7800 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 1:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Sarah, This is a great example of the value of commentaries (I think) as well as an apt and needed exposure of yet another apparent (but mistaken) support for the 'primal mind' notion. Also a helpful sidelight on bhavangacitta, by the way. However, is Ven. Nyanaponika's footnote to be considered a part of the commentaries approved by one of the councils of arahatas? Thank you, Ma'am, mike --- Sarah wrote: > When I was trying to answer Erik’s question about > the 6 Pairs in Nyanaponika’s > book, I saw N. also quoted from AN1, 10: > ‘Monks, this mind is luminous (pabhassaram), but it > is defiled by intrusive > (aagantukehi0 defilements. This mind is luminous, > and it is freed from > intrusive defilements’ (his transl.) > > Nyanaponika’s footnote to this reads : ‘The > commentary to this text explains > the ‘luminous mind’ as the subconscious life > continuum (bhavanga), which is > ‘naturally luminous’ in that it is never tainted by > defilements. The > defilements arise only in the active thought > process, not in the subliminal > flow of consciousness’. > > Now in this example, which we’ve discussed at > length, I’m sure that without the > commentary notes, I might not have understood it > correctly even thought the > nibbana interpretation wouldn’t have made sense to > me. Reading the bhavanga > interpretation, it seems logical and furthermore, I > admit I have confidence in > these ancient commentaries that had to be approved > by several councils of > arahats so soon after the Buddha’s parinibbana. Who > are we to question the > wisdom of these arahats? 7801 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > attachement. Attachments = dukka > Kind regards > Kenneth Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say that I think it is possible to enjoy something without being attached to it. What do you think? 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" 7802 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Hi, my name is Frank, and I'm a dhammaholic [Howard] --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > This is really great stuff, Erik, a very clear meditation manual in > brief. I > > think you could take this to a desert island and do pretty well > with no other > > material. > > I'll be sure to let Ajahn Chah know you appreciated his simple > instructions as much as I did, if you don't beat me to the Far Shore, > that is! :) Well, if you get there first, please save me a space! : ) Robert E. 7803 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, whenever/whatever we enjoy, there will be an attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we could not observe it. Technically speaking when we enjoy something, there is an attachment because there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable or subtle. Hence in my personal perspective, I do not think we could at present enjoy something without being not attached to it. If we are detach from what we are doing, then the feeling of pleasure will not arise because we are not attached. And again techniccally speaking this means there will not be any enjoyment as there is no arise a feeling of pleasure. Kind regards Kenneth Robert Epstein wrote: --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > attachement. Attachments = dukka > Kind regards > Kenneth Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say that I think it is possible to enjoy something without being attached to it. What do you think? Robert E. 7804 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 2:56pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, whenever/whatever we enjoy, > there will be an attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we could not > observe it. Technically speaking when we enjoy something, there is an attachment > because there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable or subtle. Hence in > my personal perspective, I do not think we could at present enjoy something > without being not attached to it. If we are detach from what we are doing, then > the feeling of pleasure will not arise because we are not attached. And again > techniccally speaking this means there will not be any enjoyment as there is no > arise a feeling of pleasure. > Kind regards > Kenneth I am no expert, but it seems to me, Kenneth, that you are equating pleasureable feelings or sensations with attachment itself. It seems to me for the path to function through mindfulness, there must be a possibility of any experience being able to be non-attached to through looking at it with awareness and becoming aware of its characteristics of not-self, emptiness and impermanence. Does seeing the insubstantial nature of an object or experience remove the sensation or feeling of pleasure, and does pleasure or enjoyment only arise as an outgrowth of attachment? These are interesting questions. I think that it is possible to enjoy something but not cling to it and to let it go when it is over. I think this is more possible when encountering it with mindfulness and not getting absorbed by the experience. I recognize that this would be hard, however, and if you are saying mainly that in our current state this would be extremely unlikely, then I can understand your point of view. But if one is free of attachment, I do not imagine that this person would necessarily be like a robot, seeing what is there but with absolutely no experience of a response to it. Can one have a response and be non-attached at the same time? That is again an interesting question which I am not in a position to answer. I have met a few people in my life whom I believe by reputation and experience were enligthtened, and they were certainly capable of laughing at a joke or enjoying a meal. They merely did not have a notion of self or dharma being real or self-existent. Although I am anxious to let go of clingings and attachments, to objects as well as views, [as well as the one I am expressing here ], I want to also be careful not to fall into annihilationism and to think that I must therefore hold onto aversion to those things. I think it was the ascetics that Buddha criticized for being so averse to psychophysical clinging that they abused and neglected their bodies, and that this did not create an appropriate state of mind for realization. If I am distorting this point, which I am uncertain about, please let me know. 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" 7805 From: Sarah Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 7:48pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Mike, Always good to hear from you! --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > This is a great example of the value of commentaries > (I think) as well as an apt and needed exposure of yet > another apparent (but mistaken) support for the > 'primal mind' notion. Also a helpful sidelight on > bhavangacitta, by the way. Thanks and yes. > However, is Ven. Nyanaponika's footnote to be > considered a part of the commentaries approved by one > of the councils of arahatas? Nyanaponika’s footnote was his ‘summary’ of the ancient commentary to AN (not published in English I think). The Pali for the ‘essential’ phrase in the commentary is: ‘navame pabhassaranti pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti bhava"ngacitta.m.’ Jim indicated the meaning: "In the ninth : 'luminous' is clear, pure. 