at the 'files' and 'database' options for moderators at e-groups, and thinking about the possibilities. I don't think indexing is the answer in this environment. Of course we can search now by keyword or author in the archives, but I don't think that's exactly what we're after. I've taken the liberty of adding a text file to the 'files' and a link to it to the 'links' of dhammastudygroup. It's a little rough but I think you'll see the potential. I'd rather use HTML files (for the formatting), but I haven't found that option here and this would (I think) require space on another server. I think free space is easy enough to come by, but haven't really investigated this yet. mike 2963 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 9:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness Jon, --- wrote: > Mike > > I must say I have learnt a lot from reading your > posts about inter- > personal relations, a skill in which I am rather > lacking. Would you > mind if I copy your formula for use with my own > posts? Your point is well taken. In fact, my 'interpersonal relations' certainly have a lot more to do with unwholesome than with wholesome states. This is a timely admonition and I thank you for it. mn 2964 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 10:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Friends, Robes & Terminology Dear Sarah, --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Nice citation! Especially in the context of the > > 'robes' thread. As you may recall, I have yet to > > read > > the commentaries--so you may be engaging in a duel > > of > > wits with an unarmed opponent... > > Mike, you're a LOT more familiar with the suttas > than > I am and really I've read preciously little of the > commentaries, but sometimes the extra notes and maps > do help! Let's not get carried away--some recent posts of yours make you familiarity with the tripitaka quite clear--and quite clearly beyond my own. > BTW, I meant to thank you for also posting the link > and comments on Piyajatika Sutta (From One Who is > Dear). It's been a condition for some useful > reflection even though I had nothing to add because > the Sutta really said it all! I do hope you'll go to the trouble of looking up the PTS translation. You (or another scholar) could probably correct me on this, but 'Born of Affection' seems to me much more to the point than 'From One Who Is Dear'. mn 2965 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 10:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Dear Khun Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > Pannati can only be the object of the mind dvara, > which is not > pannati itself and therefore can be object of > awareness, of > satipatthana. One could be aware of thinking at the > moment of > thinking, and therefore at the moment or after one > could experience > the characteristics of thinking which are completely > different from > those of an instant of seeing, even at this moment > when there are > both going on, plus hearing, touching, and > innumerable bhavangas > interposing. In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of thinking at the moment of thinking' unless that process were repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Do you mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of awareness might arise with thinking, and leave its equally imperceptible trace? Thanks in advance, mike 2966 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 10:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Dear Khun Amara, --- amara chay wrote: > Dhammanupassana encompasses all dvara because the > manodvara > experiences all the arammana in sequence to the > other dvara as well > as through the manodvara proper. Right, thanks. I think this unique characteristic of the manodvara together with its similarities to the dvi-pancadvaras is important to remember. mike 2967 From: Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 8:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Digest Number 274 Dear Sara,Amara and khun Shin: Thanks so much for your prompt respond Amara, I'm totally agree with you that jitta can only arises one at a time, however had we not know the dhamma? We'd still be in shock, frantic and for sure having a nightmare about the ugly scene. It isn't easy to forget such an incident (at least if it were me) Amara, I feel very fortunate to have learned Abidhamma It is the most importance thing in everyone's life. To have an understanding about the reality that one have to face in daily life... Sara, how are you? Hope you and Jon got something good out of Cambodia trip. For me, I'm kind of feel guilty that I haven't participate much when there were a discussion. Jaran's now in Germany on the business trip. Thanks to him he gave me the tape of Cambodia trip. Now that I'm home I have more time to swallow little by little. Jack and Oii are very busy I don't think they have time to join the discussion, but I 'll certainty try to convince them. Khun Shin,Thanks so much for sharing your story. Anumodana ka, O 2968 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 8:13pm Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > As for the most difficult to use to my mind, without > thoroughly understanding the person who asks and their questions, is > not to answer at all (4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set > aside): unless the person asked couldn't answer anyway, how would > one know when not to answer dhamma question? Granted, some people or > questions in some situations are better not being answered, but I > think the Buddha was probably alone to be able to distinguish those, > to me almost all questions lead to dhamma, somehow. Dear Jim, Sarah and all, I just realized that I did just that, not answer a dhamma question, only two days ago, when a friend of a friend asked me about a school of 'meditation retreats'. An excerpt of his message: >As my method is Anapanasati I am highly sceptical of >what appears to me as a forced type of meditation without much grounding in the >Suttas. I remember that we (when I was still a monk) spoke of the Vipassana- >factory and the black-out place, not very respectfully I´m afraid. >Pierre told me that you might have more information regarding this matter, for I >would like to form an opinion based on facts and not on rumors and prejudice. >I would greatly apreciate any information you send to me. >Sorry for bothering you and taking your time. To which I replied: I am sorry I do not know much about 'meditation retreats' of any tradition, I only study meditation in daily life, as in satipatthana as taught in the Tipitaka. The Buddha was enlightened while studying the present after considering the endless future and the innumerable rebirths in the past, and he taught repeatedly about how we can only experience the world through the six dvara, and how we should be aware of the characteristics of realities as appears through them, such as now as you read this there must be seeing, a nama or an element that is intelligence which can experience things, and the visible object that is its arammana. The citta is 17 times faster than any speed of light, therefore as we see, other citta also arise and make us feel that we are seeing and hearing at the same time, whereas in reality that citta that hears arises in alternation with the seeing, and the characteristics are distinct. Alternating with that theoretically there are the bhavanga citta or life continuum which arise in great numbers which we could never experience even through the manodvara. Besides that we also have the body sense feeling the keyboard or the mouse, and countless precesses of thinking throught the manodvara. The characteristics of each of these dhamma or realities could give us knowledge of things as they really are, as taught by no one else but the Buddha, as different dhatu or elements arising and falling away in sequence with extreme rapidity, under no one's control since by the time we experienced them they had fallen away. But the study of their characteristics as they appear would teach us that they are forever changing and not the self, hence uncontrolable, just different realities that arise and fall away from conditions. As seeing or visible objects arise now when you read this, where is the self? It only exists when we think of it. Awareness of things as they really are could accumulate knowledge that would get clearer, deeper and more powerful until there is full realization of things as they really are, nama as nama and rupa as rupa. If you are interested in the explanation about vipassana/samatha as explained in the Tipitaka, may I suggest reading the following chapters in the book 'Summary of Paramatthadhamma' in the advanced section of , chapters 7&8. I am sorry