6400 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:56am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Narada Thera - U Narada Dear Rob > >Ahh. The monk who did the Patthana trans. is U Narada of Burma >(not Narada thera- my alzheimers is really kicking in these >days). >Why was the sri lankan Narada notorious? >robert AHHH, now you really got a profound insight here! Precocious senility and imperious tones with me and I even felt guilty! Lord Buddha, I am being brainwashed!! Help!!! Indeed I already ordered in Amazon the book you suggested me about mind control, I am worried... Narada Thera from Sri Lanka is considered a great scholar and he wrote many books but his "Buddha and his Teachings" a huge volume considered a basic and valuable introduction to the fundamental principles of Buddhism. It's a kind of 'Bible' and he is very well considered in Sri Lanka and in Asia generally. He was an excellent teacher it seems. Love and take care, at your age you must be attentive ;-) Cybele >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > Dear Rob > > > > > > > Thera is a title that any monk with over 10 rains can be > > >referred by. U is a prefix that even some respected > > layBurmese > > >are given. > > > > This I know Rob I have been doing the apparently 'useless' > > formal meditation > > in both Sri Lanka and Burma but the monk you are referring who > > is : Narada > > Thera from Sri Lanka or U Narada from Burma who translated the > > Patthana? > > > > You wrote: > > I have both volumes - and very good > > > > >they are too (trans. by Narada thera of burma). > > > > This I pointed out because if you use Thera for U Narada can > > be confusing > > being the Narada Thera from Sri Lanka quite notorious. > > > > Then you are not aging and I am nit-picking, do you prefer > > like this? > > I apologyse if I gave the impression of being pedantic, it was > > not my > > intention. > > > > Cybele > > 6401 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Tadao and Mike (and Howard) --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Mike: > I've read your last question carefully, and I can tell you > that I am not the right person to answer your question. > You should direct the question to Nina. She is able to > answer your question from the viewpoint of Abidhamma. > Although to study things from the Abhidhammic viewpoint > differ, in nature, from the actual experiences; > at least, it provides us with theoretical/ > intellectual grasp of the issue in hand. > (I've forgot so many things about Abhidhmma and have > to stduy it again.) > tadao I believe the question of Mike's you refer to is the same question as Mike, Howard and I have been discussing. I think Nina has already given some comments on this, in her recent post to Num (she may well be able to add more, though). I re-post here the relevant part of that message-- "When sati is mindful of seeing, seeing has fallen away, but when it has just fallen away, its characteristic can be realized as a nama. The same for dosa that can be object of awareness. The question is, how far past is past. But sati that is mindful of a nama or rupa is not arising together with that nama or rupa, not sampayutta, it arises in a following process. Sampayutta refers only to citta and cetasikas arising together. "Sati is also used in the sense of recollection of what is past, even past lives. In fact there are many aspects of sati, referred to in the co. to the Milinda Panha. You may reflect with sati on the past, and at that moment there can be the realization that it is nama that reflects. So many different cittas, very intricate." Nina then goes on to remind us that the purpose of studying and discussing all these areas is to support the study of the reality appearing at the present moment. This is something it is very easy to forget, especially if we are having difficulty accepting something intellectually - it can so easily distract us from the real task. I have re-posted this part of her message below. Jon [From message #6343 in the archives] Lets be aware of what appears now. I quote Acharn Sujin, from the conversations in Cambodia: < The development of satipaììhåna is the development of paññå, and there should not be an idea of self who intends to do something particular in order to induce paññå. Then there is no sati which is aware of the characteristic of the dhamma that naturally arises and appears at this moment because of the appropriate conditions. Someone who does not have understanding of satipaììhåna may ask, while he is seeing naturally, what he should do in order to have sati. It is not the right practice if someone wishes to do something particular in order to have sati, because nobody can cause the arising of any reality. People can listen to the Dhamma, they can investigate, consider and understand what they hear, so that they will know that the dhamma appearing at this moment is real, and that it appears through one doorway at a time. Therefore, it is necessary to have more understanding about the realities appearing one at a time through each of the doorways. At this moment, for example, an object is appearing through the eyes and thus, it can be seen. However, if there is no citta, no reality or element that experiences something, thus, a reality which sees the object that appears, that object cannot appear. If someone sees naturally but he does not realize the distinction between the characteristic of the object that appears and the reality that sees, vipassanå, insight, is not being developed. Therefore, the only thing people can do is listening to the Dhamma so that they understand correctly that seeing at this moment is only a kind of reality, a dhamma. One should listen, investigate and consider what one hears, so that one can gradually understand that there are only realities, no self. Dhammas are real, they are beyond control, they arise naturally because of their appropriate conditions.> 6402 From: Larry Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:15am Subject: Re: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Dear Suan Lu Zaw, Fantastic!!! A thousand thank you's for your wonderful research. There is much to study in your message so I don't have anything to add right now except thanks again. Larry Biddinger 6403 From: ppp Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 4:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Speed of falling away (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! HI, Jonothan: Thank you very much for citing the previoiusly posted passage by Khun Nina and the passage by Khun Sujin. Khun Nina's comment is right on the issue (although I do not understand how/why the recollection of far past can be regarded as a type of sati). In my view, sati should be defined in its narrowest sense. tadao 6404 From: Larry Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:48am Subject: Re: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question Dear Num, thank you for your reply. My knowledge of Pali has only been picked up in bits and pieces from reading translations so it's going to take awhile to sort it out. My interest in sankhara is that it seems to be a key concept, not well understood. So far to me it almost has the sense of "to cognitively grasp", but that doesn't quite fit. As "intention" seemingly it conditions kamma and if paticcasamupada=kamma, perhaps it could be said that sankhara conditions every aspect of paticcasamuppada since dukkha is conditioned by delusion and delusion is conceptual or perhaps concept itself. Paticcasamuppada is all dukkha (tanha), right? Well enough babblng for one night, thanks again. Larry 6405 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 0:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Howard, A very good question. Paramattha dhammas arise and fall according to their nature. However, they arise and fall in processes. In between each process there are bhavanga cittas (the same cittas that arise and fall continually during deep sleep). In a sense they are the cushioning area between processes. I just heard on a tape someoone say to Acharn sujin that only the buddha and wise disciple like sariputta could really know bhavanga citta but Sujin said that even developed insight now can understand it (to some degree).The gist of what she was saying is that other wise it would seem like seeing and hearing, for example, blended into each other (because there is no gap between cittas) but panna (insight) sees that this is not so. Also upon awakening from deep sleep if sati arises the difference between bhavanga and the sense door and minddoor processes can be known. "We" could never see these matters but it is the function of panna to do its duty and understand. Someone might hear this and think they will try to "observe" this matter, but it cannot be comprehended by such a method. It is all happening so fast and the very idea of observing is caught up with subtle self view. In a similar vein some people think they observe rise and fall but before ther can be true insight into rise and fall there must be the understanding that clearly distinguishes nama from rupa. Sujin stresses that there must be firm understanding that knows anatta at the intellectual level before deeper insight can arise. Otherwise one will have the idea that sati and panna can be manufactured by will; not seeing the real conditions for these factors; not seeing that they are simply conditioned phenomena (not self). The cittas in the sense door and minddoor processes arise in strict order. Why? Because that is the nature, the law. Each citta is different from the last but it is intimately conditioned by the other cittas in the same process. It is an extreme to think that each citta is its own little package- it is another extreme to think they are blended together in any way. These matters are the way they are; and the Abhidhamma explains it as accurately as it is possible to be put into words. Only a Surpreme Buddha - a SammaSammBuddha- could convey this knowledge. Even a Pacceka Buddha who is enlightened by himself could not elucidate this so that others could understand. robert --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 7/16/01 11:21:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > <> writes: > > > > On this issue to when we talk about moments we should > rememeber > > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > (proximity > > condition)and other conditions. The present moment is > > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not > to > > mention other conditions) . > > It is not that when we talk about moments arising and > passing > > away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can > > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > Abhidhamma). > > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book > of > > the Abhidhamma. > > best wishes > > > ============================ > Yes, I understand that preceding cittas condition the > current citta in > various ways, and the various cetasikas within a given citta > bear relations > to each other. But there still is exactly one citta at any > time, with "sharp > boundaries" so-to-speak; that is, a citta wouldn'y be modeled > by, say, a > fuzzy interval, would it? (Or would 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) > 6406 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 1:28pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Suppose my previous post to Rob and you answer the question. > But no I suppose he doesn't practice what is called an orthodox practice of > meditation. > Lord Buddha, listen to me, I will become dogmatic and fundamentalist going > on like this.....;-) OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your own practice including: 1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts 2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to keenly observe the movement. > I use the four foundations of mindfulness as described in the sutta: > > Body > Sensations/feelings > Mind > Mental contents I have a set of questions following from this. Set 1: Using the whole sutta ================== Maha-satipatthana sutta also mentions other related samatha objects including bodies, corpses and bones. Do you use all such tools? If not, then my question is, since not the entire sutta is followed in both yours and Robert's cases, how can I demarcate what is "formal" and what is "informal". In Robert's case, he is not using the sitting down as a tool, in your case, you may not be using other mentioned tools in the sutta. Hence, if I take the definition that one must peruse the entire sutta, then neither your nor Robert's practice is formal. Set 2: Observing the body movement and posture =============================== When I was going through such a retreat, I could never figure out how one observes the "sitting" posture. I ended up observing the hardness appearing on the other parts of the body as the observation object. Since you mention observing body movement, what is observed when the body moves? Do you envisioning the body moving? What are the differences between having "standing", "sitting", or "walking" as the observation object, and having "hardness" as the observation object? Set 3: Using techniques not in the sutta ========================= I think we have come to an agreement that slow walking and silence are not explicitly in the maha-satipatthana sutta. In fact, I don't know of any sutta that the buddha mentioned doing things slowly to be helpful to developing the path or developing sati. The Buddha mentioned that he has completely laid out all that are helpful in reaching the path. How come doing things slowly is not explicitly mentioned? The noble silence is indeed praised by the Buddha. But, as far as I know, it is said in the context of being superior alternative to speeches that are not useful, not referring to dhamma, not referring to vinnaya, not leading toward nibbana. Again, I don't know of any sutta that even discourages such useful speeches. At least one sutta refers to hearing the Buddha dhamma's as being a pre-requisite to insights. Since during such a retreat, all speeches are virtually prohibited (they kick you out if you talk too much!). How come is a useful speech (or reading) prohibited in such a practice, but not by Buddha? Set 4: The purpose of dhamma and Satipatthana ============================== I thought the Buddha's dhamma and Satipatthana's purpose is so one can know the realities (dhamma) as they truly are. If you agree with this, how come Robert's practice, which also leads to knowing the realities as they truly are, are not as useful as a "formal" practice? Because he doesn't employ tools that would "accelerate" his practice or "sharpen" his insights? What do you think of the view that one can use drug to sharpen one's insight also? This is also not in the sutta, but there are definitely personal anecdotes of how this is helpful to sharpen one's insights? This is somewhat of an extreme comparison, but I am just wondering how far one pursues the objective of having more, better, or sharper insights by following other people advice about how to have them? kom 6407 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 2:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Mike I'm glad you found it useful. Sarah is the keeper of the files, so it depends if it passes her critical scrutiny (having your endorsement will be a plus ;-) ). Jon --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > > This is really excellent--I think you should add it to > the files for future reference. I'm certainly adding > your quotations to my own 'toolbox'. > > mike > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Tori > > > > > Dear Jon, > > > No I guess you're right. I wonder if there isn't a > > world of difference > > > between the conceptualising that men feel so > > comfortable with as opposed > > > to > > > the more earthy realities women are keen to get to > > grips with? > > > > 'Discouraging', 'conceptualising male', if the cap > > fits, I'll just have to > > wear it! > > > > But I think this is really another form of the > > 'intellectual approach vs. > > practical approach' argument that is often made. > > Rather than labelling it > > as one thing or another, it is perhaps more useful > > to consider exactly > > what is indicated in the texts. In the Kitagiri > > Sutta (MN 70) [passage A > > below], the Buddha explained that the development of > > the path is gradual > > and involves in succession listening to someone > > knowledgeable in the > > teachings, considering what one has heard, > > understanding that fully at an > > intellectual level ("gaining a reflective > > acceptance") and applying what > > one has understood. > > > > So what many people refer to as their 'practice' is > > at best only a part of > > the "gradual training, gradual practice and gradual > > progress" teaching, > > each stage of which has its prerequisites and > > conditions. > > > > Nor is this series of gradual steps a > > once-and-for-all thing. It > > continues to be the way of progress until final > > enlightenment. Even the > > sotapanna needs to keep up the listening and > > considering [passage B below, > > same sutta]. > > > > Empty conceptualising is not a part of the path. > > Listening, discussing, > > considering is forever a necessary part of the path. > > > > Tori, I hope you, Cybele and John (and lurkers Alan > > and Rosanne) enjoy > > your afternoon with Sarah today. Wish I could be > > there! > > > > Jon > > > > A. > > MLDB translation (p. 582) > > 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is > > achieved all at once. > > On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by > > gradual training, by > > gradual practice, by gradual progress. > > > > 23. "And how does there come to be gradual > > training, gradual practice, > > gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a > > teacher] visits him; when > > he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays > > respect to him, he > > gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; > > having heard the Dhamma > > he memorises it; he examines the meaning of the > > teachings he has > > memorised; when he examines their meaning, he gains > > a reflective > > acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a > > reflective acceptance > > of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when > > zeal has sprung up, he > > applies his will; having applied his will, he > > scrutinises; having > > scrutinised, he strives; resolutely striving, he > > realises with the > > [mental] body the ultimate truth and sees it by > > penetrating it with > > wisdom." > > > > B. > > MLDB translation (p. 580) > > 11. "Bhikkhus, I so not say of all bhikkhus that > > they still have work to > > do with diligence; nor do I say of all bhikkhus > > that they have no more > > work to so with diligence. > > > > 12. "I do not say of those bhikkhus who are > > arahants ... and are > > completely liberated through final knowledge, that > > they still have work to > > do with diligence. They have done their work with > > diligence; they are > > no more capable of being negligent. > > > > 13. "I say of such bhikkhus who are in higher > > training, whose minds have > > not yet reached the goal, and who are still aspiring > > to the supreme > > security from bondage, that they still have work to > > do with diligence." > > > > 6408 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Howard --- Howard wrote: > > Jon: > > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama > that > > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the > citta > > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise > simultaneously. > > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is > as > > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object > appear > > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments > of > > each kind of citta). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem > to > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen > object,and not > the no-longer-existing object, itself. Yes, this is exactly as I understand it. I think the term "image" rather than "memory" is used. Does this present any obstacle? > Also, when you say "However, so rapid > is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the > awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be > occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each > kind > of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the > simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the > object > occurs. In yet another mind moment? Again, yes (as I understand it). There are so many different 'streams' of mind moments going on apparently simultaneously but in fact each being a succession of discrete mind moments arising repeatedly but not consecutively. For example, seeing, hearing, making sense of (conceptualising) what is being seen and heard, thinking about it, bodily movement 'commands', speech 'commands', other thoughts and feelings etc. So there is presumably room for other 'streams' also. > The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of > ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more > problems > seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana finds > difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some > level > of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, separate, > discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, the > notion of > 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for the express > > purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising with the > > discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't adopt > that, > but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a "film-frame" view > > similar to that of Hume so many years later.] > --------------------------------------------------------------- I understand that the whole of the so-called 'cognative series' (citta-viithi) is unknown as such in the Pitakas although, according to Nanamoli, a nucleus of it, based on certain sutta-pitaka material, appears in the abhidhamma-pitaka (Vis IV, n.13). I'm sorry but I am not familiar with the other schools of thought you mention, nor with any discussion on the circumstances in which the commentarial material came to be. My initial observation on this issue would be that the writings on bhavanga have a similar pedigree to other authoratitive Theravadin writings which seem to be well supported by the texts and which purport to be received Theravadin wisdom rather than any individual's personal view. Jon 6409 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 3:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some Additional Thoughts on: Reply to: Sati/panna and its object Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi again, Jon - > The following also occurs to me: Nina has written in "Cetasikas" > that > > "There is only one citta at a time, cognizing one object, and each citta > is > accompanied by several cetasikas which also experience the same object, > but > which each perform their own function while they assist the citta in > cognizing that object. They arise and fall away together with the > citta." > > Moreover, sati is one of the cetasikas. Thus, the object of > sati, > when it occurs, is the very same object as the citta along with which > which > that instance of sati occurs. So, if the object of mindfulness is a > mental > one, it is the very same one that the citta discerns. If the object is a > > *previous* entire citta or any cetasika of such a citta, then, indeed, > that > is actually no longer existent, and, thus, the actual object can only be > a memory. I am not sure exactly in what terms the commentarial writings describe the object. We are talking about the moment following the falling away of the object. Whether it is regarded as a memory or image already I do not know (despite what I said in my previous post!). > A citta, then, can never take itself, or any aspect of itself, > as > object. But at any given time, there is only one citta. All past cittas > are > gone. So a mental object, an object of the mind door, is never available > for > direct observation. In that case, why call such objects ultimate > realities? We call things ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) because they have an intrinsic nature (sabhava) capable of being experienced by panna. > In fact, what leads us to think there even are such things, inasmuch as > they > are not directly observable? Do you see that there are some difficulties > here? I do not see any difficulties from the point of view of the task of the present moment. Nor particularly from a conceptual viewopint, but then I have not given this area the kind of in-depth scrutiny that you obviously have, Howard. Please feel free to expand further. Jon 6410 From: Tori Korshak Date: Mon Jul 16, 2001 11:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex At 07:30 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > > control with their > > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. > > >Ha ha, very quick Cybele Yes I think so-maybe why there is so much alcoholism in northern countries. Metta, Victoria 6411 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 4:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > (by the way Jon, > Sarah's mother while chatting in the kitchen with me, > commented 'did you meet Jon? Very nice chap, really nice!' - > seems your prestige is going up in Sussex!). Thanks, Cybele. Must invite her to join the list - I need all the support I can get! Jon 6412 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 6:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Dear Ken, Big welcome from me. Really liked your introduction (including the part you mistake me for a 'she'). Another confirmation to my view that I am in the right group of kalyanimitr(s). May all grow in wisdom(especially me). Sukin. Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. > > I am posting this message, partly to say thank you for your invaluable > guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. > > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. > > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions > beyond our control. > > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] > > Returning to the subject of lurking, it was Sukin who inspired me to > post this late introductory message when she wrote; > > Dear Cybele, Not sure if I can say that I have 'arrived' at your > wavelength of communication. But reading you certainly has made me > aware of my tendency to misconstrue. By accumulations I am quite slow > to understanding others, but now I know in part, why. And it has been > quite liberating. [end quote] > > Where you may be quite slow, Sukin, I am very slow - I have been all > my life and it makes me reluctant to join in conversations. So many > times I have read a reply to a dsg post and thought, "Oh, is that > what s/he meant! Am I glad no one will see the reply I had in > mind!" > > Thank you for the inspiration to come out, if only briefly. > > Kind regards to all, > Ken 6413 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 7:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Tori Indeed and this recent discussion on alcohol was pretty interesting for me because living here I observed how people can be totally numbed by drinking alcohol. It's quite depressing sometimes. LOve Cybele > >At 07:30 AM 7/16/01 -0700, you wrote: > > >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > >By the way, in my experience, many A-S are pretty out of > > > control with their > > > >emotional displays as well-so much for stereotypes! > > > > > > I agree and I suppose it is due to too much suppression. > > > > >Ha ha, very quick Cybele > >Yes I think so-maybe why there is so much alcoholism in northern countries. >Metta, >Victoria > 6414 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 8:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom >Dear Cybele, > >--- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > Suppose my previous post to Rob and you answer the question. > > But no I suppose he doesn't practice what is called an orthodox practice >of meditation. > > Lord Buddha, listen to me, I will become dogmatic and fundamentalist >going on like this.....;-) > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your >own practice including: >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to >keenly observe the movement. Not precisely Kom, you are misreading what I said. Let me try and explain more carefully. What I call formal practice is using a determined period of time every day to dedicate to a specific mental training, not by chance the very same one Buddha himself experimented to attain enlightenment. It seems here that we are overlooking the very fact that meditation is the Buddha's way; not casually he is rafigurated sitting cross legged and engaged in meditation. What you attempt to do is creating a bit of mental space through the mental silence whether to work out this awareness exercize as for the body fitness you practice gymnastics or a sport. Let's say that Vipassana meditation is for the mental health, the tool to exercize is awareness and the formal practice aim to strenghten this very same capacity of insight into the reality of phenomena. Helps to sharpen the mind, heighten the penetrative view that will eventually lead to a clear comprehension and refines sensitivity. My query is to assess if the simple observation and investigation of reality as most of you seems to practice retaining it is the right concentration that will conduce to right understanding leading to right mindfulness is enough to justify neglecting formal meditation as a mental training. It is the Buddha's way and continues being taught as the Buddha's way everywhere. What I am trying to understand is if effectively we can renunciate meditation withour 'regrets', meaning without being arrogant to think that we can do better without the Buddha's method and we can develop wisdom only through this investigation of namarupa that very often trespass in conceptual thought. What we are taught is that the very philosophy and psychology contained in the Abhidhamma is applied while you meditate using Satipathana as a reference. We are taught to practice daily awareness as a continuum but perform the formal practice as a mental training and that meditation is the Buddha's Way of Mindfulness. I send this by now. And will continue replying. Metta Cybele 6415 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Ken Welcome from me, too. We are glad to have you with us. --- Ken Howard wrote: > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. Yes, abhidhamma can even be fun, once you start making the connections to real life. Ken, I like what you say below-- > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions > beyond our control. This last sentence of yours shows I think true saddha -- the confidence (based, perhaps, on experience) that the right cause properly developed will bring the right result, even though that result may not be immediately apparent to us. Very much how I see things, too. Now, if only we had he patience to live it out! > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] Yes, this is a real gem. Looking forward to seeing your posts. Jon 6416 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:07pm Subject: Erik in bangkok Dear Group, Just got an email from Erik. He is now in bangkok, has moved into an apartment, and sounds great. We are going to meet once I arrive on saturday week. robert 6417 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Rob > >Dear Cybele, >It seems we are pretty much in agreement. >One aspect of the four foundations of mindfulness that should be >well reflected on is that if it is the correct awareness it is >grinding away the sense of self. I understand what you mean but in meditation is very much stressed the concept of 'Upadana-kkhanda'- the five aggregates of clinging, what conventionally is called 'personality' or self. We are warned to don't refer to a self experiencing anything. There is only bare attention acting out this investigation. >Even we feel non-judgemental but there can still be a veiled >idea that "I" am having bare awareness. I think we shouldn't >underestimate the importance of learning about the deep aspects >of the Dhamma . By this I mean knowing about the khandas (five >aggregates) or other classifications of realities- and other >teachings. We are used to taking what are only momentary >phenomena as a whole and so we confuse concept and reality. >Right awareness is supported by these details. Indeed but this is the purpose of meditation, through this dispassionate observation of the four foundations of mindfulness one develop this awareness that will lead to realize there is no self, all phenomena are impermanent and unsatisfactory. And realize it not conceptually but as actual knowledge, clear comprehension of the characteristics of all phenomena. >Sati is a conditioned phenomena and sati of the eightfold path, >which is satipatthana, arises only through the right conditions >(see, for instance, the kitagiri sutta that jon mentioned >yesterday)- it cannot arise simply because we intend to have it. There is no forcefulness in meditation at all. We are there witnessing whatever arises and paying attention; slowing down to allow this detailed observation and enforcing concentration and fostering awareness in the sense of sharpening the mind to perceive it. I know that sati only arise if there are the right conditions but if you don't apply and commit yourself to listen and study Dhamma you are not exactly collaborating to promote this right conditions. I don't see any incompatibility between this assertion and the practice of meditation. Rob as I wrote in the post to Kom; what I am trying to assess is the Buddha's way was traditionally taught as meditation; how can we overlook this very fact in the buddhist teachings. This I would like you explain me straightforwardly. it seems that people here considers meditation not necessary at all and this clashes with the original teaching in my understanding. I am not a person who hold a radical position as you well know, I am simply enquiring not criticizing or challenging anybody in this issue. I feel a bit perplexed and want to clarify. Bhavana is usually trasllated as meditation. You speak about Sati but what we are taught by monks and layteachers is that mindfulness cannot occur if you don't train your mind practicing meditation quite strictly. Is most evident that here nobody or mostly you don't agree with this view. Explain me in an articulate way your position. This is my query. Love Cybele 6418 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 --- cybele chiodi wrote: > . > Bhavana is usually trasllated as meditation. > You speak about Sati but what we are taught by monks and > layteachers is that > mindfulness cannot occur if you don't train your mind > practicing meditation > quite strictly. > Is most evident that here nobody or mostly you don't agree > with this view. > Explain me in an articulate way your position. > This is my query. > > Love > > Cybele > ____________ Dear Cybele, before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a private note to me about how last night you were explaining Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. best wishes robert 6419 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 9:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Rob >Make no mistake, if someone wishes to develop mindfulness of >breathing he is going to have to be involved in some serious >formal meditation. The texts note that this is a difficult >subject, not suited for all. In early years I did try this >practice and in fact apparently did have some rather exciting >periods of concentration. I also developed a lot of attachment >to the concentration. I don't say that it can't be developed by >others but for myself it seems the objects of the 6 doors are >appropriate and beneficial (along with the ways of samatha I >just mentioned). Well Robert we misunderstood each other here. I don't practice Anapanasati as I told you but Vipassana and then I don't fear nimitta and attachment to 'pleasant sensations', I practice insight meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and concentration purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. I like straightforwardness and Vipassana suits me a lot. It was because of this kind of meditation that I discovered Dhamma and became a buddhist. I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. I don't find meditation and Abhidhamma study not compatible, I think that one enforce another; that's why often I say Abhidhamma is like a dynamic meditation and I mean it. >I also find the study of the teachings a very strong condition >for understanding. Me too. If you don't intellectualize what happens quite often if we don't watch out. >On the other hand I know a person or two who >are knowledgeable about Dhamma but who seem to have no grasp of >the nature of this moment. Sometimes I think the best one could >do for them is to lock then in a cave for a year - make them >bring to mind their learning for its proper use. Indeed that's what I think meditation can prevent! People churning over intellectual knowledge when they are totally ignorant of their own minds and hearts. They are only 'parroting' the teachings, they don't enquiry or question, their minds are dull. >Abhidhamma can >be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual >happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. It >is good to be reminded of that danger >robert I agree and that's why I think that the study should be tempered with meditation. Love Cybele 6420 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity (Howard) Howard --- Howard wrote: >> Jon said: > > I got stuck at the point where the author says-- > > > > "As such it [equanimity as one of the factors of Awakening > (bojjhanga)] > > can either lead to greater mastery of meditation -- as the purity of > > mindfulness that accompanies the fourth jhana provides the basis for > even > > more precise analysis of qualities, thus allowing the causal loop to > > spiral to a higher level -- or else develop into the state of > > non-fashioning that opens to Awakening." > > > > What is your take on this passage? > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Well, I suppose it has more poetry than precision! ;-)) I think > that > the point is that the non-reactivity fostered by equanimity at the level > of > the 4th jhana results in greater clarity and enhanced mindfulness. > ------------------------------------------------------------- He seems to be saying that equanimity leads to either one thing ('greater mastery of meditaion') or another ('a state of non-fashioniung'). Presumably these would be references to samatha and vipassana? I would feel happier looking at particular sutta references. > >. Again I am puzzled by the terminology. Eg. 'transcendent' as > > meaning or connoting 'coming into play as one reaches the point of > > Awakening (where no temporal feedback [??] is possible)'. This makes > it > > difficult for me to say much, unless you can elucidate. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am > certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might > be > saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from > the > Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that > level. > Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something > about > which I have no idea. > ------------------------------------------------------------ As far as I understand the Abhidhamma, this is not so. But it is not clear that that is indeed what he is saying. > > > You, Jon, I believe, have Abhidhamma as your > > > main influence? > > > > Never really thought of it in those terms. Over the years I have come > to > > realise that the suttas need a knowledge of the Abhidhamma to be > > understood correctly. But I have never seen myself as a student of > the > > Abhidhamma as such; I just consult one or 2 standard references as > and > > when I want to check something. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, you certainly seem to have learned one helluva lot from > those > two references! ;-)) > --------------------------------------------------------- It's kind of you to say so, but it's really all relative. Compared to how the Abhidhamma is studied in Buddhist countries, I know hardly anything. But then, I don't think I would get far studying it in a formal way, as a series of lists etc. I have been very fortunate in having attended discussions with and listened to talks of Khun Sujin for many years now, and to have been reading Nina's books and other writings over the same period. This has given me an insight into the Abhidhamma without having to actually study it as such. It is to these 2 people that I owe all I know. The referral to texts for the purpose of posting to this list is something relatively recent for me, prompted by a wish to cite authority for any proposition I give, as far as possible. Of course, this has led to further 'discoveries' and interesting references, and so it goes on. Jon 6421 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:12pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik in bangkok Rob (and Erik) This whole thing about Erik and Bangkok comes as a surprise to me. Have I missed some posts on it while I was away? (I remember only a passing mention about it from Erik) Erik Congratulations on the move. I am sure you will find your visit/stay an interesting one. Do keep us posted on any useful dhamma chats or insights! Jon --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Dear Group, > Just got an email from Erik. He is now in bangkok, has moved > into an apartment, and sounds great. > We are going to meet once I arrive on saturday week. > robert > 6422 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:24pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: > >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath > >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your > >own practice including: > >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts > >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to > >keenly observe the movement. > > Not precisely Kom, you are misreading what I said. > Let me try and explain more carefully. > What I call formal practice is using a determined period of time every day > to dedicate to a specific mental training, not by chance the very same one > Buddha himself experimented to attain enlightenment. I am sorry I jumped to the conclusion before you explained this point! (hope you didn't get too frustrated yet) OK. Robert's practice is unorthodox because he is aware of the different realities arising throughout the day, but a) he does *not* dedicate a specific time of the day to practicing mindfulness b) does not sit cross-legged and meditates, even though the sutta explicitly says that this part of the practice. > It seems here that we are overlooking the very fact that meditation is the > Buddha's way; not casually he is rafigurated sitting cross legged and > engaged in meditation. Although I have no doubt that the Buddha became enlightened while he was sitting cross-legged, I have some reservation about having to sit cross-legged in order to develop the wisdom knowing the realities as they currently arise. Here are some points that cross through my mind: a) Not all the disciples became enlightened when they are sitting cross- legged. For some of them, it is not obvious that they do any sort of samatha meditation at all. However, I have high confidence that most of them think of the buddha, his purity, his wisdom, his loving-kindness, in parts of their days, especially while they are "observing" realities as they are. Buddha's qualities can definitely be the object of samatha meditations. b) I believe the buddha did mention that any level of kusala contributes/supports enlightenment. He encouraged us to develop all levels of kusala: dana, sila, samatha bhavana, and most importantly satipathanna. c) I have no doubt that samatha meditation, if done with Samma Samathi, does contribute to the development of wisdom. > What you attempt to do is creating a bit of mental space through the mental > silence whether to work out this awareness exercize as for the body fitness > you practice gymnastics or a sport. > Let's say that Vipassana meditation is for the mental health, the tool to > exercize is awareness and the formal practice aim to strenghten this very > same capacity of insight into the reality of phenomena. > Helps to sharpen the mind, heighten the penetrative view that will > eventually lead to a clear comprehension and refines sensitivity. What I have doubts with are the techniques advocated by the different meditation schools. As I mention in the previous message, some of the practices are not supported very well by the teachings except in some specific circumstances. (see http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/6406 about about doing things slowly and complete silence). I don't believe doing things slowly really help with insights or with the arising of kusala. Not only it is not supported by the sutta, it doesn't make any sense to me why it should. I do believe any kind of kusala helps with developing wisdom. What I am saying is that although these meditation schools teach something that on the surface look very much like something lifted from Satipatthana sutta, one has to be careful about what is being really taught. Some of these stuffs (as I mentioned) don't make any sense (to me.) Because of these, the other things that are taught are somewhat thrown into doubts in my mind whether or not the person teaching some of these practices are really transmitting the Buddha's dhamma, or are just pointing out some quick ways toward the possibly micha enlightenment. Just like any other teachings taught by anybody (meditation masters, A. Sujin, Robert, Jon, Sarah, etc.), we should be able to verify (up to a certain point), and should verify, that it is the teaching of the buddha. Otherwise, with the subtlety of the dhammas, and with the micha-ditthi that we have accumulated for endless aeons, I think we would be more prone toward doing/learning the wrong things than the right. > My query is to assess if the simple observation and investigation of reality > as most of you seems to practice retaining it is the right concentration > that will conduce to right understanding leading to right mindfulness is > enough to justify neglecting formal meditation as a mental training. If one knows how to develop samatha meditation the right way, I don't believe one should neglect developing it. However, I don't believe simply following the techniques taught by the meditation schools necessarily will bring one the right concentration unless one understands the differences between the wrong concentration (micha-samathi) and the right concentration (samma samathi). > It is the Buddha's way and continues being taught as the Buddha's way > everywhere. > What I am trying to understand is if effectively we can renunciate > meditation withour 'regrets', meaning without being arrogant to think that I, for one, do not renunciate samma samathi. I just haven't had the opportunity to run into a teacher, in whom I have confidence that he is teaching the Buddha's dhamma, who teaches samatha meditation. > we can do better without the Buddha's method and we can develop wisdom only > through this investigation of namarupa that very often trespass in > conceptual thought. > What we are taught is that the very philosophy and psychology contained in > the Abhidhamma is applied while you meditate using Satipathana as a > reference. > We are taught to practice daily awareness as a continuum but perform the > formal practice as a mental training and that meditation is the Buddha's Way > of Mindfulness. > I personally don't think of the Buddha's teachings as fixed set of method that will get one to become enlightened, but rather the teachings that will bring about knowing the realities as they are. He teaches the different conditions which will influence the development of wisdom. Knowing that, I am content to say if I adopt more and more of the Buddha's teachings into the daily life, as I start seeing the values of them, and as long as there are some development of wisdom, I am satisfied that at least I am walking on the right path. My walking may not be very fast, but I totally expect this, as how fast I walk is conditioned by how much wisdom I have accumulated, and not really how fast I *want* to walk. I think our differences are becoming clearer, don't you think? Thanks for giving me all the pointers. kom 6423 From: Tori Korshak Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Cybele wrote: as I wrote in the post to Kom; what I am trying to assess is the Buddha's way was traditionally taught as meditation; how can we overlook this very fact in the buddhist teachings. Yes and he never stopped meditating until parinibbana so shouldn't we do the same? Metta, Victoria 6424 From: Erik Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: Erik in bangkok --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob (and Erik) > This whole thing about Erik and Bangkok comes as a surprise to me. It came as quite a surprise to me as well, given only two weeks ago I had no inkling I'd be writing this message from my new apartment and new computer in BKK! So rest easy Jon, it wasn't a lack of mindfulness on your part. Imagine what a surprise it is to find out you have literally one day to clear out of your old place and move a hemisphere away, with one bag on your back, half filled with Dhamma books, the rest with the bare minimum of clothing to wear for a few days before having to start completely over again. I can barely stop laughing at the absurdity and beauty of it all! 6425 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 10:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Dear Tori Thanks for the support, I was feeling a bit lonely. ;-) Metta Cybele > >Cybele wrote: >as I wrote in the post to Kom; what I am trying to assess is if the >Buddha's way was traditionally taught as meditation; how can we overlook >this very fact in the buddhist teachings. > > >Yes and he never stopped meditating until parinibbana so shouldn't we do >the same? > >Metta, >Victoria > > 6426 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:14pm Subject: sharing abhidhamma in daily life >Dear Cybele, >before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a >private note to me about how last night you were explaining >Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. >best wishes >robert > Dear Rob Yes I am very keen on sharing this experience, was very profound to me. Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation and before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he had some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain with my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I would try to explain the passage. What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate the obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading and concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to feel myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded way. This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying to communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in the meanwhile. It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping John to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a very curious and relaxed manner. I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I felt like while talking I was sharpening my mind. Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can penetrate together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each other. His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind was very allert indeed. Well there it is Rob; looking forward for your comments. :-) Please be merciless, don't destroy brutally my dear illusions...joking! Cybele 6427 From: Jim Anderson Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom, >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your >own practice including: >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to >keenly observe the movement. The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) as follows: "Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. I.B. Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to the Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). Best wishes, Jim 6428 From: cybele chiodi Date: Tue Jul 17, 2001 11:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Erik in bangkok Dear Erik >Imagine what a surprise it is to find out >you have literally one day to clear out of your old place and move a >hemisphere away, with one bag on your back, half filled with Dhamma >books, the rest with the bare minimum of clothing to wear for a few >days before having to start completely over again. I can barely stop >laughing at the absurdity and beauty of it all! > I am enjoying too!!! Next time I go to Bangkok I can have hospitality!!! ;-) Best regards to you and hope you will enjoy this bizarre town. Glad to see you settled and enthusiastic. Love Cybele 6429 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 0:23am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Jim, --- "Jim Anderson" wrote: > Dear Kom, > > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: > >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath > >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your > >own practice including: > >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts > >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to > >keenly observe the movement. > > The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) > as follows: > > "Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, > should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of > wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. I.B. > Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to the > Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe > silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the > Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). > Thank you so much for pointing this out. kom 6430 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: : Sati of past object? op 16-07-2001 19:03 schreef Num op Num: > Arammana-paccaya for citta and cetasika can be past, > present, future or even kala-vimutti (pannatti and nibbhana) > arammana. He said that all five khandhas can be past-, present- and > future arammana-paccaya for the PRESENT citta. He said that the > future khandha can be arammana for present citta in case of > anakataga-nana. Nina: let me just translate future khandha as object for those who have specific knowledge of the future (anagata ~naana). It is clear, also past colour or sound, etc. can be objects of citta. Some people think that when a past object is remembered the object is a concept, I used to think this. A specific odour now makes us remember an odour we smelled in the past. There are stories an account of such an odor, stories of the source of that smell, etc. but there is also the rupa odor of the past that can be remembered. ( the church bell ringing in someone's childhood, a story, but also that sound is remembered. No churchbell if there was no sound) Acharn Sujin says: if there are no paramattha dhammas can there be the concept of a person? Num: For sati, from my understanding can be mindful to the > "just fallen away" reality which being function as arammana > paccaya for the citta and cetasikas which sati co-arises at that > moment. > The arammana of citta and cetasika as I mentioned can be > kala dependent (past, present and future) or kala-vimutti. But sati > can mindful to citta or cetasika (nama) of the previous citta and > cetasikas which just has fallen away and now function as arammana- > paccaya for present mindful citta, no longer as a sampayutta-paccaya. Nina: as mentioned before, sati is mindful of what has just fallen away, but we cannot count how long, it all occurs so rapidly. The main thing: what characteristic appears now? Seeing? Sound? No need to think of how many moments ago it fell away, it presents itself, does it not? No need to think of it. Num: In case of rupa, which lasts longer that citta and cetasika. It > can be atthi-paccaya (presence condition) as well as arammana-paccaya, object condiiton, for sati. > Nina: Your question amounts to whether there can be sati of satipatthana in the sense-door process of cittas experiencing that rupa. There are many sense-door processes and mind-door processes succeeding one another. When sati of satipatthana has been developed, can one stop awareness from arising in a sense-door process? But vipassana ~naana that clearly distinguishes nama from rupa, the first stage of tender insight, has to arise in a mind-door process. But at this moment the first duty is being aware of characteristics that present themselves. Realizing nama and rupa as conditioned realities is the second stage of tender insight. It may make things complicated if we try to pinpoint what type of condition there is for a particular reality. It is useful to read about conditions, it helps us to see that realities are beyond control. It may not be so useful if we try to fit in our knowledge of conditions, while we are beginning to be mindful of realities. In Cambodia,and also before and after, Acharn Sujin repeated often, as I have mentioned already, that we should know our own limitations. She did so when people were so keen about knowing conditions and dependent origination. She was really concerned that people would overreach. I quote from Conversations in Cambodia, where it was discussed that one rupa lasts as long as seventeen moments of citta. This is a comparison, and we should not count. End quote. Nina. 6431 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:23am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Enlightenment factors lokiya and lokuttara. op 15-07-2001 21:07 schreef Howard op Howard: -about the seven factors of enlightenments (wings to awakening) > Howard: > Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am > certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might be > saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from the > Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that level. > Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something about > which I have no idea. Nina: In Cambodia someone asked Acharn Sujin about the bodhipakkhiya dhammas (factors pertaining to enlightenment) whether they are lokuttara, supramundane or lokiya, mundane. The answer: they can be mundane and supramundane. These factors have to be developed so that enlightenment can be attained. They are first mundane. The factors mentioned here as wings to awakening, are confidence, energy, sati, concentration and pa~n~naa. They are also sometimes translated as the five "spiritual faculties" or indriyas. Acharn Sujin said that only when satipatthana arises, sati and the other factors of confidence etc. are indriyas. Nina. 6432 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:28am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Some Additional Thoughts on: Reply to: Sati/panna and ... Hi, Jon - Thanks much for your reply. I have nothing further to add on the topic right now, but something may occur to me later on. Again, thanks! With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/17/01 4:48:01 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi again, Jon - > > > The following also occurs to me: Nina has written in "Cetasikas" > > that > > > > "There is only one citta at a time, cognizing one object, and each citta > > is > > accompanied by several cetasikas which also experience the same object, > > but > > which each perform their own function while they assist the citta in > > cognizing that object. They arise and fall away together with the > > citta." > > > > Moreover, sati is one of the cetasikas. Thus, the object of > > sati, > > when it occurs, is the very same object as the citta along with which > > which > > that instance of sati occurs. So, if the object of mindfulness is a > > mental > > one, it is the very same one that the citta discerns. If the object is a > > > > *previous* entire citta or any cetasika of such a citta, then, indeed, > > that > > is actually no longer existent, and, thus, the actual object can only be > > a memory. > > I am not sure exactly in what terms the commentarial writings describe the > object. We are talking about the moment following the falling away of the > object. Whether it is regarded as a memory or image already I do not know > (despite what I said in my previous post!). > > > A citta, then, can never take itself, or any aspect of itself, > > as > > object. But at any given time, there is only one citta. All past cittas > > are > > gone. So a mental object, an object of the mind door, is never available > > for > > direct observation. In that case, why call such objects ultimate > > realities? > > We call things ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) because they have > an intrinsic nature (sabhava) capable of being experienced by panna. > > > In fact, what leads us to think there even are such things, inasmuch as > > they > > are not directly observable? Do you see that there are some difficulties > > here? > > I do not see any difficulties from the point of view of the task of the > present moment. Nor particularly from a conceptual viewopint, but then I > have not given this area the kind of in-depth scrutiny that you obviously > have, Howard. Please feel free to expand further. > > Jon > > /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) 6433 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Enlightenment factors lokiya and lokuttara. Hi, Nina - In a message dated 7/17/01 1:30:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Nina van Gorkom writes: > op 15-07-2001 21:07 schreef Howard op Howard: > -about the seven factors of enlightenments (wings to awakening) > > Howard: > > Well, I, not even knowing the tip of the Abhidhammic iceberg, am > > certainly in no position to shed much light on this. It seems he might be > > saying that the seven enlightenment factors are "lokuttara-only" from the > > Abhidhammic point of view, and that there is no temporality at that level. > > Whether this is actually the Abhdhammic take on the matter is something > about > > which I have no idea. > > Nina: In Cambodia someone asked Acharn Sujin about the bodhipakkhiya dhammas > (factors pertaining to enlightenment) whether they are lokuttara, > supramundane or lokiya, mundane. The answer: they can be mundane and > supramundane. These factors have to be developed so that enlightenment can > be attained. They are first mundane. The factors mentioned here as wings to > awakening, are confidence, energy, sati, concentration and pa~n~naa. They > are also sometimes translated as the five "spiritual faculties" or indriyas. > Acharn Sujin said that only when satipatthana arises, sati and the other > factors of confidence etc. are indriyas. Nina. > > ================================== Thank you very much for this information. It makes eminent sense to me! 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) 6434 From: Num Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 2:13am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sankhara = Cetana Re: pali/abhidhamma question > "intention" seemingly it conditions kamma and if paticcasamupada=kamma, > perhaps it could be said that sankhara conditions every aspect of > paticcasamuppada since dukkha is conditioned by delusion and delusion is > conceptual or perhaps concept itself. Paticcasamuppada is all dukkha > (tanha), right? Hi Larry, My understanding about Paticcasamuppada is limited. I am going to try to explain some from my understanding. Please take it with wise, careful and critical attention. Paticcasamuppada explains about chain or process continuation by proximate and supportive causes. Avijja in the dependent origination is Moha cetasika (ignorance or delusion, opposite of panna or understanding). Sankhara as I mentioned is a cetana cetasika (volition or will) which will bring an effect (vipaka--> vinnana, nama-rupa, salayatana?, phassa and vedana) in the future. Tanha means wanting to have, (object is not there yet), (sensual, self-existense, self-anihilation), upadan means grasping and not letting it go by having tanha as a proximate cause. Bhapa is also a result, Chati is a continuation and chara and morana is an association and a result of chati. Dukkha can mean unpleasant bodily sensation as in vedana (feeling) or mean intrinsic conflictual/changing property of sankhara as in anicca-dukkha-anatta. So I think in Paticcasamuppada mentions both meaning of dhukka. I think to cease the cycle is to no stop moha (ignorance) with understanding (panna). With no more moha, the cycle will stop, that is probably reaching nibbhana stage, I guess. So again, understanding (panna) is the key. I think other dsg members can give you better and more concised explanation than me. DSG members, please do not hesitate to jump in to add, to correct and comment. Num 6435 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 6:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Jim > >The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) >as follows: > >"Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, >should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of >wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. >I.B.Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to >the Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe >silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the >Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). This is most curious as in the Theravada tradition during retreats the observance of the Noble Silence is compulsory and highlighted as a indispensable tool for the practice (I mean during retreats only). Whether the teachers are monastics or laymen; in eastern as in western countries. Could you share with us a resume of this several pages leading up to the disclosure of the motivation for this rule? I would most appreciate. "When a man knows the solitude of silence, and feels the joy of quietness, he is free from fear and sin and he feels the joy of Dhamma." The Dhammapada, verse 205 Thanks Best wishes Cybele 6436 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Erik in bangkok Thanks, Erik, and good luck with the settling in. I do hope we can meet on our (Sarah and my) next visit to Bkk. Jon --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Rob (and Erik) > > This whole thing about Erik and Bangkok comes as a surprise to me. > > It came as quite a surprise to me as well, given only two weeks ago I > had no inkling I'd be writing this message from my new apartment and > new computer in BKK! So rest easy Jon, it wasn't a lack of > mindfulness on your part. Imagine what a surprise it is to find out > you have literally one day to clear out of your old place and move a > hemisphere away, with one bag on your back, half filled with Dhamma > books, the rest with the bare minimum of clothing to wear for a few > days before having to start completely over again. I can barely stop > laughing at the absurdity and beauty of it all! > > 6437 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:20am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Robert - As usual, you give a very clear, and *very helpful* reply! In a message dated 7/17/01 12:16:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert writes: > Dear Howard, > A very good question. Paramattha dhammas arise and fall > according to their nature. However, they arise and fall in > processes. In between each process there are bhavanga cittas > (the same cittas that arise and fall continually during deep > sleep). In a sense they are the cushioning area between > processes. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. Between the active cittas there are the latent, bhavanga cittas. As I have read, a bhavanga citta is likened to a spider sitting in the center of his web (latent discernment waiting to "pounce"), waiting for a stimulus (phassa) to scurry after prey (to discern the next object and become active discernment instead of latent discernment). One question that occurs to me is what is the object for a bhavanga citta? It is so that every citta has an object, right? In the case of a bhavanga citta is it a replication of the object of the preceding active citta? I seem to recall reading that rebirth consciousness is a bhavanga citta, and that its object is the "same" as that of the citta at the time of death. By analogy, this would suggest that *any* bhavanga citta might take as object the "same" object as the preceding active citta. Or is there no object for a bhavanga citta, but just a "waiting" for an object? ----------------------------------------------------------- > I just heard on a tape someoone say to Acharn sujin that only > the buddha and wise disciple like sariputta could really know > bhavanga citta but Sujin said that even developed insight now > can understand it (to some degree).The gist of what she was > saying is that other wise it would seem like seeing and hearing, > for example, blended into each other (because there is no gap > between cittas) but panna (insight) sees that this is not so. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I have a bit if a problem here. How can there be observation of a bhavanga citta, or of any citta for that matter, even by a Buddha? The citta has its own object. There cannot be a simultaneous second citta which has the first citta as *it's* object, because there is only one citta at a time. Moreover, the first citta, having its own object cannot also have a *second* object which is the citta, itself! Thus, no citta is ever an object! (However, the *memory* of a citta could be.) ------------------------------------------------------ > Also upon awakening from deep sleep if sati arises the > difference between bhavanga and the sense door and minddoor > processes can be known. "We" could never see these matters but > it is the function of panna to do its duty and understand. > Someone might hear this and think they will try to "observe" > this matter, but it cannot be comprehended by such a method. It > is all happening so fast and the very idea of observing is > caught up with subtle self view. In a similar vein some people > think they observe rise and fall but before ther can be true > insight into rise and fall there must be the understanding that > clearly distinguishes nama from rupa. > Sujin stresses that there must be firm understanding that knows > anatta at the intellectual level before deeper insight can > arise. Otherwise one will have the idea that sati and panna can > be manufactured by will; not seeing the real conditions for > these factors; not seeing that they are simply conditioned > phenomena (not self). > The cittas in the sense door and minddoor processes arise in > strict order. Why? Because that is the nature, the law. > Each citta is different from the last but it is intimately > conditioned by the other cittas in the same process. It is an > extreme to think that each citta is its own little package- it > is another extreme to think they are blended together in any > way. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: What you say in the last two sentences is, on my opinion, very important! This goes a long way towards ameliorating the "atomistic view" by showing that even though the various cittas occur during discrete time units, they are interdependent, they are connected by conditionality!! ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > These matters are the way they are; and the Abhidhamma explains > it as accurately as it is possible to be put into words. Only a > Surpreme Buddha - a SammaSammBuddha- could convey this > knowledge. Even a Pacceka Buddha who is enlightened by himself > could not elucidate this so that others could understand. > robert > > > --- Howard wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > In a message dated 7/16/01 11:21:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > > Robert writes: > > > > > > > On this issue to when we talk about moments we should > > rememeber > > > the various conditions such as anataraya - paccaya > > (proximity > > > condition)and other conditions. The present moment is > > > conditioned by the preceeding moment by this condition (not > > to > > > mention other conditions) . > > > It is not that when we talk about moments arising and > > passing > > > away that they are totally discrete little packages (it can > > > sound that way but this is not what is meant in the > > Abhidhamma). > > > This is thoroughly explained in the Patthana, the last book > > of > > > the Abhidhamma. > > > best wishes > > > > > ============================ > > Yes, I understand that preceding cittas condition the > > current citta in > > various ways, and the various cetasikas within a given citta > > bear relations > > to each other. But there still is exactly one citta at any > > time, with "sharp > > boundaries" so-to-speak; that is, a citta wouldn'y be modeled > > by, say, a > > fuzzy interval, would it? (Or would it?) > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > > ================================= Thanks much, Robert! 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) 6438 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Robert: Your message to Horward is very well written (i.e. the right on the issue and very well explained). tadao 6439 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 1:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi, Jim: Is your passage taken from the Paatimokkha? Is is one of the paaciitiyaa? I am wondering if you can cite the original pali passge for me (since I do not remeber that such a offence was included as one of the wrong-doings.) Thank you in advance, tadao (Obviously, I do not have a copy of Paatimokkha booklet.) 6440 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:39am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) Sorry I haven't been able to come back to this group for a few days. I just wanted you to know that I intend to keep dropping in when I can. Thanks for your responses to the Hui Neng story. Very interesting. Robert E. --------------- --- Joe wrote: > As far as we can tell, the Buddha himself ate meat ... ... > > ================================ > > I don't eat meat, though I do eat sea creatures. I wouldn't > knowingly > > eat vegetables prepared with meat. But, as I see it, that is > because I am > > *only* me, at my lowly stage. ...If I were "more along", I would be more like > Hui Neng. > > As I see it, this story presents a remarkable person! > > > > With metta, > > Howard ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6441 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:42am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Spiritual arrogance --- Sukinderpal Narula wrote: > Dear Cybele, > > > >Is there a 'situation' outside what our minds have created and holding on > > >to? I think there are more important things that can be discussed. > > > > I disagree with you Sukin. > > Also this can be something that your mind have created and you are holding > > to. > > You are right, this is what I realized later in the evening. I was indeed > creating > a situation myself, one that I saw Herman being 'judged' by others. But as I > realized later, I also saw Herman strong enough to defend himself and if he > chose to say anything or remain silent who was I to come up with any > clarification for him. Besides I am trying to clarify myself now aren't I, what > is the motive? Just want you to know that it is very inspiring to see you all taking the rare step of actually stepping back and looking at your own experience and motives in a conflict situation, something that seems to be lacking on the Buddhist newsgroups, for instance. It is this kind of awareness that represents actual practice, in my view. I do not know the sutras and scriptures very well, except for a few, but I am happy to recognize real practice when I see it. Robert --------------------------- ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6442 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Attachment to Right View - Spiritual arrogance --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > it is not the right view that is to be discarded but the > attachment to it. This is so smart. A most important distinction. > The most deeply held views are those revolving around the idea > of self. Those that take concepts for being something real, and > realities for self or lasting. This is very clear and goes to the heart of obstructive views. Thank you. Robert E. ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6443 From: Ken Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:53am Subject: Re: Hello dsg Dear Mike, Robert, Sukin, Jon, Thank you all for your kind words and also, Mike, for your empathy and, Sukin, for your forbearance. I must say, I did not mean to so vividly illustrate my confession to being slow-witted and prone to egg on the face. What I wanted to get across was my gratitude for all I have learned / am learning from your discussions and my apologies for not joining in. I should have added that it is a rare priviledge to experience the company, albeit as a lurker, of such wise, warm-hearted people (meaning dsg members as a whole). This is getting sentimental and not Dhamma-related so let's leave it at that. Kind regards Ken --- "m. nease" wrote: > Congratulations on finding and appreciating these fine > folks, Ken--I feel just the same way. If you're as > slow you say you are, we may be in direct competition > for 'Slowest'--I'll try to be a good sport. > > I'm also a great fan of Sukin's posts--who, by the > way, is a He (this was pointed out to me after one of > MY first posts...) > > mike > 6444 From: Num Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: : Sati of past object? > > Butsawong: No, not at the same time. > Sujin: In between the time we see and hear there are rúpas that arose and > fell away. The citta that sees and the citta that hears are more than > seventeen moments of citta apart from each other. Therefore, the development > of paññå is not counting moments of citta. The first stage of paññå that > should be developed is pañña that clearly distinguishes the difference > between nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma. It should know that rúpa dhamma does > not know anything at all, and that nåma dhamma is completely different from > rúpa, not mixed with it in any way.> Dear Nina, Thanks for your reply and comments. I like Archarn Sujun's quote that you have pasted. Always good to have a gentle reminder. Appreciate your input. I will ask you somemore. Dhamma studying is not easy. Num 6445 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 11:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, >This is most curious as in the Theravada tradition during retreats the >observance of the Noble Silence is compulsory and highlighted as a >indispensable tool for the practice (I mean during retreats only). >Whether the teachers are monastics or laymen; in eastern as in western >countries. The Pali phrase for 'Noble Silence' is 'ariyo tu.nhiibhaavo'. For 'observance of silence' it's 'muugabbata'. (muuga = dumb + vata = observance or practice). It's the same 'vata' as in 'siilabbataparaamaasa'. I checked a few commentaries and the Noble Silence refers to 2nd jhana or higher and also when one takes up a meditation subject (one of the 40). However, in a group retreat situation, I think the silence rule should be examined as to whether it comes within range of the rule the Buddha made. >Could you share with us a resume of this several pages leading up to the >disclosure of the motivation for this rule? Yes. I will try to put together a summary with quotes within the next day or so and post when done. The translation of Dhp 205 that you quote below differs significantly from Narada's translation which begins with "Having tasted the flavour of supreme detachment . . .". At first I thought you gave the wrong verse number. Best wishes, Jim >I would most appreciate. > >"When a man knows the solitude of silence, >and feels the joy of quietness, >he is free from fear and sin >and he feels the joy of Dhamma." > >The Dhammapada, verse 205 > >Thanks > >Best wishes > >Cybele 6446 From: Jim Anderson Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Tadao, >Hi, Jim: >Is your passage taken from the Paatimokkha? >Is is one of the paaciitiyaa? I am wondering if >you can cite the original pali passge for me >(since I do not remeber that such a offence >was included as one of the wrong-doings.) >Thank you in advance, tadao >(Obviously, I do not have a copy of Paatimokkha >booklet.) It isn't from the Patimokkha. It's from the 4th khandhaka of the Mahaavagga (Vinayapi.taka). The original Pali passage is: "na bhikkhave muugabbata.m titthiyasamaadaana.m samaadiyitabba.m. yo samaadiyeyya, aapatti dukka.tassa." (Vin i 159 pts). The Mahavagga and the Cullavagga contain a vast number of dukka.ta offences not found in the Patimokkha. Best wishes, Jim 6447 From: Howard Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 9:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi, Jon - In a message dated 7/18/01 12:35:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > > > Jon: > > > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a nama > > that > > > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the > > citta > > > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise > > simultaneously. > > > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance is > > as > > > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object > > appear > > > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments > > of > > > each kind of citta). > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would seem > > to > > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be the > > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen > > object,and not > > the no-longer-existing object, itself. > > Yes, this is exactly as I understand it. I think the term "image" rather > than "memory" is used. Does this present any obstacle? ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: No, no obstacle at all. (Unless, of course 'image' is used in preference to 'memory' to avoid seeing that it is a memory!) ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Also, when you say "However, so rapid > > is the succession of cittas that the appearance is as if both the > > awareness/understanding and the nama that is its object appear to be > > occurring together (this of course assumes a number of moments of each > > kind > > of citta).", I would have to ask *where* that deluded appearance of the > > simultaneity of the occurrence of an object and the awareness of the > > object > > occurs. In yet another mind moment? > > Again, yes (as I understand it). There are so many different 'streams' of > mind moments going on apparently simultaneously but in fact each being a > succession of discrete mind moments arising repeatedly but not > consecutively. For example, seeing, hearing, making sense of > (conceptualising) what is being seen and heard, thinking about it, bodily > movement 'commands', speech 'commands', other thoughts and feelings etc. > So there is presumably room for other 'streams' also. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Excellent answer! Thank you. I find this very helpful!! ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > The more I examine the "momentary theory of cittas", a kind of > > ksanavada (sp?) theory similar to that of the Sautrantikas, the more > > problems > > seem to arise, at least within my limited capacity. (Kalupahana finds > > difficulties with it as well, BTW.) It seems to me that at least some > > level > > of direct knowing occurs at a trans-citta level, if, indeed, separate, > > discrete moments of knowing are a reality. As I understand it, the > > notion of > > 'bhavangacitta' was a later commentarial one established for the express > > > > purpose of serving as a "fix" for non-continuity issues arising with the > > > > discrete-citta view. [The Sautrantikas, on the other hand, didn't adopt > > that, > > but simply allowed for gaps between cittas, adopting a "film-frame" view > > > > similar to that of Hume so many years later.] > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > I understand that the whole of the so-called 'cognative series' > (citta-viithi) is unknown as such in the Pitakas although, according to > Nanamoli, a nucleus of it, based on certain sutta-pitaka material, appears > in the abhidhamma-pitaka (Vis IV, n.13). I'm sorry but I am not familiar > with the other schools of thought you mention, nor with any discussion on > the circumstances in which the commentarial material came to be. > > My initial observation on this issue would be that the writings on > bhavanga have a similar pedigree to other authoratitive Theravadin > writings which seem to be well supported by the texts and which purport to > be received Theravadin wisdom rather than any individual's personal view. > > Jon > ============================== Thanks for this wonderful reply, 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) 6448 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 4:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Howard, Thanks for the nice response. --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > > > > Dear Howard, > >Robert: A very good question. Paramattha dhammas arise and fall > > according to their nature. However, they arise and fall in > > processes. In between each process there are bhavanga cittas > > (the same cittas that arise and fall continually during deep > > sleep). In a sense they are the cushioning area between > > processes. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Okay. Between the active cittas there are the latent, > bhavanga cittas. > As I have read, a bhavanga citta is likened to a spider > sitting in the center > of his web (latent discernment waiting to "pounce"), waiting > for a stimulus > (phassa) to scurry after prey (to discern the next object and > become active > discernment instead of latent discernment). _______ Robert:I haven't read this. _________ One question that > occurs to me is > what is the object for a bhavanga citta? It is so that every > citta has an > object, right? In the case of a bhavanga citta is it a > replication of the > object of the preceding active citta? I seem to recall > reading that rebirth > consciousness is a bhavanga citta, and that its object is the > "same" as that > of the citta at the time of death. By analogy, this would > suggest that *any* > bhavanga citta might take as object the "same" object as the > preceding active > citta. Or is there no object for a bhavanga citta, but just a > "waiting" for > an object? > ----------------------------------------------------------- The bhavanga cittas are the same type of citta as rebirth consciousness (patisandhi citta). It is vipaka citta (result of kamma ) and has as its object that same object that appeared shortly before death in the previous life. We are human now so that object must have been a wholesome one. It does not take as object the preceding active citta: it always has the same object which conditioned rebirth. _______ > > > I just heard on a tape someoone say to Acharn sujin that > only > > the buddha and wise disciple like sariputta could really > know > > bhavanga citta but Sujin said that even developed insight > now > > can understand it (to some degree).The gist of what she was > > saying is that other wise it would seem like seeing and > hearing, > > for example, blended into each other (because there is no > gap > > between cittas) but panna (insight) sees that this is not > so. > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I have a bit if a problem here. How can there be > observation of a > bhavanga citta, or of any citta for that matter, even by a > Buddha? The citta > has its own object. There cannot be a simultaneous second > citta which has the > first citta as *it's* object, because there is only one citta > at a time. > Moreover, the first citta, having its own object cannot also > have a *second* > object which is the citta, itself! Thus, no citta is ever an > object! > (However, the *memory* of a citta could be.) > ------------------------------------------------------ robert: I think we make assumptions about what panna (wisdom)can know and how it knows it. Panna is not us and doesn't see things because of our will or because we think it should know something. There are different tyes and levels of panna and panna of satipatthana understands paramatha dhammas as they are. As we have said panna arises in a process and understands preceeding processes but it is happening all so fast. 'Observation' is a word that has certain connotations and we may have an idea of how we think panna performs its function. But this is conceptualising. What we can see, directly, is that panna does understand, it does comprehend dhammas . -------------------- > > Also upon awakening from deep sleep if sati arises the > > difference between bhavanga and the sense door and minddoor > > processes can be known. "We" could never see these matters > but > > it is the function of panna to do its duty and understand. > > Someone might hear this and think they will try to "observe" > > this matter, but it cannot be comprehended by such a method. > It > > is all happening so fast and the very idea of observing is > > caught up with subtle self view. In a similar vein some > people > > think they observe rise and fall but before ther can be true > > insight into rise and fall there must be the understanding > that > > clearly distinguishes nama from rupa. > > Sujin stresses that there must be firm understanding that > knows > > anatta at the intellectual level before deeper insight can > > arise. Otherwise one will have the idea that sati and panna > can > > be manufactured by will; not seeing the real conditions for > > these factors; not seeing that they are simply conditioned > > phenomena (not self). > > The cittas in the sense door and minddoor processes arise in > > strict order. Why? Because that is the nature, the law. > > Each citta is different from the last but it is intimately > > conditioned by the other cittas in the same process. It is > an > > extreme to think that each citta is its own little package- > it > > is another extreme to think they are blended together in any > > way. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > What you say in the last two sentences is, on my > opinion, very > important! This goes a long way towards ameliorating the > "atomistic view" by > showing that even though the various cittas occur during > discrete time units, > they are interdependent, they are connected by > conditionality!! > -----------------------------------------------------------------Yes, exactly. __________________> robert 6449 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 5:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Cybele, I thought others might remark on your post. It is a confirmation of my own experience. Here are some scriptual references that show that what you saw is just as the Buddha said: Kindred sayings on the limb of wisdom IV On Hindrances (viii) restraint and Hindrance "At the time, monks, when the Ariyan disciple makes the Dhamma his object, gives attention to it, with all his mind considers it, with ready ear listens to the Dhamma, at such a time the five hindrances exist not in him, at such times these seven limbs of wisdom ( mindfulness, dhamma-vicaya - investigation, effort, piti, tranquility, concentration, equanimity)go to fulfilment". The Digha Nikaya DN 33 explains the different ways that wisdom is fulfilled and vimutti (liberation) attained(this is a summary, a little imprecise. I don't have the actual translation in front of me) 1. when a Master or a reverend fellow disciple teaches the Dhamma to a brother.[he listens]...... 2. while he himself teaching others the Dhamma in detail . . . 3. when he is reciting the doctrines of the Dhamma in detail . . . 4. when he applies his thought to the Dhamma . . . 