'mind' is bhava"ngacitta.” With regard to the question as to whether the ancient commentaries were approved by which councils and at what dates (maybe Anders’ rather than your question, Mike), others would be able to give far more useful comments on this. I believe it is a generally accepted fact that the pali canon and ancient commentaries as we read them were approved at several Councils over many centuries and show, as I read them very slowly, almost complete uniformity . Robert and Jim have studied the references with regard to the authenticity of the commentaries and abhidhamma in far more detail and Rob wrote some useful posts on this, saved at this link under ‘abhidhamma; its origins’ (or sth like that): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Many thanks again, Mike, Sarah --- Sarah wrote: > When I was trying to answer Erik’s question about > the 6 Pairs in Nyanaponika’s > book, I saw Nyanaponika also quoted from AN1, 10: > ‘Monks, this mind is luminous (pabhassaram), but it > is defiled by intrusive > (aagantukehi0 defilements. This mind is luminous, > and it is freed from > intrusive defilements’ (his transl.) > > Nyanaponika’s footnote to this reads : ‘The > commentary to this text explains > the ‘luminous mind’ as the subconscious life > continuum (bhavanga), which is > ‘naturally luminous’ in that it is never tainted by > defilements. The > defilements arise only in the active thought > process, not in the subliminal > flow of consciousness’. > 7806 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 2, 2001 11:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Sarah, --- Sarah wrote: > Nyanaponika’s footnote was his ‘summary’ of the > ancient commentary to AN (not > published in English I think). Thanks, this was what I was getting at (though I don't think my question was clear). What I wondered was if this footnote was Ven. Nyanaponika's comment or his (paraphrased) translation of an old commentary--clearly (now) the latter. > The Pali for the ‘essential’ phrase in the > commentary is: ‘navame pabhassaranti > pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti > bhava"ngacitta.m.’ > > Jim indicated the meaning: "In the ninth : > 'luminous' is clear, pure. > 'mind' is bhava"ngacitta.” Yes, I read Jim's earlier post and appreciated it. Somehow, though, your post citing N.'s footnote (again?) really helped to clarify this. Something I still don't understand is a question I asked once before (Nina kindly responded). I wonder if it would be accurate to say that the bhavangas don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but still pass along (potential) subtle defilements (anusaya). Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated kamma etc. could continue to be passed along from each citta to the next, creating (among other things) the illusion of continuity. > With regard to the question as to whether the > ancient commentaries were > approved by which councils and at what dates (maybe > Anders’ rather than your > question, Mike), others would be able to give far > more useful comments on this. > I believe it is a generally accepted fact that the > pali canon and ancient > commentaries as we read them were approved at > several Councils over many > centuries and show, as I read them very slowly, > almost complete uniformity . I'm certainly willing to accept this as a working hypothesis. I haven't gone in depth into 'hermaneutics' and detailed (and questionable) histories as this sort of approach never seems to dispel much doubt for me. On the other hand, I've found Robert's logical arguments especially convincing (i.e., what motivation would have inspired large numbers of monks, strictly bound by precepts, to conspire to interpolate a huge amount of material into the tipitaka and then lie about it from then on? -excuse the paraphrase, Robert). Admittedly this is just logic, but I believe that's allowed if balanced with comparisons to the suttas and with personal observation. Even Ven. Bodhi who, I gather, accepts the idea of the abhidhamma as a later addition to the tipitaka (see message 3350), has this to say about it: "The reason the Abhidhamma Pitaka is so deeply revered only becomes clear as a result of thorough study and profound reflection, undertaken in the conviction that these ancient books have something significant to communicate. When one approaches the Abhidhamma treatises in such a spirit and gains some insight into their wide implications and organic unity, one will find that they are attempting nothing less than to articulate a comprehensive vision of the totality of experienced reality, a vision marked by extensiveness of range, systematic completeness, and analytical precision. From the standpoint of Theravada orthodoxy the system that they expound is not a figment of speculative thought, not a mosaic put together out of metaphysical hypotheses, but a disclosure of the true nature of existence as apprehended by a mind that has penetrated the totality of things both in depth and in the finest detail. Because it bears this character, the Theravada tradition regards the Abhidhamma as the most perfect expression possible of the Buddha's unimpeded omniscient knowledge (sabbaññuta-ñana). It is his statement of the way things appear to the mind of a Fully Enlightened One, ordered in accordance with the two poles of his teaching: suffering and the cessation of suffering". A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma The Abhidhammattha Sangaha of Acariya Anuruddha Excerpt: Introduction by Bhikkhu Bodhi, General Editor > Robert and Jim have studied the references with > regard to the authenticity of > the commentaries and abhidhamma in far more detail > and Rob wrote some useful > posts on this, saved at this link under ‘abhidhamma; > its origins’ (or sth like > that): > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Right--thanks for reminding me of the links. > --- Sarah wrote: > > > When I was trying to answer Erik’s question about > > the 6 Pairs in Nyanaponika’s > > book, I saw Nyanaponika also quoted from AN1, 10: > > ‘Monks, this mind is luminous (pabhassaram), but > it > > is defiled by intrusive > > (aagantukehi0 defilements. This mind is luminous, > > and it is freed from > > intrusive defilements’ (his transl.) > > > > Nyanaponika’s footnote to this reads : ‘The > > commentary to this text explains > > the ‘luminous mind’ as the subconscious life > > continuum (bhavanga), which is > > ‘naturally luminous’ in that it is never tainted > by > > defilements. The > > defilements arise only in the active thought > > process, not in the subliminal > > flow of consciousness’. 7807 From: m. nease Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Robert, Hope you don't mind my butting in (again). --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' > or bad 'feel' about the > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you > do, they are still > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > Kind regards > > Kenneth > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just > say that I think it is possible > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > What do you think? Attachment (as I understand it in this context) refers to identification with one of the khandhas. Since there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be attached, I think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) to a khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), or clinging to (identification with) a pleasant feeling. A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without lobha (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm enjoying this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I think--but maybe that's just 'me'. mike 7808 From: m. nease Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Kenneth, --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, > whenever/whatever we enjoy, there will be an > attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we > could not observe it. Technically speaking when we > enjoy something, there is an attachment because > there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable > or subtle. Hence in my personal perspective, I do > not think we could at present enjoy something > without being not