I couldn't answer your question about the meditation retreats, (End quote) I suppose this is an example of the not answering type (4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside), perhaps followed by an explanation of something not asked at all but pertinent to the answer-- perhaps to be included in the analytical one (2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically)? Amara 2969 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 8:29pm Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of thinking > at the moment of thinking' unless that process were > repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Do you > mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of awareness > might arise with thinking, and leave its equally > imperceptible trace? Dear Mike, Any citta that is evolving with kusala, even when one is studying the truth, or the dhamma, has to have sati arising with it since sati arises with all kusala citta. Even our bhavanga would have sati since all humans are born because of kusala vipaka, although the degrees vary, but as the bhavanga are only life continuum and would not accumulate anything further since its duty is to pass on all the accumulations from the preceding citta and maintain life. Most of the time, without knowing about sati, panna and satipatthana, one would never have deeper or stronger sati arising, but hearing or studying the dhamma could be conditions for more perceptible awareness to arise and accumulate and grow stronger to become fleetingly perceptible, and become paccaya ('upasissaya paccaya') for the next moments of sati to arise. But as you say the 'imperceptible trace' would also be there even at other moments of imperceptible sati arising with kusala citta evolving with dana, sila or bhavana. Nothing is ever lost, both good and bad, until we are able to end rebirth in samsara. Amara 2970 From: amara chay Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 8:36pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 274 > I'm totally agree with you that jitta > can only arises one at a time, however > had we not know the dhamma? We'd still be > in shock, frantic and for sure having a nightmare > about the ugly scene. > It isn't easy to forget such an incident (at least if it were me) > Amara, I feel very fortunate to have learned Abidhamma > It is the most importance thing in everyone's life. > To have an understanding about the reality that one have to > face in daily life... Dear O, You are absolutely right, without the dhamma there would be much more moments of akusala for me, even when things like that do not happen. The teachings are the most precious things in life, aren't they, and the best thing is that you can take it with you no matter where your next lifetime will be! Anumodana with all those who study, Amara 2971 From: m. nease Date: Wed Jan 24, 2001 8:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Good points, Khun Amara, thanks...mn 2972 From: Jinavamsa Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 1:27am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation hello Mike and Khun Amara and all, re the comment: > In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of thinking > at the moment of thinking' unless that process were > repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Do you > mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of awareness > might arise with thinking, and leave its equally > imperceptible trace? ==== Let me see if I understand. Suppose that we are practicing mindfulness. And at one moment, what arises in consciousness is a thought, or thinking. This is noticed as it arises or comes to be/appear, and as it is replaced by whatever comes next in consciousness. That is/was fairly simple. What would be the idea of an infinite regress here [which is how I read the "repeatedly unimaginably vast number of times" phrase to be suggesting]? thank you. Jinavamsa ============= 2973 From: Jinavamsa Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 1:35am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst hello Amara Chay and all, I will not reply here to the classification of this answer to another's question in terms of the four sorts of question that are differentiated from one another in some discourses (suttas). Instead I wanted to look at the question itself. More below in context, then. Jinavamsa --- "amara chay" wrote: > > > > > As for the most difficult to use to my mind, without > > thoroughly understanding the person who asks and their questions, is > > not to answer at all (4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set > > aside): unless the person asked couldn't answer anyway, how would > > one know when not to answer dhamma question? Granted, some people > or > > questions in some situations are better not being answered, but I > > think the Buddha was probably alone to be able to distinguish those, > > to me almost all questions lead to dhamma, somehow. > > > Dear Jim, Sarah and all, > > I just realized that I did just that, not answer a dhamma question, > only two days ago, when a friend of a friend asked me about a school > of 'meditation retreats'. An excerpt of his message: > > >As my method is Anapanasati I am highly sceptical of > >what appears to me as a forced type of meditation without much > grounding in the > >Suttas. I remember that we (when I was still a monk) spoke of the > Vipassana- > >factory and the black-out place, not very respectfully I´m afraid. > >Pierre told me that you might have more information regarding this > matter, for I > >would like to form an opinion based on facts and not on rumors and > prejudice. > >I would greatly apreciate any information you send to me. > >Sorry for bothering you and taking your time. ====== Of course there is a discourse called the discourse on awareness of the in and out breathing (ânâpânasati-sutta), it's in the Majjhima Nikaya, No. 118. As to whether mindfulness of breath is forced, I would wonder/ask this person what is the forced part here? It is structured. Such a person might either look at resistance to a structured meditation (without judging this resistance as bad, or as good, for that matter) or try a more open mindfulness practice, guided purely by the orientation "Pay attention to whatever arises next in consciouness." That might be a more congenial practice for such a mind-state (iow, for a person with such a sense of how to do things). And what sort of meditation retreat might he/she be interested in? I assume something in the vipassanâ tradition, but that's just perhaps reading into the text a bit too much.... Jinavamsa ============= 2974 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 2:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Hello Jina, My point was that the arising and subsiding of a nama is so rapid that unless a very great many similar namas arise in succession they would not be noticable. I'm still pretty new to all this so I may well be mistaken. What I think of as a noticable 'thought' is a concept, and not a nama (such as vitakka). Does this make sense? mike --- Jinavamsa wrote: > hello Mike and Khun Amara and all, > > re the comment: > > > In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of > thinking > > at the moment of thinking' unless that process > were > > repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Do > you > > mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of > awareness > > might arise with thinking, and leave its equally > > imperceptible trace? > > ==== > Let me see if I understand. Suppose that we are > practicing > mindfulness. And at one moment, what arises in > consciousness > is a thought, or thinking. This is noticed as it > arises or > comes to be/appear, and as it is replaced by > whatever comes > next in consciousness. That is/was fairly simple. > What would be > the idea of an infinite regress here [which is how I > read > the "repeatedly unimaginably vast number of times" > phrase to > be suggesting]? > thank you. > Jinavamsa > ============= > 2975 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 8:29am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Amara wrote: Dear Jim, Sarah and all, I just realized that I did just that, not answer a dhamma question, only two days ago, when a friend of a friend asked me about a school of 'meditation retreats'. An excerpt of his message: >As my method is Anapanasati I am highly sceptical of >what appears to me as a frced type of meditation without much grounding in the >Suttas. I remember that we (when I was still a monk) spoke of the Vipassana- >factory and the black-out place, not very respectfully I´m afraid. >Pierre told me that you might have more information regarding this matter, for I >would like to form an opinion based on facts and