5600 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: send me book [The Corporate Body of The Buddha Educational Foundation Dear Gaopeng, i was somewhat surprised that no one responded to your message about the group in Taiwan offering free books:--- Gaopeng wrote: > > > > The above website just established its website last > > year [ 1st Dec > > 2000 ] here : [ But it is written in Chinese > > language :-)] > > http://www.budaedu.org.tw/ > > > > You could surf this website for the catalogue of the > > dhamma books free > > for distribution which are currently available: > > > > http://www.budaedu.org.tw/books/#foreign > > > > [I direct translated from the above website how to > > request the dhamma > > books as it is only written in chinese :-)] This was kind of you to help. Maybe if anyone asks for the books, if they have any difficulties, you can help too. all the dhamma books here are for FREE > > distribution. I find it amazing. > > [4]There is some very few limited items left which > > are not listed in > > the above website due to the small amount stock > > left, this are > > reserved for those right ones to request, so it is > > not convinience to > > list this items publicly, if you really need this > > not listed items, > > you are welcome to request through phone, fax, post > > or email to ask > > for further information. Erik, you never know, they may be able to help you out:-)) > > [c] apart from the above [a] & [b] for foreign > > language [english, > > sri lanka, vietname etc] dhamma books , please write > > to > > [overseas@ budaedu.org.tw ] > > ==================================================== > > > > Normally the catalogue of the dhamma books available > > are updated in a > > monthly basis. Below are some of the foreign > > language books currently > > available I took from the above website as some of > > the term are > > written in chinese: > > > > Foreign Language Dhamma Books (Updated : > > 2001.May.01.) > > > > Book Name {Author} [Language] (Printed > > Amount/units) > > > > -DHAMMA VIVIENTE > DHAMMA>{Ven. Ajahn > > Chan}[Spanish] (10,000 units) > > > > -BUDDHISM IN A NUTSHELL {Ven.NANDA} [English] (5,000 > > units) > > -THE BUDDHA'S ANCENT PATH [English] (5,000 units) > > -MAY FLOWER II [English] (5,000 units) > > -Pure-Land Zen , Zen Pure-Land [English] (5,000 > > units) > > -BUDDHISM OF WISDOM & FAITH [English] (5,000 units) > > -THE PATH OF PURIFICATION [English] (3,000 units) pls note anyone....!!! > > -BUDDHISM AS AN EDUCATION [English] (5,000 units) > > -THE WAY IT IS [English] (5,000 units) > > -THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTH [English] (4,000 units) > > -BUDDHISM: THE WISDOM OF COMPASSION AND AWAKENING > > [English] (10,000 > > units) > > -TO UNDERSTAND BUDDHISM [English] (10,000 units) > > -AN ELEMENTARY PALI COURSE [English] (2,000 units) > > -On Amidism,To Be Born in a Lotus,A Buddhist Goal > > that can be > > [English] (4,000 units) > > -EMPTY CLOUD: THE TEACHINGS OF XU YUN AND A > > REMEMBRANCE OF THE GREAT > > CHINESE ZEN MASTER [English] (4,000 units) > > -THE SUTRA OF BODHISATTYA KSITIGARBHA'S FUNDAMENTAL > > VOWS [English] > > (5,000 units) > > -THUS HAVE I HEARD [English] (5,000 units) > > -CHANGING DESTINY [English] (10,000 units) > > -VIPASSANA MEDITATION [German] > > -VINAYA TIPITAKA [India Language] {3,000 units) > > -WHY MEDITATION [India Language/Dialect Marathi] > > -MINDFULNESS:THE PATH TO THE DEATH [Italy Language] > > (10,000 units) > > -THE FIELD OF MERIT [Loas Language] [10,000 units] > > -THE PATH OF PURIFICATION [Sri Lanka Pali Language] > > (5,000 units) > > -COMMENTARY ON THE PATH OF PURIFICATION [sri Lanka > > Language] (5,000 > > units) > > -BUDDHISM: ETT LEVANDE BUDSKAP [Sweden Language] > > (10,000 units) > > 10,000 Gaopeng, thanks for your translation efforts and for mentioning this organisation. Still hoping, you'll tell us a little more about yourself:-)) Sarah 5601 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 3:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha: was Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > > I know what you mean. It is an oddly liberating > reflection that there's no one responsible for these > unwholesome tendencies and that they can't be changed > overnight (as a rule). With the added bonus that they > really are the 'fuel' for insight, it really is > elating. > > Looking at it in this way also relieves a lot of the > pressure to act in any particular way or to go around > suppressing kilesa in order to look like a 'good > Buddhist'. Exactly! And isn't it just clinging to the self and mana (conceit) when we're concerned about looking like the 'good Buddhist'? Really appreciating your recent contributions and also Dan's and Howard's excellent comments and considerations...sorry I can't contribute more for now. Sarah p.s. Just remembered when I was pretty young and in Sri Lanka with K.Sujin and Nina that some Sri Lankans who looked like 'good Buddhists' said to KS that I seemed very young and 'mischievous looking' to be so interested in the dhamma. Her response was that the dhamma was for anyone who could appreciate it! The first time I met Rob too, I liked the way that he really acted and spoke naturally without any 'good Buddhist' airs and graces at all..... 5602 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 3:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha: was Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Hi Dan, just to say you have me in stitches with your 'parodies' of what you hear... --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: - "Yikes! By cultivating samatha I run the risk > of experiencing lots of pleasant sensations and generating lobha. And > since samatha is distinct from vipassana, and vipassana is better, > It's better not to sit because it's too risky." Thanks for all your well-thought out posts....speak soon! Sarah 5603 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 3:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books Hi Dan & Erik, --- Erik wrote: > > Dan: "Ven. Narada has a "guide" to the Patthana that I haven't looked > at." > > Now I have something worth tracking down. This sort of text is > exactly what I have been hoping to locate. As Rob said, this Guide is very clear and helpful indeed. You'll find it in the PTS catalogue and i'm sure it's not too expensive as it's pretty slim. Hey, Erik, for a smart computer literate guy like you in New York, you'd only have to sort out the computer problems of one idiot like myself to pay for it!! Unlike Rob, i didn't even consider sending my texts in use!! Just a short quote from the preface,xiii, (to make this post a little more worthy) to this book by U Narada on the Patthana (Book of Conditions): 'In essence, Pth. deals with conditioned (sappaccaya) and formed 9sankhata) states that arise and cease at every instant without a break and which make up what are said to be animate and inanimate things. These states arise dependent on root and the other conditions and are not at the will and mercy of any being. They do so, not from one cause alone, but from many causes such as the conditining forces given in the Analytical Exposition of the Conditions. So Pth. is the teaching of anatta.' Must run (as Num would say), Sarah 5604 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 3:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] New Book Rob, --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Group, > I've just, with the great help of david, put chapters 1-6 The > perfections leading to Enlightenment on the web . i'll put the > remaining chapters on later . it still has some formatting and > typos to correct. > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm Good work and thanks for keeping us updated......Recommended! S. 5605 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 3:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion Dear Darren, --- Darren Goh wrote: > You were simply presenting a topic for > discussion, we all have to make our own interpretation, and come to > our own understanding. Ultimately, whether we are Christians or > Buddhists, Dhamma still be true, anicca, dukkha and anatta. Hopefully > even with a little understanding of Dhamma, a bodhi seed would be > planted and florish eventually. Some good comments here. As you suggest, it's not the label that counts so much as the understanding of realites.....Yes, we can discuss any topic with or without some understanding. T Good to hear from you and hope to hear more about your interest in dhamma. Best wishes, Sarah 5606 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 3:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha: was Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Dear Sarah, I must object here! ""The first time I met Rob too, I liked the way that he really > acted and spoke > naturally without any 'good Buddhist' airs and graces at > all....."" So I was clumsy and rough? I was trying to act as graceful and as a good as Buddhist as I could be - how come you weren't fooled? > > p.s. Just remembered when I was pretty young and in Sri Lanka > is that pretty young and in Sri lanka or pretty, young and in Sri lanka? robert 5607 From: wynn Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mindfulness of Breathing Hi, > > --- Sukinderpal Singh Narula wrote: > Dear Group, > > Can anyone tell me where this is from and under what context? > > > > "If, Rahula, Mindfulness of Breathing has been cultivated and > > regularily practiced, even the last in-breaths and out-breaths will > > pass consciously,not unconsciously". > > Majjhima Nikaya 62 Maha Rahulovada Sutta http://www.wwzc.org/translations/mahaRahulovada.htm ".......If mindfulness of breath is practiced continuously, then your last breath will be in knowing, not in unknowing." ===== http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/062-ma ha-rahulovada-e1.htm Or go to http://www.metta.lk/ and look for Majjhima Nikaya 62 "Rahula, when mindfulness of in breaths and out breaths are developed and made much in this manner, even the last breath leaves with your knowledge " *7). 7. When mindfulness of in breaths and out breaths are developed and made much in this manner, even the last breath leaves with your knowledge.'eva.m bhaavitaaya kho Raahula aanaapaanasatiyaa eva.m bahulikataaya yepi te carimakaa assaasapassaasaa te; pi viditaava nirujjhanti no aviditaati.When mindfulness of in and out breathing is developed in this manner, he becomes mindful of even his last breath, at death. 5608 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 6:36pm Subject: The graceful, good Buddhist - Rob Hi Rob, Now here I was trying to pay you a compliment..... --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Sarah, > I must object here! > ""The first time I met Rob too, I liked the way that he really > > acted and spoke > > naturally without any 'good Buddhist' airs and graces at > > all....."" > So I was clumsy and rough? > I was trying to act as graceful and as a good as Buddhist as I > could be - how come you weren't fooled? Sorry about that :-))) Let's say you weren't a 'statue' or acting saint in spite of all the meditation and attempts to fool us! You were very, very lively and vivacious with a strong NZ accent on the Pali words....but no, not clumsy or rough at all......Bundles of enthusiasm for the dhamma as now. > > > > p.s. Just remembered when I was pretty young and in Sri > Lanka > > > is that pretty young and in Sri lanka or pretty, young and in > Sri lanka? > robert take your pick! S. 5609 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:42pm Subject: Re: Request for Books > As Rob said, this Guide is very clear and helpful indeed. You'll find it in the > PTS catalogue and i'm sure it's not too expensive as it's pretty slim. Hey, Oh my! What did I just check out of the library then? First I learn that there are TWO Narada's that write great Abhidhamma books, and then I learn that there must be TWO Narada "Guides" because the one I have is quite thick and out of print! I will indeed have to look at the PTS edition too. Thanks! > Erik, for a smart computer literate guy like you in New York, you'd only have > to sort out the computer problems of one idiot like myself to pay for it!! > Unlike Rob, i didn't even consider sending my texts in use!! > > Just a short quote from the preface,xiii, (to make this post a little more > worthy) to this book by U Narada on the Patthana (Book of Conditions): > > 'In essence, Pth. deals with conditioned (sappaccaya) and formed 9sankhata) > states that arise and cease at every instant without a break and which make up > what are said to be animate and inanimate things. These states arise dependent > on root and the other conditions and are not at the will and mercy of any > being. They do so, not from one cause alone, but from many causes such as the > conditining forces given in the Analytical Exposition of the Conditions. So > Pth. is the teaching of anatta.' > > Must run (as Num would say), > > Sarah 5610 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books Dan, I just took this from the PTS website. , Pali Text Society, Ancillary Works, Paperbacks ... in paperback. Guide to Conditional Relations, Ven. U Narada, Vol. I, 1979 ISBN 198 X £23.50 Tape ca... 99.9% URL: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/pdf_ver.pdf my copy is hard copy but also 1979. It's a guide to the 1st 12 pages of the Patthana (and a LOT easier to read or refer to, I find). (This is not to be confused with 'The Guide', translation of Nettipakarana by Ven Nanamoli and also v.useful0 --- Dan wrote: > > As Rob said, this Guide is very clear and helpful indeed. You'll > find it in the > > PTS catalogue and i'm sure it's not too expensive as it's pretty > slim. Hey, > > Oh my! What did I just check out of the library then? First I learn > that there are TWO Narada's that write great Abhidhamma books, and > then I learn that there must be TWO Narada "Guides" because the one I > have is quite thick and out of print! I will indeed have to look at > the PTS edition too. Thanks! Hmm..I don't know what your Narada Guide is..maybe the same and another edition..? The one above only has 240 pages. Erik, if you take the plunge and order from PTS, remember to become a member, get yr discount and nominated free book for the year. S. 5611 From: Herman Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 8:59pm Subject: Re: In my opinion Hi all, Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in rebirth. There is no identity now, no substantial anything, what is to be reborn if it isn't there in the first place? Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over them. I know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know pain, pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom of my breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the sensations at my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, conceit. But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala or kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are kusala or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know it is Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the baby not a single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats all there is. To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral grounds is as arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They both exist, thats reality. It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples headstones, whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To help the sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or kusala, it makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they will die with 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or akusala, it makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither Mind nor Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as there is life there is death, as long as there is being, there is nothingness. Herman --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > One thing I wanted to add. in my post about wrong view last week > I said how extreme wrong view is the highest akusala. Views that > deny kamma and rebirth come under this. > Christianity may not necessarily fit here because while > christains have wrong view in that they believe in the saving > grace of a god, many of them also believe that good works lead > to heaven: thus mother theresa. > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace of god > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to how > serious the view is. > robert > 5612 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 9:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion Hi, Captain Akusala. robert --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in > rebirth. > > There is no identity now, no substantial anything, what is to > be > reborn if it isn't there in the first place? > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over > them. I > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know > pain, > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom > of my > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the > sensations at > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, > conceit. > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala > or > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are > kusala > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know > it is > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the > baby not a > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats all > there is. > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral grounds > is as > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They > both > exist, thats reality. > > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples > headstones, > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To > help the > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or kusala, > it > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they will > die with > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or > akusala, it > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither Mind > nor > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as there > is life > there is death, as long as there is being, there is > nothingness. > > > Herman > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > One thing I wanted to add. in my post about wrong view last > week > > I said how extreme wrong view is the highest akusala. Views > that > > deny kamma and rebirth come under this. > > Christianity may not necessarily fit here because while > > christains have wrong view in that they believe in the > saving > > grace of a god, many of them also believe that good works > lead > > to heaven: thus mother theresa. > > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace of > god > > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to how > > serious the view is. > > robert > > 5613 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: In my opinion Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > Hi all, > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in rebirth. Do you believe in conditions, and the result of those conditions? Do you *know* as it really is that in order for a dhamma to arise, there *must* be condition for it to arise? K. Sujin has mentioned that rebirth may be absolutely provable at one's death. > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over them. I > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know pain, > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom of my > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the sensations at > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, conceit. > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala or > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are kusala > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know it is > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. Do you know the different qualities of all those different dhammas as they really are? Do you know the different qualities of the kusala dhammas and akusala dhammas? > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the baby not a > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats all there is. > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral grounds is as > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They both > exist, thats reality I don't think we need to justify if this person is a bad person or a good person or if I am a good person or a bad person. Do you believe that akusala bring only bad results to all that are involved and kusala brings only good results to all that are involved? When one has akusala, one only brings troubles for oneself and others. The kusala is the reverse. > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples headstones, > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To help the > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or kusala, it > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they will die with > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or akusala, it > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither Mind nor > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as there is life > there is death, as long as there is being, there is nothingness. The kusala and akusala have different qualties which are provable now. You can observe for yourself if akusala "tends to" bring trouble both internally and externally or not and if kusala "tends to" bring good results both internally and externally. kom 5614 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:07pm Subject: Re: Request for Books [Sarah] > Pali Text Society, Ancillary Works, Paperbacks > ... in paperback. Guide to Conditional Relations, Ven. U Narada, Vol. I, 1979 > ISBN 198 X £23.50 Tape ca... > 99.9% URL: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/pdf_ver.pdf > > my copy is hard copy but also 1979. > > It's a guide to the 1st 12 pages of the Patthana (and a LOT easier to read or > refer to, I find). O.K. The one I checked out of the library is a guide to pages 13-141 and is 708 pages. Surprisingly, I couldn't find vol. 1. It would probably be better to start with the 200 page guide to the first twelve pages... Dan 5615 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books [Sarah] Dan, Volume one is much easier to read. i tried to buy vol 2 years ago but PTS were out of stock; I got permission from them to photocopy it if I could find a library that had a copy. In the event Nina van gorkom brought it from Holland for me on a trip to bangkok where I photocopied and had it bound. When I finally got to studying the book I found it so complex: there are charts everywhere. In book 1 he writes so clearly but I think he figured anyone who gets to vol 2 must be some sort of genius. maybe with your ability in mathematics you can figure it all out- and if you do please rewrite it in a simpler way for mortals like me, I just know it must be useful. robert --- Dan wrote: > > Pali Text Society, Ancillary Works, Paperbacks > > ... in paperback. Guide to Conditional Relations, Ven. U > Narada, > Vol. I, 1979 > > ISBN 198 X £23.50 Tape ca... > > 99.9% URL: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/pdf_ver.pdf > > > > my copy is hard copy but also 1979. > > > > It's a guide to the 1st 12 pages of the Patthana (and a LOT > easier > to read or > > refer to, I find). > > O.K. The one I checked out of the library is a guide to pages > 13-141 > and is 708 pages. Surprisingly, I couldn't find vol. 1. It > would > probably be better to start with the 200 page guide to the > first > twelve pages... > > Dan > 5616 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:25pm Subject: Re: Samatha: was Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Dear Sarah, I'm glad to hear that you are not taking my posts "personally"! I don't have any idea whether you are thinking along the lines of the parodies (although I suspect you are not), and I won't speculate on it. The parodies are just the obvious, conventional interpretation of the words I hear. What makes the words have such a distinctly different tone from the Buddha's is that Buddha's words have important, sensible, helpful meanings on every level from the conventional to the ultimate. Of course, we don't aspire to be expositors on par with Buddha, but we should also be careful of underestimating the depth of his expositions by saying that the conventional, obvious, superficial interpretation of his discourses is "wrong", that the middling depth interpretations of his discourses is "wrong", and that only the ultimate level of interpretation of his discourses is "right". It is of course important to talk about and try to understand the deeper levels. That understanding is aided by transcending the conventional interpretations, but it is hampered by dismissing them. Dan P.S. Is my writing style of "Theorem: Discussion" offensive? It has a haughty feel to it, but it really is just an adaptation of the mathematical writing style that I have been trained in. Assert something as true and then discuss whether it really is or not. Would it be more helpful to write in ter}s of "Question: Speculative answer"? > just to say you have me in stitches with your 'parodies' of what you hear... > --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: - > > "Yikes! By cultivating samatha I run the risk > > of experiencing lots of pleasant sensations and generating lobha. And > > since samatha is distinct from vipassana, and vipassana is better, > > It's better not to sit because it's too risky." > > Thanks for all your well-thought out posts....speak soon! > Sarah 5617 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 10:27pm Subject: Re: Request for Books [Sarah] > maybe with your ability in mathematics you can figure it all > out- and if you do please rewrite it in a simpler way... It's not happening anytime soon! The conditions just aren't quite right... Dan 5618 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 11:16pm Subject: Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Mike Just a follow-up to my post yesterday, to give a reference to something I have come across. The CMA (translation of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, ed. Bh Bodhi) confirms that the term anusaya can be used to mean all defilements (kilesa). It says: "Though all defilements are, in a sense, anusayas, the seven mentioned here are the most prominent." [Ch. VII, Guide to #9] In this regard it is much like the term 'defilements' (kilesa) itself, which is generally used to refer to any and all akusala tendencies but also has a specific meaning as a particular group of them (a group of 10). This may seem puzzling at first (it was to me, anyway), as are the many different groups of unwholesome tendencies etc, until you consider that all defilements are actually one or other of the 14 akusala cetasikas. This means that whether we are talking about the anusaya or the hindrances, to take an example, we are talking about the same group of realities (ie. the unwholesome cetasikas). As far as these 2 particular groups are concerned, there are in fact 4 cetasikas that are common to both (the cetasikas of moha, lobha, dosa and vicikiccha). The different ways of classifying realities help us to see different aspects of those realities. The classification of kilesa as anusaya reminds us that as long as the defilements have not been eradicated (by panna, at the path stages) they are bound to appear sooner or later. As it explains in CMA-- "The latent dispositions (anusaya) are defilements which "lie along with" (anusenti) the mental process to which they belong, rising to the surface as obsessions whenever they meet with suitable conditions. The term "latent dispositions" highlights the fact that the defilements are liable to arise so long as they have not been eradicated by the supramundane paths." [Ch. VII, Guide to #9] The classification of kilesas as the hindrances, on the other hand, highlights the fact that akusala that has arisen and appeared is a hindrance to the attainment of the jhanas. Akusala that has arisen and is manifest is anathema to the calmness or tranquillity that is the goal of samatha, since its characteristic is agitation (even in the case of subtle lobha). The latent tendencies of these same akusala are not, however, regarded as hindrances. References to the hindrances being suppressed describe a situation where those particular akusala cetasikas do not arise in a person because of the 'power' of the kusala of that person's samatha. But we need to remember that the development of that samatha in and of itself would have done nothing to eradicate the person's accumulations of those tendencies that lie latent, ie. the latent accumulation of those very same akusala tendencies that, when they appear, we call the hindrances. As discussed earlier, the hindrances are regarded as 'hindrances' only if and when they have arisen, and by the same token if they aren't arising right now they are not regarded as 'hindrances' at this moment. For example, at every moment of experience of an object through a sense door (moments of seeing, hearing etc.) occurring now, being vipaka citta, there is no akusala of any kind, and so no 'hindrance'. Akusala cittas may of course arise in the processes following the moment of actual sense-door experience; but then so too may kusala, including awareness, if the conditions for its arising have been developed. Mike, I have gone on more than was necessary for my follow-up, but some of this might be of general interest in the light of recent discussions Jon --- "m. nease" <"m. nease"> wrote: > Jon, > > That does clarify the point--thanks. > > mike > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > I hope I have understood your point correctly and > > that this has cleared it > > up - if not, please say. > > > 5619 From: Num Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 7:18pm Subject: Ignorance and wrong view (Moha and ditthi) Hi Nina, Sarah and all, I have been reading the book, Cetasika. At first I plan to finish the book first then post a question. But I think, I better clarify something before I move on. About moha and ditthi. The difference and the quality of these two cetasikas are striking. From my general understanding, when there is no wrong view, there should be no ignorance but that is not the case. Let me put throw in the definition of these two cetasikas, so everybody can talk on the same ground. ________________________________________________________ The quotes from the book,Cetasikas, which are from Atthasalini: Moha (delusion, ignorance) has characteristic of blindness or opposition to knowledge; the essence of non-penetration, or function of covering the intrinsic nature of object; the manifestation of being opposed to right practice or causing blindness; the proximate cause of unwise attention, and should be regarded as the root of all defilements. Ditthi (wrong view) : ..it has unwise conviction as characteristic; perversion as function; wrong conviction as manifestation; the desire not to see the ariyans as proximate cause. It should be regarded as the highest fault. ___________________________________________________________ The Sotapanna eradicate ditthi ( and/or sakkaya-ditthi) completely, he/she is definitely on the ariyan path but still can be suffered from lobha, dosa and moha. The sotapanna still cling to birth, status etc. I remember reading that Ven.Ananda cried in sadness after the buddha passed away. So wrong view does not always arise with every akusula citta, it coarises with only 4 lobha-mula-citta. There is no wrong view with dosa-mula-citta and moha-mula-citta, even in doubtful citta, (vicikiccha-sampayutta). So there can be an ignorance without a wrong view. This is interesting. So my point is even without wrong view, the suffer and ignorance are still there. So, I guess panna (understanding) is still a key in penetrating through the reality. Thanks for recommending a book, Sarah. Comments are appreciated. Num 5620 From: Dan Date: Thu Jun 14, 2001 11:30pm Subject: Re: Samatha: was Discouraging (1.1) [Robert] Dear Robert, > People sometimes ask me politely "how are you?" but really I am > fine for the past 10 years or so since realising what the > objects for vipassana are. Great observation. Just remembering (sati) the objects can make lobha or dosa tuck tail and run, so irresponsible behavior is less tenacious. It becomes easier to drop a "pleasant" but unproductive activity in favor of a "less pleasant" but productive activity. Of course, such a view is moha-mula at one level, but kusala at a shallower level. This is householder kusala, which I spend a lot of time thinking about because I do have obligations to a lot of people. > it(the hindrance ) lasts, and so one is distracted by it and > believes it has to be got rid of before insight can arise. Sharp insight can't arise as long as there is a steady stream of hindered cittas arising and passing away. Little moments of attenuated insight can certainly arise in the midst of flows of whatever akusala cittas are zooming by, and these moments of kusala are indeed precious. > it has already gone even before one knows it is there - and then > one is attached to a perception of it. Not realising that new > conditions are creating new fear. This is what avijja(ignorance) > does - clouds seeing these things. Yes, it is easy to see how avijja is a hindrance. Thanks for the clear explanation. Could you also explain so clearly how the other five nivarana are hindrances to insight? The texts clearly state that they are. > In fact, if understanding grows there are less opportunities for > some types of akusala - because if there is insight into the > hindrances then the conditions that create the hindrances are > also being understood - at different levels. And this leads > gradually to a turning away from those conditions. That's sounds right. > Especially, though, insight is eliminating the idea of > permanance and self and control. I don't think about insight so much in terms of ideas. I think of insight coming in short but striking flashes that have nothing to do with thinking or ideas or concepts at all. It's just "BOOM" and everything is crystal clear for an instant. The mind then tries to reorient itself to concept and understand what it saw at that instant and the moments before that instant. When the insight is stong enough, the idea of self is gone---sotapanna. Trying to force out the idea of self and permanence by reading about it, talking about it, thinking about it, pondering it is only marginally helpful because the impact of self view and vipallasa on our lives is enormously deep, and reading and thinking involve so much pannati (even when camouflaged in Abhidhamma language--after all Abhidhamma language is still language) that seeing is bound to be clouded. Samatha can help uncloud the landscape, but what do we see when the landscape is clear? A trained naturalist will see a whole lot more than you or I when we look at a forest or a meadow. Finally, I would not put the idea of "control" in the same category as self (atta) and permanence (nicca). The word "control" need not connote a sense of self---For example, do think the indriya should be called something besides "controlling faculties"? If you think about it, this is a fine translation because that is just what the indriya are--controlling faculties. The idea of "control" becomes akusala when it is rooted in a notion of self, and "out-of-control" is certainly not one of the fundamental lakkhana! > of the sotapanna. It is in later stages that craving for sense > pleasures is eradicated. The sotapanna has all the hindrances > except for doubt. This makes us realise that it is wrongview > that is the real danger. I think we can spend much energy trying > to stop the hindrances - and they will always come back . Yes, they will. But gradually, as understanding deepens, their grip becomes weaker and weaker. > However, we can't just expect this type of understanding to pop > up out of the blue. There does have to be much consideration of > the khandas and ayatanas and dhatus and other sublime teachings- > and this is contemplation is all classified under Dhammnusati, > one of the forty objects. It can be done at any time and so may > not look like samatha but it is (with the proviso that one in > this case is not aiming for high levels of samadhi but rather > looking for understanding). Yup. > And strong akusala can arise even if understanding is firm- see > the examples I gave recently about visakha and anathapindika. Yup. > Khun sujin is very helpful on explaining about seeing the > present moment. She said that one can have subtle craving for > kusala and that shifts one away from the present: > > ""There can be just unawareness, no wrong practice." Hmmm... Why can't there be wrong practice? For exapmle, what if one thinks that liberation comes about by ridding the world of inferior races. They concentrate very hard on trying to eliminate distractions in trying to reach final goal. They practice all sorts of methods of extermination and gradually the understanding of efficient extermination becomes more and more refined. This is unawareness to be sure, but it is also wrong practice. Of course the more subtle manifestations of wrong practice are the ones that we deal with more often in everyday living. > "But if one > thinks that one should rather have objects other than the > present one, since these appear to be more wholesome, one will > never study the object which appears now." This is true. But in developing samatha, objects aren't necessarily chosen because the objects appear to be more wholesome. They are chosen because concentration on them is effective at helping condition samadhi. > "And how can one know > their true nature when there is no study, no awareness of them? > So it must be the present object, only what appears now. This is > more difficult because it is not the object of desire. If desire > can move one away to another object, that object satisfies one's > desire. Desire is there all the time. If there is no > understanding of lobha as lobha, how can it be eradicated? One > has to understand different degrees of realities, also lobha > which is more subtle, otherwise one does not know when there is > lobha. Seeing things as they are. Lobha is lobha. Usually one > does not see the subtle lobha which moves one away from > developing right understanding of the present object." This is well put. But does it say that it is not helpful to sit quietly in a corner, legs crossed, eyes closed, striving to concentrate on the sensation of the breath striking the rims of the nostrils as it passes in and out of the body with each breath? Not at all. What it says is that when there is no awareness of reality as it is, there is no development of right understanding. These are not the same at all. > When I heard and knew that any paramattha dhamma can be an > object for insight I was elated (not discouraged). Being encouraged by hearing the true Dhamma is a sign of wisdom. > It took alot > of stress away. Before that I had to be so careful to arrange my > life in certain ways so as not to upset calm. Had to avoid > confrontations and many other things (and still could never get > things quite right.) This does sound stressful indeed. Dhamma can certainly eradicate the clinging to such an approach. > I still like to get away to quiet places > and have more time to study and consider Dhamma; but now there > is not the pressure of thinking I MUST be in such situations. It > seems more natural now - a more relaxed life. Right. One thing to think about, though, is what "relaxed" means. It has a number of different meanings, many of them akusala (e.g. lobha for relinquishing responsibilties, clinging to the dull pleasure of being lazy, etc.) Dan 5621 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mindfulness of Breathing > Sukin wrote: 'Keen interest' maybe; but 'ability to listen very carefully', I don't know. I find that my mind is perpetually clouded, something > like thick rain clouds across the sky. I feel like there is only moha, moha, moha everywhere..." Dear Sukin, I used to think of moha in exactly the same way--like thick rain clouds across the sky. Now I think of it as an ocean covering the entire world, with lots of other akusala and little bits of kusala bobbing about in it. Of course all this is just a lot of thinking. I think Sarah's right in saying that recognizing how many moments there are of moha is a very good sign. How many people in the world really understand this? None of us could really understand this without having heard the Dhamma and understood it to some degree. (By the way I've always held your posts in the highest esteem and have missed them). As Sarah has also pointed out, even people with some understanding often pay little attention to moha and lobha because they aren't painful--they would rather get rid of dosa because it always comes with an unpleasant feeling. In my case, for example, I've spent a huge amount of my time and effort cultivating pleasant mental states, without a lot of attention to whether they were kusala or akusala. As Robert has often and kindly pointed out, the danger of this is that it's easy to form this habit (almost like a drug addiction) and even worse, mistake it all for kusala and sammaaditthi. So you can run around all beatific and loving and kind and pure and more-compassionate-than-thou, playing the perfect Good Buddhist while getting further and further from the truth (and more and more conceited)... Personally I don't like dejection and would try to get rid of it (though I'm NOT recommending this as good practice!) Still the subject reminded me of something I'd read a long time ago that I thought might fit in here: "Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued. Grief is of two sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued. Equanimity is of two sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued. "'Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of joy is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of joy is to be pursued. And this sort of joy may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. 'Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. "'Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. 'Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. "'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities decline,' that sort of equanimity is not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful mental qualities decline, and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of equanimity is to be pursued. And this sort of equanimity may be accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the latter is the more refined. 'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. Digha Nikaya 21 Sakka-pañha Sutta Sakka's Questions http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/1Digha-Nikaya/Digha2/21-sakkapanha-e2-part.htm > Sukin said "and sometimes I feel like there is perpetual anger." I know that feeling well. Of course as Sarah pointed out, it isn't perpetual at all. Its continuity, even for a moment, is an illusion. This can be 'seen' and understood--at which moment there is no anger. 'Seeing' its impersonality or unsatisfactoriness clearly and understanding it--again at that moment, no anger. > Sukin said "I know that I am not taking into consideration, moments when there are more kusala cittas. But when I come across posts of > different members on this and another list, by comparision I feel not only stupid, but also 'defiled'." Sarah's right of course that this is just conceit, not to mention self-view. Still, sure--I IS stupid, and defiled--it's the nature of 'I', isn't it? (Though when I say 'stupid' I know it's always the dosa talking). > Sukin said "Therefore much of the time I don't feel that I have anything useful to add to the discussions, though I do interpret what I read > and tell myself that I understand and that I am able to keep up with the group. At other times I doubt the level of understanding but do not > know exactly where I'm at." Understanding is one thing and doubt is another. Both arise and subside in varying degrees of strength, according to conditions and sometimes it seems like there's a 'Sukin' there. I know you're well aware that there isn't, but forget from time to time--I certainly do. Hang in there Sukin--and beware the nivaranas! mike 5622 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 1:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Samatha: was Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Dear Sarah, --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Exactly! And isn't it just clinging to the self and > mana (conceit) when we're > concerned about looking like the 'good Buddhist'? Yep. > p.s. Just remembered when I was pretty young and in > Sri Lanka with K.Sujin and > Nina that some Sri Lankans who looked like 'good > Buddhists' said to KS that I > seemed very young and 'mischievous looking' to be so > interested in the dhamma. > Her response was that the dhamma was for anyone who > could appreciate it! Hmm, pretty, young and mischievous--lucky I wasn't there (I probably wouldn't have been a very Good Buddhist...) > The first time I met Rob too, I liked the way that > he really acted and spoke > naturally without any 'good Buddhist' airs and > graces at all..... That's so refreshing, and one of the qualities that make Robert's posts so compelling. mike 5623 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 2:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Dear Jon, Thanks again--this is all perfectly clear and just as I understood it. It really doesn't seem puzzling at all to me. The anusaya are the keystone to what understanding I have of kamma and rebirth. I really should learn the details better. I am learning them (thanks to you all) but at about the rate of nail-growth. mike p.s. Has anyone here every specifically addressed the role of kamma and rebirth with regard to momentary death? --- Jon wrote: > Mike > > Just a follow-up to my post yesterday, to give a > reference to > something I have come across. The CMA (translation > of the > Abhidhammattha Sangaha, ed. Bh Bodhi) confirms that > the term > anusaya can be used to mean all defilements > (kilesa). It says: > "Though all defilements are, in a sense, anusayas, > the seven > mentioned here are the most prominent." [Ch. VII, > Guide to #9] > > In this regard it is much like the term > 'defilements' (kilesa) itself, > which is generally used to refer to any and all > akusala > tendencies but also has a specific meaning as a > particular > group of them (a group of 10). > > This may seem puzzling at first (it was to me, > anyway), as are the > many different groups of unwholesome tendencies etc, > until you > consider that all defilements are actually one or > other of the 14 > akusala cetasikas. This means that whether we are > talking > about the anusaya or the hindrances, to take an > example, we are > talking about the same group of realities (ie. the > unwholesome > cetasikas). As far as these 2 particular groups are > concerned, > there are in fact 4 cetasikas that are common to > both (the > cetasikas of moha, lobha, dosa and vicikiccha). > > The different ways of classifying realities help us > to see different > aspects of those realities. The classification of > kilesa as > anusaya reminds us that as long as the defilements > have not > been eradicated (by panna, at the path stages) they > are bound to > appear sooner or later. As it explains in CMA-- > > "The latent dispositions (anusaya) are defilements > which "lie > along with" (anusenti) the mental process to which > they belong, > rising to the surface as obsessions whenever they > meet with > suitable conditions. The term "latent dispositions" > highlights the > fact that the defilements are liable to arise so > long as they have > not been eradicated by the supramundane paths." [Ch. > VII, Guide > to #9] > > The classification of kilesas as the hindrances, on > the other > hand, highlights the fact that akusala that has > arisen and > appeared is a hindrance to the attainment of the > jhanas. > Akusala that has arisen and is manifest is anathema > to the > calmness or tranquillity that is the goal of > samatha, since its > characteristic is agitation (even in the case of > subtle lobha). The > latent tendencies of these same akusala are not, > however, > regarded as hindrances. > > References to the hindrances being suppressed > describe a > situation where those particular akusala cetasikas > do not arise > in a person because of the 'power' of the kusala of > that person's > samatha. But we need to remember that the > development of that > samatha in and of itself would have done nothing to > eradicate > the person's accumulations of those tendencies that > lie latent, > ie. the latent accumulation of those very same > akusala > tendencies that, when they appear, we call the > hindrances. > > As discussed earlier, the hindrances are regarded as > > 'hindrances' only if and when they have arisen, and > by the same > token if they aren't arising right now they are not > regarded as > 'hindrances' at this moment. For example, at every > moment of > experience of an object through a sense door > (moments of > seeing, hearing etc.) occurring now, being vipaka > citta, there is > no akusala of any kind, and so no 'hindrance'. > Akusala cittas > may of course arise in the processes following the > moment of > actual sense-door experience; but then so too may > kusala, > including awareness, if the conditions for its > arising have been > developed. > > Mike, I have gone on more than was necessary for my > follow-up, > but some of this might be of general interest in the > light of recent > discussions > > Jon > > --- "m. nease" > <"m. nease"> > wrote: > > Jon, > > > > That does clarify the point--thanks. > > > > mike > > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > > I hope I have understood your point correctly > and > > > that this has cleared it > > > up - if not, please say. > > 5624 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 2:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ignorance and wrong view (Moha and ditthi) Dear Num, Not sure what your question is--what you've said is just as I see it (for what THAT'S worth). I've been reading Cetasikas too. I know it will take years (if I live that long) to commit the important details there to memory. Meanwhile it's good to continue to hear about them. mike --- Num wrote: > Hi Nina, Sarah and all, > > > I have been reading the book, Cetasika. At first I > plan to finish the book > first then post a question. But I think, I better > clarify something before I > move on. > > About moha and ditthi. The difference and the > quality of these two cetasikas > are striking. From my general understanding, when > there is no wrong view, > there should be no ignorance but that is not the > case. > > Let me put throw in the definition of these two > cetasikas, so everybody can > talk on the same ground. > > ________________________________________________________ > > The quotes from the book,Cetasikas, which are from > Atthasalini: > > Moha (delusion, ignorance) has characteristic > of blindness or > opposition to knowledge; the essence of > non-penetration, or function of > covering the intrinsic nature of object; the > manifestation of being opposed > to right practice or causing blindness; the > proximate cause of unwise > attention, and should be regarded as the root of all > defilements. > > Ditthi (wrong view) : ..it has unwise > conviction as characteristic; > perversion as function; wrong conviction as > manifestation; the desire not to > see the ariyans as proximate cause. It should be > regarded as the highest > fault. > > ___________________________________________________________ > > The Sotapanna eradicate ditthi ( and/or > sakkaya-ditthi) completely, he/she is > definitely on the ariyan path but still can be > suffered from lobha, dosa and > moha. The sotapanna still cling to birth, status > etc. I remember reading > that Ven.Ananda cried in sadness after the buddha > passed away. > > So wrong view does not always arise with every > akusula citta, it coarises > with only 4 lobha-mula-citta. There is no wrong view > with dosa-mula-citta and > moha-mula-citta, even in doubtful citta, > (vicikiccha-sampayutta). So there > can be an ignorance without a wrong view. This is > interesting. > > So my point is even without wrong view, the suffer > and ignorance are still > there. So, I guess panna (understanding) is still a > key in penetrating > through the reality. > > Thanks for recommending a book, Sarah. > > Comments are appreciated. > > Num 5625 From: Gaopeng Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 3:51am Subject: Fwd: Re: send me book [The Corporate Body of The Buddha Educational Foundation Dear Sarah and the rest, Thanks for responding to my very previous post, : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5600 As I set my yahoogroup mode to no mail, so I didn't really follow any thread of any groups right now into my personal email box and I also rarely read the post online now. I am 28 years male from Malaysia, a very beginner in Buddhism, not secterian but inclining theravada, plus some mahayana :-), melting pot . As for the Corporate Body of The Buddha Education, the founder is venarable JingKong, a Pureland practioner monk in Taiwan. As far as I know, it's a non-profitable charity organisation which receiving donation from worldwide, then to print the dhamma books for free distribution worldwide. A glance to the dhamma catalog, no doubt there is mostly mahayana and chinese dhamma books , but this is not secterial actually, from time to time, the theravada and vajrayana dhamma books also will be printed out for free distribution. I only have a few encounterments with them, merely two or three times through requesting one or two dhamma books through emails. All i know is, if you really want a dhamma book, just write an email to them, read the above previous letter with details: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5600 You only need to send ONE copy of email to ONE particular requesting-email address and don't cross-posting to multiple email, as this may lead to multiple copy requesting later, as may be different people will handle different request. As the Corporate Body of the Buddha Education is a charity organisation, they also lack of man power in work, so MOST of the time there WON'T have any reply [which saying that your request has been received] from them after you sent your request. Unless there is problem with your request, which most of the time won't have. Then, you just wait at home, the requesting dhamma books will arrive depends on the amount or the size of the books, if the parcel of the books is small in size, then may be they will send through air mail, which you will receive in one or two weeks time , depends your destiny. If the parcel is too heavy , then may be they will send through ship, it will need 1 to 2 months to reach it's destiny. I only speak this out through few times encounterment with them, this may be wrong. That's it. When requesting book, please clearly state the title of the book, the amount [ please only do ask the neccesary amount ], your FULL name, and your mailling address clearly with postcode and country name. I just received my Visuddhimagga [hard-cover] from them [ need more than 5 weeks time to receive], normally the books printed in Taiwan will have high quality. As for Erik, may be you could request a copy of the Visuddhimagga , The Path of Purification translated by Bhikku Nanamoli [original work by Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa]. I am a very beginner in Buddhism, I don't know what the other books you mentioned about, you could try to ask them through email [overseas@ budaedu.org.tw ], they are very pleased to send them over to you if they have a copy for free distribution. As for me, the Visuddhimaga is heavy enough to take time to digest and also to concentrate and to excel , :-). The english version for the Corporate Body of The Buddha Education website will be out soon, may be in August or September. http://www.budaedu.org.tw/ http://www.budaedu.org.tw/books/#foreign Till then, bye. May you be well and happy ! gaopeng 5626 From: Herman Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:31am Subject: Re: In my opinion Dear Kom, Thank you for your reply. I have interspersed your comments with some more comments. --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Herman, > > --- Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in rebirth. > > Do you believe in conditions, and the result of those conditions? Do you > *know* as it really is that in order for a dhamma to arise, there *must* be > condition for it to arise? K. Sujin has mentioned that rebirth may be > absolutely provable at one's death. Yes, I believe in conditions, and the results of those conditions, and that all dhammas arise because of conditions. I also believe the conditions are unknowable, meaning neither causes or results can be fully known. Play a game of chess, and try and predict what the board will look like after one, two, three moves. Or try and determine the moves that caused the current state of the board. Impossible. With such a simple state of affairs , 2 players with sixteen or fewer pieces each you need to cover billions of permutations. How much more complex is this present reality, with infinite causes which are the result of infinite causes which are the result of infinite causes. > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over them. I > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know pain, > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom of my > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the sensations at > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, conceit. > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala or > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are kusala > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know it is > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > Do you know the different qualities of all those different dhammas as they > really are? Do you know the different qualities of the kusala dhammas and > akusala dhammas? I do not know whether I know all the qualities. How will I know when I do? I know some qualities, I think, but I do not know whether I am deluded about them, ignorant or whatever. I know what other people say is kusala or akusala, but this isn't self-evident. The reality I am aware of is "x says this is kusala" not "x is kusala". When there is anger, there are conditions for anger. To then label that as akusala adds nothing except inhibition and the feeling that this anger is not acceptable, that it should not be, while the reality is that it just is. If you are aware of anger then you are aware of anger. > > > > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the baby not a > > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats all there is. > > > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral grounds is as > > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They both > > exist, thats reality > > I don't think we need to justify if this person is a bad person or a good > person or if I am a good person or a bad person. Do you believe that > akusala bring only bad results to all that are involved and kusala brings > only good results to all that are involved? When one has akusala, one only > brings troubles for oneself and others. The kusala is the reverse. > Because of the complexity of infinite causes, how can I know that this thought caused that result, this action caused that feeling? I really do not have the ability to make those discernments. I know "x says this is good, x says this is bad" I do not know "this is good, that is bad". Good and bad and in between are not absolutes, they are relative to a goal, a purpose. What is good for one person in one situation is bad for another. Over time I can start to believe that by smiling a lot I am influencing the course of the universe in a positive way. But am I ? And is that my goal? > > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples headstones, > > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To help the > > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or kusala, it > > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they will die with > > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or akusala, it > > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither Mind nor > > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as there is life > > there is death, as long as there is being, there is nothingness. > > The kusala and akusala have different qualties which are provable now. > You can observe for yourself if akusala "tends to" bring trouble both > internally and externally or not and if kusala "tends to" bring good results > both internally and externally. Kusala and akusala are tied to whatever goal is trying to be achieved. This may be trying to feel good or avoiding feeling bad, or escaping from Samsara or realising Nibbana or getting of the wheel of rebirths or whatever. How is it that we set out on a journey when we wouldn't recognise the destination if we tripped over it? And how is it that we "know" exactly what tools , what means , will get us to this destination? This is not knowledge, this is faith. Kind regards Herman 5627 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 10:18am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion Dear Kom, Rebirth proveable at one's death.... how in a more layman's way ? > -----Original Message----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2001 10:04 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion > > Dear Herman, > > --- Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in rebirth. > > Do you believe in conditions, and the result of those conditions? Do you > *know* as it really is that in order for a dhamma to arise, there *must* > be > condition for it to arise? K. Sujin has mentioned that rebirth may be > absolutely provable at one's death. > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over them. I > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know pain, > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom of my > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the sensations at > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, conceit. > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala or > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are kusala > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know it is > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > Do you know the different qualities of all those different dhammas as they > > really are? Do you know the different qualities of the kusala dhammas and > > akusala dhammas? > > > > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the baby not a > > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats all there is. > > > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral grounds is as > > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They both > > exist, thats reality > > I don't think we need to justify if this person is a bad person or a good > person or if I am a good person or a bad person. Do you believe that > akusala bring only bad results to all that are involved and kusala brings > only good results to all that are involved? When one has akusala, one > only > brings troubles for oneself and others. The kusala is the reverse. > > > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples headstones, > > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To help the > > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or kusala, it > > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they will die with > > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or akusala, it > > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither Mind nor > > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as there is life > > there is death, as long as there is being, there is nothingness. > > The kusala and akusala have different qualties which are provable now. > You can observe for yourself if akusala "tends to" bring trouble both > internally and externally or not and if kusala "tends to" bring good > results > both internally and externally. > > kom 5628 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 11:21am Subject: Re: In my opinion The story has it that if you are born as an opapatika (born whole, with all your parts), you could remember what happens in the last life. This *may* explain why ghosts and devas in the suttas remember their last lives. Unless you are again reborn as human or animals, then you are most likely will be reborn whole. Somehow, I am led to believe that being reborn as a human in the next life is somewhat unlikely for most people. Beyond this absolute provability, you can only give explanations that "make sense" or are "logical". Understandably, this doesn't work for everybody. kom --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > Dear Kom, > > Rebirth proveable at one's death.... how in a more layman's way ? > 5629 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 2:13pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion Kom, born whole .. what do you mean... with all parts.... are human considered not with all parts.... since you mentioned it, the probability of reborn a human seems distant... like cherishing the human existence and ractise Dhamma and the sort.... seems to be pointing that we ain't gonna be humans again unless we have huge good accumulations.... what do you think ? Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 11:21 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion > > The story has it that if you are born as an opapatika (born whole, with > all > your parts), you could remember what happens in the last life. This > *may* explain why ghosts and devas in the suttas remember their last > lives. > > Unless you are again reborn as human or animals, then you are most likely > will be reborn whole. Somehow, I am led to believe that being reborn as a > > human in the next life is somewhat unlikely for most people. > > Beyond this absolute provability, you can only give explanations > that "make sense" or are "logical". Understandably, this doesn't work for > > everybody. > > kom > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > wrote: > > Dear Kom, > > > > Rebirth proveable at one's death.... how in a more layman's > way ? > > 5630 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 4:05pm Subject: Dan's 'Theorem:Discussion' style Dear Dan, Sorry, but 'real' chat will have to wait til next week. Just want to reply briefly to this: --- Dan wrote: > P.S. Is my writing style of "Theorem: Discussion" offensive? It has a > haughty feel to it, but it really is just an adaptation of the > mathematical writing style that I have been trained in. Assert > something as true and then discuss whether it really is or not. > > Would it be more helpful to write in terms of "Question: Speculative > answer"? I would think that we're all very used to your style (I hadn't associated it with a mathematical style actually ;-)) and I'm quite sure it never causes offence. Strong, direct, assertive, yes, but it's always polite (and challenging;-). Your explanation is interesting. Others may have different ideas, but I would suggest you write in whatever style you're comfortable with and which comes naturally. It would be boring if we all had the same style. Jon and I always appreciate your posts. Sarah p.s. thanks, also, for keeping the subject headings updated - you win the prize for this! 5631 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 5:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Mindfulness of Breathing To Mike, Wynn. Thankyou Wynn for your links, I appreciate the difference in the translation. Thankyou Mike for the very encouraging post. Thanks everyone for supplying such good reading everyday. May all grow in wisdom. Sukin. "m. nease" wrote: > > Sukin wrote: 'Keen interest' maybe; but 'ability > to listen very carefully', I don't know. I find that > my mind is perpetually clouded, something > > like thick rain clouds across the sky. I feel > like there is only moha, moha, moha everywhere..." > > Dear Sukin, > > I used to think of moha in exactly the same way--like > thick rain clouds across the sky. Now I think of it > as an ocean covering the entire world, with lots of > other akusala and little bits of kusala bobbing about > in it. Of course all this is just a lot of thinking. > > I think Sarah's right in saying that recognizing how > many moments there are of moha is a very good sign. > How many people in the world really understand this? > None of us could really understand this without having > heard the Dhamma and understood it to some degree. > (By the way I've always held your posts in the highest > esteem and have missed them). > > As Sarah has also pointed out, even people with some > understanding often pay little attention to moha and > lobha because they aren't painful--they would rather > get rid of dosa because it always comes with an > unpleasant feeling. In my case, for example, I've > spent a huge amount of my time and effort cultivating > pleasant mental states, without a lot of attention to > whether they were kusala or akusala. As Robert has > often and kindly pointed out, the danger of this is > that it's easy to form this habit (almost like a drug > addiction) and even worse, mistake it all for kusala > and sammaaditthi. So you can run around all beatific > and loving and kind and pure and > more-compassionate-than-thou, playing the perfect Good > Buddhist while getting further and further from the > truth (and more and more conceited)... > > Personally I don't like dejection and would try to get > rid of it (though I'm NOT recommending this as good > practice!) Still the subject reminded me of something > I'd read a long time ago that I thought might fit in > here: > > "Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be > pursued & not to be pursued. Grief is of two sorts: to > be pursued & not to be pursued. Equanimity is of two > sorts: to be pursued & not to be pursued. > > "'Joy is of two sorts, I tell you, deva-king: to be > pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in > reference to what was it said? When one knows of a > feeling of joy, 'As I pursue this joy, unskillful > mental qualities increase, and skillful mental > qualities decline,' that sort of joy is not to be > pursued. When one knows of a feeling of joy, 'As I > pursue this joy, unskillful mental qualities decline, > and skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > joy is to be pursued. And this sort of joy may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Joy is of two sorts, I > tell you, deva-king: to be pursued & not to be > pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this > was it said. > > "'Grief is of two sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & > not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in reference > to what was it said? When one knows of a feeling of > grief, 'As I pursue this grief, unskillful mental > qualities increase, and skillful mental qualities > decline,' that sort of grief is not to be pursued. > When one knows of a feeling of grief, 'As I pursue > this grief, unskillful mental qualities decline, and > skillful mental qualities increase,' that sort of > grief is to be pursued. And this sort of grief may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Grief is of two sorts, I > tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was > it said. And in reference to this was it said. > > "'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be > pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in > reference to what was it said? When one knows of a > feeling of equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, > unskillful mental qualities increase, and skillful > mental qualities decline,' that sort of equanimity is > not to be pursued. When one knows of a feeling of > equanimity, 'As I pursue this equanimity, unskillful > mental qualities decline, and skillful mental > qualities increase,' that sort of equanimity is to be > pursued. And this sort of equanimity may be > accompanied by directed thought & evaluation or free > of directed thought & evaluation. Of the two, the > latter is the more refined. 'Equanimity is of two > sorts, I tell you: to be pursued & not to be pursued.' > Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it > said. > > Digha Nikaya 21 > Sakka-pañha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/1Digha-Nikaya/Digha2/21-sakkapanha-e2-part.htm > > > > Sukin said "and sometimes I feel like there is > perpetual anger." > > I know that feeling well. Of course as Sarah pointed > out, it isn't perpetual at all. Its continuity, even > for a moment, is an illusion. This can be 'seen' and > understood--at which moment there is no anger. > 'Seeing' its impersonality or unsatisfactoriness > clearly and understanding it--again at that moment, no > anger. > > > Sukin said "I know that I am not taking into > consideration, moments when there are more kusala > cittas. But when I come across posts of > > different members on this and another list, by > comparision I feel not only stupid, but also > 'defiled'." > > Sarah's right of course that this is just conceit, not > to mention self-view. Still, sure--I IS stupid, and > defiled--it's the nature of 'I', isn't it? (Though > when I say 'stupid' I know it's always the dosa > talking). > > > Sukin said "Therefore much of the time I don't feel > that I have anything useful to add to the > discussions, though I do interpret what I read > > and tell myself that I understand and that I am able > to keep up with the group. At other times I doubt the > level of understanding but do not > > know exactly where I'm at." > > Understanding is one thing and doubt is another. Both > arise and subside in varying degrees of strength, > according to conditions and sometimes it seems like > there's a 'Sukin' there. I know you're well aware > that there isn't, but forget from time to time--I > certainly do. > > Hang in there Sukin--and beware the nivaranas! > > mike 5632 From: Ong Teng Kee Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books Narada also wrote guide to patthana vol.2 but not published by PTS(pts have vol 1 only and two patthana text tran by him).I have the vol 2 printed in Myanmar which have tran. from Mulatika and anutika with charts,it is thicker than vol.1 which is just a beginner book. -----Original Message----- From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:03:32 +0800 (CST) Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books > Dan, > > I just took this from the PTS website. > , > Pali Text Society, Ancillary Works, Paperbacks > ... in paperback. Guide to Conditional Relations, Ven. U Narada, Vol. I, 1979 > ISBN 198 X £23.50 Tape ca... > 99.9% URL: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/pdf_ver.pdf > > my copy is hard copy but also 1979. > > It's a guide to the 1st 12 pages of the Patthana (and a LOT easier to read or > refer to, I find). > > (This is not to be confused with 'The Guide', translation of Nettipakarana by > Ven Nanamoli and also v.useful0 > > > --- Dan wrote: > > As Rob said, this Guide is very clear > and helpful indeed. You'll > > find it in the > > > PTS catalogue and i'm sure it's not too expensive as it's pretty > > slim. Hey, > > > > Oh my! What did I just check out of the library then? First I learn > > that there are TWO Narada's that write great Abhidhamma books, and > > then I learn that there must be TWO Narada "Guides" because the one I > > have is quite thick and out of print! I will indeed have to look at > > the PTS edition too. Thanks! > > Hmm..I don't know what your Narada Guide is..maybe the same and another > edition..? The one above only has 240 pages. > > Erik, if you take the plunge and order from PTS, remember to become a member, > get yr discount and nominated free book for the year. > > S. 5633 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 8:00pm Subject: Re: Request for Books Thanks for the explanation, Teng Kee. Clearly, I'm not quite ready for vol. 2 (probably not vol. 1 yet either, but since you say "beginner" book, there may be hope!). But vol. 2 still seems much less cryptic than Patthana itself. Dan > Narada also wrote guide to patthana vol.2 but not published by PTS (pts have vol 1 only and two patthana text tran by him).I have the vol 2 printed in Myanmar which have tran. from Mulatika and anutika with charts,it is thicker than vol.1 which is just a beginner book. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah Procter Abbott > Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:03:32 +0800 (CST) > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books > > > > Dan, > > > > I just took this from the PTS website. > > , > > Pali Text Society, Ancillary Works, Paperbacks > > ... in paperback. Guide to Conditional Relations, Ven. U Narada, Vol. I, 1979 > > ISBN 198 X £23.50 Tape ca... > > 99.9% URL: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/pdf_ver.pdf > > > > my copy is hard copy but also 1979. > > > > It's a guide to the 1st 12 pages of the Patthana (and a LOT easier to read or > > refer to, I find). > > > > (This is not to be confused with 'The Guide', translation of Nettipakarana by > > Ven Nanamoli and also v.useful0 > > > > > > --- Dan wrote: > > As Rob said, this Guide is very clear > > and helpful indeed. You'll > > > find it in the > > > > PTS catalogue and i'm sure it's not too expensive as it's pretty > > > slim. Hey, > > > > > > Oh my! What did I just check out of the library then? First I learn > > > that there are TWO Narada's that write great Abhidhamma books, and > > > then I learn that there must be TWO Narada "Guides" because the one I > > > have is quite thick and out of print! I will indeed have to look at > > > the PTS edition too. Thanks! > > > > Hmm..I don't know what your Narada Guide is..maybe the same and another > > edition..? The one above only has 240 pages. > > > > Erik, if you take the plunge and order from PTS, remember to become a member, > > get yr discount and nominated free book for the year. > > > > S. > > 5634 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 8:05pm Subject: Re: Dan's 'Theorem:Discussion' style Thanks for your kind and encouraging words, Sarah. Dan P.S. I think you must mean someone else in your "p.s." > I would think that we're all very used to your style (I hadn't associated it > with a mathematical style actually ;-)) and I'm quite sure it never causes > offence. Strong, direct, assertive, yes, but it's always polite (and > challenging;-). > > Your explanation is interesting. Others may have different ideas, but I would > suggest you write in whatever style you're comfortable with and which comes > naturally. It would be boring if we all had the same style. Jon and I always > appreciate your posts. > > Sarah > > p.s. thanks, also, for keeping the subject headings updated - you win the prize > for this! > 5635 From: robert Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 9:24pm Subject: Re: In my opinion Dear dan, Some good points here. Rather than discuss them I will just add that today I listened to "Amazing Grace". We can listen and interpret it in our own way, in ways that accord with Dhamma, or ways that don't. Whichever way it is a moving song. robert Dan wrote: > > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace of god > > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to how > > serious the view is. > I think about it just the opposite way! The concept of "grace of God" > or "salvation by faith" is a crude version of anatta. This is sure to > raise a lot of hackles, but try to understand my point before letting > it condition too much dosa! Christian faith is all about putting the > ego aside and letting actions be guided by the Holy Spirit. Any > action -- even one that superficially looks very good -- that is > guided by the personal will is at best non-effectual in salvation. > Instead, Christian faith demands that the ego be put aside and faith > in God be developed. If faith is strong enough, good works are done > incessantly, cheerfully and without any nudging from the ego or the > will or the atta. The view is not "anatta" per se but only that any > activity governed by atta rather than God is necessarily akusala. > What is "God"? Well, I'd say that it is a crutch that Christians use > for understanding anatta. It can be reasonably effective in > attenuating people's clinging to self, and as far as that goes it is > helpful. Ultimately, though, liberation does require dropping that > crutch. > > As for doing good works, I'm sure both Mother Theresa and Buddha > would disagree that "good works" per se is the vehicle for salvation > or enlightenment. Mother Theresa would say that faith is key: If > faith is strong, the good works will naturally follow > without "effort" and without direction from the will. Buddha would > say that wisdom is key: If wisdom is strong, the good works will > naturally follow without "effort" and without direction from any > atta. Neither puts much stock in external good works. Both put much > stock in purification of the mind. This is a very important point. > > Buddha did not have any prescription: "Do this and you will move > toward enlightenment." He did not say: "Sit on a cushion and direct > attention to the sensation of the breath on the area above the upper > lip as that breath enters and leaves the nose. If you do so, you will > be enlightened." Instead, he talked a lot about wisdom and gave lots > of example of wise people doing this and lots of "good works", but it > is the wisdom and not the work that is important. Bramajala sutta has > a wonderful discussion of this point. Buddha talks about how > superficial people praise him for his good works, but those who have > a deeper understanding recognize that the good works flow from his > wisdom rather than the other way around, and that it is his wisdom > that is most deserving of praise. > > "The Bondage of the Will" is a wonderful book that Martin Luther > wrote about the Christian conception that any activity directed by > the will is not only ineffectual for attaining salvation, it is > downright sinful because it demonstrates a lack of faith in God--- > shades of "sakaya ditthi is akusala" and "liberation by insight, not > by ritual meditation or chanting or reading". > > Dan 5636 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 10:09pm Subject: Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) Dan Enjoyed this post of yours with the story about your meditation teacher in Thailand. I had not realised (or had forgotten, if you have mentioned it before) that you have a Thailand connection. Do tell us more about it sometime. I agree with you about the need for conventional effort in life, and the value of conventional effort of the kusala kind. I do not suggest that the Buddha wished to discourage anyone from conventional effort of the kusala kind. But when it comes to bhavana (mental development), and I include here samatha as well as vipassana, I believe the suttas are not to be read in terms of convectional effort, ie, that that is not the meaning with which they were delivered. If you want a reason as to why he did not spell things our more, my answer would be that he was talking to some very highly developed individuals and the message was appropriate for the particular listeners. The spelling out is found in the commentaries and especially in the abhidhamma. Jon --- Dan wrote: > Dear Jon, > Again, we are not so far apart. You wrote: > > As I understand it, right effort and the other factors that are to > be > > developed are cetasikas (mental factors) that arise together at > moments of > > true satipatthana. At such moments, and at such moments only, the > path > > leading out of samsara is being developed. > > When those factors arise at such moments they each perform their > > particular 'path-factor' function. > > The conventional, everyday notions of "trying hard", "arousing > energy", "making wish", "strives for the non-arising of [akusala]" > etc. is indeed closely linked to atta or sakaya ditthi. > > But understanding of right striving can only come about when the veil > of ignorance about the nature of conventional, everyday striving is > lifted. By just talking about the imperfections of conventional > striving we run the risk of dismissing or rejecting those > conventional notions before understanding has grown strong enough to > replace the conventional notions with the right ones in practice and > everyday living. The result could too easily be a Jack Kerouac, > Timothy Leary, Beat, superficial understanding of the concept with a > feeling of relief that there's no one responsible for the kusala and > akusala. It would not be beneficial to replace the conventional > understanding of "engenders wish, makes effort, arouses energy, > exerts the mind, strives for the non-arising of evil bad states that > have not arisen; engenders wish, makes effort, arouses energy, exerts > the mind, strives for the abandoning of evil bad states that have > arisen;..." with its conventional counterpart "does not engender > wish, cannot arouse right energy, does not exert the mind, should not > strive for the non-arising of evil bad states..." This miccha ditthi > would be more along the lines of "...no fruit or result of good and > bad actions; no this world, no other world...", which is so often and > so easily more serious than the sakaya ditthi of conventional > understanding of "striving". This miccha ditthi breeds a sense of > complacency and a weakening of a sense of responsibility (ahiri and > anottapa) that are not conducive to development of insight ["Oh, it > is such a relief to know there is no one responsible for kusala and > akusala".] > > This reminds of an encounter with my first meditation teacher in > Thailand. When I was an undergraduate college student, I found > classes pretty easy and I always tried to do just well enough to get > an A-, which really wasn't difficult most of the time. After > graduating, I went immediately to graduate school in pure math. > Although I went to a fancy school for my undergraduate degree and a > second tier graduate school, the quality of work expected in graduate > school was so much higher than that expected in undergraduate school > that I had tremendous difficulty keeping up because I never learned > how to work when I was an undergraduate. Near the end of the first > year, I was struggling to pass one of my classes and getting quite > stressed about it. I then reflected briefly (and wrongly!) on > some "Buddhist" and "Taoist" notions of "striving is unwholesome; not- > striving is wholesome". The answer was then oh-so-clear: Just skip > the final! What a great sense of relief! I couldn't expect to pass > the class, then, but the idea of caring about passing a class is just > evidence of ego and clinging, so why should I care about the class?! > Just forget about it instead! I was proud of this insight and told my > monk teacher the story. He said [paraphrase]: "When are you going to > learn to deal with difficult situations responsibly?" Oh my! How > right he was! The idea is to remove the self from the striving, not > to remove the striving, i.e. to make the striving "right striving" > not by abandoning striving but by abandoning the wrongness of the > striving. > > This is part of the genious of Buddha's masterful use of language and > why "path" means so much more than any single moment of consciousness > and why the teaching is so deep: It makes sense to interpret the > words in a conventional sense (good in the beginning), in a deeper > philosophical sense (good in the middle), and in the deepest, > liberating sense (good in the end). It is extraordinarily helpful to > present these ideas in language that is so rich and has so much depth > that it can be helpful to all sorts of people who are willing to > listen, those who understand it all at just the conventional level > and those who understand it at the deepest levels. > > This highlights one of our differences. You wrote: > > The effort being referred to here is not effort of the conventional > kind, > > because that inevitably involves the idea of a self (even though > our aim > > may be the development of the path as we understand it) but rather > the > > effort that accompanies a moment of satipatthana. > > I disagree. In my understanding, Buddha was such a master of > language, such a master of Dhamma, and so careful in his thinking > that his statements can be interpreted on a number of different > levels and they make sense on a number of different levels, depending > on the capability of the hearer to comprehend. I'd agree that the > meaning of "effort" you are referring to is certainly a part of the > teaching, but don't you think the teaching is rich enough to make > sense on a conventional level as well? If not, then why would he make > such extensive use of conventional language without giving us an > explicit caveat that he did not mean his words did not mean what they > seem to mean? Was he talking in code language, intended solely for > those who could understand the concepts at their deepest level? If > so, then the teaching is not nearly so deep as it seems to me, but > from my experience, any of my guesses about the depth of the teaching > always turn out to be too shallow, so I hesitate to accept that the > language of "striving" and "energy" are only meant to be taken on one > level. > > Dan 5637 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 10:45pm Subject: Re: In my opinion Dear Loke, Something is considered to be born whole when you appear "whole", with all your parts, at the moment of birth consciousness. Humans are considered to have birth conciousness at the point of the conception (not 9 months later!) and at that point, we were only a single-celled organism (about to multiply rapidly). It is still not entirely clear to me why there appear to be very heavy considerations about the human existence while it seems that to be born a Deva, one must have even higher kamma to be born in such a plane. The considerations I am talking about are: 1) The human planes are not too happy and it is not completely miserable. Therefore, all kinds of dhammas appear that don't appear in other planes. 2) It is possible to develop all different levels of kusalas in the human plane. It is hard to give (dana) in the deva planes. 3) Since human lives are so short comparing to other planes' existence, in this samsara, the time as a human is probably a very small percentage. 4) Sammasam buddha can only be a human. 5) Somehow, the commentaries mention that the results of killing an Ariya human are more severe than killing an ariya deva! As long as we are stuck in this samsara, we will eventually be born as a human again. It is just a question of how long since the different explanations say it is unlikely. kom --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > Kom, > > born whole .. what do you mean... with all parts.... are human considered > not with all parts.... since you mentioned it, the probability of reborn a > human seems distant... like cherishing the human existence and ractise > Dhamma and the sort.... seems to be pointing that we ain't gonna be humans > again unless we have huge good accumulations.... > > what do you think ? > > Loke CL > 5638 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 11:13pm Subject: Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) > Enjoyed this post of yours with the story about your meditation > teacher in Thailand. I had not realised (or had forgotten, if you > have mentioned it before) that you have a Thailand connection. > Do tell us more about it sometime. I did send Sarah a note about it a few months ago. You are welcome to look at it if you'd like. If you have any other questions, I'd be happy to discuss them with you. > well as vipassana, I believe the suttas are not to be read in > terms of convectional effort, ie, that that is not the meaning with > which they were delivered. I think this is the heart of our disagreement. To me, one of the amazing things about the teachings is their great depth and their sensibility on so many levels. Buddha spoke to large and diverse audiences, yet the discourses have things to offer all the listeners. For example, in the anapansati sutta (MN 118), the Buddha addressed an audience of Bhikkhus, whose development ranged from Arahantship to non-Ariyan samatha meditators. What they had in common was an earnest desire to learn Dhamma. The difference in level of understanding between an Arahant and a non-Ariyan samatha meditator is immense (unfathomable for the likes of me). Do you suppose the Buddha's words would have the same meaning for all those different ears? I don't believe it for a minute. > If you want a reason as to why he did not spell things our more, > my answer would be that he was talking to some very highly > developed individuals and the message was appropriate for the > particular listeners. Buddha was a truly great teacher, and I really doubt he was thinking so narrowly in his discourses. It is just too much of a coincidence that his teaching would make sense on so many levels and to so many people if he only intended it to have meaning on one level and in a way that is so different from the conventional meaning of the words he chose to use. 5639 From: Howard Date: Fri Jun 15, 2001 7:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion Hi, Robert (and Dan) - I agree with you in the following with regard to your praises for "Amazing Grace" and for Dan's excellent post. I find that my "Buddhism" has led to an increased appreciation of much that is to be found in other religions, including my birth religion of Judaism. I find that the Dhamma serves as a source of deep understanding for (what I consider to be) the best parts of those other religions. With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/15/01 11:09:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time, robert writes: > Dear dan, > Some good points here. Rather than discuss them I will just add that > today I listened to "Amazing Grace". We can listen and interpret it > in our own way, in ways that accord with Dhamma, or ways that don't. > Whichever way it is a moving song. > robert > > > Dan wrote: > > > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace of god > > > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to how > > > serious the view is. > > I think about it just the opposite way! The concept of "grace of > God" > > or "salvation by faith" is a crude version of anatta. This is sure > to > > raise a lot of hackles, but try to understand my point before > letting > > it condition too much dosa! Christian faith is all about putting > the > > ego aside and letting actions be guided by the Holy Spirit. Any > > action -- even one that superficially looks very good -- that is > > guided by the personal will is at best non-effectual in salvation. > > Instead, Christian faith demands that the ego be put aside and > faith > > in God be developed. If faith is strong enough, good works are done > > incessantly, cheerfully and without any nudging from the ego or the > > will or the atta. The view is not "anatta" per se but only that any > > activity governed by atta rather than God is necessarily akusala. > > What is "God"? Well, I'd say that it is a crutch that Christians > use > > for understanding anatta. It can be reasonably effective in > > attenuating people's clinging to self, and as far as that goes it > is > > helpful. Ultimately, though, liberation does require dropping that > > crutch. > > > > As for doing good works, I'm sure both Mother Theresa and Buddha > > would disagree that "good works" per se is the vehicle for > salvation > > or enlightenment. Mother Theresa would say that faith is key: If > > faith is strong, the good works will naturally follow > > without "effort" and without direction from the will. Buddha would > > say that wisdom is key: If wisdom is strong, the good works will > > naturally follow without "effort" and without direction from any > > atta. Neither puts much stock in external good works. Both put much > > stock in purification of the mind. This is a very important point. > > > > Buddha did not have any prescription: "Do this and you will move > > toward enlightenment." He did not say: "Sit on a cushion and direct > > attention to the sensation of the breath on the area above the > upper > > lip as that breath enters and leaves the nose. If you do so, you > will > > be enlightened." Instead, he talked a lot about wisdom and gave > lots > > of example of wise people doing this and lots of "good works", but > it > > is the wisdom and not the work that is important. Bramajala sutta > has > > a wonderful discussion of this point. Buddha talks about how > > superficial people praise him for his good works, but those who > have > > a deeper understanding recognize that the good works flow from his > > wisdom rather than the other way around, and that it is his wisdom > > that is most deserving of praise. > > > > "The Bondage of the Will" is a wonderful book that Martin Luther > > wrote about the Christian conception that any activity directed by > > the will is not only ineffectual for attaining salvation, it is > > downright sinful because it demonstrates a lack of faith in God--- > > shades of "sakaya ditthi is akusala" and "liberation by insight, > not > > by ritual meditation or chanting or reading". > > > > Dan > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5640 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 1:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ignorance and wrong view (Moha and ditthi) op 14-06-2001 17:18 schreef Num op Num: > Hi Nina, Sarah and all,> > I have been reading the book, Cetasika. At first I plan to finish the book > first then post a question. But I think, I better clarify something before I > move on. > > About moha and ditthi. The difference and the quality of these two cetasikas > are striking. From my general understanding, when there is no wrong view, > there should be no ignorance but that is not the case. > > Let me put throw in the definition of these two cetasikas, so everybody can > talk on the same ground. > > ________________________________________________________ > > The quotes from the book,Cetasikas, which are from Atthasalini: > > Moha (delusion, ignorance) has characteristic of blindness or > opposition to knowledge; the essence of non-penetration, or function of > covering the intrinsic nature of object; the manifestation of being opposed > to right practice or causing blindness; the proximate cause of unwise > attention, and should be regarded as the root of all defilements. > > Ditthi (wrong view) : ..it has unwise conviction as characteristic; > perversion as function; wrong conviction as manifestation; the desire not to > see the ariyans as proximate cause. It should be regarded as the highest > fault. > > The Sotapanna eradicate ditthi ( and/or sakkaya-ditthi) completely, he/she is > definitely on the ariyan path but still can be suffered from lobha, dosa and > moha. The sotapanna still cling to birth, status etc. I remember reading > that Ven.Ananda cried in sadness after the buddha passed away. > > So wrong view does not always arise with every akusula citta, it coarises > with only 4 lobha-mula-citta. There is no wrong view with dosa-mula-citta and > moha-mula-citta, even in doubtful citta, (vicikiccha-sampayutta). So there > can be an ignorance without a wrong view. This is interesting. > > So my point is even without wrong view, the suffer and ignorance are still > there. So, I guess panna (understanding) is still a key in penetrating > through the reality. > > Dear Num, what you got from my cetasika book is all right. Ignorance accompanies each akusala citta and it conditions that citta, also the citta with wrong view. Ignorance does not know realities, it does not know what is kusala and akusala. When there is lobha or dosa there is ignorance of realities, even if you have learnt the Dhamma. It seems it is all forgotten at that moment. There are many moments of forgetfulness of realities in a day; there may be moments of moha-mulacittas, when there is just ignorance, not even lobha or dosa. But sometimes there may be awareness of sound as it appears. Then we can learn the difference between the moments of sati and the moments without sati, when there is ignorance of realities. Moha can be an object of sati, its characteristic can be known when it appears. Wrong view, ditthi, is a distorted view of reality, and it has many degrees. One may really believe that there is my mind which lasts, or one may believe that there is no difference between kusala and akusala, that these do not bring their appropriate results. Such a view can lead to evil deeds harming other people. Also wrong practice is a form of ditthi, someone may believe that he can only be aware of realities when performing a special practice, that it is not possible in daily life. Wrong view always goes together with clinging as you remarked, one clings to that view. We have accumulated wrong view, it is a latent tendency, anusaya, just as ignorance. Latent tendencies do not arise with the akusala citta, they have been accumulated and are carried on from moment to moment, but at any time they can condition the arising of akusala citta. Is this explanation sufficient for now? Nina. 5641 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 1:07am Subject: right effort Dear friends, I like very much Jon¹s explanation of the four right efforts, stressing that while there is satipatthana, there is the fulfilment of the four right efforts (samma-padhana): there are conditions for avoiding akusala which has not yet arisen,overcoming akusala which has arisen, developing kusala which has not yet arisen and maintaining kusala which has arisen. Then one is on the Middle Way, one does not force oneself in performing difficult practices so as to supress akusala, nor is one indulgent and lax. Some people find it a relief not to be responsible for their aksuala, since it is conditioned already. Different types of citta may have such thoughts. It may be akusala citta which does not see the disadvantage of akusala. But if there is right understanding of conditions there is kusala citta: one may not torment oneself by scrupulous thoughts and realize that akusala can be an object of awareness, and at that moment there is kusala citta.Through satipatthana one will have more understanding of the conditions for the cittas which arise and one comes to see more the benefit of kusala and the danger of akusala. Speaking in conventional words of responsibility, there will be more sense of responsibilty for one¹s actions. It is sati, not self which realizes the danger of akusala. The expression may give rise to misunderstandings. One may have associations with an idea of self who is suppressing them. Wise people in the Buddha¹s time who developed samatha even to the degree of jhana developed this with pa~n~naa: this kind of understanding knew the disadvantages of akusala and the right conditions for calm. They knew how to be temporarily free from the hindrances by concentrating on one of the meditation subjects. They could do this not by forcing themselves to difficult practices, it was by pa~n~naa which knew the right conditions to become temporarily free from the hindrances. In the scriptures we read the Buddha spoke to people about the inception of energy or effort. He spoke in conventional terms (according to the method of the suttanta) to different people in order to help them to have a sense of urgency. Santi Phantakeong explains about this subject in his Lexicon: Thus we see that the study of the Abhidhamma is most helpful for the understanding of the words of the sutta. With Metta, Nina. 5642 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 2:37am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] right effort Dear Nina, It has occurred to me that my own posts have tended to lower the overall quality of the material here by focusing on 'lower' rather than 'abhi' Dhamma. A post like this one, showing so clearly how the two work together, is priceless to a remedial student like myself. Anumodanaa, Ma'am. mike p.s. Thanks also for your superb books. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > It is sati, not self > which realizes the danger of akusala. Sati, not paññaa? 5643 From: Dan Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 3:16am Subject: Re: right effort Good explanation, Nina. Thanks. And Mike: > It has occurred to me that my own posts have tended to > lower the overall quality of the material here by > focusing on 'lower' rather than 'abhi' Dhamma. Nonsense! If that kind of reasoning were true, Buddha would never have spoken much of the suttas, would never have used conventional language, and would never have spoken to householders. We delight in your words, Mike. Dan 5644 From: Lim Tai Eng. Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 0:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest Number 434 _ I would appreciate if you could email the e-file Beyond Belief by Bhante A.L De Silva. Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu. Metta LTE ----- Original Message ----- From: selamat Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 11:15 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest Number 434 _ > Dear Paul et. al. > > If you or someone need, we would deliver you personally (by direct email > address) an e-file "Beyond Belief" by bhante A.L. De Silva. He wrote the > book for the Buddhists whose saddha might be trembled by evangelist. It also > describe some Basic Important Buddhist concepts. Food for thought for > Christians and Buddhists who like selling the concept of "God" which we have > already realized that There is no God in the ultimate reality; although > "some/many Buddhists" have the concept. > > with metta, > dhamma study group bogor > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > > Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2001 9:03 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest Number > 434 _ > > > > Dear Loke, > > > > If your Christian friends believe what you are talking about is the doing > of > > Satan, then they probably will not listen to you. (Actually some early > > Christians, including Origen--one of the original Christian "Church > Fathers" > > believed that there are a succession of lives--that a soul reincarnates. > > Your friends probably don't know this. Unfortunately Origne's belief was > > later condemned by one of the Church councils--but he is still considered > one > > of the Church fathers. Also the Hassidic Jews believe in > > reincarnation--though whether their belief stems from the Judaism of > Jesus's > > period, or was a later addition from other sources, I do not know. In > India, > > where Buddha was born, reincarnation was already a long established > belief. > > However, the Buddha's teaching of rebirth, I think, goes well beyond that > > because he describes a moment to moment process as well as a life to life > > process. So maybe it is more important to explain the moment to moment > > process to your friends. > > > > From a logical point of view, the problem with the Christian concept of > > no-rebirth is that everything has to be decided in this life. Unless > > everyone goes to Heaven, some people will have to go to Hell permanently. > No > > rebirth logically leaves Christians with an Eternal Hell as punishment. > This > > is difficult to reconcile with a concept of an All-Loving God. Of course, > > they try to do so anyway, but I think it is a major weak point. > > > > I guess I wonder whether your friends are questioning you because (1) they > > are trying to convert you, (2) they like to argue, (3) they are giving you > a > > hard time, or (4) they have a sincere wish to learn about these things. > If > > they don't have a sincere wish, maybe it is better to steer the discussion > > onto what you have in common (principles of loving-kindness, morality, > etc.)? > > If they continue to try an argue, explain why arguing isn't very useful. > > > > Paul Bail > > > > From: "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > Subject: RE: Digest Number 434 > > > > Dear Pau Bail, > > > > Actually it was not debate.... maybe I put it wrongly > > however... people of Christian faiths question me about the rebirth... how > > then should I state this concept clearly and accurately as the Christians > > don't believe it and rather think it was something against God hence the > > doing of Satan.... I know for myself that rebirth is an imminent process > > till libration... but how do I put forth its concept and ideas and > > workings.... ? > > > > rgds, > > Loke CL > > 5645 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 3:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) Dan --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > > Enjoyed this post of yours with the story about your meditation > > teacher in Thailand. I had not realised (or had forgotten, if you > > have mentioned it before) that you have a Thailand connection. > > Do tell us more about it sometime. > > I did send Sarah a note about it a few months ago. You are welcome to > look at it if you'd like. If you have any other questions, I'd be > happy to discuss them with you. Thanks. I will dig it out some time. > > well as vipassana, I believe the suttas are not to be read in > > terms of conventional effort, ie, that that is not the meaning with > > which they were delivered. > > I think this is the heart of our disagreement. To me, one of the > amazing things about the teachings is their great depth and their > sensibility on so many levels. Buddha spoke to large and diverse > audiences, yet the discourses have things to offer all the listeners. > For example, in the anapansati sutta (MN 118), the Buddha addressed an > audience of Bhikkhus, whose development ranged from Arahantship to > non-Ariyan samatha meditators. What they had in common was an earnest > desire to learn Dhamma. The difference in level of understanding > between an Arahant and a non-Ariyan samatha meditator is immense > (unfathomable for the likes of me). Do you suppose the Buddha's words > would have the same meaning for all those different ears? I don't > believe it for a minute. I have no argument with this, Dan. I agree that the discourses are intended to have meaning at different levels, for listeners of different levels of understanding. And I am sure we are all interested in understanding the suttas at the deepest level of which we are capable. But none of this is of any real use in ascertaining the meaning of a particular sutta or passage (eg. in the present discussion, what is meant by right effort). For that I think we need the commentaries and the abhidhamma. Do you agree that these texts represent the best source of information on this issue? Jon 5646 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 5:37pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's questions on westerners and rebirth CL I have something I think you might find of interest in your search for reasons why westerners become interested in Buddhism, and how they handle issues such as rebirth. The other day I received an email from a former colleague, now several years retired and living back in his home country. Since leaving Hong Kong he has become a Buddhist! He gives a short explanation, which I will quote below. It seems that the question of rebirth was quite central to his change of beliefs. The conversation he mentions was I think the only conversation I ever had with him on matters of religion, beliefs etc. Here is what he writes: I thought of it [Buddhism] as a curiosity until one day in Hong Kong. It was the day when I happened to be talking to you and I said something like - "Isn't it the Buddhists who believe in reincarnation?" And you said - "So do the Christians - in their way". That thought had such an effect on me that shortly afterwards I concluded that I wasn't a Christian. I went and got various books - mainly by Christmas Humphreys - and decided that his Theosophy or Buddhism made a great deal of sense - and that a lot of Buddhist ideas make a great deal of sense. Incidentally, I believe Voltaire once wrote - "It is no more surprising to be born twice than it is to be born once." So there's a first-hand account. Does it answer any questions for you? Jon --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Kirkpatrick [SMTP:robert] > > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 3:32 PM > > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: questions > > > > Especially when it comes to kamma and rebirth I try to make > > every effort to convince - if I think there is any chance of > > slowly bringing one around. > > There are five actions that inevitably lead one to avicci hell _ > > these are splitting the sangha, killing an arahant, wounding a > > Buddha, killing ones father or mother. However, these are rated > > as being less serious kamma than the wrong view that thinks life > > ends simply upon death- because this view denies kamma. One who > > holds this view is said to go to apaya. And it is also strong > > wrong view that particularly pertains to the simile of the > > turtle poking his head through the ring every hundred years. > > Devadatta wounded the buddha and split the sangha - however he > > didn't have strong wrong view and is predicted to become a > > pacceka buddha. > > > > We can see the danger of such views. Would one who believed in > > kamma and rebirth have bombed hiroshima. I read an interview > > with an abortion doctor who felt that he was acting heroically > > by doing so many (well-paid) abortions a day when it was an > > unpopular job. > > When I hear wrong view I really feel concerned for those that > > hold to it. They feel attached to their view and it may seem > > rude to disagree with another; but if we think of the > > consequences if they don't change it will motivate us to do > > anything we can to help. If we can't help that is fine- but we > > should be wary of any thinking that might hinder our compassion > > or slow our efforts to explain. > > I have consistently found that even when someone strongly > > disagrees about rebirth and kamma if one gives enough detailed > > explanantion a slight positive impact is made- just enough to > > dislodge a smidgen of clinging. This can be built on. Not only > > that but understanding kamma and vipaka is essential for any > > higher level of understanding - let alone satipatthana. > > robert > > > [Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)] robert I agree with your views ... and > I share your sentiment onthe subject... would you care to give example > of > the explanation used in detailed form..... to better convince the wrong > viewed party ?thank you in advance > > Loke CL > 5647 From: Ong Teng Kee Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 7:31pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books Dear Dan, I said the guide to patthana is a beginner book not the vol 1 text.It is not a must to study patthana in negative ,positive,dukapatthana,tikapatthana from 6 0r 5 vol of patthana.We need to study patthana as mentioned in visuddhimagga magga which is enough for us .i cannot remember all the numbers in VM until now.I think to study Yamaka and dhatukatha is enough for us.Yamaka already been translted in Myanmar (Eng).It is printed in Malaysia for free but I cannot get any set for you at this moment. -----Original Message----- From: Dan Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 12:00:45 -0000 Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books > Thanks for the explanation, Teng Kee. Clearly, I'm not quite ready > for vol. 2 (probably not vol. 1 yet either, but since you > say "beginner" book, there may be hope!). But vol. 2 still seems much > less cryptic than Patthana itself. > > Dan > > > Narada also wrote guide to patthana vol.2 but not published by PTS > (pts have vol 1 only and two patthana text tran by him).I have the > vol 2 printed in Myanmar which have tran. from Mulatika and anutika > with charts,it is thicker than vol.1 which is just a beginner book. > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sarah Procter Abbott > > Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2001 20:03:32 +0800 (CST) > > > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Request for Books > > > > > > > Dan, > > > > > > I just took this from the PTS website. > > > , > > > Pali Text Society, Ancillary Works, Paperbacks > > > ... in paperback. Guide to Conditional Relations, Ven. U Narada, > Vol. I, 1979 > > > ISBN 198 X £23.50 Tape ca... > > > 99.9% URL: http://www.palitext.demon.co.uk/pdf_ver.pdf > > > > > > my copy is hard copy but also 1979. > > > > > > It's a guide to the 1st 12 pages of the Patthana (and a LOT > easier to read or > > > refer to, I find). > > > > > > (This is not to be confused with 'The Guide', translation of > Nettipakarana by > > > Ven Nanamoli and also v.useful0 > > > > > > > > > --- Dan wrote: > > As Rob said, this Guide is very clear > > > and helpful indeed. You'll > > > > find it in the > > > > > PTS catalogue and i'm sure it's not too expensive as it's > pretty > > > > slim. Hey, > > > > > > > > Oh my! What did I just check out of the library then? First I > learn > > > > that there are TWO Narada's that write great Abhidhamma books, > and > > > > then I learn that there must be TWO Narada "Guides" because the > one I > > > > have is quite thick and out of print! I will indeed have to > look at > > > > the PTS edition too. Thanks! > > > > > > Hmm..I don't know what your Narada Guide is..maybe the same and > another > > > edition..? The one above only has 240 pages. > > > > > > Erik, if you take the plunge and order from PTS, remember to > become a member, > > > get yr discount and nominated free book for the year. > > > > > > S. 5648 From: Dan Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: Request for Books Thanks for more good suggestions, Teng Kee. > I said the guide to patthana is a beginner book not the vol 1 text. Right. >I think to study Yamaka and dhatukatha is enough for us.Yamaka already been translted in Myanmar (Eng).It is printed in Malaysia for free but I cannot get any set for you at this moment. > I did not know of the Yamaka translation. I've read a few lines of Yamaka, and it certainly was be more interesting than C.A.F. Rhys Davids' "valley of dry bones" comment about it would suggest. I'm glad to hear of an endorsement of the value of this little-read book. These books out of Myanmar are difficult to attain in the U.S., but now I have something to try to track down. Dan 5649 From: Dan Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 7:57pm Subject: Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) > I have no argument with this, Dan. I agree that the discourses are > intended to have meaning at different levels, for listeners of different > levels of understanding. And I am sure we are all interested in > understanding the suttas at the deepest level of which we are capable. O.K., good. I agree. > But none of this is of any real use in ascertaining the meaning of a > particular sutta or passage (eg. in the present discussion, what is meant > by right effort). For that I think we need the commentaries and the > abhidhamma. Do you agree that these texts represent the best source of > information on this issue? I still think a chase for THE real meaning of the discourses is risky because it the natural outcome is an attitude of "This is the only right way. All other ways are wrong"--something we must be on guard against at all times. I find the commentaries and Abhidhamma of great help in bringing out deeper and deeper meanings. I also find your penchant for always aiming at higher and higher levels of understanding refreshing and helpful as well. Dan 5650 From: Erik Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) --- Dan wrote: > I still think a chase for THE real meaning of the discourses is risky > because it the natural outcome is an attitude of "This is the only > right way. All other ways are wrong"--something we must be on guard > against at all times. In keeping with the Four Ties (from the Abhidhammattha Sangaha): "(iv) There are four (bodily) Ties (5): 1. Covetousness, 2. Ill will, 3. Adherence to rites and ceremonies, 4. Dogmatic belief that 'this alone is truth'." Speaking of #3 (for our Thai contingent here), I got a big kick out of this article: http://www.bangkokpost.com/newindex/today/160601_news03.html 5653 From: wynn Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 10:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd:Questions) Hi Robert, You wrote: > After the scandal with Phra yantra (who was once > thought to an arahant) it seems like Thais are now realising > that arahants are not as common as some believed. Tell me what you think about Phra Yantra after reading this. Personally, I think maybe he is innocent after all. ===== From The Buddhist Council of New South Wales http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/Teaching_1.htm http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/index.htm U.S.A. JUDGE RULES THAI BUDDHIST MONK FACES PERSECUTION IN THAILAND http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/AjahnYantra.htm The Background to the Ajahn Yantra Conspiracy http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/AjahnYantra_1.htm http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:A7k6homchR8:www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/phra .htm+Phra+Yantra&hl=en ===== http://www.jps.net/sunnataram/ http://www.jps.net/sunnataram/recovery/index.html 5654 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 0:16am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd:Questions) Dear Wyn, I met Phra yantra and spent a whole day with him (we went to a secluded beach with some other monks in a van). It is a very long story. I didn't even try to reach a conclusion about it all. I will say that the urls you give here give an very one-sided picture. I feel exactly the same way now toward him as before the scandal- which is to say he seemed a friendly enough monk. he was held out to be an arahant by so many though - and the people who worshipped him were the very ones who now despise him. Life's like that. robert --- wynn wrote: > Hi Robert, > > You wrote: > > > After the scandal with Phra yantra (who was once > > thought to an arahant) it seems like Thais are now realising > > that arahants are not as common as some believed. > > > > Tell me what you think about Phra Yantra after reading this. > Personally, I think maybe he is innocent after all. > > ===== > > From The Buddhist Council of New South Wales > http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/Teaching_1.htm > http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/index.htm > > U.S.A. JUDGE RULES THAI BUDDHIST MONK FACES PERSECUTION IN > THAILAND > http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/AjahnYantra.htm > > The Background to the Ajahn Yantra Conspiracy > http://www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/AjahnYantra_1.htm > > http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:A7k6homchR8:www.zip.com.au/~lyallg/phra > .htm+Phra+Yantra&hl=en > > ===== > > http://www.jps.net/sunnataram/ > http://www.jps.net/sunnataram/recovery/index.html > 5655 From: Howard Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 9:16pm Subject: Ledi Sayadaw Hi, Abhidhamma Experts! I have begun to read the following work, which I am finding pleasant: ************************************* The Patthanuddesa Dipani The Buddhist Philosophy of Relations by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw, Aggamahapandita, D.Litt. ********************************************** Could any of you let me have your opinion about Ledi Sayadaw and his work? I would appreciate it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5656 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 1:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ledi Sayadaw His work is excellent. Check out his work on Vipassana, too... "Manual of Insight"... I think? Metta... ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 1:16 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ledi Sayadaw > Hi, Abhidhamma Experts! > > I have begun to read the following work, which I am finding pleasant: > ************************************* > The Patthanuddesa Dipani > > The Buddhist Philosophy of Relations > > by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw, Aggamahapandita, D.Litt. > ********************************************** > Could any of you let me have your opinion about Ledi Sayadaw and his > work? I would appreciate it. > > With metta, > Howard > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) > 5657 From: Num Date: Sat Jun 16, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: In my opinion Hi Herman, Kom and all, Herman, I am really entertained by your questions and the way you study reality. > I do not know whether I know all the qualities. How will I know when > I do? I know some qualities, I think, but I do not know whether I am > deluded about them, ignorant or whatever. I know what other people > say is kusala or akusala, but this isn't self-evident. The reality I > am aware of is "x says this is kusala" not "x is kusala". When there > is anger, there are conditions for anger. To then label that as > akusala adds nothing except inhibition and the feeling that this > anger is not acceptable, that it should not be, while the reality is > that it just is. If you are aware of anger then you are aware of > anger. \ > > > Good and bad and in between are not absolutes, they are > relative to a goal, a purpose. What is good for one person in one > situation is bad for another. Over time I can start to believe that > by smiling a lot I am influencing the course of the universe in a > positive way. But am I ? And is that my goal?