5. when he has well grasped some given clue (nimitta) to concentration, has well applied his understanding, has well thought it out, has well penetrated it by intuition (pa~n~naa) . . . _______ robert --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Dear Rob > > Yes I am very keen on sharing this experience, was very > profound to me. > > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for > meditation and > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our > views. > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to > him and he had > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try > and explain with > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me > and I would > try to explain the passage. > What I started experiencing was that more and more I > concentrated on > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to > elucidate the > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was > reading and > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I > got this > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to > intellectualize to feel > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very > openminded way. > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while > explaining, trying to > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots > of new > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had > rippen in the > meanwhile. > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because > helping John > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own > understanding in a very > curious and relaxed manner. > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was > acute; I felt > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we > can penetrate > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, > helping each > other. > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and > my mind was > very allert indeed. > Well there it is Rob; looking forward for your comments. :-) > Please be merciless, don't destroy brutally my dear > illusions...joking! > > Cybele > 6450 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Thank you Jim. I look forward for yoiur post. And by the way, I prefer the Narada translation as well. I am fond of Narada. But in that case seemed pertinent use this one. ;-) Love Cybele >> >Yes. I will try to put together a summary with quotes within the next day >or >so and post when done. The translation of Dhp 205 that you quote below >differs significantly from Narada's translation which begins with "Having >tasted the flavour of supreme detachment . . .". At first I thought you >gave >the wrong verse number. > >Best wishes, >Jim > > >I would most appreciate. > > > >"When a man knows the solitude of silence, > >and feels the joy of quietness, > >he is free from fear and sin > >and he feels the joy of Dhamma." > > > >The Dhammapada, verse 205 > > > >Thanks > > > >Best wishes > > > >Cybele > 6451 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 8:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Rob and Kom - part 1 Rob You told me that you have posted a reply to me but is never arrived on my account, must be delayed. Could you send it privately and I forward into the account, otherwise it will take a long time to reach. Thank you Cybele >> >--- cybele chiodi wrote: > > >. > > Bhavana is usually translated as meditation. > > You speak about Sati but what we are taught by monks and > > layteachers is that > > mindfulness cannot occur if you don't train your mind > > practicing meditation > > quite strictly. > > Is most evident that here nobody or mostly you don't agree > > with this view. > > Explain me in an articulate way your position. > > This is my query. > > > > Love > > > > Cybele > > ____________ >Dear Cybele, >before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a >private note to me about how last night you were explaining >Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. >best wishes >robert > > 6452 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 8:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Cybele First, congratulations on your and John's kusala in reading and discussing together. This sort of thing can be very useful for helping both one's own understanding and the other person's. I think your choice of ADL as a text is an excellent one - so much meat there to consider. > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation > and > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he > had > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain > with > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I > would > try to explain the passage. > What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate > the > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading > and > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to > feel > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded > way. > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying > to > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in > the > meanwhile. > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping > John > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a > very > curious and relaxed manner. > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I > felt > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) I wouldn't want to say it was or wasn't awareness -- only you could know that. And you could only know by having a good understanding about awareness at an intellectual level -- its characteristic and function, what can be its object etc. That's why it is important to have studied these things -- so that if it arises it can be recognised. Otherwise one is left wondering about the nature of the moment (and perhaps clinging to the experience afterwards). The interesting thing to me is that this experience which you think may have been kusala involving awareness at a certain level (let's assume it was, for the purpose of this discussion!) happened without your intention to 'practice' or to have any awareness at that moment.. But because you have read a lot of dhamma over the years and considered it at length and critically, and because the right kind of reflection was being conditioned by the discussion of the useful text, the conditions were ripe and so it happened. At that moment the effort was right, without your having to 'have effort' in the conventional sense. This is how awareness can arise naturally, without one's intending to have it. > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can > penetrate > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each > > other. > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind > was > very allert indeed. Good luck with your further studies together. But don't expect a repeat experience! As Ken indicated, if we develop the right conditions we can have confidence that the appropriate result will follow, but we have no way of knowing when or in what circumstances that will be. Jon 6453 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 9:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Howard --- Howard wrote: > > > > Jon: > > > > Where the object of sati or panna is a nama, it is necessarily a > nama > > > that > > > > has just fallen away, so that the nama that is the object and the > > > citta > > > > that is the moment of awareness/understanding do not arise > > > simultaneously. > > > > However, so rapid is the succession of cittas that the appearance > is > > > as > > > > if both the awareness/understanding and the nama that is its > object > > > appear > > > > to be occurring together (this of course assumes a number of > moments > > > of > > > > each kind of citta). > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > > > This is something I do not "get". The "citta theory" would > seem > > > to > > > imply that if the "object" of a citta is gone, then all that can be > the > > > *current* object is a (very fresh) *memory* of the just-fallen > > > object,and not > > > the no-longer-existing object, itself. >> > > Jon: > > Yes, this is exactly as I understand it. I think the term "image" > rather > > than "memory" is used. Does this present any obstacle? > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > No, no obstacle at all. (Unless, of course 'image' is used in > preference to 'memory' to avoid seeing that it is a memory!) > ---------------------------------------------------------- Sorry, but I didn't make myself clear. I meant, does the explanation, ie. that the nama that is the object of awarenss has actually just fallen away, does that present any obstacle. I can tell you have given a lot of thought to this area, and I hope I am not just creating more confusion! Sorry about the ambiguity. (As I said in a subsequent post, I am not sure exactly what term is used to describe the just-fallen-away reality.) Jon 6454 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 9:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Joe I am just getting around to one or two posts that were sent during my recent time away. I was interested in this question. --- Joe wrote: > Jon > >In my view, we are not > > in the realm of precepts/sila here, but in the realm of right or > wrong > > view. > > This is exactly what I was thinking. > >> Jon: > >That is, what is the development of the path as taught by the > > Buddha? Just because certain substances give experiences that > > (subjectively) appear to match descriptions found in the texts this > does > > nothing to indicate that this is an alternative or supplementary > form of > > practice. > > As I have said elsewhere, the same could be said of any activity or > > practice. Sure, there are lots of techniques that when practised > can > be > > interpreted as bringing signs of progress on the path, but if the > practice > > is not correct from the beginning the result will not be the > development > > of the path taught by the Buddha. > Joe: > Can't wisdom arise during any activity, assuming right view is > present? Is this the same thing, would you say, as saying that awareness or wisdom may take any reality as its object and may arise at any time? That is certainly so, I believe. However, since awareness and right view/wisdom are conditioned realities, there is no way of knowing when they will arise or in what circumstances. Any idea, for example, that one can 'apply' right view to an activity or situation is mistaken (I am not suggesting this is what you are saying, Joe, but it is an idea that one comes across from time to time). Even more mistaken is the idea that one can do anything as long as it's done with right view. That idea implies a strong notion of control over the arising of right view. Jon 6455 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 10:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]drugs) Re: kusala, akusala, ignorance, wrong view, samatha,samadhi, dogmas, drugs and ex-Christian aunts! Erik, New flat, new computer (with internet access, I presume). Sounds good! In a not too distant post you said-- > It is very important to recall that there are many many strategies > out there, from the emptiness strategy to the one of watching the > arising and passing away of dhammas, even koan practice. Very > different approaches. There is no "one size fits all" approach to the > Dharma, never has been, never will be. …. There are indeed many stategies out there claiming to support the path - far more than the few you have mentioned. Erik, I would be interested to know how you would say one should determine whether a given strategy does in fact support the path. Presumably this would not be a purely subjective thing. What criteria should be applied? Jon 6456 From: ppp Date: Wed Jul 18, 2001 4:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: : Sati of past object? To Khun Nina: How have you been? With respect to your converstion with Khun Num, you make an excllent arugment on how we should study the Abhidhamma. Many people who have studied the Abhidhamma extensively tend to become overly zellous (?spelling?) to constrast every experience of theirs with the pieces of information they've acquired in the Abhidhamma. It would be nice if our own intelecual understanding of the Abhidhamma is mapped into our understanding of the realities in the one-to-one fashion. Unfortunately, our pannaa does not grow as quickly as we would like it to. Being reminded by such a phrase as "Kantiyo paramag na vijjati" (there is nothing superior than patience), we should, as Khun Sujin reminds as time and again, develop the right understanding so that, not the self but, sati can start seeing things as they are. I've neglected the study of Dhamma for a long long time, but there are many (Pali) phrases which I would never forget, and, which remind me how lucky I am for having encountered the Buddhas' teaching in this life. Due simply to various "conditions" (including this Internet link as one of them, I am here again, resuming my study of Dhamma. Best Wishes, tadao 6458 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:42am Subject: note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life hi cybelle this is just great to hear, all your study sounds as though it is paying off, although i would also add to jon's note about paccaya that perhaps your years of sitting meditation played a part too, especially if while sitting you were able to accurately notice realities as they appeared....that is what you do (or rather what you intend to do) when you practice "formally", am i right cybelle? -- of course whether noticing arises or not doesn't depend on the intention for it to arise....although i must admit i find that dedicating time every day to cultivation works much better for me than only waiting to notice throughout the day, with the result that the more regularly i sit, the more i seem to remember to note during non-sitting times...i wonder if that is perhaps because formal practice time doesn't demand conceptualization/papanca.... and a solid "yes" to the idea of the breath-as-anchor for the four foundations -- rings true with the Anapanasati Sutta.... i'm interested in hearing more about your sitting practice, as i'm certainly going to be continuing mine :-) hi jon and nina apologies for not following up on your responses to my "listening to and considering" query a long way back there (before you left, actually jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: i was incredibly busy!) though i have been lurking all along... i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha dhamma? or is it just papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is considering the Dhamma simply another way of saying "noting realities as they ppear at the six doors"? for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" something we can do willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and control....perhaps a better word would be "hearing", which arises, as opposed to listening, which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here in japan who liked to remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he would also say the same with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the idea of a controlling self wasn't something that required prepositions for those verbs, ie looking *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we can neither decide to listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... just some recent mental notes... bruce ps: i'll be in bkk 26 july -14 aug if anyone would like to get together... At 20:44 2001/07/18 +0800, you wrote: > Cybele > > First, congratulations on your and John's kusala in reading and discussing > together. This sort of thing can be very useful for helping both one's > own understanding and the other person's. I think your choice of ADL as a > text is an excellent one - so much meat there to consider. > > > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation > > and > > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. > > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he > > had > > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain > > with > > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I > > would > > try to explain the passage. > > What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on > > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate > > the > > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading > > and > > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this > > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to > > feel > > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded > > way. > > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying > > to > > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new > > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in > > the > > meanwhile. > > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping > > John > > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a > > very > > curious and relaxed manner. > > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I > > felt > > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) > > I wouldn't want to say it was or wasn't awareness -- only you could know > that. And you could only know by having a good understanding about > awareness at an intellectual level -- its characteristic and function, > what can be its object etc. That's why it is important to have studied > these things -- so that if it arises it can be recognised. Otherwise one > is left wondering about the nature of the moment (and perhaps clinging to > the experience afterwards). > > The interesting thing to me is that this experience which you think may > have been kusala involving awareness at a certain level (let's assume it > was, for the purpose of this discussion!) happened without your intention > to 'practice' or to have any awareness at that moment.. But because you > have read a lot of dhamma over the years and considered it at length and > critically, and because the right kind of reflection was being conditioned > by the discussion of the useful text, the conditions were ripe and so it > happened. At that moment the effort was right, without your having to > 'have effort' in the conventional sense. > > This is how awareness can arise naturally, without one's intending to have > it. > > > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can > > penetrate > > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each > > > > other. > > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind > > was > > very allert indeed. > > Good luck with your further studies together. But don't expect a repeat > experience! As Ken indicated, if we develop the right conditions we can > have confidence that the appropriate result will follow, but we have no > way of knowing when or in what circumstances that will be. > > Jon > 6459 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:42am Subject: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear everybody I just got it from a friend and I thought of sharing with you as we are or were discussing on the subject of meditation. No offense meant, just a viewpoint. > >An intellectual Buddhist once asked the Ajahn Chah an annoying >intellectual question, quoting all sorts of sutras and so forth. Ajahn Chah >asked her about her daily practice and she admitted that she had no >practice, but rather she spent much time analyzing sutras. Chah >replied, "Madame, you are the farmer who, each morning, goes out to >the chicken coop and collects the chicken shit instead of the eggs." > Love Cybele 6460 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:36am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante ----- Original Message ----- From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 10:04 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Equanimity and Bhante > Dear Cybele, > > You are welcome. > > One thing I have had over the years is a good sense of humor. I think that > the Blessed One probably had a very good one, too. > > The important thing is for us to be honest --- but not hurt others with > words --- even when truthful. > > The other day I met two young men who were preaching Islam to me. I > listened. And having had perhaps a bit more on the ball in terms of > theological background, and having studied Islam and the Koran, I could have > been critical and made them look like fools, but what would this serve? In > the end, I was told by one of the young men that it was my "type of person" > that Islam badly needed! Why? Because when we live the Holy Life it shows. > No need to have any pride and no need to be ostentatious or to ostracize! > > I know you did not make a declaration that I was nervy! LOL!!! > > But what is interesting is how you mentioned I was not the ""conventionally > the classic 'calm almost [apathetic], meaning by > this aloof, Theravada monk." > > Isn't interesting how stereotypes prevail? Being gentle is not to be so > aloof, and aloofness is detachment not lethargy and apathy. And another > thing, too, is that the Sangha is not a heard of sheep or cattle. > > I do not see myself as <> to your remarks as much as trying to > respond! And it is not a matter of taking charge, either, as much as it is a > matter of "response-ability" read: "responsibility". > > As long as we know about volition and know that the how of living is not as > important when we have a why to live, then we can see how communication will > eventually develop and be enhanced to facilitate a common experiential > ground to share in to practice in --- and it is hardly confining, but most > liberating. > > Again, I think taking time to observe rather to always jump to the keyboard > (and this is not to accuse anyone in particular) to give a view allows us > the pausing or spacing that is necessary to be sure one is practicing sati > as much as is possible. > > Often times, people do not intend to be akusala but they end up in that > situation. Why? They lose skillfulness and get pulled into the very things > they really do not want to be pulled into. Again, lobha, dosa, moha, avijja > and tanha. > > So often we have the map and the directions but we end up getting lost from > reading the signs and following directions on the road. And these days, it > seems to me, that people choose the fast lane and speed. Speed kills. There > is nothing I know of in the Tipitaka that says one has to practice in the > ways we see practice being carried out today. > > Expecting that the Dhamma is to fit into a life-style and must change in > conform to meet the times is not Right View. It is we, with out life-styles, > and all the things that go with them, and with all the New Age "stuff" that > needs to conform to the Dhamma. Sadhu! That's very good. Thank you very much for writing this. > If we separate the body and the mind from each other, our ordinary awareness > disappears, but that doesn't mean that awareness is annihilated. It's still > there, but it's a special awareness that doesn't have to depend on the body > or mind. It's the same as when we separate the wax of a candle from its > wick: The flame disappears, but the fire potential isn't annihilated. > Whether or not there's fuel, it exists in the world by its very nature. This > is the awareness of nibbana. That's actually what I have been trying to say about Nibbana all along. But I should let the subject drop dead now, lest it becomes a crusade. :-) 6461 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:49am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 11:40 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Dear Cybele and others, > Thank you for all your posts. There are so many I want to reply > to (some by you, some by Anders, and otehrs) but don't have > enough time. > Just some points about formal meditation practice. Today I spent > a couple of hours in the forest near my house. I walked and at > at a suitable spot sat for awhile. I find this place conducive > to consideration of Dhamma. I don't know if you call it formal > meditation though. If it's not your own way, it's no good, as you will probably find yourself distrubred by attachments to views of of a certain standard required ("idiot, can't you fix your mind for even thirty seconds!" - that's what I used to do anyway :-)) I like to go out in the forest sometimes as well, and just sit there for half and hour to an hour (depending on my mood). It's all very conduicive to meditation. > You cite the section on mindfulness of breathing from the > satipatthana sutta. Indeed for this object one must take a > special posture, one must be in a quiet place. However, this is > not one of the objects of samatha I use. It so happens that > death and metta and Dhammanusati and Buddhanusati are the types > of samatha that seem to suit me. Along with satipatthana. None > of these require a special posture to develop. As we read > Samyutta Nikaya (translated as Kindred Sayings, P.T.S.) > Salayatana Vagga Interesting stuff. When I meditate, I always go for the 'undirected awareness' technique (which is what my own teacher favours) and metta, which is my favourtie. It's much morew conduicive to concentration for me, and always installs a great sense of well-being. > I also find the study of the teachings a very strong condition > for understanding. On the other hand I know a person or two who > are knowledgeable about Dhamma but who seem to have no grasp of > the nature of this moment. Sometimes I think the best one could > do for them is to lock then in a cave for a year - make them > bring to mind their learning for its proper use. Abhidhamma can > be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual > happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. It > is good to be reminded of that danger Sadhu! That's very good (and very important). I agree that reading the scriptures can be a very strong condition for understanding (that's how it was for me with the Platform Sutra), but if one mistakes being able to comprehend it for actual understanding (or insight for that matter) then one can very well get lost. 6462 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:52am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 3:54 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > I am not distributing certificates Kom, you have to ask Rob, he is the > stream enterer not me. :-) Damn you seem eager to award that title to as many people as possible :-) 6463 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:59am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Anderson Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 5:15 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Dear Kom, > > >OK. So, I think you classify Robert's practice as unorthodox because: > >a) He did not sit down cross-legged and observe the breath > >b) He did not employ any tools that you have observed to be useful to your > >own practice including: > >1) Silence to avoid increasing the conceptual thoughts > >2) Walking slowly to slow down mental proliferation, and to be able to > >keenly observe the movement. > > The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) > as follows: > > "Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, > should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of > wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. I.B. > Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to the > Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe > silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the > Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). Hahaha, no idle talk, no silence. I wonder if there's anything that's not forbidden somehow in the Vinaya! Only kidding, but I just think this is kinda funny (although I wholeheartedly agree with the rule). Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6464 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:56am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 3:38 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. > It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. I first came to Zen because of its lack of a formal approach. Then I discovered Theravada and was drawn to the fact that it had a formal approach. Then I discovered the drawbacks of formal as well as informal approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and Theravada for its formal approach! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6465 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:03am Subject: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 1:49 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > Thank you Jim. > I look forward for yoiur post. > And by the way, I prefer the Narada translation as well. > I am fond of Narada. > But in that case seemed pertinent use this one. ;-) Does anyone know if Narada's translation is available anywhere on the net? If not, what would you say are your favourite internet translations of the Dhammapada? 6466 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:04am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... ----- Original Message ----- From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 10:06 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Palmer > > Date: Saturday, July 14, 2001 4:09 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] A lurker surfaces (again)..... > > > >Hello everybody, > > > >Having followed this fascinating group for around a month the urge to > >participate is finally overcoming my 'Anglo-Saxon reticence' as my friend > >Cybele would say :-) > > > >A few of you may know me from my recent 'de-lurking' in Dhamma-List in > which > >case I apologise for the repetition. > > > >My name is John Palmer and I'm based in Romford, not far from London. I'm > 39 > >and having been practising for around 4 years, my interest having been > >stirred up by a course at the Buddhist Society here. > > > >I'm very much a beginner > > We are all beginners here... no matter how many years we have been > practicing... the trick though is to stay a beginner! ;-) So true. If you think you have attained something you can rest assured that it's an illusion. Always! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6467 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:12am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 5:56 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > Dear Tori, > I think what really blinds you to these realities is that they are > taken as self, as "my dosa, my lobha". > I wrote a post to Paul a while back that may have bearing on this. > >>"Sarah told me a story. When she was staying with friends in > Australia (old students of khun Sujin), they were taking her to > the airport to catch a flight back to hong kong. They were > running very late and sarah was showing some agitation. > These friends then said that "this shows how much more > understanding Sujin has"; because a few months earlier the same > thing happened when Sujin was visiting Australia -they only got > her on the flight with minutes to spare. BUT Sujin showed no > concern at all. > Later on when Sarah commented on this to Khun Sujin all she said > was "they don't understand the path". Great story, Robert. As I see it, it just shows in practise what I was trying to say with words in my original post. 6468 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:15am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 5:19 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > Dear Mike, > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Dear Kom > > > > This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. > > However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to > > liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To > > me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with > > cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant > > feeling attending any of them can condition so much > > attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned > > them. Have I missed anything here? > > > > mike > > I haven't seen you missing anything at all. I was just trying to > add to the discussion that people sometimes confuse the different > neutrality including: > 1) Upekkha and Tatramajjhatta > 2) Tatramajjhatta that arises with samatha, and Tatramajjhatta that > arises with the satipatthana > > > Here is a list of upekkah definition: > (http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat5.html): > > There are 10 kinds of upekkha (indifference), namely > > Chalagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to > the 6 arammana of the arahanta, who has eradicated all kilesa. > > Brahmaviharupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is > indifferent to all entities. > > Bojjhagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is one of the > components that make enlightenment possible. > > Viriyupekkha, the viriya-cetasika which is right perseverance which > is not too tense nor too lax in the development of bhavana. > > Sankharupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is indifferent when the > realization of the tilakkhana of the sankhara-dhamma. > > Vedanupekkha, the vedana-cetasika that does not feel unhappy or > happy. > > Vipassanupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is neutral in the > consideration of the arammana that arises from causes and conditions. > > Tatramajjhattatupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika that is > neutral, not biased or partial. > > Jhanupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the jhana which > attenuates the preoccupation by other dhamma which renders the peace > less steadfast. This intends especially the tatiyajjhana (from the > perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which has abandoned piti. > > Parisuddhupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the > catutthajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which is > completely peaceful and cleansed from all adversaries, without any > further function to abandon the elements of jhana. Aargh, my eyes are loosing focus. I think you just used more Pali terms in your post than you did English words, Kom :-) Damn, I need to learn more Pali. Merry, Anders 6469 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:40am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 11:35 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > Perhaps I should move in with Anders or Robert, they are well equipped to > stand up to me! ;-) Haha, I might treat you to a real U. G. Krishnamurti cure (ever read some of his stuff? That guy crushes ego like the rest of us munches corn flakes. Nothing is spared!). 6470 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:26am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 7:23 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > Anders: > >I think that it depends on your own capacities for progress. Personally, > >I'd always recommend seated meditation for those who are prepared to make > >the effort, as it can certainly do no harm (unless, you are really really > >poor at it :-)). > > What does it means 'prepared to do the effort'? It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and work to overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will thus never make much progress. > Meditation is an essential mental training and important part of the > Buddhist tradition, as studying and listening to Dhamma. > According with the original texts. Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? > >But then you have people like Hui-neng, who don't even need to practise. He > >hears one phrase from the Diamond Sutra and "Poof", he's enlightened. > > Well but we are not Hui-neng or have his past accumulations. > Unless you are talking only ofr yourself. > What I am not going to evaluate or prove right or wrong but I am talking > generally. No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustarte the wide range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was Dogen who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are sharp and dull." > Well this should not be our concern. See above... > I refer to my own experience naturally but the fact of being stuck is due to > a wrong effort not necessarily to the technique itself. > Or to our past accumulations. No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different techniques because there are different people with different temperaments and capabilities. > >It depends on what your own capacities are. If you find that you are > >incapable of being mindful, and that you are constantly being dragged > >around by your defilements, then meditation might be good for you, so as to > >loosen up your deferments. Meditation as such, should be used as a catalyst > >to foster awareness throughout your daily life. > > Well this is the purpose - purification of the mind. > And who is not constantly dragged around by defilements? Some people aren't, apparently. > Who can say earnestly that is fair to skip this mental training and not > doubt that one is misled by preferences and self conceit? No one, to be fair. The reason I don't meditate is a lack of self-discipline to be honest. I know that it would probably do me a world of good if I did it on a regular basis. But I've found that my practise is not very dependent on seated meditation. On the other hand, if I didn't make progress then that would be due to my own laziness. No reason to point any fingers. But some people will never experience realisation because they are not prepared to make the effort needed to exploit their own capacities. Simple cause and effect. > Well we are considering that one pays attention to daily awareness and not > shielding himself behind anything whatsoever - meditation or study or > hedonism. > And Jhanas are not the goal in Vipassana. > We don't practice Samatha to attain Jhanas, we practice Vipassana to develop > insight. Pardon my asking, but is Vipassana limited to seated meditation? > >On the other hand, if you are more than capable of being equanimous in your > >daily life, and observe your mind-states and learn from it, then you might > >not need it. Those who aren't sick have no need for medicine. > > Who can affirm such a thing considering that we are immersed in delusion? True. As I said, I would always recommend meditation to everybody. > Who can be sure of mental health, spiritual health? > With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation of > the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily meditation in > formal terms. Neither do I. > >Expedient means, such as meditation, are purely used to counter > >defilements. If there's nothing to counter, why do it? > > Expedient means Anders? > Meditation is taught everywhere as the core of Buddhist teachings indeed. > Naturally I am talking about Buddhism not other approaches that might > interest you. The whole system of Buddhism is nothing more than a set of expedient means to end the cycle of birth and death. What's so strange about that? > That is all the point indeed. > I just speak about Theravada tradition and Vipassana. > What is written in Satipathana Sutta as Buddha's original teaching is > unequivocable in my understanding. > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the most > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? > Quotating for further discussion and reference: > > > 'This is the only way, monks, for the purification of beings, for the > overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destroying of pain and grief, > for reaching the right path, for the realization of Nibbana, namely the Four > Foundations of Mindfulness.' You interpret that to mean seated meditation. I interpret that to mean daily mindfulness. 6471 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:20am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) ----- Original Message ----- From: ppp Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 2:03 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) > Hi, Derek: > You have a very good language background. > You can start reading a Pali text, placing the text and > its translation side-by-side. I am familar with Pali (because > I was a Buddhist monk in South-east Asia having spent > 12 hours a day reading its texts for the duratin of several years. > Spendijng just two months in May and June, I've picked up Sanskrit > and teaching it right now as a university credit summer course. > (I have 45 students with various language/linguistic background.) > Those who know Pali CANNOT read Sanskrit straighforwardly. > However, those who know Sanskrit SHOULDN'T have much problem > in reading Pali. I strongly encourage you to start reading Pali texts. > Don't start with Pali grammar, but start reading the Pali texts. > tadao Do you do Sanskrit translations as well, Tadao? 6472 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:12am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 12:11 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Anders, >In view of the fact that we are dealing with your understanding of ignorance only, it would be appropriate that you describe what you understand ignorance to be. Try to not refer to the scriptures. Use your own experience. Actually, the link of ignorance wasn't really what I was aiming at. It was more the Samsaric cycle as a whole. >In view of the fact that I attended a gymnasium in Holland, I find it hard to believe that you, who attends a gymnasium in Denmark, does not possess a dictionary in which the term "locus" is defined. However, this link should help you. I do in fact (and you should find it hard to believe). But all three dictionaries are located at my dad's house (I am typing this from my mom's). The dictionaries here are rather old, and as such the word wasn't there. http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary >A helpful hint, your question was: Where did ignorance arise? And why do I presuppose there is a locus for ignorance? Well, since I was really aiming at the Samsaric cycle, let's rephrase: Why do you presuppose there is a locus for Samsara? Because if there isn't, you affirm the doctrine of annihilation after Parinibbana. >Still play any role playing games? Nah, I lost interest (although I still like to flip through the books from time to time). Why do you ask? 6473 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:52am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 3:12 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > Anders -- I loved your little aside about how the Kaalaama Sutta > itself is not to be relied upon, according to the Kaalaama Sutta! As > far as your question about "where everything started from" is > concerned, I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There > is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- > conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- > being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from > what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is > a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, > therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, > made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern any Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that there is not simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only way for it to be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when Nibbana itself is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that there is a self involved). 6474 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 8:06 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > Dear Cybele, > > I have considered not responding to your message, as I wasn't too sure > how contagious the Latin blood is... ;-). > > --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > The Discourse on the Four Foundations of Mindfulness is one of the > most > > famous of all the Buddha's discourses and is the primary source for the > > practice of Insight meditation as taught by the Buddha himself. > > Everybody here seems so keen in extrenuously defending the original > > teaching, how it comes that they neglect meditation? > > But since you have mentioned this point multiple times (with no > challenges, no less!), I will attempt one explanation to this question. > > If you have looked at Anders' post of Nina's article, you will see that not > everybody interprets the Buddha's teachings of Satipatthana and > Vipassana the same way. If I read what Nina is saying right, > Satipatthana is knowing the characteristics of the reality that is currently > arising now. With this definition, it is immaterial, when Satipathana is > rising, whether or not you are sitting cross-legged, closing your eyes, and > observing you breath, or whether or not you are attending a retreat. > > Now let's take Robert, your favorite dhamma friend, for a hypothetical > example. Let's say, he is convinced (or knows) that what Nina says is > about right. How do you think "he" meditates/practices > Satipatthana/Vipassana? "He" knows the characteristics of the rising > nama/rupa as they truly are as they are arising. > > Now, if it is not obvious already, I am not trying to convey what > Satipathana is, but I hope you understand (may not agree) why some > people say they don't "meditate." The saying of such doesn't mean that > they are denying the development of wisdom. > > Your intellectualizing-male friend, Good point, Kom. It's all relative. 