not on rumors and prejudice. >I would greatly apreciate any information you send to me. >Sorry for bothering you and taking your time. To which I replied: I am sorry I do not know much about 'meditation retreats' of any tradition, I only study meditation in daily life, as in satipatthana as taught in the Tipitaka. The Buddha was enlightened while studying the present after considering the endless future and the innumerable rebirths in the past, and he taught repeatedly about how we can only experience the world through the six dvara, and how we should be aware of the characteristics of realities as appears through them, such as now as you read this there must be seeing, a nama or an element that is intelligence which can experience things, and the visible object that is its arammana. The citta is 17 times faster than any speed of light, therefore as we see, other citta also arise and make us feel that we are seeing and hearing at the same time, whereas in reality that citta that hears arises in alternation with the seeing, and the characteristics are distinct. Alternating with that theoretically there are the bhavanga citta or life continuum which arise in great numbers which we could never experience even through the manodvara. Besides that we also have the body sense feeling the keyboard or the mouse, and countless precesses of thinking throught the manodvara. The characteristics of each of these dhamma or realities could give us knowledge of things as they really are, as taught by no one else but the Buddha, as different dhatu or elements arising and falling away in sequence with extreme rapidity, under no one's control since by the time we experienced them they had fallen away. But the study of their characteristics as they appear would teach us that they are forever changing and not the self, hence uncontrolable, just different realities that arise and fall away from conditions. As seeing or visible objects arise now when you read this, where is the self? It only exists when we think of it. Awareness of things as they really are could accumulate knowledge that would get clearer, deeper and more powerful until there is full realization of things as they really are, nama as nama and rupa as rupa. If you are interested in the explanation about vipassana/samatha as explained in the Tipitaka, may I suggest reading the following chapters in the book 'Summary of Paramatthadhamma' in the advanced section of , chapters 7&8. I am sorry I couldn't answer your question about the meditation retreats, (End quote) I suppose this is an example of the not answering type (4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside), perhaps followed by an explanation of something not asked at all but pertinent to the answer-- perhaps to be included in the analytical one (2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically)? Amara ======================= Dear Amara, I don't see your correspondent's question about the meditation retreats, but what I see is a request for information concerning facts about meditation. So is he really asking a question or just requesting information? I think the last (short) paragraph of your reply is more relevant to what he is requesting than the first (long) paragraph. The Dighanikaya commentary (DA ii 567) gives a simple example for each of the four types of questions and answers. 1. eka.msavyaakara.niiya -- categorically eg. yes/no "Is the eye impermanent? (cakkhu.m aniccan ti)" is to be answered categorically with: "Yes, it is impermanent. (aama aniccan ti)" 2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically "Is only the eye impermanent? (anicca.m naama cakkhun ti)" is to be answered analytically with: "Not only the eye (but) also the ear is impermanent and the nose is impermanent.(na cakkhumeva sotampi anicca.m ghaanampi anicccan ti)" [I'm uncertain about how to translate 'naama' in the question] 3. pa.tipucchavyaakara.niiya -- with a counter-question "As the eye, so the ear; as the ear, so the eye. (yathaa cakkhu.m tathaa sotam; yathaa sota.m tathaa cakkhun ti)" is to be counterquestioned: "In what sense do you ask? (ken'a.t.thena pucchaasii ti)" When "I ask in the sense of seeing (dassan'a.t.thena pucchaamii ti)" is spoken it is to be answered "No (na hii ti)."; when "I ask in the sense of impermanent (anicc'a.t.thena pucchaamii ti)" is spoken, it is to be answered "Yes (aamaa ti)". 4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside (not to be answered) "Are the soul and the body the same? (ta.m jiiva.m ta.m sariiran ti)" is to be set aside with: "This is unanswered by the Blessed One (avyaakatam eta.m Bhagavataa ti). [For more examples of this type of question see the Avyaakatasa.myutta] These may be the only examples we have to work with and we'll have to figure out what is appropriate for the remaining billions of other questions of every shape and form. There is a common type of question in the Tipitaka such as: Is ruupa permanent or impermanent? This would be what is called an alternative type question as classified in the English grammar book cited in a previous post and I would label this one a type 1in the Sutta scheme. I would be inclined to class questions that are not answered as no. 4 even if the reason is that the person does not know the answer when others may, or the question is too personal, or it doesn't really need an answer, and so on. In my first paragraph above I ask you a question, but in my mind you have a choice of answering it or not. It's up to you and if you decide that it's a no. 4 -- that's ok with me. Best wishes, Jim A. 2976 From: Jinavamsa Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 9:40am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation hello Mike, I see. We are talking on several levels of understanding at the same time here, and trying to fit them together. At least if I follow along with what I'm reading. We have nama (nâma) as a general category covering what is mental, as in the term nâma-rűpa. Then we can think of each moment of consciousness and its reported brevity. I read (here?) recently about it's being faster than the speed of light. I don't remember that in particular, but still, it was something very short-lived indeed. But if we look at how things work in paying attention to consciousness, we can notice a smell, for example, or a sound, and these are not over in a one-twenty-thousandth of a second, say (or whatever perhaps-overly, perhaps-artificially precise measure of its duration). They are long enough for us to notice. Anyway, it was in that meditationally-applicable sense that I was speaking of a thought or a thinking (to give it the verbal sense we might feel in the Indic expressions). I leave here the earlier exchange... there's perhaps more to say, anyway. jina --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hello Jina, > > My point was that the arising and subsiding of a nama > is so rapid that unless a very great many similar > namas arise in succession they would not be noticable. > I'm still pretty new to all this so I may well be > mistaken. > > What I think of as a noticable 'thought' is a concept, > and not a nama (such as vitakka). Does this make > sense? > > mike > > --- Jinavamsa wrote: > > hello Mike and Khun Amara and all, > > > > re the comment: > > > > > In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of > > thinking > > > at the moment of thinking' unless that process > > were > > > repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Do > > you > > > mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of > > awareness > > > might arise with thinking, and leave its equally > > > imperceptible trace? > > > > ==== > > Let me see if I understand. Suppose that we are > > practicing > > mindfulness. And at one moment, what arises in > > consciousness > > is a thought, or thinking. This is noticed as it > > arises or > > comes to be/appear, and as it is replaced by > > whatever comes > > next in consciousness. That is/was fairly simple. > > What would be > > the idea of an infinite regress here [which is how I > > read > > the "repeatedly unimaginably vast number of times" > > phrase to > > be suggesting]? > > thank you. > > Jinavamsa > > ============= > > > > 2977 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > > In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of thinking > > at the moment of thinking' unless that process were > > repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Dear Jina, I think Mike was being modest of his citta'a accumulated ability to be mindful of thinking as a nama, a kind of citta experiencing thoughts, which happen in alternation with other kinds of citta almost all through your waking hours and even when you dream. When you are fast asleep or in a coma, the bhavanga citta (life continuum) keep