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.