attached to it. Agreed. > If we are detach > from what we are doing, then the feeling of pleasure > will not arise because we are not attached. And > again techniccally speaking this means there will > not be any enjoyment as there is no arise a feeling > of pleasure. Not sure about this--I thought I remembered the Buddha speaking about 'enjoying' and 'delighting'. Here's an example I came up with: "The Tathagata enjoys non-ill will, delights in non-ill will. To him -- enjoying non-ill will, delighting in non-ill will -- this thought often occurs: 'By this activity I harm no one at all, whether weak or firm.' "The Tathagata enjoys seclusion, delights in seclusion. To him -- enjoying seclusion, delighting in seclusion -- this thought often occurs: 'Whatever is unskillful is abandoned.' Itivuttaka 38 The Group Of Twos http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/itivuttaka/iti2.html It seems to me that sukkha vedanaa will arise when the conditions for it exist (I don't know think that attachment is a necessary condition for pleasant feeling), even when there is no ego--just that lobha and vedanna upaadaana won't arise. But maybe I'm mistaken. What do you think? Thanks for letting me join in your discussion. mike > Robert Epstein wrote: > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or > bad 'feel' about the > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you > do, they are still > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > Kind regards > > Kenneth > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say > that I think it is possible > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > What do you think? > > Robert E. 7809 From: Ken Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:42am Subject: Re: toeing the party line....;-) Mike You wrote; " . . . These rebukes of the Buddha are always bracingly instructive. I've read this one before, (though I think the translation was 'you foolish man'), but forget the source--can you cite it?" Gladly. The reference given by Walpola Rahula ("What the Buddha Taught" p24), for the Mahatanhasamkhaya-sutta is M I (PTS), p256 ff. I tried to find it on the net but without success. Are you making a collectiio of these rebukes? I'd like to make a collection of the various ways of seeing the Four Foundations of Mindfulness as "the Middle Way." Your recent comment; "In this context I think satipatthaana could be called the middle path between 'dealing with akusala' and ignoring it," will make a good start. Kind regards Ken 7810 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 9:04am Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Dear Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > --- Sarah wrote: > > > Nyanaponika's footnote was his `summary' of the > > ancient commentary to AN (not > > published in English I think). > > Thanks, this was what I was getting at (though I don't > think my question was clear). What I wondered was if > this footnote was Ven. Nyanaponika's comment or his > (paraphrased) translation of an old > commentary--clearly (now) the latter. From the superficial comparisons I did from B. Bodhi's notes and the commentaries (in MN), whenever he refers to the ancient Acariya's commentaries, he explicitly says so. When he doesn't, it is implied that the source is not the ancient commentaries. kom 7811 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > Hope you don't mind my butting in (again). > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' > > or bad 'feel' about the > > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you > > do, they are still > > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > > Kind regards > > > Kenneth > > > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just > > say that I think it is possible > > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > > What do you think? > > Attachment (as I understand it in this context) refers > to identification with one of the khandhas. Since > there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be attached, I > think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) to a > khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), or > clinging to (identification with) a pleasant feeling. > > A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without lobha > (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana > (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm enjoying > this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I > think--but maybe that's just 'me'. > > mike Thanks, Mike, I appreciate the discussion. It's sort of an important topic to me, and I'll try to explain why. I understand your point, and I probably agree, that for us folks on the way here it's probably a long shot to have enjoyments without attachment or unpleasant experiences without aversion. But it's important to me to point at a model of experience that does not involve being attached to aversion or averse to attachment. It seems to me that if the model is 'anti-experience' based on the addictive nature of experience, that new karmic effects are created on top of the ones that already need to be released. I am saying that when enjoyment or pleasure arises, that the subtle response 'I shouldn't be enjoying this because it will cause attachment' may be in the mind of the practitioner, and that this is a mistake. That this is not an expression of mindfulness but of thought-reaction to what is arising. If one instead takes the attitude that I believe the Buddha prescribes, if I am correct, one would simply want to say: 'See pleasure as pleasure, and if attachment is present, see attachment as attachment', etc. I think that it is important to not only look at primary attachment and aversion, but attachment to aversion and aversion to attachment. I would consider these a practioner's problems, because they would only arise for someone who sincerely cared about the path. But I think they're very important to someone who has already committed themselves to not feeding attachment. Does any of this make sense? Robert E. 7812 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 0:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Kenneth, > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, > > whenever/whatever we enjoy, there will be an > > attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we > > could not observe it. Technically speaking when we > > enjoy something, there is an attachment because > > there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable > > or subtle. Hence in my personal perspective, I do > > not think we could at present enjoy something > > without being not attached to it. > > Agreed. > > > If we are detach > > from what we are doing, then the feeling of pleasure > > will not arise because we are not attached. And > > again techniccally speaking this means there will > > not be any enjoyment as there is no arise a feeling > > of pleasure. > > Not sure about this--I thought I remembered the Buddha > speaking about 'enjoying' and 'delighting'. Here's an > example I came up with: > > "The Tathagata enjoys non-ill will, delights in > non-ill will. To him -- enjoying non-ill will, > delighting in non-ill will -- this thought often > occurs: 'By this activity I harm no one at all, > whether weak or firm.' > > "The Tathagata enjoys seclusion, delights in > seclusion. To him -- enjoying seclusion, delighting in > seclusion -- this thought often occurs: 'Whatever is > unskillful is abandoned.' > > Itivuttaka 38 > The Group Of Twos Thanks, Mike. I think these are good examples of Buddha describing a kind of benign enjoyment and delight, and is part of what I was hinting at. It may be for advanced states only, but is still something to understand, so that we don't see all pleasant experience as being inherently expressions of attachment. Wouldn't it be a shame if we