you alive and during the waking hours they arise in between processes of citta through the other sense dvara and the subsequent manodvara maintaining life until the next vipaka (the result of former kamma) brings result as the next instant of experiencing some arammana through one of the five dvara. Your reaction of like (a degree of lobha) or dislike (a degree of dosa) for the arammana perceived is due to your accumulations, and if you do not realize it is a nama and not the self, there could be more upanissaya paccaya (conditions born of repetition or precedent behavior that facilitate the same kind of citta to arise again in the future). If the lobha or dosa is strong enough, it might result in some kamma (physical or verbal actions) that, if it were akusala (against the five precepts, for example), would result in some unpleasant vipaka in the future. To be aware of thoughts as such is very beneficial, one is not fooled by the senses as being a person or a self, but the characteristics of thinking as impermanent, ever changing and uncontrolable could be studied like the rest of realities. > > Do you > > mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of awareness > > might arise with thinking, and leave its equally > > imperceptible trace? > > ==== > Let me see if I understand. Suppose that we are practicing > mindfulness. And at one moment, what arises in consciousness > is a thought, or thinking. This is noticed as it arises or > comes to be/appear, and as it is replaced by whatever comes > next in consciousness. That is/was fairly simple. What would be > the idea of an infinite regress here [which is how I read > the "repeatedly unimaginably vast number of times" phrase to > be suggesting]? I think Mike was talking about how fast the citta is, and that although it can arise only one at a time as soon as it falls away it is the anatara paccaya (immediate cause, with no interval possible) for the next citta to arise subsequently. In a tiny moment uncountable citta arise and fall away so that only another nama, the sati cetasika, could detect the citta and cetasika, and even so there has to be conditions for sati to arise (it arises uniquely with kusala citta) and to begin to be aware of realities, not only the nama (without knowledge that the soul is not one continuos entity that begins with birth and ends with death or beyond, and not instants of citta arising and falling away with extreme rapidity and changing continually, under no one's control, not even a higher power's, the study of the characteristics of realities as they really are could never begin, except for the Buddha who discovered this truth) but for the rupa as well. In the process of thinking, the nama would be the thinking and the arammana would be concepts or thoughts of the arammana received in sequence from the five sense dvara. If you are interested in the mechanisms of the citta you might want to read Q&A5 in the Q&A section of or for more detail the 'Summary of Paramatthadhamma' chapters on the citta in the advanced section of the same site. Please tell us what you think, Amara 2978 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 11:37am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst --- "Jinavamsa" wrote: > hello Amara Chay and all, > I will not reply here to the classification of this answer to > another's question in terms of the four sorts of question that > are differentiated from one another in some discourses (suttas). > Instead I wanted to look at the question itself. More below > in context, then. > Of course there is a discourse called the discourse on awareness > of the in and out breathing (ânâpânasati-sutta), it's in the > Majjhima Nikaya, No. 118. As to whether mindfulness of breath > is forced, I would wonder/ask this person what is the forced > part here? It is structured. Such a person might either look > at resistance to a structured meditation (without judging this > resistance as bad, or as good, for that matter) or try a more > open mindfulness practice, guided purely by the orientation "Pay > attention to whatever arises next in consciouness." That might > be a more congenial practice for such a mind-state (iow, for > a person with such a sense of how to do things). And what sort > of meditation retreat might he/she be interested in? I assume > something in the vipassanâ tradition, but that's just perhaps > reading into the text a bit too much.... Dear Jina, I did not post his entire message because I did not think it relevant to the types of questions and answers we were studying, but I see that it might have been misleading, so here it is, I have taken the names out as I don't think they are relevant: >*** gave your adress to me. My name is ***, >formerly ***. I stayed in robes for six years and was quite >involved in *** meditationretreats for foreigners. Since more than 10 >years I´m back in Germany and participate in a local buddhist group. >This group is dedicated to the study and practise of authentic Buddha-Dhamma >very similar to the style *** propagated. >Now there is an increasing fraction of students of *** coming in, trying to turn this group into a pure meditation group of >the *** method. As my method is Anapanasati I am highly sceptical of >what appears to me as a forced type of meditation without much grounding in the >Suttas. I remember that we (when I was still a monk) spoke of the Vipassana- >factory and the black-out place, not very respectfully I´m afraid. >*** told me that you might have more information regarding this matter, for I >would like to form an opinion based on facts and not on rumors and prejudice. >I would greatly apreciate any information you send to me. >Sorry for bothering you and taking your time. *** You will see that he was not against Anapanasati in the least. My reply was an explanation of my own studies, nothing to do with retreats, though I did suggest he read the chapters on 'samatha' and 'vipassana' in the 'Summary...' also. Amara 2979 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 11:47am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > My point was that the arising and subsiding of a nama > is so rapid that unless a very great many similar > namas arise in succession they would not be noticable. > I'm still pretty new to all this so I may well be > mistaken. > > What I think of as a noticable 'thought' is a concept, > and not a nama (such as vitakka). Does this make > sense? Dear Mike, Even without labling them thoughts or vitakka, you could see the differences between seeing, hearing, tasting and touching, and thinking, don't you think? The characteristic of seeing and its arammana, visible objects, right now? It is a long and difficult path out of samsara, but the Buddha told us to be brave and cheerful in the studies, which could only bring good results! So let's keep walking, Amara 2980 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 0:17pm Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > I don't see your correspondent's question about the meditation retreats, but > what I see is a request for information concerning facts about meditation. > So is he really asking a question or just requesting information? I think > the last (short) paragraph of your reply is more relevant to what he is > requesting than the first (long) paragraph. > > The Dighanikaya commentary (DA ii 567) gives a simple example for each of > the four types of questions and answers. > > 1. eka.msavyaakara.niiya -- categorically eg. yes/no > > "Is the eye impermanent? (cakkhu.m aniccan ti)" is to be answered > categorically with: "Yes, it is impermanent. (aama aniccan ti)" > > 2. vibhajjavyaakara.niiya -- analytically > > "Is only the eye impermanent? (anicca.m naama cakkhun ti)" is to be answered > analytically with: "Not only the eye (but) also the ear is impermanent and > the nose is impermanent.