6475 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:05am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 6:14 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, --- "Anders Honoré" > >> Well, the beginning is not different from the end. I'll explain below. >I have actually never contemplated the beginning myself. Because of that, = >only the scripture is a guide. There are other on-going thread that >discusses the sutta(s?) that the Buddha mentioned that: >a) Ignorance rises out of asava (a kind of tanha) >b) Ignorance rises out of tanha (craving) >I still don't have a clue what you are implying, but it seems we are discussing how ignorance rises out of something in the beginning of the samsaric cycle, which implies how it could end? Is this where you are leading to? >(The beginning wouldn't ever be verifiable, even though the end will at least be implied by the enlightenment.) Ignorance was just an example (since it is mentioned as the first link in the suttas). You are right, the 'end' is better to use. I'll try to reformulate my question this time (which wasn't clear at all the first time): I think we both agree that after Parinibbana, there is just Nibbana left (or do we?). My question is: How can there ever be any knowledge that Nibbana remains when that which cognises Nibbana (conditioned elements) has dispersed? >> Please define heart-base (heart-base, hsin in Chinese) generally means >> 'Budha-nature' or Nirvana. >The vathu rupa, which heart-base (hadaya vathu) is, is a conditioned materiality said to be located in the middle of the heart (and somewhere else if without a heart!). It is a place of rising for many types of consciousness and mental factors. It is certainly not Nibbana. Good. I figured it might not have the same meaning as the Chinese word. >I don't believe there are any scripture explaining the end of samsaric cycl= >e by the process of how it comes in the beginning. There is only: without >this, that can't come to be, etc (and nibbana is definitely *not* included = >as a link). Even though I may be able to able to derive (if not contrive!) >such a logic, I wouldn't trust it much myself. Logic (or my logical mind) = >has failed to reveal the truths many many times. The buddha didn't >expound the beginning much at all (even related to explaining the end), it = >would only lead to more delusion to think I can explain as such. Exactly. Once the entire Samsaric cycle has ceased (whether it is before Samsara, if there ever was such a time. I don't think so, or after) there is just that which is not subject to the laws of dependent co-origination left; the Unconditioned. > Well, as I mentioned in another post, I draw from both Mahayana and > Theravada, and I don't think either is untrue. I don't think that Mahayan= a > arose simply as a 'rebellious' way to create a > new doctrine. I think it arose out of the need to emphasise parts of the > Dhamma which might have been somewhat under-emphasised by the old schools at > that given point in time, and thus it highlights aspects of the Dhamma which > might not be very strong in the schools before it. But that is just my view. > I would like to quote Bodhidharma, the first Patriarch of Zen, to show you > what I've been trying to say all along: > ..."This mind is the buddha" says the same thing. Beyond this mind you'll= > never find another Buddha [Nirvana]. To search for enlightenment or nirvana > beyond this mind is impossible.... When the mind reaches nirvana, you don't > see nirvana, because the mind is nirvana. If you see nirvana somewhere > outside the mind, you're deluding yourself. >The theravadans try to stick to the original text as much as possible for >knowing (or fearing, for some of us) that diverging from it will distort th= e meanings of the teachings. I am quite sure that some of the distortions introduced by different people (even in translations), intentional or not, = calling themselves Theravadan or not, with or without delusion while so doing, more often lead people to the wrong end than the right one. The Buddha dhamma is incredibly subtle, a distortion sometimes serves as a hinderance (conventional, not the 5 hinderances!) rather than an aid to the understanding, and ultimately the realization. Yup. On the other hand, a rephrasement can also serve to help people understand whose mindframe might not be akin to to Indian one at the Buddha's time. Generally, my impression is that Mahayana (and perhaps Zen most of all) is more based around the experiental approach of explaining reality, whereas Theravada is more based around the causal appoach towards reality. Of course, things aren't as black and white as that, but that's the general impression I have. >Again, just like the concept of duality, I can somewhat map what Bodhidharma said to the Theravadan frame of references, but not completely, especially the part "the mind is nirvana." I think it's important to remember just how much the various interpretation of the Buddhadhamma should be relied on (including one's own). Ajahn Chah, for example (whom I would definitely count as an enlightened individual), once commented that the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch [of Zen], Hui-neng was highly profound and he hoped that one day his own students would be able to comprehend the subtle wisdom it contains. Hui-neng didn't even bother saying Mind is Nirvana. He simply renamed Nirvana to 'Essence of Mind'. How should we trust Ajahn Chah's interpretation of the Pali Canon, as well as his interpretation the Sutra of the Sixth patriarch? Do you trust Ajahn Chah's wisdom over your own? If so, why? PS. Just in case anyone is curious, the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch is available at my own website via this link: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/zen-writings/platform-sutra.htm Anders 6476 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:14am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2001 7:57 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > My question was, where did ignorance arise once it had arisen? Dear Anders, > Is it right that everything happens because of conditions? Naturally, that is so. >Ignorance arises because of many different causes, but the most important one is because of the lack of panna (wisdom). Perhaps, your question is more philosophical than I understand it? Well, once again my poor verbal skills showed. The intended meaning of my question was missed by a long shot. I've tried to rephrase it. 6477 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:28am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 7:35 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > It is always amazing to me how much people (and this is not at all directed > as a criticism of Cybele!) can seem to garner so much from an email post. In > fact, I am told I am often too calm and need to get fired up! Ha! > > This medium of exchange is very deceptive. Remember, we do not know the > inner workings of other human beings from reading our CRT's. When we move > with the speed of mind that we do, this medium and its deceptiveness can > lead to heedlessness and one can very easily hurt another with words -- > especially when people are so attached to them. Not everyone is capable of > letting words go... tanha for words... > > After taking time to reflect and being "silent" on this list and some > others, it becomes apparent that sometimes we need to take a long, hard look > at the verbolatry that can be made to appear so sincere, so right, so > true -- when in fact, the contradictions not only of terms of Dhamma, but of > the very Dhamma Itself appear most readily. > > As far as "butt kicking" is concerned: I am really interested in seeing > others manage their own kicks to their derrieres! I have to watch my own > derriere and keep it on the cushion more and more! I can only recommend that > others do the same. Practice is where it is at... not in chatter. > > When it comes to Dhamma, my sometimes perhaps, imposing tones are not what > matters. Often, some people just cannot handle the truth and subvert it into > an emotional reaction, railing against the person who expresses it and > projecting their own difficulties. In this case, "I" hardly matters. I am > not here to have go around after go around. > > Sometimes, too, no matter what peripheral words we use to deliver the truth > with, it can still be hard for another to realize. > > The advice of the Blessed One was to avoid extremism and fanaticism, and to > be especially careful of holding views. Look at what people write --- it is > forensic. We do not retract the written word as easily as vocalized speech. > The two are entirely different in many respects. > > What I cannot sometimes feel at ease with is the way the simple Dhamma and > its practice gets turned into something complex and seemingly out of reach > for so many. While we have this luxury, I am reminded of the illiterate > people I have met in Asia who practice Dhamma and meditate and "get it". > They may not be so erudite but they practice, and practice well. They > literally shine light and live the Dhamma which is observed in their daily > lives and actions. I wonder what they would offer concerning all the words > floating around made to look so important? I wonder if some of us could be > open to the advice of an illiterate dirt farmer or a housewife with zero > formal education? > > Let's just face the facts, a lion's roar does not exactly fit in with the > New Age "fluff" and the subversion of the Dhamma we can readily see for > ourselves. A small point here is that there is no such thing as > "modernizing" the Dhamma. It is not something to be bought and sold like a > commodity and, in fact, it is "big business" today. > > If we are to have a great capacity for compassion, then it has to begin with > ourselves, yes, but in fact, too, it is always other directed when it is > real compassion. And that may seem paradoxical but in fact it tells us how > deeply interconnected we actually all are. > > Something that would help here: Let us not be so concerned that we are > offended, but more concerned that we offend! > > Enough words. I would rather leave us with one for practice and with its > full implications: Sadhu! Wise words indeed, Bhante. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6478 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:10am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 9:43 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity > Anders > > Thanks for your reply and comments below. I think the various posts to > date have covered the main points. > > Just one aspect of your post I would like to comment on. You said- > > > Panna arises when one observes cause and effect. But it is quite > > difficult > > to observe it properly, if you are being dragged around by it, through > > clinging. I would say that equanimity helps you cease clinging to it, in > > order to observe it. > > The object of panna of the level of satipatthana/vipassana must be a > reality appearing at that moment. I am not sure how the observance of > cause and effect fits into this. Well, cause and effect is just my 'western label' for dependent co-origination. We are basically saying the same thing with different words, I think. > What you are advocating, I think, is the 'have less clinging first, then > you will have more panna' approach (which is usually expressed in terms of > developing samatha rather than specifically equanimity). Would you not > consider the clinging to be a possible possible object for panna? Ooh, yes definitely. good point! Any mental factor is an applicable object (personally, I found observing clinging to be very hard to discern directly initially though. Don't know how that's like for others). 6479 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:11am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Sweetheart You returned back! I rejoice, I thought that you have let me down! ;-) You got lost in the threads, it was not me to attribute the title to Rob but somebody else, an ex-monastic David. I was just paying my respects, you know how I am 'reverent' on this issue. Read much more attentively our correspondence, don't disappoint me master. You are my guide and my light! :-))))) Please don't forget the tip please... Love Cybele >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > I am not distributing certificates Kom, you have to ask Rob, he is the > > stream enterer not me. :-) > >Damn you seem eager to award that title to as many people as possible :-) > > 6480 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:15am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom >>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. > > It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. > >I first came to Zen because of its lack of a formal approach. Then I >discovered Theravada and was drawn to the fact that it had a formal >approach. Then I discovered the drawbacks of formal as well as informal >approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and Theravada >for >its formal approach! > >Anders Honore >************************************************* >Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ >************************************************* > > > 6481 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:29am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Anders > > > Perhaps I should move in with Anders or Robert, they are well equipped >to > > stand up to me! ;-) > >Haha, I might treat you to a real U. G. Krishnamurti cure (ever read some >of >his stuff? That guy crushes ego like the rest of us munches corn flakes. >Nothing is spared!). > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha who already takes good care. And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of others Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. You name it and I have done it, you can bet! You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. Love Cybele 6482 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:47am Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern any > Nibbana after Parinibbana? Anders, With all these stream-enterers around I have to be careful what I say ;-) but I think of nibbana as an event, not as an object. Before nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. After nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. After parinibbana -- no more chopping wood, no more carrying water :-) Derek. 6483 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Ditto, Howard--and thanks very much, both. mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > Howard: > What you say in the last two sentences is, on > my opinion, very important! This goes a long way > towards ameliorating the "atomistic view" by showing > that even though the various cittas occur during > discrete time units, they are interdependent, they > are connected by conditionality!! ----------Yes, exactly. __________________> robert 6484 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:36am Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Anders, >Does anyone know if Narada's translation is available anywhere on the net? >If not, what would you say are your favourite internet translations of the >Dhammapada? The following is a list of 11 Dhammapada translations available online that was submitted to dhamma-list by Ven. Dhammanando (of Iceland) on May 29/99. In it you will find the link to Narada's translation which is still valid. I don't know about the others. Jim ================================ Max Muller's English translation of the Dhammapada has now been added to the Gutenberg archives. You can get it by ftp from: ftp://sunsite.doc.ic.ac.uk//Mirrors/uiarchive.cso.uiuc.edu/pub/etext/gutenbe rg/dhmpd10.zip or from any of the Gutenberg mirror sites. Below are listed other Dhammapada translations available on the web. In order of preference: 1. Ven. Acarya Buddharakkhita http://world.std.com/~metta/canon/khuddaka/dhp1/index.html (There is also a feminist edition of Buddharakkhita's trans. available from http://wsrv.clas.virginia.edu/~cam4z/home.htm . In this version "he" is replaced by "one", "himself" by "oneself" etc.) 2. Sathienpong Wannapok http://www.seattleboys.com/dharma/canon/dmp.zip 3. Rev. John Richards http://www.edepot.com/dhamma2.html 4. Rev. Narada http://www.serve.com/cmtan/Dhammapada/index.html 5. Harischandra Kaviratna http://www.halcyon.com/pasadena/dhamma/dham-hp.htm 6. Joko Beck http://www.edepot.com/dhamma3.html 7. Ven. Thanissaro http://world.std.com/~metta/canon/khuddaka/dhp/index.html 8. Phra Khantipalo http://www.saigon.com/~anson/dhp_ev/dhp_idx.htm 9. Daw Mya Tin (Sasana Pitaka Association) http://www.buddhism.ndirect.co.uk/dmpada1.htm (not yet complete in this online version) Finally, a very nice German translation in rhyming couplets: 10. Kurt Schmidt http://www.palikanon.com/khuddaka/dhp.html Yathaa bubbu.laka.m passe Yathaa passe mariicika.m Eva.m loka.m avekkhanta.m Maccuraajaa na passati. (Dhp. 170) Als Wasserblase schau sie an, als Truggesicht, Die Welt; dann findet dich der Fuerst des Todes nicht. (K.R. Norman) One should see it as a bubble; one should see it as a mirage. The king of death does not see one regarding the world in this way. 6485 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:48am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders > >Good point, Kom. It's all relative. > INDEED Anders, INDEED. But we should pay attention and notice it. Believing that one has the knowledge and actually having it is a very subtle affair. It's all relative...to mindfulness. Cybele 6486 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:03am Subject: Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody Dear everybody Dear Tori The Buddhist Path for me is to walk on steadily yet not being very concerned about reaching any destination, so to speak 'wherever you go there you are', being on the road is already a trip (sorry but I am an anachronistic late hippie) Meditation is a mental training, is about fostering awareness, is to sharpen your mind and penetrate the nature of phenomena, of life itself. It's investigation of mental processes, non biased and dispassionate. The 'motivation' is in doing it simply and unpretentiously, without any particular expectation to accomplish anything special what doesn't mean that you don't have purposefulness. Aspiration and desire are to be distinguished as inner drives but nevertheless craving is very subtle and we have to be attentive to don't get entrapped in old mental patterns that are confortable like an old pair of sleepers and prevent us from observing reality as it is. And meditation is to develop skills in observing reality as it is, without fear or denial and not distorting it to accomodate to our views and prejudices. What is the motivation to be alive, to breath, to eat, to drink? Dhamma is about life, the motivation is being alive and exploring fully this possibility. And so is meditation. Our mind perceive this reality and contain all the possibilities but we have to learn the skills, to deepen your 'sight-insight'. I will quotate somebody I admire who lived very much in the present moment in mindfulness and he is not a buddhist teacher, the great Thoreau: Direct your eye right inward, and you'll find A thousand regions in your mind Yet undiscovered. Travel them and be expert in home-cosmography. Thoreau - Walden I know awareness is not but a sparkling light just perceptible that flickers in our mind and for me even when we communicate at a deeper level with somebody this is already like meditation. Never approached meditation as something separate from me. The meditative mind can happen always and we don't have to pursue it just to be open, to surrender, is effortless. It's something experiencing reality and understanding it, accepting whatever comes. Dhamma is lively, I don't let myself be fooled by rigidity and narrowmindness, Dhamma is wide enough to embrace everybody and everything, is heartwarming and a source of strenght, it's fullness, openess because is empty of self and can contain everything without oppression: dhamma is about freedom, be still and feel the refreshing breeze in this hot afternoon. :-) Just practicing for it's own sake, I don't demand nothing, I don't expect nothing just being present, awake to this very moment. Love CYbele 6487 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! Dear Derek > >--- "Anders Honoré" >wrote: > > But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern >any > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? > >Anders, Derek: > >With all these stream-enterers around I have to be careful what I >say ;-) but I think of nibbana as an event, not as an object. > >Before nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. > >After nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. > >After parinibbana -- no more chopping wood, no more carrying water :-) > >Derek. Normally I don't get myself engrossed in Nibbanistic discussions but I must say that your choice in illustrating it is SO CUTE! Lovely! Cybele 6488 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:54am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi, Jim: Thank you very much for your citation of the Pali passage from the Vinaya. So it is one of the aapattis. (Monks try hard not break the rules down to the level of paacittiyas, but they many not be aware of the presence of many aapattis.) Thank you again, tadao 6489 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:16am Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Hi, Kom: As for Dhamapada books, the book I like most is the following: Dhammapada: A Practical Guide to Right Living (Tesxt and Translation) by Venerable Aacharya Buddharakkhita Thera. Published by Buddha Vacana Trust, Maha Bodhi Society, Bangalore-9. I do not where I've got my copy, but it is very inexpensive, handy (light weight), and, most importantly, it contains orginal Pali texts (so that you can learn by heart any orignal Pali verses which you like). tadao 6490 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:44am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > Anders: I think that it depends on your own capacities for progress. Personally, I'd always recommend seated meditation for those who are prepared to make the effort, as it can certainly do no harm (unless, you are really really poor at it :-)). > > > > What does it means 'prepared to do the effort'? > >It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and work to >overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will thus >never make much progress. Cybele: Of course it's a free choice but why one should be silly to waste an opportunity of clear comprehension in the buddhist path? Who is free from limitations apart Buddha himself? > > > Meditation is an essential mental training and important part of the > > Buddhist tradition, as studying and listening to Dhamma. > > According with the original texts. > >Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning >counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? Counter-measure Anders, don't you ever think that perhaps all your self confidence it's a smoke curtain that prevents you of facing some reality that is a bit difficult to deal with? Do you really believe you are that much BEYOND? Meditation it is not to oppose anything but to develop right understanding; this is not an expedient means, this is investigation of Dhamma, this is lifelong lasting. Dear Anders I never dropped my initial theory about some manic tendences of many so called spiritual aspirants. Too much self confidence, you are flying very high; for me Dhamma is very down to earth. > > >But then you have people like Hui-neng, who don't even need to >practise. >He hears one phrase from the Diamond Sutra and "Poof", he's enlightened. Cybele: > > Well but we are not Hui-neng or have his past accumulations. > > Unless you are talking only of yourself. > > What I am not going to evaluate or prove right or wrong but I am > >talking generally. Anders: >No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustarte the wide >range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was Dogen >who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are sharp and >dull." Indeed and I have met plenty of dulls Andres, don't be too optimistic. Wisdom is fruit of right understanding and this very world would not be the mess that is if people were wise, don't you think so? > > > I refer to my own experience naturally but the fact of being stuck is >due to a wrong effort not necessarily to the technique itself. > > Or to our past accumulations. >No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different >techniques because there are different people with different temperaments >and capabilities. Nobody ever contested it. Meditation is in the buddhist path and who threads the buddhist path cannot dismiss it so lightly; about this issue we are trying to clarify. You are not buddhist and therefore doesn't concern you perhaps. What doesn't change the fact that Buddha himself attained enlightenment through meditation. Why study the texts if you neglect this fundamental principle? > > >It depends on what your own capacities are. If you find that you are >to > >loosen up your deferments. Meditation as such, should be used as a >catalyst > >to foster awareness throughout your daily life. Cybele: > > Well this is the purpose - purification of the mind. > > And who is not constantly dragged around by defilements? Anders: >Some people aren't, apparently. Oh I would like to be introduced to them. You are beyond defilements? Or you believe you are? Seems that here we are a huge company of fools, I would like to meet all this wise people that you have the privilege to know being a 18 years old guy. Cybele: > > Who can say earnestly that is fair to skip this mental training and not >doubt that one is misled by preferences and self conceit? Andres: >No one, to be fair. The reason I don't meditate is a lack of >self-discipline to be honest. I know that it would probably do me a world >of good if I did it on a regular basis. But I've found that my practise is >not very dependent on seated meditation. On the other hand, if I didn't >make progress then that would be due to my own laziness. No reason to point >any fingers. But some people will never experience realisation because they >are not prepared to make the effort needed to exploit their own capacities. >Simple cause and effect. Cybele: Anders we don't practice meditation to accomplish anything, we don't have expectations, we just sit still and observe the arising and passing away of phenomena, we observe reality in bare attention. That's all, no fireworks, no mystical visions. At least not in Vipassana. Cybele: > > Well we are considering that one pays attention to daily awareness and >not shielding himself behind anything whatsoever - meditation or study or >hedonism. > > And Jhanas are not the goal in Vipassana. > > We don't practice Samatha to attain Jhanas, we practice Vipassana to >develop insight. Anders: > >Pardon my asking, but is Vipassana limited to seated meditation? No Vipassana is every moment but to observe without so much interference of conceptual thought we sit still as well. I vaguely remember that a certain Gautama practiced like that and he figure out something about the very nature of this troubled life of ours. It seems they used to call him the one who is awake... > > > >On the other hand, if you are more than capable of being equanimous in >your daily life, and observe your mind-states and learn from it, then you >might not need it. Those who aren't sick have no need for medicine. They are meditating, the object is their very illness. Anders it seems that you support the idea that sit meditation and daily awareness are almost incompatible. It's all meditation but teh formal one has a relevance in the practice that we cannot overlook because doesn't 'suits' us. Cybele: > > Who can affirm such a thing considering that we are immersed in >delusion? Anders: >True. As I said, I would always recommend meditation to everybody. Cybele: > > Who can be sure of mental health, spiritual health? Andres: > > With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation >of the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily >meditation in formal terms. But you don't practice... I interrupt here otherwise it becomes far too long and boring to read over. Metta Cybele 6491 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:25am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Vakkali-Ray) Hi, Derek: (i) When you studied Sanskrit, did you use Whiney's Sanskrit Grammar? For my course, I've cheked most of the grammar books, and I chose the cheapest textbook: Coulson, Michael (1992) Sanskrit: An Introduction to the Classical Langauage. Chicago, Ill: NTC/Contemporaty Publishing. I LOVE this textbook. While all the grammar books are for the sake of grammar learning, this textbook guides students how to read Sanskrit texts. As for your question, the goal of my class is reading orignial Sanskrit texts So as reading practices, in each class, I use even a sentence or two (from the Sanskrit Reader) and a few lines from verses I've collected from other sourses. I do not like grammar, so when I teach such languaes, as Pali and Sankrit, reading of original texts becomes the main endevour of my classes. (ii) More importantly, as for your Pali study, if you need any grammar book, don't use A.K. Warder's book, which, in my view, an absolute bore. I know one book which suits your language background; i.e., Geiger, Wilhelm. (1943). Paali Literature and Langauge. Calcutta: Univeristy of Calucatta. This is an excellent (grammar) book for those who know Sanskrit/Vedic. The book contrasts many pali words with Sanskrit/Vedic words. Also, if you are interested in reading older Pali texts, such as Dhammapada and Sutta-nipaata, this book explains the declentions and conjugations of "archaic words", whose explantions you would find nowhere else. So I highly recommend you to get a hold of a copy of this ?ook. You need not study it, you can just use its index to consult forms you are not familiar with. So, it is not the same as learning a totallly new langauge. Also, as I recommend you last time, please please start reading Pali texts/sentences. At first it may be time consuming, but soon you will pick up your pace. Remember that you have an excellent langauge background. Good luck with your Pali study, tadao 6492 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:04am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi, Dear Kom: In my view, you cannot slow down any realities. You may think that you can regulate the speed of, say, your breathing in and out. But it is just your idea. Doesn't matter how slowly you breathe in and out, the speed of the arising/falling-away of the actual realies you experience through your door-ways does not change at all. If you think that by way of slowing your activies you can see things more clearly, you are living in your own worlds of the concepts, i.e., me trying to catch naamas and ruupas. These naamaas and ruupas are, in fact, far too "real" (here, I cannot find a good word) to be caught by our intention or desire. If they were so easily grasapable/catchable, then, the Buddha wouldn't have spent uncoutless lives to acculate his wisdom. tadao 6493 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:56am Subject: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > ANDERS: > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > cognised by the sixth > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an > object > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > discern any > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > there is not > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only > way for it to > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when > Nibbana itself > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that > there is a > self involved). > _________________ The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and Phala-citta. About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were there any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was the Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara (formations)[the five aggregates]? Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, vinnana? At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we think somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having existed. This would be annihilationism. What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was never a being to be annihilated. robert 6494 From: gayan Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:09am Subject: Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! dear robert, I vaguely remember a phrase from a sutta where buddha says something like this, "monks, some may accuse me of preaching about annihilation.To that I say this, yes,I preach you about annihilation,annihilation of dukkha that is, and nothing else." (pardon for the vagueness) rgds --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > ANDERS: > > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > > cognised by the sixth > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an > > object > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > > discern any > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > > there is not > > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only > > way for it to > > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when > > Nibbana itself > > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that > > there is a > > self involved). > > > _________________ > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > Phala-citta. > > About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were there > any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was the > Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or > sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara > (formations)[the five aggregates]? > Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, > vinnana? > > At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we think > somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having existed. > This would be annihilationism. > What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has > ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, > mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was > never a being to be annihilated. > robert > > 6495 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:23am Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Tadao, I learned Sanskrit at university and our professor had written his own introductory textbook -- including grammar, of course, but also including vocabulary, pronounciation, practice exercises, and some cassette tapes to assist with pronounciation. I don't think his book is commercially available but he may sell copies privately. It was designed for use in university courses. For Pali I use mainly the Geiger/Norman. I occasionally look up explanations in Warder, but I'm not working my way systematically through Warder's book. Sean and Jim have helped me out with questions (on the Pali translator list). Best regards, Derek. 6496 From: gayan Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah dear cybele, Thanks for posting this, i have read this before with the same amusement and excitement. I am a fan of ven.chah's similes which are very much inline with similes found in tipitaka. 'In my view and understanding' I think that meditation is the super- tool. A mind conduicive to formal/informal meditation is a result of past good kammas as per many stories in tipitaka.So eventhough I observe that I am not a good meditator and my mind is not easily calmed I tell myself that I need not to have a grudge against meditation. :o) This story is not releted to the topic, but I like to post it anyway. ven.chah cautions his pupils about the potential attachment to the pleasant sights and feelings which result from deep concentration. "Do not give a damn about those bright lights, its not worth, I have a brighter light in my torch over here..."hahaha rgds an everybody --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear everybody > > I just got it from a friend and I thought of sharing with you as we are or > were discussing on the subject of meditation. > No offense meant, just a viewpoint. > > > > >An intellectual Buddhist once asked the Ajahn Chah an annoying > >intellectual question, quoting all sorts of sutras and so forth. Ajahn Chah > >asked her about her daily practice and she admitted that she had no > >practice, but rather she spent much time analyzing sutras. Chah > >replied, "Madame, you are the farmer who, each morning, goes out to > >the chicken coop and collects the chicken shit instead of the eggs." > > > > Love > > Cybele > 6497 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:44am Subject: Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Anders, I don't think I put too much pali in my posts to you! Those terms are lifted off a book translation which has many pali words. I hardly know all= the terms myself. There are many word glossary on the net including: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/glossary_of_pali_ terms.htm kom --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kom Tukovinit > Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2001 5:19 AM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity > > > > Dear Mike, > > > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > Dear Kom > > > > > > This sort of thing is why I value your posts so much. > > > However, when I spoke of akusala it was with regard to > > > liking (lobha) of that which conditions upekkhaa. To > > > me that's the problem (or one of the problems) with > > > cultivation of any of the brahma viharas--the pleasant > > > feeling attending any of them can condition so much > > > attachment retrospectively, to whatever conditioned > > > them. Have I missed anything here? > > > > > > mike > > > > I haven't seen you missing anything at all. I was just trying to > > add to the discussion that people sometimes confuse the different > > neutrality including: > > 1) Upekkha and Tatramajjhatta > > 2) Tatramajjhatta that arises with samatha, and Tatramajjhatta that > > arises with the satipatthana > > > > > > Here is a list of upekkah definition: > > (http://www.dhammastudy.com/paramat5.html): > > > > There are 10 kinds of upekkha (indifference), namely > > > > Chalagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is indifferent to > > the 6 arammana of the arahanta, who has eradicated all kilesa. > > > > Brahmaviharupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is > > indifferent to all entities. > > > > Bojjhagupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika which is one of the > > components that make enlightenment possible. > > > > Viriyupekkha, the viriya-cetasika which is right perseverance which > > is not too tense nor too lax in the development of bhavana. > > > > Sankharupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is indifferent when the > > realization of the tilakkhana of the sankhara-dhamma. > > > > Vedanupekkha, the vedana-cetasika that does not feel unhappy or > > happy. > > > > Vipassanupekkha, the panna-cetasika that is neutral in the > > consideration of the arammana that arises from causes and conditions. > > > > Tatramajjhattatupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika that is > > neutral, not biased or partial. > > > > Jhanupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the jhana which > > attenuates the preoccupation by other dhamma which renders the peace > > less steadfast. This intends especially the tatiyajjhana (from the > > perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which has abandoned piti. > > > > Parisuddhupekkha, the tatramajjhattata-cetasika in the > > catutthajjhana (from the perspective of the 4 rupa-jhana), which is > > completely peaceful and cleansed from all adversaries, without any > > further function to abandon the elements of jhana. > > Aargh, my eyes are loosing focus. I think you just used more Pali terms in > your post than you did English words, Kom :-) Damn, I need to learn more > Pali. > > Merry, > Anders 6498 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:45am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- gayan wrote: > Thanks Gayan, I think I have a vague memory of this too! robert dear robert, > > I vaguely remember a phrase from a sutta where buddha says > something > like this, > "monks, some may accuse me of preaching about annihilation.To > that I > say this, yes,I preach you about annihilation,annihilation of > dukkha > that is, and nothing else." > > (pardon for the vagueness) > rgds > > 6499 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Hi, Robert: I also vaguely recall the sutta. (Is it not from the Anguttara Nikaaya? If it is, it must be from the book of "One".) tadao 6500 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:14pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear tadao, Thanks for the pointer, and welcome to DSG. I am looking forward to learning mroe from you. kom --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Dear Kom: > In my view, you cannot slow down any realities. You may think that > you can regulate the speed of, say, your breathing in and out. But > it is just your idea. Doesn't matter how slowly you breathe in and > out, the speed of the arising/falling-away of the > actual realies you experience through your door-ways > does not change at all. If you think that by way of slowing your > activies you can see things more clearly, you are living in your > own worlds of the concepts, i.e., me trying to catch naamas and > ruupas. These naamaas and ruupas are, in fact, far too "real" > (here, I cannot find a good word) to be caught by our intention > or desire. If they were so easily grasapable/catchable, then, > the Buddha wouldn't have spent uncoutless lives to acculate > his wisdom. tadao 6501 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: So did you study at UCLA? Did you have to memorize all the Sandhi rules? Unlike Sanskrit, Sandhi is not extensive in Pali. In any script versions of Pali text, words are separted, so invidiual words are so recognizable. Given your Sanskrit/Laten background, you will soon see that Pali is much much easier language to learn. As in Sanskrit, Pali may use compounding extensively, but the feature is not prblematic as far as the Tipitaka is concerned. Once you get into commentaries, then, you will face up with extensive use of compounding. But, here again, given your Sanskrit background, you can easily indentify which compounds are dvanda, tatpurusa, karmadhaaraya, etc. As for Pali grammar book, a couple of months ago, I ordred one book published by a German publisher (Mouton). I was told that it would take some time to get a copy of cheap (paper-back) version of the book, which I have been waiting for. Once I receive a copy, I will let you know how good or useful it is. tadao P.S. I studied Pali using Thai textbooks. Also after studying Pali several years, I was exposed to Paanini's grammar. My encourtering his grammar was the oorgin of my interests in linguistics, which I teach here as a lecturer (regularly I teach such courses as acoustic/experimenal phonetics, psycholinguistics, and writing systems of the world, and offer such courses as Pali and Sanskrit only as summer courses.) 6502 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:18am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom: We are all learners. Let's help each other to develp the right understanding. tadao 6503 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:36pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > Dear Rob > > > >I > practice insight > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > concentration > purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > _______________________________ Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to the breath? We have to be very circumspect about the practice, I think. Do we really want to be aware of any dhamma, as it really is, or are we secretly looking for calmness. I mentioned recently that I was waliking in the forest and sat in a place - and found this conducive to contemplation. While sitting I might have had the idea 'hmm, this place is quite good, but maybe I could find a better spot". Instead of just knowing the moment. Or I might think I need to reflect on the teachings first; rather than just being aware. \ Now I am sitting at my computer; I could have the idea that this is not ideal "I should be sitting in the forest". However wherever we are, whether there is thinking or not, dhammas are arising and can be known. Last week I was in Tokyo. Shinjuku station has almost 2million people a day passing through it. I find it a very conducive place for reflection and direct awareness of seeing and colour. One can see that there are only different colours appearing through the eyedoor and immediateley thinking forming concepts about the visible object. That doesn't mean I think I have to be in such situations for awareness to arise. > Indeed that's what I think meditation can prevent! > People churning over intellectual knowledge when they are > totally ignorant > of their own minds and hearts. > They are only 'parroting' the teachings, they don't enquiry or > question, > their minds are dull. > > Abhidhamma can > >be a refuge of concepts that distance us from the actual > >happenings - and I certainly fall into this trap many times. > It > >is good to be reminded of that danger > >robert > > I agree and that's why I think that the study should be > tempered with > meditation. > ___________ What is meditation? What was I was doing at shinjuku station? Could we be sitting very still concentrating and yet be doing something other than what the Buddha taught? robert 6504 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 0:49pm Subject: Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, You are back in flood! --- "Anders Honoré" > Ignorance was just an example (since it is mentioned as the first link in > the suttas). You are right, the 'end' is better to use. I'll try to > reformulate my question this time (which wasn't clear at all the first > time): I think we both agree that after Parinibbana, there is just Nibban= a > left (or do we?). Yes, I think we agree. Nibbana doesn't rise, it doesn't fall, therefore, it "remains". > My question is: How can there ever be any knowledge that > Nibbana remains when that which cognises Nibbana (conditioned elements) has > dispersed? I don't think that the Buddha ever said the "knowledge" of nibbana remains after all the kandhas cease. My speculation is that since Nibbana = is the anti-thesis of all the conditioned phenomena, that it is unconditioned, neither rising nor falling, and it becomes obvious at the point of cognition. > Exactly. Once the entire Samsaric cycle has ceased (whether it is before > Samsara, if there ever was such a time. I don't think so, or after) there= is > just that which is not subject to the laws of dependent co-origination left; > the Unconditioned. I don't think we disagree on this. The only disagreement is obviously whether or not Nibbana is consciousness. Again, as I mentioned, there doesn't appear to be much support in the teaching that Nibbana is consciousness. > Yup. On the other hand, a rephrasement can also serve to help people > understand whose mindframe might not be akin to to Indian one at the > Buddha's time. Generally, my impression is that Mahayana (and perhaps Zen > most of all) is more based around the experiental approach of explaining > reality, whereas Theravada is more based around the causal appoach towards > reality. Of course, things aren't as black and white as that, but that's = the > general impression I have. I wouldn't call all the teachings I have from different people as simple "rephrasements". Some inventions hinder instead of help. > > >Again, just like the concept of duality, I can somewhat map what > Bodhidharma said to the Theravadan frame of references, but not > completely, especially the part "the mind is nirvana." > > I think it's important to remember just how much the various interpretation > of the Buddhadhamma should be relied on (including one's own). If I were to derived the concept of nibbana on my own, I would be suspicious of it. Since I don't, and this is taught by others, and so far = best supported by the scriptures, then I have no reason to suspect this particular model. I am not convicted of this understanding, although I am= concerned about how people come up with such drastic variations. Ajahn Chah, > for example (whom I would definitely count as an enlightened individual), > once commented that the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch [of Zen], Hui-neng was > highly profound and he hoped that one day his own students would be able to > comprehend the subtle wisdom it contains. > Hui-neng didn't even bother saying Mind is Nirvana. He simply renamed > Nirvana to 'Essence of Mind'. How should we trust Ajahn Chah's > interpretation of the Pali Canon, as well as his interpretation the Sutra= of > the Sixth patriarch? Do you trust Ajahn Chah's wisdom over your own? If so, > why? Ajahn Chah may be an Ajanh to many, but I haven't had the opportunity to be his student. Because of that, I certainly wouldn't take Ajanh Chah on his words because I simply don't know what he teaches. My point is, if a teaching, by anybody, is not supported by the Buddha teachings (of course, subjected to one's own understanding), we regard it not to be the teaching of Buddha. I have observed some of your statements to fall within the teaching, and some outside of it. One of the= thing that I consider to be outside (nibbana as a consciousness), I think, = is sufficiently discussed for my purpose. kom 6505 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:07pm Subject: Quotes from Acharn Sujin 1.