were meant to enjoy, without attachment, the subtle flavor of the advanced portion of the path to enlightenment, and instead suppressed this, thinking it erroneously to represent attachment? Perhaps lower enjoyments that attach us to the things of the world are suspect, but the enjoyment of the path itself may not be attached, but may be natural expressions of the correct mood on the way to Nirvana. I also recall some discussion of the jhanas or other progressive states where it is mentioned in each stage how pleasant and enjoyable each state is. Perhaps someone else can remind me where the Buddha speaks this way. Thanks, Robert E. =============== 7813 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 1:47pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Hi Sarah, This is a wonderful post. I learned from it a lot. Thank you and all who participated in this discussion. ~mettha Ranil >From: Sarah >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation >Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:57:06 +0800 (CST) > >Dear Mike C, > >thank you very much for your post and comments below (and thanks Frank for >your >help). > > > From: Michael Chu < > > Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm > > Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting > > meditation > > > Dear Sara and all, > >> > > I am very lazy at my practice of meditation. I > > average about fifteen > > minutes of meditation every other day. Comparing > > myself to my fellow > > cultivator friends, namely Frank and William, who do > > at least one hour of > > sitting meditation each day continuously for several > > years, I have noticed > > their ability to be mindful and serene far exceed > > mine. > >Mike, may I make 2 quick comments here? I don’t think it’s very fruitful to >compare yourself with others. Doesn’t this just lead to thoughts of >inferiority >(in this case) and unhappy feelings? Secondly, do we ever really know >another’s >state of mind? isn’t it hard enough to know when we’re really calm or have >mindfulness as opposed to a pleasant feeling or subtle clinging? We can >never >tell in another just be the appearance or posture what the state of mind >is. > > > > I personally noticed that lacking the mindfulness of > > cultivation from > > meditation, I am having a much more difficult time > > progressing in the Noble > > Eightfold Path compare to my peers. On the > > concentration group, I can only > > sporadically address my present moment with the right > > effort, mindfulness, > > and concentration. Without the appropriate > > concentration, I find myself to > > have further difficulty achieving the right speech and > > action. > >Mike, i think you have the right idea when you recognise that the time for >mindfulness is the present moment. However, it seems that you have an idea >of a >‘self’ that should be able to progress, concentrate, be mindful and achieve >rt >speech and action. When we mind so much about these states, doesn’t it also >show how much we cling to ME, myself. Doesn’t it show how much we’d like to >be >the mindful, concentrated one with good speech and action? > >What about when we compare or wish to have mindfulness, being aware of the >clinging to self at these times? Wouldn’t that be a little progress? People >have the idea that concentration should be fixing undistractedly on an >object . >But in what way is it pure or wholesome when this happens? There is >concentration all the time, even when we’re distracted (according to the >Teachings). > > My progress > > of having the right understanding, thought, and speech > > is also hindered. By > > lacking the right understanding, I find myself making > > poor plans for my > > livelihood. My clarity of mind is always compromised. > >We all lack right understanding most the time, Mike. Recognizing how little >understanding there is, is a really good start. Actually, I think the more >understanding develops, the more it sees what real beginners we are. As one >of >our members, suggested, we think we know and then there’s a little >breakthrough >and we realise it was all wrong after all! For understanding to really >develop, >we need to hear and consider more about what are the actual phenomena that >can >be known. > >When we talk about livelihood plans, we can talk about them from many >angles. >Frank is considering taking early retirement and living in a forest. Form a >conventional point of view, these would be poor livelihood decisions. From >a >Buddhist point of view, it would depend on the intentions and motivations >involved, because in Buddhism, we’re always more concerned with the present >state of mind than ‘the story’. I hope your livlihood works out better in >both >regards! > > > > I also noticed lacking the ability to be mindful even > > hinders the right > > breathing and induces undesirable states like > > sluggishness, impatience, > > restlessness, and anger. I can only so far only be > > able to do a limited > > form of damage control on these undesirable states > > when I occasionally > > remember to stay away from them. Another thing I > > noticed is that these > > undesirable statements can be quickly terminated if I > > catch them on their > > early stages. To be able to catch the arising of > > these undesirable states, > > we need to be mindful. > >It seems that we can ‘catch’ them or stop them arising and conventionally, >this >is often true. Hence we say to a child ‘snap out of it’ and the child >sometimes >does! On a deeper level, however, we can see we’re pretty much stuck with >our >‘character’ and inclinations, so that sooner or later these negative states >will arise again and again in spite of good intentions. Why is this? >Because >they have been gathering for so very long and are not controllable. Even if >mindfulness is mindful of the anger or impatience for a moment, what about >next >moment? > >Again, may I suggest, that the reason we mind so much about these states is >not >usually because we see the danger of ALL kinds of unwholesomeness, but >because >the ones you’ve mentioned are unpleasant and we cling so much to a self! >When >we’re having a great time and there’s no anger or impatience, do we mind >about >the excitement and attachment? What about all the ignorance in between? > > > >> The very reason why we should apply appropriate > > mindfulness and catch the > > arising anger before it gets any bigger and out of > > control. > > > > So far the best way to achieve mindfulness that I know > > of is through > > practicing proper meditation. If you have any > > suggestion that we can better > > achieve mindfulness, I would love to know. > >Actually, Mike, there is no self to apply mindfulness or do anything. This >doesn’t mean ‘give up’ and it doesn't mean 'sit' or 'don't sit', it means >learn >more about what mindfulness really is, what the objects of mindfulness are >and >develop understanding (by understanding , not doing) of these same >realities at >any time. This is what I call bhavana or meditation. > >One or two practical suggestions: > >1) Join DSG, go to ‘Useful Posts’ at this link and scroll down to ‘new to >Dhamma’ for some suggestions or other topics that look interesting. > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > >2) Keep asking questions here....be patient for replies and ignore posts >that >are too technical for now. > >3) Go to this website and read anything that doesn’t seem too hard >http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > >Hope to hear more form you, > >Best wishes, >Sarah > 7814 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 3:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Num, Num wrote: > Hi Kom and Nina, > > Hope you guys don't mind I try to get in the discussion about paccaya. It's > hard for me reading about paccaya. Again, please do correct me and I always > appreciate every