(na cakkhumeva sotampi anicca.m ghaanampi > anicccan ti)" [I'm uncertain about how to translate 'naama' in the question] > > 3. pa.tipucchavyaakara.niiya -- with a counter-question > > "As the eye, so the ear; as the ear, so the eye. (yathaa cakkhu.m tathaa > sotam; yathaa sota.m tathaa cakkhun ti)" is to be counterquestioned: "In > what sense do you ask? (ken'a.t.thena pucchaasii ti)" When "I ask in the > sense of seeing (dassan'a.t.thena pucchaamii ti)" is spoken it is to be > answered "No (na hii ti)."; when "I ask in the sense of impermanent > (anicc'a.t.thena pucchaamii ti)" is spoken, it is to be answered "Yes (aamaa > ti)". > > 4. .thapaniiyavyaakara.niiya -- to be set aside (not to be answered) > > "Are the soul and the body the same? (ta.m jiiva.m ta.m sariiran ti)" is to > be set aside with: "This is unanswered by the Blessed One (avyaakatam eta.m > Bhagavataa ti). [For more examples of this type of question see the > Avyaakatasa.myutta] > > These may be the only examples we have to work with and we'll have to > figure out what is appropriate for the remaining billions of other questions > of every shape and form. There is a common type of question in the Tipitaka > such as: Is ruupa permanent or impermanent? This would be what is called an > alternative type question as classified in the English grammar book cited in > a previous post and I would label this one a type 1in the Sutta scheme. I > would be inclined to class questions that are not answered as no. 4 even if > the reason is that the person does not know the answer when others may, or > the question is too personal, or it doesn't really need an answer, and so > on. In my first paragraph above I ask you a question, but in my mind you > have a choice of answering it or not. It's up to you and if you decide that > it's a no. 4 -- that's ok with me. Dear Jim, Thank you for your analysis, I see you make a distinction between the request for information and a question which escaped me. The more so perhaps since normally both situations could use the common verb, to ask, (to ask for information, to ask a question) and both request answers. To clarify things a bit more, you would say that if your example from the Subhasutta: > Turning now to the Subhasutta: > > ... the brahman youth Subha, Todeyya's son, spoke thus to the Lord: > "Good Gotama, brahmans speak thus: 'A householder is accomplishing the > right path, dhamma, what is skilled; one who has gone forth is not > accomplishing the right path, dhamma, what is skilled.' What does the good > Gotama say to this?" were not followed by the question, he would not be asking anything? This is a distinction I need to study more closely. For example if my correspondent had been more specific and asked me who such people were, what their methods are and what I thought of them they would constitute questions? Please don't think I am nit-picking, in normal Thai scripts there are no question marks, they came only recently with the more modern Thai usage. Thank you for your patience, Amara > "On this point I, brahman youth, discriminate, on this point I do not speak > definitely. ..." > [Vibhajjavaado kho aham ettha, maa.nava, naaham ettha eka.msavaado.] > -- translated by I.B. Horner, p.386 2981 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 1:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: perception/memory, consciousness Mike My reference to your interpersonal skills was entirly genuine, so please do not take it as an admonition in any shape or form. None was intended and none is called for, least of all from me. I apologise that the tone of the rest of my message left room for this misintepretation. This is a useful reminder for me that 'speech' that is encouraging, sympathetic and helpful to others is always the best speech, for which reminder, my thanks. Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > > --- wrote: > > Mike > > > > I must say I have learnt a lot from reading your > > posts about inter- > > personal relations, a skill in which I am rather > > lacking. Would you > > mind if I copy your formula for use with my own > > posts? > > Your point is well taken. In fact, my > 'interpersonal > relations' certainly have a lot more to do with > unwholesome than with wholesome states. This is a > timely admonition and I thank you for it. > > mn 2982 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 1:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Amara > I just realized that I did just that, not answer a > dhamma question, > only two days ago, when a friend of a friend asked > me about a school > of 'meditation retreats'. An excerpt of his > message: You might like to suggest he post his query to this list. There are a number of members who would have something to say on this subject, many of them with first-hand experience of meditation retreats. Jonothan 2983 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 2:30pm Subject: Re: Foremost analyst > You might like to suggest he post his query to this > list. There are a number of members who would have > something to say on this subject, many of them with > first-hand experience of meditation retreats. Jonothan Have done. When I suggested he read the chapters of the 'Summary' he wrote back that it was what he was looking for and that he had downloaded practically the whole book, so I in turn suggested that if he had any questions or points he wished to discuss he might post it here, as well as to write me in private, whichever he perferred, but that here he would have many more points of views, of course. Amara 2984 From: shin lin Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 6:30pm Subject: My sister Maggie Dear Dhamma Friends, I believe there are many friends who are like my younger sister, Maggie who entered this discussion and would like to get out right away because she didn't understand what everyone was talking about and within one day, she received so much mails, which she has no cue of what is going on.. She told me that she is going to log off because it scared her off. IS there any possibilities which we can do like setting group for total beginners ? There are some people who does not have any idea what is dhamma ? And Maggie is one of them. She only knows how to meditate and recites.. She has no idea of what dhamma is and I think it is extremely hard for me to explain to her. It would be appreciated if any of you can help her. Anumodana. asking for help, Shin 2985 From: Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 6:40pm Subject: Hello Hello, I am Shin Lin's sister, Maggie... Pls kindly advise me what is the best for beginners.. I believe only every action equal to every reaction. So I just have to pray and be peaceful. What is the purpose of studying Dhamma? with regards, Maggie 2986 From: bruce Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 7:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello hi maggie i'm a beginner too....it seems you're starting off the right way: asking questions -- at least, that is what has worked for me, so i can recommend it...i don't feel as though i have enough wisdom to explain what i think i know, so i am just content asking questions, and trying to understand everyone's very generous answers and explanations.... a lot of people on this list use a lot of pali....it might seem difficult or obscure at first, but the more we are exposed to pali, the more familiar we become with it....as i study the Dhamma i've come to realize that the concepts are actually expressed a lot more clearly in pali, and i'm beginning to consider and study the Dhamma using more and more pali.... there is a very good glossary on the website at http://www.dhammastudy.com/gloss.html where you can quickly look up almost any word someone on this list will use....i downloaded the whole glossary and keep it on my hard disk so i can access it any time.... also: you can start reading articles on the web as preparation for email study: http://www.dhammastudy.com/ the articles here are graded....i keep going back to the "beginner" section to reinforce what i'm learning.... some practical advice: if there are too many emails, use filters and send them to a dhammastudy mailbox so they don't fill up your inbox, or else read them on the web where you can put them in order according to topic-thread....read as much as possible, but don't feel obligated to read everything! -- i know i can't keep up sometimes, so i just don't force it.... anyway, my basic advice is: ask questions. use the website for background study. and above all, have patience. as for your very direct question: "What is the purpose of studying Dhamma?", i'll leave that to some more experienced list-members to answer.... be well, peaceful and happy bruce At 10:40 2001/01/25 -0000, you wrote: > Hello, > I am Shin Lin's sister, Maggie... Pls kindly advise me what is the best for > beginners.. > I believe only every action equal to every reaction. So I just have to pray > and be peaceful. What is the purpose of studying Dhamma? > with regards, > Maggie 2987 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 8:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello Dear Maggie, We are all beginners here. It is just that some of us have been studying longer and have picked up some Pali. As Bruce said you may come to see the use in this later. But for now don't worry about that. You have done the right thing asking a question - we don't have to use pali to discuss it and for now you can simply ignore the more technical posts (which are literally in a foreign language). You said only a little but it is clear you have some confidence in cause and effect. (You probably know the word kamma- this essentially means cause and is an important part of