>>>> I think this is an excellent question. At times I think, I can answer myself clearly but moha or ignorance is enormous for me to penetrate through. At times, I still doubt about this kind of circumstances. I'd like to share my opinion that kusala or akusala is self-evident. Thing isn't kusala or akusala b/c someone calls it that way or akusala cannot be kusala even if someone keep telling us that it is. Even the Buddha cannot change it's nature, reality is reality. Dhamma or reality is real, the name or how we call it cannot change it's quality. We still need concept for thinking and communication though. Let me bring up the Piyajatika sutta "From the one who is dear", http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn087.html. The Buddha said this to the householder who his son just passed away, "'That's the way it is, householder. That's the way it is -- for sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are born from one who is dear, come springing from one who is dear.'" The householder was not delight in the buddha's words, he went on and share what he heard with the group of gamblers who also did not agree with what the buddha said. Well, I can admit that at time I agree with the gambler not the Buddha. The reason, I like this sutta and brought it up because I am too, when I run into some situations or activities, I ask myself is it kusala or akusala. Is playing tennis, jogging, biking, bird watching, traveling or even studying kusala or it's akusala? One of my friends asked me if I saw a man pointing a rifle to a big group of school kids and it happens that I have a gun in my pocket, would I shoot that man to save hundreds of kids. Kusula/akusula is not the same as right or wrong in conventional sense. In the States we drive on the right, in Thailand I drive on the left. My friend said that I drive on the wrong side, I told him that I drive on the left side not a wrong side. Let me paste another quote from Nina's books, Abhidhamma in Daily Life and Cetasikas : _____________________________________________________________________ We should know the difference between kusala and akusala. The 'Atthasalini (Book I, Part I, Ch.1, 38) speaks about the meaning of the word 'kusala'. The word 'kusala' has many meanings; it can mean 'of good health', 'faultless', 'skillful', 'productive of happy results'. When we perform dana (generosity), sila (morality) and bhavana (mental development), the citta is kusala. All different kinds of wholesomeness such as the appreciation of other people’s good deeds, helping others, politeness, paving respect, observing the precepts, studying and teaching Dhamma, samatha (tranquil meditation) and vipassana (development of ‘insight’), are included in dana, sila or bhavana. Kusala is ‘productive of happy results'; each good deed will bring a pleasant result. The 'Atthasalini' (Book I, Part I, Ch.I, 39) states about akusala: 'Akusala' means 'not kusala'. Just as the opposite to friendship is enmity, or the opposite to greed, etc,. is disinterestedness, etc., so 'akusala' is opposed to 'kusala'... Unwholesome deeds will bring unhappy results. Nobody wishes to experience an unhappy result, but many people are ignorant about the cause which brings an unhappy result, about akusala. They do not realize when the citta is unwholesome and they do not always know when they perform unwholesome deeds. ____________________________________________________________________ Only these three mental phenomena when arise with citta, will cause that citta become akusala in nature, : Moha (delusion, ignorance) has characteristic of blindness or opposition to knowledge; the essence of non-penetration, or function of covering the intrinsic nature of object; the manifestation of being opposed to right practice or causing blindness; the proximate cause of unwise attention, and should be regarded as the root of all defilements. Lobha(clinging or attachment): ...lobha has the characteristic of grasping an object, like birdlime (lit. 'monkey lime'). Its function is sticking, like meat put in a hot pan. It is manifested as not giving up, like the dye of lampblack. Its proximate cause is seeing enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. Swelling with the current of craving, it should be regarded as taking (beings) with it to states of loss, as a swift-flowing river does to the great ocean and Dosa (aversion): ..It has flying into anger or churlishness as characteristic, like a smitten snake; spreading of itself or writhing as when poison takes effect, as function; or, burning that on which it depends as function, like a jungle-fire; offending or injuring as manifestation, like a foe who has got his chance; having the ground of vexation as proximate cause, like urine mixed with poison. ________________________________________________________________________ I think all three are hard to really see and be aware of. I always take akusala for being kusala. Wrong view is very pervasive. Dosa ; if it's intensity is pretty severe may be easily observed b/c it always occurs with unpleasant feeling. Lobha can arise with neutral or pleasant feeling or even happiness or satisfaction (piti) and we usually like that feeling or state of emotion. Thinking of these realities is different from being aware of or understanding of the reality. These 3 realities have their own immediate effects as well as future effects. We don't have to wait their future effects. Trying to suppress them without really understanding them, we may block them for a while. Smatha will block these temporary, like when you a rock on top of the grass, it will stop growing, but as soon as you remove the stone, the grass will re-grow again. Come back to the question, that what kind of activity is kusala or akusala. Again, thinking is not a real moment of awareness. Citta is very fast. When I play tennis, series of perception, different kinds of citta, feeling and emotion happens. Kusala can happen in the middle of long series of unawareness of reality. Nobody else can tell, what kind of citta(kusala, akusala or others) arise at that moment. We can guess or think about it if we are not aware of it. I don't think I really answer your question, just like to share my opinion. Best wishes, Num 5658 From: Dan Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 8:02am Subject: Re: Ledi Sayadaw Hi Howard, Ledi Sayadaw was the teacher of your teacher's teacher. Smart guy. Dan > Hi, Abhidhamma Experts! > > I have begun to read the following work, which I am finding pleasant: > ************************************* > The Patthanuddesa Dipani > > The Buddhist Philosophy of Relations > > by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw, Aggamahapandita, D.Litt. > ********************************************** > Could any of you let me have your opinion about Ledi Sayadaw and his > work? I would appreciate it. > > With metta, > Howard > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) > 5659 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 8:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ledi Sayadaw Dear Howard, Ledi sayadaw is very good on many aspects of Dhamma - especially his writing conditions samvega (urgency)- some great stuff on the dangers of samsara. Then agan you can find bits and pieces where he departs from the ancient tradition at times - whether he is right or wrong in those places has been a matter of great debate. robert --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Abhidhamma Experts! > > I have begun to read the following work, which I am > finding pleasant: > ************************************* > The Patthanuddesa Dipani > > The Buddhist Philosophy of Relations > > by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw, Aggamahapandita, D.Litt. > ********************************************** > Could any of you let me have your opinion about Ledi > Sayadaw and his > work? I would appreciate it. > > With metta, > Howard > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at > dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a > flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5660 From: Howard Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 4:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Ledi Sayadaw Hi, Robert - In a message dated 6/16/01 8:42:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time, robert writes: > Dear Howard, > Ledi sayadaw is very good on many aspects of Dhamma - especially > his writing conditions samvega (urgency)- some great stuff on > the dangers of samsara. Then agan you can find bits and pieces > where he departs from the ancient tradition at times - whether > he is right or wrong in those places has been a matter of great > debate. > robert > ========================== Thanks a lot for your quick reply. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5661 From: wynn Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 11:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re:Fwd:Questions) Hi, Only Ajahn Yantra knows whether he was guilty or innocent. There was a concerted effort by the Thai Government to discredit him and a lot of the evidence that they produced was proven to be false. An example was the woman who was supposed to be the mother of his nine year old child. She later admitted that she was paid to make this claim. Another was the credit card vouchers supposedly used by him in a Melbourne massage parlour. the address on the credit slips for the parlour were of their new address - several years after Ajahn Yantra was in Melbourne. ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2001 12:16 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re:Fwd:Questions) > Dear Wyn, > I met Phra yantra and spent a whole day with him (we went to a > secluded beach with some other monks in a van). It is a very > long story. I didn't even try to reach a conclusion about it > all. I will say that the urls you give here give an very > one-sided picture. I feel exactly the same way now toward him as > before the scandal- which is to say he seemed a friendly enough > monk. > he was held out to be an arahant by so many though - and the > people who worshipped him were the very ones who now despise > him. Life's like that. > robert 5662 From: Herman Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 4:06pm Subject: Re: In my opinion Dear Num, Thank you for your reply. I would like to make some comments on one section of your reply. I have delted the rest for the sake of brevity. --- Num wrote: > Hi Herman, Kom and all, > Let me paste another quote from Nina's books, Abhidhamma > in Daily Life and Cetasikas : > > _____________________________________________________________________ > > We should know the difference between kusala and akusala. The 'Atthasalini > (Book I, Part I, Ch.1, 38) speaks about the meaning of the word 'kusala'. The > word 'kusala' has many meanings; it can mean 'of good health', 'faultless', > 'skillful', 'productive of happy results'. When we perform dana > (generosity), sila (morality) and bhavana (mental development), the citta is > kusala. All different kinds of wholesomeness such as the appreciation of > other people’s good deeds, helping others, politeness, paving respect, > observing the precepts, studying and teaching Dhamma, samatha (tranquil > meditation) and vipassana (development of ‘insight’), are included in dana, > sila or bhavana. Kusala is ‘productive of happy results'; each good deed will > bring a pleasant result. The 'Atthasalini' (Book I, Part I, Ch.I, 39) states > about akusala: > > 'Akusala' means 'not kusala'. Just as the opposite to friendship is enmity, > or the opposite to greed, etc,. is disinterestedness, etc., so 'akusala' is > opposed to 'kusala'... > > Unwholesome deeds will bring unhappy results. Nobody wishes to experience an > unhappy result, but many people are ignorant about the cause which brings an > unhappy result, about akusala. They do not realize when the citta is > unwholesome and they do not always know when they perform unwholesome deeds. > > Best wishes, > > Num > From these definitions it would appear that only from a result can it be known if a deed or thought was kusala or akusala. And therefore there needs to be knowledge of what caused what, and that is just guesswork for me, or a matter of belief at best. Each breath keeps me alive. Is it akusala to breathe because it is sustaining akusala activity? I had terrible feelings of guilt when my first son was born. I took the responsibility of his existence on my shoulders. I had caused it. ( a bit conceited, isn't it)All the pain and suffering and ill that would ever come upon him and his children was my fault, and all the good things as well. I don't think that way anymore. I have the privilege of two wonderful children, and they have taught me more than any one else. And they weren't even trying. All the best to you Num Herman 5663 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 8:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) Dan --- Dan wrote: > > > I still think a chase for THE real meaning of the discourses is risky > because it the natural outcome is an attitude of "This is the only > right way. All other ways are wrong"--something we must be on guard > against at all times. Thanks for this reminder (something familiar to those in academic circles, I'm sure!). However, I'm not sure it is correct to associate this attitude particularly with a deepening knowledge of the dhamma. Is it not more a matter of an individual's predispositions/accumulated tendencies? Someone with little or no understanding could be as prone to it as anyone else. If right understanding is developed, the effect should be to the contrary. I accept of course that we never come to know the *real* meaning of a discourse, even though we may sometimes talk in those terms. We can only ever hope to understand the teachings at the level we are currently capable of and not more. We should not forget that that level is beginner's level (speaking for myself, anyway). Jon 5664 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 8:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Dan Sorry, it's me again. [Jon] > > You make a very direct connection between the practice of samatha > and the > > arising of moments of insight. If I understand correctly, that > connection > > is supported by the following reasoning: > > - the hindrances 'weaken' insight > > - the hindrances are (temporally) suppressed by the development of > > samatha > > - therefore by developing samatha and suppressing the hindrances, > (and > > not otherwise,??) insight can arise. > > > > While I have absolutely no disagreement with the first 2 > propositions, the > > 3rd is one of those persuasively 'logical' conclusions that however > is > > not, in my view, how the teachings are to be read. [Dan] > I don't think this is what Erik is saying at all. Insight does not > arise BY samatha and suppressing the hindrances. However, samatha and > suppressing the hindrances can condition a STRENTGTHENING of insight > by allowing a clearer view to realities I take your point here, Dan. It does read as though I was suggesting that. What I in fact was trying to indicate was that, according to this reasoning, insight is much more likely to arise, (or perhaps could only arise,) in close temporal proximity to the practice of samatha, or in one who regularly practices samatha, the reason being that at such times the hindrances are in a subdued state from the influence of the samatha. (I think in subsequent posts you have both indicated that while the practice of samatha is not regarded as absolutely essential, it is certainly a great influence for the better when it comes to insight.) I have been looking at quite a few passages on the hindrances lately. I have yet to come across anything that makes a connection between suppression of the hindrances by samatha and the development of satipatthana/arising of insight. If you or Erik have anything along these lines I would be interested to see it. Jon --- Dan wrote: > Jon > > Erik: > > > Jonothan, I believe you're missing one thing here. When one does > > > samatha and uses that as a basis for vipassana, the effects carry > > > over into every activity outside of formal meditation. The > hindrances > > > may only be suppressed to a high degree during actual samatha & > > > jhana. However, the side-effects of samatha & vipassana continue > > > during all hours. The mind is "armored" against afflictions > because > > > of its increased mindfulness and mental clarity. The mind remains > > > more or less in equanimity at all times--or at least a whole lot > more > > > than it would otherwise, and that is a very good thing, because > > > kusala & akusala are mutually exclusive, and this signifies that > one > > > is creating more kusala than one would be otherwise. > > Jon: > > You make a very direct connection between the practice of samatha > and the > > arising of moments of insight. If I understand correctly, that > connection > > is supported by the following reasoning: > > - the hindrances 'weaken' insight > > - the hindrances are (temporally) suppressed by the development of > > samatha > > - therefore by developing samatha and suppressing the hindrances, > (and > > not otherwise,??) insight can arise. > > > > While I have absolutely no disagreement with the first 2 > propositions, the > > 3rd is one of those persuasively 'logical' conclusions that however > is > > not, in my view, how the teachings are to be read. > > I don't think this is what Erik is saying at all. Insight does not > arise BY samatha and suppressing the hindrances. However, samatha and > suppressing the hindrances can condition a STRENTGTHENING of insight > by allowing a clearer view to realities. To emphasize the first > point: Even when samatha lifts a fog, sati and vipassana might still > keep their eyes closed. When the fog is lifted, the landscape can be > viewed with wisdom or not. > > Jon: > > Speaking for myself, there is no resistance whatsoever to the > development > > of samatha. But my own views as to what that development is, and > the role > > that samatha plays, may differ markedly from your own, Erik. I do > perhaps > > disagree with many of the claims that are made regarding samatha, > but am > > happy to discuss the subject any time. > > You are right to disagree with many claims made about samatha, but > are your assumptions about what Erik is saying and what I am saying > are just what you think we are saying? > > Dan > 5665 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 10:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] seeing the danger of akusala op 15-06-2001 20:37 schreef m. nease op m. nease: > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > >> It is sati, not self >> which realizes the danger of akusala. > > Sati, not pa~n~naa? > Dear Mike, There are different levels of realizing the danger of akusala. Sati is non-forgetful of kusala, and it is heedful, it prevents akusala. As you can read in the "Expositor", sati searches well the courses of dhammas, advantageous and disadvantageous:-< these states are advantageous, those disadvantageous, these states are serviceable, those not serviceable>- and then removes the disadvatageous and takes up the advantageous>. In the Questions of King Milinda (Book II, under sati) sati is compared to a confidential adviser of the King, instructing him in good and evil: And thus the king makes the evil in himself die out, and keeps up the good. There can be the observing of sila without pa~n~naa. It is sati which keeps one from evil, it is non-forgetful, heedful. There are also other wholesome cetasikas which perform their task such as shame,hiri, which shrinks back from evil and fear of blame, ottappa, there is confidence in kusala, saddhaa, there are many other sobhana cetasikas, each performing their own function. In the case of abstaining from evil deeds, the cetasikas which are the abstentions (virati cetasikas) perform their functions. They all realize the danger of akusala, but each in their own way, performing their own function. Khun Sujin gave once an example of someone who was about to speak an angry word, she had opened her mouth, but sati kept her from speaking and thus she did not speak. When I was at the very beginning to learn the Dhamma and speaking about abstaining from alcohol, Khun Sujin said:. This impressed me very much, I had not looked at it that that way. As I said, there are different levels of seeing the danger of akusala, sila can also be observed without pa~n~naa. Would one abstain from killing if one had not realized its danger and disadvantage? But pa~n~naa, understanding, clearly knows the characteristic of kusala and akusala, which can be intellectual understanding, considering. When it has been developed by satipatthana,it can be direct understanding of the true nature of kusala and akusala as non-self. Understanding can be developed so that it becomes lokuttara pa~n~naa, supramundane understanding which eradicates defilements stage by stage. It can become understanding which sees evermore the danger even of subtle clinging, and of moments without awareness. Understanding is the condition for the accompanying wholesome cetasikas to prevent the arising of akusala, to be heedful as to the six doorways. For example, hiri, shame, can shrink back also from more subtle defilements, it can be shame of moments of forgetfulness of nama and rupa.Thus, understanding is the condition for realizing ever more deeply the danger of akusala. It conditions all the accompanying cetasikas to be more effective in the performing of their tasks. It is amazing how all the cetasikas work together. If the Buddha had not taught this we would never have known, and considering this is Buddhanusati, a meditation subject of samatha in daily life. It can come very naturally. When we begin to be mindful of a nama or rupa, there can be Buddhanusati. I was very glad Robert reminded us in one of his posts about meditation subjects of samatha in daily life, such as Dhammanusati. He quoted from Khun Sujin's book Wholesome Deeds I had translated, and even when something I have translated has been quoted, it is again a special reminder for me. I am grateful for any reminder. Nina. 5666 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 11:12pm Subject: Re: In my opinion Dear Herman, --- Herman wrote: > > Do you believe in conditions, and the result of those conditions? > Do you > > *know* as it really is that in order for a dhamma to arise, there > *must* be > > condition for it to arise? K. Sujin has mentioned that rebirth > may be > > absolutely provable at one's death. > > Yes, I believe in conditions, and the results of those conditions, > and that all dhammas arise because of conditions. I also believe the > conditions are unknowable, meaning neither causes or results can be > fully known. Play a game of chess, and try and predict what the board Are they truly unknowable even at the intellectual understanding? We hear that in order to see, there must be the following conditions: 1) Eyesense - you can't see if you are blind 2) Consciousness - you can't see if you are asleep 3) Something to see 4) Enough light Without those, seeing doesn't occur. I think many (although not all, certainly not for me!) conditions can't be thought of in this particular manner. For example, the grasping to the 5 sense objects---visible object, sound, taste, smell, tactile objects---can only occur if there are contact of the mind and the sense objects, and also the feelings that co-arise with such experiences. Are these causes-results purely just faith for you or does it make sense for you as well? I have faith that at some level along the path, that some of these elementary (not all that is taught) relationship will turn into "this is proven for me" because of direct experiences. My confidence in the teaching increases ever so slightly each time I notice (not even at the satipathana level) something that match the teachings. > will look like after one, two, three moves. Or try and determine the > moves that caused the current state of the board. Impossible. With > such a simple state of affairs , 2 players with sixteen or fewer > pieces each you need to cover billions of permutations. How much more > complex is this present reality, with infinite causes which are the > result of infinite causes which are the result of infinite causes. As far as the 24 conditions expounded in Abhidhamma, I would certainly agree with you. As I understand how realities condition one another, how one reality (such as panna) arises is enormously complex that it may appear to somebody as being very close to random. I don't think even if we become enlightened that these conditions will be fully known---I have heard this is in the realm of the Buddha's panna only. On the other hand, if you agree with me in some of the points made above, we would both agree that things don't just arise in a random fashion. There must be specific causes in order to have specific effects. It just happens that the Buddha indicates that kamma is one of these causes in many phenomenons, even if it is not absolutely proveable to you and I yet. > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over > them. I > > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know > pain, > > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom of > my > > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the sensations > at > > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, > conceit. > > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala or > > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are > kusala > > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know it > is > > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. Nina and Num have discussed what is akusala recently. My brief understanding is that that they are qualities, if developed, bring only unhappy results. But yet we are not masters of causes and results, so we cannot draw such conclusion ourself. However, the Buddha said this, I believe it, and it makes sense to me. With that state of mind, then I can study what are the different qualities and characteristics of the different akusala realities, even just so as I know what is meant by kusala and akusala, and what I believe will bring good or bad results. > Because of the complexity of infinite causes, how can I know that > this thought caused that result, this action caused that feeling? I I think we can only draw conclusion in simple cases. > really do not have the ability to make those discernments. I know "x > says this is good, x says this is bad" I do not know "this is good, > that is bad". Good and bad and in between are not absolutes, they are > relative to a goal, a purpose. What is good for one person in one > situation is bad for another. Over time I can start to believe that > by smiling a lot I am influencing the course of the universe in a > positive way. But am I ? And is that my goal? I believe there are absolute qualities of those realities, even if the are heavily conditioned by the co-arising realities and other pre-arising realities. I also believe that those qualties bring results. Although I think there are many goals that people pursue when studying Buddhism, but I think one result that is unique to Buddhism only, the end of all suffering, is a worthwhile goal to have. > Kusala and akusala are tied to whatever goal is trying to be > achieved. This may be trying to feel good or avoiding feeling bad, or > escaping from Samsara or realising Nibbana or getting of the wheel of > rebirths or whatever. How is it that we set out on a journey when we > wouldn't recognise the destination if we tripped over it? And how is > it that we "know" exactly what tools , what means , will get us to > this destination? As I believe that there are absolute qualities of realities that can be observed, it's the only way to prove it to ourself whether or not something is what we think it is or not. This doesn't mean that one can prove everything, but it means that the most important things will be provable. I categorises my "faith" in Buddhism into three different categories: 1) faith arising because of the teaching's self-consistency, 2) faith arising because it makes sense to me based on my personal experiences/pre- disposition, and 3) faith arising because the realities can be experienced/proven now. If you call all these things as being pure faith, then so be it. kom 5667 From: Howard Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 7:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ledi Sayadaw Hi, Dan - In a message dated 6/17/01 2:35:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Dan writes: > Hi Howard, > Ledi Sayadaw was the teacher of your teacher's teacher. Smart guy. > > Dan > ========================== Hmm, interesting! Thanks. Surprising, though - the monk whom I see is Thai, not Burmese. Of course, they are bordering countries, so it is understandable. (I would've talked to "my monk", Maha Wan, about the Sayadaw, but Maha Wan is currently in Thailand.) Thanks again for the info, Dan. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5668 From: Dan Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 0:05am Subject: Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) > I accept of course that we never come to know the *real* meaning of a > discourse, even though we may sometimes talk in those terms. I don't think there is ONE real meaning. It seems that the discourses have meanings on several levels and that they were intended to have meanings on several levels. To choose the level at which you happen to be thinking of at a given time as THE meaning and that the other levels of meaning are WRONG is a danger. > We can only > ever hope to understand the teachings at the level we are currently > capable of and not more. We should not forget that that level is > beginner's level (speaking for myself, anyway). So the level you are thinking of is "beginner's level". Do people who do not have the depth of understanding that you have, then have NO understanding, not even a beginner's understanding and are therefore just plain wrong? Dan 5669 From: Dan Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 0:14am Subject: Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] > (I think in subsequent posts you have both indicated that while the > practice of samatha is not regarded as absolutely essential, it is > certainly a great influence for the better when it comes to insight.) Again, Jon, I don't think you follow our argument (or mine, anyway). Samatha is NOT NECESSARILY a great influence for the better when it comes to insight, but it CAN BE a great influence. > I have been looking at quite a few passages on the hindrances lately. I > have yet to come across anything that makes a connection between > suppression of the hindrances by samatha and the development of > satipatthana/arising of insight. If you or Erik have anything along these > lines I would be interested to see it. Only the ones I posted earlier along with the logic that if the arising of hindrances weaken insight, then it makes sense that by the non-arising, insight may be strenghtened. Also, Buddha frequently speaks approvingly of development of samatha and even makes direct and explicit exhortations to his disciples to practice samatha (e.g. MN 152). Why practice? Because it feels good? I don't think so! Because it can be a tool for strengthening insight. 5670 From: Dan Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 0:17am Subject: Re: seeing the danger of akusala Dear Nina, You posts are a great addition to the group. I'm very grateful you are here. Dan --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 15-06-2001 20:37 schreef m. nease op "m. nease":> > > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > >> It is sati, not self > >> which realizes the danger of akusala. > > > > Sati, not pa~n~naa? > > > Dear Mike, There are different levels of realizing the danger of akusala. > Sati is non-forgetful of kusala, and it is heedful, it prevents akusala. As > you can read in the "Expositor", sati searches well the courses of dhammas, > advantageous and disadvantageous:-< these states are advantageous, those > disadvantageous, these states are serviceable, those not serviceable>- and > then removes the disadvatageous and takes up the advantageous>. In the > Questions of King Milinda (Book II, under sati) sati is compared to a > confidential adviser of the King, instructing him in good and evil: things are bad for the king and these good, these helpful and these are the > reverse.> And thus the king makes the evil in himself die out, and keeps up > the good. > There can be the observing of sila without pa~n~naa. It is sati which keeps > one from evil, it is non-forgetful, heedful. There are also other wholesome > cetasikas which perform their task such as shame,hiri, which shrinks back > from evil and fear of blame, ottappa, there is confidence in kusala, > saddhaa, there are many other sobhana cetasikas, each performing their own > function. In the case of abstaining from evil deeds, the cetasikas which are > the abstentions (virati cetasikas) perform their functions. They all realize > the danger of akusala, but each in their own way, performing their own > function. > Khun Sujin gave once an example of someone who was about to speak an angry > word, she had opened her mouth, but sati kept her from speaking and thus she > did not speak. When I was at the very beginning to learn the Dhamma and > speaking about abstaining from alcohol, Khun Sujin said: abstains, it is sati that keeps you from drinking>. This impressed me very > much, I had not looked at it that that way. > As I said, there are different levels of seeing the danger of akusala, sila > can also be observed without pa~n~naa. Would one abstain from killing if one > had not realized its danger and disadvantage? But pa~n~naa, understanding, > clearly knows the characteristic of kusala and akusala, which can be > intellectual understanding, considering. When it has been developed by > satipatthana,it can be direct understanding of the true nature of kusala and > akusala as non-self. Understanding can be developed so that it becomes > lokuttara pa~n~naa, supramundane understanding which eradicates defilements > stage by stage. It can become understanding which sees evermore the danger > even of subtle clinging, and of moments without awareness. Understanding is > the condition for the accompanying wholesome cetasikas to prevent the > arising of akusala, to be heedful as to the six doorways. For example, hiri, > shame, can shrink back also from more subtle defilements, it can be shame of > moments of forgetfulness of nama and rupa.Thus, understanding is the > condition for realizing ever more deeply the danger of akusala. It > conditions all the accompanying cetasikas to be more effective in the > performing of their tasks. > It is amazing how all the cetasikas work together. If the Buddha had not > taught this we would never have known, and considering this is Buddhanusati, > a meditation subject of samatha in daily life. It can come very naturally. > When we begin to be mindful of a nama or rupa, there can be Buddhanusati. I > was very glad Robert reminded us in one of his posts about meditation > subjects of samatha in daily life, such as Dhammanusati. He quoted from Khun > Sujin's book Wholesome Deeds I had translated, and even when something I > have translated has been quoted, it is again a special reminder for me. I am > grateful for any reminder. > Nina. 5671 From: Dan Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: Ledi Sayadaw > Hmm, interesting! Thanks. Surprising, though - the monk whom I see is > Thai, not Burmese. Of course, they are bordering countries, so it is > understandable. (I would've talked to "my monk", Maha Wan, about the Sayadaw, > but Maha Wan is currently in Thailand.) Thanks again for the info, Dan. I'm sorry, Howard. I was talking about Ledi => U Ba Khin => Goenka, mistakenly assuming you were a follower of Goenka. "Never assume anything!" 5672 From: Howard Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 8:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon] Hi, Jon (and Dan) - In a message dated 6/17/01 8:58:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > I take your point here, Dan. It does read as though I was suggesting > that. > > What I in fact was trying to indicate was that, according to this > reasoning, insight is much more likely to arise, (or perhaps could only > arise,) in close temporal proximity to the practice of samatha, or in one > who regularly practices samatha, the reason being that at such times the > hindrances are in a subdued state from the influence of the samatha. > > (I think in subsequent posts you have both indicated that while the > practice of samatha is not regarded as absolutely essential, it is > certainly a great influence for the better when it comes to insight.) > > I have been looking at quite a few passages on the hindrances lately. I > have yet to come across anything that makes a connection between > suppression of the hindrances by samatha and the development of > satipatthana/arising of insight. If you or Erik have anything along these > lines I would be interested to see it. > > Jon > > ======================================= I am appending five suttas obtained from the Access to insight site that have some bearing on this, I believe. I will comment a bit on the last two of these, which I take take to be the most definitive on this issue: #1 Anguttara Nikaya II.29 Vijja-bhagiya Sutta A Share in Clear Knowing Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. "These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana). "When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned. "When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- #2 Anguttara Nikaya IV.170 Yuganaddha Sutta In Tandem Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it -- his fetters are abandoned, his latent tendencies abolished. "Whoever -- monk or nun -- declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- #3 Anguttara Nikaya IV.94 Samadhi Sutta Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. "Monks, these four types of individuals are to be found existing in world. Which four? "There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment and ask him: 'How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "As for the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness, he should approach an individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness...and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "As for the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, he should approach an individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment...and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated? How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way. Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "As for the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, his duty is to make an effort in establishing ('tuning') those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the (mental) fermentations. "These are four types of individuals to be found existing in world." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ - #4 Samyutta Nikaya XII.23 Upanisa Sutta Prerequisites Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. Read an alternate translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, the ending of the effluents is for one who knows & sees, I tell you, not for one who does not know & does not see. For one who knows what & sees what is there the ending of effluents? 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is perception, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such are fabrications, such their origination, such their disappearance. Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' The ending of the effluents is for one who knows in this way & sees in this way. "The knowledge of ending in the presence of ending has its prerequisite, I tell you. It is not without a prerequisite. And what is the prerequisite for the knowledge of ending? Release, it should be said. Release has its prerequisite, I tell you. It is not without a prerequisite. And what is its prerequisite? Dispassion... Disenchantment... Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present... Concentration... Pleasure... Serenity... Rapture... Joy... Conviction... Stress... Birth... Becoming... Clinging... Craving... Feeling... Contact... The six sense media... Name-&-form... Consciousness... Fabrications... Fabrications have their prerequisite, I tell you. They are not without a prerequisite. And what is their prerequisite? Ignorance, it should be said. "Thus fabrications have ignorance as their prerequisite, consciousness has fabrications as its prerequisite, name-&-form has consciousness as its prerequisite, the six sense media have name-&-form as their prerequisite, contact has the six sense media as its prerequisite, feeling has contact as its prerequisite, craving has feeling as its prerequisite, clinging has craving as its prerequisite, becoming has clinging as its prerequisite, birth has becoming as its prerequisite, stress & suffering have birth as their prerequisite, conviction has stress & suffering as its prerequisite, joy has conviction as its prerequisite, rapture has joy as its prerequisite, serenity has rapture as its prerequisite, pleasure has serenity as its prerequisite, concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present has concentration as its prerequisite, disenchantment has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present as its prerequisite, dispassion has disenchantment as its prerequisite, release has dispassion as its prerequisite, knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite. "Just as when the gods pour rain in heavy drops & crash thunder on the upper mountains: The water, flowing down along the slopes, fills the mountain clefts & rifts & gullies. When the mountain clefts & rifts & gullies are full, they fill the little ponds. When the little ponds are full, they fill the big lakes. When the big lakes are full, they fill the little rivers. When the little rivers are full, they fill the big rivers. When the big rivers are full, they fill the great ocean. In the same way: "Fabrications have ignorance as their prerequisite, consciousness has fabrications as its prerequisite, name-&-form has consciousness as their prerequisite, the six sense media have name-&-form as their prerequisite, contact has the six sense media as its prerequisite, feeling has contact as its prerequisite, craving has feeling as its prerequisite, clinging has craving as its prerequisite, becoming has clinging as its prerequisite, birth has becoming as its prerequisite, stress & suffering have birth as their prerequisite, conviction has stress & suffering as its prerequisite, joy has conviction as its prerequisite, rapture has joy as its prerequisite, serenity has rapture as its prerequisite, pleasure has serenity as its prerequisite, concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present has concentration as its prerequisite, disenchantment has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present as its prerequisite, dispassion has disenchantment as its prerequisite, release has dispassion as its prerequisite, knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite." -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note that in the Upanisa Sutta it is said that "knowledge & vision of things as they actually are present has concentration as its prerequisite" and that "concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite". Assuming that the word 'prerequisite' is the correct translation of the Pali, this strikes me as rather definitive. I also obtained the following from the Access to Insight site: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------ #5 When gold is debased by these five impurities, it is not pliant, malleable, or luminous. It is brittle and not ready to be worked. Which five? Iron, copper, tin, lead, & silver...But when gold is not debased by these five impurities, it is pliant, malleable, & luminous. It is not brittle and is ready to be worked. Then whatever sort of ornament one has in mind -- whether a belt, an earring, a necklace, or a gold chain -- it would serve one's purpose. In the same way, when the mind is debased by these five impurities, it is not pliant, malleable, or luminous. It is brittle and not rightly concentrated for the ending of the effluents. Which five? Sensual desire, ill will, sloth & drowsiness, restlessness & anxiety, and uncertainty...But when the mind is not debased by these five impurities, it is pliant, malleable, & luminous. It is not brittle and is rightly concentrated for the ending of the effluents. Then whichever of the six higher knowledges [§64] one turns one's mind to know & realize, one can witness > -- A.V.23 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Now, this last material points out that the hindrances are hindrances to concentration. The previous material of the Upanisa Sutta points out the prerequisite status of samatha for vipassana. Together, I think these may provide an answer to this issue. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5673 From: Howard Date: Sun Jun 17, 2001 9:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Ledi Sayadaw Hi, Dan - In a message dated 6/17/01 12:51:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Dan writes: > > Hmm, interesting! Thanks. Surprising, though - the monk whom > I see is > > Thai, not Burmese. Of course, they are bordering countries, so it > is > > understandable. (I would've talked to "my monk", Maha Wan, about > the Sayadaw, > > but Maha Wan is currently in Thailand.) Thanks again for the info, > Dan. > > I'm sorry, Howard. I was talking about Ledi => U Ba Khin => Goenka, > mistakenly assuming you were a follower of Goenka. "Never assume > anything!" > ============================= Ahh! I understand. Well, yes, I *did* attend a 10-day Goenka retreat, and in that sense one could say that he is "my teacher". So you were not wrong. I guess I have many teachers. The one I fully rely on is the Buddha, as seen through the tipitaka, and also through the eyes of all those teachers, ancient and modern - mainly, but not exclusively, Theravadin - whose explanations seem to be clearest and most helpful to me at any given time. (And what is clearest and most helpful to me changes with changing conditions.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5674 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 4:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] seeing the danger of akusala Dear Nina, Far too many excellent points to reply to at once. An especially interesting point that sati can prevent akusala even without paññaa--like so many of your points, it seems obvious AFTER you've pointed it out. I don't have The Expositor or The Questions, but can see how valuable they must be in shedding light on the meanings of the discourses. I'll be reading this post many more times and will probably respond again later. Thank you for taking the time for such a detailed and illuminating response. mike 5675 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 10:49am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Qu estions) Is this Phra Yantra = Phra Ajahn Yantra ? If so, can anyone tell me the length of the scandal... didn't caught wind of it ... thanks Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Kirkpatrick [SMTP:robert] > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 9:45 PM > Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Revealing the defilements (was Re: > Fwd: Questions) > > That article mildy surprised me. I tell you Erik, things have > changed in the last few years in thailand. I am not referring > to these rituals but rather that the monks who do them are now > being critised. After the scandal with Phra yantra (who was once > thought to an arahant) it seems like Thais are now realising > that arahants are not as common as some believed. > I have been to the temple in Khon khaen where lungpoor Khoon > stays (saw him ). It is in the middle of a vast desolate plain > with scant houses but is the most beautiful temple I've ever > seen. Really nice but ven. khoon is a promoter of amulets etc. > What is more surprising is that Phra mahabua is being critised > in a national paper - he used to be held sacred. > robert > --- Erik wrote: > > --- Dan wrote: > > > > > I still think a chase for THE real meaning of the discourses > > is > > risky > > > because it the natural outcome is an attitude of "This is > > the only > > > right way. All other ways are wrong"--something we must be > > on guard > > > against at all times. > > > > In keeping with the Four Ties (from the Abhidhammattha > > Sangaha): "(iv) There are four (bodily) Ties (5): 1. > > Covetousness, 2. > > Ill will, 3. Adherence to rites and ceremonies, 4. Dogmatic > > belief > > that 'this alone is truth'." > > > > Speaking of #3 (for our Thai contingent here), I got a big > > kick out > > of this article: > > > > http://www.bangkokpost.com/newindex/today/160601_news03.html > > 5676 From: B.Kassapa Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 6:07pm Subject: Re: seeing the danger of akusala Please excuse me, but are you the same person that has a book published on Dhamma Study Group web site, this is my reply to a Mrs Amara on Dhamma List. Amara I think there is nothing new in Nina Van Gorkom's new book, except for the fact that she has extracted most of her work from many Buddhists sites including Nibana.com. Please advise Ms Gorkom of this fact and I hope Lawsuits don't follow from the offended parties. It is not advisable to publish new books on Buddhism, as personal views tend to distort actual Buddhist practices by oversimplifying them. It is better to study the Dhamma than trying to show everybody what a cleaver Buddhist you are by writing a Book about something you know nothing about, you go about it just by taking the facts form others. It is not something we should be proud of. Metta B.Kassapa --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 15-06-2001 20:37 schreef m. nease op "m. nease": > > > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > >> It is sati, not self > >> which realizes the danger of akusala. > > > > Sati, not pa~n~naa? > > > Dear Mike, There are different levels of realizing the danger of akusala. > Sati is non-forgetful of kusala, and it is heedful, it prevents akusala. As > you can read in the "Expositor", sati searches well the courses of dhammas, > advantageous and disadvantageous:-< these states are advantageous, those > disadvantageous, these states are serviceable, those not serviceable>- and > then removes the disadvatageous and takes up the advantageous>. In the > Questions of King Milinda (Book II, under sati) sati is compared to a > confidential adviser of the King, instructing him in good and evil: things are bad for the king and these good, these helpful and these are the > reverse.> And thus the king makes the evil in himself die out, and keeps up > the good. > There can be the observing of sila without pa~n~naa. It is sati which keeps > one from evil, it is non-forgetful, heedful. There are also other wholesome > cetasikas which perform their task such as shame,hiri, which shrinks back > from evil and fear of blame, ottappa, there is confidence in kusala, > saddhaa, there are many other sobhana cetasikas, each performing their own > function. In the case of abstaining from evil deeds, the cetasikas which are > the abstentions (virati cetasikas) perform their functions. They all realize > the danger of akusala, but each in their own way, performing their own > function. > Khun Sujin gave once an example of someone who was about to speak an angry > word, she had opened her mouth, but sati kept her from speaking and thus she > did not speak. When I was at the very beginning to learn the Dhamma and > speaking about abstaining from alcohol, Khun Sujin said: abstains, it is sati that keeps you from drinking>. This impressed me very > much, I had not looked at it that that way. > As I said, there are different levels of seeing the danger of akusala, sila > can also be observed without pa~n~naa. Would one abstain from killing if one > had not realized its danger and disadvantage? But pa~n~naa, understanding, > clearly knows the characteristic of kusala and akusala, which can be > intellectual understanding, considering. When it has been developed by > satipatthana,it can be direct understanding of the true nature of kusala and > akusala as non-self. Understanding can be developed so that it becomes > lokuttara pa~n~naa, supramundane understanding which eradicates defilements > stage by stage. It can become understanding which sees evermore the danger > even of subtle clinging, and of moments without awareness. Understanding is > the condition for the accompanying wholesome cetasikas to prevent the > arising of akusala, to be heedful as to the six doorways. For example, hiri, > shame, can shrink back also from more subtle defilements, it can be shame of > moments of forgetfulness of nama and rupa.Thus, understanding is the > condition for realizing ever more deeply the danger of akusala. It > conditions all the accompanying cetasikas to be more effective in the > performing of their tasks. > It is amazing how all the cetasikas work together. If the Buddha had not > taught this we would never have known, and considering this is Buddhanusati, > a meditation subject of samatha in daily life. It can come very naturally. > When we begin to be mindful of a nama or rupa, there can be Buddhanusati. I > was very glad Robert reminded us in one of his posts about meditation > subjects of samatha in daily life, such as Dhammanusati. He quoted from Khun > Sujin's book Wholesome Deeds I had translated, and even when something I > have translated has been quoted, it is again a special reminder for me. I am > grateful for any reminder. > Nina. 5677 From: robert Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 6:26pm Subject: Fwd: Re: New Page --- Robert wrote: --- Dear B. Kassapa, Welcome to the forum (I think this is your first post?). It is pleasing to see your concern over distortions creeping into the sublime Dhamma. Have you read all of Cetasikas? It is a 400 page book and was only put on the web today - but perhaps you read it in its print version which has been out since the beginning of 1999. I had a manuscript copy since 1990, before the internet began, so I think it was not plagiarised from Nibbana.com. Her first book was published in the 1960's. You might have read the book Concepts and Realities on Nibbana.com http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/sujin3.htm , which is one by Nina's teacher, Sujin Boriharnwanaket. Nina actually did the translation(although it is not mentioned on the web) so her style of writing may seem familiar to you. I think Nina will be pleased that you find nothing new in her book. She is very careful to follow the letter and meaning of the Dhamma - although she does relate it to our daily life. Thus her writings include so many quotes from the Tipitaka and as you say there is nothing new in this. Nina said to me once that the Dhamma is not hers or mine or anyone's - it is the way things are, exactly as the SammasamBuddha described, he left it for us to study. robert http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/post?protectID=014202113112099031171098203004129208071 wrote: > Amara > I think there is nothing new in Nina Van Gorkom's new book, except > for the fact that she has extracted most of her work from many > Buddhists sites including Nibana.com. Please advise Ms Gorkom of this > fact and I hope Lawsuits don't follow from the offended parties. It > is not advisable for Laypersons to publish new books on Buddhism, as > personal views tend to distort actual Buddhist practices by > oversimplifying them. It is better to study the Dhamma. > metta > B.Kassapa > > --- "Amara" wrote: > > Dear friends, > > > > We are uploading Nina van Gorkom's book 'Cetasikas' to the > > intermediate section of , do take a > look > > if you have time! Comments will be much appreciated, > > > > Enjoy, > > > > Amara --- End forwarded message --- 5678 From: Moderators Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 6:39pm Subject: Moderators' message (was: Re: seeing the danger of akusala) Dear B.Kassapa Please note that the guidelines for members of this list do not allow messages of this tone or content. If in doubt, please check the guidelines at the group's homepage at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Dham maStudyGroup%20Guidelines.htm Jon & Sarah Abbott --- B.Kassapa wrote: > Please excuse me, but are you the same person that has a book > published on Dhamma Study Group web site, this is my reply to a Mrs > Amara on Dhamma List. > > Amara > I think there is nothing new in Nina Van Gorkom's new book, except > for the fact that she has extracted most of her work from many > Buddhists sites including Nibana.com. Please advise Ms Gorkom of this > fact and I hope Lawsuits don't follow from the offended parties. It > is not advisable to publish new books on Buddhism, as personal views > tend to distort actual Buddhist practices by oversimplifying them. It > is better to study the Dhamma than trying to show everybody what a > cleaver Buddhist you are by writing a Book about something you know > nothing about, you go about it just by taking the facts form others. > It is not something we should be proud of. > > Metta > B.Kassapa 5679 From: m. nease Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 8:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: seeing the danger of akusala Dear B., Welcome to dsg. Amara, Nina, B. Kassapa, Mike, Nibana.com, lawsuits, laypersons--all just concepts without substance, paññati--devoid of any of the foundations of mindfulness. A false accusation is akusala and will have akusala results. What dhammas condition such speech (or any speech)? These dhammas may be known and may be the basis for the arising of understanding--paññati can't (though some of the conditions even for paññati can). Even without understanding, mindfulness can prevent wrong speech (and its unfortunate results). Best Wishes, mike 5680 From: Jim Anderson Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 8:39pm Subject: Fw: Cetasikas Dear members, Amara asked me to forward the following announcement to this list. Jim >Dear friends, > >We are uploading Nina van Gorkom's book 'Cetasikas' to the intermediate >section of , do take a look if you have time! >Comments will be much appreciated, > >Enjoy, > >Amara > > 5681 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 8:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: New Page --- robert wrote: > Have you read all of Cetasikas? It is a 400 page book and was only > put on the web today - but perhaps you read it in its print version > which has been out since the beginning of 1999. I had a manuscript > copy since 1990, before the internet began, so I think it was not > plagiarised from Nibbana.com. Her first book was published in the > 1960's. ........many of us started receiving manuscipt copies of 'Cetasikas' in the late 70s and indeed we bound and distributed these worldwide for many years at that time...... This is truly one of the most useful books I have and I'm delighted anyone has web access now. Sarah 5682 From: Howard Date: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:37pm Subject: Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') Hi, Nina (and all) - I have started reading (and thoroughly enjoying) 'Cetasikas'. In the introduction, you write the following: Citta and its accompanying cetasikas arise and fall away extremely rapidly. When right understanding has not been developed we cannot distinguish between different objects experienced through the different doorways. We are inclined to join different realities together into a 'whole", and thus we cannot realize their arising and falling away, their impermanence, and their nature of non-self. I am trying to understand *where* the attempted joining of different realities occurs. If cittas truly occur as separate, discrete states, then it would seem that such a "joining" would have to occur within a single citta, in which case it is a processing of *memories* of preceding cittas and their cetasikas. Is this so? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5683 From: Dan Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:46am Subject: Question Q: What happens when a Buddhist becomes totally absorbed with the computer he is working with? A: He enters Nerdvana. 5684 From: Erik Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 5:33am Subject: Re: Question --- Dan wrote: > Q: What happens when a Buddhist becomes totally absorbed with the > computer he is working with? > A: He enters Nerdvana. I thought that was the name of a techno-trance-grunge band out of Redmond. 