(was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, I thought you might like to read this. In December Acharn sujin visited Cambodia. Some of her talks were recorded and a new book in Thai has been published. I was just sent some translated extracts. In this section of the book the audience consisted of monks, nuns and laypeople. Toward the end Sujin is asked questions about satipatthana by the Sangharaja, Cambodia's head monk. (Khun Butsawong, the man who translates Sujin's talks for Cambodia radio station, translates between Sujin and the venerable monk) The post is split into 2 sections. Discussion in the Unaloam Temple, Phnom Penh. Sujin: I know that people in Cambodia take a great interest in satipatthana and therefore let us discuss this subject of Buddhism because it is of the highest benefit. If one studies the Dhamma without developing the understanding which realizes the dhammas one has studied, one merely develops theoretical understanding of realities. There are realities, dhammas, all the time, also at this moment. When people study dhammas, they usually study concepts denoting realities. Dhammas are reality. However, if the Exalted One, the Sammasambuddha, had not attained enlightenment, nobody would know that what we take for self, for the world, for different things, are only dhammas, each with their own characteristic. I do appreciate the kusala all of you have accumulated, and this is the condition for you to come together at this place. If you had not accumulated kusala in the past there would no condition for you to listen to the Dhamma now. The Dhamma is the truth but it is difficult to comprehend. No matter whether one is born as a human being or as another kind of living being, there are only dhammas, realities, that are born. However, how many people who listen to the Dhamma can really understand that everything is only dhamma, reality? It seems that the Dhamma which is real is very ordinary. However, it is difficult to really understand it, because it is the true Dhamma of the ariyans, the enlightened ones. When we are sound asleep nothing appears to us, but why is it that as soon as we have opened our eyes there are objects appearing to us? This seems very ordinary to us, but we should really understand the reason why, while we are asleep nothing appears, and why, when we have opened our eyes, different objects can appear. If there would not be nama dhamma (mental reality), there would not be any reality that could appear. If there would not be seeing, different things could not appear at this very moment. If we would not hear, smell, taste, experience things through the bodysense or think, the world could not appear. At this moment we all are seeing and on account of what we see happiness or sorrow arises. When we hear, happiness and sorrow arise on account of what we hear. It is the same in the case of the experiences through the other senses. This is the ordinary daily life of everybody. Every day we see, we hear, we experience happiness and sorrow, time and again. Everybody is attached to what he sees. Can anyone deny that he clings each time he sees? These are dhammas which arise and take their course, and nobody can prevent them from arising. When life arises it has to take its course each moment, and nobody can exert control over the amount of happiness or sorrow he experiences, this depends on conditions. Do you think about birth in the same way as the Bodhisatta? You may think that being born is just an ordinary event, common to everybody. Nobody can prevent this and nobody particularly wants to be born, but when there are the right conditions there has to be birth. However, the Bodhisatta reflected on birth as follows: dhammas which have arisen must fall away. When will there be an end to what is susceptible to change, when will it fall away and not arise again? People who have not realized the noble Truths and do not take an interest in the Dhamma will have to continue to see, to hear, all the time, in each plane of existence, during each life. This will happen until they begin to see that it is of the greatest benefit to study the Dhamma and to hear the Dhamma from the person who has attained enlightenment and who could reach the end of the arising of dhammas. People who are not the Sammasambuddha nor a Solitary Buddha(Pacceka Buddha) should be listeners, people who listen attentively and with great care to the Dhamma. We should remember that the Dhamma the Buddha realized through his enlightenment is of a profound nature and that nobody can understand it without study and investigation. The Buddha realized through his enlightenment the true Dhamma of the ariyans (the enlightened ones). He realized the dhammas which are reality, so that people who had developed panna to the degree of penetrating the true nature of these dhammas could become ariyans as well. We may have developed worldly knowledge in many fields, in many branches of science, but we are still susceptible to suffering, dukkha. All of us have to undergo many kinds of dukkha. Let everybody here consider the truth of daily life: we have a body and thus, we are susceptible to sickness, to suffering. We should realize that even a discomfort such as hunger occurring in daily life is dukkha. Is there anybody who never experienced pain or illness? Even while we are sitting now we may feel stiffness. Apart from bodily pain occurring in daily life, there is also mental pain. When we suffer from bodily pain there is bound to be mental affliction as well. We can discern these two kinds of dukkha; we can see that bodily pain is real and that mental pain, oppression or disturbance, is also dukkha. We can understand that these two kinds of dukkha are truly dukkha; they are called Òdukkha dukkhaÓ. There are three kinds of dukkha: dukkha-dukkha (intrinsic suffering), vipariŒma dukkha (suffering in change) and sa˜khŒra-dukkha (suffering inherent in conditioned realities). As regards dukkha-dukkha, this is bodily pain and mental affliction that everybody experiences. This does not mean that people who know these kinds of dukkha are already ariyans. Everybody knows these kinds of dukkha in daily life. There is another kind of dukkha which is vipariŒma dukkha, dukkha because of change. This kind of dukkha occurs when happiness changes, when it does not last. Everybody looks for happiness and wants to experience happiness, but when one has acquired it, it changes again, it does not last. What causes happiness is susceptible to change and then one looks again for something else that can bring happiness. For example, people wish to acquire a particular thing, but when they have acquired it, it can only bring happiness for a moment, and therefore, they wish to acquire something else again that can bring happiness. Thus, happiness which changes and does not last is a kind of dukkha, suffering. Everybody has to experience dukkha, each day, but one does not feel that there is dukkha because of the fact that everything arises and then falls away, that everything changes very rapidly. One does not realize the dukkha inherent in all conditioned dhammas, sa˜khŒra dhammas, which are impermanent. The Buddha explained the characteristics of the three kinds of dukkha by way of feelings. As to dukkha-dukkha, this is bodily pain and unpleasant mental feeling, domanassa vedanŒ, which is mental pain. Thus, when dukkha-dukkha is classified by way of feelings, it includes the painful feeling which accompanies body-consciousness and the unpleasant mental feeling which accompanies the citta with aversion. Happy feeling, sukha vedanŒ, is a cause for suffering when it changes, and one looks for another object that can bring happiness; thus, it is suffering in change, vipariŒma dukkha. Indifferent feeling, feeling that is neither pleasant nor unpleasant, and also all other dhammas which arise and fall away, which are impermanent, are sa˜khŒra dukkha. People may well know bodily suffering and mental suffering, and they may well realize that even pleasant feeling is suffering, since it is susceptable to change, but this does not mean that they are ariyans. They cannot become enlightened until they realize the kind of dukkha which is sa˜khŒra-dukkha, dukkha inherent in all0conditioned realities. Is there anybody among you while you are sitting here who really knows to what extent there is dukkha? Everything arises and the falls away extremely rapidly. People who have studied the Dhamma know that a moment of seeing is different from a moment of hearing and that therefore seeing has to fall away before the reality of hearing can arise. Everybody can know through the study of Dhamma that the arising and falling away is dukkha, but this is understanding of the level of theoretical knowledge, pariyatti. This is different from the direct realization of the truth that the dhammas which arise and then fall away are dukkha. We read in the Tipi“aka that people of other beliefs asked the monks for what reason they were ordained in accordance with the Dhamma and the Vinaya. The monks answered that the reason was practising with the purpose of realizing dukkha. Thus we see that the understanding of dukkha has several degrees. There is not merely the degree of knowledge stemming from listening. People who have not developed panna, right understanding, may understand in theory, because they listened to the Dhamma, that the citta which sees falls away. However, they do not realize that the impermanence of realities is dukkha. As soon as one kind of citta falls away it is succeeded by another kind of citta which arises. One kind of dhamma arises and falls away and then another dhamma arises succeeding it, but they are not ready to see dukkha, that is, the arising and falling away of dhammas. The arising and falling away of dhammas occurs extremely rapidly and therefore people believe that these dhammas are a self who is there all the time. Therefore, they are not affected by the arising and falling away of the dhammas that see or hear. They take dhammas for permanent and self, until they know the true nature of the dhammas and do not take them for self any more. The understanding which is the study of dhammas should be developed gradually, stage by stage. One cannot forego any stage of development, and therefore, it is not possible to realize immediately the arising and falling away of realities. It is necessary to know first the characteristic of nŒma which is non-self, and the characteristic of rœpa which is non-self. We have discussed this subject here only for a little while and therefore you may not be able to realize already the characteristic of nama dhamma and of rœpa dhamma. We should continue to discuss this subject for a long time. Buddhism does not teach only about dukkha, it also teaches about the cause of the arising of dukkha, the dhamma which is the cessation of dukkha and the way of the development of panna that leads to the complete cessation of dukkha, so that it does not arise again. This is the teaching of the four noble Truths. Pa––Œ that can penetrate the four noble Truths should be developed stage by stage. For example, there is seeing at this moment and this is real, and thus, panna can only know the characteristic of the dhamma which is seeing. It can realize seeing as the dhamma which knows an object, as an element (dhŒtu) which knows or experiences. What appears through the eyesense is rœpa dhamma that does not know anything. This is the development of panna in daily life. Daily life is different for different people; some people may have accumulated skill for jhŒna and others not, but realities appear naturally in the life of each individual. So long as lokuttara citta (supramundane citta experiencing nibbŒna) has not arisen yet a person cannot consider and investigate lokuttara citta as the noble Truth of dukkha, but he can investigate other cittas that arise and appear at that moment. Thus, the study of dhammas should be in conformity with a personÕs real life so that he can understand what has been taught in the Tipitaka, also with regard to the four noble Truths. When someone is seeing and satipa““hŒna does not arise, panna cannot clearly realize the difference between nŒma dhamma and rœpa dhamma and then the noble Truth of dukkha cannot be penetrated. At this moment dhammas are arising and falling away, but ignorance (avijjŒ) cannot penetrate the truth and there is still clinging and desire to realize the truth. All kinds of clinging and desire are obstructions, they prevent a person to become detached and to realize the third noble Truth, the cessation of dukkha, that is, nibbŒna. Panna is not developed if one merely expects to know what has not arisen yet, what has not appeared yet. However, there is a way to test whether there is the real panna or not at this moment, when a reality is appearing. We can find out whether or not the characteristic of that reality can be understood as a nama dhamma or a rœpa dhamma. People should not have false expectations to know a reality other than the dhamma that appears at this very moment. At this moment a reality is appearing but there is no panna which knows as it really is the characteristic of that reality. How can panna then develop? If there is no understanding at this moment, there will not be understanding at the next moment. Only when panna arises together with sati, when there is awareness and understanding of the characteristic of the reality that appears, can panna can gradually develop. Panna can grow together with sati which is aware over and over again of the characteristics of all kinds of dhammas. In this way there can be understanding of all dhammas appearing through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-door. People should understand correctly that the reality appearing at this very moment is the dhamma panna should know as it really is. If they do not know yet the dhamma which appears now, they should continue to study the Dhamma and continue to listen to the Dhamma. In that way understanding can grow and there will be conditions for the arising of satipatthana. There is no other way to know the characteristics of dhammas as they really are. When you are listening and beginning to have understanding, you are actually beginning to develop the panna that is able to know the characteristics of realities. This is the very beginning of the development of insight, of vipassana. (from here there are questions - see next post) 6506 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:20pm Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Tadao, I studied Sanskrit at the University of British Columbia, Canada, and my teachers were Dr Karin Preisendanz (now of University of Hamburg, Germany) and Dr Ashok Aklujkar (who wrote our textbook). I remember that we did spend a week or two memorizing sandhi rules ... not sure if we memorized absolutely all of them though! I started learning Pali mainly because I wanted to understand the chanting we do at my temple here in Vancouver ("itipi so bhagavaa ...," etc.). After that, I found that I would come across passages in the sutta-s where the precise meaning wasn't clear from English translations. So I started to make a close study of bits and pieces in the original Pali. For example, just this evening I was reading in English translation that the Buddha's two teachers also practiced mindfulness and concentration (in MN 26). I wanted to know if these were really the same words as steps 7 and 8 of the Noble Eightfold Path, so I looked up the Pali, and sure enough ... his two teachers practiced sati and samaadhi. (After that I started to investigate the question of what the Buddha's innovations were, beyond his teachers, but that's another story!) Are you in Thailand? I am going to Wat Mahathat in Bangkok at the end of August to practice meditation and also to explore whether if I'd like to do a longer-term ordination. Derek. 6507 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:21pm Subject: Quotes from Acharn Sujin 2 (was:Theravada and Satipathana - Kom In this section Butsawong translates questions from the audience and Sujin replies. ButSawong: there is a question about a parrot that develops satipatthanna by reciting, ÒAtthi, atthi Ó (the pali term for bones) 3 . I would like to ask how rupa dhamma or nama dhamma can be the object of satipatthana in this way? Sujin: A parrot cannot know the four noble Truths and nobody can know the mind of a parrot. If a parrot says, ÒbonesÓ and a human being says the word ÒbonesÓ, is there a difference between the ability of a bird and of a human being to understand the meaning of this word? What is a person thinking who has listened to the Dhamma for a long time and hears the word ÒbonesÓ; does he think in a way different from a parrot ? A parrot and a human being have each a different bodily appearance. Is seeing-consciousness different in the case of a parrot and of a human being, or is it the same? We can see that a parrot is different from a human being because of the bodily appearance. However, nama dhamma has no outward appearance; there are kusala cittas and akusala cittas which arise. Birth as a bird is the result of akusala whereas birth as a human is the result of kusala. We should consider the Dhamma in all details. When someone just listens to the words of the Dhamma without considering them he may mistakenly believe that a parrot can develop satipathana. The parrot may have accumulated inclinations which we cannot know; it is true that the Bodhisatta who developed panna was also born as a bird in his former lives. We do not know about this, we only know with regard to ourselves the realities which arise. We can find out that satipatthana is not at all easy. We have to listen to the Dhamma for a long time so that there can be conditions for sati to be aware of a reality even at this very moment. Nobody here can know the citta of someone else, and who would have the kind of panna that knows the citta of a parrot? Thus, what we would be able to know is our own citta at this moment and this is what is most beneficial. Then we shall know that even thinking of a parrot is only one moment of citta that thinks. This is different from the citta that sees or hears. This is the way to develop panna so that we correctly understand the characteristic of nŒma dhamma, the element that knows, that can know an object through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind-door. Everybody here can only know his own citta and thus he should have more understanding of his own citta. But Sawong: There are questions concerning the development of satipatthana. In the section on ÒClear Comprension it has been stated that one should be aware while going forward. Should sati be aware now of going forward or of the element of wind produced by citta which conditions the going forward? Sujin: At this moment nobody is going forward, but sati can arise and be aware of the characteristic of the dhamma that is real at this moment. There is no need yet to think of something. If you can understand the characteristic of sati which is aware of the characteristic of the reality now there will be no doubt about the object of awareness. Sati is anatta, non-self, and when there are the right conditions it can arise and be aware of realities at any moment in daily life, no matter whether one sits, is lying down, stands, walks, speaks, is silent or thinks. But Sawong: Someone has a question about right understanding, sammaditthi. He asks whether sammaditthi arises when someone practises satipatthana in daily life. Can he at such a moment consider rœpa dhamma and nama dhamma? Or are there other dhammas arising together with samma ditthi(right understanding) that he can consider? Sujin: There are eight Path factors, but usually five factors count, because the three factors which are the abstinences (virati cetasikas) cannot arise together with the citta which is not supramundane citta, lokuttara citta 4 . These five Path factors are: right understanding (samma ditthi), right thinking (sammŒ-sankappa), right effort (samma-vayama), right mindfulness (samma-sati) and right concentration (samma sammadhi). While we are sitting there is rœpa produced by citta 6 . How can this rœpa be known? When a particular reality is known it can only be known when it appears through the appropriate doorway. When a blind person, for example, wants to know what the different colours really are, he cannot know this because the eye-door is lacking. Sound does not appear to a deaf person, and thus, pa––Œ could not know the characteristic of sound. At this moment a reality appears and thus there must be a doorway, the means through which that reality can appear. Without a doorway that reality cannot appear. With regard to the rœpa produced by citta, this arises within oneself, not outside. Therefore, only when it appears through a doorway it could be known. Can anybody without the rœpa which is bodysense (kŒyapasŒda rœpa) experience a rœpa appearing at the body? Can rœpas such as softness, hardness, cold, heat, motion or pressure appear? When someoneÕs bodysense is contacted by cold, heat, softness or hardness, he takes the cold, heat, softness or hardness for his own. The rœpas of cold, heat, softness, hardness, motion and pressure arise and appear at the body, but if a person does not know that they are not self or belonging to a self, how can he know the characteristic of rœpa produced by citta? Cold, heat and the other rœpas appearing through the bodysense are not only rœpas produced by citta; there are also the rœpas produced by the other three factors, namely, kamma, temperature (utu) and nutrition (ŒhŒra). Thus, the study on the level of theoretical knowledge of the Dhamma (pariyatti) is the study of the names of realities. At that level the characteristics of realities do not appear to panna. Panna should be developed stage by stage so that the true nature of realities can be directly known. But Sawong: The venerable Head Patriarch has some questions. If it is true that one cannot choose or select any object for the practice of satipatthana, how do you explain that, as we read in the commentaries, objects are selected in accordance with a personÕs temperament or character, such as a greedy temperament (tanhŒ carita) or a speculative temperament (di““hi carita) 7 . Furthermore, some people have samatha as their vehicle, they have developed tranquillity and insight, and some have vipassanŒ as their vehicle, they have developed only vipassanŒ. In the Commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta a city with four gates has been compared to nibbana, and it has been explained that just as people can enter a city with four gates by anyone of these gates, one can attain enlightenment by means of anyone of the four applications of mindfulness, mindfulness of the body, of feeling, of citta and of dhammas. How do we have to understand this? Sujin: Usually when people read in the scriptures about these subjects they desire to know more about this, or they desire to act in a particular way. When they hear about different temperaments, such as a person of an intelligent temperament, a ruminating temperament, or a hateful temperament, they think of themselves as having such or such temperament and they choose a particular way of development which suits their character. However, in reality this subject of the Dhamma has been taught so that it is a condition for the arising of panna that knows the truth. Only when one develops satipatthana panna can arise and then a person can know what character or temperament he has. Without the development of satipatthana he does not know realities and he can only guess what kind of temperament he has. There are qualities such as attachment, aversion, ignorance, and also panna, understanding of the Dhamma. What temperament do we have? This is only thinking and guessing. Everybody has these dhammas. Only when panna arises and sati is aware we can know the truth about the different characters of each individual, we can know how our accumulated inclinations are the condition for our own temperament. Someone may guess about his temperament and he may believe that he should develop a particular object among the four Applications of Mindfulness. He hopes to obtain a result by this way of practice. However, this is not the right condition for knowing the truth of non-self of realities; it is not the way to know all realities thoroughly. Someone may select an object and fix his attention on that object since he believes that he has such or such temperament and that he should therefore develop this particular Application of Mindfulness. At that moment he neglects awareness of all the objects he is used to taking for self. Of what temperament is a person when attachment arises, when aversion arises or when ignorance arises? All these realities are non-self, anatta. Therefore, the wrong view of self cannot be eradicated by selecting an object someone believes is suitable for his temperament. It is true that in the development of samatha the object of meditation is selected in accordance with someoneÕs character. By the development of samatha defilements are subdued so that calm increases. However, the development of vipassanŒ is different from the development of samatha and it has a different aim, namely, the eradication of ignorance. Ignorance of realities conditions the wrong view which takes realities for self. Therefore, in the development of satipatthana there should not be any selection of objects of understanding. In the ÒPath of DiscriminationÓ(Treatise I on Knowledge, Ch 1, Section 1, All), it has been said: ÒBhikkhus, all is to be directly known. And what is all that is to be directly known? Eye is to be directly known, visible object is to be directly known, eye-consciousness... eye-contact... any feeling that arises with eye-contact as its condition whether pleasant or painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant is also to be directly known...Ó Further on all realities are summed up and it is said that all of them should be known thoroughly, not any reality is excepted. But Sawong: The venerable Patriarch wishes to express his appreciation, anumodana, to the Thai Buddhists who are a large group brought here by Mother Sujin, and who have come to Cambodia to support Buddhism. People here listen to the Dhamma now with great joy and happiness. The Patriarch considers himself as the host receiving his guests who bring along the noble Truths. He wishes to apologize if there is anything lacking or anything which is not as it should be. Everybody begins to understand the subject of maha-satipatthaa. They try to grasp the meaning of satipatthana and thus they ask questions all the time about this subject. If there are questions which are not suitable I also wish to apologize to Mother Sujin. As the host, the Patriarch extends his blessings to everybody of this group and expresses his thankfulness. ****** 6508 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 1:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom hi rob and cybele: At 21:36 2001/07/18 -0700, you wrote: > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > Dear Rob > > > > > > >I > > practice insight > > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > > concentration > > purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. > > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > > > _______________________________ > > Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a > dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to the > breath? ======================== i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes one is getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a reminder to return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever realities are appearing....isn't that right, cybele? ======================== > What is meditation? ======================== how about: awareness of realities arising in the present (or just slightly past, as image/memory, according to jon and howard's recent exchange) ======================== What was I was doing at shinjuku station? > Could we be sitting very still concentrating and yet be doing > something other than what the Buddha taught? ======================== of course we could be. however, isn't it possible that we could also be walking through shinjuku station and thinking we are being aware of realities, when we are just thinking about being aware? and thinking we are practicing as the Buddha taught? and perhaps even enjoying these thoughts? how do we know we are practicing what the Buddha taught whether we are sitting with our eyes closed or walking through a train station? rob, do you usually *try* to be aware of realites in shinjuku station? :-) bruce 6509 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Zen & Theravada (was Hello) --- "Purnomo ." wrote: > Dear freinds, > > I noticed that we discuss about zen and Theravada. May I take your time ? > I think that Zen and Theravada is different. The great is Theravada is used > Tripitaka as "path" to Nibbana. So, if we discuss of weak or strong of > religion it is no use. > I just to point that The Buddha learn us Samatha and Vipassana. Are those in > Zen ? I think there aren't. Vipassana is only one way to Nibbana. > > with metta, I'm stepping out on a limb, because I'm far from as educated in Buddhism as most people on this list. But I think that both Mindfulness and Insight are very present in Zen. In Vietnamese Zen, as practiced by Thich Nath Hanh, it's hard to tell Zen and Vipassana practice apart in many ways. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6510 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:08pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: This case is a rare one where only the Buddha or the person > themself could really see the subtlety of the intention. I think > you've hit the mark with "connection betwen her love and > non-judgemental attitude". One of the things Acharn sujin > sometimes says when asked about matters such as paying taxes, > part of which may go towards the army etc. is that she "is not > the manager of the world". That woman was a sotapanna and could > never have the intention to kill . However, she was not an > anagami or arahant and still had attachment to her husband. > > I think there are others who could add more to this. > look forward to more from you Robert > robert Dear Robert, Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I am not too familiar yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a sotapanna is an enlightened person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant denotes someone who has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? I think it is interesting that the sotapanna could still have attachment, although a positive, sort of pure attachment, in the form of love for her husband, and that the arahant would have transcended even this positive relation to others, and be, I suppose, 'completely free' of either positive or negative attachments or aversions. If you could say a bit more about the conditions of these different attainments, it would be of great interest to me. If this is too redundant for the group, I would be happy to be referred to an appropriate passage on the web. Nice again to be in your company! Thanks, Robert E. 6511 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- bruce wrote: > hi rob and cybele: > > > At 21:36 2001/07/18 -0700, you wrote: > > > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > > > Dear Rob > > > > > > > > > >I > > > practice insight > > > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > > > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > > > concentration > > > purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare attention. > > > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > > > > > _______________________________ > > > >Robert: Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a > > dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to > the > > breath? > > ======================== > i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes > one is > getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a > reminder to > return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever > realities are > appearing....isn't that right, cybele? > ======================== Robert:When "one is getting carried away by concepts" are there paramattha dhammas (realities) arising? If there is never awareness of the thinking process it will not be known as it is. Are there really anchors in samsara? While one is returning to the breath how many dhammas have arisen and passed away? Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) xxvii writes: “Because the functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has to be taken while the deed is being performed to its completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas 3)”I can perform” and 4) “I can feel”. Thus these four imaginary characteristic functions of being have bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. But the elements have not the time or span of duration to carry out such functions” (end quote) This "deep-rooted belief in their existence" can occur even while one thinks they are being aware. That is why samatha and vipassana are different. One can develop samatha correctly and still have self-view as much as ever. > > > > What is meditation? > ======================== > how about: awareness of realities arising in the present (or > just slightly > past, as image/memory, according to jon and howard's recent > exchange) > ======================== Yes, if it is correct awreness. perhaps we could add:arising in association with panna. > > What was I was doing at shinjuku station? > > Could we be sitting very still concentrating and yet be > doing > > something other than what the Buddha taught? > > ======================== > of course we could be. > > however, isn't it possible that we could also be walking > through shinjuku > station and thinking we are being aware of realities, when we > are just > thinking about being aware? and thinking we are practicing as > the Buddha > taught? and perhaps even enjoying these thoughts? > > how do we know we are practicing what the Buddha taught > whether we are > sitting with our eyes closed or walking through a train > station? > > rob, do you usually *try* to be aware of realites in shinjuku > station? :-) _______ Robert:As I have written before, Bruce, much/most of the time it is some subtle deviation or clinging or idea of control. One of things we have discussed in the past is how clinging in subtle forms should be known in the present moment too. it can be seen and thus it becomes clearer when it arises. I think without studying the teachings, meeting with Acharn sujin, I would be convinced that I had awareness much more than than I do (and this is still probably an over-estimation). I would be that much more deluded. robert 6512 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:35pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Stream Entry - clarification Anders, This is a very profound post. Your questions about whether oneself or others would need or want to know one's realization in an objective way, raises very interesting questions. It occurs to me that being able to certify one's own level of attainment can only be a gift for the ego, and make one feel 'proud' to have attained something. I can't see any way out of this, and it helps me to understand why Zen Master Ikkyu tore up his certificate of enlightenment when his students at the monastery had become too attached to his stature. They wept and taped it back together until he finally burned it. Why be attached to such things? Subhuti's words in the Diamond Sutra are remarkably profound if taken in this way. What does it do for the practitioner to know if they are a stream-entrant or not? It merely clouds their awareness with a self-concept. It can only be an overlay. Now if the 'stream-entrant' describes his actual experience and properties, well, that might be useful. It is possible to take an inventory without providing a label that glosses all the specifics. So if you were to say 'I no longer have attachment to possessions', or 'I have attachment to possessions but I'm no longer attached or averse to that attachment' this could be useful information to you or others, because it goes to an actual element of living, letting go, being at peace in awareness, etc. When you say 'but let's figure out if I'm really enlightened or not', however, you are then involved in a contest, rather than a description of where you are really at. So I have to agree with you, and to admit that the aspect of me that wants to know 'Is Anders enlightened?', 'Is Robert [me] enlightened or is he not?', or 'is he close to realization?', is nothing other than the ego-sense, which is enamoured of attainments and sufferings. What does it do for me to see this? Well, then I can relax in the 'is-ness' that is present right now, and stop worrying about 'me', which is an indulgence of the ego-sense in the first place. And worrying about whether Anders is a stream-entrant, although an exciting diversion, is also another way of the ego [by projection] asking itself 'Am I enlightened? Is my attainment lesser or greater than this or that person? How great or miserable am *I*?' So what happens when I drop all that? Then I am faced with existence itself, and where I really am with that existence, and where I really am with this moment. And then I am forced to ask myself: well, with this moment what am I going to do? Will I be vigilant, and look into this matter of 'Who am I?' in this moment? Or will I look for another distraction or contest to get off the path? Really, when you look at it, there's only the path [which is not really a path but just being present/Mindful at any given opportunity] or not the path [going off into dreamland again]. And it's both simple and frighteningly present right now. It also occurs to me that while dropping the quest to define one's attainment, that negative labelling also serves the same purpose, of bolstering the sense of oneself as a separate entity. I am constantly saying to myself 'well you have all this attachment and emotion all the time; nope, you're not there yet, buddy' and negatively evaluating my 'prospects' for realization. This is an enormous obstacle to realizing my true nature *now*. One cannot realize in the future when conditions are right. Now is always the time to look into who one really is. Enlightenment, as I understand the Buddha, is not really an attainment. It is a prior condition. This is exciting if realized in truth. It means that I am already living/expressing pure Buddha-nature/Right View, but unfortunately I am too deluded at the moment to enjoy this truth. So that immediate delusion can be looked at *now* and at any time. It doesn't have to wait until I judge myself as capable or deserving. Robert E. ------------------------------- --- Anders Honoré wrote: > It seems that my website caused some confusion as to the whether or not, I > am a stream-entrant. So I figured I'd spell it out and make my own view > clear in this regard. > > I have made no claim, nor will I ever, make the claim that I am a > stream-entrant. As I said, I confess to consuming alcoholic substances from > time to time, so on that account, anyone who feels that this "disqualifies" > me, are in their right mind to do so. > > But, nor will you see me deny that I might be a stream-entrant. As they > Diamond Sutra wisely says: > > "Subhuti, what do you think? The stream entrant is able to think, 'I have > attained the stream entrant's reward', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Stream entrant' is the > name for entering the stream and for entering nowhere else: not entering > forms, sounds, odors, tastes, tactile sensations, or ideas. This is called a > 'stream entrant'." > "Subhuti, what do you think? The Once-returner is able to think, 'I have > attained the Once-returner's reward', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Once-returner' is the > name for one more arrival and really is without future arrival. This is > called a 'Once-returner'." "Subhuti, what do you think? The Non-returner is > able to think, 'I have attained the Non-returner's reward', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? 