Buddhism). The Buddha carefully described causes and results so that we could understand and untangle the mass of conditions we call life. It is a very gradual process to do this - but even a little understanding is truly priceless. I leave it at that for now. Do read the beginner articles, as Bruce advised, and books at www.dhammastudy.com I have read some of them more than 10times and still find guidance even now. Robert --- wrote: > Hello, > I am Shin Lin's sister, Maggie... Pls kindly advise me what is > the best for > beginners.. > I believe only every action equal to every reaction. So I just > have to pray > and be peaceful. What is the purpose of studying Dhamma? > with regards, > Maggie > 2988 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 8:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Hello Again, Jina, (By the way, do you remember meeting on the d-l last year? It was Dhiravamsa who first introduced me to the Theravada by way, interestingly, of vedananupassana.) --- Jinavamsa wrote: > re the comment: > > > In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of > thinking > > at the moment of thinking' unless that process > were > > repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Do > you > > mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of > awareness > > might arise with thinking, and leave its equally > > imperceptible trace? > ==== > Let me see if I understand. Suppose that we are > practicing > mindfulness. And at one moment, what arises in > consciousness > is a thought, or thinking. This is noticed as it > arises or > comes to be/appear, and as it is replaced by > whatever comes > next in consciousness. That is/was fairly simple. > What would be > the idea of an infinite regress here [which is how I > read > the "repeatedly unimaginably vast number of times" > phrase to > be suggesting]? > thank you. > Jinavamsa > ============= I awoke around 3AM thinking about this and I don't think I gave your question regarding my comment due consideration. I want to take another stab at this by way of my own limited understanding, using as little abhidhamma terminology (in which language I'm nearly illiterate, anyway) as possible. I'm a big Buster Keaton fan. Suppose I'm watching a Buster Keaton movie on TV, and someone comes along and says, "That isn't Buster Keaton." So I say, "Whaddaya mean, of COURSE it's Buster Keaton, who do YOU think it is?!" and he says (rather smugly), "It isn't anyone at all. It's just light from the tube in your television set, electronically converted from an extremely rapid series of still images, each one nearly identical to the previous one (because of nearly identical conditions in their production). Each succeeding moment of light from this series of still images, impinging on the sensitive matter in yer eyeballs, carries with it the illusion of Buster Keaton (not to mention a locomotive, trees, soldiers etc." And he continues (on, and on) about microscopic bits of silver bromide on an extremely long strip of celluloid, and the amazing coincidence of all the atoms that make up these things starting out at the big bang and arriving billions of years later at the same time in the same place, inside a bunch of other atoms comprising a projector, etc., etc., until even a good Buddhist wants to strangle him. But he has a point--that liberation from attachment to the illusions that we take for the 'selves' of things is gained not from thinking about, say, the story line of the movie or my idea of Buster Keaton or even about this guy's long-winded analyses, but by the experience and understanding of the nature of each of these succeeding moments of experience. That's what I was aiming at. That it's the quanta--nama and rupa--arising and subsiding so rapidly that we don't consciously experience them, that make up the illusion of the movie, or Buster Keaton, or Jina, or Mike, or my computer, or this list. And that it's these quanta that are the foundations of mindfulness--not the illusions themselves. Standing by for corrections... mike 2989 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 9:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello Hi Maggie, I'm very glad that Shin has encouraged you to check us out and I'm sorry that so many messages you saw on your first look were so confusing. I think it's like that for most people when they first take a look. Bruce and Robert have given some good suggestions. If the volume is too much, use the website only or get them in the digest form which is easy to scroll through. I'm sure many people here skip the more technical messages with too much pali and it's easy to do that. It's not like a live discussion where you have to politely listen to those aspects you have no interest in! In fact, in the beginning you could just view the ones addressed to you and skip everything else until you get a little more used to us all. For me, the purpose of studying Dhamma is to get to know a little more about what I think of as myself and the world around me. What is the greatest achievment in life? What is happiness? What is wise and unwise? What can really be proved and checked out at this moment? What are the causes of our difficulties in life and why are the Buddha's teachings still being studied? These are a few of the questions I'm interested in and studying Dhamma helps me begin to understand some of the answers SLOWLY! How about you? What are you interested to know? In the group we 'meet' friends from all over the world who can share their understanding and ask different questions. So please join us and ask anything you like. If you read anything in the books and articles others are recommending that doesn't make sense, you many like to see if it makes sense to any of us. Best wishes, Sarah (in Hong Kong but from England) --- wrote: > Hello, > I am Shin Lin's sister, Maggie... Pls kindly advise > me what is the best for > beginners.. > I believe only every action equal to every reaction. > So I just have to pray > and be peaceful. What is the purpose of studying > Dhamma? > with regards, > Maggie 2990 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 9:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Dear Jina and Mike, Greatly appreciate your input on the list Jina. I have been listening in on the very informative discussion between you, Amara, sarah and Jim about vibhajavadi and learnt a lot. Please excuse my intrusion on this thread. --- "m. nease" wrote: > > I awoke around 3AM thinking about this and I don't > think I gave your question regarding my comment due > consideration. I want to take another stab at this by > way of my own limited understanding, using as little > abhidhamma terminology (in which language I'm nearly > illiterate, anyway) as possible. > > I'm a big Buster Keaton fan. Suppose I'm watching a > Buster Keaton movie on TV, and someone comes along and > says, "That isn't Buster Keaton." So I say, "Whaddaya > mean, of COURSE it's Buster Keaton, who do YOU think > it is?!" and he says (rather smugly), "It isn't anyone > at all. It's just light from the tube in your > television set, electronically converted from an > extremely rapid series of still images, each one > nearly identical to the previous one (because of > nearly identical conditions in their production). > Each succeeding moment of light from this series of > still images, impinging on the sensitive matter in yer > eyeballs, carries with it the illusion of Buster > Keaton (not to mention a locomotive, trees, soldiers > etc." And he continues (on, and on) about microscopic > bits of silver bromide on an extremely long strip of > celluloid, and the amazing coincidence of all the > atoms that make up these things starting out at the > big bang and arriving billions of years later at the > same time in the same place, inside a bunch of other > atoms comprising a projector, etc., etc., until even a > good Buddhist wants to strangle him. Good analogy. I know whay you mean with your last sentence. Even I reach saturation about the speed of rise and fall after a while. > > But he has a point--that liberation from attachment to > the illusions that we take for the 'selves' of things > is gained not from thinking about, say, the story line > of the movie or my idea of Buster Keaton or even about > this guy's long-winded analyses, but by the experience > and understanding of the nature of each of these > succeeding moments of experience. > > That's what I was aiming at. That it's the > quanta--nama and rupa--arising and subsiding so > rapidly that we don't consciously experience them, > that make up the illusion of the movie, or Buster > Keaton, or Jina, or Mike, or my computer, or this > list. And that it's these quanta that are the > foundations of mindfulness--not the illusions > themselves. > > Standing