5685 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 6:12am Subject: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Tom wrote: > Subject: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > Thank you. I used to practise TM (transcendental > meditation). Their > newsgroups are really kind of frightening. I began > the practice of Zen about > 20 years ago and moved about 8 years later into > Theravada studies. I am also > interested in Tibetan Buddhism, but so far haven't > made any arrangements > with any of the local Lamas. > > Thank you so much for this newsgroup. > > Tom. 5686 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 6:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Tom, Tom wrote: > > Subject: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > > > > Thank you. I used to practise TM (transcendental > > meditation). Their > > newsgroups are really kind of frightening. I began > > the practice of Zen about > > 20 years ago and moved about 8 years later into > > Theravada studies. I am also > > interested in Tibetan Buddhism, but so far haven't > > made any arrangements > > with any of the local Lamas. > > > > Thank you so much for this newsgroup. Thank you for your message and you're very welcome here! That's interesting about the TM newsgroups..do hope this never becomes 'frightening'! You're in good company here with others who have also studied and practised Zen for many years and also Tibetan Budddhism. Looking forward to hearing more from you. Where do you live? Best wishes and thanks, Sarah 5687 From: Tom Anderson -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Anderson > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:37 AM > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > Thank you for your message and you're very welcome here! > > That's interesting about the TM newsgroups..do hope this never becomes > 'frightening'! > I doubt it will. It is just one of the side-effects of TM, I think. > You're in good company here with others who have also studied > and practised Zen for many years and also Tibetan Budddhism. > > Looking forward to hearing more from you. Where do you live? > TORONTO > > Best wishes and thanks, > Sarah > 5689 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 10:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dan --- Dan wrote: > > (I think in subsequent posts you have both indicated that while the > > practice of samatha is not regarded as absolutely essential, it is > > certainly a great influence for the better when it comes to > insight.) > > Again, Jon, I don't think you follow our argument (or mine, anyway). > Samatha is NOT NECESSARILY a great influence for the better when it > comes to insight, but it CAN BE a great influence. This was actually how I read you - the practice of samatha can be a great influence for the better when it comes to insight, because it moderates the hindrances. Thanks for articulating the point with more particularity than I had. > > I have been looking at quite a few passages on the hindrances > lately. I > > have yet to come across anything that makes a connection between > > suppression of the hindrances by samatha and the development of > > satipatthana/arising of insight. If you or Erik have anything > along these > > lines I would be interested to see it. > > Only the ones I posted earlier along with the logic that if the > arising of hindrances weaken insight, then it makes sense that by the > non-arising, insight may be strenghtened. Also, Buddha frequently > speaks approvingly of development of samatha and even makes direct > and explicit exhortations to his disciples to practice samatha (e.g. > MN 152). Why practice? Because it feels good? I don't think so! > Because it can be a tool for strengthening insight. I of course agree that the Buddha always spoke highly approvingly of the development of samatha, and at times exhorted this particular form of kusala. I question only the further connection that is frequently made between this and satipatthana, namely that for one who sees the importance of satipatthana the practice of samatha will help subdue the hindrances and this can be a great influence for the better in terms of the satipatthana. I do not find this connection explicitly stated in the suttas, commentaries or abhidhamma, and it contradicts my understanding of the conditions for the arising of satipatthana (as found in the texts) -- these do not in my view include the suppression of the hindrances that comes with the development of samatha (yes, even though the hindrances are said to 'weaken insight'). Dan, I hope this clarifies my supposed 'anti-samatha' position. Jon 5690 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 3:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Howard Thanks for coming in with these interesting sutta references and comments. --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Dan) - > > In a message dated 6/17/01 8:58:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Jonothan Abbott writes: > > What I in fact was trying to indicate was that, according to this > > reasoning, insight is much more likely to arise, (or perhaps could > only > > arise,) in close temporal proximity to the practice of samatha, or in > one > > who regularly practices samatha, the reason being that at such times > the > > hindrances are in a subdued state from the influence of the samatha. > > I have been looking at quite a few passages on the hindrances lately. > I > > have yet to come across anything that makes a connection between > > suppression of the hindrances by samatha and the development of > > satipatthana/arising of insight. If you or Erik have anything along > these > > lines I would be interested to see it. > ======================================= > I am appending five suttas obtained from the Access to insight > site > that have some bearing on this, I believe. I will comment a bit on the > last > two of these, which I take take to be the most definitive on this issue: I am not able to comment in detail right now, but hope to do so later. On a quick reading, I must say I do not find the passages particularly useful in understanding the extent to which if at all the suppression of the hindrances by samatha is or can be of direct use as far as satipatthana is concerned. But perhaps further reading will help clarify this. > #1 > Anguttara Nikaya II.29 > Vijja-bhagiya Sutta > A Share in Clear Knowing > > #2 > Anguttara Nikaya IV.170 > Yuganaddha Sutta > In Tandem > > > #3 > Anguttara Nikaya IV.94 > Samadhi Sutta > Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight) > #4 > Samyutta Nikaya XII.23 > Upanisa Sutta > Prerequisites > Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, the ending of the effluents is for one … > knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite." > Note that in the Upanisa Sutta it is said that "knowledge & > vision of > things as they actually are present has concentration as its > prerequisite" > and that "concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite". Assuming that > the > word 'prerequisite' is the correct translation of the Pali, this strikes > me > as rather definitive. See my comments below. > I also obtained the following from the Access to Insight site: > #5 > When gold is debased by these five impurities, it is not pliant, … > concentrated for the ending of the effluents. Then whichever of the six > higher knowledges [ > -- A.V.23 > > > Now, this last material points out that the hindrances are > hindrances > to concentration. Agreed. The previous material of the Upanisa Sutta points out > the > prerequisite status of samatha for vipassana This point I need to consider. I am wondering if you are perhaps equating concentration with samatha. The 2 are not always used synonymously (although sometimes they are). Concentration is the normal translation for samadhi, the cetasika that is one of the Universals. Samatha is usually translated as tranquillity, calmness or the like, since that is its distinguishing feature. Of course, it is developed by concentration on an appropriate subject (kammatthana), but it is a particular kind of development of concentration, accompanied by panna and leading to the tranquillity that comes from being temporarily freed from kilesa. References to concentration are sometimes references to concentration of the particular kind that accompanies panna of the level of vipassana. This is possibly how your last reference is to be read (concentration that is ‘for the ending of the effluents’). I will see if my translation has any useful commentary on the Upanisa Sutta and report back. Thanks for the material to consider. Jon 5691 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dear howard and jon, Could I quote a sutta which may have bearing on your conversation> > > > > HOward: Now, this last material points out that the > hindrances are > > hindrances > > to concentration. > JON:Agreed. > > Howard: The previous material of the Upanisa Sutta points out > > the > > prerequisite status of samatha for vipassana _____ > Jon: This point I need to consider. I am wondering if you are > perhaps equating > concentration with samatha. The 2 are not always used > synonymously > (although sometimes they are). Concentration is the normal > translation > for samadhi, the cetasika that is one of the Universals. > Samatha is > usually translated as tranquillity, calmness or the like, > since that is > its distinguishing feature. Of course, it is developed by > concentration > on an appropriate subject (kammatthana), but it is a > particular kind of > development of concentration, accompanied by panna and leading > to the > tranquillity that comes from being temporarily freed from > kilesa. > > References to concentration are sometimes references to > concentration of > the particular kind that accompanies panna of the level of > vipassana. > This is possibly how your last reference is to be read > (concentration that > is ‘for the ending of the effluents’). _______________________________________________ I think Jon has explained this correctly. Here is the samadhi sutta. Note the different types of concentration. (the 3rd type is that associated with satipatthana and the last type with advanced stages of vipassana) Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 Samadhi Sutta Concentration ---------------------------------------------------------------- "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which four? There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents. 1."And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now. 2. "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision? There is the case where a monk attends to the perception of light and is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any hour of the day]. Day [for him] is the same as night, night is the same as day. By means of an awareness open & unhampered, he develops a brightened mind. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. 3."And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. 4."And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents. "These are the four developments of concentration. "And it was in connection with this that I stated in Punnaka's Question in the Way to the Far Shore [Sn V.3]: 'He who has fathomed the far & near in the world, for whom there is nothing perturbing in the world -- his vices evaporated, undesiring, untroubled, at peace -- he, I tell you, has crossed over birth aging.'" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5692 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Rob and Howard Thanks for this very pertinent sutta, Rob. It also brings out another point about your post, Howard. Reference to 'knowledge and vision', as in the Upanisa Sutta, is often a reference to a level of samatha, rather than the vipassana it sounds so much like. This can be a trap for the casual reader. In the 2nd of the 4 types of concentration in the Samadhi Sutta quoted below, the reference is I think to samatha (subject to checking the commentary!). Jon --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear howard and jon, > Could I quote a sutta which may have bearing on your > conversation> ..... . Here is the samadhi > sutta. Note the different types of concentration. (the 3rd type > is that associated with satipatthana and the last type with > advanced stages of vipassana) > Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 > Samadhi Sutta > Concentration > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which > four? There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There is > the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, > leads to the ending of the effluents. > > 1."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & > remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from > withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With > the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & > remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of > composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & > evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he > remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive > to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which > the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a > pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- > as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he > enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & > mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development > of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a > pleasant abiding in the here & now. > > 2. "And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision? There is the case where a monk attends to the perception > of light and is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any > hour of the day]. Day [for him] is the same as night, night is > the same as day. By means of an awareness open & unhampered, he > develops a brightened mind. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > attainment of knowledge & vision. > > 3."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is > the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, > known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are > known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they > subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they > persist, known as they subside. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > mindfulness & alertness. > > 4."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There > is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling > away with reference to the five aggregates for > sustenance/clinging: 'Such is form, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, > such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its > origination, such its disappearance.' This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > ending of the effluents. > > "These are the four developments of concentration. > > "And it was in connection with this that I stated in Punnaka's > Question in the Way to the Far Shore [Sn V.3]: > > 'He who has fathomed > the far & near0in the world, > for whom there is nothing > perturbing in the world -- > his vices evaporated, > undesiring, untroubled, > at peace -- > he, I tell you, has crossed over birth > aging.'" > 5693 From: <> Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way of bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra meditation. One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the result is, like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes back to the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental condition, a spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of approach to what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. Benson's Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a part of the problem.) There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. I can post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and seems to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into greater dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for others.] Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! Presently, he is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor South American country. --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? Or others ? > > Thanks, > Loke CL > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tom Anderson > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:37 AM > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > > > Thank you for your message and you're very welcome here! > > > > That's interesting about the TM newsgroups..do hope this never becomes > > 'frightening'! > > I doubt it will. It is just one of the side-effects of TM, I think. > > You're in good company here with others who have also studied > > and practised Zen for many years and also Tibetan Budddhism. > > > > Looking forward to hearing more from you. Where do you live? > > TORONTO > > > > Best wishes and thanks, > > Sarah > > 5694 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 7:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Very interesting, Tom. There are many types of concentration meditation and it seems to me that it is not so hard to develop wrong concentration(which comes with pleasant or neutral feeling) - but which is attached to the object of meditation. This can appear as genuine detachment because the old objects of attachment - family, career etc. - now seem less important than this new practice. I think this can also happen with Buddhist practice,and so it takes real inquiry to distinguish right from wrong; but I feel you know this already. thanks robert --- <> wrote: > TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way > of > bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra > meditation. > One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the > result is, > like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes > back to > the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. > > Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental condition, > a > spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of > approach to > what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. > Benson's > Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a > part of > the problem.) > > There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. > I can > post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and > seems > to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these > feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into > greater > dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for > others.] > > Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! > Presently, he > is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor South > > American country. > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > wrote: > > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? > Or > others ? > > > > Thanks, > > Loke CL > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tom Anderson > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:37 AM > > > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: RE: Welcome to > dhammastudygroup > > > > > > Thank you for your message and you're very welcome here! > > > > > > That's interesting about the TM newsgroups..do hope this > never > becomes > > > 'frightening'! > > > I doubt it will. It is just one of the side-effects of > TM, I > think. > > > You're in good company here with others who have also > studied > > > and practised Zen for many years and also Tibetan > Budddhism. > > > > > > Looking forward to hearing more from you. Where do you > live? > > > TORONTO > > > > > > Best wishes and thanks, > > > Sarah 5695 From: Herman Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 7:30pm Subject: Re: In my opinion Dear Kom, Thank you, as always, for the time you have taken to provide further food for thought. --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Herman, > > --- Herman wrote: > > > Do you believe in conditions, and the result of those conditions? > > Do you > > > *know* as it really is that in order for a dhamma to arise, there > > *must* be > > > condition for it to arise? K. Sujin has mentioned that rebirth > > may be > > > absolutely provable at one's death. > > > > Yes, I believe in conditions, and the results of those conditions, > > and that all dhammas arise because of conditions. I also believe the > > conditions are unknowable, meaning neither causes or results can be > > fully known. Play a game of chess, and try and predict what the board > > Are they truly unknowable even at the intellectual understanding? We > hear that in order to see, there must be the following conditions: > 1) Eyesense - you can't see if you are blind > 2) Consciousness - you can't see if you are asleep > 3) Something to see > 4) Enough light > You bring up very interesting and very relevant points, Kom. At a real level, there is no doubt about anything. There is no doubt about seeing, hearing, smelling, bodily sensation, thinking etc. Words, concepts are not required at this level. But at the conceptual level, doubt beckons everywhere. If I reduce the refresh rate on my video card to around 50 Hz, there is a slight flicker in my peripheral vision. I do not doubt the flickering. It is real. Conceptually it means that there are 50 new images drawn on my monitor every second, and there is a very small, vague awareness of change in my case when this happens. I do not know this, but accept (believe, have faith) that this is so. To me it means that the apparatus of vision in my case is able to discern changes at about 1/50th of a second. Some things which I read on forums such as these, suggest to me that it ought to be possible to be aware of each refresh of the screen as it happens, awareness of each moment as it happens. This is a matter of grave doubt for me. When I strike the middle A on my piano, I hear a sound. No doubt there. Conceptually, this note is actually a vibration, vibrating at 440 cycles a second. 440 rarefactions and condensations per second. But all I hear is a constant sound at a particular pitch. Again, sometimes I read things here that make me believe that it ought to be possible to hear the reality as it is conceived, 440 rarefactions and condensations per second . Again, grave doubt. Is it all my stored akusala, or ignorance, or fetters, or hindrances, or cankers, that prevents me from hearing 440 cycles, seeing 50 refreshes. Or is there such a thing as a biological limit? I hope to .... (oops, nearly said God :-)) that to be enlightened doesn't mean I can no longer hear Bach, but must hear cycles of rarefactions and condensations. > Without those, seeing doesn't occur. I think many (although not all, > certainly not for me!) conditions can't be thought of in this particular > manner. For example, the grasping to the 5 sense objects---visible object, > sound, taste, smell, tactile objects---can only occur if there are contact of > the mind and the sense objects, and also the feelings that co-arise with > such experiences. > > Are these causes-results purely just faith for you or does it make sense for > you as well? I have faith that at some level along the path, that some of > these elementary (not all that is taught) relationship will turn into "this is > proven for me" because of direct experiences. My confidence in the > teaching increases ever so slightly each time I notice (not even at the > satipathana level) something that match the teachings. My fiancee works in a centre where seriously injured people are rehabilitated. One of the common anguishes of amputees is phantom pain. They feel pain in limbs they do not have, when there is no rupa within cooee. Touch a totally unrelated part of their body, and they feel it in their phantom limb. This suggests to me that bodily sense cannot be realised by anyone, it all happens in the mind/brain. When I am aware of seeing, hearing, feeling (bodily sense) tasting and thinking the reality that it reflects has already expired. The present moment is a concept, a matter of faith, and thus subject to doubt. Awareness is the realisation that there is no present moment to know. Seeing, hearing, tasting etc is real, the present moment is a memory. > > > will look like after one, two, three moves. Or try and determine the > > moves that caused the current state of the board. Impossible. With > > such a simple state of affairs , 2 players with sixteen or fewer > > pieces each you need to cover billions of permutations. How much more > > complex is this present reality, with infinite causes which are the > > result of infinite causes which are the result of infinite causes. > > As far as the 24 conditions expounded in Abhidhamma, I would certainly > agree with you. As I understand how realities condition one another, how > one reality (such as panna) arises is enormously complex that it may > appear to somebody as being very close to random. I don't think even if > we become enlightened that these conditions will be fully known---I have > heard this is in the realm of the Buddha's panna only. > > On the other hand, if you agree with me in some of the points made > above, we would both agree that things don't just arise in a random > fashion. There must be specific causes in order to have specific effects. > It just happens that the Buddha indicates that kamma is one of these > causes in many phenomenons, even if it is not absolutely proveable to you > and I yet. I read in some suttas (I'm sorry I cannot quote the source, if you disagree that this is really based on a sutta, I will happily retract) that to be born beautiful/handsome, wealthy, healthy, would be the result of good deeds in previous lives. This tends to create the illusion that beauty is an absolute thing, but I am here to tell you that what is admired in one culture is derided in another. Some cultures take pride in frugality , while others are ostentatious to the max. Wealth is a very subjective matter. To me these suttas re kamma reinforce indiscriminate stereotypes, not wisdom. I therefore doubt their absolute value. > > > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over > > them. I > > > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know > > pain, > > > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom of > > my > > > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the sensations > > at > > > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, > > conceit. > > > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala or > > > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are > > kusala > > > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know it > > is > > > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > Nina and Num have discussed what is akusala recently. My brief > understanding is that that they are qualities, if developed, bring only > unhappy results. But yet we are not masters of causes and results, so we > cannot draw such conclusion ourself. However, the Buddha said this, I > believe it, and it makes sense to me. With that state of mind, then I can > study what are the different qualities and characteristics of the different > akusala realities, even just so as I know what is meant by kusala and > akusala, and what I believe will bring good or bad results. Again on kamma, I have read, that a wholesome thing done may not bear it's fruit for countless years or lives. Same with an unwholesome thing. Far be it for me to connect one cause to a result somewhere else. > > > Because of the complexity of infinite causes, how can I know that > > this thought caused that result, this action caused that feeling? I > > I think we can only draw conclusion in simple cases. > > > really do not have the ability to make those discernments. I know "x > > says this is good, x says this is bad" I do not know "this is good, > > that is bad". Good and bad and in between are not absolutes, they are > > relative to a goal, a purpose. What is good for one person in one > > situation is bad for another. Over time I can start to believe that > > by smiling a lot I am influencing the course of the universe in a > > positive way. But am I ? And is that my goal? > > I believe there are absolute qualities of those realities, even if the are > heavily conditioned by the co-arising realities and other pre- arising > realities. I also believe that those qualties bring results. Although I think > there are many goals that people pursue when studying Buddhism, but I > think one result that is unique to Buddhism only, the end of all suffering, is > a worthwhile goal to have. > > > Kusala and akusala are tied to whatever goal is trying to be > > achieved. This may be trying to feel good or avoiding feeling bad, or > > escaping from Samsara or realising Nibbana or getting of the wheel of > > rebirths or whatever. How is it that we set out on a journey when we > > wouldn't recognise the destination if we tripped over it? And how is > > it that we "know" exactly what tools , what means , will get us to > > this destination? > > As I believe that there are absolute qualities of realities that can be > observed, it's the only way to prove it to ourself whether or not something > is what we think it is or not. This doesn't mean that one can prove > everything, but it means that the most important things will be provable. > > I categorises my "faith" in Buddhism into three different categories: 1) > faith arising because of the teaching's self-consistency, 2) faith arising > because it makes sense to me based on my personal experiences/pre- > disposition, and 3) faith arising because the realities can be > experienced/proven now. If you call all these things as being pure faith, > then so be it. Reality is the only thing that doesn't require faith. It also doesn't require discussion or verification via suttas or whatever. Having said that, I immensely enjoy being part of this group, and always look forward to cranking up the old modem. (Clinging, I know, but I don't care) I am not critical of you or anyone else. If I was you I would say what you have said, if you were me , likewise. Kind regards, Kom > > kom 5696 From: Herman Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 7:39pm Subject: Captain Akusala Dear Robert, So what is reborn? If that is a leading question, feel free to paraphrase it. I ask the question in the light of not-self. What is born, what is reborn? And you really believe it would be better to have bombed Hiroshima than to not believe in rebirth? You obviously have a strong conviction about this. Kind regards Herman --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Hi, Captain Akusala. > robert > --- Herman wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in > > rebirth. > > > > There is no identity now, no substantial anything, what is to > > be > > reborn if it isn't there in the first place? > > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell over > > them. I > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I know > > pain, > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the bottom > > of my > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the > > sensations at > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg gas, > > conceit. > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things akusala > > or > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas are > > kusala > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't know > > it is > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the > > baby not a > > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats all > > there is. > > > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral grounds > > is as > > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They > > both > > exist, thats reality. > > > > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples > > headstones, > > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To > > help the > > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or kusala, > > it > > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they will > > die with > > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or > > akusala, it > > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither Mind > > nor > > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as there > > is life > > there is death, as long as there is being, there is > > nothingness. > > > > > > Herman > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > wrote: > > > One thing I wanted to add. in my post about wrong view last > > week > > > I said how extreme wrong view is the highest akusala. Views > > that > > > deny kamma and rebirth come under this. > > > Christianity may not necessarily fit here because while > > > christains have wrong view in that they believe in the > > saving > > > grace of a god, many of them also believe that good works > > lead > > > to heaven: thus mother theresa. > > > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace of > > god > > > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to how > > > serious the view is. > > > robert > > > 5697 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 7:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Captain Akusala --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > So what is reborn? If that is a leading question, feel free to > > paraphrase it. > > I ask the question in the light of not-self. What is born, > what is > reborn? > > And you really believe it would be better to have bombed > Hiroshima > than to not believe in rebirth? > > You obviously have a strong conviction about this. > > Kind regards > > Herman > > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > Hi, Captain Akusala. > > robert > > --- Herman wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in > > > rebirth. > > > > > > There is no identity now, no substantial anything, what is > to > > > be > > > reborn if it isn't there in the first place? > > > > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell > over > > > them. I > > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I > know > > > pain, > > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the > bottom > > > of my > > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the > > > sensations at > > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg > gas, > > > conceit. > > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things > akusala > > > or > > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas > are > > > kusala > > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't > know > > > it is > > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > > > > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the > > > baby not a > > > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats > all > > > there is. > > > > > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral > grounds > > > is as > > > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They > > > both > > > exist, thats reality. > > > > > > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples > > > headstones, > > > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To > > > help the > > > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or > kusala, > > > it > > > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they > will > > > die with > > > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or > > > akusala, it > > > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither > Mind > > > nor > > > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as > there > > > is life > > > there is death, as long as there is being, there is > > > nothingness. > > > > > > > > > Herman > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > > wrote: > > > > One thing I wanted to add. in my post about wrong view > last > > > week > > > > I said how extreme wrong view is the highest akusala. > Views > > > that > > > > deny kamma and rebirth come under this. > > > > Christianity may not necessarily fit here because while > > > > christains have wrong view in that they believe in the > > > saving > > > > grace of a god, many of them also believe that good > works > > > lead > > > > to heaven: thus mother theresa. > > > > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace > of > > > god > > > > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to > how > > > > serious the view is. > > > > robert > > > > 5698 From: Ong Teng Kee Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 8:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) -----Original Message----- From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 10:04:53 +0800 (CST) Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dear Jon, I think you didn't understand satipatthana sutta ,its com and sub com.First you need to know that some people have enough parami of samatha ,so in this life he not need to emerge from jhana(as a sukkhavipassaka).Some must emerge from jhana to attain his fruition(as a samathayanika). In satipatthana sutta mentions vedana,citta and dhamma without mentioning jhana,that doesn't mean that we can do vedana anupassana without emerging from jhana because in com we have samathayanika doing anupassana after emerging from jhana on vedana with kasina as objeat first.We even find dhamma anupassana has practice of buddhanusati jhana. When Buddha said ekayano-the only way in satipattana sutta,it couldn't be meaning samatha is not included in this very important sutta .It couldn't be meaning the direct way as tran by Bhikkhu Bodhi in his tran.This is a totally wrong tran.There are even people thinking satipattana sutta is for sukkhavipassaka only for all subjects . > > > I question only the further connection that is frequently made between > this and satipatthana, namely that for one who sees the importance of > satipatthana the practice of samatha will help subdue the hindrances and > this can be a great influence for the better in terms of the satipatthana. > I do not find this connection explicitly stated in the suttas, > commentaries or abhidhamma, and it contradicts my understanding of the > conditions for the arising of satipatthana (as found in the texts) -- > these do not in my view include the suppression of the hindrances that > comes with the development of samatha (yes, even though the hindrances are > said to 'weaken insight'). > > Dan, I hope this clarifies my supposed 'anti-samatha' position. > > Jon > 5699 From: Tom Anderson Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 8:23pm Subject: wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Thanks for your reply, Robert. Your summation of the difficulty with TM is very apt, quite to the point. This, to me, seems to be the core element of the "cult" mentality that differentiates TM and other "cults" from genuine spiritual practise and aspiration. Finding this newsgroup has been quite helpful for me. I have looked at a number of the TM newsgroups in an effort to try to understand what was wrong with TM (it gives results, but they are not necessarily what one wants to be stuck with -- and they do stick). The idea being that understanding what is wrong will assisting in finding a cure. I already, of course, had the cure in my own practise of samatha/vipassana. But this group has really helped to understand that. Many thanks, again, for your insightful response. Tom. --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Very interesting, Tom. There are many types of concentration > meditation and it seems to me that it is not so hard to develop > wrong concentration(which comes with pleasant or neutral > feeling) - but which is attached to the object of meditation. > This can appear as genuine detachment because the old objects of > attachment - family, career etc. - now seem less important than > this new practice. > I think this can also happen with Buddhist practice,and so it > takes real inquiry to distinguish right from wrong; but I feel > you know this already. > thanks > robert > > > --- <> wrote: > > TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way > > of > > bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra > > meditation. > > One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the > > result is, > > like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes > > back to > > the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. > > > > Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental condition, > > a > > spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of > > approach to > > what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. > > Benson's > > Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a > > part of > > the problem.) > > > > There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. > > I can > > post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and > > seems > > to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these > > feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into > > greater > > dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for > > others.] > > > > Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! > > Presently, he > > is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor South > > > > American country. > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > wrote: > > > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? > > Or > > others ? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Loke CL > > > 5700 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 8:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Herman, The process of rebirth according to the Tipitaka is happening even now. As you know said that there is no permanent self, that what we call a person is a conventional term for momentary arisings of countless groups of subatomic matter (kalapas) and even briefer moments of mental states which immediately after their presence fall away. Thus it has to be explained how, if matter and mind are momentary, there is still continuity even in this life. The reason given is that the present matter and mind are conditioned and in turn they condition more matter and mind. If there were no conditions the mind and matter would cease. When Buddhists speak of rebirth of persons, this is only for convenience and is not to be taken in the sense of ultimate truth. The words "I" and "you" are expressions found useful in speech, but do not designate realities. What Buddhism calls the next life (or next second, for that matter) is a conventional term for the continuation of moments of mind and matter. There is continuity without identity, persistence without a persisting substance. No doer of the deeds is found, No one who ever reaps their fruits Empty phenomena roll on. This only is the correct view. No God nor Brahma can be called the maker of this wheel of life Empty phenomena roll on, Dependent on conditions all. Visuddhimagga (Davids (ed.) 1920) Among the conditions for the continuation of phenomena are the same greed, hatred and delusion that obsess the mind now: consequently at death, assuming these factors haven't been eradicated, rebirth will ensue. According to Buddhist texts the transition from one life to another normally wipes out memories of the earlier existence. It doesn't, however, eliminate deep character tendencies. For instance if one had developed the strong habit of kindness this would be carried over to the next life. In agreement with science, the texts acknowledge the effect of the parent's genetic material and the environment but put forward mental conditions as additional factors. One is born as a human (and as male or female, clever or not etc.) because the genetic matter at conception is the most suitable base for the individual stream of mentality to arise with at that time. This is said to be why even identical twins, having the same genetic makeup and brought up in the same family, have some differing characteristics. The most common analogy given in Buddhist texts to explain rebirth is that of an oil-lamp. The flame of the lamp is, in one sense, the same hour after hour. But we know that it is in reality different each moment. . The wick, oil and air are needed to keep it going and it is burning up these up. However the continuum – one moment of flame links with the next moment – is happening so fast that we can’t see that each moment is entirely different. When the oil is almost exhausted the flame may be used to light another lamp. Is it a different flame now? In one sense yes, the supply of oil and the wick are different. In another sense it is the same flame. In this simile the oil of the lamp is like the body of a person. The wick is the body that functions as the support for the process of consciousness. The air and oxygen are the objects of sense (colour, sound, smell etc.) and the flame is like consciousness and other mental factors. When the person dies that is the same as the first lamp ending. The transference of the flame to the next lamp is the same as the arising of consciousness in the new body. To understand conditionality, the crucial aspect of anatta, we must understand that mind and matter (nama and rupa) can't simply cease to arise while the conditions for them - greed, aversion and delusion are present. If we believe that the stream of mind and matter ends at death - no matter whetehr one is a monster or a saint - then we are caught in self view of the type that is anihilation view, a serious wrong view. This type of view means that one could well decide that it doesn't matter what anyone does. One could be a killer but when one dies one is exactly the same as Mother Theresa (by this thinking). On the question of Hiroshima?; the one who understands conditionality and kamma and rebirth would sooner stick their head in a fire than commit such a deed. robert --- Herman wrote: > Dear Robert, > > So what is reborn? If that is a leading question, feel free to > > paraphrase it. > > I ask the question in the light of not-self. What is born, > what is > reborn? > > And you really believe it would be better to have bombed > Hiroshima > than to not believe in rebirth? > > You obviously have a strong conviction about this. > > Kind regards > > Herman > > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > Hi, Captain Akusala. > > robert > > --- Herman wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in > > > rebirth. > > > > > > There is no identity now, no substantial anything, what is > to > > > be > > > reborn if it isn't there in the first place? > > > > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell > over > > > them. I > > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I > know > > > pain, > > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the > bottom > > > of my > > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the > > > sensations at > > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg > gas, > > > conceit. > > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things > akusala > > > or > > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas > are > > > kusala > > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't > know > > > it is > > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > > > > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the > > > baby not a > > > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats > all > > > there is. > > > > > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral > grounds > > > is as > > > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They > > > both > > > exist, thats reality. > > > > > > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples > > > headstones, > > > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To > > > help the > > > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or > kusala, > > > it > > > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they > will > > > die with > > > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or > > > akusala, it > > > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither > Mind > > > nor > > > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as > there > > > is life > > > there is death, as long as there is being, there is > > > nothingness. > > > > > > > > > Herman > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > > wrote: > > > > One thing I wanted to add. in my post about wrong view > last > > > week > > > > I said how extreme wrong view is the highest akusala. > Views > > > that > > > > deny kamma and rebirth come under this. > > > > Christianity may not necessarily fit here because while > > > > christains have wrong view in that they believe in the > > > saving > > > > grace of a god, many of them also believe that good > works > > > lead > > > > to heaven: thus mother theresa. > > > > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace > of > > > god > > > > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to > how > > > > serious the view is. > > > > robert > > > > 5701 From: m. nease Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 8:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Tom, I appreciated Robert's reply too (as always). Selling concentrative bliss is an ancient business--maybe was ancient in the Buddha's day (not sure about this). Here in the US it seems like another mega-guru hits the best-seller lists every few years, recycling (and selling) various bits and pieces of Indian religion. I used to get mad at these guys. Of course they're really not to blame at all--just ignorance, aversion and desire. Which makes me all the more grateful for the Budhhadhamma--and this list. Welcome to dsg. mike 5702 From: Tom Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:01pm Subject: Re: Sarah's nephew TOM & Betty's book --- "Amara" wrote: > Hi Everybody, Firstly apologies for not posting anything since I registered to become a part of this group. I have had a look at some discussions of which some makes absolutely no sense whilst others I can understand amounts of. I am actually 23 (doesn't time fly Sarah?!) and graduated from University last year with a degree in Sociology (like Sarah)which is part of the reason why I do not blindly accept things - I was brought up also into a Christian Society and attended Christian School. The analysis below about what I do and don't know about is essentially correct, although I did read some Buddhist readings on Consciousness and Social construction of the Self for a Philosophy course as a part of my degree. I have a book called 'Teach yourself Buddhism' which I am gradually working through. My interest at present is purely investigative though this may not remain the case. Tom > > > The heading is to get Tom's attention. Tom is my 21yr > > old nephew in England. He's completely new to > > Buddhism, Betty, but he has joined the list recently > > and is lurking in the background to see if he can > > learn anything. > > > Dear Tom, > > A warm welcome from your aunt's Thai friend! If there are any > questions I can help you with I shall be most happy to! > > > > Betty, before you went to Turkey (hope you had a good > > trip btw), you asked for suggestions for a book for > > raw beginners. There wasn't much (any?) response, > > probably because it was around the same time Erik made > > his grand debut. > > > Dear Sarah and Betty, > > I think one other reason no one answered was because Betty was going > abroad, and after that we probably got so involved with other issues. > I think now is a great time to tackle this, especially since Tom is > there now also. Betty has been a much loved teacher to her students > (and friends! Are we still roommates for India?) for most of her > life, Tom, you're lucky she's on the list! > > > > I'm just trying to read Tom's mind a little, to see if > > this helps give you any clues: > > > > 1. He would know no pali words at all > > 2. he probably knows a little about the life story of > > the buddha > > 3. He's probably heard about nibbana, maybe the noble > > truth of suffering and I doubt much else. > > 4. He would know something about the Dalai Lama > > > > He'd probably like to hear about: > > > > 1. What are the 'core' teachings in brief > > 2. What is different from other religions > > 3. Why people like his aunt (who he seldom sees) were > > brought up strictly as Christians and then became > > Buddhists > > 4. Whether all kinds of Buddhism are the same > > 5. How it helps in life, especially when one doesn't > > have any special problems > > > > I would like to ask Betty to begin with > > 1. the meanings of the word dhamma > 2. how it is divided into nama and rupa > 3. how that is categorized into the 4 paramatthadhamma > > for a firm basis first, and work from there. This is how I see the > ideal beginner's book starting with! > > What do you think, Betty? > > Amara 5703 From: Erik Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:16pm Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: Robert, > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which > four? There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There is > the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, > leads to the ending of the effluents. > > 1."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & > remains in the first jhana: This is pretty unambiguous. Jhana always = pleasant abiding here & now. Nothing new here. > 2. "And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision? There is the case where a monk attends to the perception > of light and is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any > hour of the day]. Day [for him] is the same as night, night is > the same as day. By means of an awareness open & unhampered, he > develops a brightened mind. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > attainment of knowledge & vision. Here is talks about "brightened mind." One side-effect of samatha and vipassana is this very "brightened mind." Samatha & vipassana condition the six yuggalas, mental and bodily tranquility, agility, pliancy, workableness, proficiency, and uprightness (passadhi, lahuta, muduta, kammannanta, pagunnata, ujukata). These characteristics are all hallmarks of a well-developed samatha/vipassana practice. This is almost appearing, if interpreted this way, as saying that insight can only arise this way, through this combination (the combination of samatha & vipassana being implied). Unless vipassana alone can engender this sort of mental brightness, without the support of samatha. But this brings me to a question. It is well-documented that one side-effect fo developing jhana meditation is "lightness" and "mental plinacy." This becomes very evident only a little way into a successful practice of jhana, just as things start cooking at the "bliss-bunny" stage of jhana meditation where it's all fun and new (and this elation can last months). So to me this passage appears to speak directly to this. If so, then pure vipassana should produce the same mental pliancy and lightness over time. Is this the case, though? I haven't heard of sukkhavipassaka practitioner talk about this sort of "lightness" and "pliancy," but that may only reflect my own considerable ignorance of this. > 3."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is > the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, > known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are > known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they > subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they > persist, known as they subside. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > mindfulness & alertness. > > 4."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There > is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling > away with reference to the five aggregates for > sustenance/clinging: 'Such is form, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, > such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its > origination, such its disappearance.' This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > ending of the effluents. This is a somewhat confusing passage to me, given cultivating knowledge & vision are listed separately from terminating the asavas. The above mention about knowledge and vision TO ME represent the actual insight that abandons the fetters. This last passage discusses strategies that help one overcome the effluents, but are not the same as knowledge & vision (if I am interpreting this correctly). In other words, how are the asavas overcome? The Sabbasava Sutta lists several strategies apart from insight for doing away with the asavas: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn002.html The last passsage you qouted, if taken literally, seems to imply that one can merely observe the arising and passing away of dhammas, that that alone is sufficient for release. But is it? If so, why then is "knowledge and vision" listed as a separate category among these four types up above? In terms of terminating the asavas, the Sabbasava Sutta notes: "There are fermentations to be abandoned by seeing, those to be abandoned by restraining, those to be abandoned by using, those to be abandoned by tolerating, those to be abandoned by avoiding, those to be abandoned by destroying, and those to be abandoned by developing." Note "seeing" here refers to yoniso manasikara, not panna, from my reading of the Sutta. In terms of awakening, the Sabbasava Sutta lists the bojjhangas: "And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by developing? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, develops mindfulness as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion...dispassion...cessation, resulting in letting go. He develops analysis of qualities as a factor of awakening...persistence as a factor of awakening...rapture as a factor of awakening...serenity as a factor of awakening...concentration as a factor of awakening...equanimity as a factor of awakening dependent on seclusion...dispassion...cessation, resulting in letting go. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to develop these qualities do not arise for him when he develops them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by developing." Just a quick question. My guess here is the dhamma-vicaya (investigation of dharmas) is a synonym for the type of insight meditation fo vipassana. If not, can someone please clarify for me? I am curious to piece all these various factors together, the ridding of the asavas along with knowledge & vision, how they relate. It is becoming clearer and clearer that the idea of lokuttara-nana as some magic "silver bullet" is a pipe-dream if we wish to do away with dukkha here and now. In other words, insight alone is insufficient for happiness here and now, even if it is lokuttara (pre arahata- magga anyway). This is confirmed by the scriptures; nowhere does it imply dukkha is terminated until arahata-magga. So there have to be other ways to get rid of dukkha that work in the relative world. This is my reading of these instructions, that we have to apply all these myriad antidotes in the course of development. My only comment from my own experience is that watching the arising and pasing away of dhamma has been the most effective tool I have found to deal with panic attacks for example. This enabled me to conquer this nasty problem, by feeling the dhammas as mere physiological sensations separate from the psychological associations that normally create the panic-loop. Also to deal with may unpleasant sensations (though I still confess I have been overwhelmed at times, especially lately), I have found this to really help. As far as being a basis for deep insight, not yet, though I imagine if I could practice this in a retreat setting I may get more insight into how this works at the level you suggest. 