'Non-returner' is the name > for no further arrival, and really has no non-arrival. This is why he is > called 'Non-returner'." "Subhuti, what do you think? The Worthy (arhat) is > able to think, 'I have attained the Worthy's enlightenment', no?" > Subhuti replied, "No, World Honored One. And why? Really, there is nothing > called a 'Worthy'. > "World Honored One, if a Worthy were to think, 'I have attained the Worthy's > enlightenment', then it would be because of attachment to a self, a person, > sentient beings, and a soul. World Honored One, the Buddha has said that I > have attained the samàdhi of non-dispute that among others is the best. It > is the best because I am free of the desire to be a Worthy. I do not think, > 'I am free of the desire to be a Worthy'. World Honored One, if I were to > think, 'I have attained the Worthy's enlightenment', then the World Honored > One would not have said that Subhuti is a happy woodland practitioner, > because Subhuti really practices nowhere. And so he is called 'Subhuti, the > happy woodland practitioner'." > ------------------- > So even if I were a stream-entrant, it would be erroneous to say "I am a > stream-entrant," as this would still be an attachment to the image of self > (I know; because I used to think I was. Big mistake! Hindered my practise a > great deal). > As I said, I do not care if I am stream-entrant or not, nor do I have any > interest in finding out. > > Some may interpret this as a sign that I really am a stream-entrant. That > too is an illusion! To say that someone is a stream-entrant or not, would > require you to take static "snapshot" of reality an evaluate this. Already, > the flux of existence has moved on, and the snapshot is no longer in accord > with reality, so what is the point? Ultimately, it can never be a correct > assessment. > > If it is really that important for anyone here to find out, then I suggest > that you find someone who might be qualified to make that assessment, namely > an actual stream-entrant and qualified teacher, and I will be happy to > comply. For myself, such a thing has no relevancy however. Having confirmed > whether I am enlightened or not, will not serve to further my own practise > and progress. > To those, who would like to know, I would quote the words of Hui-neng, the > Sixth Patriarch of Zen in this regard: > > "If you are under delusion and cannot realize your Essence of Mind, you > should seek the advice of a pious and learned friend. When your mind is > enlightened, you will know the Essence of Mind [Nibbana], and then you may > tread the Path the right way. Now you are under delusion, and do not know > your Essence of Mind. Yet you dare to ask whether I know my Essence of Mind > or not. If I do, I realize it myself, but the fact that I know it cannot > help you from being under delusion. Similarly, if you know your Essence of > Mind your knowing would be of no use to me. Instead of asking others, why > not see it for yourself and know it for yourself?" > > Personally, I do not see the point of discerning such things. It has no > relevancy for me; and as Hui-neng points out, it should not have any > relevancy for anyone else either. > > Some may argue "but we should know, so that we might know whether your words > are valid or not." To this, I would say, go and read the Kalama Sutta, which > essentially says: > > "Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When > there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, > don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical > conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering > views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our > teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are > unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized > by the wise; these qualities, when undertaken & carried out, lead to harm & > to suffering' -- then you should abandon them. > ------------------- > Basically, it tells you to go from your own direct experience of the Dhamma. > If you find your own direct experience of the Dhamma inadequate to answer > such a question, then what is the point of lingering on it, since it has no > practical application for you that might help you further your own daily > practise? > I think there are many people here who might find themselves violating the > principles laid forth in this sutta, but again, this is not something that > they should accept from my words, or even the Kalama Sutta itself! This is > something they have to discover from their own personal experience. > > But as I said, if it is important for some people "know" (although it is a > false knowing), then I will be happy to comply provided they can find > someone qualified to give an answer in this regard. > > Regards, > Anders > ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6513 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 2:40pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > We can know for ourselves in our daily life anytime we do something that > in conventional terms might be seen as 'encouraging unwholesomeness' in > others whether the citta (moment of consciousness) accompanying that > action is kusala or akusala. Thanks Jon. I appreciate your response. Robert ===== Robert Epstein, Program Director / Acting Instructor THE COMPLETE MEISNER-BASED ACTOR'S TRAINING in Wash., D.C. homepage: http://homepage.mac.com/epsteinrob1/ commentary: http://www.scene4.com/commentary/commentary.html profile: http://www.aviar.com/snsmembers/Robert_Epstein/robert_epstein.html "What you learn to really do becomes real" "Great actors create actions that are as rich as text" 6514 From: craig garner Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody Dear Cybele, That was a lovely description of the path and its many ways of unfoldoing thank you so much for your words of truth. With love Craig ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:03 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody > > Dear everybody > Dear Tori > > The Buddhist Path for me is to walk on steadily yet not being very > concerned about reaching any destination, so to speak 'wherever you go there > you are', being on the road is already a trip (sorry but I am an > anachronistic late hippie) > Meditation is a mental training, is about fostering awareness, is to > sharpen your mind and penetrate the nature of phenomena, of life itself. > It's investigation of mental processes, non biased and dispassionate. > The 'motivation' is in doing it simply and unpretentiously, without > any particular expectation to accomplish anything special what doesn't > mean that you don't have purposefulness. > Aspiration and desire are to be distinguished as inner drives but > nevertheless craving is very subtle and we have to be attentive to > don't get entrapped in old mental patterns that are confortable like an old > pair of sleepers and prevent us from observing reality as it is. > And meditation is to develop skills in observing reality as it is, > without fear or denial and not distorting it to accomodate to our views and > prejudices. > What is the motivation to be alive, to breath, to eat, to drink? > Dhamma is about life, the motivation is being alive and exploring fully this > possibility. And so is meditation. > Our mind perceive this reality and contain all the possibilities > but we have to learn the skills, to deepen your 'sight-insight'. > I will quotate somebody I admire who lived very much in the present moment > in mindfulness and he is not a buddhist teacher, the great Thoreau: > > Direct your eye right inward, and you'll find > A thousand regions in your mind > Yet undiscovered. Travel them and be > expert in home-cosmography. > > Thoreau - Walden > > I know awareness is not but a sparkling light just perceptible that flickers > in our mind and for me even when we communicate at a deeper level with > somebody this is already like meditation. > Never approached meditation as something separate from me. > The meditative mind can happen always and we don't have to pursue > it just to be open, to surrender, is effortless. > It's something experiencing reality and understanding it, accepting whatever > comes. > > Dhamma is lively, I don't let myself be fooled by rigidity > and narrowmindness, Dhamma is wide enough to embrace everybody and > everything, is heartwarming and a source of strenght, it's fullness, openess > because is empty of self and can contain everything without oppression: > dhamma is about freedom, be still and feel the refreshing breeze in this hot > afternoon. :-) > Just practicing for it's own sake, I don't demand nothing, I don't expect > nothing just being present, awake to this very moment. > > Love > > CYbele 6515 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 3:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom hi rob > > ======================== > > i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes > > one is > > getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a > > reminder to > > return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever > > realities are > > appearing....isn't that right, cybele? > > ======================== > > Robert:When "one is getting carried away by concepts" are there > paramattha dhammas (realities) arising? If there is never > awareness of the thinking process it will not be known as it is. bruce: there aren't any rules that say one has to return to the breath...when you realize you're thinking, you have awareness of thinking, that's all; whether it arises with panna or not is another story; and all of it is dependent on conditions: there might be long strings of papanca and then, awareness of thinking, or there might not be anything like that at all.... the point is not to hold on to the breath or anything else, but awareness of whatever arises at the six dvara....the breath is is just a sensation to remind you that indeed realities are arising constantly at the six doors...you could just as easily use the ringing of the telephone....whether awareness arises or not is beyond control.... > Are there really anchors in samsara? While one is returning to > the breath how many dhammas have arisen and passed away? bruce: i have no idea, and don't think it's possible or even necessary to know, especially at our level...this reminds me of that recent exchange about the time-length of a process of citta....x milliseconds vs y milliseconds....i realize the topic might be interesting to some, but is that contemplating the Dhamma?? sounds more like counting angels dancing on the head of a pin! > Thein Nyun in his preface to the DhatuKathu (Pali Text Society) > xxvii writes: $BE#(Jecause the > functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of > continuity, collection and form, the ideas arise: > 1)the initial effort that has to be exerted when a > deed is about to be performed and > 2) the care that has > to be taken while the deed is being performed to its > completion and this leads to the subsequent ideas > 3)$BG*(J can perform$BG(Jand > 4) $BE*(J can feel$BG(J > Thus these four > imaginary characteristic functions of being have > bought about a deep-rooted belief in their existence. > But the elements have not the time or span of duration > to carry out such functions$BG(J(end quote) bruce: this is great. > This "deep-rooted belief in their existence" can occur even > while one thinks they are being aware. > That is why samatha and vipassana are different. One can develop > samatha correctly and still have self-view as much as ever. bruce: of course. but is self-view a danger only to those who develop samatha correctly? i would think it is just as great a danger to those who think they are developing vipassana correctly, but aren't.... so how can we know if insight is being cultivated correctly? > > however, isn't it possible that we could also be walking > > through shinjuku > > station and thinking we are being aware of realities, when we > > are just > > thinking about being aware? and thinking we are practicing as > > the Buddha > > taught? and perhaps even enjoying these thoughts? > > > > how do we know we are practicing what the Buddha taught > > whether we are > > sitting with our eyes closed or walking through a train > > station? > > > > rob, do you usually *try* to be aware of realites in shinjuku > > station? :-) > _______ > Robert:As I have written before, Bruce, much/most of the time it > is some subtle deviation or clinging or idea of control. > One of things we have discussed in the past is how clinging in > subtle forms should be known in the present moment too. it can > be seen and thus it becomes clearer when it arises. > I think without studying the teachings, meeting with Acharn > sujin, I would be convinced that I had awareness much more than > than I do (and this is still probably an over-estimation). I > would be that much more deluded. bruce: i know you've said that before, and i'm pretty certain that's all that arises in me too, if even that....i guess what i was trying to say was that i don't think it's more likely that one will have clinging or an idea of control while sitting than while walking through a train station....but a lot of the list members give the impresssion that clinging is more likely to arise while sitting, or that awareness of realities at the six doors is less likely to arise sitting, but not at other times, as if everyone who sits is in the immediate danger of getting stuck in some jhana cave sparkling with piti, thinking they hit the mother lode..... again, how do we do know whether or not subtle clinging to a sense of self is arising at all? as for the arising of panna: how many on this list can say -- honestly -- that they do not hope it will arise (some day, some life), that they do not care if it arises, and that there is no trying, in their practice, whether in train stations, reading the Dhamma or sitting on cushions? bruce ps: thanks for the quotes from khun sujin. discovering her writing is why i joined this list in the first place. she is so brilliantly clear. unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends up, for me at least, being more confusing than clarifying.... 6516 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:19pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- bruce wrote: > > > > This "deep-rooted belief in their existence" can occur even > > while one thinks they are being aware. > > That is why samatha and vipassana are different. One can > develop > > samatha correctly and still have self-view as much as ever. > > bruce: of course. but is self-view a danger only to those > who develop > samatha correctly? i would think it is just as great a danger > to those who > think they are developing vipassana correctly, but aren't.... > > so how can we know if insight is being cultivated correctly? Vipassana cannot be developed at all unless there is sufficient understanding of anatta at the intellectual level. My point was that samatha is not dependent on understanding anatta. > > > > > > Robert:As I have written before, Bruce, much/most of the > time it > > is some subtle deviation or clinging or idea of control. > > One of things we have discussed in the past is how clinging > in > > subtle forms should be known in the present moment too. it > can > > be seen and thus it becomes clearer when it arises. > > I think without studying the teachings, meeting with Acharn > > sujin, I would be convinced that I had awareness much more > than > > than I do (and this is still probably an over-estimation). I > > would be that much more deluded. > > bruce: i know you've said that before, and i'm pretty certain > that's all > that arises in me too, if even that....i guess what i was > trying to say was > that i don't think it's more likely that one will have > clinging or an idea > of control while sitting than while walking through a train > station....but > a lot of the list members give the impresssion that clinging > is more likely > to arise while sitting, or that awareness of realities at the > six doors is > less likely to arise sitting, but not at other times, as if > everyone who > sits is in the immediate danger of getting stuck in some jhana > cave > sparkling with piti, thinking they hit the mother lode..... > > again, how do we do know whether or not subtle clinging to a > sense of self > is arising at all? > > as for the arising of panna: how many on this list can say -- > honestly -- > that they do not hope it will arise (some day, some life), > that they do not > care if it arises, and that there is no trying, in their > practice, whether > in train stations, reading the Dhamma or sitting on cushions? +--------- if we don't see that hoping for what it is - craving- I think it will be a continual hidden hindrance. I think also some of us can say there has been some panna arising at times- it isn't just hope. > > bruce > > ps: thanks for the quotes from khun sujin. discovering her > writing is why > i joined this list in the first place. she is so brilliantly > clear. > unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends up, > for me at > least, being more confusing than clarifying.... __________ I take your point. I will try to reduce the number of my posts. Thanks robert 6517 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom she is so brilliantly > > clear. > > unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends up, > > for me at > > least, being more confusing than clarifying.... > __________ > I take your point. I will try to reduce the number of my posts. > Thanks > robert robert PLEASE don't even consider reducing the number of your posts!!...yours are among the most edifying on the list! really!! it's probably more that i'm ready for a much-needed break from the discussions (which i'll be getting next week :-) bruce 6518 From: Sukinderpal Narula Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Cybele, So nice to hear this, now all you got to do is plan a trip to Bangkok. To be in the presence of the most, if not truly selfless person I know, Acharn Sujin. Nina is now my favourite writer, her writings always point to personal experience unlike most others whose writhings usually cause me to conceptualize and unknowingly get caught in the resultant view. Anumodana, Sukin. cybele chiodi wrote: > >Dear Cybele, > >before I answer this would you mind repeating what you said in a > >private note to me about how last night you were explaining > >Abhidhamma in daily life in your own words and what you noticed. > >best wishes > >robert > > > > Dear Rob > > Yes I am very keen on sharing this experience, was very profound to me. > > Yesterday evening as usual me and my friend John sat down for meditation and > before normally we read some text and discuss it, sharing our views. > John is reading Abhidhamma in daily life that I suggested to him and he had > some doubts, got stuck in some concepts and asked me to try and explain with > my own words my understanding of it to help him to clarify. > I decided to simplify reading aloud and John would question me and I would > try to explain the passage. > What I started experiencing was that more and more I concentrated on > explaining it in an articulate form and making analogies to elucidate the > obscure points more I felt a clear comprehension of what I was reading and > concepts that I missed emerged and I could consider them and I got this > sensation of mental lucidity while explaining to him. > And I was not trying to show off or neither prone to intellectualize to feel > myself on the 'safe path'; I was really sharing in a very openminded way. > This understanding would unfold spontaneously while explaining, trying to > communicate John what the text meant and realizing myself lots of new > perspectives that I had previously overlooked or somehow had rippen in the > meanwhile. > It was very stimulating and a kind of quiet joy arised because helping John > to get through the text was in fact deepening my own understanding in a very > curious and relaxed manner. > I felt a kind of mental disclosure, perceptions doors opening. > The sensations were quite vivid and the keeness of my mind was acute; I felt > like while talking I was sharpening my mind. > Perhaps is just more delusion but looked like awareness. ;-) > I decided to continue reading the book with John and then we can penetrate > together beyond the words to reach an actual understanding, helping each > other. > His questions would promote this keeness in investigating and my mind was > very allert indeed. > Well there it is Rob; looking forward for your comments. :-) > Please be merciless, don't destroy brutally my dear illusions...joking! > > Cybele 6519 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 4:51pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Bruce, This goes straight to my heart - (hadaya vattha) ( the place where mindprocesses based on vanity arise). Thanks. But anyway this is one of the times where I have been thinking about cutting back. I feel the best way to help anyone is by encouraging them to study and learn more from the tipitaka and from Nina and acharn Sujin's books. I look on this list as an opportunity to give that encouragement; the rest is mostly incidental. see you in bangkok soon robert --- bruce wrote: > she is so brilliantly > > > clear. > > > unfortunately much of what's discussed on the list ends > up, > > > for me at > > > least, being more confusing than clarifying.... > > __________ > > I take your point. I will try to reduce the number of my > posts. > > Thanks > > robert > > robert PLEASE don't even consider reducing the number of your > posts!!...yours are among the most edifying on the list! > really!! it's > probably more that i'm ready for a much-needed break from the > discussions > (which i'll be getting next week :-) > > bruce > > > 6520 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom At 01:51 2001/07/19 -0700, you wrote: > Dear Bruce, > This goes straight to my heart - (hadaya vattha) ( the place > where mindprocesses based on vanity arise).... ha ha! that's great! see you soon.... bruce 6521 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] sharing abhidhamma in daily life Dear Sukin You are trully gallant. Thanks. Nina is not my favourite writer because she uses a dry language that doesn't appeal to my latin blood but suits me as certainly keeps me safe from getting overexcited - I must necessarily be cool and this detachment helps while studying dhamma. No offense meant Nina, much appreciation for your remarkable dedication. I will enjoy meeting Sujin but you see dear Sukin I am not very confident in 'gurus' of any kind. I respect them and appreciate their teachings but I have met so many famous, eminent teachers monastics and laypeople and I have learned to don't hold to my expectations. It's difficult for others to live up our expectations, we have so many and are so demanding! :-) I know Sujin doesn't present herself as a guru, this is only a remark of our tendence to grasp, to be possessive of teachings and teachers. What I truly enjoy Sukin is seeing how different people from very different backgrounds and mentalities can be drawn together and despite their differences communicate in the language of Dhamma, like me and you. This is lovely and encouraging for me. :-) Love Cybele >Dear Cybele, >So nice to hear this, now all you got to do is plan a trip to Bangkok. >To be in the presence of the most, if not truly selfless person I know, >Acharn Sujin. >Nina is now my favourite writer, her writings always point to personal >experience unlike most others whose writhings usually cause me to >conceptualize and unknowingly get caught in the resultant view. >Anumodana, > >Sukin. > 6522 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dearv 'asterix' >>dear cybele, > >Thanks for posting this, i have read this before with the same >amusement and excitement. >I am a fan of ven.chah's similes which are very much inline with >similes found in tipitaka. >'In my view and understanding' I think that meditation is the super- >tool. >A mind conduicive to formal/informal meditation is a result of past >good kammas as per many stories in tipitaka. So eventhough I observe >that I am not a good meditator and my mind is not easily calmed I >tell myself that I need not to have a grudge against meditation. :o) Really appreciate your input. Because it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about meditation and evrybody else dismisses it what I couldn't believe true. Thank you very much for posting your comments and sharing. >This story is not releted to the topic, but I like to post it anyway. >ven.chah cautions his pupils about the potential attachment to the >pleasant sights and feelings which result from deep concentration. >"Do not give a damn about those bright lights, its not worth, I have >a brighter light in my torch over here..."hahaha :-))) Great, he is hilarious. Love Cybele 6523 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:14pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Cybele, Tori and John,(Alan, Alex) I'm racing against the clock to catch up with posts in the internet cafe in Chichester (nearest town to Dairy Cottage) and it's taking some catching up! Just wonderful posts from everyone (including yours) and a very busy month.....;-))... Thanks for all your kind words and I'm so glad you all enjoyed the get-together as much as I did....it was super to meet you all and I appreciate the long journeys you all had to make.. My mother and the other friends enjoyed meeting you all too. Hope to hear from Alex here in due course and John, delighted to read your intro on dsg and to hear that you and Cybele are reading ADL together!! look f/w to the next reunion.. Sarah 6524 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with Tori and everybody Dear Craig Glad to share and feel your appreciation. I was very sincere. LOve Cybele > >Dear Cybele, That was a lovely description of the path and its many ways of >unfoldoing thank you so much for your words of truth. With love >Craig >----- Original Message ----- >From: cybele chiodi >>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:03 AM >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Buddhist path and meditation - sharing with >Tori >and everybody > > 6525 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:28pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Hi Bruce > > --- cybele chiodi wrote: > > > > > > >I > > > practice insight > > > meditation based on the four foundations of mindfulness. > > > The breath is an anchor, you don't develop calm and > > > concentration purposefully, it's only a byproduct of bare > > > attention. > > > I never felt Anapanasati as suitable for me. > > > > > _______________________________ > > > > Ok I see. Why does the breath need to be your anchor? If a > > dhamma is appearing why not know it rather than return to the > > breath? Bruce what I practice is Vipassana and therefore I don't ignore and dhamma arising. I observe it without elaboration and return to my breath to avoid clinging and mental proliferation. But I have four objects to relate to. Body Feelings Mind Mental objects >======================== >i think the point is to return to the breath when one realizes one is >getting carried away by concepts, and the breath in turn is a reminder to >return to whatever is arising in the present moment, whatever realities are >appearing....isn't that right, cybele? >======================== Indeed that's why I say I don't practice Anapanasati. It's a different approach. > > > What is meditation? >======================== >how about: awareness of realities arising in the present (or just slightly >past, as image/memory, according to jon and howard's recent exchange) Good 'definition'. Metta Cybele 6526 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Quotes from Acharn Sujin 1.(was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Rob I printed out the text and will read with attention. Can't read long text directly on the screen, I am old fashioned. My reply will follow. Thanks Love Cybele >From: Robert Kirkpatrick >Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Quotes from Acharn Sujin 1.(was: Theravada and >Satipathana - Kom >Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2001 22:07:24 -0700 (PDT) > >Dear Cybele, >I thought you might like to read this. >In December Acharn sujin visited Cambodia. Some of her talks >were recorded and a new book in Thai has been published. I was >just sent some translated extracts. >In this section of the book the audience consisted of monks, >nuns and laypeople. Toward the end Sujin is asked questions >about satipatthana by the Sangharaja, Cambodia's head monk. >(Khun Butsawong, the man who translates Sujin's talks for >Cambodia radio station, translates between Sujin and the >venerable monk) >The post is split into 2 sections. > 6527 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:27pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 5:44 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: The meaning of Equanimity Dear Anders, >I don't think I put too much pali in my posts to you! No, not at all! Thankfully. It was all in jest... :-) 6528 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:27pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Kom Tukovinit Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 6:49 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Anders, >You are back in flood! Yup. --- "Anders Honoré" > >> My question is: How can there ever be any knowledge that >> Nibbana remains when that which cognises Nibbana (conditioned >>elements) has >> dispersed? >I don't think that the Buddha ever said the "knowledge" of nibbana >remains after all the kandhas cease. My speculation is that since Nibbana = >is the anti-thesis of all the conditioned phenomena, that it is >unconditioned, neither rising nor falling, and it becomes obvious at the >point of cognition. For some reason I can't make much sense of what you're saying here, in relation to my question (my fault). Would you mind rephrasing it. >I wouldn't call all the teachings I have from different people as >simple "rephrasements". Some inventions hinder instead of help. Me neither. They explain things from a totally different perspective. Some 'inventions' help some people and hinder others. People are different, so I think it's fair that there are different approaches. One has to find that which suits oneself. >If I were to derived the concept of nibbana on my own, I would be suspicious of it. Since I don't, and this is taught by others, and so far = best supported by the scriptures, then I have no reason to suspect this particular model. I am not convicted of this understanding, although I am= concerned about how people come up with such drastic variations. Yup, that's what I wonder about most too. Ajahn Chah, > for example (whom I would definitely count as an enlightened individual), > once commented that the Sutra of the Sixth Patriarch [of Zen], Hui-neng was > highly profound and he hoped that one day his own students would be able to > comprehend the subtle wisdom it contains. > Hui-neng didn't even bother saying Mind is Nirvana. He simply renamed > Nirvana to 'Essence of Mind'. How should we trust Ajahn Chah's > interpretation of the Pali Canon, as well as his interpretation the Sutra= of > the Sixth patriarch? Do you trust Ajahn Chah's wisdom over your own? If so, > why? >Ajahn Chah may be an Ajanh to many, but I haven't had the opportunity to >be his student. Because of that, I certainly wouldn't take Ajanh Chah on >his words because I simply don't know what he teaches. Never read any of his teachings? They are really great. You should read them someday. >My point is, if a teaching, by anybody, is not supported by the Buddha >teachings (of course, subjected to one's own understanding), we regard it >not to be the teaching of Buddha. I have observed some of your >statements to fall within the teaching, and some outside of it. One of the= >thing that I consider to be outside (nibbana as a consciousness), I think, = is sufficiently discussed for my purpose. Quite right 6529 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:56pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:44 AM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > >It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and work to > >overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will thus > >never make much progress. > > Cybele: > Of course it's a free choice but why one should be silly to waste an > opportunity of clear comprehension in the buddhist path? > Who is free from limitations apart Buddha himself? Apparently, many people are silly. > >Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning > >counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? > > Counter-measure Anders, don't you ever think that perhaps all your self > confidence it's a smoke curtain that prevents you of facing some reality > that is a bit difficult to deal with? > Do you really believe you are that much BEYOND? Whoa, did I push some bottons there? You are reading into my message Cybele. I already said that the reason I don't meditate personally on a regular basis is due to plain laziness, and that I know it would do me a world of good. What I'm saying above is in general, not something about me. > Meditation it is not to oppose anything but to develop right understanding; > this is not an expedient means, this is investigation of Dhamma, this is > lifelong lasting. Which in turn is a counter-measure against ignorance (which is even more lasting than a life-time). I am telling you, it's all expedient means. Ask any stream-entrant you know, they'll agree :-) > Dear Anders I never dropped my initial theory about some manic tendences of > many so called spiritual aspirants. > Too much self confidence, you are flying very high; for me Dhamma is very > down to earth. I honestly can't see what triggered this reaction from you in my own writings. It seems to me that you somehow attached to the idea that I had inserted myself on some cloud high above you, and you seem to dislike that. Generally, through the past couple of posts, I've been sensing a growing aversion. What's the deal with you? My deal is that I am self-confident (interpret that negatively or positively as you wish). But that doesn't mean I am not listening. Already, I am sitting here noting my own response to your response. For me, Dhamma is the most down-to-earth thing I know. > Anders: > >No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustarte the wide > >range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was Dogen > >who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are sharp and > >dull." > > Indeed and I have met plenty of dulls Andres, don't be too optimistic. Of course I have met many more dulls than sharp-wits myself as well. But what are you aiming at? > >No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different > >techniques because there are different people with different temperaments > >and capabilities. > > Nobody ever contested it. > Meditation is in the buddhist path and who threads the buddhist path cannot > dismiss it so lightly; about this issue we are trying to clarify. > You are not buddhist and therefore doesn't concern you perhaps. Who said that I am not a Buddhist? > What doesn't change the fact that Buddha himself attained enlightenment > through meditation. > Why study the texts if you neglect this fundamental principle? As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of expedient means. For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how degrading" Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. You can employ them as you wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not ultimately aimed at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do you much good. > Anders: > >Some people aren't, apparently. > > Oh I would like to be introduced to them. > You are beyond defilements? > Or you believe you are? Nope, again you interpret me into a general context. > Seems that here we are a huge company of fools, I would like to meet all > this wise people that you have the privilege to know being a 18 years old > guy. Sure. Send me a private email and I'll give you their adresses :-) I am not saying I know any arhats, but I certainly know people who are a lot wiser than me. > Cybele: > Anders we don't practice meditation to accomplish anything, we don't have > expectations, we just sit still and observe the arising and passing away of > phenomena, we observe reality in bare attention. > That's all, no fireworks, no mystical visions. > At least not in Vipassana. That's the attitude in meditation you are talking about. I am talking about the actual result. > Anders: > > > >Pardon my asking, but is Vipassana limited to seated meditation? > > No Vipassana is every moment but to observe without so much interference of > conceptual thought we sit still as well. > I vaguely remember that a certain Gautama practiced like that and he figure > out something about the very nature of this troubled life of ours. > It seems they used to call him the one who is awake... Haha, yes. I also recall how some of his students only had to listen to one discourse to become arhats. Or are they not truly enlightened because they did not follow the 'proper' and 'formal' Buddhist path? > They are meditating, the object is their very illness. > Anders it seems that you support the idea that sit meditation and daily > awareness are almost incompatible. How did you come up with that idea? I mentioned in a previous post that seated meditation is to be used as a catalyst to foster daily awareness. > It's all meditation but teh formal one has a relevance in the practice that > we cannot overlook because doesn't 'suits' us. To tell you the truth, I don't give a fuck about formal or informal practises. That's all a load of hogwash which enables one to separate oneself from it, and shelter yourself from reality. What I care about is the personal practise: What are the fruits, what is lacking? What progress is being made? If no progress is being made, find some other expedient means that will help you progress (and seated meditation is usually a universal helper). But I knwo someone who practised formal meditation for decades. He didn't begin to make real progress until he actually quit it. > > > With such concern I agree that mostly we learn from direct observation > >of the phenomena in daily awareness but I don't dismiss so easily > >meditation in formal terms. > > But you don't practice... Nope. Does that make me a hypocrite? Genuine question really. 6530 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:57pm Subject: re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) ----- Original Message ----- From: Jim Anderson Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:36 AM Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) > Dear Anders, > > >Does anyone know if Narada's translation is available anywhere on the net? > >If not, what would you say are your favourite internet translations of the > >Dhammapada? > > The following is a list of 11 Dhammapada translations available online that > was submitted to dhamma-list by Ven. Dhammanando (of Iceland) on May > 29/99. In it you will find the link to Narada's translation which is still > valid. I don't know about the others. Thank you very much. Will go and have a look. Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6531 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:11pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:29 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > >Haha, I might treat you to a real U. G. Krishnamurti cure (ever read some > >of > >his stuff? That guy crushes ego like the rest of us munches corn flakes. > >Nothing is spared!). > > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha who > already takes good care. Gee, I hate to break it to you, but the Buddha is actually dead, Cybele :-) > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of others Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in reality. > Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my > present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. > You name it and I have done it, you can bet! > You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. Ever been a moonie? 6532 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 5:58pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! ----- Original Message ----- From: Derek Cameron Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:47 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Extra time! --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > But since Nibbana is an object cognised by the sixth > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an object > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to discern any > Nibbana after Parinibbana? Anders, >With all these stream-enterers around I have to be careful what I >say ;-) but I think of nibbana as an event, not as an object. >Before nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. >After nibbana -- chop wood, carry water. >After parinibbana -- no more chopping wood, no more carrying water :-) I'll buy that one. :-) Now, should I go and chop wood one way or the other... 6533 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:19pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:08 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) > Dear Robert, > Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I am not too familiar > yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a sotapanna is an enlightened > person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant denotes someone who > has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? If I remember, an anagami is a non-returner (will be reborn in the some heavenly abode and there attain Parinibbana), whereas an arahant (Arhat) has eradicated all the fetters and will enter Parinibbana, upon the death of their physical bodies. 6534 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:00pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:11 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > Sweetheart > > You returned back! I rejoice, I thought that you have let me down! ;-) Nah, I have just been missing an internet connection. > You got lost in the threads, it was not me to attribute the title to Rob but > somebody else, an ex-monastic David. Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) > I was just paying my respects, you know how I am 'reverent' on this issue. > Read much more attentively our correspondence, don't disappoint me master. > You are my guide and my light! :-))))) > Please don't forget the tip please... Oh my god, I forgot to tip!!! I had a hundred bucks prepared for Lance Armstrong to win the Tour! Damn. 6535 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:01pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 11:15 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > >>Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > > > I practiced Zen for years without never considering becoming a buddhist. > > > It was the Theravada approach that fascinated me. > > > >I first came to Zen because of its lack of a formal approach. Then I > >discovered Theravada and was drawn to the fact that it had a formal > >approach. Then I discovered the drawbacks of formal as well as informal > >approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and Theravada > >for > >its formal approach! You made a reply Cybele, but you seem to have forgotten to write anything in that reply :-) 6536 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:01pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 6:42 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah > Dear everybody > > I just got it from a friend and I thought of sharing with you as we are or > were discussing on the subject of meditation. > No offense meant, just a viewpoint. > > > > >An intellectual Buddhist once asked the Ajahn Chah an annoying > >intellectual question, quoting all sorts of sutras and so forth. Ajahn Chah > >asked her about her daily practice and she admitted that she had no > >practice, but rather she spent much time analyzing sutras. Chah > >replied, "Madame, you are the farmer who, each morning, goes out to > >the chicken coop and collects the chicken shit instead of the eggs." > > > > Love Haha, you gotta love that guy. Beautiful! 6537 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:07pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Stream Entry - clarification ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Epstein Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:35 AM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Stream Entry - clarification > Anders, > This is a very profound post. Your questions about whether oneself or others > would need or want to know one's realization in an objective way, raises very > interesting questions. > > It occurs to me that being able to certify one's own level of attainment can only > be a gift for the ego, and make one feel 'proud' to have attained something. I > can't see any way out of this, and it helps me to understand why Zen Master Ikkyu > tore up his certificate of enlightenment when his students at the monastery had > become too attached to his stature. They wept and taped it back together until he > finally burned it. Haha, how 'Zen'. > Why be attached to such things? Subhuti's words in the Diamond Sutra are > remarkably profound if taken in this way. > > What does it do for the practitioner to know if they are a stream-entrant or not? > It merely clouds their awareness with a self-concept. It can only be an overlay. > Now if the 'stream-entrant' describes his actual experience and properties, well, > that might be useful. It is possible to take an inventory without providing a > label that glosses all the specifics. So if you were to say 'I no longer have > attachment to possessions', or 'I have attachment to possessions but I'm no longer > attached or averse to that attachment' this could be useful information to you or > others, because it goes to an actual element of living, letting go, being at peace > in awareness, etc. When you say 'but let's figure out if I'm really enlightened > or not', however, you are then involved in a contest, rather than a description of > where you are really at. > > So I have to agree with you, and to admit that the aspect of me that wants to know > 'Is Anders enlightened?', 'Is Robert [me] enlightened or is he not?', or 'is he > close to realization?', is nothing other than the ego-sense, which is enamoured of > attainments and sufferings. > > What does it do for me to see this? Well, then I can relax in the 'is-ness' that > is present right now, and stop worrying about 'me', which is an indulgence of the > ego-sense in the first place. And worrying about whether Anders is a > stream-entrant, although an exciting diversion, is also another way of the ego [by > projection] asking itself 'Am I enlightened? Is my attainment lesser or greater > than this or that person? How great or miserable am *I*?' Yes, we all want to categorise ourselves and our practise. Is this good or bad, or what? In reality, our practise just *is*. > So what happens when I drop all that? Then I am faced with existence itself, and > where I really am with that existence, and where I really am with this moment. > And then I am forced to ask myself: well, with this moment what am I going to do? > Will I be vigilant, and look into this matter of 'Who am I?' in this moment? Or > will I look for another distraction or contest to get off the path? > > Really, when you look at it, there's only the path [which is not really a path but > just being present/Mindful at any given opportunity] or not the path [going off > into dreamland again]. And it's both simple and frighteningly present right now. > > It also occurs to me that while dropping the quest to define one's attainment, > that negative labelling also serves the same purpose, of bolstering the sense of > oneself as a separate entity. I am constantly saying to myself 'well you have all > this attachment and emotion all the time; nope, you're not there yet, buddy' and > negatively evaluating my 'prospects' for realization. This is an enormous > obstacle to realizing my true nature *now*. Yep. Basically, you're just creating more volition for yourself. But for those who are prone to think 'I have attained this or that' I would certainly say 'think " I am not there yet"'. > One cannot realize in the future when > conditions are right. Now is always the time to look into who one really is. > Enlightenment, as I understand the Buddha, is not really an attainment. It is a > prior condition. This is exciting if realized in truth. It means that I am > already living/expressing pure Buddha-nature/Right View, but unfortunately I am > too deluded at the moment to enjoy this truth. So that immediate delusion can be > looked at *now* and at any time. It doesn't have to wait until I judge myself as > capable or deserving. The path is all about removing things (delusion, ill will, attachment) rather than attaining something. 6538 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:16pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life ----- Original Message ----- From: bruce Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 6:42 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > and is beyond our control? Pardon me for breaking in, but doesn't your question entail that there is someone to control (or to not have control)? 6539 From: Sarah Procter Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 6:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Hello dsg Dear Ken, i'm rather behind but have just read your super intro.... --- Ken Howard wrote: > Hello DhammaStudyGroup > > My name is Ken Howard, I am a fifty-year-old Australian who has been > lurking on this excellent list for the past seven or eight months. > In that time, I have learned more than in all of my previous twenty- > six years as a Dhamma student. this is great to hear and thanks for letting us know. > I am posting this message, partly to say thank you for your invaluable > guidance and partly to explain my lurking behaviour. > > What a big mistake it was to think (for twenty-six years), that a > knowledge of the Abhidhamma was not important - let alone vitally > important. You (dsg) put me straight on that and, along with your > related web sites, you are making the study of a difficult subject an > absolute pleasure. I think others are beginning to feel the same way...it's a real pleasure for me to read the posts here too.. > > Even more importantly, you have shown me the correct approach to the > Buddhadhamma. This Dhamma is not just another course in education or > training; we don't take it up and master it, we take refuge in > it. > Our role is to listen and learn, the rest is a matter for conditions > beyond our control. > yes, you've got the 'essence'... > One of my many favourite quotes on this point is in a recent post from > Nina; > Even when satippatthana is not always expressly mentioned, it is > always implied, because it is the specific teaching of the Buddha. > His teaching is unique, not to be compared to what other teachers > before him had also taught. [end quote] > I like this quote very much too and it really shows your excellent appreciation of the Teachings (to my mind!!). Whatever I read, whether suttas, vinaya or abhidhamma, I read it in this light... > Thanks for your inspiring post too, Ken....look f/w to more, but in any case it's great to know there are people like yourself out there lurking and benefiting as we are... BTW, where in Oz are you....hope to meet you one day. Larry, Also great to have you and your important and carefully considered abhidhamma questions here...I'd like to add more, but as I just mentioned to Cybele and co, no time for now...If you are inclined, pls add a little more about yourself (if I've missed it in my rush to catch up, ignore!!) Ray H, thanks for your further comments...glad you're enjoying the group too...you've all joined in one of the busiest months to date;-))Most members have written intros scattered in the archives....but ask anyone to tell you more and they MAY oblige.....One or two others at least are in Calif, inc. Kom AND next Oct (2002) khun Sujin is planning to be there...Kom or I will give more details in due course...I'm hoping to join, but we'll see... l/f to more from you too, Sarah 6540 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:11pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life At 12:16 2001/07/19 +0200, you wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bruce > > Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 6:42 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing > abhidhamma in daily life > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one > > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > > and is beyond our control? > > Pardon me for breaking in, but doesn't your question entail that there is > someone to control (or to not have control)? no it doesn't entail that at all; the "our" is conventional.... 