by for corrections.. Sounds pretty good to me. I think it might have been me a month or two back who cited the commentarial statement about the incredible speed of the arising and passing away of mind and matter. This was to show that the level of understanding called vipassana - at which time nama and rupa are clearly distinguished- is not at all a hazy insight. Nor can it be controlled or bought into being by dint of will. It is a most advanced stage of wisdom indeed. This was not meant to discourage or cause anyone to doubt whether they ever had sati or panna. There has to be so much awareness and understanding before the stage of vipassana. And at the beginning stages the difference between nama and rupa is vague. This does not mean there is never insight of the level of satipatthana. Robert 2991 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 10:44pm Subject: Re: Hello > What is the purpose of studying Dhamma? Hello and welcome, Maggie, This is just the place for such a question, I think, and everyone has answered you so well I hope you will stay and study with us. I love to learn new things, especially about the Buddha's teachings and I have learned a lot from this list. Any question I did not know about I asked people who could help and learned so much that way too. Besides you will find that people with different accumulations will give you fresh views of things. The reason I first studied the dhamma is because I was born a Buddhist and have always been taught that the dhamma is the greatest good and I wanted to find our what it is, and how good it is, for myself. I learned that the Dhamma means the truth, reality, and the Buddha's teachings. I also learned that the truth according to the teachings and truer than what I had believed to be the truth, and that it can be proven by anyone with eyes, ears, nose tongue, body sense and mind. I have been studying since then, and can safely say that for me it has been most beneficial as well as absolutely fascinating. I can't encourage you enough to try it out yourself, Amara 2992 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 10:55pm Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > I'm a big Buster Keaton fan. Suppose I'm watching a > Buster Keaton movie on TV, and someone comes along and > says, "That isn't Buster Keaton." So I say, "Whaddaya > mean, of COURSE it's Buster Keaton, who do YOU think > it is?!" and he says (rather smugly), "It isn't anyone > at all. It's just light from the tube in your > television set, electronically converted from an > extremely rapid series of still images, each one > nearly identical to the previous one (because of > nearly identical conditions in their production). > Each succeeding moment of light from this series of > still images, impinging on the sensitive matter in yer > eyeballs, carries with it the illusion of Buster > Keaton (not to mention a locomotive, trees, soldiers > etc." And he continues (on, and on) about microscopic > bits of silver bromide on an extremely long strip of > celluloid, and the amazing coincidence of all the > atoms that make up these things starting out at the > big bang and arriving billions of years later at the > same time in the same place, inside a bunch of other > atoms comprising a projector, etc., etc., until even a > good Buddhist wants to strangle him. > > But he has a point--that liberation from attachment to > the illusions that we take for the 'selves' of things > is gained not from thinking about, say, the story line > of the movie or my idea of Buster Keaton or even about > this guy's long-winded analyses, but by the experience > and understanding of the nature of each of these > succeeding moments of experience. > > That's what I was aiming at. That it's the > quanta--nama and rupa--arising and subsiding so > rapidly that we don't consciously experience them, > that make up the illusion of the movie, or Buster > Keaton, or Jina, or Mike, or my computer, or this > list. And that it's these quanta that are the > foundations of mindfulness--not the illusions > themselves. > > Standing by for corrections... Dear Mike, It is I who stand corrected, I should not have second guessed you at answering Jina this morning! Talk about a fresh look at the dhamma!!! This has been the most enjoyable description so far, thank you for the laughter as well as the penetrating insight. Sorry I took the liberty earlier, Amara 2993 From: amara chay Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 10:59pm Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation > I have been > listening in on the very informative discussion between you, > Amara, sarah and Jim about vibhajavadi and learnt a lot. > Please excuse my intrusion on this thread. Dear Robert, There can be no intrusion on this list, so long as it is about the dhamma, and we look forward to learning more from you, fresh from your vacation! Anumodana, Amara 2994 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jan 25, 2001 11:34pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Dear Mike, > -----Original Message----- > From: m. nease [mailto:] > Sent: Thursday, January 25, 2001 4:54 AM > > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation > > > I'm a big Buster Keaton fan. Suppose I'm watching a > Buster Keaton movie on TV, and someone comes along and > says, "That isn't Buster Keaton." So I say, "Whaddaya > mean, of COURSE it's Buster Keaton, who do YOU think > it is?!" and he says (rather smugly), "It isn't anyone > at all. It's just light from the tube in your > television set, electronically converted from an > extremely rapid series of still images, each one > nearly identical to the previous one (because of > nearly identical conditions in their production). > Each succeeding moment of light from this series of > still images, impinging on the sensitive matter in yer > eyeballs, carries with it the illusion of Buster > Keaton (not to mention a locomotive, trees, soldiers > etc." And he continues (on, and on) about microscopic Thanks for this analogy. I would like to add that if you think of how TV works, the image doesn't even exist. At a finer grain level, TV electron emitter fills the image with progressive series of lines through the entire tube. Each still image that we see is just a series of line. A line can be broken down further. It is a series of electrons hitting the tube progressively to form a line. The light emitted at the beginning of the line is long gone before the light at the end of the line even starts to begin. When we see a person at a moment, what part of a person do we see? How many moments of cittas does it take to see just a person (the entire) head (pannatti) ? When we "see" a person head, surely, the rupas that we think of as a head have all ceased to exist. Which part of the person do we see first? The ear? Then the cheek? Then the nose? The rupa that we take as the ear has ceased to exist even before we start seeing the cheek. Can we take anything we see to be something else besides what is seen? The something else is just purely delusional: it doesn't exist. Anumodhana again for the effort to write down a very good explanation. kom 2995 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jan 26, 2001 0:41am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Vipassana meditation Dear Kom, --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > When we see a person at a moment, what part of a > person do we see? How many > moments of cittas does it take to see just a person > (the entire) head > (pannatti) ? When we "see" a person head, surely, > the rupas that we think > of as a head have all ceased to exist. Which part > of the person do we see > first? The ear? Then the cheek? Then the nose? > The rupa that we take as > the ear has ceased to exist even before we start > seeing the cheek. Can we > take anything we see to be something else besides > what is seen? The > something else is just purely delusional: it doesn't > exist. This is just what I was aiming at, much better explained--thanks! mike 2996 From: Jinavamsa Date: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:52am Subject: Re: Foremost analyst hello Amara, thank you for the context of this meditator practicing in Germany. I do not know which tradition of vipassana meditation he is following. I know Dhiravamsa has led a retreat in Germany yearly now for over 35 years (at Haus der Stille, near Hamburg). with metta, jinavamsa 2997 From: Jinavamsa Date: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:57am Subject: Re: My sister Maggie hello Shin and (presently absent sister Maggie), I too have only recently joined this discussion group. I have a sense of what you are saying. It occurs to me, given this, that one way this might work is if terms in Pali are joined with renderings of