5704 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sarah's nephew TOM & Betty's book Tom Welcome to the list, and thanks for the 'coming out' post. Sarah will be delighted when she sees. --- Tom wrote: > --- "Amara" wrote: > > Hi Everybody, > > Firstly apologies for not posting anything since I registered to > become a part of this group. I have had a look at some discussions of > which some makes absolutely no sense whilst others I can understand > amounts of. I know what you mean. Some of us get a bit carried away with obstruse points, but I'm glad this has not deterred you. Always feel free to come in and ask or say anything - chances are there are several 'lurkers' wanting to know or say the same thing. > I am actually 23 (doesn't time fly Sarah?!) and graduated from > University last year with a degree in Sociology (like Sarah)which is > part of the reason why I do not blindly accept things - I was brought > up also into a Christian Society and attended Christian School. The > analysis below about what I do and don't know about is essentially > correct, although I did read some Buddhist readings on Consciousness > and Social construction of the Self for a Philosophy course as a part > of my degree. > > I have a book called 'Teach yourself Buddhism' which I am gradually > working through. My interest at present is purely investigative > though this may not remain the case. Do bring up any points from your reading, and we look forward to hearing more from you. Jon 5705 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dear Erik, good questions . The second type of concentration - where it talks about "knowledge and vision' is confusing as we might think it refers to insight. I think the commentaries (as I remember - don't have a reference handy) say that this refers to the type of special power developed after the jhanas are mastered where one can see all kinds of things (devas etc.) that are now hidden to us. It is quite different from vipassana and is rather a result of perfected samatha practice. if someone can check the commentary on this it would be helpful. robert --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > Robert, > > > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. > Which > > four? There is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here > & > > now. There is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > > vision. There is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There > is > > the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, > > leads to the ending of the effluents. > > > > 1."And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here > & > > now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from > > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & > > remains in the first jhana: > > This is pretty unambiguous. Jhana always = pleasant abiding > here & > now. Nothing new here. > > > 2. "And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > > vision? There is the case where a monk attends to the > perception > > of light and is resolved on the perception of daytime [at > any > > hour of the day]. Day [for him] is the same as night, night > is > > the same as day. By means of an awareness open & unhampered, > he > > develops a brightened mind. This is the development of > > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > > attainment of knowledge & vision. > > Here is talks about "brightened mind." One side-effect of > samatha and > vipassana is this very "brightened mind." Samatha & vipassana > condition the six yuggalas, mental and bodily tranquility, > agility, > pliancy, workableness, proficiency, and uprightness (passadhi, > > lahuta, muduta, kammannanta, pagunnata, ujukata). These > characteristics are all hallmarks of a well-developed > samatha/vipassana practice. This is almost appearing, if > interpreted > this way, as saying that insight can only arise this way, > through > this combination (the combination of samatha & vipassana being > > implied). Unless vipassana alone can engender this sort of > mental > brightness, without the support of samatha. But this brings me > to a > question. It is well-documented that one side-effect fo > developing > jhana meditation is "lightness" and "mental plinacy." This > becomes > very evident only a little way into a successful practice of > jhana, > just as things start cooking at the "bliss-bunny" stage of > jhana > meditation where it's all fun and new (and this elation can > last > months). So to me this passage appears to speak directly to > this. If > so, then pure vipassana should produce the same mental pliancy > and > lightness over time. Is this the case, though? I haven't heard > of > sukkhavipassaka practitioner talk about this sort of > "lightness" > and "pliancy," but that may only reflect my own considerable > ignorance of this. > > > 3."And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There > is > > the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, > > known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions > are > > known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as > they > > subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as > they > > persist, known as they subside. This is the development of > > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > > mindfulness & alertness. > > > > 4."And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? > There > > is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & > falling > > away with reference to the five aggregates for > > sustenance/clinging: 'Such is form, such its origination, > such > > its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, > such > > its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, > such > > its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their > origination, > > such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its > > origination, such its disappearance.' This is the > development of > > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > > ending of the effluents. > > This is a somewhat confusing passage to me, given cultivating > knowledge & vision are listed separately from terminating the > asavas. > The above mention about knowledge and vision TO ME represent > the > actual insight that abandons the fetters. This last passage > discusses > strategies that help one overcome the effluents, but are not > the same > as knowledge & vision (if I am interpreting this correctly). > In other > words, how are the asavas overcome? The Sabbasava Sutta lists > several > strategies apart from insight for doing away with the asavas: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn002.html > > The last passsage you qouted, if taken literally, seems to > imply that > one can merely observe the arising and passing away of > dhammas, that > that alone is sufficient for release. But is it? If so, why > then > is "knowledge and vision" listed as a separate category among > these > four types up above? > > In terms of terminating the asavas, the Sabbasava Sutta notes: > > "There are fermentations to be abandoned by seeing, those to > be > abandoned by restraining, those to be abandoned by using, > those to be > abandoned by tolerating, those to be abandoned by avoiding, > those to > be abandoned by destroying, and those to be abandoned by > developing." > > Note "seeing" here refers to yoniso manasikara, not panna, > from my > reading of the Sutta. > > In terms of awakening, the Sabbasava Sutta lists the > bojjhangas: > > "And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by developing? > There > is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, develops > mindfulness as a factor of awakening dependent on > seclusion...dispassion...cessation, resulting in letting go. > He > develops analysis of qualities as a factor of > awakening...persistence > as a factor of awakening...rapture as a factor of > awakening...serenity as a factor of awakening...concentration > as a > factor of awakening...equanimity as a factor of awakening > dependent > on seclusion...dispassion...cessation, resulting in letting > go. The > fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were > not to > develop these qualities do not arise for him when he develops > them. > These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by > developing." > > Just a quick question. My guess here is the dhamma-vicaya > (investigation of dharmas) is a synonym for the type of > insight > meditation fo vipassana. If not, can someone please clarify > for me? > > I am curious to piece all these various factors together, the > ridding > of the asavas along with knowledge & vision, how they relate. > It is > becoming clearer and clearer that the idea of lokuttara-nana > as some > magic "silver bullet" is a pipe-dream if we wish to do away > with > dukkha here and now. In other words, insight alone is > insufficient > for happiness here and now, even if it is lokuttara (pre > arahata- > magga anyway). This is confirmed by the scriptures; nowhere > does it > imply dukkha is terminated until arahata-magga. So there have > to be > other ways to get rid of dukkha that work in the relative > world. This > is my reading of these instructions, that we have to apply all > these > myriad antidotes in the course of development. > > My only comment from my own experience is that watching the > arising > and pasing away of dhamma has been the most effective tool I > have > found to deal with panic attacks for example. This enabled me > to > conquer this nasty problem, by feeling the dhammas as mere > physiological sensations separate from the psychological > associations > that normally create the panic-loop. Also to deal with may > unpleasant > sensations (though I still confess I have been overwhelmed at > times, > especially lately), I have found this to really help. As far > as being > a basis for deep insight, not yet, though I imagine if I could > > practice this in a retreat setting I may get more insight into > how > this works at the level you suggest. > > > 5706 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dear Roberts, The commentaries translated in Thai says the same thing. kom --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Erik, > good questions . The second type of concentration - where it > talks about "knowledge and vision' is confusing as we might > think it refers to insight. I think the commentaries (as I > remember - don't have a reference handy) say that this refers to > the type of special power developed after the jhanas are > mastered where one can see all kinds of things (devas etc.) that > are now hidden to us. It is quite different from vipassana and > is rather a result of perfected samatha practice. if someone can > check the commentary on this it would be helpful. > robert 5707 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:57pm Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Corrections: --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > Dear Roberts, > > (I remember) The commentaries translated in Thai says the same thing. > > kom 5708 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 10:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Thanks Kom, I would much appreciate if someone can give a translation of the commentary - pali or Thai to this. I have seen the sort of confusion that Erik noted with other serious students of Dhamma on this point. We often have similar cofusions in English because so few of the commentaries are translated and thus people reach their own conclusions. robert --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Corrections: > > --- "Kom Tukovinit" > wrote: > > Dear Roberts, > > > > (I remember) The commentaries translated in Thai says the > same thing. > > > > kom > 5709 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 10:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Revealing the defilements (was Re: Fwd: Questions) Howard Thanks for this post. I must apologise (and to others also) for my slowness in getting back on posts -- I'm afraid I've not been able to keep up lately (but I'm enjoying the stimulating discussion). --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > I understand what you are saying, but I believe that there are > (at > least) two senses of the (noble 8-fold) path, the higher being the > supermundane path, and the lower being the mundane path. Yes, this is my understanding also. The supramundane path refers to the lower stages of enlightenment that lead to final enlightenment. This is the Noble Eightfold path properly so called. The mundane path refers to a moment of satipatthana (awareness) arising in one who has not attained to any of the stages of enlightenment. > We start on the > mundane path. We begin where we are, else there is no beginning, and > hence no > ending. The cultivation of all the factors of mindfulness starts on the > mundane path. Absolutely. And this is a very useful reminder. > You write "Thus it is mindfulness that is watchful (guards the > senses) and 'exercises' effort - when it arises." But this arising of > mindfulness is not a random occurrence - nothing comes from nothing, but > results from practice, and that practice includes persistent mundane > effort. True. But mundane effort is still not the same as conventional effort. The factors of the mundane path, at a moment of satipatthana, also perform their 'path-factor' functions, but at the mundane level. This includes in the case of viraya (effort) cetasika the fourfold endeavour in relation to the arising and maintaining of kusala etc. As you said above, we begin where we are. Part of the 'where we are' is a person with lots of akusala and very little accumulated understanding. So we know that any moments of awareness that arise are bound to be weak and fleeting -- but even one such moment is of inestimable value. If we have an appreciation of the urgency and importance of the task, this can condition the arising of the necessary effort, but only of course if we have a correct understanding of the development of satipatthana in the first place. Jon 5710 From: Tom Anderson Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 0:00am Subject: wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup I think it is extremely difficult to remain grateful to the guru types who daily try to get us to subscribe to their methods of enriching them! But you are so right. If H. H. the Dalai Lama can be grateful to Mao, then, surely all these petty thieves are sent to us to help us see the Way more clearly. Sometimes I ruminate on some aspect of the greed-drived guru-types out to rip off the ignorant masses and then find in that some little thing the Buddha said. Increasingly I am overwhelmed by the brilliance of the elegant insight of the Dharma. This news group is such a blessing. Thanks. --- "m. nease" <"m. nease"> wrote: > Dear Tom, > > I appreciated Robert's reply too (as always). Selling > concentrative bliss is an ancient business--maybe was > ancient in the Buddha's day (not sure about this). > Here in the US it seems like another mega-guru hits > the best-seller lists every few years, recycling (and > selling) various bits and pieces of Indian religion. > > I used to get mad at these guys. Of course they're > really not to blame at all--just ignorance, aversion > and desire. Which makes me all the more grateful for > the Budhhadhamma--and this list. Welcome to dsg. > > mike > 5711 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 1:06am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') op 18-06-2001 21:37 schreef Howard op Howard: > Hi, Nina (and all) - > > I have started reading (and thoroughly enjoying) 'Cetasikas'. In the > introduction, you write the following: > > Citta and its accompanying cetasikas arise and fall away extremely rapidly. > When right understanding has not been developed we cannot distinguish between > different objects experienced through the different doorways. We are inclined > to join different realities together into a 'whole", and thus we cannot > realize their arising and falling away, their impermanence, and their nature > of non-self. > > I am trying to understand *where* the attempted joining of different > realities occurs. If cittas truly occur as separate, discrete states, then it > would seem that such a "joining" would have to occur within a single citta, > in which case it is a processing of *memories* of preceding cittas and their > cetasikas. Is this so? Dear Howard, Joining realities into a whole. Does this not happen time and again in our life? We read unpleasant or sad news and immediately we think with aversion about the story we read, or about the person who wrote to us, we are distressed by concepts. Or, we read good news and we are carried away by the story, are delighted. In reality there is seeing which sees just colour or visible object. Seeing is vipaka, result of kamma, but seeing only knows colour, it does not know whether the object is pleasant or unpleasant. Then there are after seeing has fallen away other types of cittas which recognize the meaning of the letters and other ones which think of the story that was written, and the thinking goes on and on. It seems that everything is known in one moment, seeing and recognizing the letters and knowing the meaning, but this is not so. We join as it were many different phenomena into a whole: the world, we, ourselves who are unhappy or happy. Indeed, sa~n~naa, remmebrance, which accompanies each citta plays an important part, but also other cetasikas. We may have read many times in the Kindred Sayings on Sense (K. IV, Ch 3, § 82) the sutta on the World, but it is always new, always fresh since it reminds us of the truth: Then a certain brother came to see the Exalted One...Seated at one side that brother said to the Exalted One:- Œ ³The world!The world!² is the saying,lord. How far, lord, does this saying go?¹ ŒIt crumbles away, brethren. Therefore it is called ³the world.² What crumbles away? The eye... objects...eye-consciousness...etc. It crumbles away, brethren. Therefore, it is called ³the world² Œ It is so good to be reminded of realities, it can help us in times of disease, suffering, affliction, loss of dear people. When there is satipatthana the world starts to crumble away: only one object through one doorway at a time appears.That is reality, no use to dwell on and on on what has fallen away. A long time ago when I was in India with Khun Sujin, Sarah, Jonothan and others we were having tea in a garden in Benares, discussing the Dhamma (happy surprise, several of them are on this list, it is like meeting old friends again). Afterwards we were thinking of the story of the garden and all the people in it drinking tea, but, as Khun Sujin explained, there is only one moment of citta thinking of this story, this whole, and when the thinking falls away, the story is over; where are all the people? It is a kind of death. At the last moment of life the dying-consciousness falls away and then also the story of our life we found so important is gone. The late Phra Dhammadharo kept on reminding us of this. (By the way, this is mindfulness of death, marana sati, Robert was referring to this as something that is always with him. Please, Robert, I like a reminder, can you add something?) Past experiences have been accumulated and since each citta is succeeded by a following one they can be remembered vividly, even now. I still remember so clearly the garden in Benares, sitting there talking Dhamma. After a long stay in Sri Lanka Sarah brought me to the airport and since I was sad to take leave she reminded me of the Benares story: all the people in Sri Lanka we met during these weeks are a story we are thinking of, just a moment of citta which thinks, and then the story disappears with the citta which falls away. No more. Thus, if we realize that there are in the ultimate sense only elements, no people, no world, we may begin to understand the difference between the moments we think of concepts and the moments that just one reality appears at a time. For more explanation you may like to read the article on Zolag web Understanding Reality, about eating a duck¹s foot. We think, I am eating a duck¹s foot but there are many different realities: seeing, visible object, attention to shape and form, tasting, thinking of flavour. Nina. 5712 From: Howard Date: Tue Jun 19, 2001 9:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.... Hi, Robert (and Jon) - In a message dated 6/19/01 4:20:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, robert writes: > Dear howard and jon, > Could I quote a sutta which may have bearing on your > conversation> > > > > > > HOward: Now, this last material points out that the > > hindrances are > > > hindrances > > > to concentration. > > > JON:Agreed. > > > > Howard: The previous material of the Upanisa Sutta points out > > > the > > > prerequisite status of samatha for vipassana > _____ > > > Jon: This point I need to consider. I am wondering if you are > > perhaps equating > > concentration with samatha. The 2 are not always used > > synonymously > > (although sometimes they are). Concentration is the normal > > translation > > for samadhi, the cetasika that is one of the Universals. > > Samatha is > > usually translated as tranquillity, calmness or the like, > > since that is > > its distinguishing feature. Of course, it is developed by > > concentration > > on an appropriate subject (kammatthana), but it is a > > particular kind of > > development of concentration, accompanied by panna and leading > > to the > > tranquillity that comes from being temporarily freed from > > kilesa. > > > > References to concentration are sometimes references to > > concentration of > > the particular kind that accompanies panna of the level of > > vipassana. > > This is possibly how your last reference is to be read > > (concentration that > > is ‘for the ending of the effluents’). > _______________________________________________ > I think Jon has explained this correctly. Here is the samadhi > sutta. Note the different types of concentration. (the 3rd type > is that associated with satipatthana and the last type with > advanced stages of vipassana) > Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 > Samadhi Sutta > Concentration > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which > four? There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There is > the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, > leads to the ending of the effluents. > > 1."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & > remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from > withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With > the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & > remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of > composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & > evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he > remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive > to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which > the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a > pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- > as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he > enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & > mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development > of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a > pleasant abiding in the here & now. > > 2. "And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision? There is the case where a monk attends to the perception > of light and is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any > hour of the day]. Day [for him] is the same as night, night is > the same as day. By means of an awareness open & unhampered, he > develops a brightened mind. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > attainment of knowledge & vision. > > 3."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is > the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, > known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are > known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they > subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they > persist, known as they subside. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > mindfulness & alertness. > > 4."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There > is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling > away with reference to the five aggregates for > sustenance/clinging: 'Such is form, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, > such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its > origination, such its disappearance.' This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > ending of the effluents. > > "These are the four developments of concentration. > > "And it was in connection with this that I stated in Punnaka's > Question in the Way to the Far Shore [Sn V.3]: > > 'He who has fathomed > the far & near in the world, > for whom there is nothing > perturbing in the world -- > his vices evaporated, > undesiring, untroubled, > at peace -- > he, I tell you, has crossed over birth > aging.'" > > ================================= Thank you (both) for the valid points. For some reason, I have not yet seen the post of yours, Jon, that Robert quotes here. With regard to concentation and calm not being one and the same, I certainly realize that. But they typically co-occur, and they are mutually supportive. Hence the association. The point of my post was that suppressing the hindrances leads to calm, which fosters concentration, which in turn enables further calm and further suppression of he hindrances, and the concentration is prerequisite for the development of insight, and, hence - bottom line - samatha and supression of hindrances lead to insight. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5713 From: Erik Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 5:43am Subject: Those pesky hindrances again... I found this posted elsewhere: "Bhikkhus, like a man would borrow some money to engage in some business. When that business prospered, he would pay off the debt and would have some money remaining for his wife and children. So he would reflect, earlier I borrowed this money and engaged in this business. It prospered. I paid off the debt and now I have some money remaining to attend to my wife and children. He gains joy and pleasure on account of it.Or like a man who was seriously ill, not desiring even to take food, and in the meantime he would get over the illness Food too will become agreeable to him and he would regain his bodily strength. So he reflects, earlier I was seriously ill, food was not agreeable to me. Now I have overcome that illness, food is agreeable, and now I have regained my bodily strength. Recalling this he gains joy and pleasure. Or like a man, released from prison. Happy and without fear and not losing his wealth. He reflects, earlier I was a prisoner, now am free and happy. I have not lost my wealth and now I live without fear. Recalling that he gains pleasure and joy. Or like a man who was a slave under another's power, not in his own power, not able to go where he liked. Released he is no more under another's power, using his power, freed from slavery would go where he liked. He reflects, earlier, I was a slave, under another's power, not in my own power. Now I `m free, in my own power, free to go where I like. On account of that he gains joy and pleasure. Or like a man in a desert with his wealth. Would safely cross the desert without loss of wealth. He would reflect, I entered the desert path with all my wealth and crossed the desert safely without loss of life or wealth and he gains pleasure and joy on account of it. In the same manner the bhikkhu sees himself as though in debt, with an illness, in prison, as a slave, and as in a desert path when the five hindrances are not dispelled, When they are dispelled he sees himself as the debt paid off, the illness subsided, released from prison, released from slavery, and as having crossed the desert path." MN Mahaassapurasutta 5714 From: Dan Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 6:46am Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dear Jon, You wrote: > I question only the further connection that is frequently made between > this and satipatthana, namely that for one who sees the importance of > satipatthana the practice of samatha will help subdue the hindrances and > this can be a great influence for the better in terms of the satipatthana. > I do not find this connection explicitly stated in the suttas, > commentaries or abhidhamma, and it contradicts my understanding of the > conditions for the arising of satipatthana (as found in the texts) - - > these do not in my view include the suppression of the hindrances that > comes with the development of samatha (yes, even though the hindrances are > said to 'weaken insight'). > > Dan, I hope this clarifies my supposed 'anti-samatha' position. Let me make sure I get this right. I think that samatha can support and help strengthen insight. And do you say that samatha CAN'T support and strengthen satipatthana? I don't see it. Can you share your understanding of the conditions for the arising of satipatthana and how by that understanding you see that it it is impossible for samatha to support and strengthen satipatthana? Dan 5715 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 7:25am Subject: Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup --- jlsallis wrote: > Hi, group - > I've been on dhamma-list for a while, and am > following Amara's dhamma study. > I thought I might learn some more here. I've been > practicing for quite a > while, but only started study about a year or so > ago. My meditation is > mostly mindfulness of the breath. I don't consider > that I belong to any > particular tradition,though. > I'll probably lurk for a while and get my bearings. > Thanks for the welcome - > Judy Sallis > > > >All new members are invited to consider posting a > short ‘Hello’. Other > members would be interested to know something about > you, your interest in > Buddhism and how you found your way here! 5716 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 7:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Hi, Judy, Thanks for joining and giving a short intro..we all like to see these and find out a little more about new members. I sincerely hope you do learn more here. Please don't feel overwhelmed by some of the detailed posts and we hope to hear plenty from you, so don't lurk too long ;-)) Where do you live by the way? Best wishes, Sarah jlsallis wrote: > > Hi, group - > > I've been on dhamma-list for a while, and am > > following Amara's dhamma study. > > I thought I might learn some more here. I've been > > practicing for quite a > > while, but only started study about a year or so > > ago. My meditation is > > mostly mindfulness of the breath. I don't consider > > that I belong to any > > particular tradition,though. > > I'll probably lurk for a while and get my bearings. > > Thanks for the welcome - > > Judy Sallis 5717 From: Howard Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 5:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was, Re: Discouraging (1.... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 6/19/01 7:49:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > It also brings out another point about your post, Howard. Reference to > 'knowledge and vision', as in the Upanisa Sutta, is often a reference to a > level of samatha, rather than the vipassana it sounds so much like. This > can be a trap for the casual reader. > > In the 2nd of the 4 types of concentration in the Samadhi Sutta quoted > below, the reference is I think to samatha (subject to checking the > commentary!). > =========================== Hmm! Interesting. Easy to make a mistake here I see. Thanks, Jon! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5718 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 10:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dan > Let me make sure I get this right. I think that samatha can support > and help strengthen insight. And do you say that samatha CAN'T > support and strengthen satipatthana? I don't see it. Can you share > your understanding of the conditions for the arising of satipatthana > and how by that understanding you see that it it is impossible for > samatha to support and strengthen satipatthana? > > Dan I will try and give my understanding about this in as simple terms as possible. Satipatthana is the development of awareness/mindfulness of a reality appearing at the present moment. The prerequisites for the arising of awareness are: - having met the dhamma, listened to it and considered it at length - having understood correctly what awareness is, its function and characteristic and what can be the object of awareness - applying what one has heard and correctly understood. The main obstacle to the arising of awareness is not recognising one’s wrong view about its development. As regards samatha, if we see the importance and urgency of studying the reality of the present moment, it is not necessary to think in terms of a specific role for samatha in that studying, any more than it is to think in terms of a role for dana or sila. This of course is not to deny the great kusala that dana, sila and samatha are. Every opportunity for the development of kusala of any kind is to be welcomed, and any kusala developed will be a support for the future development of awareness. There is a connection, but it is a question as to exactly what that connection is. That’s it in a nutshell for me. Thanks for the opportunity to reflect on this subject. Jon --- Dan wrote: > Dear Jon, > You wrote: > > I question only the further connection that is frequently made > between > > this and satipatthana, namely that for one who sees the importance > of > > satipatthana the practice of samatha will help subdue the > hindrances and > > this can be a great influence for the better in terms of the > satipatthana. > > I do not find this connection explicitly stated in the suttas, > > commentaries or abhidhamma, and it contradicts my understanding of > the > > conditions for the arising of satipatthana (as found in the texts) - > - > > these do not in my view include the suppression of the hindrances > that > > comes with the development of samatha (yes, even though the > hindrances are > > said to 'weaken insight'). > > > > Dan, I hope this clarifies my supposed 'anti-samatha' position. > > Let me make sure I get this right. I think that samatha can support > and help strengthen insight. And do you say that samatha CAN'T > support and strengthen satipatthana? I don't see it. Can you share > your understanding of the conditions for the arising of satipatthana > and how by that understanding you see that it it is impossible for > samatha to support and strengthen satipatthana? > > Dan > 5719 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 11:58am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup this sounds pretty scary... especially about the soverign nation..... it has doomsday occult written all over it.......or money making machine.... > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Anderson > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:38 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way of > bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra meditation. > One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the result is, > like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes back to > the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. > > Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental condition, a > spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of approach to > what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. Benson's > Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a part of > the problem.) > > There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. I can > post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and seems > to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these > feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into greater > dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for others.] > > Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! Presently, he > is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor South > American country. > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > wrote: > > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? Or > others ? > > > > Thanks, > > Loke CL > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tom Anderson > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 7:37 AM > > > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: RE: Welcome to > dhammastudygroup > > > > > > Thank you for your message and you're very welcome here! > > > > > > That's interesting about the TM newsgroups..do hope this never > becomes > > > 'frightening'! > > > I doubt it will. It is just one of the side-effects of TM, I > think. > > > You're in good company here with others who have also studied > > > and practised Zen for many years and also Tibetan Budddhism. > > > > > > Looking forward to hearing more from you. Where do you live? > > > TORONTO > > > > > > Best wishes and thanks, > > > Sarah 5720 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 0:10pm Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > great kusala that dana, sila and samatha are. Every opportunity for the > development of kusala of any kind is to be welcomed, and any kusala > developed will be a support for the future development of awareness. > There is a connection, but it is a question as to exactly what that > connection is. I would be grateful if you expand on what this connection is. kom 5721 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 2:04pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sarah's nephew TOM & Betty's book Dear all, I too would like to know some of the below especially the Christians part.... > > 3. Why people like his aunt (who he seldom sees) were > > brought up strictly as Christians and then became > > Buddhists > 1. the meanings of the word dhamma > 2. how it is divided into nama and rupa > 3. how that is categorized into the 4 paramatthadhamma thanks in advance Loke CL 5722 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 2:12pm Subject: Paying Respect Dear list, Something struck me this morning while I was on my motorcycle on my way to work..... Although I had been a practising Buddhist for almost 13 years.... something came across that I couldn't seem to understand fully.... the question is "Why do we kneel and bring our foreheads down to the back of our hands to pay respects to monks and our teachers....?" Since it was done without knowing in the beginning .... or understanding and now the need to understand arises.. ok ok I was asked by a friend and I couldn't seems to be able to provide a satisfactory answer. Certain friends told me this is to cultivate humility... but is that all ? What other reasons for this actions ? I initially thought it to be some kind of tradition and practise.... But I am sure there is more to it... Any takers ? May all of you be well and happy always, Loke CL 5723 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 2:54pm Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's questions on westerners and rebirth not really... I mean what goes on in a person's mind when the voncersion takes place.. does he sees the negativity and how wrong his birth religion wise.. or maybe he sees it a realisation ... The key question here is what change ? Thanks, Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Jonothan Abbott [SMTP:Jon] > Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2001 5:38 PM > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's questions on westerners and > rebirth > > CL > > I have something I think you might find of interest in your search for > reasons why westerners become interested in Buddhism, and how they handle > issues such as rebirth. > > The other day I received an email from a former colleague, now several > years retired and living back in his home country. Since leaving Hong > Kong he has become a Buddhist! He gives a short explanation, which I will > quote below. It seems that the question of rebirth was quite central to > his change of beliefs. The conversation he mentions was I think the only > conversation I ever had with him on matters of religion, beliefs etc. > > Here is what he writes: > I thought of it [Buddhism] as a curiosity until one day in Hong Kong. > It was the day when I happened to be talking to you and I said something > like - "Isn't it the Buddhists who believe in reincarnation?" And you > said - "So do the Christians - in their way". That thought had such an > effect on me that shortly afterwards I concluded that I wasn't a > Christian. I went and got various books - mainly by Christmas > Humphreys - and decided that his Theosophy or Buddhism made a great deal > of sense - and that a lot of Buddhist ideas make a great deal of sense. > Incidentally, I believe Voltaire once wrote - "It is no more surprising > to be born twice than it is to be born once." > > So there's a first-hand account. Does it answer any questions for you? > > Jon > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Robert Kirkpatrick [SMTP:robert] > > > Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 3:32 PM > > > > > Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: questions > > > > > > Especially when it comes to kamma and rebirth I try to make > > > every effort to convince - if I think there is any chance of > > > slowly bringing one around. > > > There are five actions that inevitably lead one to avicci hell _ > > > these are splitting the sangha, killing an arahant, wounding a > > > Buddha, killing ones father or mother. However, these are rated > > > as being less serious kamma than the wrong view that thinks life > > > ends simply upon death- because this view denies kamma. One who > > > holds this view is said to go to apaya. And it is also strong > > > wrong view that particularly pertains to the simile of the > > > turtle poking his head through the ring every hundred years. > > > Devadatta wounded the buddha and split the sangha - however he > > > didn't have strong wrong view and is predicted to become a > > > pacceka buddha. > > > > > > We can see the danger of such views. Would one who believed in > > > kamma and rebirth have bombed hiroshima. I read an interview > > > with an abortion doctor who felt that he was acting heroically > > > by doing so many (well-paid) abortions a day when it was an > > > unpopular job. > > > When I hear wrong view I really feel concerned for those that > > > hold to it. They feel attached to their view and it may seem > > > rude to disagree with another; but if we think of the > > > consequences if they don't change it will motivate us to do > > > anything we can to help. If we can't help that is fine- but we > > > should be wary of any thinking that might hinder our compassion > > > or slow our efforts to explain. > > > I have consistently found that even when someone strongly > > > disagrees about rebirth and kamma if one gives enough detailed > > > explanantion a slight positive impact is made- just enough to > > > dislodge a smidgen of clinging. This can be built on. Not only > > > that but understanding kamma and vipaka is essential for any > > > higher level of understanding - let alone satipatthana. > > > robert > > > > > [Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)] robert I agree with your views ... and > > I share your sentiment onthe subject... would you care to give example > > of > > the explanation used in detailed form..... to better convince the wrong > > viewed party ?thank you in advance > > > > Loke CL 5724 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 4:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Tom, Mike will remember a long discussion thread that we all found helpful. It was a translation of the Vangakas - cheating dhammas- written by an esteemed sri lankan monk and translated by Gayan (a group member). These are states of mind that look kusala(wholesome) but are imitations and are in fact akusala. You can go to this page http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL%20POSTS%20LINKS and go to "cheating" where you will find links to these posts 3543, 3544, 3545 I sent some of the notes to Sujin Boriharnwanaket and she asked the pali commitee to translate the original commentary (a very pithy summary which the monk used for his expanded work). You can see this at http://www.dhammastudy.com/vancaka.html robert 5725 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 5:42pm Subject: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Erik, Dan, Herman, C.L., Tom A, Num and all, Firstly, many thanks everyone for all the recent great posts which I've really appreciated! I have dozens that I would like to respond to but simply don't have time before our trip on Friday. (We'll be in Europe, Jon for 2wks and me for 4..will be checking in when we have the chance and not at the top of a Swiss mountain!) Back to my ambitious heading...... It is only through the Buddha's teachings that we have the chance to understand more and more precisely the difference between wholesome (kusala) mental states and unwholesome (akusala) ones and to know these as not-self. We could not learn these details in Christianity. At any moment of wholesomeness (whether sila, dana, samatha or vipassana) there is awareness (sati) which is mindful of the wholesome state. In order for wholesome states to be developed, there has to also be the understanding of these realities (either at the level of samatha or vipassana) from the very beginning. At this moment, after seeing an object, is there any knowing whether the mental states which follow are kusala or akusala? When we give a present or show kindness, how much understanding is there of what is skilful and what is unskilful? For most of us, most the time, there is very, very little. There may be some concern about the dosa (aversion) or strong lobha (attachment), but how much understanding is there of the moments with moha (ignorance)? This is why I said to Sukin that just realizing there is 'moha, moha, everywhere' shows there is some real appreciation of the truth! Most the time, the realities are clouded over and we live in a world of stories and concepts as Nina just discussed. In the commentary to the Brahmajala Sutta (B.Bodhi transl p.141) there are comments on the reasons for wrong views (ditthigata) and how they result in 'dogmas' : 'What are the eight standpoints (i.e. grounds for views)? The aggregates, ignorance, contact, perception, initial thought, unwise reflection, evil friends, and the voice of another....' '"....They (the standpoints) are 'thus misapprehended' (evamparamattha) i.e. apprehended again and again with an unquestioning mind and consummated with the conclusion 'This alone is truth, any other view is false'. " (Note this last phrase relates to wrong views only!). One of the (wrong) doctrines discussed is that of 'The doctrines of endless equivocation'. This is' equivocation through endless views and speech' in one who 'does not himself declare anything as wholesome or unwholesome' and who does not understand the courses of wholesome and unwholesome kamma. I like this quote (p.166): 'When asked: 'Is this wholesome?", he says: 'I do not take it thus.' Asked: 'What, 's it then unwholesome?', he says: 'I do not take it that way.' Asked; 'is it then something other than these two?', he says: 'Nor do I take it in some other way.' Asked; 'If it is neither of these three, what is your opinion?", he says: 'I do not say that it is not.' Asked : 'In your opinion is it neither this nor that?' he says: 'Nor do I say that it is neither this nor that.' Thus he resorts to equivocation and does not take a stand on any single side.' Many very highly 'intelligent' friends of mine hold similar views and do not accept that even strong anger is necessarily unwholesome. We read that all wrong views are bound up with the idea of self and thus it is only the sotapanna who has eradicated the wrong view of self and all other wrong views. If there is no understanding of the difference between any moments of kusala and akusala, it is very easy to follow a concentration practice (TM or any supposedly Buddhist practice) and to obtain many apparent benefits and altered mental states. However, in order for it to be the development of samatha or vipassana at any given moment, the mental states must be wholesome and panna (rt understandingat the respective level) has to be present. Like Rob, I find there are many moments of reflection on death in a day, not by any special trying, but just by conditions because of reading and hearing useful comments. Death can come at any moment and all the possessions and people and other objects of attachment can be lost at any time. Indeed fire is on our heads and this may be a condition for panna (wisdom) to arise. There may be wholesome mental states when we reflect like this but not necessarily. There can also be concentrating on the topic of death or breath or any other object of samatha in a quiet placeand it may seem that samatha is being developed. But even at the very beginning, such as now, is there really any knowing of which moments are wholesome and calm and which aren't? Personally, speaking, I find it very easy to be deluded, to concentrate with a deep-rooted idea of self and to take the pleasant experiences for being the development of calm. Erik, when we are concerned to get rid of 'dukkha' doesn't this show the clinging? In an absolute sense all realities are unsatisfactory (dukkha), even the blissful ones, and for this reason we need to know and develop detachment not just from those we find unpleasant but from whatever is conditioned now. With this in mind, even though there can of course be moments of kusala and even of wisdom when one takes any kind of intoxicants or mind-altering drugs, the reason it is strongly advised against is because it makes the job harder and there are likely for most people to be more conditions for other kinds of unwholesomeness. There are fewer conditons for hiri and otappa (moral shame and dread) and other wholesome states to arise at these times. When we listen to a piece of music by Bach or Beethoven, it will depend on what musical understanding we have as to how it is appreciated and whether it is appreciated in the way the composer intended or not. And so when we read a sutta, what is understood now with some appreciation of abhidhamma may be different from before or it may just be a little deeper. Along the way, understanding is bound to see some wrong views and interpretations we have, however, and this is really a cause for joy to my mind! I hope I haven't jumped around too much. I may not be able to write anything more except for short simple notes 'til my return, but you're all in very good company and I look forward to enjoying all the posts while I'm away. (At this stage of total home and office chaos, I'd be just as happy to stay put , but those are some proliferations which are not worth pursuing!! Best wishes, Sarah 5726 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 5:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sarah's nephew TOM & Betty's book Dear Tom P., --- Tom wrote: > > > Firstly apologies for not posting anything since I registered to > become a part of this group. I have had a look at some discussions of > which some makes absolutely no sense whilst others I can understand > amounts of. Super! It may be helpful for you to read the posts under the title 'New to the List and new to Buddhism' where several people gave good advice to someone else in a similar postion: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/USEFUL%20POST%20LINKS others her may have recommended books for beginners with a webpage link (Rob or Binh?) . The > analysis below about what I do and don't know about is essentially > correct, although I did read some Buddhist readings on Consciousness > and Social construction of the Self for a Philosophy course as a part > of my degree. Interesting and you've always reflected a lot I know. > > I have a book called 'Teach yourself Buddhism' which I am gradually > working through. My interest at present is purely investigative > though this may not remain the case. This is a healthy approach and I look f/w to chatting more when I see you very soon in Sussex!! There is a glossary for the pali terms: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/glossary_of_pali_terms.htm but just read what makes some sense and any questions, however basic (usually the best) will be very welcome by everyone....:(as Jon said, for every question asked there will be many lurkers with the same one in mind at any time I'm sure!) love, Sarah 5727 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 6:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Dear Tom A, --- Tom Anderson wrote: > I think it is extremely difficult to remain grateful to the guru > types who daily try to get us to subscribe to their methods of > enriching them! But you are so right. If H. H. the Dalai Lama can be > grateful to Mao, then, surely all these petty thieves are sent to us > to help us see the Way more clearly. > > Sometimes I ruminate on some aspect of the greed-drived guru-types > out to rip off the ignorant masses and then find in that some little > thing the Buddha said. Increasingly I am overwhelmed by the > brilliance of the elegant insight of the Dharma. > > This news group is such a blessing. Great contributions to the list! .....and don't we listen to and follow whatever teachings seem 'right' at the time? Again, 'our' wrong views and ignorance that are the real problem....not the guru or Mao. Obviously there were conditions and understanding to turn away from TM and join us here...it's a blessing for many of us! Sarah 5728 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 6:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Loke's Christian Friends (was RE: Digest Number 434 _ Hi Tai Eng, Hope you got help with this and perhaps you would let us know what your interest is! --- "Lim Tai Eng." wrote: > I would appreciate if you could email the e-file Beyond Belief by Bhante A.L You also wrote to us off-list about a problem you're having with the 'itinerary' for Binh message which seemed to be sent by you but wasn't!!: >Sorry to bother you again. Just to caution the list that I have recently received the message again. This is the fourth time I received the message and the sender is myself. This time it contain virus. This was detected by the computer system. I just would hope that they do not sent to the dsg list again. I do not know whether it is possible to find out who the actual sender is. I am in the process of finding out. Anyway, it hasn't been sent to the list again and I hope you sort out your problem. I know nothing about technical problems! In the meantime, perhaps you'd tell us a little about yourself. Are you in Australia in perth (as on the itinerary0 or where? Tell us about your group. Best wishes, Sarah p.s hope this goes to the real 'you' and not the fake sender! 5729 From: Tom Anderson Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 6:42pm Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Mondy-making machine would be my first guess. Dooms-Day groups tend not to be profitable ;0) -- Increasingly, from what I can discern from the internet, the organization is attracting fewer members (no doubt because it costs about 1,000 USD to learn the initial technique -- it used to cost about 35 USD). TM bears many resemblances to Buddhist ideas. But Mahesh claimed to have gotten the inspiration for TM whilst visiting the shrine of Lakshmi in southern India. [This was published in a book by Joyce Collins-Smith "Call No Man Master".] You can check out the activities of the organization at TranceNet. There are many guru-types of characters endeavouring to be as successful as Mahesh (he is extremely charming in public and can be ruthless in private). It might not be such a bad idea to be aware of how they have borrowed/distorted the Buddhadhamma for their own purposes. --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > this sounds pretty scary... especially about the soverign nation..... it has > doomsday occult written all over it.......or money making machine.... > > > -----Original Message----- > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > > > TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way of > > bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra meditation. > > One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the result is, > > like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes back to > > the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. > > > > Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental condition, a > > spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of approach to > > what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. Benson's > > Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a part of > > the problem.) > > > > There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. I can > > post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and seems > > to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these > > feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into greater > > dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for others.] > > > > Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! Presently, he > > is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor South > > American country. > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > wrote: > > > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? Or > > others ? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Loke CL > > > 5730 From: Erik Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 6:55pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Erik, when we are concerned to get rid of 'dukkha' doesn't this show the > clinging? To follow the same logic, when the Buddha taught a path for eradicating dukkha that he was promoting clinging. In an absolute sense all realities are unsatisfactory (dukkha), even > the blissful ones, and for this reason we need to know and develop detachment > not just from those we find unpleasant but from whatever is conditioned now. Of course. However you miss one important point. When akusala arises to such a strong degree it wipes out all your lofty aspirations, what then? Unless we are arahants, there will be dukka, very much so in the conventional sense. How do we deal with this? There have to be ways of dealing with dukkha *right now* that let you simply cope until the strength to overcome them fully through insight. And insight will never have cause to arise when the mind is constantly overwhelmed by the hindrances. Impossible! Hence, the Buddha taught the instructions as found in the Sabbasava Sutta, examples like "tolerating" etc. > With this in mind, even though there can of course be moments of kusala and > even of wisdom when one takes any kind of intoxicants or mind- altering drugs, > the reason it is strongly advised against is because it makes the job harder > and there are likely for most people to be more conditions for other kinds of > unwholesomeness. There are fewer conditons for hiri and otappa (moral shame and > dread) and other wholesome states to arise at these times. "Drugs" is an awfully broad category, Sarah. Do you include serotonin and dopamine as drugs (scientists certainy do)? These are native neurotransmitters, and have a very big impact on mood, for example. And yet I am not aware that serotonin is a cause for ahirika or anottapa. Alcohol, and most stupifacient drugs, certainly. And that fits, because the precept against intoxicants mentions anything causing heedlessness. But stupifacient drugs operate under a completely different mechanism than the ones I mention, which include MDMA, LSD, psilocybin, mescaline and their very near cousins. If anything hiri and ottapa and sati are increased with the class of drugs known as psychedelics. Furthermore, it becomes possible to expose deep layers of psychological holding and release them through this practice, which is how I have used them the past twenty years or so. In the case of MDMA, I consider this a perfect adjunct to practice, because it is so versatile. For example, if you know what you're doing you can use this as a very nice way to spend several hours meditating on the Bhrahma viharas, streaming tears of gratitude for your teachers and sending tidal waves of metta to everyone around you--and if that isn't extraordinarily high kusala I don't know what is. Those effects carry over long beyond the session itself, and can leave one with something like a "benchmark" for what really super-powerful metta feels like. That practice was one of the practices that helped me get rid of scads of ragged, nasty karma and even more anger I'd been carryng for years (therapists were using MDMD to help patients get past painful emotional blockages until it was made illegal in the '80s to further the revolting War on Some Drugs), and acted as a support condition for my learning samatha as well as the meaning of conventional Bodhicitta. And, it served as a support conditions feeding into mental and bodily pliancy, thus served as a direct support for samatha ("training wheels" I call it). I am not advocating anyone else do what I've done here because this has come about after 20 years of research into traditional uses of drugs like this (which stretch back 7,000 years in North America--the peyote cults, for example). This is very much a legitimate area of spirituality and will only become moreso as people lose their wrong views about thise things. Huston Smith has a wonderful new book out discussing pharmacology & spiritual experience. Since the mind and body mutually condition one another, using a chemical route is just as legitimate as any other if done with Right View. 5731 From: Tom Anderson Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 6:54pm Subject: wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup One of the difficulties upon which I often find myself dwelling is exactly that: in the beginning of TM I felt so blesssed to have, as it were, gotten into something so incredibly wonderful at the beginning! (Mahesh had only been teaching about 10 years when I started.) It took a long time before I began to feel I had made quite a blunder; but by this time Mahesh had begun to change the original teaching: he started "selling" siddhis (and trandmarked the misspelling 'sidhi' for the purpose). But I also developed a keen sense of suspicion as a result. I hold my own observational abilities as suspect as any guru/teacher I encounter. Like the man from Missouri, I really have a strict "show me" policy. I can therefore be grateful to Mahesh. Perhaps, in a similar kind of way, it is possible to be grateful for all the wrongs into which I have blundered, owing to karma or lack of awareness or faulty discernment. It hasn't been easy. It has been painful. But I have found myself in this company: how fortunate I am, indeed! --- Sarah Procter Abbott wrote: > Dear Tom A, > > --- Tom A wrote: > I think it is extremely difficult to > remain grateful to the guru > > types who daily try to get us to subscribe to their methods of > > enriching them! But you are so right. If H. H. the Dalai Lama can be > > grateful to Mao, then, surely all these petty thieves are sent to us > > to help us see the Way more clearly. > > > > Sometimes I ruminate on some aspect of the greed-drived guru- types > > out to rip off the ignorant masses and then find in that some little > > thing the Buddha said. Increasingly I am overwhelmed by the > > brilliance of the elegant insight of the Dharma. > > > > This news group is such a blessing. > > Great contributions to the list! > .....and don't we listen to and follow whatever teachings seem 'right' at the > time? Again, 'our' wrong views and ignorance that are the real problem....not > the guru or Mao. > > Obviously there were conditions and understanding to turn away from TM and join > us here...it's a blessing for many of us! > > Sarah > > 5732 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 9:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > great kusala that dana, sila and samatha are. Every opportunity for > the > > development of kusala of any kind is to be welcomed, and any kusala > > developed will be a support for the future development of awareness. > > There is a connection, but it is a question as to exactly what that > > connection is. > > I would be grateful if you expand on what this connection is. > > kom I'm not sure that I could do this! My intention was merely to suggest that, while the 2 are not totally unconnected, the relationship between samatha and satipatthana is nowhere near as direct or immediate as I understand Dan to be suggesting. I believe there are a number of ways in which present kusala can be conditioned by past kusala, but I think you would be better able than I am to suggest what they are. Let's hear it, Kom! Jon 5733 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 10:11pm Subject: Thailand - july 28 to August 3 or 4 Dear group, Cybele just mentioned to me that a very kind friend of hers would like to visit Thailand one day. So as I am going on the dates above (and possibly in september too) if anyone is thinking of going in the near future I would love to meet you there. I'll be meeting with Khun Sujin and other friends and all are welcome to join in the discussions - plus dinner in the evening etc. best wishes robert 5734 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 11:02pm Subject: Re: Paying Respect Dear Loke, --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > "Why do we kneel and bring our foreheads down to the back of our > hands to pay respects to monks and our teachers....?" The form of paying respects are not as important as the mental states of the person paying the respects. Different people pay the respects differently (including Anjali, doing what you said, doing what the Thais doi, doing what the Nepalese do, giving flowers, incense, flags, etc.) We pay respects for people deserving of respects, meaning anybody with wholesome qualities, and anybody who are our benefactors. We give the highest respect to the Buddha because of his unparalleled wholesome qualities and beneficiency. We pay respects to our parents because there are no higher benefactors to us. kom 5735 From: Dan Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana [Jon] Dear Jon, Please be patient with me, Jon. I may not be the brightest bulb in the drawer, but I do want to understand. You seem to disagree that samatha can support and strengthen awareness, i.e. that it is impossible for samatha to help sharpen awareness. I really must apologize for my thick skull, but I just don't see how what you wrote supports the argument that it is impossible for samatha to help sharpen awareness. > The prerequisites for the arising of awareness are: > - having met the dhamma, listened to it and considered it at length > - having understood correctly what awareness is, its function and > characteristic and what can be the object of awareness > - applying what one has heard and correctly understood. Or, "The voice of another and wise attention." According to Visudhimagga, the proximate cause for understanding is concentration (Vism. XIV). Also, the hindrances obscure reality, making it difficult to discern the lakhana in dhammas. Samatha entails cultivation of concentration and temporarily dissipates the hindrances, making it easier to discern lakhana, thereby sharpening awareness, provided your "prerequisites" are also met. In this fashion, samatha supports and strengthens awareness. I can't see how this contradicts what you wrote. There MUST be a contradiction, though, for your contention to stand. > As regards samatha, if we see the importance and urgency of studying the > reality of the present moment, it is not necessary to think in terms of a > specific role for samatha in that studying, any more than it is to think > in terms of a role for dana or sila. This is beside the point. There is marked difference between "not necessary to think in terms of a specific role for samatha" and "impossible for samatha to sharpen awareness." > There is a connection, but it is a question as to exactly what that > connection is. That's right. There is a connection, and that connection is more than "no connection." What do you say the connection is? Dan 5736 From: robert Date: Wed Jun 20, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Fwd: Nibbana As A Stimulus Can Condition Re: Robert Kirkpatrick's Reply To Steve --- <> wrote: Dear Robert How are you? You are right. Nibbana as a stimulus can condition us. The only thing I could add to your message is that nibbana is not only the object of the transworldly consciousness (lokuttara citta), but also a stimulus for our sensuous healthy minds with wisdom (kamavacara ñanasampayuttam kusala cittam). Ñana here could be cintamaya ñana or anumana ñana. You might like to read the verse 1 of Metta Suttam, Kuddakapaatha, Khuddakanikaya. The relevant clause in the verse 1 of Metta Suttam is as follows. "yanta santam padam abhisamecca", padam being nibbana. The concept of nibbana, when it is a stimulus for our natural minds, could motivate us to strive for it (sammavayama). That is how nibbana conditions our thinking, actions and other path-specific mental components at the worldly level. You might like also to double check "aramana paccayo" in Patthana. You should find "sabbe dhamma manoviññanadhatuya ....", nibbana being one of dhamma as stimuli. With regards Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Robert wrote: > I just thought: when I said "Nibbana is unconditioned and > unconditioning"; certainly the unconditioned is correct but as it is > an object for the lokuttara citta it must be conditioning in some > ways. > I think it conditions the (future) end of conditions. > robert > > > Robert wrote: > > --- "Stephen Parfitt" wrote: > > > > > > I've read what Nina has to say about kiriyacittas several times > and > > she says that they are neither cause nor result, to my simple mind > > this suggests that they are unconditioned and unconditioning, but > > these adjectives apply only to the paramattha dhamma of Nibbana, > > don't they? > > _______________\ > > Dear Steve, > > Hope you don't mind me adding a little to Amara's answer. > > There are different types of cittas -some are resultant, vipaka > > (sorry for the pali, Dan). Others, the akusala and kusala cittas, > are > > causal - they are those during which new kamma is being made. There > > are also kiriya cittas which arise during every mind process which > > are neither causal nor resultant - the kiriya cittas. > > However, this does not mean they are unconditioned or > unconditioning, > > which only applies to Nibbana as you say. The Buddha explained > > Abhidhamma in detail and in the Patthana we learn of 24 conditions. > > The kiriya citta are conditioned by several of these conditions and > > likewise condition other cittas. But they are not vipaka, nor are > > they akusala or kusala. > > Very useful to study this to see how absolutely anatta > > (uncontrollable and conditioned) are all these moments. > > robert --- End forwarded message --- 5737 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 0:21am Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) Dear Jon, Unfortunately, I only have some suspicion about this connection. I will give you some logics, and then anyone can draw their own conclusion: 1) Alala (the Jhana teacher of the Buddha) had the wisdom to develop Jhana and concentration to the highest degree, had the accumulation such that had he listened from the Buddha, he would have penetrated the true characteristics of dhamma, but yet he didn't. (Jhana Samadhi + enough accumulated panna from the past != enlightenment w/o the teacher's agitation of that accumulated panna in the present life) 2) There are stories about those Bikkhu who had developed Jhana to the highest degree, had listened to the Buddha in that life, but yet didn't penetrate the characteristics of dhamma (Jhana Samadhi + not enough acumulated panna != enlightenment) 3) There are stories about those who penetrated the dhamma while listening to the Buddha through the following series: a) The buddha/disciple explained the topics related to what the audience will be inclined to hearing to condition the kusala mental states of the audience b) The buddha/disciple explained the 4 noble truths or something related allowing the audience to penetrate the true characteristics. (maliable mental states + enough past accumulated panna + agitation of that panna = enlightenment) 4) I believe there are suttas that exhort people to do all different levels of kusala (Sila, Dana, Bhavana) because they are factors to Vimokha. 