6541 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:24pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders informal > > >approaches. Now I appreciate Zen for its informal approach and >Theravada > > >for > > >its formal approach! > >You made a reply Cybele, but you seem to have forgotten to write anything >in >that reply :-) It was just a mistake, pressed wrong button. Cyber confusion. > > > 6542 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom I am looking forward for your reply to my post. Have you already dropped the issue? Love Cybele 6543 From: Herman Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:35pm Subject: Determining consciousness Hi all, I have scoured the net, and have found very little regarding votthapana, determining consciousness. Google gave me 40 hits , with at least a quarter being in languages I did not comprehend. All the references I read amounted to less than an A4 page of information. There are millions of pages on kamma, with myriads of interesting, sometimes amusing, often conflicting views. Likewise kusala and akusala. But very little on votthapana. This citta is not determined by kamma. And this citta determines whether what follows is kusala or akusala. It is the crux of the biscuit, how things are determined. This is where right view and wrong view arise. What determines the result of a votthapana-citta? If anyone can assist in my quest for freedom, and tell me more about determining consciousness, I would be grateful. Herman 6544 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:41pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Sweetheart > > > > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha >who already takes good care. > >Gee, I hate to break it to you, but the Buddha is actually dead, Cybele :-) Yes and so is Krishnamurti. And don't reveal this secret to anybody else...but you are going to die too!!!! :-( > > > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of >others > >Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in >reality. I have more than the double of your years therefore ahime' I met a great deal of real 'masters', fake masters, gurus, good teachers, crap ones and so on. > > > Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my > > present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. > > You name it and I have done it, you can bet! > > You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. > >Ever been a moonie? > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) Cybele 6545 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:46pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders > > > You got lost in the threads, it was not me to attribute the title to Rob >but > > somebody else, an ex-monastic David. > >Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) I know I am noticeable, what can I do, it's my magnetic personality. hehehehehehehhe :-) 6546 From: Herman Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex And who was Osho's dentist? (rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Sweetheart > > > > > > > I don't fancy Krishnamurti crushing my ego sweetheart I have the Buddha > >who already takes good care. > > > >Gee, I hate to break it to you, but the Buddha is actually dead, Cybele :-) > > > Yes and so is Krishnamurti. > And don't reveal this secret to anybody else...but you are going to die > too!!!! :-( > > > > > > > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of > >others > > > >Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in > >reality. > > I have more than the double of your years therefore ahime' I met a great > deal of real 'masters', fake masters, gurus, good teachers, crap ones and so > on. > > > > > > Anders; while you were still in another incarnation I was already on my > > > present one wandering mind and body exploring many possibilities. > > > You name it and I have done it, you can bet! > > > You can well guess that you are not the only one openminded here poppet. > > > >Ever been a moonie? > > > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > > Cybele > 6547 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:07pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:48 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > And who was Osho's dentist? > > (rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) Herman, are you trying to tell us that YOU KNEW Osho's dentist!?! Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6548 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:17pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:46 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > >Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) > > I know I am noticeable, what can I do, it's my magnetic personality. > hehehehehehehhe :-) Indeed ;-) Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? 6549 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:15pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:41 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > Yes and so is Krishnamurti. He is? I thought it was only J. Krishnamurti who had passed away. > And don't reveal this secret to anybody else...but you are going to die > too!!!! :-( Well, considering that I have yet to turn 20, I automatically fall into the category of people who says: "Bah, that's just a nasty rumour, incited to keep the population in line." > > > And yes I have read Krishnamurti and met him face to face and lots of > >others > > > >Really? I know its off-topic, but I'd really like to hear how he was in > >reality. > > I have more than the double of your years therefore ahime' I met a great > deal of real 'masters', fake masters, gurus, good teachers, crap ones and so > on. Yeah, but how was U.G.? > >Ever been a moonie? > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? 6550 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:20pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! ----- Original Message ----- From: Robert Kirkpatrick Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 4:56 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! > > ANDERS: > > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > > cognised by the sixth > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or an > > object > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > > discern any > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > > there is not > > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the only > > way for it to > > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is when > > Nibbana itself > > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply that > > there is a > > self involved). > > > _________________ > > The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > Phala-citta. Magga and Phala... I lost the glossary link. Could you translate (or repost the glossary link)? > About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were there > any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was the > Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or > sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara > (formations)[the five aggregates]? > Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, > vinnana? > > At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we think > somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having existed. > This would be annihilationism. > What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has > ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, > mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was > never a being to be annihilated. > robert Well, one has to consider the four views refuted by the Buddha (or was it Sariputra? Or both?): 'And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to declare, "Friend, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative man, attainer of the superlative attainment -- being described, is described otherwise than with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, does not exist after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither exists nor does not exist after death"?' 'No, venerable sir.' 'Very good, Anuradha. Both formerly & now, Anuradha, it is only stress that I describe, and the stopping of stress.' (S XXII.86 ) Anders Honore ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* 6551 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:20pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Anders >> > >It means if one is willing to understand one's own limitations and >>work to > > >overcome them. Many people are quite content to not meditate and will >thus never make much progress. > > > > Cybele: > > Of course it's a free choice but why one should be silly to waste an > > opportunity of clear comprehension in the buddhist path? > > Who is free from limitations apart Buddha himself? > >Apparently, many people are silly. But you are not, then no justification. ;-) > > > >Yup. But the bottom line is that they are all expedient means, meaning >counter-measures. For those who have nothing to counter, why do it? Cybele: > > Counter-measure Anders, don't you ever think that perhaps all your self >confidence it's a smoke curtain that prevents you of facing some reality >that is a bit difficult to deal with? > > Do you really believe you are that much BEYOND? > >Whoa, did I push some bottons there? You are reading into my message >Cybele. >I already said that the reason I don't meditate personally on a regular >basis is due to plain laziness, and that I know it would do me a world of >good. What I'm saying above is in general, not something about me. I relate things to personal experiences Anders. The button you pushed is just this self confidence of yours that ggrrrrr I see as a hindrance to observe reality as it is because can be a shield of defensiveness. Your previous posts were cool and reasonable and whether I agree or not I respected. Because they showed openmindness. When the tone is too self assured I am prone to fire up; this happens not only with you but with everyone else Anders. In an ever changing reality we cannot be sure of anything but be open to observe in wholeheartedness and cope. Cybele: > > Meditation it is not to oppose anything but to develop right >understanding; > > this is not an expedient means, this is investigation of Dhamma, this is >lifelong lasting. > >Which in turn is a counter-measure against ignorance (which is even more >lasting than a life-time). I am telling you, it's all expedient means. Ask >any stream-entrant you know, they'll agree :-) Anders I will beat you up virtually naughty guy! Behave yourself! ;-) Don't start stretching your wings to fly high. Cybele: > > Dear Anders I never dropped my initial theory about some manic tendences >of many so called spiritual aspirants. > > Too much self confidence, you are flying very high; for me Dhamma is >very down to earth. Anders: >I honestly can't see what triggered this reaction from you in my own >writings. It seems to me that you somehow attached to the idea that I had >inserted myself on some cloud high above you, and you seem to dislike that. I already told you Anders in a very straightforward manner what triggered my reaction. I am attached to many ideas as you for sure. I am not concerned if yours is a sense of superiority or not. What I dislike is a forceful assertiveness. Your being 'beyond'. It's most evident and I don't need to deny that aversion has arisen and I sent the post all the same because I wish to come to terms with your attitude, therefore I show mine without 'make up'. I don't play roles of equanimous and evolved. I am what I am and I am burdened with aversion, craving and delusion like everybody else. >Generally, through the past couple of posts, I've been sensing a growing >aversion. Replied above. Anders: >What's the deal with you? My deal is that I am self-confident(interpret >that negatively or positively as you wish). But that doesn't mean I am not >listening. Already, I am sitting here noting my own response to your >response. >For me, Dhamma is the most down-to-earth thing I know. Hei Anders now we start communicating, that's good. My point was indeed that you were not listening. I felt you like in a cocoon of 'self confidence'. > > Anders: > > >No, I am not talking about myself. I am just trying to illustrate the >wide range innate potentials that flourish in the world. I think it was >Dogen who once said: "Wisdom is not profound or shallow, but people are >shar and dull." > > > > Indeed and I have met plenty of dulls Anders, don't be too optimistic. > >Of course I have met many more dulls than sharp-wits myself as well. But >what are you aiming at? Just what I said, no hidden agenda Anders. Anders: > > >No technique is the 'ultimate' technique in itself. There are different >techniques because there are different people with different temperaments >and capabilities. Cybele: > > Nobody ever contested it. > > Meditation is in the buddhist path and who threads the buddhist path >cannot dismiss it so lightly; about this issue we are trying to clarify. > > You are not buddhist and therefore doesn't concern you perhaps. > >Who said that I am not a Buddhist? It seemed to me that you don't want to be labelled and that you prefer 'a wide range' of knowledge to explore and not concentrate on one path. Cybele: > > What doesn't change the fact that Buddha himself attained enlightenment > > through meditation. > > Why study the texts if you neglect this fundamental principle? Anders: >As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of expedient >means. For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how >degrading" >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. You can employ them as you >wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not ultimately aimed >at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do you much >good. We cannot aim at anything at all Anders because all depend on right conditions arising and our past accumulations but we can practice awareness to penetrate the reality of phenomena. That's what meditation is about as Abhidhamma. A tool to foster mindfulness. There is no 'aim' for me but just practicing and as a natural unfolding this ignorance and attachment will vanish. > > > Anders: > > >Some people aren't, apparently. > > > > Oh I would like to be introduced to them. > > You are beyond defilements? > > Or you believe you are? > >Nope, again you interpret me into a general context. Than we must refine our skills of communication. Cybele: > > Seems that here we are a huge company of fools, I would like to meet all >this wise people that you have the privilege to know being a 18 years old >guy. > >Sure. Send me a private email and I'll give you their adresses :-) Only if they are handsome otherwise I don't care! ;-) >I am not saying I know any arhats, but I certainly know people who are a >lot wiser than me. So do I. To be continued... Cybele 6552 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Dear Herman >> >And who was Osho's dentist? > >(rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) > >Herman That one I missed but I met Osho in Poona during one of my long stays in India, long time ago. Didn't impress me that much. Cybele 6553 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:41pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders >> > >Oh, well. I noticed you doing too! :-) > > > > I know I am noticeable, what can I do, it's my magnetic personality. > > hehehehehehehhe :-) > >Indeed ;-) >Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) Invite me for the performance. Cybele 6554 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 8:45pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > >Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? Yes and they assigned me the mission of diffuse my Latin blood all over the place and infect everybody with carnival fever particularly scandinavians. ;-) Cybele 6555 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:03pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Nibbana annihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! --- : > > > > ANDERS: > > > Yup, that was my point. But since Nibbana is an object > > > cognised by the sixth > > > sense (or so Kom claims. I don't find this to be true), or > an > > > object > > > discerned by any conditioned dhamma how is it possible to > > > discern any > > > Nibbana after Parinibbana? How is it possible to know that > > > there is not > > > simple annihilation after Parinibbana? As I see it, the > only > > > way for it to > > > be possible that any escape from Samsara is possible is > when > > > Nibbana itself > > > is the 'cogniser' (although using such a word might imply > that > > > there is a > > > self involved). > > > > > _________________ > > > > Robert:The Theravada do say that nibbana is an object of citta > > (consciousness). It is the object of magga-citta and > > Phala-citta. > _______ > Anders:Magga and Phala... I lost the glossary link. Could you > translate (or repost > the glossary link)? ______ magga citta (path consciuosness) , phala citta (fruition consciousness) _________ > > Robert: About Parinibbana: Did the Buddha exist in actuality? Were > there > > any realities apart from fleeting conditioned phenomena? Was > the > > Buddha: rupa (materiality) or feeling (vedana) or > > sanna(perception) or vinnana (consciouness)sankhara > > (formations)[the five aggregates]? > > Was the Buddha apart from rupa, vedana, sankhara, sanna, > > vinnana? > > > > At the parinibbana, death, of an arahant or Buddha do we > think > > somebody died? We must if we perceive them as having > existed. > > This would be annihilationism. > > What we can say is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it > has > > ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, > > mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there > was > > never a being to be annihilated. > > robert > __________ >Anders: Well, one has to consider the four views refuted by the Buddha > (or was it > Sariputra? Or both?): > 'And so, Anuradha -- when you can't pin down the Tathagata as > a truth or > reality even in the present life -- is it proper for you to > declare, > "Friend, the Tathagata -- the supreme man, the superlative > man, attainer of > the superlative attainment -- being described, is described > otherwise than > with these four positions: The Tathagata exists after death, > does not exist > after death, both does & does not exist after death, neither > exists nor does > not exist after death"?' > > 'No, venerable sir.' > > 'Very good, Anuradha. Both formerly & now, Anuradha, it is > only stress that > I describe, and the stopping of stress.' > (S XXII.86 ) > ____________--- If one has the idea of the Tathagata as existing, as a being then one is caught up in view already. If you say "he exists, does not exist... " it is all tangled up with view. In the Samyutta nikaya , khandasamyutta (85(3) Yamaka: venerable Yamaka was caught in view, he had the idea that the Buddha and arahants existed and after death would be annihilated. The Saratthapakasini notes (p1078 of Bhikkhus bodhi's translation of the samyutta nikaya): "If he had thought 'Formations arise and cease; a simple process of formations reaches nonoccurence' this would not be view (ditthigata) but knowledge in accordance with the Teaching. But since he thought "A being is annihilated and destroyed' this becomes a view.""endquote As I said what the teachings say is about the parinibbana of an arahant is that rupa is impermanent and dukkha, it has ceased and passed away; as has feeling, perception, vinnana, mental formations. This is not anihilationism because there was never a being to be annihilated. robert 6556 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Cybele, --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Kom > > I am looking forward for your reply to my post. > Have you already dropped the issue? > Hmmm.... I must admit, I was about to drop it, since I thought we at least have discussed the differences (maybe no answers!) that were put forth. Also, Robert (and Bruce, Tadao, etc.) have been responding to the same thread, which I thought expanded on what we were discussing earlier. I can recap my thoughts, and maybe you can recap yours, and then we can see what we still left undiscussed... 1) The definition of being formal. I understand that you said being formal means dedicating a time of the day regularly to do sitting meditation. I still wonder about the origin of such definition as I don't think anybody can be following the steps in the sutta in an hour to observe breath, bones, and corpses, which are also clearly in the sutta. 2) I believe there are adjuncts, beyond what the Buddha taught, added to the practices taught by the different schools of meditations. We discussed doing things slowly, and the observation of silence. With these adjuncts, I would be more careful learning from these schools, as they may add in other areas that are more subtle than the two discussed. I am not saying they are (completely) not transmitting the Buddha's dhamma, but I think we need to be vigilent to differentiate what is Buddha's and not Buddha's teachings (from anybody not excluding Anders, Roberts, etc.). 3) I understand Maha-satipatthana sutta, and in fact many of the Buddha's teachings, to have both samatha (meditation or not) and satipatthana in it. It is easy personally for me to see how contemplating on death, corpses, and bones can be objects of samatha, whereas the concentration on breath is harder to see if it is actually wholesomeness and unwholesomeness that is arising. It is hard for me to see how observing the breath can be purely satipatthana (as you mentioned.) However, it is definitely easy to see how I could be attached to the different feelings that arise while sitting. 4) Rambling thought: I think people are fixated on "what can I do to speed up my insight, enhance my understadings, etc." For example, you see many posts about the different "techniques" to get on the path, and if one of the techniques don't appear to work, don't do it. Buddha's teaches many causes/supports to the insights arising including listening to the teachings, contemplation, satipathana, sila, dana, and tranquil meditations. Do we drop some of these stuffs because they don't appear to aid the insights? Should we also add stuffs outside the teaching that appear to help (or are said to help)? kom 6557 From: Erik Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:43pm Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > The button you pushed is just this self confidence of yours that ggrrrrr I > see as a hindrance to observe reality as it is because can be a shield of > defensiveness. Then that is some negative conditioning you'll just have to overcome, Cybele. Misplaced confidence may be a hindrance, but can you possibly be the judge of such a thing in another? I think not. Best work on your own bhavana. > Your previous posts were cool and reasonable and whether I agree or not I > respected. Because they showed openmindness. > When the tone is too self assured I am prone to fire up; this happens not > only with you but with everyone else Anders. Perhaps this is exactly the sort of provocation you need then. > Anders: > >As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of expedient > >means. > For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how > >degrading" > >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. Thank you, Anders. And I'm not agreeing with you because you're a fellow Dane, either, but because this statement is dead-on. If there is one thing understand about the Dharma it is this one point. Recognizing this fact is the critical antidote to the very dogmatism and ditthi that DIRECTLY acts as a bar awakening. This point cannot be underscored enough times. The dharma is all about skill-in-means (upaya), no more, no less. It has never been more than expedient means, never more than a raft. You can employ them as you > >wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not ultimately aimed > >at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do you much > >good. > > We cannot aim at anything at all Anders because all depend on right > conditions arising and our past accumulations but we can practice awareness > to penetrate the reality of phenomena. Sorry Cybele, but we can and MUST aim, and aim high--as high as possible. Aspiration is the foundation of the path. Without the highest aspiration possible we don't stand a snowballs's chance in one of the hot hells of getting out of this mess. Penetrating the charateristics of dhammas takes enormous effort and perserverance, and it is the aspiration to reach supreme enlightenment that is the fodder for the sort of pratice necessary to awaken. That means we need to practice at least as much as a musician practicing for a Carnegie Hall recital. Serious, day-in, day out, consistent, every- waking-second-focused-on-the-aim practice. If we don't have the aspiration to replicate the Buddha's awakening, then we'll never engage the practices necessary to do so, or we'll become discouraged at the first obstacle that comes our way and give up. We have to not only aim high, but also to have the confidence we can achieve that aim as well. > There is no 'aim' for me but just practicing and as a natural unfolding this > ignorance and attachment will vanish. You have an awful lot of the very sort of confidence you decry in suggesting your practice will bring about this result. But will it? What did the Buddha do? Did he just kinda hang out, practice a little here and there, hoping that things would sorta "natuarlly" work out, y'know, and if not, oh well? Not the Buddha whose teachings I am familiar with. He abandoned a life of total luxury to take up the homeless life, engaged in brutal ascetic practices for several years, and sat under the Bo tree with the SOLE AIM of not stirring from his spot until he'd attained supreme enlightenment, Buddhahood. Can you or I hope to ever attain this without at least equivalent effort? 6558 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Drinking (was: Re: To Kom (and also Robert)1) --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- > > Dear Robert, > Thanks for all of your helpful and interesting responses. I > am not too familiar > yet with Theravadin terminology, but I take it that a > sotapanna is an enlightened > person of 'stream entrant' level? And that anagami or arahant > denotes someone who > has destroyed even the subtler seeds of self? > > I think it is interesting that the sotapanna could still have > attachment, although > a positive, sort of pure attachment, in the form of love for > her husband, and that > the arahant would have transcended even this positive relation > to others, and be, > I suppose, 'completely free' of either positive or negative > attachments or > aversions. > > If you could say a bit more about the conditions of these > different attainments, > it would be of great interest to me. If this is too redundant > for the group, I > would be happy to be referred to an appropriate passage on the > web. > > Nice again to be in your company! > > ____________________ Dear Robert E. Thanks for the questions. Just to reiterate, Nibbana is not consciousness, it is the object of mind. When vipassana wisdom is highly developed, the mind of the ordinary person changes to the mind of the Noble One. This change is called path moment. It is followed immediately by path fruition. Both have nibbana as their object. The four paths to enlightenment are stream-winner, once returner, non-returner, and fully-enlightened or Perfect One (the Arahant). There are ten fetters keeping us from full enlightenment: 1) Wrong view of self 2) Doubt about the Buddha's teaching 3) Clinging to rules and rituals 4) Sensual desire 5) Hatred 6) Desire for fine material existence 7) Desire for immaterial existence (Fine material existence is an existence where there is still body. Immaterial existence is where there is only nama. So both of these fetters (6 and 7) refer to craving for types of heavenly existence.) 8) Pride 9) Restlessness 10) Ignorance The First Path, the stream-winner path-moment erases the first three fetters; for the Second Path, the once-returner path-moment weakens the next two fetters; for the Third Path, the non-returner path-moment erases the two weakened fetters; and for the Fourth Path, the arahatta path moment erases the five remaining fetters. The first path also eradicates all stinginess; the sotapanna is naturally generous. The sotapanna's attachment to husband of wife can be just as impure as ours. What they don't have anymore is attachment to selfview, they cannot see any dhamma as self . The wisdom developed to see dhammas as they are is gradual, over lifetimes; the one who attains to nibbana will have no doubt about this matter according to the teaching. It is deep wisdom that penetrates to nibbana. This book mark will take you to a list of websites highly recommended by the moderators of dhammastudygroup http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/links best wishes robert 6559 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:02pm Subject: Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about > meditation and evrybody else dismisses it Count me among the meditation-believers, Cybele! Whether it's informal (sati) or seated, formal meditation (sati and samaadhi), it's the only thing that really makes a difference for me. I see all this dhamma study as merely an adjunct and a support for real practice. There! Now I'll get myself thrown into the heretic's club ;-) Derek. 6560 From: Derek Cameron Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:16pm Subject: Re: What the Buddha taught --- "Kom Tukovinit" wrote: > I think we need to be vigilent to differentiate what is Buddha's and not > Buddha's teachings (from anybody not excluding Anders, Roberts, etc.). Agreed! And from my reading of the sutta-s, what the Buddha taught is not the same thing as "vipassanaa" as taught nowadays. The Buddha's own teachers practiced mindfulness (sati) and concentration (samaadhi). Where the Buddha went beyond his teachers is that he directed his purified and concentrated mind to knowledge of three things -- (i) his past lives, (ii) the passing away and reappearance of beings, and (iii) the destruction of the aasava-s. That's very different from what the modern "vipassanaa" movement advocates. I'm not saying that either is right or wrong; just observing the difference. Derek. 6561 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Howard --- Howard wrote: > As I have read, a bhavanga citta is likened to a spider sitting in the > center > of his web (latent discernment waiting to "pounce"), waiting for a > stimulus > (phassa) to scurry after prey (to discern the next object and become > active > discernment instead of latent discernment). Interesting analogy. I though it might also be useful to give the description of bhavanga citta from the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha translation and commentary summary prepared by Bhikkhu Bodhi (Ch III, Guide to ##8)-- "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment during life whenever there is no active cognitive process taking place. … When an object impinges on a sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing the object. Immediately after the cognitive process is completed, again the bhavanga supervenes and continues until the next cognitive process arises. Arising and perishing at every moment during this passive phase of consciousness, the bhavanga flows on like a stream, without remaining static for two consecutive moments." In the same passage it discusses the meaning and function of bhavanga-- " The word bhavanga means factor (anga) of existence (bhava), that is, the indispensable condition of existence. Bhavanga is the function of consciousness by which the continuity of the individual is preserved through the duration of any single existence, from conception to death." Jon 6562 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life Bruce --- bruce wrote: > hi cybelle > > this is just great to hear, all your study sounds as though it is paying > off, although i would also add to jon's note about paccaya that perhaps > your years of sitting meditation played a part too, especially if while > sitting you were able to accurately notice realities as they > appeared....that is what you do (or rather what you intend to do) when > you > practice "formally", am i right cybelle? However, Bruce, it seems that Cybele's experience this time occurred without any intention to notice realities. Is it possible that this could give rise to a citta of a different quality than at times when we are trying to notice realities, hence with an idea of self? The paying attention to realities without there being any intention to do so is, I would say, conditioned by rather special factors. -- of course whether noticing > arises or not doesn't depend on the intention for it to > arise....although i > must admit i find that dedicating time every day to cultivation works > much > better for me than only waiting to notice throughout the day, with the > result that the more regularly i sit, the more i seem to remember to > note > during non-sitting times But if the intention to notice at times of formal practice is not the correct way, then the 'noticing' occurring during the day may also not be the correct way, since it would be tainted by the ideas held about the formal practice. I mention this simply to try and highlight the subtle difference that I believe is the key to the understanding of the Buddha's teaching on the development of awareness and understanding, and to which your comments below are directed. > hi jon and nina > > apologies for not following up on your responses to my "listening to and > considering" query a long way back there (before you left, actually > jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: i was incredibly > busy!) though i have been lurking all along... > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no > one > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha dhamma? or is it just > papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is considering the > Dhamma > simply another way of saying "noting realities as they appear at the six > doors"? As I understand it, Bruce, consideration of what one has read or heard, or is hearing or reading or talking about at the time, and reflection on how it may relate to the experience of the present moment, can be useful. That is why it can be particularly helpful to read or talk about the realities that are being experienced at the present moment (ie. right now). There may some moments of kusala interspersed among the many moments of akusala. Is that not enough, or do you want more!?! > for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" something we can do > willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and control....perhaps > a > better word would be "hearing", which arises, as opposed to listening, > which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here in japan who liked to > remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he would also say the same > with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the idea of a controlling > self > wasn't something that required prepositions for those verbs, ie looking > *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we can neither decide to > listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... It's true that the intention to listen and the actual moment of hearing are separate moments and indeed different types of citta. That's not the way is seems to us, of course -- perhaps we should no pretend otherwise! Jon 6563 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Jon, --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott > "Bhavanga- cittas arise and pass away every moment > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > the object. Did he go on to define what active cognitve process is? kom 6564 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:33pm Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Dear Jon, --- Sarah and Jonothan Abbott <114059178213193154090218164036129208> wrote: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > the object. Sorry to repeat the question. Did he go on to define what active cognitiv= e process is? Did he define an unactive cognitive process? Is bhavanga an unactive cognitive process? kom 6565 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:49pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Kom > > "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment > > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > > the object. > > Sorry to repeat the question. Did he go on to define what active > cognitiv= > e > process is? Did he define an unactive cognitive process? Is bhavanga > an > unactive cognitive process? He is presumably using 'active cognative process' as a translation of a particular pali term. I had taken it to mean 'vitthi-citta', but I'm not sure what accounts for the 'active'. Bhavanga cittas are cittas that are not vitthi cittas (ie. cittas that arise in a process). I'll let you know if i find out. Jon 6566 From: bruce Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life thanks for this reply jon -- yes, this does help, especially your wrap-it-up description of my "condsideration" albatross...i hope to ask khun sujin for further clarification if i get the chance.... *intending* to have awareness is not, er, intentional, at least in my daily sitting and noticing throughout the day...it's probably there but in that pesky realm everyone refers to as "subtle"..."intention" is the seed for a whole new series of questions...if it's been discussed before, though, perhaps you or someone else could give me message #s or dates or subject titles to search? bruce At 22:29 2001/07/19 +0800, you wrote: > Bruce > > --- bruce wrote: > hi > cybelle > > > > this is just great to hear, all your study sounds as > though it is paying > > off, although i would also add to jon's note about > paccaya that perhaps > > your years of sitting meditation played a part too, > especially if while > > sitting you were able to accurately notice realities > as they > > appeared....that is what you do (or rather what you > intend to do) when > > you > > practice "formally", am i right cybelle? > > However, Bruce, it seems that Cybele's experience this > time occurred without any intention to notice > realities. Is it possible that this could give rise > to a citta of a different quality than at times when > we are trying to notice realities, hence with an idea > of self? > > The paying attention to realities without there being > any intention to do so is, I would say, conditioned by > rather special factors. > > -- of course whether noticing > > arises or not doesn't depend on the intention for it > to > > arise....although i > > must admit i find that dedicating time every day to > cultivation works > > much > > better for me than only waiting to notice throughout > the day, with the > > result that the more regularly i sit, the more i > seem to remember to > > note > > during non-sitting times > > But if the intention to notice at times of formal > practice is not the correct way, then the 'noticing' > occurring during the day may also not be the correct > way, since it would be tainted by the ideas held about > the formal practice. > > I mention this simply to try and highlight the subtle > difference that I believe is the key to the > understanding of the Buddha's teaching on the > development of awareness and understanding, and to > which your comments below are directed. > > > hi jon and nina > > > > apologies for not following up on your responses to > my "listening to and > > considering" query a long way back there (before you > left, actually > > jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: > i was incredibly > > busy!) though i have been lurking all along... > > > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what > "considering" the Dhamma > > entails....i understand (only conceptually of > course) that there is no > > one > > doing the considering....does this mean that the > considering just arises > > and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha > dhamma? or is it just > > papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is > considering the > > Dhamma > > simply another way of saying "noting realities as > they appear at the six > > doors"? > > As I understand it, Bruce, consideration of what one > has read or heard, or is hearing or reading or talking > about at the time, and reflection on how it may relate > to the experience of the present moment, can be > useful. That is why it can be particularly helpful to > read or talk about the realities that are being > experienced at the present moment (ie. right now). > There may some moments of kusala interspersed among > the many moments of akusala. Is that not enough, or > do you want more!?! > > > for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" > something we can do > > willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and > control....perhaps > > a > > better word would be "hearing", which arises, as > opposed to listening, > > which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here > in japan who liked to > > remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he > would also say the same > > with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the > idea of a controlling > > self > > wasn't something that required prepositions for > those verbs, ie looking > > *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we > can neither decide to > > listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... > > It's true that the intention to listen and the actual > moment of hearing are separate moments and indeed > different types of citta. That's not the way is seems > to us, of course -- perhaps we should no pretend > otherwise! > > Jon 6567 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] note to jon and nina + re: cybelle's sharing abhidhamma in daily life --- bruce wrote: > thanks for this reply jon -- yes, this does help, especially your > wrap-it-up description of my "condsideration" albatross...i hope to ask > khun sujin for further clarification if i get the chance.... > > *intending* to have awareness is not, er, intentional, at least in my > daily > sitting and noticing throughout the day...it's probably there but in > that > pesky realm everyone refers to as "subtle"... Exactly so, Bruce. Subtle expectation, desire, intention, call it what you will. If one perceives a more-or-less direct relationship between the 'practice' and the (possible) arising of awareness/understanding, how could there not be that expectation? After all, that is the rationale for doing the practice -- to see things more clearly. Jon 6568 From: m. nease Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Dear Jon, I'd like to thank the contributors to the equanimity thread, especially Kom--I had no idea how many different connotations 'upekkha' has in the texts and always just sort of took them all in in a sort of vague, general sense (as I usually do). Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I think we have to be careful here. The so-called > practice of developing equanimity may in fact not be > kusala of any kind at all. If it stems from a > desire to have less lobha and dosa (whether > because of the belief that lobha and dosa are > antithetical to the development of understanding or > for any other reason), it is bound to be akusala. > It is just an aspect of the desire for more > kusala/understanding or less akusala. I am not > saying this is so in your case, but I mention it > because one often finds references which seem to > suggest that this is part of the way of practice > taught by the Buddha. I did want to add one more citation: "'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.