those terms in English. This might be helpful to those who do not know Pali, do not have a Pali dictionary handy, or who do not have the time or patience to look up each Pali word in order to follow the comments being made. with mettâ (kind friendship), jinavamsa :>) --- "shin lin" wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > I believe there are many friends who are like my younger sister, Maggie > who entered this discussion and would like to get out right away because > she didn't understand what everyone was talking about and within one > day, she received so much mails, which she has no cue of what is going > on.. > She told me that she is going to log off because it scared her off. > IS there any possibilities which we can do like setting group for total > beginners ? There are some people who does not have any idea what is > dhamma ? And Maggie is one of them. She only knows how to meditate > and recites.. She has no idea of what dhamma is and I think it is > extremely hard for me to explain to her. > It would be appreciated if any of you can help her. Anumodana. > asking for help, > Shin 2998 From: Jinavamsa Date: Fri Jan 26, 2001 7:06am Subject: Re: Vipassana meditation hello Mike, ah yes. memory re-activated! I have nothing I'd call a correction to what you're saying. Maybe I'd just add something that goes along with what you're pointing out here. And that is that we can see the results of this illusion-making if not the illusion-making itself. In other words, perhaps the units out of which the sense of a self are too small to be perceived individually (I leave aside the somewhat speculative nature of such a statement); still, the resultant sense of a self can be perceived. Most easily, perhaps, in inter-relationship with other people, as when someone recognizes us as this or that, or criticizes us, or commends us, and so on. It is perhaps here that the arising of vedanâ (experiences insofar as pleasant, unpleasant, or neither especially pleasant or unpleasant) can be used to bring our attention to the relevant sense of self being addressed, as a mirror held close to the mouth on an ice-cold day can show us our breath. And did you meet Dhiravamsa up in San Juan Island? (He's visiting Thailand right now, then he's on to Australia to lead a retreat there, before returning to Spain.) Jinavamsa --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hello Again, Jina, > > (By the way, do you remember meeting on the d-l last > year? It was Dhiravamsa who first introduced me to > the Theravada by way, interestingly, of > vedananupassana.) > > --- Jinavamsa wrote: > > > re the comment: > > > > > In my case 'I' could surely not 'be aware of > > thinking > > > at the moment of thinking' unless that process > > were > > > repeated unimaginably vast numbers of times. Do > > you > > > mean that a (surely imperceptible) moment of > > awareness > > > might arise with thinking, and leave its equally > > > imperceptible trace? > > ==== > > Let me see if I understand. Suppose that we are > > practicing > > mindfulness. And at one moment, what arises in > > consciousness > > is a thought, or thinking. This is noticed as it > > arises or > > comes to be/appear, and as it is replaced by > > whatever comes > > next in consciousness. That is/was fairly simple. > > What would be > > the idea of an infinite regress here [which is how I > > read > > the "repeatedly unimaginably vast number of times" > > phrase to > > be suggesting]? > > thank you. > > Jinavamsa > > ============= > > I awoke around 3AM thinking about this and I don't > think I gave your question regarding my comment due > consideration. I want to take another stab at this by > way of my own limited understanding, using as little > abhidhamma terminology (in which language I'm nearly > illiterate, anyway) as possible. > > I'm a big Buster Keaton fan. Suppose I'm watching a > Buster Keaton movie on TV, and someone comes along and > says, "That isn't Buster Keaton." So I say, "Whaddaya > mean, of COURSE it's Buster Keaton, who do YOU think > it is?!" and he says (rather smugly), "It isn't anyone > at all. It's just light from the tube in your > television set, electronically converted from an > extremely rapid series of still images, each one > nearly identical to the previous one (because of > nearly identical conditions in their production). > Each succeeding moment of light from this series of > still images, impinging on the sensitive matter in yer > eyeballs, carries with it the illusion of Buster > Keaton (not to mention a locomotive, trees, soldiers > etc." And he continues (on, and on) about microscopic > bits of silver bromide on an extremely long strip of > celluloid, and the amazing coincidence of all the > atoms that make up these things starting out at the > big bang and arriving billions of years later at the > same time in the same place, inside a bunch of other > atoms comprising a projector, etc., etc., until even a > good Buddhist wants to strangle him. > > But he has a point--that liberation from attachment to > the illusions that we take for the 'selves' of things > is gained not from thinking about, say, the story line > of the movie or my idea of Buster Keaton or even about > this guy's long-winded analyses, but by the experience > and understanding of the nature of each of these > succeeding moments of experience. > > That's what I was aiming at. That it's the > quanta--nama and rupa--arising and subsiding so > rapidly that we don't consciously experience them, > that make up the illusion of the movie, or Buster > Keaton, or Jina, or Mike, or my computer, or this > list. And that it's these quanta that are the > foundations of mindfulness--not the illusions > themselves. > > Standing by for corrections... > > mike 2999 From: Jim Anderson Date: Fri Jan 26, 2001 10:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Foremost analyst Dear Amara, You wrote: >Dear Jim, > >Thank you for your analysis, I see you make a distinction between the >request for information and a question which escaped me. The more so >perhaps since normally both situations could use the common verb, to >ask, (to ask for information, to ask a question) and both request >answers. To clarify things a bit more, you would say that if your >example from the Subhasutta: > >> Turning now to the Subhasutta: >> >> ... the brahman youth Subha, Todeyya's son, spoke thus to the Lord: >> "Good Gotama, brahmans speak thus: 'A householder is accomplishing >the >> right path, dhamma, what is skilled; one who has gone forth is not >> accomplishing the right path, dhamma, what is skilled.' What does >the good >> Gotama say to this?" > > >were not followed by the question, he would not be asking anything? Right, he would not be asking anything, -- just telling the Buddha what the brahmans said. >This is a distinction I need to study more closely. For example if my >correspondent had been more specific and asked me who such people >were, what their methods are and what I thought of them they would >constitute questions? Yes, they would be questions. I consider your correspondent's statement: >I would greatly apreciate any information you send to me. to be along the lines of a directive. There are 4 general semantic classes of sentences: statements, questions, directives, & exclamations. According to 'A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language': "questions are primarily used to seek information on a specific point" and "directives are primarily used to instruct someone to do something". A request is a pragmatic category of a directive. The syntactic class of sentences called an imperative is typically used to express a directive such as: "Please send me any information." It is possible however to express a directive using a declarative such as: "I'd love a cup of tea." which is suggesting that someone bring a cup of tea to the speaker -- a suggestion is another pragmatic category of the directive. I read the full message (with names deleted) that you posted in response to Jinavamsa which provides a better idea of the kind of information the writer is seeking. I still don't see any questions, directly or indirectly, in the message. But it is probable that the person writing the message has some specific questions in mind and that the information you send him may help him to answer some of these questions. Making distinctions in linguistic usage can be very difficult and confusing in some areas. The following is an example of a directive that performs indirectly as a question: "Tell me what you know about this group." which could also be put directly as a question:"What do you know about this group?" I'm just giving you my perspective on the matter and I can understand that you might read a dhamma question in between the lines. Best wishes, Jim A.