5) By way of patthana, these kusala dhammas (one-pointedness + pana) during satipathanna are very intertwined in causing each other to arise and supporting each other. Without one, the other doesn't arise. I have no doubt that they must support one another. Hence, my suspicion is this: it is obvious that without understanding and penetration of what dhammas (and the path) truly is, it is impossible to attain enlightenment even if you have samathi at the highest level. However, kusala at all levels supports the development of the path. Then, it is important to develop panna first, and then does any levels of kusala as long as you know (be honest to yourself) that it is kusala. kom --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Kom > > --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > great kusala that dana, sila and samatha are. Every opportunity for > > the > > > development of kusala of any kind is to be welcomed, and any kusala > > > developed will be a support for the future development of awareness. > > > There is a connection, but it is a question as to exactly what that > > > connection is. > > > > I would be grateful if you expand on what this connection is. > > > > kom > > I'm not sure that I could do this! > > My intention was merely to suggest that, while the 2 are not totally > unconnected, the relationship between samatha and satipatthana is nowhere > near as direct or immediate as I understand Dan to be suggesting. > > I believe there are a number of ways in which present kusala can be > conditioned by past kusala, but I think you would be better able than I am > to suggest what they are. Let's hear it, Kom! > > Jon 5738 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 0:29am Subject: Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) The other thought that occured to me is that these conditions are intricate, and only the Buddha can fully know how these dhammas (panna and samathi) support one another. I am suspicious that I will never find a fully-satisfactory answer to this question. All I can do is: 1) Believe in my own experience or conviction 2) Believe in others Both of them are prone to faulty logics and wrong accumulation. In my mind, however, there is no dispute that panna is the leading factor in the enlightenment. kom --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Kom > to suggest what they are. Let's hear it, Kom! > > Jon 5739 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 4:09am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] wrong concentration(Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup --- Tom Anderson wrote: > Increasingly I am overwhelmed by the brilliance of > the elegant insight of the Dharma. > This news group is such a blessing. Couldn't agree more, Tom--good to see you here. mike 5740 From: Howard Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 4:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Joining Realities into a "Whole" (From 'Cetasikas') Hi, Nina - Thank you for the detailed reply. I do understand you. My main point, I think, was the role of memory in grouping of mind-phases and their objects into a conceptual whole. With metta, Howard > op 18-06-2001 21:37 schreef Howard op Howard: > > > Hi, Nina (and all) - > > > > I have started reading (and thoroughly enjoying) 'Cetasikas'. In the > > introduction, you write the following: > > > > Citta and its accompanying cetasikas arise and fall away extremely > rapidly. > > When right understanding has not been developed we cannot distinguish > between > > different objects experienced through the different doorways. We are > inclined > > to join different realities together into a 'whole", and thus we cannot > > realize their arising and falling away, their impermanence, and their > nature > > of non-self. > > > > I am trying to understand *where* the attempted joining of different > > realities occurs. If cittas truly occur as separate, discrete states, > then it > > would seem that such a "joining" would have to occur within a single > citta, > > in which case it is a processing of *memories* of preceding cittas and > their > > cetasikas. Is this so? > Dear Howard, > Joining realities into a whole. > > Does this not happen time and again in our life? We read unpleasant or sad > news and immediately we think with aversion about the story we read, or > about the person who wrote to us, we are distressed by concepts. Or, we read > good news and we are carried away by the story, are delighted. In reality > there is seeing which sees just colour or visible object. Seeing is vipaka, > result of kamma, but seeing only knows colour, it does not know whether the > object is pleasant or unpleasant. Then there are after seeing has fallen > away other types of cittas which recognize the meaning of the letters and > other ones which think of the story that was written, and the thinking goes > on and on. It seems that everything is known in one moment, seeing and > recognizing the letters and knowing the meaning, but this is not so. We join > as it were many different phenomena into a whole: the world, we, ourselves > who are unhappy or happy. Indeed, sa~n~naa, remmebrance, which accompanies > each citta plays an important part, but also other cetasikas. > We may have read many times in the Kindred Sayings on Sense (K. IV, Ch 3, § > 82) the sutta on the World, but it is always new, always fresh since it > reminds us of the truth: > Then a certain brother came to see the Exalted One...Seated at one side that > brother said to the Exalted One:- > Å’ ³The world!The world!² is the saying,lord. How far, lord, does this saying > go?¹ > Å’It crumbles away, brethren. Therefore it is called ³the world.² What > crumbles away? The eye... objects...eye-consciousness...etc. It crumbles > away, brethren. Therefore, it is called ³the world² Å’ > It is so good to be reminded of realities, it can help us in times of > disease, suffering, affliction, loss of dear people. When there is > satipatthana the world starts to crumble away: only one object through one > doorway at a time appears.That is reality, no use to dwell on and on on what > has fallen away. > A long time ago when I was in India with Khun Sujin, Sarah, Jonothan and > others we were having tea in a garden in Benares, discussing the Dhamma > (happy surprise, several of them are on this list, it is like meeting old > friends again). Afterwards we were thinking of the story of the garden and > all the people in it drinking tea, but, as Khun Sujin explained, there is > only one moment of citta thinking of this story, this whole, and when the > thinking falls away, the story is over; where are all the people? It is a > kind of death. At the last moment of life the dying-consciousness falls away > and then also the story of our life we found so important is gone. The late > Phra Dhammadharo kept on reminding us of this. (By the way, this is > mindfulness of death, marana sati, Robert was referring to this as something > that is always with him. Please, Robert, I like a reminder, can you add > something?) > Past experiences have been accumulated and since each citta is succeeded by > a following one they can be remembered vividly, even now. I still remember > so clearly the garden in Benares, sitting there talking Dhamma. > After a long stay in Sri Lanka Sarah brought me to the airport and since I > was sad to take leave she reminded me of the Benares story: all the people > in Sri Lanka we met during these weeks are a story we are thinking of, just > a moment of citta which thinks, and then the story disappears with the citta > which falls away. No more. > Thus, if we realize that there are in the ultimate sense only elements, no > people, no world, we may begin to understand the difference between the > moments we think of concepts and the moments that just one reality appears > at a time. > For more explanation you may like to read the article on Zolag web > Understanding Reality, about eating a duck¹s foot. We think, I am eating a > duck¹s foot but there are many different realities: seeing, visible object, > attention to shape and form, tasting, thinking of flavour. > Nina. > > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5741 From: jlsallis Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 6:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: Welcome to dhammastudygroup >Hi, Judy, > >Where do you live by the way? ---Denver, Colorado, USA. And I'm sure I'll learn a lot! Judy >Best wishes, >Sarah 5742 From: Howard Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 4:56am Subject: Copy of a Post Mailed Thirty-Two hours Ago Hi, all - I mailed the following yesterday, but I haven't seen it yet. My apologies to any of you who have already seen this: ************************************ Hi, Robert (and Jon) - In a message dated 6/19/01 4:20:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, robert writes: > Dear howard and jon, > Could I quote a sutta which may have bearing on your > conversation> > > > > > >       HOward:  Now, this last material points out that the > > hindrances are > > > hindrances > > > to concentration. > > > JON:Agreed. > > > >  Howard: The previous material of the Upanisa Sutta points out > > > the > > > prerequisite status of samatha for vipassana > _____ > > > Jon:  This point I need to consider.  I am wondering if you are > > perhaps equating > > concentration with samatha.  The 2 are not always used > > synonymously > > (although sometimes they are).  Concentration is the normal > > translation > > for samadhi, the cetasika that is one of the Universals. > > Samatha is > > usually translated as tranquillity, calmness or the like, > > since that is > > its distinguishing feature.  Of course, it is developed by > > concentration > > on an appropriate subject (kammatthana), but it is a > > particular kind of > > development of concentration, accompanied by panna and leading > > to the > > tranquillity that comes from being temporarily freed from > > kilesa. > > > > References to concentration are sometimes references to > > concentration of > > the particular kind that accompanies panna of the level of > > vipassana. > > This is possibly how your last reference is to be read > > (concentration that > > is ‘for the ending of the effluents’). > _______________________________________________ > I think Jon has explained this correctly. Here is the samadhi > sutta. Note the different types of concentration. (the 3rd type > is that associated with satipatthana and the last type with > advanced stages of vipassana) > Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 > Samadhi Sutta > Concentration > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which > four? There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There is > the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, > leads to the ending of the effluents. > > 1."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & > now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & > remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from > withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With > the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & > remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of > composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & > evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he > remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive > to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which > the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a > pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- > as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he > enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & > mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development > of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a > pleasant abiding in the here & now. > > 2. "And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & > vision? There is the case where a monk attends to the perception > of light and is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any > hour of the day]. Day [for him] is the same as night, night is > the same as day. By means of an awareness open & unhampered, he > develops a brightened mind. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > attainment of knowledge & vision. > > 3."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is > the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, > known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are > known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they > subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they > persist, known as they subside. This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > mindfulness & alertness. > > 4."And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There > is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling > away with reference to the five aggregates for > sustenance/clinging: 'Such is form, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such > its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, > such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its > origination, such its disappearance.' This is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the > ending of the effluents. > > "These are the four developments of concentration. > > "And it was in connection with this that I stated in Punnaka's > Question in the Way to the Far Shore [Sn V.3]: > > 'He who has fathomed > the far & near in the world, > for whom there is nothing > perturbing in the world -- >    his vices evaporated, >    undesiring, untroubled, >        at peace -- > he, I tell you, has crossed over birth >            aging.'" > > =================================       Thank you (both) for the valid points. For some reason, I have not yet seen the post of yours, Jon, that Robert quotes here.       With regard to concentation and calm not being one and the same, I certainly realize that. But they typically co-occur, and they are mutually supportive. Hence the association. The point of my post was that suppressing the hindrances leads to calm, which fosters concentration, which in turn enables further calm and further suppression of he hindrances, and the concentration is prerequisite for the development of insight, and, hence - bottom line - samatha and supression of hindrances lead to insight. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5743 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 8:30am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup pleaseelaborate more about the ruthless in private thingy.... > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Anderson > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 6:42 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > Mondy-making machine would be my first guess. Dooms-Day groups tend > not to be profitable ;0) -- Increasingly, from what I can discern > from the internet, the organization is attracting fewer members (no > doubt because it costs about 1,000 USD to learn the initial > technique -- it used to cost about 35 USD). TM bears many > resemblances to Buddhist ideas. But Mahesh claimed to have gotten the > inspiration for TM whilst visiting the shrine of Lakshmi in southern > India. [This was published in a book by Joyce Collins-Smith "Call No > Man Master".] You can check out the activities of the organization at > TranceNet. > > There are many guru-types of characters endeavouring to be as > successful as Mahesh (he is extremely charming in public and can be > ruthless in private). It might not be such a bad idea to be aware of > how they have borrowed/distorted the Buddhadhamma for their own > purposes. > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > wrote: > > this sounds pretty scary... especially about the soverign > nation..... it has > > doomsday occult written all over it.......or money making > machine.... > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Tom A [SMTP:Tom A] > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:38 PM > > > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to > dhammastudygroup > > > > > > TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way of > > > bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra > meditation. > > > One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the result > is, > > > like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes > back to > > > the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. > > > > > > Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental condition, a > > > spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of > approach to > > > what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. > Benson's > > > Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a > part of > > > the problem.) > > > > > > There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. I > can > > > post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and > seems > > > to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these > > > feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into > greater > > > dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for others.] > > > > > > Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! > Presently, he > > > is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor South > > > American country. > > > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > > wrote: > > > > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? Or > > > others ? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Loke CL > > > > 5744 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 8:36am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Paying Respect Dear Kom, While as a practising Buddhist that pay respect out of our reverance for the persons quality ... and the sort.... however... how do you explain this (to the person asking's satisfaction and layman's plus non Buddhist or atheist point of view) ? As in why do we do it ? How do you know that the person is worthy ? I think I am referring to the Thera. Anjali practise... Thank you for your time in replying.... May all of you be well and happy always Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 11:02 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Paying Respect > > Dear Loke, > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > "Why do we kneel and bring our foreheads down to the back of > our > > hands to pay respects to monks and our teachers....?" > > The form of paying respects are not as important as the mental states of > the person paying the respects. Different people pay the respects > differently (including Anjali, doing what you said, doing what the Thais > doi, > doing what the Nepalese do, giving flowers, incense, flags, etc.) > > We pay respects for people deserving of respects, meaning anybody with > wholesome qualities, and anybody who are our benefactors. We give the > highest respect to the Buddha because of his unparalleled wholesome > qualities and beneficiency. We pay respects to our parents because there > are no higher benefactors to us. > > kom 5745 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 10:11am Subject: Re: Paying Respect Dear Loke, You ask many questions not to answer your own questions but to answer others'. Personally, if I fully understand why certain things are followed or why they are done, then I know: 1) when not to answer when the differences in understanding are too big or there is not enough time/patience to explain/hear it. 2) when to answer if it can be explained 3) how to explain by knowing the understanding and the inclinationation of the other party. Without all the ingredients, you may not be able to answer a question satisfactorily for the other person. If you remember some of the suttas, even the Buddha, who had sappanuyutta-nanna, cannot explain certain concepts to everybody. --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > ... how do you explain > this (to the person asking's satisfaction and layman's plus non Buddhist or > atheist point of view) ? As in why do we do it ? If you can't explain the concept of wholesome qualities, and why it is good to remind ourself of those good qualities, then you can't answer this question. > How do you know that the > person is worthy ? This is totally a personal judgement. It is *possible* to be paying respect to somebody who is not worthy of such respects, since we can only make judgement on people on their *outward* appearances. Given some time, this worthiness would be clearer. On the other hand, we can often be wrong. For example, you may say "anumoddhana" to my efforts of writing this answer. On the other hand, how do you know I am not writing this message out of conceit, coarse or subtle? You don't: you can only guess. > I think I am referring to the Thera. Anjali practise... I don't know the historical traditions of this practice and why it is done in such a way, so I can't answer this question... kom 5746 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 11:03am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Paying Respect Dear Kom, I trully understand your point of view but if you were trying to get someone close to you to follow the Middle Path and Dhamma and to embrace the Buddha's teaching... you tend to try your utmost best to answer all those question (of course there are previous vipaka that might be hampering this effort.....and we might not have control over it) and we will try every means to lead them out of wrong views... try and fail but never fail to try... of course there is always a limit... but are you telling me to give up just like that... I am not about to ... considering I am still not perfect with all my defilements and attachments.... so it will be helpful if I can ideas and advice from Dhamma friends around the globe.... Thank you p/s as I have no connection to the net in the office.... can provide the suttas excerpt for me ? Rgds, Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 10:11 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Paying Respect > > Dear Loke, > > You ask many questions not to answer your own questions but to > answer others'. Personally, if I fully understand why certain things are > followed or why they are done, then I know: > 1) when not to answer when the differences in understanding are too > big or there is not enough time/patience to explain/hear it. > 2) when to answer if it can be explained > 3) how to explain by knowing the understanding and the inclinationation > of the other party. > > Without all the ingredients, you may not be able to answer a question > satisfactorily for the other person. If you remember some of the suttas, > even the Buddha, who had sappanuyutta-nanna, cannot explain certain > concepts to everybody. > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > > ... how do you explain > > this (to the person asking's satisfaction and layman's plus non > Buddhist or > > atheist point of view) ? As in why do we do it ? > > If you can't explain the concept of wholesome qualities, and why it is > good to remind ourself of those good qualities, then you can't answer > this question. > > > How do you know that the > > person is worthy ? > > This is totally a personal judgement. It is *possible* to be paying > respect to somebody who is not worthy of such respects, since we can > only make judgement on people on their *outward* appearances. > Given some time, this worthiness would be clearer. On the other hand, > we can often be wrong. > > For example, you may say "anumoddhana" to my efforts of writing this > answer. On the other hand, how do you know I am not writing this > message out of conceit, coarse or subtle? You don't: you can only guess. > > > I think I am referring to the Thera. Anjali practise... > > I don't know the historical traditions of this practice and why it is done > in > such a way, so I can't answer this question... > > kom 5747 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 11:32am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, sa matha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! have a safe and enjoyable holiday..... Loke CL > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah Procter Abbott [SMTP:Sarah ] > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 5:43 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, > samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > > Dear Erik, Dan, Herman, C.L., Tom A, Num and all, > > Firstly, many thanks everyone for all the recent great posts which I've > really > appreciated! I have dozens that I would like to respond to but simply > don't > have time before our trip on Friday. (We'll be in Europe, Jon for 2wks and > me > for 4..will be checking in when we have the chance and not at the top of a > Swiss mountain!) > > Back to my ambitious heading...... It is only through the Buddha's > teachings > that we have the chance to understand more and more precisely the > difference > between wholesome (kusala) mental states and unwholesome (akusala) ones > and to > know these as not-self. We could not learn these details in Christianity. > > At any moment of wholesomeness (whether sila, dana, samatha or vipassana) > there > is awareness (sati) which is mindful of the wholesome state. In order for > wholesome states to be developed, there has to also be the understanding > of > these realities (either at the level of samatha or vipassana) from the > very > beginning. > > At this moment, after seeing an object, is there any knowing whether the > mental > states which follow are kusala or akusala? When we give a present or show > kindness, how much understanding is there of what is skilful and what is > unskilful? > > For most of us, most the time, there is very, very little. There may be > some > concern about the dosa (aversion) or strong lobha (attachment), but how > much > understanding is there of the moments with moha (ignorance)? This is why I > said > to Sukin that just realizing there is 'moha, moha, everywhere' shows there > is > some real appreciation of the truth! Most the time, the realities are > clouded > over and we live in a world of stories and concepts as Nina just > discussed. > > In the commentary to the Brahmajala Sutta (B.Bodhi transl p.141) there are > comments on the reasons for wrong views (ditthigata) and how they result > in > 'dogmas' : > > 'What are the eight standpoints (i.e. grounds for views)? The aggregates, > ignorance, contact, perception, initial thought, unwise reflection, evil > friends, and the voice of another....' > > '"....They (the standpoints) are 'thus misapprehended' (evamparamattha) > i.e. > apprehended again and again with an unquestioning mind and consummated > with the > conclusion 'This alone is truth, any other view is false'. " > > (Note this last phrase relates to wrong views only!). > > One of the (wrong) doctrines discussed is that of 'The doctrines of > endless > equivocation'. This is' equivocation through endless views and speech' in > one > who 'does not himself declare anything as wholesome or unwholesome' and > who > does not understand the courses of wholesome and unwholesome kamma. I like > this > quote (p.166): > > 'When asked: 'Is this wholesome?", he says: 'I do not take it thus.' > Asked: > 'What, 's it then unwholesome?', he says: 'I do not take it that way.' > Asked; > 'is it then something other than these two?', he says: 'Nor do I take it > in > some other way.' Asked; 'If it is neither of these three, what is your > opinion?", he says: 'I do not say that it is not.' Asked : 'In your > opinion is > it neither this nor that?' he says: 'Nor do I say that it is neither this > nor > that.' Thus he resorts to equivocation and does not take a stand on any > single > side.' > > Many very highly 'intelligent' friends of mine hold similar views and do > not > accept that even strong anger is necessarily unwholesome. We read that all > wrong views are bound up with the idea of self and thus it is only the > sotapanna who has eradicated the wrong view of self and all other wrong > views. > > If there is no understanding of the difference between any moments of > kusala > and akusala, it is very easy to follow a concentration practice (TM or any > supposedly Buddhist practice) and to obtain many apparent benefits and > altered > mental states. However, in order for it to be the development of samatha > or > vipassana at any given moment, the mental states must be wholesome and > panna > (rt understandingat the respective level) has to be present. > > Like Rob, I find there are many moments of reflection on death in a day, > not by > any special trying, but just by conditions because of reading and hearing > useful comments. Death can come at any moment and all the possessions and > people and other objects of attachment can be lost at any time. Indeed > fire is > on our heads and this may be a condition for panna (wisdom) to arise. > > There may be wholesome mental states when we reflect like this but not > necessarily. There can also be concentrating on the topic of death or > breath or > any other object of samatha in a quiet placeand it may seem that samatha > is > being developed. > > But even at the very beginning, such as now, is there really any knowing > of > which moments are wholesome and calm and which aren't? Personally, > speaking, I > find it very easy to be deluded, to concentrate with a deep-rooted idea of > self > and to take the pleasant experiences for being the development of calm. > > Erik, when we are concerned to get rid of 'dukkha' doesn't this show the > clinging? In an absolute sense all realities are unsatisfactory (dukkha), > even > the blissful ones, and for this reason we need to know and develop > detachment > not just from those we find unpleasant but from whatever is conditioned > now. > > With this in mind, even though there can of course be moments of kusala > and > even of wisdom when one takes any kind of intoxicants or mind-altering > drugs, > the reason it is strongly advised against is because it makes the job > harder > and there are likely for most people to be more conditions for other kinds > of > unwholesomeness. There are fewer conditons for hiri and otappa (moral > shame and > dread) and other wholesome states to arise at these times. > > When we listen to a piece of music by Bach or Beethoven, it will depend on > what > musical understanding we have as to how it is appreciated and whether it > is > appreciated in the way the composer intended or not. And so when we read a > sutta, what is understood now with some appreciation of abhidhamma may be > different from before or it may just be a little deeper. Along the way, > understanding is bound to see some wrong views and interpretations we > have, > however, and this is really a cause for joy to my mind! > > I hope I haven't jumped around too much. I may not be able to write > anything > more except for short simple notes 'til my return, but you're all in very > good > company and I look forward to enjoying all the posts while I'm away. (At > this > stage of total home and office chaos, I'd be just as happy to stay put , > but > those are some proliferations which are not worth pursuing!! > > Best wishes, > Sarah > 5748 From: Howard Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 8:31am Subject: Another Question on Material from the Intro to Cetasikas Hi, Nina (and all) - In the introduction to Cetasikas, there is discussed a "sense door process" and a subsequent "mind door process" as follows: ************************ Summarizing the cittas which perform their function in a sense door process and then in a the mind-door process when a rupa impinges on one of the sense-doors: > atita-bhavanga (past bhavanga) > bhavanga calana (vibrating bhavanga) > bhavangupaccheda (arrest bhavanga, the last bhavanga arising before the > object is experienced through the sense door) > five-sense-door-adverting-consciousness (pancadvaravajjana citta) > sense-cognition (dvi-pancavinnana, seeing-consciousness, etc.) > receiving-consciousness (sampaticchana-citta) > investigating-consciousness (santirana-citta) > determining-consciousness (votthapana-citta) > 7 javana-cittas (kusala cittas or akusala cittas in the case of > non-arahats), > 2 registering-consciousness (tadarammana-cittas which may or may not arise). > Then there are bhavanga-cittas and the last two of these, arising before the object is experienced through the mind-door, are specifically designated by a name. The process runs as follows: > bhavanga calana (vibrating bhavanga) > bhavangupaccheda (which is in this case the mind-door through which the > cittas of the mind-door process will experience the object) > mind-door-adverting-ccnsciousnes (mano-dvaravajjana-citta) > 7 javanacitta > 2 tadarammana-cittas (which may or may not arise) . After the mind-door process has been completed there are bhavanga-cittas again. ************************* What is the ontological status of these processes, these sequences of cittas? Each citta is a so-called "ultimate reality". What about each entire process? Is it just the referent of a concept? Is it "less real" than the cittas which make it up? In what sense is the referent of a (grounded/non-imaginary) concept less real than the "ultimate realities" it subsumes? Is it just that the conceptual object is *constructed* by the mind from directly observed "ultimate realities" which are interrelated in some fashion? If that is, in fact, the answer, then it seems to me that it is not quite the case that the conceptual object is less *real* as much as it is the case that it is less *basic*, being reducible to ultimate objects. (All conditioned dhammas, of course, even the "ultimate realities", have a somewhat "compromised" reality in that they are not independent, separate entities, but are dependently arisen, empty of self.) What are your thoughts on this? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5749 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 5:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Fwd: Re: send me book [The Corporate Body of The Buddha Educational Foundation Dear Gaopeng, --- Gaopeng wrote: > Dear Sarah and the rest, > > Thanks for responding to my very previous post, : > I am 28 years male from Malaysia, a very beginner in Buddhism, > not secterian but inclining theravada, plus some mahayana :-), > melting pot . > There are a few Malaysians in dsg..whereabouts do you live? If you're reading Visuddhimagga, you're obviously quite serious in your studies and many people here have a 'melting pot' background.... Many thanks for all your kind info about the group in Taiwan and i'm glad you've had success in obtaining the books. I haven't looked at the website, but it sounds as though they're very generous. Your notes and translation is very helpful to anyone here who doesn't have the funds to purchase these books. Hope to hear more from you and any comments from the Vism or other books you're reading. Sarah 5750 From: Erik Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 6:05pm Subject: Re: Paying Respect --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > Dear Kom, > > I trully understand your point of view but if you were trying to get > someone close to you to follow the Middle Path and Dhamma and to embrace the > Buddha's teaching... Loke, please take the following comments in the appropriate spirit-- as an observation, not a criticism. Why would you wish to do such a thing? Proselytizing as I understand it (which is what it seems you're suggesting) isn't the way of the Buddha. If a person has the appropriate accumulations, and comes, though experience, to comprehend dukkha, then THAT is their entry into the Dhamma. If they are sincerely asking you about the Dharma after awakening to this fact, beacuse they are really serious about getting out of the mess they just realize they've found themselves in, then that's another story. If this is the case, then please disregard my entire message. But to me, when I hear "trying to get someone...to follow [my path]" I am concerned. "Who" is "trying" to do the "getting" here? What is the motivation, the REAL motivation, behind trying to convince another to join up? As far as skillfully encouraging altruism and ethics whenever the opportunity arises, that's another story, and a great way to share the Dharma (especially if you do this by example) without atempting to coerce someone into another viewpoint they may not be ready (or able) to accept. And in practice that is about the best we can do. Form someone the very best route in thes life ma be Christianity. Who are we to judge another's accumulations such that we can discern if the Buddha's Dharma is their game in this life? If it is, it will assuredly manifest, ASSUREDLY! I know. I;'ve seen to many "meaningful coincidences" around this stuff to ever believe finding the Dhamma is a random activity. 5751 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 8:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Another Question on Material from the Intro to Cetasikas Dear Howard, Really glad you asked this. I've wondered about the same thing and come up with various vague similes and hypotheses but have never managed to formulate the question so well as you've done here. Hope you don't mind if I take a stab at it. The sense-door and mind-door processes both arise and subside so rapidly (as I understand it) that they are subjectively (conventionally) meaningless--as Hermann pointed out recently 'we' can't really experience them--only equally brief mental factors--cittas and cetasikas--can do so. If subsequent, cognizable referents (ideas? paññati?), constructed from previous moments of experience known only to instantaneous naamas, are the only means by which these moments can be intellectually (ontologically) considered, then which are the less abstract (or more 'real'?) To me the answer lies in how the word 'real' is used. In this context I think something is called 'real' just because can be taken as an object by sati, that is, it can be a foundation of mindfulness. The subsequent ideas are not called 'real' because they are an after-the-fact construction which can't be taken as an object by sati. (By the way, in my personal opinion, there IS an important, conventional kind of insight which can be derived from paññati but which is NOT vipassanaa). Also in my personal opinion, it's all-important what we think about and how we think about it. I think that's why the discourses are spoken in conventional language, as if addressed to people who exist and have the power to decide, think, speak and act. So the question of the relationship between (infinitessimal) moments of (present) experience and how 'we' think about them (after the fact) is really crucial (hence abhidhamma?) Do you remember the 'Masterpiece' thread? "...the Blessed One has said, 'Monks, have you seen a masterpiece of painting?' 'Yes, Lord.' 'Monks, that masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, monks, the mind is even more artistic than that masterpiece.'" Gaddula Sutta, SN XXII.100 (S ii 151-2) from Nina's AIDL Jim and Gayan both had some really interesting comments (3974 & ?) that I think are pertinent to these questions. The absolutely convincing nature of this ever-changing 'masterpiece' is, I think, the central problem of view. The other day I was sitting in the sun and a dragonfly landed on my hand. I sat there thinking of this sutta and trying to convince myself that this was just an illusion, a "masterpiece". I stared intently at this dragonfly for several minutes--suddenly, it bent its abdomen slightly, then suddenly POOPED on the back of my hand! It stayed there for a few minutes, then bang! it was gone. Who could've made that up? What was real? I couldn't even begin to get past the 'story' of the pooping dragonfly. Does it help to intellectually conceive of the sense-door and mind-door processes that preceded and left the traces which were the raw material for the 'story'? I honestly don't know. So I guess this isn't an answer to your question... Please excuse the rambling. mike --- Howard wrote: > What is the ontological status of these > processes, these sequences of > cittas? Each citta is a so-called "ultimate > reality". What about each entire > process? Is it just the referent of a concept? Is it > "less real" than the > cittas which make it up? In what sense is the > referent of a > (grounded/non-imaginary) concept less real than the > "ultimate realities" it > subsumes? Is it just that the conceptual object is > *constructed* by the mind > from directly observed "ultimate realities" which > are interrelated in some > fashion? If that is, in fact, the answer, then it > seems to me that it is not > quite the case that the conceptual object is less > *real* as much as it is the > case that it is less *basic*, being reducible to > ultimate objects. (All > conditioned dhammas, of course, even the "ultimate > realities", have a > somewhat "compromised" reality in that they are not > independent, separate > entities, but are dependently arisen, empty of > self.) What are your thoughts > on this? > > With metta, > Howard > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A > star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, > a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond > Sutra) 5752 From: bruce Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 9:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Another Question on Material from the Intro to Cetasikas in a week of many posts, this one really shines...thanks mike, you made my day, made me smile, and provide some excellent foodforthought... bruce At 05:40 2001/06/21 -0700, you wrote: > Dear Howard, > > Really glad you asked this. I've wondered about the > same thing and come up with various vague similes and > hypotheses but have never managed to formulate the > question so well as you've done here. Hope you don't > mind if I take a stab at it. > > The sense-door and mind-door processes both arise and > subside so rapidly (as I understand it) that they are > subjectively (conventionally) meaningless--as Hermann > pointed out recently 'we' can't really experience > them--only equally brief mental factors--cittas and > cetasikas--can do so. If subsequent, cognizable > referents (ideas? pa‚óati?), constructed from > previous moments of experience known only to > instantaneous naamas, are the only means by which > these moments can be intellectually (ontologically) > considered, then which are the less abstract (or more > 'real'?) > > To me the answer lies in how the word 'real' is used. > In this context I think something is called 'real' > just because can be taken as an object by sati, that > is, it can be a foundation of mindfulness. The > subsequent ideas are not called 'real' because they > are an after-the-fact construction which can't be > taken as an object by sati. (By the way, in my > personal opinion, there IS an important, conventional > kind of insight which can be derived from pa‚óati but > which is NOT vipassanaa). > > Also in my personal opinion, it's all-important what > we think about and how we think about it. I think > that's why the discourses are spoken in conventional > language, as if addressed to people who exist and have > the power to decide, think, speak and act. So the > question of the relationship between (infinitessimal) > moments of (present) experience and how 'we' think > about them (after the fact) is really crucial (hence > abhidhamma?) > > Do you remember the 'Masterpiece' thread? > > "...the Blessed One has said, 'Monks, have you seen a > masterpiece of painting?' 'Yes, Lord.' 'Monks, that > masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, > monks, the mind is even more artistic than that > masterpiece.'" > > Gaddula Sutta, SN XXII.100 (S ii 151-2) from Nina's > AIDL > > Jim and Gayan both had some really interesting > comments (3974 & ?) that I think are pertinent to > these questions. > > The absolutely convincing nature of this ever-changing > 'masterpiece' is, I think, the central problem of > view. The other day I was sitting in the sun and a > dragonfly landed on my hand. I sat there thinking of > this sutta and trying to convince myself that this was > just an illusion, a "masterpiece". I stared intently > at this dragonfly for several minutes--suddenly, it > bent its abdomen slightly, then suddenly POOPED on the > back of my hand! It stayed there for a few minutes, > then bang! it was gone. > > Who could've made that up? What was real? I couldn't > even begin to get past the 'story' of the pooping > dragonfly. Does it help to intellectually conceive of > the sense-door and mind-door processes that preceded > and left the traces which were the raw material for > the 'story'? I honestly don't know. So I guess this > isn't an answer to your question... > > Please excuse the rambling. > > mike > > --- Howard wrote: > > > What is the ontological status of these > > processes, these sequences of > > cittas? Each citta is a so-called "ultimate > > reality". What about each entire > > process? Is it just the referent of a concept? Is it > > "less real" than the > > cittas which make it up? In what sense is the > > referent of a > > (grounded/non-imaginary) concept less real than the > > "ultimate realities" it > > subsumes? Is it just that the conceptual object is > > *constructed* by the mind > > from directly observed "ultimate realities" which > > are interrelated in some > > fashion? If that is, in fact, the answer, then it > > seems to me that it is not > > quite the case that the conceptual object is less > > *real* as much as it is the > > case that it is less *basic*, being reducible to > > ultimate objects. (All > > conditioned dhammas, of course, even the "ultimate > > realities", have a > > somewhat "compromised" reality in that they are not > > independent, separate > > entities, but are dependently arisen, empty of > > self.) What are your thoughts > > on this? > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A > > star at dawn, a bubble > > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, > > a flickering lamp, a > > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond > > Sutra) > 5753 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Maranasati - meditation on death (Nina, Erik) Dear Nina, I saw your note asking for reminders about death so am planning to say something on this. Dear Erik, I thought I would tie it into your note about awareness of dhammas and panic attacks. However, I am a little overwhemled with work (plus go to Tokyo on Sunday to give a talk) so it is going to take a few days. In the meantime here is a note I wrote to david on d-l which has a little bearing. --Dear Dave, Deja vue. I developed fear of just about everything a few years after I began Buddhist practice. I was so scared of death and being lost in samsara away from Dhamma. Especially when flying I would break out in a cold sweat and strange sensations would course up and down my body. For sure we cannot control where we will be reborn. We cannot even control the next moment- can you arrange which object will present itself next – seeing, hearing, smelling, touch , feeling, mindobject? If we study the present correctly we will that the idea of control is an illusion. And this is exactly what the Dhamma elucidates when in the Abhidhamma it details the complex conditions that are needed for each moment to arise . The idea of no control seems frightening but it is the key to the Dhamma and also the way to overcoming all fears. It seems fearful because this is where the sense of self is tied to. Kammasakata-nana , the understanding of kamma and its results at its most basic it is simply a belief that if we do good we get good. At deeper levels it applies to every moment: now there is seeing and seeing consciousness is vipaka, conditioned by past kamma. Is the object pleasant now? Yes, at this moment we are reading Dhamma – and that is because we must have fukfilled the beneficial conditions that make this happen. Is there understanding now? If so this is not vipaka (result) but cause (kamma) and this will bring pleasant results in the future sometime; we don't know when. It also conditions more understanding to arise on and on. This sort of study now – of the present moment – gradually wears away the sense of a self who can control. There are many other conditions apart from kamma and they can be undersatood too. Fear is also a conditioned dhamma. If we see it in this way it becomes not our fear but simply an object for study and investigation, something we can learn from. Fear comes with unpleasant feelings – but feelings are not us or ours they are just conditioned dhammas. They should be investigated. On the intellectuallisation ? Well we have to know what the Dhamma is before it can be applied. But only real application works. Sometimes I think "there is no-self, everything is anatta", but even while thinking this there is a hidden belief in "me" who is thinking so. No fast path to understanding , at least in my case. When I was in a plane I took a Dhama book. This didn't stop the fear but while reading it I could see moments of kusala (wholesome ) coming in between the fear. And too I learnt to accept the fear and unpleasant feelings and study them with detachment . Also reflecting often on how kamma has already been done long ago: if it is time to die it will happen – whether on the ground or in the air. And somehow confidence grew that doing all this was very kusala kamma – and that if I did die at least I was doing the best thing that could be done. robert 5754 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 0:20am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > For example, if you know what you're doing you can use this as a very > nice way to spend several hours meditating on the Bhrahma viharas, > streaming tears of gratitude for your teachers and sending tidal > waves of metta to everyone around you--and if that isn't > extraordinarily high kusala I don't know what is. Lobha, or alobha? Samma-vayama? 5755 From: Howard Date: Thu Jun 21, 2001 9:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Another Question on Material from the Intro to Cetasikas Hi, Mike - I think the "stab" you take at this question in the following is excellently executed. There certainly is an obvious sense of conceptual referents being "less real" in that concepts are derivative and non-foundational because of being *constructed* from directly observed, ultimate phenomena. I hesitate, though, to use the "R-word" of 'reality' in this matter, only because to do so might be misleading. I think of concepts as derivative and indirect, but still giving knowledge that is unavailable without them. Yes, ultimately there is no tree in my backyard - ultimately, there is no tree, no backyard, and, in fact, no separate entities at all. Nonetheless, there are patterns of relationships among directly observed phenomena which are captured by the shorthand of concepts, with these relations being a part of "reality" in the larger sense. My point here is that conventional notions such as those of 'tree', 'car', 'person' etc, do carry real semantic value in that they capture relations and relational patterns. Without this, Ibelieve there would be a gap in our knowledge. I don't think we should short-change convention! ;-)) But, of course, we can make grave errors with conventional notions. We can treat such conceptual objects as if they were on the same ontological level as the "ultimate realities", which is a mixing of levels and a conflating of 'fundamental' with 'derivative'. I think that what is important is for us to be able to *distinguish* between ultimate/fundamental and derivative/constructed/reducible. When we can distinguish these easily, consistently, and clearly, we needn't worry too much about "reality" vs "non-reality". A more basic mistake we can make, I think, is in attributing *independent* reality/ essence/ entityness to *any* dhammas, whether derivative or fundamental. All conditioned dhammas have only dependent existence, being dependently arisen and bearing relations to other concurrent dhammas, and, hence, being nothing *in and of themselves*. Even the truly ultimate dhamma, nibbana, the unconditioned element, bears a relation, it would seem, to the conditioned dhammas. If there were no such relation, then there would either be a strict duality between two unbridgeable absolute realities, the "world" of conditions and nibbana, or there would be something along the lines of Advaita Vedanta wherein the world of conditions is absolutely nonexistent and nibbana is a SELF. Neither of these positions, of course, is the middle way of Buddhism wherein *all* dhammas are not-self. With metta, Howard In a message dated 6/21/01 9:04:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time, m. nease writes: > Dear Howard, > > Really glad you asked this. I've wondered about the > same thing and come up with various vague similes and > hypotheses but have never managed to formulate the > question so well as you've done here. Hope you don't > mind if I take a stab at it. > > The sense-door and mind-door processes both arise and > subside so rapidly (as I understand it) that they are > subjectively (conventionally) meaningless--as Hermann > pointed out recently 'we' can't really experience > them--only equally brief mental factors--cittas and > cetasikas--can do so. If subsequent, cognizable > referents (ideas? paññati?), constructed from > previous moments of experience known only to > instantaneous naamas, are the only means by which > these moments can be intellectually (ontologically) > considered, then which are the less abstract (or more > 'real'?) > > To me the answer lies in how the word 'real' is used. > In this context I think something is called 'real' > just because can be taken as an object by sati, that > is, it can be a foundation of mindfulness. The > subsequent ideas are not called 'real' because they > are an after-the-fact construction which can't be > taken as an object by sati. (By the way, in my > personal opinion, there IS an important, conventional > kind of insight which can be derived from paññati but > which is NOT vipassanaa). > > Also in my personal opinion, it's all-important what > we think about and how we think about it. I think > that's why the discourses are spoken in conventional > language, as if addressed to people who exist and have > the power to decide, think, speak and act. So the > question of the relationship between (infinitessimal) > moments of (present) experience and how 'we' think > about them (after the fact) is really crucial (hence > abhidhamma?) > > Do you remember the 'Masterpiece' thread? > > "...the Blessed One has said, 'Monks, have you seen a > masterpiece of painting?' 'Yes, Lord.' 'Monks, that > masterpiece of art is designed by the mind. Indeed, > monks, the mind is even more artistic than that > masterpiece.'" > > Gaddula Sutta, SN XXII.100 (S ii 151-2) from Nina's > AIDL > > Jim and Gayan both had some really interesting > comments (3974 & ?) that I think are pertinent to > these questions. > > The absolutely convincing nature of this ever-changing > 'masterpiece' is, I think, the central problem of > view. The other day I was sitting in the sun and a > dragonfly landed on my hand. I sat there thinking of > this sutta and trying to convince myself that this was > just an illusion, a "masterpiece". I stared intently > at this dragonfly for several minutes--suddenly, it > bent its abdomen slightly, then suddenly POOPED on the > back of my hand! It stayed there for a few minutes, > then bang! it was gone. > > Who could've made that up? What was real? I couldn't > even begin to get past the 'story' of the pooping > dragonfly. Does it help to intellectually conceive of > the sense-door and mind-door processes that preceded > and left the traces which were the raw material for > the 'story'? I honestly don't know. So I guess this > isn't an answer to your question... > > Please excuse the rambling. > > mike > > --- Howard wrote: > > > What is the ontological status of these > > processes, these sequences of > > cittas? Each citta is a so-called "ultimate > > reality". What about each entire > > process? Is it just the referent of a concept? Is it > > "less real" than the > > cittas which make it up? In what sense is the > > referent of a > > (grounded/non-imaginary) concept less real than the > > "ultimate realities" it > > subsumes? Is it just that the conceptual object is > > *constructed* by the mind > > from directly observed "ultimate realities" which > > are interrelated in some > > fashion? If that is, in fact, the answer, then it > > seems to me that it is not > > quite the case that the conceptual object is less > > *real* as much as it is the > > case that it is less *basic*, being reducible to > > ultimate objects. (All > > conditioned dhammas, of course, even the "ultimate > > realities", have a > > somewhat "compromised" reality in that they are not > > independent, separate > > entities, but are dependently arisen, empty of > > self.) What are your thoughts > > on this? > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A > > star at dawn, a bubble > > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, > > a flickering lamp, a > > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond > > Sutra) > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5756 From: Erik Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 4:10am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Dan wrote: > > For example, if you know what you're doing you can use this as a > very > > nice way to spend several hours meditating on the Bhrahma viharas, > > streaming tears of gratitude for your teachers and sending tidal > > waves of metta to everyone around you--and if that isn't > > extraordinarily high kusala I don't know what is. > > Lobha, or alobha? Samma-vayama? The proof of the pudding is in the (one) tasting. 5757 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 4:38am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Extraordinarily intense lobha but oh-so-pleasant. 5758 From: Erik Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 4:54am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Dan wrote: > Extraordinarily intense lobha but oh-so-pleasant. It depends on motivation and the degree of accumulate wisdom, I suppose. For example, tantrikas are renowned for transforming even poisons into the purest amrit. I love the domain of alchemy. 5759 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 5:53am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > > Extraordinarily intense lobha but oh-so-pleasant. > > It depends on motivation and the degree of accumulate wisdom, I > suppose. I doubt it. Isn't that the point? 5760 From: Num Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 2:00am Subject: Drug and alcohol Hi all, Well, I have seen couple posts recently about drug and alcohol use. I know it's personal but please be careful and use wise and careful attention plus wisdom. The positive effects of drug are always very short but the negative consequences stay for much longer time and it's usually pervasive and pernicious. Not everyone get addicted to drug and alcohol when he uses, but a lot of people do and then they have to keep "chasing" for something they will never get. Let me just cut and paste section from Nina's Cetasika, which she quoted it from Visuddhimagga and Atthasalini regarding Lobha or attachment or clinging. ______________________________________________________________________________ _________ The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 162) gives the following definition of lobha: greed has the characteristic of grasping an object like "monkey lime". Its function is sticking, like meat put in a hot pan. It is manifested as not giving up, like the dye of lamp-black. In proximate cause is seeing enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. Swelling with the current of craving, it should be regarded as taking (beings) with it to states of loss, as a swift-flowing river does to the great ocean. The Atthasalini (II, Part IX, Chapter I, 249) gives a similar definition (1 See also Dhammasangani 389). Greed has the characteristic of grasping like monkey lime. Monkey lime was used by hunters in order to catch monkeys. We read in the Kindred Sayings (V, Maha-vagga, Book III, Chapter I, 7, The monkey) that a hunter sets a trap of lime for monkeys. Monkeys who are free from "folly and greed" do not get trapped. We read: .....But a greedy, foolish monkey comes up to the pitch and handles it with one paw, and his paw sticks fast in it. Then, thinking: I'll free my paw, he seizes it with the other paw, but that too sticks fast. To free both paws he seizes them with one foot,. and that too sticks fast. To free both paws and the one foot, he lays hold of them with the other foot, but that too sticks fast. To flee both paws and both feet he lays hold of them with his muzzle: but that too sticks fast. So that monkey thus trapped in five ways lies down and howls, thus fallen on misfortune... In this way the hunter can catch him and roast him over the fire. The Buddha explained to the monks that the monk who is not mindful gets trapped by the "five sensual elements ": visible object, sound, scent, savour and tangible object. When one is taken in by these objects, "Mara gets access" (2 Mara is that which is evil, akusala, and a wider sense: everything which is bound up with dukkha.). Clinging is dangerous, it leads to one's own destruction. Are we at this moment taken in by one of the "five sensual elements"? Then we are in fact "trapped". At the moment of lobha we enjoy the object of clinging and we do not see that lobha makes us enslaved, we do not see the danger of lobha. Therefore it is said that the proximate cause of lobha is seeing enjoyment in things that lead to bondage. Growing into a river of craving, lobha takes us to the "states of loss". Lobha can motivate unwholesome deeds which are capable of producing an unhappy rebirth. So long as lobha has not been eradicated we are subject to birth, old age, sickness and death. ______________________________________________________________________________ __________ Best wishes, Num 5761 From: jlsallis Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 7:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Another Question on Material from the Intro to Cetasikas Hi, group - well, although I said I would lurk for a while, I do have a question. Have also started to read "Cetasikas". I have been mulling over phassa for a while, and even after reading that section, am still stuck. I can see phassa as two possibilities - (1) as a description of the process of contact between the sense base, the object, and the sense consciousness - i.e. the "union" of the three of these is contact. Or (2) As an enabler - something called "contact" enables the union of the sense base, object, and sense consciousness. Neither of these seems satisfactory, but as I said, even after reading the "phassa" chapter, I still can't figure this out. Any ideas? thanks Judy 5762 From: Erik Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 8:14am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Dan wrote: > > > Extraordinarily intense lobha but oh-so-pleasant. > > > > It depends on motivation and the degree of accumulate wisdom, I > > suppose. > I doubt it. Isn't that the point? Not clear what you're saying. Are you suggesting that intense lobha is the ONLY possibly outcome, or only one (or more) person's experience? What I was suggesting is that the wisdom and understanding of the person applying this practice is the most important ingredient. That is the only point I see of any relevance here. 5763 From: Erik Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 8:29am Subject: Re: Drug and alcohol --- Num wrote: > Hi all, > > Well, I have seen couple posts recently about drug and alcohol use. I know > it's personal but please be careful and use wise and careful attention plus > wisdom. Absolutely. Wisdom and caution are vital whenever you tweak your neurons. You can kill yourself if you don't know what you're doing. So know what you're doing! (easier sad than done; it takes a lot of training to learn how to work effectively with medicines). > The positive effects of drug are always very short but the negative > consequences stay for much longer time and it's usually pervasive and > pernicious. Please be very specific which drug you're talking about. Do you mean capsicum (in hot chili)? Caffeine? Nicotine? Alcohol? Psilocybin? Methamphetamine? Dextromethorphan? All of these drugs operate in totally different ways and in totally different neural pathways, some fostering addiction, some working directly against addictive thinking (psychedelic drugs for example). > Not everyone get addicted to drug and alcohol when he uses, but a > lot of people do and then they have to keep "chasing" for something they will > never get. That is where proper training and ritualized use comes in--the traditional way of doing it, the way the Native Americans do. Many have succcessfully used peyote this way to cure alcoholism (the scourge of Amerindians), and Bill Wilsom, founder of AA, strongly encouraged LSD as a treatment for addiction (he used it himself for this purpose). Given these realities, this is much more complicated topic than the sound-bite propagandists of the War on Some Drugs would have us believe. There has been too much misinformation, and far too much confusion about "drugs," comparing apples and oranges. Heroin and LSD couldn't be more different in terms of function, yet many people lump them into the same category, simply because they're all illegal. 