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html mike 6569 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:37pm Subject: A danger to the sasana Dear group, Sometimes one hears of people saying that study of the Abhidhamma is a waste of time: one is just caught up in intellectual conceptualising and papanca. That may be true for some people but I would beware of making a generalisation. Here is a sutta worth considering. (the only problem being that those who do not see any value in study probably will not read it because it must be just intellectual waffle) So for the converted (most of this list I guess): Samyutta Nikaya IX (20)7 p708 of Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation The Peg --------------------------------------------- Staying at Savatthi. "Monks, there once was a time when the Dasarahas had a large drum called 'Summoner.' Whenever Summoner was split, the Dasarahas inserted another peg in it, until the time came when Summoner's original wooden body had disappeared and only a conglomeration of pegs remained. [1] "In the same way, in the course of the future there will be monks who won't listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. They won't lend ear, won't set their hearts on knowing them, won't regard these teachings as worth grasping or mastering. But they will listen when discourses that are literary works -- the works of poets, elegant in sound, elegant in rhetoric, the work of outsiders, words of disciples -- are recited. They will lend ear and set their hearts on knowing them. They will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering. "In this way the disappearance of the discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- will come about. "Thus you should train yourselves: 'We will listen when discourses that are words of the Tathagata -- deep, deep in their meaning, transcendent, connected with emptiness -- are being recited. We will lend ear, will set our hearts on knowing them, will regard these teachings as worth grasping & mastering.' That's how you should train yourselves." The commentary notes that this means deep teachings such as those dealing with emptiness(sunnatapatisamyutta), explaining mere phenomena devoid of a being (sattasunnata-dhammamattam eva pakasaka) [like the whole of the Abhidhamma? -robert] 6570 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:39pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] The meaning of Equanimity Thanks, Mike. robert --- "m. nease" wrote: > > I did want to add one more citation: > > "'Equanimity is of two sorts, I tell you: to be > pursued & not to be pursued.' Thus was it said. And in > 6571 From: cybele chiodi Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Kom I will be very honest with you and I don't mean hostilityu, don't misread me. My tones are intenses because is my temperament. Yet I am not opposing or averting your understanding in this issue. Sometimes we are very attuned even if with different opinions but some others you are listening to your thoughts about the issue but to mine indeed. I have voiced out very PRECISE questions that have been as usual on this subject cleverly avoided. All the point can simply be reduced to one - Buddha attained enlightenment through meditation, sitting crosslegged and contemplating the four foundations of mindfulness. This we are taught - whether in Theravada, or Tibetian, or Zen, or Pure land Schools, even the Nichiren use meditation as a tool in the practice. Now how do you assume that you can dismiss meditation and realize whatever is only studying the texts and conceptual thought. This is my issue and it seems to me that I am pretty straightforward to ask it clearly. For a moment it seemed to me that you were interested in understand the point of meditation in my practice but now you are focussing only in dismantle this possiblity and reafirm your convictions. You are not listening, you are not sharing woth me, you are listening to yourself only. I paid attention to your viewpoint, I am studying Abhidhamma and considering the teachings, I am including such directions in my practice of daily awareness - I did not hide myself in any cocoon of self confidence, I am ready to discuss and ponder another approach. But I need an answer that is enough substantial. Don't use Robert to illutrate anything Kom; Robert practiced so much meditation in his life previously to Khum Sujin that I am not surprised on how penetrative is his view, even not considering his past accumulations. That's the very fact that nobody considers. Let's examine: >1) The definition of being formal. I understand that you said being formal >means dedicating a time of the day regularly to do sitting meditation. I >still wonder about the origin of such definition as I don't think anybody >can be following the steps in the sutta in an hour to observe breath, >bones, and corpses, which are also clearly in the sutta. I never declared that you should dedicate one hour or 5 for that matter Kom. We get all confused between daily practice and retreats. A schedule is an schedul, no big deal - you dedicate the time and energy it suits you. And obviuosly you cannot find in a sutra an indication of how much time one should devote to the practice - it's such a subjective point. > >2) I believe there are adjuncts, beyond what the Buddha taught, added to he >practices taught by the different schools of meditations. Don't produce 'smoke curtains Kom'- MEDITATION IS in the original teachings. This we are discussing. Let's keep focussed. Whatever else is frame, the big picture is that. Buddha reached deliverance through meditation and this he taught the mankind. Otherwise as you are very keen on texts - you show me a text were this is disclaimed. I send this by now. Love Cybele 6572 From: Jim Anderson Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] on the practice of silence (was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Cybele, >>The Buddha made a vinaya rule against the practice of silence (muugabbata) >>as follows: >> >>"Monks, an observance of members of other sects, the practice of silence, >>should not be observed. Whoever observes it, there is an offence of >>wrong-doing." -- The Book of the Discipline, Part 4, p. 211 trs. >>I.B.Horner. It also comes with a story of several pages long leading up to >>the Buddha making this rule. It involved several monks deciding to observe >>silence together during a rains-retreat (it's at the beginning of the >>Pavaara.naakkhandhaka, Mahaavagga). > > >This is most curious as in the Theravada tradition during retreats the >observance of the Noble Silence is compulsory and highlighted as a >indispensable tool for the practice (I mean during retreats only). >Whether the teachers are monastics or laymen; in eastern as in western >countries. > >Could you share with us a resume of this several pages leading up to the >disclosure of the motivation for this rule? Here's a condensed version of quotes from pp. 208-11, The Book of the Discipline, Part IV. (trs. I.B. Horner): [While the Lord was staying near Savatthi,] "several monks, friends, and associates, entered on the rains in a certain residence in the Kosala country. Then it occurred to these monks: 'Now by what means can we, all together, on friendly terms and harmonious, spend a comfortable rainy season and not go short of almsfood?' " "Then it occurred to these monks: 'If we should neither address one another nor converse, but whosover should return first from the village . . . [a long passage on how the duties are to be performed] . . . by signalling with his hands, having invited a companion (to help him) by a movement of his hand; but he should not for such a reason break into speech . . . Then the monks neither addressed one another nor conversed . . . [same passage repeated verbatim with tense changes to show that all this had taken place for the duration of the retreat] . . . did not break into speech." [At the end of the three months rains retreat these monks then went to see the Lord near Savatthi.] "Then the Lord spoke thus to these monks, I hope that you kept going, I hope that, all together, on friendly terms and harmonious, you spent a comfortable rainy season and did not go short of almsfood?' [The monks replied that things had gone well for them.] "Now, Truthfinders (sometimes) ask knowing, and knowing (sometimes) do not ask . . . In two ways, Lords question monks, either: . . . or 'Shall we lay down a training rule for disciples?' Then the Lord spoke thus to these monks: 'But in what way, monks, did you, all together, on friendly terms . . . not go short of almsfood?' 'In that connection, did we, Lord, several friends and associates enter on the rains . . . [all what took place is repeated from the beginning] . . . but not for such a reason did he break into speech. Thus did we, Lord, . . . not go short of almsfood.' "Then the Lord addressed the monks, saying: 'Indeed, monks, these foolish men having spent an uncomfortable time pretend to have spent an equally comfortable time. Indeed, monks, these foolish men having spent communion like beasts, pretend to have spent an equally comfortable time. Indeed . . . like sheep, pretend to have spent an equally comfortable time . . . How, monks, can these these foolish men observe an observance of members of (other) sects: the practice of silence?' " [Here's an interesting footnote on the practice of silence, p. 211: "custom of being dumb (muuga), according to VA. 1073, for three months. Cf. the monks who sat like dumb swine, (muugasuukaraaa), when they might have been speaking dhamma, above p.131."] Best wishes, Jim 6573 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:58pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 3:43 PM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how > > >degrading" > > >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. > > Thank you, Anders. And I'm not agreeing with you because you're a > fellow Dane, either, but because this statement is dead-on. If there > is one thing understand about the Dharma it is this one point. > Recognizing this fact is the critical antidote to the very dogmatism > and ditthi that DIRECTLY acts as a bar awakening. This point cannot > be underscored enough times. The dharma is all about skill-in-means > (upaya), no more, no less. It has never been more than expedient > means, never more than a raft. Yes, a raft it is. 6574 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 10:59pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:45 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex > > > > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > > > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > > > >Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? > > Yes and they assigned me the mission of diffuse my Latin blood all over the > place and infect everybody with carnival fever particularly scandinavians. > ;-) NOOO! Non e possible! 6575 From: Anders Honoré Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 11:00pm Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 2:41 PM Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom > >Indeed ;-) > >Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > Invite me for the performance. Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow isn't due to come for another five months. :-) 6576 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Dear Erik >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > > The button you pushed is just this self confidence of yours that >ggrrrrr I see as a hindrance to observe reality as it is because can be a >shield of defensiveness. > >Then that is some negative conditioning you'll just have to overcome, >Cybele. Misplaced confidence may be a hindrance, but can you possibly >be the judge of such a thing in another? I think not. Best work on >your own bhavana. Dear Erik very curious that YOU are the one who make this remark considering how you get carried away by your own moods and beliefs quite often and I have an apology letter of yours to prove it. It's always so simple for us point the finger but indeed who doesn't has such a tendence? I don't see this big deal and neither Anders because he could discuss with me and speak his mind. I am not trying to repress anybody. I am working on my bhavana and Anders can perfectly deal with me without your coming for rescue. Do you think that your approach with me is less harsh? It is very unkind what you said Erik. Your tone is very much incisive. I am not judging him, I am discussing without playing roles in all earnest. Sharing and clarifying is already bhavana for me if you don't mind. He doesn't need your virile friendship to support him; he is very clever and quite stable. No need to come out and defend your fellow danish. Erik it seems that you cannot cope with my intensity but you are very intense as well. And I accept you. > > > Your previous posts were cool and reasonable and whether I agree or >not I respected. Because they showed openmindness. > > When the tone is too self assured I am prone to fire up; this >happens not only with you but with everyone else Anders. > >Perhaps this is exactly the sort of provocation you need then. Indeed, that's what I was explaning Erik. I am honest, I don't need to reinvent myself in the virtual world. You are going to meet me in Bkk if you care to, obviously and you will verify that I am not different in real life than I am here. What I declare I am - there is very little distinctions or incongruences. > > Anders: > > >As I said, the entire Buddhist path is nothing more than a set of >expedientmeans. > > For me, that doesn't entail "ha! only expedient means. how > > >degrading" > > >Or "ooh, how holy". That's just the way it is. > >Thank you, Anders. And I'm not agreeing with you because you're a >fellow Dane, either, but because this statement is dead-on. If there >is one thing understand about the Dharma it is this one point. >Recognizing this fact is the critical antidote to the very dogmatism >and ditthi that DIRECTLY acts as a bar awakening. This point cannot >be underscored enough times. The dharma is all about skill-in-means >(upaya), no more, no less. It has never been more than expedient >means, never more than a raft. You are being dogmatic affirming this. If I have another approach, mine is necessarily the one to be discarded? And meditation that was the REAL ISSUE is not about developing SKILLS of awareness? > > You can employ them as you > > >wish (I am certainly employing them), but if they are not >ultimately aimed > > >at destroying ignorance and attachment to self, then it won't do >you much > > >good. > > > > We cannot aim at anything at all Anders because all depend on right > > conditions arising and our past accumulations but we can practice >awareness to penetrate the reality of phenomena. > >Sorry Cybele, but we can and MUST aim, and aim high--as high as >possible. Aspiration is the foundation of the path. Without the >highest aspiration possible we don't stand a snowballs's chance in >one of the hot hells of getting out of this mess. Erik, you misread me completely. It's not about aspirations. The point on not 'aiming' is don't becoming attached to the goal, but just walk the path. Has nothing to do with aspiration. And is so curious because I would say that by now my 'faith' and love for Dhamma are so evident and you make such frivolous observations in my case. And I am sorry Erik but in my school the goal is the path. >Penetrating the >charateristics of dhammas takes enormous effort and perserverance, >and it is the aspiration to reach supreme enlightenment that is the >fodder for the sort of pratice necessary to awaken. That means we >need to practice at least as much as a musician practicing for a >Carnegie Hall recital. Serious, day-in, day out, consistent, every- >waking-second-focused-on-the-aim practice. If we don't have the >aspiration to replicate the Buddha's awakening, then we'll never >engage the practices necessary to do so, or we'll become discouraged >at the first obstacle that comes our way and give up. We have to not >only aim high, but also to have the confidence we can achieve that >aim as well. Why have you chosen me to make such statements Erik. I am a very serious practitioner. Don't treat me as a non commited person, this is very much unfair and totally out of place. > > There is no 'aim' for me but just practicing and as a natural >unfolding this ignorance and attachment will vanish. > >You have an awful lot of the very sort of confidence you decry in >suggesting your practice will bring about this result. But will it? Sweetheart I PRACTICE, that's all my point: I don't practice craving for this or that I simply practice in the best way I can. And this is not self confidence, this is confidence IN the practice. >What did the Buddha do? Did he just kinda hang out, practice a little >here and there, hoping that things would sorta "natuarlly" work out, >y'know, and if not, oh well? Not the Buddha whose teachings I am >familiar with. He abandoned a life of total luxury to take up the >homeless life, engaged in brutal ascetic practices for several years, >and sat under the Bo tree with the SOLE AIM of not stirring from his >spot until he'd attained supreme enlightenment, Buddhahood. Can you >or I hope to ever attain this without at least equivalent effort? ERIK by now I am shouting my brains out. What are you talking about? Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN TO RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. I have set all my life to study and practice Dhamma, how can you be so insensitive declaring this? I am very much keen in practicing, you MISREAD ME, you got all wrong Erik. Read all the thread and afterwards, we can discuss because you are indeed JUDGING ME and spitting out sentences. You are not my teacher, my teacher is the path. You are preaching me and you contest my tone with Anders. We are really mirrors for each other. Metta Love and respect Cybele 6577 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:26am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Derek > >--- "cybele chiodi" >wrote: > > it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about > > meditation and evrybody else dismisses it > >Count me among the meditation-believers, Cybele! Whether it's >informal (sati) or seated, formal meditation (sati and samaadhi), >it's the only thing that really makes a difference for me. I see all >this dhamma study as merely an adjunct and a support for real >practice. > >There! Now I'll get myself thrown into the heretic's club ;-) > >Derek. > Sweetheart, I love you!!!!! One more in the heretic club, we must organize meetings and socialize among outsiders of the Abhidhamma. ;-) Big kiss and a hug as well Love Cybele 6578 From: Anders Honoré Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:43am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders ----- Original Message ----- From: cybele chiodi Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN TO > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. Jeez, talk about accusing, Cybele. Your post here not only indicates that Erik is a nationalist (possible racist), but also a sexist. As Nietszche once said: "He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not become a monster himself." 6579 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:43am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom Dear Anders >> > >Indeed ;-) > > >Are you sure that Latin blood isn't contagious? > > > > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. > > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > > Invite me for the performance. > >Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow isn't due >to come for another five months. :-) Really? In England, there is already an awful climate, windy, rainy, cold and depressive inducing. I think that I should come to visist you! ;-) You can dance even in the carpet, it's ok. Cybele 6580 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:49am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders Anders >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN >TO > > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. > >Jeez, talk about accusing, Cybele. Your post here not only indicates that >Erik is a nationalist (possible racist), but also a sexist. As Nietszche >once said: >"He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not >become >a monster himself." We are becoming pathetic by now. I am not hunting anybody. I found that Erik interferred on a thread without actually following it because indeed he assumed lots of things about my practice that indeed were very much in harmony with his approach. What shows me that he haven't read what I wrote previously. I felt him very much coming in 'rescue' and I think that you are quite capable of handling it alone. Cybele 6581 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- cybele chiodi wrote: > Buddha attained enlightenment through meditation, sitting > crosslegged and > contemplating the four foundations of mindfulness. > This we are taught - whether in Theravada, or Tibetian, or > Zen, or Pure land > Schools, even the Nichiren use meditation as a tool in the > practice...... >Whatever else is frame, the big picture is that. > Buddha reached deliverance through meditation and this he > taught the > mankind. > Otherwise as you are very keen on texts - you show me a text > were this is > disclaimed. _________________ Dear Cybele, You seem to indicating meditation as being based on sitting crosslegged. In fact for anapanasati - which is the way all Buddhas are enlightened - that posture is necessary. However, there were others - such as sariputta - who attained sotapanna while listening to a discourse (standing). The texts say that anapanasati(mindfulness of breathing ) is not suited for all. If it were the only way to develop wisdom then we would certainly all have to be now sitting crosslegged (if we wanted to develop any understanding). I find it very heartening to hear that in any position understanding can be developed. Otherwise when in shinjuku station I would be thinking 'god, if only I was in a quiet place where I could sit and develop understanding'; not realising that dhammas are arising at each moment - ready to be insighted. Or when talking with or helping my children perhaps I would have a slight non-presentness - wishing I could be by myself where the 'real work' could be done. Not seeing that speaking can be known directly as it really is - simply a type of rupa conditioned by different cittas. The Digha Nikaya DN 33 explains the different ways that wisdom is fulfilled and vimutti (liberation) attained(this is a summary, a little imprecise. I don't have the actual translation in front of me) 1. when a Master or a reverend fellow disciple teaches the Dhamma to a brother.[he listens]...... 2. while he himself teaching others the Dhamma in detail . . . 3. when he is reciting the doctrines of the Dhamma in detail . . . 4. when he applies his thought to the Dhamma . . . 5. when he has well grasped some given clue (nimitta) to concentration, has well applied his understanding, has well thought it out, has well penetrated it by intuition (pa~n~naa) . . . No mention of sitting crosslegged in these five ways- although certainly the last type encompasses anapanasati (and hence also sitting crosslegged). ____________ Cybele:Now how do you assume that you can dismiss meditation and realize whatever is only studying the texts and conceptual thought. __________ Robert:When I first learned about Buddhism I was overawed by the themes expounded. The void, the deathless, freedom, nirodha, non-graping and so on. I would hear a talk and it all seemed right. I could certainly see that these things must be true. I listened to h famous teachers who put things so beautifully; it was almost poetry. They made the path seem simple and direct.But somehow I found it didn’t quite transform me as I had expected. After a few years I decided to deleve into the pali texts. I was warned off this by some. I had this urge to learn about Abhidhamma – a monk told me that this was "only theory"; “you should just practice”, he said. Anyway I studied and gradually things began to make more sense. I found details in the Abhidhamma and commentaries that I could not find anywhere else. For instance here is a passage about verbal intimation – “the mode and the alteration in the consciousness-originated earth element that causes that occurrence of speech utterance which mode and alteration are a condition for the knocking together of clung to matter…..” This is not just theory – it happens everytime we talk to others. Speech is merely these elements, not us. The Buddha taught them so that there can be awareness of them. So that they are not taken for self. You see I had heard from other teachers that everything is anatta but I found while I believed this to be true, nonetheless when I spoke I thought it was “me” speaking. Contemplating passages like this helped to bring attention to every little moment in life and break it down into its component parts. Before I studied I had heard many times that avijja(ignorance) keeps the wheel spinning. But ignorance of exactly what? They said ignorance of the four noble truths but without the details I couldn't grasp the meaning. The commentary to the udana says that ignorance darts among what is not real (people, beings) and does not dart among what is real (paramattha dhammas, the five aggregates). This helped me a lot when I read it years ago. It made sense . I thought ""yes we are always thinking of “us” and “them” of ‘he” and “she” but we don’t consider that this is merely concept. What then is real? And how to understand paramattha dhammas."" In this way the study of paramattha dhammas, realities, became uppermost and has helped me to gradually see the difference between concept and reality (a little). So on this list I write what has helped me in the hope that it will help others. I know I am one of the slow ones who needs lots of help, lots of details before anything makes sense. h robert 6582 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 0:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear cybele, can i have the best of 'both' worlds.?? I am fond of both abhidhamma and 'heresy', thats what I understood as what is encouraged in tipitaka. btw Name the place, :o) rgds ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 12:26 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > > Dear Derek > > > > >--- "cybele chiodi" > >wrote: > > > it seems that here only me, Bruce and Tori are concerned about > > > meditation and evrybody else dismisses it > > > >Count me among the meditation-believers, Cybele! Whether it's > >informal (sati) or seated, formal meditation (sati and samaadhi), > >it's the only thing that really makes a difference for me. I see all > >this dhamma study as merely an adjunct and a support for real > >practice. > > > >There! Now I'll get myself thrown into the heretic's club ;-) > > > >Derek. > > > > Sweetheart, I love you!!!!! > One more in the heretic club, we must organize meetings and socialize among > outsiders of the Abhidhamma. ;-) > > Big kiss and a hug as well > > Love > > Cybele 6583 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:01am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] on the practice of silence (was: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) dear Jim Thank you very much for your kindness in researching about this issue. Very interesting. Love Cybele 6584 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: anumodana. op 18-07-2001 06:08 schreef ppp op tadao: > I've neglected the study of Dhamma for a long long time, but > there are many (Pali) phrases which I would never forget, and, which > remind me how lucky I am for having encountered the Buddhas' teaching > in this life. Due simply to various "conditions" (including this > Internet link as one of them, I am here again, resuming my study > of Dhamma. > Dear Tadao, thank you for your kind letter. I appreciate very much all your posts, and I also appreciate it that you will help Robert's students with the Japanese translation of Buddhism in Daily Life. How nice to have contact with you again in this way. I still remember that you gave me for my birthday, when we were in Sri Lanka, a Pali text of alobha, adosa and amoha, beautifully written out by you. We both owe a lot to the late Alan Driver, our friend and great teacher. Please, when there is an occasion, would you share with us the phrases you never forget? We can benefit from this. My warmest regards to Susie, I am always so happy to hear from her. Sarah brought us all together again with great metta, she is so clever achieving this. I admire her for the way she always welcomes the newcomers with such kindness. Your letter was the condition for me to reread Alan Driver"s "Be here now", which is, as most people here know, on Robert's Web Abhidhamma Vipassana. His message is still loud and clear. He had such a direct way of explaining difficult matters, his way was down to earth. I came across several passages that will give an answer to questions asked in this forum, I shall quote him. Kindest regards, Nina. 6585 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup]bhavangacitta op 17-07-2001 06:02 schreef Robert Kirkpatrick op Robert: > Dear Howard, > A very good question. Paramattha dhammas arise and fall > according to their nature. However, they arise and fall in > processes. In between each process there are bhavanga cittas > (the same cittas that arise and fall continually during deep > sleep). In a sense they are the cushioning area between > processes. > I just heard on a tape someoone say to Acharn sujin that only > the buddha and wise disciple like sariputta could really know > bhavanga citta but Sujin said that even developed insight now > can understand it (to some degree).The gist of what she was > saying is that other wise it would seem like seeing and hearing, > for example, blended into each other (because there is no gap > between cittas) but panna (insight) sees that this is not so. > Also upon awakening from deep sleep if sati arises the > difference between bhavanga and the sense door and minddoor > processes can be known. "We" could never see these matters but > it is the function of panna to do its duty and understand. Dear friends, I am very glad Robert wrote about the tape on bhavanga. I would like to add a few things. I was present there and I remarked to Acharn that I was so surprised that bhavangacitta could be object of awareness. Acharn answerd: When I asked: can the object of bhavangacitta be known, the answer was: no. She explained about bhavangacitta: there is nothing appearing and then an object appears when there are cittas arising in a process that experience one of the objects through six doors. In other words, there is nothing, meaning, no object impinges on one of the doorways so that it can appear. Thus, we should not exclude bhavangacitta from the objects of awareness. Bhavangacitta is a difficult subject and I have heard that some people translate it as subconsciousness, but this creates misunderstandings. It is a citta that arises and falls away, there is a succession of them in between the processes of cittas (vithicittas). They are citta, experiencing an object and accompanied by feeling. What object, what feeling? Just before death of the previous life kamma conditioned the last javana cittas, that are kusala cittas or akusala cittas. If kusala kamma will produce a happy rebirth, it conditions kusala javanacittas experiencing a desirable object, and, as Acharn Sujin explained, it can be an object experienced through any of the six doors. The rebirth-consciousness is not kusala citta, it is kusala vipakacitta, thus of the jati (nature) of vipaka, result. There are different types and of different degrees (for details, see Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Ch 11). They can be with or without panna, they can be accompanied by pleasant feeling or indifferent feeling. They experience an object, but not an object that is impinging on one of the six doors, like the cittas, arising in processes. They experience the same object as the object experienced by the last javanacittas of the previous life. The succeeding bhavangacitta and all the bhavangacittas are the same type of vipakacitta as the rebirth-consciousness, and they experience the same object, and they are accompanied by the same feeling, pleasant or indifferent. If akusala kamma will produce an unhappy rebirth, it conditions akusala javanacittas just before death and these experience an undesirable object, such as a symbol or sign of the akusala kamma one performed, or an image of one's nextdestiny. The rebirthconsciousness that is akusala vipaka experiences the same undesirable object, and it is accompanied by indifferent feeling. It is actually the same type of citta as santiranacitta, investigating consciousness, but here it does not arise in a process, it is "doorfreed" (dvara vimutta) and performs the function of rebirth. It is ahetuka (rootless) akusala vipakacitta. Thus, although the last javanacittas that were akusala cittas could be dosamulacittas accompanied by unpleasant feeling, the vipakacitta that is rebirth-consciousness conditioned by the akusala kamma conditioning those javanacittas, cannot be accompanied by unpleasant feeling, it is ahetuka vipakacitta, accompanied by indifferent feeling only. The following bhavangacittas are the same type of citta, experiencing the same undesirable object, accompanied by the same feeling. Jonothan touched on another important point: can we find details on the processes of cittas in the scriptures, or is there just the nucleus of them? I have mentioned this in my preface to "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", because I thought people would like to know about this. Yes, we find important material on this subject in the "Path of Discrimination", Patisambhidamagga, of the Khuddaka Nikaya, Treatise on Knowledge, Ch XVII, Behaviour, Cariya. And also in the Conditional Relations, Patthana, Feeling Triplet, Investigation Chapter, under Proximity and Repetition, where also the process of enlightenment is dealt with. But we have to know that the cittas arising in processes are referred to as mind-element (including adverting-consciousness and receiving-consciousness) and mind-consciousness-element (all cittas other than those included in mind-element and the sense-cognitions of seeing, etc.). I shall not quote now, that takes too much time. The commentaries have worked out more details, but they are based on very old sources of the Theravada tradition. Buddhagosa did not put in his own ideas. Nina. 6586 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Considering op 18-07-2001 18:42 schreef bruce: > hi jon and nina > > apologies for not following up on your responses to my "listening to and > considering" query a long way back there (before you left, actually > jon)...conditions didn't allow a good response (iow: i was incredibly > busy!) though i have been lurking all along... > > i have to admit i still don't undertand what "considering" the Dhamma > entails....i understand (only conceptually of course) that there is no one > doing the considering....does this mean that the considering just arises > and is beyond our control? is it a paramattha dhamma? or is it just > papanca?...or can it be both at different times? is considering the Dhamma > simply another way of saying "noting realities as they ppear at the six > doors"? > > for that matter, is "listening to the Dhamma" something we can do > willingly? "listening" seems to bespeak willing and control....perhaps a > better word would be "hearing", which arises, as opposed to listening, > which seems forced....reminds me of a Sayadaw here in japan who liked to > remind me: "no listening -- just hearing"....he would also say the same > with looking/seeing, which made me wonder if the idea of a controlling self > wasn't something that required prepositions for those verbs, ie looking > *at*, listening *to*....all makes me think that we can neither decide to > listen to the Dhamma, nor consider the Dhamma.... Dear Bruce, let me quote from Alan Driver: End quote. Maybe this answers your questions. You could call it listening or hearing, it does not matter. Nina. 6587 From: cybele chiodi Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear Gayan > >Dear cybele, > >can i have the best of 'both' worlds.?? >I am fond of both abhidhamma and 'heresy', thats what I understood as what >is encouraged in tipitaka. > >btw Name the place, :o) > > >rgds I agree, let's explore all possibilities!! ;-) The place, let's see... Sri Lanka uphill, in Ella! Love Cybele 6588 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:19am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah oh..easy for me.. just 70+ miles from where i live. ----- Original Message ----- From: "cybele chiodi" Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Practice and Ajahn Chah > > Dear Gayan > > > > >Dear cybele, > > > >can i have the best of 'both' worlds.?? > >I am fond of both abhidhamma and 'heresy', thats what I understood as what > >is encouraged in tipitaka. > > > >btw Name the place, :o) > > > > > >rgds > > I agree, let's explore all possibilities!! ;-) > The place, let's see... Sri Lanka uphill, in Ella! > > Love > > Cybele > > 6589 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 2:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: . Nibbbana op 13-07-2001 15:12 schreef Derek Cameron op Derek: I don't think anyone has yet mentioned the lines: "There > is, bhikkhus, a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not- > conditioned. If, bhikkhus, there were no not-born, not-brought-to- > being, not-made, not-conditioned, no escape would be discerned from > what is born, brought-to-being, made, conditioned. But since there is > a not-born, a not-brought-to-being, a not-made, a not-conditioned, > therefore an escape is discerned from what is born, brought-to-being, > made, conditioned" (Udaana VIII.3, repeated at Itivuttaka 43). Dear Derek and all, I am glad you brought up this important text. I have noticed that people might think that nibbana is citta, or even right view which is panna cetasika. In that case nibbana would be conditioned, and there would not be the third noble Truth, no cessation of dukkha. Dukkha is the arising and falling away of conditioned dhammas. Citta experiences an object, it is conditioned by object-condition and several other conditions. Cetasika is conditioned by citta and several other conditions. When the Buddha was the Bodhisatta Sumedha he made the quest for the unconditioned, that which is not dukkha. See the Chronicle of the Buddhas (Buddhava'msa), Sumedha: < Sitting in seclusion I thought thus then:" Again-becoming is dukkha, also the breaking up of the physical frame. Liable to birth, liable to ageing, liable to disease am I then; I will seek the peace that is unageing, undying, secure." In the first book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani (Buddhist Psychological Ethics) Nibbana is referred to as the unconditioned element, asankhata dhatu (See Appendix II) and it is nama or arupa( non rupa), but it is different from conditioned nama, it does not experience an object. Realities are either nama or rupa, and since nibbana is not rupa it is classified as nama. Kom has explained very clearly about the classification of the four paramattha dhammas. We read in the Atthasalini, Expositor (II, Book II, Part II, Suttanta Couplets, 392) an explanation of nama. Nama is derived from namati, bending towards an object, and it can also be a name. Citta and cetasika bend towards an object, experience an object. And also: they cause one another to bend on to the object: "The four khandhas are name (nama) in the sense of bending, for they bend towards the object. In the sense of causing to bend all (of the foregoing, namely nibbana and the four nama khandhas) are "name" (nama). For the four khandhas cause one another to bend on to the object; and nibbana bends faultless dhammas on to itself by means of the causal relation of the dominant influence of the object." Thus, nibbana does not bend towards an object, it does not experience an object, but, it is predominant object condition for the lokuttara cittas that experience it, it bends them towards itself in that way. Buddhists take their refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the ariyan Sangha. At this moment we do not know what nibbana is like, and it makes no sense to speculate about it. We have confidence that there is a Path leading to the end of dukkha, and that there are people who have realised the third noble Truth by following this Path. We have to learn what dukkha is, the impermanence of nama and rupa. This can only be realized if we study now what nama is and what rupa is, so that their characteristics can be clearly distinguished, there is no other way. I liked what Robert said about awareness, even of attachment to right view, being aware again and again and again of the object at the very moment it appears, so that we come to know its true nature. Nina. 6590 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:33am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Dear Anders > > > > Hope so. I already can visualize you dancing a samba naked in the snow. > > > Hehehehehehehehehehehehe! ;-) > > > Invite me for the performance. > > > >Well, I should have more than enough time to practise, since snow isn't due > >to come for another five months. :-) > > Really? > In England, there is already an awful climate, windy, rainy, cold and > depressive inducing. > I think that I should come to visist you! ;-) > You can dance even in the carpet, it's ok. Actually, the weather is starting to improve over hear. We've had some awful weather as well for a while, but in the past few days, things have begun to turn around. 6591 From: Anders Honore Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 3:35am Subject: Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > Anders > > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Anders > > > Can you kindly READ ALL THE POSTS OF THIS THREAD INSTEAD OF JUMPING IN > >TO > > > RESCUE YOUR FELLOW MALE AND DANISH AND LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN. > > > >Jeez, talk about accusing, Cybele. Your post here not only indicates that > >Erik is a nationalist (possible racist), but also a sexist. As Nietszche > >once said: > >"He who hunts monsters should see to that in the process, he does not > >become > >a monster himself." > > > We are becoming pathetic by now. > I am not hunting anybody. > I found that Erik interferred on a thread without actually following it > because indeed he assumed lots of things about my practice that indeed were > very much in harmony with his approach. > What shows me that he haven't read what I wrote previously. > I felt him very much coming in 'rescue' and I think that you are quite > capable of handling it alone. Yup. But Nietszche's words are certainly worth noting. 6592 From: ppp Date: Thu Jul 19, 2001 9:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars Hi, Derek: To be brief, I am in Victoria. I teach at UVic. tadao 6593 From: Derek Cameron Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 7:23am Subject: Re: Sanskrit and Pali grammars --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Derek: > To be brief, I am in Victoria. I teach at UVic. tadao Small world! Maybe you know Ashok Aklujkar, my Sanskrit professor at UBC? Derek. 6594 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 7:49am Subject: Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex No, Anders, but I fully intend to market the sacred molars I am yet to manufacture in my little shed out the back. This will hopefully allow me to do away with the dana my employer so graciously extends to me :-) Herman --- "Anders Honoré" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <180015253121038031172218004036129208> > Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 1:48 PM > Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in > West Sussex > > > > And who was Osho's dentist? > > > > (rhetorical question only, no reply required, or merited ) > > Herman, are you trying to tell us that YOU KNEW Osho's dentist!?! > > Anders Honore > ************************************************* > Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ > ************************************************* 6595 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 8:34am Subject: Re: Meeting in the 'AgathaChristie ' village in West Sussex Cybele, Why eat meat before abstaining (carnivale)? The theory of carnivale is one thing. It has to do with preparation for fasting and contemplation. The practise of carnivale is another thing. Anytime I've been close enough to see, it has been pure, unadulterated debauchery. Which aspect were you hoping to share with the Scandinavians? :-) Herman --- "cybele chiodi" wrote: > > > > > AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! > > > I told I am 'openminded' not SILLY! ;-) > > > >Never been part of any UFO-sects or anything like that? > > Yes and they assigned me the mission of diffuse my Latin blood all over the > place and infect everybody with carnival fever particularly scandinavians. > ;-) > > Cybele > > > > > 6596 From: ppp Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 1:42am Subject: re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Practice and Ajahn Chah Dear all: With respect to Aachaan Chah's comment, if we know that "chiken shit" can be used as fertilizer to nurish plants (i.e. right understanding) we eventually eat to survive, it is nothing wrong with collecting it. Many people, in fact, avoid eggs under the assumption that they contain too much bad colesterol, which is the main underlying cause of the hear-attack (i.e. wrong practice). Sorry, I do not know who Aachaan Chah is, but it is dengerous to practice Dhamma without paying respect to Buddha's words. tadao 6597 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:20am Subject: Re: Dhammapada/Narada [DhammaStudyGroup] (was Re: Theravada and Satipathana - Kom) Dear Kom and Tadao, If you don't already know about it, there's a wonderful site in Taiwan with the Dhammapada in Pali and English with analysis and with sound files for individual words and whole sentences--a really great site: http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/PALI/reading.htm The sound files work best if you right-click on them and select 'Save As' to put them on your hard drive, them open them for play-back. mike --- ppp wrote: > Hi, Kom: > As for Dhamapada books, the book I like most is the > following: > Dhammapada: A Practical Guide to Right Living > (Tesxt and Translation) by Venerable Aacharya > Buddharakkhita Thera. Published by Buddha Vacana > Trust, Maha Bodhi Society, Bangalore-9. > I do not where I've got my copy, but it is very > inexpensive, handy (light weight), and, most > importantly, it contains orginal Pali texts (so > that you can learn by heart any orignal > Pali verses which you like). tadao 6598 From: Herman Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:22am Subject: Re: Sati/panna and its object (was: The meaning of Equan... Hi there, As an addendum to the discussion , bhavanga-cittas are said to have the same object as the birth consciousness. Herman --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Kom > > > > "Bhavanga-cittas arise and pass away every moment > > > during life whenever there is no active cognitive > > > process taking place. … When an object impinges on a > > > sense door, the bhavanga is arrested and an active > > > cognitive process ensues for the purpose of cognizing > > > the object. > > > > Sorry to repeat the question. Did he go on to define what active > > cognitiv= > > e > > process is? Did he define an unactive cognitive process? Is bhavanga > > an > > unactive cognitive process? > > He is presumably using 'active cognative process' as a translation of a > particular pali term. I had taken it to mean 'vitthi-citta', but I'm not > sure what accounts for the 'active'. Bhavanga cittas are cittas that are > not vitthi cittas (ie. cittas that arise in a process). > > I'll let you know if i find out. > > Jon > > 6599 From: m. nease Date: Fri Jul 20, 2001 9:31am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Nibbana anihilation? (was Consciousness vs. Nibbbana - Final round! Dear Gayan and Robert, So do I--unfortunately, I'm unable to find it so far (as usual of late). I'll post it if I can find it. mike --- Robert Kirkpatrick wrote: > > --- gayan wrote: > > > Thanks Gayan, > I think I have a vague memory of this too! > robert > > dear robert, > > > > I vaguely remember a phrase from a sutta where > buddha says > > something > > like this, > > "monks, some may accuse me of preaching about > annihilation.To > > that I > > say this, yes,I preach you about > annihilation,annihilation of > > dukkha > > that is, and nothing else." > > > > (pardon for the vagueness) > > rgds