5764 From: Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2) Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 9:33am Subject: RE: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Paying Respect [Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)] Dear Ripka, > If a person has the appropriate accumulations, and comes, > though experience, to comprehend dukkha, then THAT is their entry > into the Dhamma. If they are sincerely asking you about the Dharma > after awakening to this fact, beacuse they are really serious about > getting out of the mess they just realize they've found themselves > in, then that's another story. If this is the case, then please > disregard my entire message. > [Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)] agree with what you say > But to me, when I hear "trying to get someone...to follow [my path]" > I am concerned. "Who" is "trying" to do the "getting" here? What is > the motivation, the REAL motivation, behind trying to convince > another to join up? > [Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)] as for the motivation, well from my viewpoints, knowing the effects of certain actions and its kamma is my motivation and push to let the person that I am trying to talk know the cause and effects of things and when they do ask about Buddhist practise .. then I feel I should try my best to explain why Buddhist does things this way or that. > As far as skillfully encouraging altruism and ethics whenever the > opportunity arises, that's another story, and a great way to share > the Dharma (especially if you do this by example) without atempting > to coerce someone into another viewpoint they may not be ready (or > able) to accept. And in practice that is about the best we can do. > [Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)] Showing by example is one thing... I think sometime there arise a need to explain ourselves and share with people our ideas and concepts when they ask of course... > Form someone the very best route in thes life ma be Christianity. Who > are we to judge another's accumulations such that we can discern if > the Buddha's Dharma is their game in this life? If it is, it will > assuredly manifest, ASSUREDLY! I know. I;'ve seen to many "meaningful > coincidences" around this stuff to ever believe finding the Dhamma is > a random activity. > [Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)] this has nothing to do with the Christianity issue.... I think I have been asking way too much question about Christianity that I am somehow pulled towards it everytime a question comes up though it may not be linked.... :>) Rgds, Loke CL 5765 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 9:44am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Erik wrote: > --- Dan wrote: > > > > Extraordinarily intense lobha but oh-so-pleasant. > > > > > > It depends on motivation and the degree of accumulate wisdom, I > > > suppose. > > I doubt it. Isn't that the point? > > Not clear what you're saying. Are you suggesting that intense lobha > is the ONLY possibly outcome, or only one (or more) person's > experience? What I was suggesting is that the wisdom and > understanding of the person applying this practice is the most > important ingredient. That is the only point I see of any relevance > here. No discernment of alobha vs. lobha => no wisdom. Isn't the indulgence done out of lobha for the sake of lobha? If there is wisdom, then there is no need for the drug. If there is no wisdom, then the drug delivers only lobha. 5766 From: Herman Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 2:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Robert, Thank you for your very clear elaboration. Sorry for the gap between replies, there are presently a lot of things taking my attention. In essence we are in agreement. If I may just highlight some differences. --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Herman, > Among the conditions for the continuation of phenomena are the > same greed, hatred and delusion that obsess the mind now: I tend to think that each mental state is a seed for its reappearance, whethere wholesome or unwholesome. Hate will thus , cannot thus, ever lead to anything else but hate. And the wholesome states will never be the source of anything but wholesome states. > consequently at death, assuming these factors haven't been > eradicated, rebirth will ensue. According to Buddhist texts the > transition from one life to another normally wipes out memories > of the earlier existence. It doesn't, however, eliminate deep > character tendencies. For instance if one had developed the > strong habit of kindness this would be carried over to the next > life. I cannot see how this could be given we both agree there is not this "one". I am perhaps being confused at a language level only. There is kindness, but it is not my kindness or your kindness. True enough, kindness will engender kindness, but not as a permanent quality which is transferred from one five fold mass to another to own, in my opinion. The notion of personal kamma is very misleading , I think. > The most common analogy given in Buddhist texts to explain > rebirth is that of an oil-lamp. The flame of the lamp is, in > one sense, the same hour after hour. But we know that it is in > reality different each moment. . The wick, oil and air are > needed to keep it going and it is burning up these up. However > the continuum – one moment of flame links with the next moment – > is happening so fast that we can't see that each moment is > entirely different. When the oil is almost exhausted the flame > may be used to light another lamp. Is it a different flame now? > In one sense yes, the supply of oil and the wick are different. > In another sense it is the same flame. In this simile the oil of > the lamp is like the body of a person. The wick is the body > that functions as the support for the process of consciousness. > The air and oxygen are the objects of sense (colour, sound, > smell etc.) and the flame is like consciousness and other mental > factors. When the person dies that is the same as the first > lamp ending. The transference of the flame to the next lamp is > the same as the arising of consciousness in the new body. This is is very good simile. What continues is consciousness. Hate fosters hate, engenders hate, and there is no powerful magic that will suddenly end this, no matter what happens to five fold masses or other concomitants of mind. But it is not my hate. There is no self owning this hate. But as long as there is hate, there will be more hate. > > To understand conditionality, the crucial aspect of anatta, we > must understand that mind and matter (nama and rupa) can't > simply cease to arise while the conditions for them - greed, > aversion and delusion are present. If we believe that the stream > of mind and matter ends at death - no matter whetehr one is a > monster or a saint - then we are caught in self view of the type > that is anihilation view, a serious wrong view. > This type of view means that one could well decide that it > doesn't matter what anyone does. One could be a killer but when > one dies one is exactly the same as Mother Theresa (by this > thinking). Again I may be being confused at a language level, but in reality there is no killer or Mother Theresa that own the qualities of sinner or saint. There are five fold masses, which are just conditions and then, conditions, conditions, conditions. Can Mother Theresa do any different than she does? Can the person who killed deliberately do differently? > On the question of Hiroshima?; the one who understands > conditionality and kamma and rebirth would sooner stick their > head in a fire than commit such a deed. Hiroshima required the entire history of the entire universe before it could take place. To isolate the pilot who released the bomb as the culprit is surely not your intention. Hiroshima is the result of infinite causes, and they roll on, endlessly. Personal kamma has no heuristic value, at best it may arouse fear. Unless there is seeing the emptiness of Hiroshima as seeing the emptiness of a beautiful garden as seeing the emptiness of ....... whatever , there will continue to be a severe reality conflict for the foreseeable eternities. If there is no stepping off the wheel of rebirth now, it will never happen. Kind Regards Herman > robert > > --- Herman wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > > > So what is reborn? If that is a leading question, feel free to > > > > paraphrase it. > > > > I ask the question in the light of not-self. What is born, > > what is > > reborn? > > > > And you really believe it would be better to have bombed > > Hiroshima > > than to not believe in rebirth? > > > > You obviously have a strong conviction about this. > > > > Kind regards > > > > Herman > > > > > > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > wrote: > > > Hi, Captain Akusala. > > > robert > > > --- Herman wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > Call me Captain Akusala if you wish, I don't believe in > > > > rebirth. > > > > > > > > There is no identity now, no substantial anything, what is > > to > > > > be > > > > reborn if it isn't there in the first place? > > > > > > > > Furthermore, I wouldn't know akusala or kusala if I fell > > over > > > > them. I > > > > know sloth , hatred, love, anger, anxiety, generosity. I > > know > > > > pain, > > > > pleasure, craving, aversion, the top of my breath , the > > bottom > > > > of my > > > > breath, the sensations at the bottom of my breath, the > > > > sensations at > > > > my philtrum when I think of Mum, red, green, rotten egg > > gas, > > > > conceit. > > > > But nowhere have I seen a line that makes these things > > akusala > > > > or > > > > kusala in themselves. Cetasikas don't know whether cittas > > are > > > > kusala > > > > or akusala, cittas don't know themselves. Panna doesn't > > know > > > > it is > > > > Panna. Nibbana doesn't know itself. > > > > > > > > When the doctor asks you whether to save the mother or the > > > > baby not a > > > > single sutta will assist you. You do what you do, thats > > all > > > > there is. > > > > > > > > To take reality, and divide and categorise it on moral > > grounds > > > > is as > > > > arbitrary as choosing between the red and blue teams. They > > > > both > > > > exist, thats reality. > > > > > > > > It is neither good nor bad to change dates on peoples > > > > headstones, > > > > whether to prolong life or shorten it, people will die. To > > > > help the > > > > sick so they die three years later, call it akusala or > > kusala, > > > > it > > > > makes no difference, give food to the poor so that they > > will > > > > die with > > > > 8 teeth in their mouth instead of 3, call it kusala or > > > > akusala, it > > > > makes no difference, just do what you do, because neither > > Mind > > > > nor > > > > Deep Blue knows the consequence of anything. As long as > > there > > > > is life > > > > there is death, as long as there is being, there is > > > > nothingness. > > > > > > > > > > > > Herman > > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > > > wrote: > > > > > One thing I wanted to add. in my post about wrong view > > last > > > > week > > > > > I said how extreme wrong view is the highest akusala. > > Views > > > > that > > > > > deny kamma and rebirth come under this. > > > > > Christianity may not necessarily fit here because while > > > > > christains have wrong view in that they believe in the > > > > saving > > > > > grace of a god, many of them also believe that good > > works > > > > lead > > > > > to heaven: thus mother theresa. > > > > > It really depends how much weight they put on the "grace > > of > > > > god > > > > > (wrong view)" versus "doing good works (ie kamma) as to > > how > > > > > serious the view is. > > > > > robert > > > > > 5767 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 5:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Another Question on Material from the Intro to Cetasikas Dear Judy, I'm glad to see your interest and excellent question. I don't have time to discuss further (but I'm sure someone else will). In the meantime, you may like to look at a post I wrote on phassa, no.5253...maybe you can see if this helps at all first. Look forward to checking in when i can to see what else comes up! Sarah --- jlsallis wrote: > Hi, group - > well, although I said I would lurk for a while, I do have a question. Have > also started to read "Cetasikas". I have been mulling over phassa for a > while, and even after reading that section, am still stuck. I can see > phassa as two possibilities - (1) as a description of the process of contact > between the sense base, the object, and the sense consciousness - i.e. the > "union" of the three of these is contact. Or (2) As an enabler - something > called "contact" enables the union of the sense base, object, and sense > consciousness. Neither of these seems satisfactory, but as I said, even > after reading the "phassa" chapter, I still can't figure this out. > Any ideas? > thanks > Judy > 5768 From: Erik Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 6:58pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Dan wrote: > --- Erik wrote: > > --- Dan wrote: > > Not clear what you're saying. Are you suggesting that intense lobha > > is the ONLY possibly outcome, or only one (or more) person's > > experience? What I was suggesting is that the wisdom and > > understanding of the person applying this practice is the most > > important ingredient. That is the only point I see of any relevance > > here. > > No discernment of alobha vs. lobha => no wisdom. Isn't the indulgence > done out of lobha for the sake of lobha? Hey Dan, Your choice of the word "indulgence" tells me everything I need to know. What I am hearing is the sound of an Inner Puritan waiting to get out! :) You are making prima facie assumptions about others' motivations and understanding here. If you think only in terms of "indulgence," yidams help you. In my own case, about 50% of my trips have been what most people consider "bad" trips (which were the very best trips for me of all, because they let me face my demons directly). Given this fact, how can you suggest that "bad trips" engender lobha, that this is some sort of indulgence? Look me in the virtual eye and tell me you aren't kidding when you use the word "indulgence." This kind of practice is anything BUT indulgence. It's about directly facing your deepest, darkest fears and hidden corners. This is not for the faint of heart. This is not in any sense "indulgence." It is brutal, painful, difficult WORK. Each time I've gone in it's been with deep apprehension and fear of knowing just how difficult it's gonna get (not with MDMA, rather LSD or psilocybin). > If there is wisdom, then there is no need for the drug. If there is SUFFICIENT wisdom and mental development, then there is no need for any "external" supports (kutis, seclusion, even certain drugs). > If there is > no wisdom, then the drug delivers only lobha. What drug delivers lobha inherently? Please elaborate on how this is possible. Yours in heresy, Erik 5769 From: Herman Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 8:17pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Erik, What prevents you from facing some of the less conventional demons? Death would be interesting, don't you think? And serious hard work! Try drinking a litre of sulphuric acid, with a pinch of salt and an olive. It'll do the trick for sure. For the fundamentalists among us, I am not soliciting Erik's demise. I am just suggesting to him that fear of the demise of the self is the lurking demon behind every little demon that manifests itself. I enjoy your posts, Erik, as well as Dan's. Catch ya later, dudes Herman --- Erik wrote: > --- Dan wrote: > > --- Erik wrote: > > > --- Dan wrote: > > > > Not clear what you're saying. Are you suggesting that intense > lobha > > > is the ONLY possibly outcome, or only one (or more) person's > > > experience? What I was suggesting is that the wisdom and > > > understanding of the person applying this practice is the most > > > important ingredient. That is the only point I see of any > relevance > > > here. > > > > No discernment of alobha vs. lobha => no wisdom. Isn't the > indulgence > > done out of lobha for the sake of lobha? > > > Hey Dan, > > Your choice of the word "indulgence" tells me everything I need to > know. What I am hearing is the sound of an Inner Puritan waiting to > get out! :) > > You are making prima facie assumptions about others' motivations and > understanding here. If you think only in terms of "indulgence," > yidams help you. In my own case, about 50% of my trips have been what > most people consider "bad" trips (which were the very best trips for > me of all, because they let me face my demons directly). Given this > fact, how can you suggest that "bad trips" engender lobha, that this > is some sort of indulgence? Look me in the virtual eye and tell me > you aren't kidding when you use the word "indulgence." > > This kind of practice is anything BUT indulgence. It's about directly > facing your deepest, darkest fears and hidden corners. This is not > for the faint of heart. This is not in any sense "indulgence." It is > brutal, painful, difficult WORK. Each time I've gone in it's been > with deep apprehension and fear of knowing just how difficult it's > gonna get (not with MDMA, rather LSD or psilocybin). > > > If there is wisdom, then there is no need for the drug. > > If there is SUFFICIENT wisdom and mental development, then there is > no need for any "external" supports (kutis, seclusion, even certain > drugs). > > > If there is > > no wisdom, then the drug delivers only lobha. > > What drug delivers lobha inherently? Please elaborate on how this is > possible. > > Yours in heresy, > Erik 5770 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 8:48pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! I'm confident that the hallucinogen way is not the Buddha's way. Even if you experience the most passionate fear or "compassion" or "appreciation" while tripping, the question is how much attachment arises either to the various mental phenomena arising at the time, or in recollecting the trips, or anticipating them, or dreading them, or even in defense of the ritual. There is a danger of not recognizing these attachments as attachments (akusala) when they arise. In my understanding, LSD and MDMA work by creating very strong attachments to various mental phenonema when they arise. The attachments are born of attention--even a very close and sensitive and detailed attention-- but it is ayoniso because of the attachment. > Look me in the virtual eye and tell me > you aren't kidding when you use the word "indulgence." Of course I'm not kidding. Regardless of how passionate your tripping may be, indulging in hallucinagens is not path. It's an emotional game that confuses attachment with wisdom. I don't know the cetasikas that will follow the 'hearing' of these words, but I do hope they condition some reflection on how trips are so enmeshed with attachment (POSSIBLY even inherently). > What drug delivers lobha inherently? Please elaborate on how this is > possible. When consciously indulged, LSD inherently delivers attachment (either lobha or dosa). It does by blocking seratonin and thereby intensifying attention. With the increased attention, all kinds of mental phenomena that normally reside in the background take center stage. That's the point of the exercise. But this increased attention is accompanied by attachment--not just an ordinary attachment, but a strong attachment. This is also the point of the exercise--the intense emotional experiences while tripping, and that is attachment. Dan 5771 From: bruce Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 8:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hindrances and Satipatthana (was Re: Discouraging (1.1) [Jon]) hi jon, hi all i, of course, have the thickest skull of anyone on this list (mana!), re: > Satipatthana is the development of awareness/mindfulness of a reality > appearing at the present moment. > > The prerequisites for the arising of awareness are: > - having met the dhamma, listened to it and considered it at length > - having understood correctly what awareness is, its function and > characteristic and what can be the object of awareness > - applying what one has heard and correctly understood. i just don't get this, as usual....how does one "apply" what one has heard? what is being done? how does one "consider" what one has heard? these sound so active and choice-driven ....is this "applying" and "considering" something that one can choose to do? do you do it, jon? does anyone on the list do it? if so, please, i'd really like a description of and details about how-to-do such an activity, as an "activity" is certainly what it sounds like ....or am i unable to see the forest out of the molehills? (sorry for all the quotes, and if the above sounds abrupt; it's not intended to be....i guess i just feel like i'm rapidly losing fluency in english these past few weeks...) bruce 5772 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 9:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Dan, I don't have a strong anti-drug position, as I think alcohol is the more damaging to hiri and otappa. But your explanation seems most insightful. robert --- Dan wrote: > I'm confident that the hallucinogen way is not the Buddha's > way. Even > if you experience the most passionate fear or "compassion" > or "appreciation" while tripping, the question is how much > attachment > arises either to the various mental phenomena arising at the > time, or > in recollecting the trips, or anticipating them, or dreading > them, or > even in defense of the ritual. There is a danger of not > recognizing > these attachments as attachments (akusala) when they arise. In > my > understanding, LSD and MDMA work by creating very strong > attachments > to various mental phenonema when they arise. The attachments > are born > of attention--even a very close and sensitive and detailed > attention-- > but it is ayoniso because of the attachment. > > > Look me in the virtual eye and tell me > > you aren't kidding when you use the word "indulgence." > > Of course I'm not kidding. Regardless of how passionate your > tripping > may be, indulging in hallucinagens is not path. It's an > emotional > game that confuses attachment with wisdom. I don't know the > cetasikas > that will follow the 'hearing' of these words, but I do hope > they > condition some reflection on how trips are so enmeshed with > attachment (POSSIBLY even inherently). > > > What drug delivers lobha inherently? Please elaborate on how > this > is > > possible. > > When consciously indulged, LSD inherently delivers attachment > (either > lobha or dosa). It does by blocking seratonin and thereby > intensifying attention. With the increased attention, all > kinds of > mental phenomena that normally reside in the background take > center > stage. That's the point of the exercise. But this increased > attention > is accompanied by attachment--not just an ordinary attachment, > but a > strong attachment. This is also the point of the exercise--the > > intense emotional experiences while tripping, and that is > attachment. > > Dan > 5773 From: Erik Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 10:26pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Dan wrote: > I'm confident that the hallucinogen way is not the Buddha's way. So am I. I have never suggested there is even a "hallucinogen way." I am a Dhammist, not anythign else. I know for sure they can serve as wonderful aids on the path for those with the appropriate understanding and accumulations. But this is true for any activity done with right understanding and motivation. > Even > if you experience the most passionate fear or "compassion" > or "appreciation" while tripping, the question is how much attachment > arises either to the various mental phenomena arising at the time, or > in recollecting the trips, or anticipating them, or dreading them, or > even in defense of the ritual. How much attachment arises to any practice, anticipating it, dreading it, or in defense of it? >There is a danger of not recognizing > these attachments as attachments (akusala) when they arise. In my > understanding, LSD and MDMA work by creating very strong attachments > to various mental phenonema when they arise. What you suggest is untenable, because it implies there is some inherent property of these drugs that "creates" attachment. How does attachment arise? What are the conditions for lobha? Can the words of the Abhidhamma (whicn divorced from actual practice) be a condition for unhealthy attachment, for example? Other than pointing out the very obvious danger that we can get attached to things, anything, if we lack appropriate attention and understanding, I'm not really sure what your point is. 5774 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Herman, Sorry for interupting here, but I am a bit concerned about the views being expressed here. My impression from your posts is that faith doesn't seem to play a significant role in your views. On the other hand, there are some basic doctrines of Buddhism, regardless of your faith and convictions, that without understanding them, you may mis-interpret somebody's (and Buddha's) saying in a significant way. --- Herman wrote: > I tend to think that each mental state is a seed for its > reappearance, whethere wholesome or unwholesome. Hate will thus , > cannot thus, ever lead to anything else but hate. And the wholesome > states will never be the source of anything but wholesome states. Do you know that by parlay of the Abhidhamma saying, even unwholesome mental states can condition the rising of wholesome states, given the proper attention? The reverse is also true, wholesome mental states can condition the rising of unwholesome states, given the improper attention. Satipatthana (wholesome) can cognize unwholesome states. In this case, an unwholesome state conditions the rising of the wholesome states. When I first start learning about the dhamma in a more serious way, I was motivated to come to the temple to get some food and was curious to see how a person who is not a monk would teach the dhamma. Again, unwholesome states indirectly condition the rising of the wholesome states (or I assume!.) You may also notice that it is very easy to be attached to the wholesome mental states as well. Some people give because it makes them feel good. Do you think this is a form of attachment or non-attachment? We may be attached to all kind of wholesome qualities from any levels of kusala except at the supra-mundane levels: you can be attached to mental qualities (calm, peace, insights, piti [rapture], upekha [indifferent feeling]) of sila, dana, samatha meditation, satipathana, etc, all without even knowing it. Unwholesome states, at their worst, bring only bad results if much developed. This is the laws of kamma, of causes and results, one of the most fundamental doctrines in Buddhism. There are more than one references of this law from all (I believe) the three baskets: not believing in it is said to be a micha-ditthi that can only gets one to be reborn in hell. > > consequently at death, assuming these factors haven't been > > eradicated, rebirth will ensue. According to Buddhist texts the > > transition from one life to another normally wipes out memories > > of the earlier existence. It doesn't, however, eliminate deep > > character tendencies. For instance if one had developed the > > strong habit of kindness this would be carried over to the next > > life. > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree there is not > this "one". I am perhaps being confused at a language level only. > There is kindness, but it is not my kindness or your kindness. True > enough, kindness will engender kindness, but not as a permanent > quality which is transferred from one five fold mass to another to > own, in my opinion. The notion of personal kamma is very misleading , > I think. Both wholesome and unwholesome states are accumulated as "tendencies". These same qualities tend to rise again in the future if one is arising now. Any moments of unwholesome qualities add to the tendencies that they will rise again in the future. You don't even have to believe in the last life, this life, and the next life to see this. "Habits" are the closest conventional explanation to this. Have you ever read the suttas that directly talk about the habits that are carried from one life to another? Have you noticed you own actions that form habits? When we are saying something like, this is not self and this is not mine. Do you see that this can be explained by the assertions that all conditioned dhammas are rising and falling away extremely rapidly because of conditions? As soon as you tag onto (identify) one of these phenomena as self, that reality has already fallen away a long long time ago. On the other hands, it is clear that the phenomena now are conditioning the rising of the next phenomena. This is why we are easily mistaken into identifying things as self because the pheonomena a second ago feel exactly like the phenomena arising now. The example to this would be, if you burn your hand now on a stove, you still remain burned even a second from now. The previous materials that made up your hand a moment ago are conditioning the materials that make up your hand now. They are not the same materials (and hence not self), but yet ones condition the others. This is the same as mental states. The mental states a moment ago is conditioning the mental states arising now. In fact, if you look at the explanations carefully, the conditioning of the mental states now are not just limited by the mental states a moment ago. It is conditioned by all sorts of conditions from the past, even a long long time ago including past lives, with the example being the accumulated tendencies and kamma. > This is is very good simile. What continues is consciousness. Hate > fosters hate, engenders hate, and there is no powerful magic that > will suddenly end this, no matter what happens to five fold masses or > other concomitants of mind. But it is not my hate. There is no self > owning this hate. But as long as there is hate, there will be more > hate. Do you believe in the Buddha, the dhamma and the path, and the Sangha? They are what we associate with the end of suffering. They have all seen (or is) the end of suffering, including hate. Don't you think this is truly amazing and magical? I don't see how anyone could be "practicing" Buddhism without believing these or at least holding that they are possibilities. Without them, you are only taking bits and pieces of the teachings, incorporating them into your own beliefs, maybe all without really trying to understand what the Buddha's teachings fundamentally are. You don't have to believe in all the teachings, but you will need to understand the fundamenatals to understand what other people say, and to see whether or not what other people say matches the teachings (and not your own beliefs) or not. > > > > > To understand conditionality, the crucial aspect of anatta, we > > must understand that mind and matter (nama and rupa) can't > > simply cease to arise while the conditions for them - greed, > > aversion and delusion are present. If we believe that the stream > > of mind and matter ends at death - no matter whetehr one is a > > monster or a saint - then we are caught in self view of the type > > that is anihilation view, a serious wrong view. > > This type of view means that one could well decide that it > > doesn't matter what anyone does. One could be a killer but when > > one dies one is exactly the same as Mother Theresa (by this > > thinking). > > Again I may be being confused at a language level, but in reality > there is no killer or Mother Theresa that own the qualities of sinner > or saint. There are five fold masses, which are just conditions and > then, conditions, conditions, conditions. Can Mother Theresa do any > different than she does? Can the person who killed deliberately do > differently? This is the view that concerns me. I believe you are veering toward the view of there are no causes and effects, even if you are not convinced of the law of kamma yet. > > On the question of Hiroshima?; the one who understands > > conditionality and kamma and rebirth would sooner stick their > > head in a fire than commit such a deed. > > Hiroshima required the entire history of the entire universe before > it could take place. To isolate the pilot who released the bomb as > the culprit is surely not your intention. Hiroshima is the result of > infinite causes, and they roll on, endlessly. Personal kamma has no > heuristic value, at best it may arouse fear. Unless there is seeing > the emptiness of Hiroshima as seeing the emptiness of a beautiful > garden as seeing the emptiness of ....... whatever , there will > continue to be a severe reality conflict for the foreseeable > eternities. > > If there is no stepping off the wheel of rebirth now, it will never > happen. The kamma that the pilot had committed is fully his own. He cannot blame anybody for it. He had the choice, even if the choice may have been being executed for military disobediences. Again, this is the point I am trying to make. Even if you don't think the law of kamma holds true, you may want to at least understand how the Buddha explains how it works. Otherwise, you will not understand what Robert is saying about somebody with the conviction of such laws, he would rather stick his head in the fire rather than commiting such a serious kamma. Although I don't really hope to convince anybody anything that something is true, at least I think we should come to terms what the differences are. I believe I am referencing what the Buddha is teaching (certainly with some mistakes), what do you base your convictions and ideas on? kom 5775 From: Dan Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 10:54pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! > Other than pointing out the very obvious danger that we can get > attached to things, anything, if we lack appropriate attention and > understanding, I'm not really sure what your point is. It is very easy to mistake a drug-induced intensified attention and the attachment associated with that attention as wisdom when it is really delusion. The drug makes discernment more difficult because the attention (manasikara) is artificially intensified without the benefit of increased awareness (sati); it is easier to see more things but more difficult to see them with detachment--an obstacle to the path. Thanks for helping make this clearer to me. Dan 5776 From: Joe Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 11:31pm Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Howdy from Todos Santos, One thing I'd like to point out in this discussion -- and it's not intended to be either in support of or against the use of psychedelics -- is that all our perceptions are chemically conditioned, whether by the food we eat and the air we breathe, or the herbal cough syrup we slurped in the middle of the night. LSD may be less subtle, but the result is the same -- chemically induced perceptions. Some people's brains excrete more serotonin, some less. A few folks I've met seem to be tripping all the time, "naturally", for better or worse. Second, correct practice of dhamma increases attention, does it not? Does attachment automatically follow? Finally, does Guru Tipitaka have anything to say on this topic? Could both positions (pro, anti) be just idle speculation? Joe --- Dan wrote: > > Other than pointing out the very obvious danger that we can get > > attached to things, anything, if we lack appropriate attention and > > understanding, I'm not really sure what your point is. > > It is very easy to mistake a drug-induced intensified attention and > the attachment associated with that attention as wisdom when it is > really delusion. The drug makes discernment more difficult because > the attention (manasikara) is artificially intensified without the > benefit of increased awareness (sati); it is easier to see more > things but more difficult to see them with detachment--an obstacle to > the path. Thanks for helping make this clearer to me. > > Dan 5777 From: Erik Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 0:18am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Dan wrote: > > Other than pointing out the very obvious danger that we can get > > attached to things, anything, if we lack appropriate attention and > > understanding, I'm not really sure what your point is. > > It is very easy to mistake a drug-induced intensified attention and > the attachment associated with that attention as wisdom when it is > really delusion. The drug makes discernment more difficult because > the attention (manasikara) is artificially intensified without the > benefit of increased awareness (sati); it is easier to see more > things but more difficult to see them with detachment--an obstacle to > the path. Thanks for helping make this clearer to me. I am not seeing any of the clarity you suggest you've found. One thing you should be aware of: it is an incontrovertible fact that the a practice combining LSD+MDMA and samatha & vipassana has _directly_ resulted in sotapatti-nana. It's a fait accompli, in other words, whether you choose to accept that or not. I mean, it's entirely possible I am either deluded or a liar, but let's say for the sake of argument I'm not. That means in no uncertain terms that this is none other than the ariyan Dhamma, my friend. Regardless of your own views as to the integrity of what I've just said, every one of your arguments is founded on a number of assumptions not supported anywhere in the Tipitaka. For example, you imply (even say directly) that these drugs _inherently_ produce clinging, so there isn't even any need to go further than analyzing these very arguments to test their integrity when scrutinized in light of anatta and paticca samuppada. I am curious how any view that suggests inherent existence (as you've done) can be anything other than miccha-ditthi. Is there a single phenomenon you can point to in the triple-realm that has such an essence that it is always akusala, that it will always promote clinging in EVERYONE, regardless of accumulations? Second, your arguments ingnore how reality arises: 1) in dependence on conditions; 2) in dependence on parts; and 3) IN DEPENDENCE ON THE MIND LABELING THEM. This last items is the key. If you accept the Buddha's position that all follows on from mind, that our accumulations shape our perceptions of phenomena, then your argument entails the absurd consequence of saying that these particular phenomena ("drugs") exist apart from the mind congizing them, that they are somehow the SOLE exception to the law of anatta. That is an untenable view. For example, by asserting that "drugs" have an _inherently_ akusala nature, it entails the absurd consequence of eternalism--that things possess fixed nature independent of the mind cognizing them. If that's sammaditthi, I'm a monkey's uncle. Nagarjuna would have a field-day refuting such arguments. Come on Dan, I know you can do MUCH better than this, because this is anatta 101. :) And regardless of your personal experiences or opinions, I can say I know FOR SURE I am a MUCH better person today as a result of this practice, my understanding fo the Dhamma is far better, my relationships are far better, and the intensity and committment to living the Dhamma has increased RADICALLY as a direct result of the beneficial influence of these tools. So believe what you will, the proof of the pudding is, as always, in the tasting. (As an aside, this is my very mostest favoritist debate in the whole wide world! :) :) :) --I've found few things force careful investigation into the nature of Dhammas better than controversies like this one!). 5778 From: Howard Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 8:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Hi, Herman (and Robert) - I hope you and Robert don't object to my entering your conversation. In a message dated 6/22/01 2:36:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Herman writes: > Dear Robert, > > Thank you for your very clear elaboration. Sorry for the gap between > replies, there are presently a lot of things taking my attention. > > In essence we are in agreement. If I may just highlight some > differences. > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > wrote: > > > Dear Herman, > > > > Among the conditions for the continuation of phenomena are the > > same greed, hatred and delusion that obsess the mind now: > > I tend to think that each mental state is a seed for its > reappearance, whethere wholesome or unwholesome. Hate will thus , > cannot thus, ever lead to anything else but hate. And the wholesome > states will never be the source of anything but wholesome states. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree, but with the proviso that not all seeds bear fruit. Without the proper associated conditions, a seed may be unproductive, and, in fact, certain conditions could render the seed impotent. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > consequently at death, assuming these factors haven't been > > eradicated, rebirth will ensue. According to Buddhist texts the > > transition from one life to another normally wipes out memories > > of the earlier existence. It doesn't, however, eliminate deep > > character tendencies. For instance if one had developed the > > strong habit of kindness this would be carried over to the next > > life. > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree there is not > this "one". I am perhaps being confused at a language level only. > There is kindness, but it is not my kindness or your kindness. True > enough, kindness will engender kindness, but not as a permanent > quality which is transferred from one five fold mass to another to > own, in my opinion. The notion of personal kamma is very misleading , > I think. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree that there is no underlying something, there is no self. However, according to the Buddha - and I can only take this on faith at the moment - the complex of conditions on which we impute a "person" consists of co-occuring conditions which remain together in a lawfully changing stream which constitutes the conventional being. ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > The most common analogy given in Buddhist texts to explain > > rebirth is that of an oil-lamp. The flame of the lamp is, in > > one sense, the same hour after hour. But we know that it is in > > reality different each moment. . The wick, oil and air are > > needed to keep it going and it is burning up these up. However > > the continuum – one moment of flame links with the next moment – > > is happening so fast that we can't see that each moment is > > entirely different. When the oil is almost exhausted the flame > > may be used to light another lamp. Is it a different flame now? > > In one sense yes, the supply of oil and the wick are different. > > In another sense it is the same flame. In this simile the oil of > > the lamp is like the body of a person. The wick is the body > > that functions as the support for the process of consciousness. > > The air and oxygen are the objects of sense (colour, sound, > > smell etc.) and the flame is like consciousness and other mental > > factors. When the person dies that is the same as the first > > lamp ending. The transference of the flame to the next lamp is > > the same as the arising of consciousness in the new body. > > This is is very good simile. What continues is consciousness. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, except here we need to be careful. There is no "thing", no "substance" called consciousness that continues. The Buddha warned against terminology to the effect that "it is this self-same consciousness that is reborn". There is just the next step in a process of discerning, conditioned by the current state of mind. ------------------------------------------------------------ Hate > fosters hate, engenders hate, and there is no powerful magic that > will suddenly end this, no matter what happens to five fold masses or > other concomitants of mind. But it is not my hate. There is no self > owning this hate. But as long as there is hate, there will be more > hate. ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes ... but. Other factors come into play. It isn't a matter of clockwork determinism. It isn't a matter of a ball of string rolling along fatalistically until fully unravelled, as the simile of a competing school at the time of the Buddha went. If it were, then there would be no fourth noble truth, no path to freedom. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To understand conditionality, the crucial aspect of anatta, we > > must understand that mind and matter (nama and rupa) can't > > simply cease to arise while the conditions for them - greed, > > aversion and delusion are present. If we believe that the stream > > of mind and matter ends at death - no matter whetehr one is a > > monster or a saint - then we are caught in self view of the type > > that is anihilation view, a serious wrong view. > > This type of view means that one could well decide that it > > doesn't matter what anyone does. One could be a killer but when > > one dies one is exactly the same as Mother Theresa (by this > > thinking). > > Again I may be being confused at a language level, but in reality > there is no killer or Mother Theresa that own the qualities of sinner > or saint. There are five fold masses, which are just conditions and > then, conditions, conditions, conditions. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Agreed. --------------------------------------------------------------- Can Mother Theresa do any > different than she does? Can the person who killed deliberately do > differently? -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Do you mean in the future? Do you mean "Can things change?"? Yes. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > On the question of Hiroshima?; the one who understands > > conditionality and kamma and rebirth would sooner stick their > > head in a fire than commit such a deed. > > Hiroshima required the entire history of the entire universe before > it could take place. To isolate the pilot who released the bomb as > the culprit is surely not your intention. Hiroshima is the result of > infinite causes, and they roll on, endlessly. ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Among these causes is human volition. ------------------------------------------------------------ Personal kamma has no > heuristic value, at best it may arouse fear. Unless there is seeing > the emptiness of Hiroshima as seeing the emptiness of a beautiful > garden as seeing the emptiness of ....... whatever , there will > continue to be a severe reality conflict for the foreseeable > eternities. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I miss your meaning here, Herman. Kamma/intention/intentional action has kammic consequence, kamma vipaka. --------------------------------------------------------------- > > If there is no stepping off the wheel of rebirth now, it will never > happen. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It is always "now". But conditions change, and the cultivation of useful conditions can lead to the exact and complete pattern of conditions needed for stepping off the wheel. ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Kind Regards > > Herman > > =================================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5779 From: m. nease Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 0:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Herman and Kom, --- Herman wrote: > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree > there is not this "one". Hermann, I really appreciate your frankness regarding your views. I was a little shocked at first but none of us gets to decide what we do and don't believe--all our beliefs arise and subside according to conditions, as I understand it. That said, I must agree with Kom's points here, as well as I'm able to understand them. I would go further and say that, a view without kamma and rebirth as a central feature may be some form of 'Buddhism' but is definitely not Buddhadhamma. I think the mistake here is in thinking that rebirth implies a self which is reborn. Mistaking what is born and dies for self is absolutely central to Buddhadhamma as I understand it. But throwing out kamma and rebirth along with self-view is a really big mistake, I think. Hermann, I don't take you for "an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person". I know you're extremely well-informed and maybe I've completely misunderstood your points. If so, my apologies--no offense intended. "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by the feeling born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving...That feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to the effluents. "Or he doesn't assume form to be the self...but he may have a view such as this: 'This self is the same as the cosmos. This I will be after death, constant, lasting, eternal, not subject to change.' This eternalist view is a fabrication...Or...he may have a view such as this: 'I would not be, neither would there be what is mine. I will not be, neither will there be what is mine.' This annihilationist view is a fabrication...Or...he may be doubtful & uncertain, having come to no conclusion with regard to the true Dhamma. That doubt, uncertainty, & coming-to-no-conclusion is a fabrication. "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person, touched by what is felt born of contact with ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. That craving...That feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end to the effluents." Samyutta Nikaya XXII.81 Palileyyaka Sutta At Palileyyaka http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/samyutta/sn22-81.html Yo paticcasamuppadam passati, so Dhammam passati. Yo Dhammam passati, so paticcasamuppadam passati. One who sees paticcasamuppada sees the Dhamma. One who sees the Dhamma sees paticcasamuppada. [M.I.191] Best wishes, mike 5780 From: Num Date: Fri Jun 22, 2001 11:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drug and alcohol Hi all, Thanks Dan for your concise points. Erik, your last couple mails sound somewhat tangential. I have some difficulty trying to follow your points. A tight definition of substance of addiction can be somewhat elusive. A lot of people use various terms for various meanings and purposes. One substance e.g. Morphine, called a medication when use for medical indication, a great pain killer esp. postoperative. But when it was abused and used to served addiction it's called drug or street drug. The terms are interchangeably, Chemical, Substance, Psychoactive substance, Drug with some differences. Legality or illegality is not the whole point of addiction, alcohol, nicotine(tobacco) and caffeine are legal in the States but they still can also cause addiction. Also the definition of use, abuse, dependence and addiction are somewhat complicated. When "drug" or "substance" mentioned, it usually refereed to Alcohol, Amphetamine and it derivative, Caffeine, Cannabis, Cocaine, Hallucinogen e.g. LSD, Inhalants, Nicotine, Opioids, PCP and related substance e.g. Ketamine, Sedative, hypnotics, or anxiolytic and misc. e.g anabolic hormone, steroid, anticholinergic medication etc. The final common path of all substances above is, it can activate rewarding circuitry in nervous system. If you use it long enough, usually it will cause permanent brain change(plasticity) or brain damage. As I mentioned in my previous mail with analogy of monkey lime and lobha. Not thing last forever, the drug effect as well, so we have to keep chasing and obtaining them. It's pretty definite that those substances give positive short-live effect but also the longer consequences. Most if car accidents are alc. and marijuana related. Some planes crashes are secondary mj use. A very strong risk factors for complete suicide or homicide is substance use. A lot of heart attacks or strokes are secondary to cocaine or amphetamine use. HIV risk with huggy drug use and sharing needle. Alc is with the most pervasive effect, accident, malnutrition, seizure, dementia, seual and physical abuses, fetal alcohol syndrome. Substance can cause a lot of psychiatric syndromes as well. I think you mentioned about Panic attack, which is not uncommon with LSD use, both during intoxication and even at long term after stop using LSD. Not to mention family, interpersonal, financial, societal cost from drug use. I have never heard that Capsacin is used as psychoactive substance. The mind, brain, rupa and nama are complicated. Tendency or anusayya is lying deep down in everyone. For me it's still hard to recognize which moment is clinging and which is not. Let me again paste from "Cetasika" about Alobha _______________________________________________________ ...alobha has the characteristic of the mind being free from cupidity for an object of thought, or of its being detached, like a drop of water on a lotus leaf. It has the function of not appropriating, like an emancipated monk, and the manifestation of detachment, like a man fallen into a foul place.... ..Some one who falls into a cesspool does not consider that a place of shelter where he could stay. He see it as a danger, as something to be abhorred, and there for he would get out of it as soon as possible. ... ______________________________________________________ So it's self-evident to see when it is the moment of lobha and when is not. As Kom mentioned, akusala can condition kusala and vice versa. Wrong view is pervasive, hard to see. I heard from someone that wrong view is even worse than 5 anantariya-kamma, b/c anantariya-kamma will one day cease it's consequence but wrong view can last indefinitely b/c of it's pervasiveness. I somewhat agree with that. Robert, there is no hiri nor ottappa with any akusala moment, with or without drug, right :) Again please use your careful and wise attention. Nobody else can work harder than you for you to get on the right path. Best wishes, Num 5781 From: Tom Anderson Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 4:37am Subject: Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup Not unlike many guru-types, he could be all sweetness and delight in public. In private, he could be demanding, critical of all effort that produced less than perfect results and punishing of failure. Punishing, here, means withholding his sweetness and delight, putting the one who failed at a distance from which, very possibly, the one who failed could not return. He knew the effect of witholding the love we sought! I believe other organizations know it as shunning. But these things, despite their impact upon our psychological makeup, have to be seen through, recognized as just what they are, past experiences (even, perhaps, present ones). I have found it very difficult to extract myself from the grip and scarring of that kind of spirituality as I became increasingly interested in the Buddhadhamma. (I kept wanting to "figure out" what went wrong. This caused me to have great difficulty in seeing the simple truth laid out plainly before me!) That is not, I believe, the way. The Way is to see experience as experience. Experience, in the solitude of sitting practise, the remnants of what may linger from past damage and simply note its arising, its changing and its departing. What could be more simple or more difficult? But the answer to the conundrum is simply to persist. To persist in persisting. No thing, no experience, no pleasure, no pain has inherent substance. There is only mind and the illusions it plays amongst that must be seen. Perhaps I am confusing the film script (Little Buddha) with something more profound: didn't the Buddha call this tendency of "mind" simply *the architect* -- at the moment of recognizing the architect of our suffering, we are free. If we learn anything from imperfect teachers, it is (?should be?) what to avoid, yes? --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" wrote: > pleaseelaborate more about the ruthless in private thingy.... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tom A [SMTP:Tom A] > > Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 6:42 PM > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to dhammastudygroup > > > > Mondy-making machine would be my first guess. Dooms-Day groups tend > > not to be profitable ;0) -- Increasingly, from what I can discern > > from the internet, the organization is attracting fewer members (no > > doubt because it costs about 1,000 USD to learn the initial > > technique -- it used to cost about 35 USD). TM bears many > > resemblances to Buddhist ideas. But Mahesh claimed to have gotten the > > inspiration for TM whilst visiting the shrine of Lakshmi in southern > > India. [This was published in a book by Joyce Collins-Smith "Call No > > Man Master".] You can check out the activities of the organization at > > TranceNet. > > > > There are many guru-types of characters endeavouring to be as > > successful as Mahesh (he is extremely charming in public and can be > > ruthless in private). It might not be such a bad idea to be aware of > > how they have borrowed/distorted the Buddhadhamma for their own > > purposes. > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > wrote: > > > this sounds pretty scary... especially about the soverign > > nation..... it has > > > doomsday occult written all over it.......or money making > > machine.... > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Tom A [SMTP:Tom A] > > > > Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:38 PM > > > > > > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Fwd: RE: Welcome to > > dhammastudygroup > > > > > > > > TM (transcendental meditation) is Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's way of > > > > bilking folks out of both trust and money. TM is a mantra > > meditation. > > > > One thinks the mantra as easily as any other thought: the result > > is, > > > > like samatha, a sense of quietness, at which point, one comes > > back to > > > > the mantra at that quieter sense of thought. > > > > > > > > Trouble is, this leads to a very dissociated mental condition, a > > > > spacey feeling, a slight disorientation, a dreamy kind of > > approach to > > > > what others consider ordinary reality. (A safer form is Dr. > > Benson's > > > > Relaxation Response; but the dissociative tendency is still a > > part of > > > > the problem.) > > > > > > > > There are several sites that take a very critical look at TM. I > > can > > > > post them if you are interested. Initially, TM feels good and > > seems > > > > to be quite helpful, but one is increasingly drawn (by these > > > > feelings) into a desire for more involvement. [Hence, into > > greater > > > > dissociation from the concerns of life and concerns for others.] > > > > > > > > Maharishi has turned this into a $3+billion enterprise! > > Presently, he > > > > is trying to establish his own soverign nation in a poor South > > > > American country. > > > > > > > > --- "Loke ChaiLiang (EWMA/MEO2)" > > > > wrote: > > > > > what is this TM ... what is it like ? Samatha ? Vipassana ? Or > > > > others ? > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Loke CL > > > > > 5782 From: Erik Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 4:43am Subject: Re: Drug and alcohol --- Num wrote: > Hi all, > > Thanks Dan for your concise points. Erik, your last couple mails sound > somewhat tangential. I have some difficulty trying to follow your points. The one that all dhammas lack self? I think that's the main issue here. The mechanics of the various chemicals themselves are quite secondary in this discussion. It all boils down to the skillfulness of application, which always includes right view. A lot > of people use various terms for various meanings and purposes. One substance > e.g. Morphine, called a medication when use for medical indication, a great > pain killer esp. postoperative. But when it was abused and used to served > addiction it's called drug or street drug. What you are saying is that in the right hands and in the appropriate circumstances, even potentially deadly and addictive drugs can be medicines. My point exactly. 5783 From: robert Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 10:09am Subject: Fwd: Re: Burning down the House --- Robert wrote: Dear Mary, Thanks for quoting the Fire sermon, a favourite sutta. I thought you might like to hear a little about a key term in this sutta - nibbindati. In the translation it says " > Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones > disregards the eye and he disregards forms, and he disregards eye- > consciousness, and he disregards eye-contact, and the feeling that > arises from eye-contact - be it pleasant ore painful or neither > painful nor pleasant - that too he disregards. > __________ Nibbindati is translated here as 'disregards'. Bhikkhu bodhi in his translation has 'experiences revulsion'. Both of these terms are valid as literal meanings but it is good to know more about the context so that we can understand it better. In the sutta preceeding this (samyuttanikaya salayatanvagga 27(4) Full understanding) The Buddha says "Sabba bhikkhave, anabhijana aparijana avirajaya appajaha abhabbo dukkhakkhayaya. This is translated (relying On ven. bodhi's translation) as Bhikkhus without directly knowing and fully understanding the all (sabba), without developing dispassion towards it and abandoning it, one is incapable of destroying suffering. Kiñca, bhikkhave, sabba ...? And what (kinca), bhikkhus is the all..? Yañca, bhikkhave cakkhu, ye ca rupa, yañca cakkhuviññana, ye ca cakkhuviññana aviññatabba dhamma…repeats for other senses. The eye and forms and eyeconsciousness and things to be cognised by eyeconsciousness. there are many other suttas in these same section of the tipitaka explaining again and again how it is by fully understanding the eye and eye consciousness and visible object and the other senses that detachment grows and leads to nibbana. This is rather crucial as we might read the fire sermon and see "disregards eye and disregards form and he disregards eyeconsciousness .." to mean avoiding these contacts. Thus we might aim for some refined state of mind where we can't experience seeing, or think we should close our eyes to have insight. In fact the path is one of understanding all these contacts. This eventually leads to nibbindati because the true nature of seeing and form and eye is known (impermanent, dukkha and not-self) which naturally comes with profound detachement. When venerable Bodhi says "experiences revulsion" he gives a very literal translation of nibbindati but we should know that this really indicates a deep detachement with no aversion (and that only arises in association with pleasant or neutral feeling). robert Mary wrote: > > The Fire Sermon > Translated from Pali as found in "The Selected Suttas" pamphlet > Chithurst Buddhist Monastery: > > With his skill in training the trainable, the All-transcendent > Buddha, clear speaker, teacher of highest knowledge, he who expounds > the Dhamma and Vinaya (training) that is fitting and worthy to the > people, teaching this delightful fire parable to meditators of > highest skill has liberated those who listen with the liberation that > needs no further training, through the true investigation of the wise > and attentive. Let us recite this Sutta displaying the > characteristics of Dukkha. > *** > > Thus have I heard: > At one time the Blessed One was staying near Gaya at Gaya Head > together with a thousand bhikkhus. There the Blessed One addressed > the bhikkhus thus: > > "Bhikkhus, everything is burning. And what, bhikkhus, is everything > that is burning? The eye, bhikkhus, is burning, forms are burning, > eye-consciousness is burning, eye-contact is burning, the feeling > which arises from eye-contact, be it pleasant or painful or neither > painful nor pleasant, that too is burning. With what is it burning > with birth, ageing, and death, with grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow > and despair. > > The ear is burning, sounds are burning, ear-consciousness is burning, > ear-contact is burning, the feeling which arises from ear-contact, be > it pleasant or painful or neither painful nor pleasant, that too is > burning. With what is it burning? I declare it is burning with the > fire of lust, hatred and delusion; it is burning with birth, ageing, > and death, with grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow and despair. > > The nose is burning, odors are burning, nose-consciousness is > burning, nose-contact is burning, the feeling which arises from nose- > consciousness is burning, tongue-contact is burning, the feeling > which arises from tongue-contact, be it pleasant or painful or > neither painful nor pleasant, that too is burning. With what is it > burning? I declare it is burning with the fire of lust, hatred and > delusion; it is burning with birth, ageing, and death, with grief, > lamentation, pain, sorrow and despair. > > The body is burning, tangible objects are burning, body- consciousness > is burning, body-contact is burning, the feeling which arises from > body-contact, be it pleasant or painful or neither painful nor > pleasant, that too is burning. With what is it burning? I declared it > is burning with the fire of lust, hatred and delusion; it is burning > with birth, ageing, and death, with grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow > and despair. > > The mind is burning, mental states are burning, mind-consciousness is > burning, mind-contact is burning, the feeling which arises through > mind-contact, be it pleasant ore painful or neither painful nor > pleasant, that too is burning. With what is it burning? I declare it > is burning with the fire of lust, hatred and delusion; it is burning > with birth, ageing, and death, with grief, lamentation, pain, sorrow > and despair. > > Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones > disregards the eye and he disregards forms, and he disregards eye- > consciousness, and he disregards eye-contact, and the feeling that > arises from eye-contact - be it pleasant ore painful or neither > painful nor pleasant - that too he disregards. > > He disregards the ear and he disregards sounds, and he disregards ear- > consciousness, and he disregards ear-contact, and the feeling that > arises from ear-contact - be it pleasant or painful or neither > painful nor pleasant - that too he disregards. > > He disregards the nose and he disregards odors, and he disregards > nose-consciousness, and he disregards nose-contact, and the feeling > that arises from nose-contact - be it pleasant or painful or neither > painful nor pleasant - that too he disregards. > > He disregards the tongue and he disregards tastes, and he disregards > tongue-consciousness, and he disregards tongue-contact, and the > feeling that arises from tongue-contact - be it pleasant ore painful > or neither painful nor pleasant - that too he disregards. > > He disregards the body and he disregards tangible objects, and he > disregards body-consciousness, and he disregards body-contact, and > the feeling that arises from body-contact - be it pleasant ore > painful or neither painful nor pleasant - that too he disregards. > > He disregards the mind and he disregards mental states, and he > disregards mind-consciousness, and he disregards mind-contact, and > the feeling that arises from mind contact - be it pleasant or painful > or neither painful nor pleasant - that too he disregards. > Disregarding, he is dispassionate; through dispassion he is freed; in > freedom the knowledge comes to be, 'I am freed', and he > comprehends: 'Destroyed is birth, lived is the Brahmafaring, done is > what was to be done, there is no more of being such or such'." > > Thus spoke the Blessed One; delighted, the group of five bhikkhus > rejoiced in what the Lord had said. Moreover, while this discourse > was being uttered, the minds of those thousand bhikkhus were freed > from the defilements, without any further attachment. > > End of Fire Sermon. > > Moral of the story? Never play house with a group of Buddhist unless > your looking to end the game:) > > Much Metta and congratulations to all those of you who make it this > final line. > > Still burning, > But getting cooler, > Mary --- End forwarded message --- 5784 From: robert Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 10:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala --- Thanks Mike, Do you remember a sutta whch goes something like this: the Buddha was expounding in diverse ways the anattaness of all dhammas. At that time a bhikkhu thought "so there is no self, who then gets results of ill deeds, .." and reasoned that kamma etc was not valid. the Buddha knew his mind and severely rebuked him saying that he "had taught in many suttas and gathas about kamma and results" and how this man was overreaching etc. robert "m. nease" <"m. nease"> wrote: > Dear Herman and Kom, > > --- Herman wrote: > > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree > > there is not this "one". > > Hermann, I really appreciate your frankness regarding > your views. I was a little shocked at first but none > of us gets to decide what we do and don't believe--all > our beliefs arise and subside according to conditions, > as I understand it. > > That said, I must agree with Kom's points here, as > well as I'm able to understand them. I would go > further and say that, a view without kamma and rebirth > as a central feature may be some form of 'Buddhism' > but is definitely not Buddhadhamma. > > I think the mistake here is in thinking that rebirth > implies a self which is reborn. Mistaking what is > born and dies for self is absolutely central to > Buddhadhamma as I understand it. But throwing out > kamma and rebirth along with self-view is a really big > mistake, I think. > > Hermann, I don't take you for "an uninstructed, > run-of-the-mill person". I know you're extremely > well-informed and maybe I've completely misunderstood > your points. If so, my apologies--no offense > intended. > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > person, touched by the feeling born of contact with > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > to the effluents. > > "Or he doesn't assume form to be the self...but he may > have a view such as this: 'This self is the same as > the cosmos. This I will be after death, constant, > lasting, eternal, not subject to change.' This > eternalist view is a fabrication...Or...he may have a > view such as this: 'I would not be, neither would > there be what is mine. I will not be, neither will > there be what is mine.' This annihilationist view is a > fabrication...Or...he may be doubtful & uncertain, > having come to no conclusion with regard to the true > Dhamma. That doubt, uncertainty, & > coming-to-no-conclusion is a fabrication. > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > person, touched by what is felt born of contact with > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > to the effluents." > > Samyutta Nikaya XXII.81 > Palileyyaka Sutta > At Palileyyaka > > http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/samyutta/sn22- 81.html > > Yo paticcasamuppadam passati, > so Dhammam passati. > Yo Dhammam passati, > so paticcasamuppadam passati. > > One who sees paticcasamuppada > sees the Dhamma. > One who sees the Dhamma > sees paticcasamuppada. > > [M.I.191] > > Best wishes, > > mike > 5785 From: Dan Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 11:02am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Hi Joe, Está en Guatemala. Que bueno! Of course all our perceptions are chemically conditioned, and serotonin titers vary from person to person and from moment to moment, especially when a chemical is ingested with the purpose of radically altering brain chemistry for a full day. You ask: "correct practice of dhamma increases attention, does it not? Does attachment automatically follow?" This is an excellent question and well put. Attention (manasikara) is present in every moment of consciousness (citta)--wholesome, unwholesome, and neither- wholesome-nor-unwholesome. Correct practice is defined in terms of development of wise attention (yoniso manasikara), which necessarily weakens attachment (by definition). For example, a meditator sits quietly in a corner, eyes closed, concentrating on the meditation subject. After some time, the mind becomes calm and the perception of the meditation subject becomes sharp and clear. In this relatively calm and concentrated state, many subtle objects become clear. This is a dangerous time for a meditator because it is easy to become enraptured by seeing subtle mental phenomena with a clarity unsurpassed in everyday experience. It is astoundingly difficult not to confuse this clarity of vision of sensations as wisdom or as the goal of the practice or as evidence of progress in understanding, but it must be understood that awareness of the subtle sensations is distinctly different from the experiential penetration of the essential characteristics of dhammas (the lakhana, viz. anatta, anicca, and dukkha) that comes with the development of wisdom. Also, the intellectual understanding of the lakhana arising with the awareness of subtle sensations is also distinctly different from understanding based on attainment (bhavamayapañña). Realizing the differences may take years or decades of practice with a good teacher; but even a long period of the most careful and scrupulous practice is no guarantee of any level of discernment. These "corruptions of insight" based on misinterpretation of meditative experience are overcome only after penetrating the characteristics of all the dhammas that the mind experiences (without discrimination) and seeing them as they are (yathabuta), at the time they arise and pass away. It is not easy, even with persistent effort because that effort needs to be "right effort" (samma-vayama). "Right effort" is manifested externally in much the same way as "conventional effort", so it can be difficult to discern the difference. Right effort doesn't just pop up out of the blue before a thorough understanding of conventional effort and its limitations has been developed. Without strong development of right effort, understanding is bound to weak, shallow, and inconsistent; but conceit (mana) gives rise to confusion between strong perception and wisdom. In meditation, right effort and understanding lag perception and concentration. Sometimes the development of understanding appears painfully slow (craving for results). Partially out of lack of patience and partially out of conceit, perception is mistaken for advanced development. With hallucinogens temporary "development" of perception requires litte effort or discipline, and the tendency to confuse perception with wisdom tends to be MUCH stronger than it is for the beginning meditator because that perception is very strong and right effort and understanding have very little chance to develop. If right effort and understanding have developed to the point where they rival the intensity of the drug-induced perceptions, the inclination to "trip" would not be there. If the right effort and understanding are not sufficiently developed to rival the intensity of the perceptions, then the perceptions cannot but generate attachment and delusion. There really are no shortcuts to insight. Dan > Howdy from Todos Santos, > > One thing I'd like to point out in this discussion -- and it's not > intended to be either in support of or against the use of > psychedelics -- is that all our perceptions are chemically > conditioned, whether by the food we eat and the air we breathe, or > the herbal cough syrup we slurped in the middle of the night. LSD may > be less subtle, but the result is the same -- chemically induced > perceptions. Some people's brains excrete more serotonin, some less. > A few folks I've met seem to be tripping all the time, "naturally", > for better or worse. > > Second, correct practice of dhamma increases attention, does it not? > Does attachment automatically follow? > > Finally, does Guru Tipitaka have anything to say on this topic? Could > both positions (pro, anti) be just idle speculation? > > Joe > > > --- Dan wrote: > > > Other than pointing out the very obvious danger that we can get > > > attached to things, anything, if we lack appropriate attention > and > > > understanding, I'm not really sure what your point is. > > > > It is very easy to mistake a drug-induced intensified attention and > > the attachment associated with that attention as wisdom when it is > > really delusion. The drug makes discernment more difficult because > > the attention (manasikara) is artificially intensified without the > > benefit of increased awareness (sati); it is easier to see more > > things but more difficult to see them with detachment--an obstacle > to > > the path. Thanks for helping make this clearer to me. > > > > Dan 5786 From: Dan Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 11:04am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Dear Erik, > I am not seeing any of the clarity you suggest you've found. What you have helped to clarify for me is how taking hallucinogens is a rite, especially when they are viewed as a tool for developing along the path. I don't deny that ritual can be helpful on a superficial level, but ultimately any ritual is ineffectual. This doesn't mean that ritual is wrong, only that it is akusala to cling to ritual or to a particular ritual or to take offense if someone questions a ritual that is precious to you. A particular instance of performing a ritual is wrong when it does more to generate delusion than understanding. In some people with weak understanding but an openness to learn, hallucinogens can teach that there are subtle mental phenomena occuring that we normally don't pay any attention to. This is very important to know, but ultimately it is pretty superficial knowledge. You have also given me occasion to think through the hallucinogen issue a little more fully to understand more precisely the role of hallucinogens in spiritual development. Viz., there is a danger in that the subtle mental phenomena can take on an undeserved, unwholesome importance in the mind. The mind easily becomes strongly attached to these phenomena or simply to their subtlety. Recognizing this strong attachment is difficult, but overcoming the attachment is even more difficult, so that while the value of the hallucinogen is superficial, its danger is great. > thing you should be aware of: it is an incontrovertible fact that the > a practice combining LSD+MDMA and samatha & vipassana has _directly_ > resulted in sotapatti-nana. It's a fait accompli, in other words, > whether you choose to accept that or not. I mean, it's entirely > possible I am either deluded or a liar... I don't think you are a liar, nor do I think you are lying in this case. I do think it's entirely possible that you are deluded, but I'm not going to spend much time speculating on that. That's your job! What do you think? Is it possible that you are deluded? > said, every one of your arguments is founded on a number of > assumptions not supported anywhere in the Tipitaka. For example, you > imply (even say directly) that these drugs _inherently_ produce > clinging, I didn't say or imply that these drugs "inherently produce clinging." My exact words were: "When consciously indulged, LSD inherently delivers attachment (either lobha or dosa)." If someone slips LSD into an Arahant's rice bowl, it will not produce clinging. But when someone makes a conscious decision to drop acid as a tool for spiritual development, that volition is rooted in lobha (and moha, of course). The drug takes over from there, intensifying perception at the cost of discernment. The result? Intense attachment to normally subtle mental phenomena or attachment to the sudden non-subtleness of those same kinds of phenomena. > I am curious how any view that suggests inherent existence (as you've > done) can be anything other than miccha-ditthi. Is there a single > phenomenon you can point to in the triple-realm that has such an > essence that it is always akusala, that it will always promote > clinging in EVERYONE, regardless of accumulations? Dosa, lobha, and moha are three dhammas that are always akusala (i.e. any consciousness they accompany is necessarily akusala), but I don't think I understand your question. > If you accept the Buddha's position that > all follows on from mind, that our accumulations shape our > perceptions of phenomena, then your argument entails the absurd > consequence of saying that these particular phenomena ("drugs") exist > apart from the mind congizing them, that they are somehow the SOLE > exception to the law of anatta. I'm not following you here. Buddha didn't espouse a view that "All follows from mind." Are you referring to Dhp. 1: "Manopuggangama dhamma…" (Mind precedes mental phenomena…)? Most material phenomena do not follow from mind, but Buddha did not concern himself with such phenomena. > That is an untenable view. For example, by asserting that "drugs" > have an _inherently_ akusala nature, it entails the absurd > consequence of eternalism--that things possess fixed nature > independent of the mind cognizing them. I'm not sure what you mean by "things possess fixed nature independent of the mind cognizing them", but I do agree that it would be absurd to assert that "drugs" are inherently akusala. Obviously, the substances are just substances---no citta to call akusala or kusala. I don't know what your point is, though. > And regardless of your personal experiences or opinions, I can say I > know FOR SURE I am a MUCH better person today as a result of this > practice, my understanding fo the Dhamma is far better, my > relationships are far better, and the intensity and committment to > living the Dhamma has increased RADICALLY as a direct result of the > beneficial influence of these tools. Well, I certainly cannot vouch for your personal experiences, but I am glad to hear that your understanding of and commitment to Dhamma have increased radically. Development of understanding of Dhamma is a phenomenon that is always kusala. I hope your development continues. Best wishes, Dan 5787 From: Victor Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 1:04pm Subject: introduction/hi Hi all, I've been reading messages for some time, and this is the first message I post to the list. I am 29, from the States, started learning Buddhism about 6 years ago and specifically the Theravada tradition about 3 years ago. metta, Victor 5788 From: robert Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 3:17pm Subject: Re: introduction/hi --- Welcome Victor, look forward to your comments . robert Victor wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been reading messages for some time, and this is the first > message I post to the list. > > I am 29, from the States, started learning Buddhism about 6 years ago > and specifically the Theravada tradition about 3 years ago. > > metta, > Victor 5789 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 3:27pm Subject: Re: introduction/hi Dear Victor, Thanks for the introduction and welcome to the group. I bet our moderators and others are happy to hear it. kom --- Victor wrote: > Hi all, > > I've been reading messages for some time, and this is the first > message I post to the list. > > I am 29, from the States, started learning Buddhism about 6 years ago > and specifically the Theravada tradition about 3 years ago. > > metta, > Victor 5790 From: Herman Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 7:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Greetings, Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Herman (and Robert) - > > I hope you and Robert don't object to my entering your conversation. I always send each post to everyone in the group, and would never object to an opinion from anyone. > In a message dated 6/22/01 2:36:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > Herman writes: > > > > Dear Robert, > > > > Thank you for your very clear elaboration. Sorry for the gap between > > replies, there are presently a lot of things taking my attention. > > > > In essence we are in agreement. If I may just highlight some > > differences. > > > > --- Robert Kirkpatrick > > wrote: > > > > > Dear Herman, > > > > > > > Among the conditions for the continuation of phenomena are the > > > same greed, hatred and delusion that obsess the mind now: > > > > I tend to think that each mental state is a seed for its > > reappearance, whethere wholesome or unwholesome. Hate will thus , > > cannot thus, ever lead to anything else but hate. And the wholesome > > states will never be the source of anything but wholesome states. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree, but with the proviso that not all seeds bear fruit. Without > the proper associated conditions, a seed may be unproductive, and, in fact, > certain conditions could render the seed impotent. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you, very true. The conclusion that beckons is that not every thought or action (even if it has an intention) will necessarily have a result. Uncharted territory for me, I don't know. > > > > > > > > consequently at death, assuming these factors haven't been > > > eradicated, rebirth will ensue. According to Buddhist texts the > > > transition from one life to another normally wipes out memories > > > of the earlier existence. It doesn't, however, eliminate deep > > > character tendencies. For instance if one had developed the > > > strong habit of kindness this would be carried over to the next > > > life. > > > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree there is not > > this "one". I am perhaps being confused at a language level only. > > There is kindness, but it is not my kindness or your kindness. True > > enough, kindness will engender kindness, but not as a permanent > > quality which is transferred from one five fold mass to another to > > own, in my opinion. The notion of personal kamma is very misleading , > > I think. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree that there is no underlying something, there is no self. > However, according to the Buddha - and I can only take this on faith at the > moment - the complex of conditions on which we impute a "person" consists of > co-occuring conditions which remain together in a lawfully changing stream > which constitutes the conventional being. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > The most common analogy given in Buddhist texts to explain > > > rebirth is that of an oil-lamp. The flame of the lamp is, in > > > one sense, the same hour after hour. But we know that it is in > > > reality different each moment. . The wick, oil and air are > > > needed to keep it going and it is burning up these up. However > > > the continuum â€" one moment of flame links with the next moment â€" > > > is happening so fast that we can't see that each moment is > > > entirely different. When the oil is almost exhausted the flame > > > may be used to light another lamp. Is it a different flame now? > > > In one sense yes, the supply of oil and the wick are different. > > > In another sense it is the same flame. In this simile the oil of > > > the lamp is like the body of a person. The wick is the body > > > that functions as the support for the process of consciousness. > > > The air and oxygen are the objects of sense (colour, sound, > > > smell etc.) and the flame is like consciousness and other mental > > > factors. When the person dies that is the same as the first > > > lamp ending. The transference of the flame to the next lamp is > > > the same as the arising of consciousness in the new body. > > > > This is is very good simile. What continues is consciousness. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Yes, except here we need to be careful. There is no "thing", no > "substance" called consciousness that continues. The Buddha warned against > terminology to the effect that "it is this self-same consciousness that is > reborn". There is just the next step in a process of discerning, conditioned > by the current state of mind. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Hate > > fosters hate, engenders hate, and there is no powerful magic that > > will suddenly end this, no matter what happens to five fold masses or > > other concomitants of mind. But it is not my hate. There is no self > > owning this hate. But as long as there is hate, there will be more > > hate. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes ... but. Other factors come into play. It isn't a matter of > clockwork determinism. It isn't a matter of a ball of string rolling along > fatalistically until fully unravelled, as the simile of a competing school at > the time of the Buddha went. If it were, then there would be no fourth noble > truth, no path to freedom. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > If, in a single moment there is no attachment, no dosa, lobha, moha, is there freedom in that moment? Or do you have to be completely out of jail before you can be free? But then, in the outside world, you might be married, and still feel imprisoned? Or your job, kids, whatever. Is freedom a place, or an experience. If it is a place, then when you are there , thats all there is, but if it is an experience, then it is a rose amongst thorns, a light in darkness. > > > > > > To understand conditionality, the crucial aspect of anatta, we > > > must understand that mind and matter (nama and rupa) can't > > > simply cease to arise while the conditions for them - greed, > > > aversion and delusion are present. If we believe that the stream > > > of mind and matter ends at death - no matter whetehr one is a > > > monster or a saint - then we are caught in self view of the type > > > that is anihilation view, a serious wrong view. > > > This type of view means that one could well decide that it > > > doesn't matter what anyone does. One could be a killer but when > > > one dies one is exactly the same as Mother Theresa (by this > > > thinking). > > > > Again I may be being confused at a language level, but in reality > > there is no killer or Mother Theresa that own the qualities of sinner > > or saint. There are five fold masses, which are just conditions and > > then, conditions, conditions, conditions. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Agreed. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Can Mother Theresa do any > > different than she does? Can the person who killed deliberately do > > differently? > -------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Do you mean in the future? Do you mean "Can things change?"? Yes. > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Things change. For sure. If there were no change there would be no awareness. Awareness is awareness of change. If there is no change , there is nothing. But the path of change is always one, meaning, there are not multiple realities, only one. Mother Theresa, or my mum, or anyone else's mum do what they do. That's all. > > > > > > > > On the question of Hiroshima?; the one who understands > > > conditionality and kamma and rebirth would sooner stick their > > > head in a fire than commit such a deed. > > > > Hiroshima required the entire history of the entire universe before > > it could take place. To isolate the pilot who released the bomb as > > the culprit is surely not your intention. Hiroshima is the result of > > infinite causes, and they roll on, endlessly. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Among these causes is human volition. > ------------------------------------------------------------ Yes , I accept that. But the direction that volition can take is determined by awareness. If there is no awareness , then things will roll on blindly, endlessly. If there is awareness, then volition can say Yes, No, Stop, Go. > Personal kamma has no > > heuristic value, at best it may arouse fear. Unless there is seeing > > the emptiness of Hiroshima as seeing the emptiness of a beautiful > > garden as seeing the emptiness of ....... whatever , there will > > continue to be a severe reality conflict for the foreseeable > > eternities. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I miss your meaning here, Herman. Kamma/intention/intentional action > has kammic consequence, kamma vipaka. > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Giving a scrap of food to a beggar is in essence no different to kicking him in the shins. If you kick him because you love him, and you say to him get off your arse and feed yourself, then you will perceive when you are being kicked that people love you. Intention conditions the perception of whatever future reality arises (nama), it doesn't condition the reality (rupa). > > > > If there is no stepping off the wheel of rebirth now, it will never > > happen. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > It is always "now". But conditions change, and the cultivation of > useful conditions can lead to the exact and complete pattern of conditions > needed for stepping off the wheel. > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > I accept what you are saying. But is stepping off the wheel a permanent thing. Once you're off' you're off? I have these doubting thoughts about the convenience of the Buddha becoming enlightened, realising Nibbana, yet staying alive, and dying in pain. The carrot is not being reborn? Metta Herman > > Kind Regards > > > > Herman > > > > > =================================== > With metta, > Howard > > > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble > in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a > phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) > > > > 5791 From: Dan Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 7:56pm Subject: Re: introduction/hi Hi Victor, It's good to hear from you. Which part of the States do you live in? ...Looking forward to hearing more from you. Dan > Hi all, > > I've been reading messages for some time, and this is the first > message I post to the list. > > I am 29, from the States, started learning Buddhism about 6 years ago > and specifically the Theravada tradition about 3 years ago. > > metta, > Victor 5792 From: Howard Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 4:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Hi, Herman - In a message dated 6/23/01 7:35:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Herman writes: > If, in a single moment there is no attachment, no dosa, lobha, moha, > is there freedom in that moment? Or do you have to be completely out > of jail before you can be free? But then, in the outside world, you > might be married, and still feel imprisoned? Or your job, kids, > whatever. > > Is freedom a place, or an experience. If it is a place, then when you > are there , thats all there is, but if it is an experience, then it > is a rose amongst thorns, a light in darkness. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: With regard to the previous two paragraphs, from my reading and from my very meager experience, I believe that that the answer is "both". I do believe that there is a mode of "awareness", sometimes called unmanifestive discernment, discussed a bit in the Udana, which is radiant, devoid of all conditions, and which is perfect peace, timeless, without flaw, and the entry to which uproots defilements. It is a "place" in the sense you mention that when there, that's all that there is. "Entry" to it has the effect of uprooting defilements and leading towards the final stage of sanctification in which all conditions are, as it were, "seen through" for good, and the realm of conditions-in-time and the timeless realm of nibbana are seen to form a seamless whole. But until the path has been walked to its end, I suspect that your description "a rose amongst thorns, a light in darkness" is valid. ------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > To understand conditionality, the crucial aspect of anatta, we > > > > must understand that mind and matter (nama and rupa) can't > > > > simply cease to arise while the conditions for them - greed, > > > > aversion and delusion are present. If we believe that the stream > > > > of mind and matter ends at death - no matter whetehr one is a > > > > monster or a saint - then we are caught in self view of the type > > > > that is anihilation view, a serious wrong view. > > > > This type of view means that one could well decide that it > > > > doesn't matter what anyone does. One could be a killer but when > > > > one dies one is exactly the same as Mother Theresa (by this > > > > thinking). > > > > > > Again I may be being confused at a language level, but in reality > > > there is no killer or Mother Theresa that own the qualities of > sinner > > > or saint. There are five fold masses, which are just conditions > and > > > then, conditions, conditions, conditions. > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Agreed. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Can Mother Theresa do any > > > different than she does? Can the person who killed deliberately > do > > > differently? > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Do you mean in the future? Do you mean "Can things change?"? > Yes. > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Things change. For sure. If there were no change there would be no > awareness. Awareness is awareness of change. If there is no change , > there is nothing. But the path of change is always one, meaning, > there are not multiple realities, only one. Mother Theresa, or my > mum, or anyone else's mum do what they do. That's all. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: In one sense, this is tautology. In another sense, this might be fatalism. We *can* take volitional actions which have consequences. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On the question of Hiroshima?; the one who understands > > > > conditionality and kamma and rebirth would sooner stick their > > > > head in a fire than commit such a deed. > > > > > > Hiroshima required the entire history of the entire universe > before > > > it could take place. To isolate the pilot who released the bomb > as > > > the culprit is surely not your intention. Hiroshima is the result > of > > > infinite causes, and they roll on, endlessly. > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > Among these causes is human volition. > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > Yes , I accept that. > But the direction that volition can take is determined by awareness. > If there is no awareness , then things will roll on blindly, > endlessly. If there is awareness, then volition can say Yes, No, > Stop, Go. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes! Agreed completely. Exactly so. -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Personal kamma has no > > > heuristic value, at best it may arouse fear. Unless there is > seeing > > > the emptiness of Hiroshima as seeing the emptiness of a beautiful > > > garden as seeing the emptiness of ....... whatever , there will > > > continue to be a severe reality conflict for the foreseeable > > > eternities. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > I miss your meaning here, Herman. > Kamma/intention/intentional action > > has kammic consequence, kamma vipaka. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Giving a scrap of food to a beggar is in essence no different to > kicking him in the shins. If you kick him because you love him, and > you say to him get off your arse and feed yourself, then you will > perceive when you are being kicked that people love you. Intention > conditions the perception of whatever future reality arises (nama), > it doesn't condition the reality (rupa). ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Again, I may be missing your point. One thing that occurs to me to say here is that suffering does not consist of unpleasant experience in general, but consists of the unpleasant mental experience of reacting with craving, craving for the presence or absence of various experiences. ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > If there is no stepping off the wheel of rebirth now, it will > never > > > happen. > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > It is always "now". But conditions change, and the > cultivation of > > useful conditions can lead to the exact and complete pattern of > conditions > > needed for stepping off the wheel. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > I accept what you are saying. But is stepping off the wheel a > permanent thing. Once you're off' you're off? I have these doubting > thoughts about the convenience of the Buddha becoming enlightened, > realising Nibbana, yet staying alive, and dying in pain. The carrot > is not being reborn? -------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that I should reiterate what I said last about suffering. Suffering is not pain; it is *minding* pain. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > Metta > > Herman > > ============================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 5793 From: Victor Date: Sat Jun 23, 2001 10:38pm Subject: Re: introduction/hi Hi Dan, --- Dan wrote: > Hi Victor, > It's good to hear from you. Which part of the States do you live > in? ...Looking forward to hearing more from you. Currently I live in Philadelphia, PA. > > Dan > metta, Victor 5794 From: m. nease Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 0:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Robert, Here's a link to a translation of the Mahaatanhaasankhayasutta.m Sutta (incorrectily identified in the URL and on the web page as the culatanhasankhaya-sutta). There's a Pali version (correctly identified) on the same site. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/037-culatanhasankhaya-sutta-e1.htm Cheers! mike --- robert wrote: > Do you remember a sutta whch goes something like > this: > the Buddha was expounding in diverse ways the > anattaness of all > dhammas. At that time a bhikkhu thought "so there is > no self, who > then gets results of ill deeds, .." and reasoned > that kamma etc was > not valid. the Buddha knew his mind and severely > rebuked him saying > that he "had taught in many suttas and gathas about > kamma and > results" and how this man was overreaching etc. > robert 5795 From: Joe Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 1:31am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Estoy en Todos Santos, Mexico, guey (hay dos en Mexico, uno en Guatemala)! I never suggested psychedelics were a short cut to anything. Your comment about it not requiring enough effort echoes Aldous Huxley's conclusion that although these substances may 'open the doors to perception', those doors remain shut tighter than ever afterwards. Of course he wasn't using the word 'perception' in exactly the same way you are, more akin to what you term 'wisdom'. Your point about intention (in another of your postings) is a good one. My point was, and I guess I should have given examples, that when we drink a cup of coffee to further practice, if we eat a scrambled egg burrito to further practice, we are intentionally altering our body's chemistry in order to attain. To me the difference is very subtle, to you perhaps not. But I'd still like to hear what the Tipitaka has to say on the subject. I haven't found anything that quite applies, not that I (or anyone I know) has read the entire Tipitaka. Otherwise you're just speculating, however intellectually satisfying the speculation may be. A couple of years ago either Tricycle or Inquiring Mind (I forget which) devoted an entire issue to the debate about psychedelics and Buddhism. Very interesting reading, covering a lot of the same ground you and your debate opponent have thus far covered, plus some the two of you haven't yet touched on, if I remember correctly. Joe ...--- Dan wrote: > Hi Joe, > Está en Guatemala. Que bueno! > > Of course all our perceptions are chemically conditioned, and > serotonin titers vary from person to person and from moment to > moment, especially when a chemical is ingested with the purpose of > radically altering brain chemistry for a full day. > > You ask: "correct practice of dhamma increases attention, does it > not? Does attachment automatically follow?" This is an excellent > question and well put. Attention (manasikara) is present in every > moment of consciousness (citta)--wholesome, unwholesome, and neither- > wholesome-nor-unwholesome. Correct practice is defined in terms of > development of wise attention (yoniso manasikara), which necessarily > weakens attachment (by definition). > > For example, a meditator sits quietly in a corner, eyes closed, > concentrating on the meditation subject. After some time, the mind > becomes calm and the perception of the meditation subject becomes > sharp and clear. In this relatively calm and concentrated state, many > subtle objects become clear. This is a dangerous time for a meditator > because it is easy to become enraptured by seeing subtle mental > phenomena with a clarity unsurpassed in everyday experience. It is > astoundingly difficult not to confuse this clarity of vision of > sensations as wisdom or as the goal of the practice or as evidence of > progress in understanding, but it must be understood that awareness > of the subtle sensations is distinctly different from the > experiential penetration of the essential characteristics of dhammas > (the lakhana, viz. anatta, anicca, and dukkha) that comes with the > development of wisdom. Also, the intellectual understanding of the > lakhana arising with the awareness of subtle sensations is also > distinctly different from understanding based on attainment > (bhavamayapañña). Realizing the differences may take years or decades > of practice with a good teacher; but even a long period of the most > careful and scrupulous practice is no guarantee of any level of > discernment. These "corruptions of insight" based on > misinterpretation of meditative experience are overcome only after > penetrating the characteristics of all the dhammas that the mind > experiences (without discrimination) and seeing them as they are > (yathabuta), at the time they arise and pass away. It is not easy, > even with persistent effort because that effort needs to be "right > effort" (samma-vayama). "Right effort" is manifested externally in > much the same way as "conventional effort", so it can be difficult to > discern the difference. Right effort doesn't just pop up out of the > blue before a thorough understanding of conventional effort and its > limitations has been developed. Without strong development of right > effort, understanding is bound to weak, shallow, and inconsistent; > but conceit (mana) gives rise to confusion between strong perception > and wisdom. > > In meditation, right effort and understanding lag perception and > concentration. Sometimes the development of understanding appears > painfully slow (craving for results). Partially out of lack of > patience and partially out of conceit, perception is mistaken for > advanced development. With hallucinogens temporary "development" of > perception requires litte effort or discipline, and the tendency to > confuse perception with wisdom tends to be MUCH stronger than it is > for the beginning meditator because that perception is very strong > and right effort and understanding have very little chance to > develop. If right effort and understanding have developed to the > point where they rival the intensity of the drug-induced perceptions, > the inclination to "trip" would not be there. If the right effort and > understanding are not sufficiently developed to rival the intensity > of the perceptions, then the perceptions cannot but generate > attachment and delusion. There really are no shortcuts to insight. > > Dan > > Howdy from Todos Santos, > > > > One thing I'd like to point out in this discussion -- and it's not > > intended to be either in support of or against the use of > > psychedelics -- is that all our perceptions are chemically > > conditioned, whether by the food we eat and the air we breathe, or > > the herbal cough syrup we slurped in the middle of the night. LSD > may > > be less subtle, but the result is the same -- chemically induced > > perceptions. Some people's brains excrete more serotonin, some > less. > > A few folks I've met seem to be tripping all the time, "naturally", > > for better or worse. > > > > Second, correct practice of dhamma increases attention, does it > not? > > Does attachment automatically follow? > > > > Finally, does Guru Tipitaka have anything to say on this topic? > Could > > both positions (pro, anti) be just idle speculation? > > > > Joe > > > > > > --- Dan wrote: > > > > Other than pointing out the very obvious danger that we can get > > > > attached to things, anything, if we lack appropriate attention > > and > > > > understanding, I'm not really sure what your point is. > > > > > > It is very easy to mistake a drug-induced intensified attention > and > > > the attachment associated with that attention as wisdom when it > is > > > really delusion. The drug makes discernment more difficult > because > > > the attention (manasikara) is artificially intensified without > the > > > benefit of increased awareness (sati); it is easier to see more > > > things but more difficult to see them with detachment--an > obstacle > > to > > > the path. Thanks for helping make this clearer to me. > > > > > > Dan 5796 From: DeBenedictis/Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 2:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! http://members.tripod.com/~parvati/buddha.html http://www.psykedelbok.se/buddhism_psychedelics.html http://pears2.lib.ohio-state.edu/FULLTEXT/JR-ADM/stolar.htm http://www.erowid.org/entheogens/writings/clark_psychedelics.shtml ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2001 1:31 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Estoy en Todos Santos, Mexico, guey (hay dos en Mexico, uno en Guatemala)! I never suggested psychedelics were a short cut to anything. Your comment about it not requiring enough effort echoes Aldous Huxley's conclusion that although these substances may 'open the doors to perception', those doors remain shut tighter than ever afterwards. Of course he wasn't using the word 'perception' in exactly the same way you are, more akin to what you term 'wisdom'. Your point about intention (in another of your postings) is a good one. My point was, and I guess I should have given examples, that when we drink a cup of coffee to further practice, if we eat a scrambled egg burrito to further practice, we are intentionally altering our body's chemistry in order to attain. To me the difference is very subtle, to you perhaps not. But I'd still like to hear what the Tipitaka has to say on the subject. I haven't found anything that quite applies, not that I (or anyone I know) has read the entire Tipitaka. Otherwise you're just speculating, however intellectually satisfying the speculation may be. A couple of years ago either Tricycle or Inquiring Mind (I forget which) devoted an entire issue to the debate about psychedelics and Buddhism. Very interesting reading, covering a lot of the same ground you and your debate opponent have thus far covered, plus some the two of you haven't yet touched on, if I remember correctly. Joe ...--- Dan wrote: > Hi Joe, > Está en Guatemala. Que bueno! > > Of course all our perceptions are chemically conditioned, and > serotonin titers vary from person to person and from moment to > moment, especially when a chemical is ingested with the purpose of > radically altering brain chemistry for a full day. > > You ask: "correct practice of dhamma increases attention, does it > not? Does attachment automatically follow?" This is an excellent > question and well put. Attention (manasikara) is present in every > moment of consciousness (citta)--wholesome, unwholesome, and neither- > wholesome-nor-unwholesome. Correct practice is defined in terms of > development of wise attention (yoniso manasikara), which necessarily > weakens attachment (by definition). > > For example, a meditator sits quietly in a corner, eyes closed, > concentrating on the meditation subject. After some time, the mind > becomes calm and the perception of the meditation subject becomes > sharp and clear. In this relatively calm and concentrated state, many > subtle objects become clear. This is a dangerous time for a meditator > because it is easy to become enraptured by seeing subtle mental > phenomena with a clarity unsurpassed in everyday experience. It is > astoundingly difficult not to confuse this clarity of vision of > sensations as wisdom or as the goal of the practice or as evidence of > progress in understanding, but it must be understood that awareness > of the subtle sensations is distinctly different from the > experiential penetration of the essential characteristics of dhammas > (the lakhana, viz. anatta, anicca, and dukkha) that comes with the > development of wisdom. Also, the intellectual understanding of the > lakhana arising with the awareness of subtle sensations is also > distinctly different from understanding based on attainment > (bhavamayapañña). Realizing the differences may take years or decades > of practice with a good teacher; but even a long period of the most > careful and scrupulous practice is no guarantee of any level of > discernment. These "corruptions of insight" based on > misinterpretation of meditative experience are overcome only after > penetrating the characteristics of all the dhammas that the mind > experiences (without discrimination) and seeing them as they are > (yathabuta), at the time they arise and pass away. It is not easy, > even with persistent effort because that effort needs to be "right > effort" (samma-vayama). "Right effort" is manifested externally in > much the same way as "conventional effort", so it can be difficult to > discern the difference. Right effort doesn't just pop up out of the > blue before a thorough understanding of conventional effort and its > limitations has been developed. Without strong development of right > effort, understanding is bound to weak, shallow, and inconsistent; > but conceit (mana) gives rise to confusion between strong perception > and wisdom. > > In meditation, right effort and understanding lag perception and > concentration. Sometimes the development of understanding appears > painfully slow (craving for results). Partially out of lack of > patience and partially out of conceit, perception is mistaken for > advanced development. With hallucinogens temporary "development" of > perception requires litte effort or discipline, and the tendency to > confuse perception with wisdom tends to be MUCH stronger than it is > for the beginning meditator because that perception is very strong > and right effort and understanding have very little chance to > develop. If right effort and understanding have developed to the > point where they rival the intensity of the drug-induced perceptions, > the inclination to "trip" would not be there. If the right effort and > understanding are not sufficiently developed to rival the intensity > of the perceptions, then the perceptions cannot but generate > attachment and delusion. There really are no shortcuts to insight. > > Dan > > Howdy from Todos Santos, > > > > One thing I'd like to point out in this discussion -- and it's not > > intended to be either in support of or against the use of > > psychedelics -- is that all our perceptions are chemically > > conditioned, whether by the food we eat and the air we breathe, or > > the herbal cough syrup we slurped in the middle of the night. LSD > may > > be less subtle, but the result is the same -- chemically induced > > perceptions. Some people's brains excrete more serotonin, some > less. > > A few folks I've met seem to be tripping all the time, "naturally", > > for better or worse. > > > > Second, correct practice of dhamma increases attention, does it > not? > > Does attachment automatically follow? > > > > Finally, does Guru Tipitaka have anything to say on this topic? > Could > > both positions (pro, anti) be just idle speculation? > > > > Joe > > > > > > --- Dan wrote: > > > > Other than pointing out the very obvious danger that we can get > > > > attached to things, anything, if we lack appropriate attention > > and > > > > understanding, I'm not really sure what your point is. > > > > > > It is very easy to mistake a drug-induced intensified attention > and > > > the attachment associated with that attention as wisdom when it > is > > > really delusion. The drug makes discernment more difficult > because > > > the attention (manasikara) is artificially intensified without > the > > > benefit of increased awareness (sati); it is easier to see more > > > things but more difficult to see them with detachment--an > obstacle > > to > > > the path. Thanks for helping make this clearer to me. > > > > > > Dan 5797 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Thanks Mike, This is the famous rebuke of Bhikkhu sati who fell into self view. But there is another sutta somewhere where a monk concludes that kamma is inoperative due to his hearing about no-self. he went the opposite extreme to ven. sati. If I see it in the future I'll post it. best wishes robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Here's a link to a translation of the > Mahaatanhaasankhayasutta.m Sutta (incorrectily > identified in the URL and on the web page as the > culatanhasankhaya-sutta). There's a Pali version > (correctly identified) on the same site. > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/037-culatanhasankhaya-sutta-e1.htm > > Cheers! > > mike > > --- robert wrote: > > > Do you remember a sutta whch goes something like > > this: > > the Buddha was expounding in diverse ways the > > anattaness of all > > dhammas. At that time a bhikkhu thought "so there is > > no self, who > > then gets results of ill deeds, .." and reasoned > > that kamma etc was > > not valid. the Buddha knew his mind and severely > > rebuked him saying > > that he "had taught in many suttas and gathas about > > kamma and > > results" and how this man was overreaching etc. > > robert 5798 From: Dan Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 8:04am Subject: Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! --- Joe wrote: > Estoy en Todos Santos, Mexico, guey (hay dos en Mexico, uno en > Guatemala)! Dios mio! Esto no sabia. Muy interesante. Trabajaba unos ocho anos en Guatemala, pero era en 1990. Es una pais muy interesante. > But I'd still like to hear what the Tipitaka has to say on the > subject. I haven't found anything that quite applies, not that I (or > anyone I know) has read the entire Tipitaka. The five precepts are not to be taken lightly. In fact, they are fundamental and essential. Without question hallucinogens are "intoxicants." Dan 5799 From: Herman Date: Sun Jun 24, 2001 3:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]Rebirth- Captain Akusala Dear Mike, Robert and Kom, I hope you wil accept from me that I am a student of reality, not a practising Buddhist. The Buddha is attributed with statements along the lines of :Take nothing on blind faith, but test everything. There is lust no realisation here that after the death of this body, some mental accumulations will settle in some other body. I guess if it really is the case, and there is an open mind, the realisation wil hit. But until then..... The threat of hell may be an incentive to accept a belief , in some quarters, but not here. Quite the opposite in fact. There is infinite wisdom in the general teachings of the Buddha, but if I am asked to bow before an infallible pope, casting all else aside, I tend to think that I am dealing with a social institution rather than a liberating insight, an institution hell bent on ideas of self and self-perpetuation. Sorry if this offends. With lovingkindness Herman --- Robert wrote: > --- > Thanks Mike, > Do you remember a sutta whch goes something like this: > the Buddha was expounding in diverse ways the anattaness of all > dhammas. At that time a bhikkhu thought "so there is no self, who > then gets results of ill deeds, .." and reasoned that kamma etc was > not valid. the Buddha knew his mind and severely rebuked him saying > that he "had taught in many suttas and gathas about kamma and > results" and how this man was overreaching etc. > robert > > > "m. nease" <"m. nease"> wrote: > > Dear Herman and Kom, > > > > --- Herman wrote: > > > > > I cannot see how this could be given we both agree > > > there is not this "one". > > > > Hermann, I really appreciate your frankness regarding > > your views. I was a little shocked at first but none > > of us gets to decide what we do and don't believe--all > > our beliefs arise and subside according to conditions, > > as I understand it. > > > > That said, I must agree with Kom's points here, as > > well as I'm able to understand them. I would go > > further and say that, a view without kamma and rebirth > > as a central feature may be some form of 'Buddhism' > > but is definitely not Buddhadhamma. > > > > I think the mistake here is in thinking that rebirth > > implies a self which is reborn. Mistaking what is > > born and dies for self is absolutely central to > > Buddhadhamma as I understand it. But throwing out > > kamma and rebirth along with self-view is a really big > > mistake, I think. > > > > Hermann, I don't take you for "an uninstructed, > > run-of-the-mill person". I know you're extremely > > well-informed and maybe I've completely misunderstood > > your points. If so, my apologies--no offense > > intended. > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > person, touched by the feeling born of contact with > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > to the effluents. > > > > "Or he doesn't assume form to be the self...but he may > > have a view such as this: 'This self is the same as > > the cosmos. This I will be after death, constant, > > lasting, eternal, not subject to change.' This > > eternalist view is a fabrication...Or...he may have a > > view such as this: 'I would not be, neither would > > there be what is mine. I will not be, neither will > > there be what is mine.' This annihilationist view is a > > fabrication...Or...he may be doubtful & uncertain, > > having come to no conclusion with regard to the true > > Dhamma. That doubt, uncertainty, & > > coming-to-no-conclusion is a fabrication. > > > > "What is the cause, what is the origination, what is > > the birth, what is the coming-into-existence of that > > fabrication? To an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill > > person, touched by what is felt born of contact with > > ignorance, craving arises. That fabrication is born of > > that. And that fabrication is inconstant, fabricated, > > dependently co-arisen. That craving...That > > feeling...That contact...That ignorance is inconstant, > > fabricated, dependently co-arisen. It is by knowing & > > seeing in this way that one without delay puts an end > > to the effluents." > > > > Samyutta Nikaya XXII.81 > > Palileyyaka Sutta > > At Palileyyaka > > > > > http://www.cambodianbuddhist.org/english/website/canon/samyutta/sn22- > 81.html > > > > Yo paticcasamuppadam passati, > > so Dhammam passati. > > Yo Dhammam passati, > > so paticcasamuppadam passati. > > > > One who sees paticcasamuppada > > sees the Dhamma. > > One who sees the Dhamma > > sees paticcasamuppada. > > > > [M.I.191] > > > > Best wishes, > > > > mike > >