input. This is only my opinion. Nina may add more when she comes back from her trip, but meanwhile my turn to ‘get in’ to your discusion;-) Paccaya are very complicated and it’s just these few days with no students that I can give them a little more attention. (Actually I tried last week, but didn’t have a yahoo connection and then other posts jumped the queue!) > > From your writing (Nina's) about conditions and from other sources I have > read and listened, Jhana paccaya included both miccha-samadhi and > samma-samadhi. Also from your books and some discussion with Kom, all 7 > Jhana( esp ekaggata) factors can arise in both kusula or akusula citta. In > Dosa based samadhi, only domanassa can be a vedana along with other Jhana > factors, viakka, vicara as well as ekaggata. In Lobha based samadhi vitakka, > > vicara, piti, somanassa(sukha), ekaggata and I think even upekkha can be a > Jhanna factors here b/c at time lobha-mula-citta can accompany by upekkha as > well, not only in last stage of Jhana in both four and five level. But if > samadhi is samma-samadhi, which means it's accompanied by panna, Jhana cannot > > be akusala in nature. So panna distinguishs Jhana into kusala and akulasa. Num, this all seems pretty correct to me (no guarantees, though!!). From U Narada’s text (below), we read ‘It is due to jhana condition that a faultless or faulty action in thought, word or deed can be completely performed from the beginning right thought to the end. Without jhana condition it would not be possible (1) to shoot birds and animals...’etc Those who wish to read more can do so at: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ I also find U Narada’s ‘Guide to Conditional Relations’ helpful (PTS) As Dan wrote (very helpfully) recently, it’s so easy to confuse different states and to confuse kusala with akusala. It’s also easy to overestimate one’s own attainments in these areas, I think. It’s helpful to reflect on how jhana can be taken in this wide sense as condition to see how even strong samadhi and the other factors can all be unwholesome. As Nina writes: ‘When there is no panna which precisely knows when there is kusala cita and when akusala citta, one can take wrong concentration for right concentration. One may mistakenly believe that the citta is calm when one just sits and for example looks for a long time at a kasina (disk) whih is one of the meditation subjectys. Instead of true calm which is wholesome there is merely clinging to quiet’. A little later she adds: ‘When one overestimates the development of jhana there will be wrong concentration. It is dificult to distinguish between jhana factors such as vitakka and vicara. While we are thinking there must be vitakka and vicara performing their functions, they arise together, but do we discern their different characteristics? Do we know the characteristic of piti and can we distinguish it from sukha, pleasant feeling? When we find out for ourselves how difficult it is to distinguish between these jhana-factors, we will understand that there must be a high degree of panna for the development of the jhana-factors’. >> Also in Magga paccaya, miccha-ditthi has been included as a factor, but > ditthi and panna(samma-ditthi) cannot arise together. If magga paccaya at > that moment has samma-ditthi(panna), all other magga factors also have been > entitled as samma- â€|.., if it's not a right path (with miccha-ditthi) > whatever magga factors which coarise at that moment all become part of > miccha-magga. Exactly so. Someone recently (Robert E?) suggested one couldn’t follow the wrong path for 30 years if one was sincere in one’s endeavours (or something to that effect, apologies Rob E if this isn’t correct). On the contrary, I think that if miccha -ditthi is being taken for samma-ditthi, it’s very possible to just be accumulating more miccha-ditthi, not just for 30 years but for aeons of lifetimes! Nina gives an example under ‘Path condition’ which is relevant to some of the discussions on dsg: ‘One may take the wrong path for the right path when one thinks that one should not be aware of akusala, that one should suppress it before one can develop vipassana. When we understand that akusala citta is conditioned by numerous factors, some of them stemming from the past, some of them factors of the present, we are reminded to be aware of akusala in order to see it as not self.’ Thanks for your comments and encouragement to consider a little more in these areas, Num. Hope you had a good trip to Canada and look forward to more of your timely insights. Very heavy rain in Hong Kong, so a good chance to catch up here;-) Sarah 7815 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:05pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Kom and all, I appreciated your comments, Thai commentary notes and Nina’s very helpful pointers on this topic which I’ve been pursuing a little as I just told Num. --- Kom Tukovinit wrote:............................................ > . Do you by > any chance have further explanation about why Domanassa would assist > the citta to be fixed on the object (but not anger, for example)? I > think I can understand about how the rest of the factors assist the > citta in being fixed on the object, but I still don't see how > domanasa does this. .................................................. In addition to Nina’s clear and helpful comments given here in brief: ........................................... Nina: In the Guide to Conditional Relations, by U Narada, Ch II, 17 Jhana Condition) it is explained that the jhanafactors make the associated states fix themselves formly to pleasant and unpleasant objects. We should see domanassa not in isolation, but associated with the other jhanafactors ............................................... I’d like to add another quote from U Narada later(p.218)which might also be helpful. This is regard to sukha, translated as bliss. I think it’ll be easy to see how domanassa performs its function in the same (opposite) way: ‘Next, bliss performs its function of great relish so that consciousness cannot turn away from the object which it enjoys. for although consciousness enjoys the object, unless the relish is very great the object will not be dear enough for consciousness to fasten on to it. Because the delight, which takes place for a short while owing to the novelty of the object, will soon turn into disgust and eventually consciousness will turn away from the object’. Kom, returning to the Sutta > Digha Nikaya 21 > Sakka-pañha Sutta > Sakka's Questions > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn21.html and the 2 kinds of domanassa, to be pursued and not to be pursued again, firstly thanks for your Thai commentary notes (yes, not available in English, but your translation is very helpful). I think I may have been barking up the wrong tree. Nina gave me a good clue below when she likened it to the tanha issue in the Netti which some of us discussed at length: ........................................ Nina: You dealt again with another aspect, domanassa that can be pursued, as explained in the Co. This is actually similar to desire that should not be pursued and that could be pursued, in the 'Guide", the Netti, .......................................... As I mentioned, Khun Sujin stressed that it should not be understood that tanha was ever kusala in anyway. However tankha for following the noble path is or developing kusala is not as bad as other kinds of tanha (connected to the 5 sensualities) as it can be upanissaya paccaya for kusala and this is what should be understood. This is how I read the Thai comm notes you provided, but it may not sound convincing to others;-) ........................................... Kom: ‘The commentary mentioned that domanassa that should not be pursued includes domanassa that is connected to the 5 sensualities. The domanassa that should be pursued includes domanassa resulting from wanting to attain the lokutarra phala but doesn't attain adaquate amount of vipassana in a certain period of time, the wanting of the same kind of ayatana as the ariyans. As a result of the want, the domanassa arises. "To be pursued" domannassaa includes: domanassa resulting from leaving the 5 sensualities, from vipassana, from being mindful - being aware, from the 1st Jhana, etc. It was then explained in detail how a Bikhu can have domanassa resulted from wanting to have the result but has not attained. .................................................. Finally, a quote from Nyanaponika on the jhana factors in ‘Abhidhamma Studies, p57: ‘The intensity of a state of consciousness does not allow anything to be said about its ethical value or its spiritual rank. It is a point common to the intensifying factors and the pentad of sense-contact that both groups are ethically indifferent; they may occur in wholesome, unwholesome, and karmically neutral consciousness. Both groups take, as it were, the colour of their “root sap”, that is, they assume the quality of thw wholesome, unwholesome, or neutral “root causes’ (muula or hetu) associated with them....’ Kom, Num and others, let me just say I’m just learning a little a I write and any corrections or comments from your ‘bright brains’ are very welcome or from any others. It’s been interesting and I think the understanding of jhana (and path) factors, both kusala and akusala as conditions at this moment is very useful, even if it’s mostly theoretical for now! Best wishes, Sarah 7816 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:20pm Subject: Anusaya-latent tendencies-Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Yes, I read Jim's earlier post and appreciated it. > Somehow, though, your post citing N.'s footnote > (again?) really helped to clarify this. yes, sometimes it has to be the right note at the right time....;-)) > > Something I still don't understand is a question I > asked once before (Nina kindly responded). I wonder > if it would be accurate to say that the bhavangas > don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but still > pass along (potential) subtle defilements (anusaya). > Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated kamma > etc. could continue to be passed along from each citta > to the next, creating (among other things) the > illusion of continuity. yes, all the anusaya are passed along from citta to citta regardless of which jati (plane) the citta is (i.e whether kusala- wholesome, akusala-unwholesome, vipaka-result or kiriya-inoperative), so even with the bhavanga cittas, with no gap or interval between them. We have to go back to the paccaya (conditions) to understand the intricacies of how this happens and how the citta arising now could not be any other citta than it is. Excuse this brief answer for now (I'm jhana-ed out)! Others may add more detail too. Thanks for your other comments about the comentaries, Mike. Btw when I mentioned the verse in 'Good Grief' posts was a little more tricky, I didn't realise how tricky;-)) Speak soon, Sarah 7817 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Ranil, --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > This is a wonderful post. I learned from it a lot. Thank you and all who > participated in this discussion. I appreciate your kind comments and thank you for participating by reading and reflecting;-)) Look forward to hearing more from you. Sarah > > > From: Michael Chu < > > > Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm > > > Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting > > > meditation 7818 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Kenneth, You're another one who has slipped in quietly I believe?? That's fine and you're very welcome. I'm enjoying (yes, plenty of attachment for sure) your posts with Robert E and others. If you also care to tell us a little more about your'self' and dhamma background and where you live, that would be interesting too... Btw, I can't fault what you've written here!! Best regards, Sarah --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > Kind regards > > Kenneth 7819 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 5:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Hi Anders, I’ll keep this pretty brief as I know you’re busy and trying to take a break;-)) --- Anders Honore wrote: > > So soon? The Pali Canon was compiled centuries after his Parinibbana, > and I'll bet the commentaries are even later. It is always easy to > slap the label "300 arahants" on them commentators to canonify their > writings as well, but I do not take such statements on blind > authority (nor do I take the Mahayana teachings on blind authority). I think I’ve answered this (as best I can without more research)in my note to Mike under the same heading.... > > Well, writings such as the Mahaparinirvana Sutra does not even make > any pretense: It says outright that there is a self (Nirvana/Buddha- > nature). Prominent figures such as Nagarjuna (who, if aybody, must be > regarded as "canon" within Mahayana) said the same thing. > As I have stated several times here, I have found no place whatsoever > in the Pali Canon that says that there categorically no self. The > only thing that comes close is the "Sabbe dhamma anatta", but as we > know "dhamma" is pretty much a catch-all prhase which can mean a > multitude of things. There a loads of suttas in which the Buddha > explains in great detail how all conditioned dhammas are anatta > (where he basically goes trhough the entire chain of dependent co- > origination), but he never once mentions Nibbbana specifically in > relation to annatta. The Buddha encourages us to understand the paramattha dhammas which are appearing now and can be known now. These are the conditioned realities appearing through the 6 doorways which as you said, should be known by panna. He doesn’t talk about a primal mind or bodhi citta appearing through one of these doorways because these are concepts, along with nibbana (until realised) that cannot be known directly. The concern in the teachings is with realities to be known right now. > Again, how does your own understanding of anatta accord with the > criterions in the Kalama sutta? When I read any of the suttas (from the difficult one I was discussing with Mike and Kom to the Satipatthana sutta or Kalama sutta to any others), they are all about paramattha dhammas, the understanding of these dhammas as anatta and the development of satipatthana and vipassana. Different suttas have a different emphasis according to the audience at the time. In the Kalama Sutta, the emphasis is on understanding directly those states which are wholesome and those which are unwholesome, those which bring ‘good’ results and those which bring ‘bad’ results. As I just stressed on the tricky jhana post, there cannot be any bhavana (mental development or meditation) of either samatha or vipassana if there is no understanding of the difference between wholesome and unwholesome moments. When I read these suttas, they remind me right now to develop awareness and understand whether the citta which is directing these words and the acompanying mental states are wholesome or unwholesome. Are we lost in stories now? Is there seeing and visible object now? Is there any self or primal mind in the seeing or is it just the nama which experiences an object for a moment, and then gone? Very much look forward to more in due course, Anders. Sarah 7820 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Rob E, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a > > necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with stiff hips > > or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;--)) ;--)) > > My immediate response is 'no' and then my secondary response is 'yes'. > I think > it's 'no' in the sense that no physical obstacle should be sufficient to > bar > someone from exercising mindfulness. On the other hand, I can't say > that > meditating lying down is going to have the same effect as meditating > sitting up, > or that slumping over is going to have the same effect as sitting up > straight, or > that sitting with tension in body and breathing is going to have the > same effect > as sitting with gentle uprightness. > > I am not aware of what the Buddha said on posture and position, but I > know that if > I sit cross-legged on the floor and watch the breath it is a very > different > experience in some ways than what happens if I lie down [which I do when > falling > asleep] and watch the breath. In the Satipatthana Sutta (in the section on The Modes of Deportment), the Buddha had this to say about posture and position: "And further, O bhikkhus, when he is going, a bhikkhu understands: 'I am going'; when he is standing, he understands: 'I am standing'; when he is sitting, he understands: 'I am sitting'; when he is lying down, he understands: 'I am lying down'; or just as his body is disposed so he understands it…. Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body…." The 4 postures and positions described here--going, standing sitting and lying down--between them cover all postures that may be assumed at any time. This helps us to understand that satipatthana (ie. mundane insight) is not limited as to posture or time. Nor is it limited as to kind of activity. In the same sutta, Section on The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, the Buddha said: "And further, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practising clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practising clear comprehension; in bending and in stretching, … in wearing the robes and bowl, … in regard to what is eaten, drunk, chewed and savoured, … in defecating and in urinating, … in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practising clear comprehension. … Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body…" This likewise covers all activities at any time of the day. So although things do seem different depending on whether we are, for example, sitting or lying down, being quiet or rushing around, with the family or 'in practice', satipatthana as taught by the Buddha is something that cuts across all these differences. It is something that is independent of situation or occasion. It can be useful to ask ourselves whether our understanding of what satipatthana is consistent with this, or whether we have an idea of satipatthana that requires that certain conditions as to posture, activity or time need to be satisfied in order for it to arise. Jon 7821 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Binh) - > This is an interesting sutta you quote below, particularly the > last > paragraph, apparently indicating a jhana-less approach to arahantship: On my reading, 2 of the 4 approaches given here (ie. numbers 2 and 4 below) indicate a jhana-less approach. (By 'jhana-less' I mean in the sense of not requiring prior development of mundane jhana. But all 4 ways are accompanied by concentration that is jhana-equivalent in its force.) Here are the 4 ways again, with extracts from footnotes to the translation [passages in square brackets are mine]: 1. After developing samatha The footnote says that this refers to one who makes tranquillity the vehicle of his practice (samatha-yaanika). Tranquillity here refers to access concentration, the jhanas or the formless attainments. 2. Before developing samatha The commentary reads: "This refers to one who by his natural bent first attains to insight and then, based on insight produces concentration (samadhi)." The sub-com reads: "This is one who makes insight the vehicle (vipassanaa-yaanika)." 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha [This is the instance of insight being 'based on' jhana. The insight arises after emerging from jhana, and takes the jhana moments as its object. This is the 'yoked/conjoined' instance.]. 4. By overcoming the corruptions (ie without any part being played by samatha) The footnote reads: 'According to AA [the commentary], the "agitation" (uddhacca) meant here is a reaction to the arising of the ten "corruptions of insight" when they are wrongly taken as indication path-attainment. The term dhammavitakka, "thoughts about higher states" is taken to refer to the same ten corruptions. …' Regarding the 4th way just given, you observe: > AN IV, 165 > Translation 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha' > 83. Ways to Arahantship > "Or again, friends, a monk's mind is seized by agitation caused by > higher > states of mind. But there comes a time when his mind becomes internally > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated; then the path arises in > him. . He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he > is > doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies > eliminated." > ************************************************* > The questions that occur to me are the following: > > 1) What is meant by "higher states of mind"? > > 2) What sort of agitation would arise as a result of them? > > 3) Exactly what is the state wherein one's "mind becomes > internally > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated"? It sounds like it *could* be > access concentration or khanika samadhi (moment-to-moment > concentration). > That would be interesting. This would, indeed, suggest an approach to > complete enlightenment, one out of four, that does not have jhanic > attainment > as a requirement at all, though it still requires a strong and rather > stable > one-pointedness of mind. Your questions (1) and (2) are covered by the footnote, I think. On your Q.3, we need to keep in mind the distinction between samatha and samadhi. Samatha bhavana (tranquillity development) refers to the development of kusala by concentration on a single object, eventually to a degree of absorption in the object where all sense-door impressions, and the akusala associated with those experiences, are suppressed. Being (temporarily) freed from akusala, the mind becomes exceedingly tranquil. Samadhi cetasika (concentration mental factor) is a cetasika whose function is to fix the citta on whatever object is the object of the citta at that moment. It accompanies every citta. At moments of enlightenment (magga citta) samadhi cetasika arises and performs its function with an intensity equivalent to that of the jhanas. It is developed to this 'jhana-equivalent' level during the course of the development of mundane insight over the many (millions of) lifetimes it has taken to attain to enlightenment. In other words, every moment of satipatthana during this lifetime means the further development and accumulation of khanika samadhi. So, yes, it may well be that 'concentration' in the passage from the sutta refers to khanika samadhi; but this does not connote the development of samatha bhavana. I think the important point to realise about all this is as follows, if my understanding is correct: Regardless of which of the 4 ways of enlightenment one is talking about, attainment of supramundane path consciousness (enlightenment) is always the culmination of the development of mundane path consciousness (ie. mundane insight--vipassana bhavana). In other words, it is not the culmination of samatha bhavana. Even those whose attainment is 'based on' jhana (No. 3 in the series above) cannot attain unless mundane insight has been developed to the necessary degree. So on a practical level, it always comes back to the development of awareness of realities appearing at the present moment, as taught in the Satipatthana Sutta--for this is how mundane insight is developed. Jon 7822 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief!- Num Correction: --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Num, > > Those who wish to read more can do so at: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > I meant to add that those who wished to read in more detail can do so in 'Conditions' by Nina Van Gorkom at this website. (A lot easier to digest than the Pathana, imho;-)) 7823 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 8:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation Thanks Sarah, From your post I learnt the following important point: No point of comparing myself with others (even to the extent of the status of the mind.). I am myself and I am where I am and I have to act according to that state of mind or the situation ...etc. Ofcoures I knew it throuht my life but your post made me really understand it. It was like a missing peace which made the picture complete. Also, yesterday I heard in a sermon over here in Sri Lanka (from Rev. Uduwe Dhammaloka) that when ever you are in troble, having problems...etc Buddha has told to do 2 things. 1. To adhere to the five percepts 2. Try to control your mind No 1 will solve most of the problems itseems. for example you may end all the lies you have told and you have to tell just by telling the truth once (ofcourse there might be a bomb blast after you tell the truth but at least your problem is going to be over) and you may stop drinking is you are in to drinking. And by no 2 you can avoid yourself falling into more problems by being mindful. But again we have to use the above wisely. Should not tell the truth like a fool. Now I have to ask this. There are some situations in life that it may seem easier not to tell the truth. Say like this. If I tell the truth another person will get hurt. If I dont tell, I will get hurt. So I will not tell the truth because the other person will get hurt. How should these situations be handled? ~meththa to you and all Ranil >From: "ranil gunawardena" >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation >Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2001 05:47:34 > >Hi Sarah, > >This is a wonderful post. I learned from it a lot. Thank you and all who >participated in this discussion. > >~mettha >Ranil > > > >From: Sarah > > > >Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation > >Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2001 17:57:06 +0800 (CST) > > > >Dear Mike C, > > > >thank you very much for your post and comments below (and thanks Frank >for > >your > >help). > > > > > From: Michael Chu < > > > Date: Thu Aug 30, 2001 5:13 pm > > > Subject: cultivation style and the need for sitting > > > meditation > > > > > Dear Sara and all, > > >> > > > I am very lazy at my practice of meditation. I > > > average about fifteen > > > minutes of meditation every other day. Comparing > > > myself to my fellow > > > cultivator friends, namely Frank and William, who do > > > at least one hour of > > > sitting meditation each day continuously for several > > > years, I have noticed > > > their ability to be mindful and serene far exceed > > > mine. > > > >Mike, may I make 2 quick comments here? I don’t think it’s very fruitful >to > >compare yourself with others. Doesn’t this just lead to thoughts of > >inferiority > >(in this case) and unhappy feelings? Secondly, do we ever really know > >another’s > >state of mind? isn’t it hard enough to know when we’re really calm or >have > >mindfulness as opposed to a pleasant feeling or subtle clinging? We can > >never > >tell in another just be the appearance or posture what the state of mind > >is. > > > > > > I personally noticed that lacking the mindfulness of > > > cultivation from > > > meditation, I am having a much more difficult time > > > progressing in the Noble > > > Eightfold Path compare to my peers. On the > > > concentration group, I can only > > > sporadically address my present moment with the right > > > effort, mindfulness, > > > and concentration. Without the appropriate > > > concentration, I find myself to > > > have further difficulty achieving the right speech and > > > action. > > > >Mike, i think you have the right idea when you recognise that the time >for > >mindfulness is the present moment. However, it seems that you have an >idea > >of a > >‘self’ that should be able to progress, concentrate, be mindful and >achieve > >rt > >speech and action. When we mind so much about these states, doesn’t it >also > >show how much we cling to ME, myself. Doesn’t it show how much we’d like >to > >be > >the mindful, concentrated one with good speech and action? > > > >What about when we compare or wish to have mindfulness, being aware of >the > >clinging to self at these times? Wouldn’t that be a little progress? >People > >have the idea that concentration should be fixing undistractedly on an > >object . > >But in what way is it pure or wholesome when this happens? There is > >concentration all the time, even when we’re distracted (according to the > >Teachings). > > > > My progress > > > of having the right understanding, thought, and speech > > > is also hindered. By > > > lacking the right understanding, I find myself making > > > poor plans for my > > > livelihood. My clarity of mind is always compromised. > > > >We all lack right understanding most the time, Mike. Recognizing how >little > >understanding there is, is a really good start. Actually, I think the >more > >understanding develops, the more it sees what real beginners we are. As >one > >of > >our members, suggested, we think we know and then there’s a little > >breakthrough > >and we realise it was all wrong after all! For understanding to really > >develop, > >we need to hear and consider more about what are the actual phenomena >that > >can > >be known. > > > >When we talk about livelihood plans, we can talk about them from many > >angles. > >Frank is considering taking early retirement and living in a forest. Form >a > >conventional point of view, these would be poor livelihood decisions. >From > >a > >Buddhist point of view, it would depend on the intentions and motivations > >involved, because in Buddhism, we’re always more concerned with the >present > >state of mind than ‘the story’. I hope your livlihood works out better in > >both > >regards! > > > > > > I also noticed lacking the ability to be mindful even > > > hinders the right > > > breathing and induces undesirable states like > > > sluggishness, impatience, > > > restlessness, and anger. I can only so far only be > > > able to do a limited > > > form of damage control on these undesirable states > > > when I occasionally > > > remember to stay away from them. Another thing I > > > noticed is that these > > > undesirable statements can be quickly terminated if I > > > catch them on their > > > early stages. To be able to catch the arising of > > > these undesirable states, > > > we need to be mindful. > > > >It seems that we can ‘catch’ them or stop them arising and >conventionally, > >this > >is often true. Hence we say to a child ‘snap out of it’ and the child > >sometimes > >does! On a deeper level, however, we can see we’re pretty much stuck with > >our > >‘character’ and inclinations, so that sooner or later these negative >states > >will arise again and again in spite of good intentions. Why is this? > >Because > >they have been gathering for so very long and are not controllable. Even >if > >mindfulness is mindful of the anger or impatience for a moment, what >about > >next > >moment? > > > >Again, may I suggest, that the reason we mind so much about these states >is > >not > >usually because we see the danger of ALL kinds of unwholesomeness, but > >because > >the ones you’ve mentioned are unpleasant and we cling so much to a self! > >When > >we’re having a great time and there’s no anger or impatience, do we mind > >about > >the excitement and attachment? What about all the ignorance in between? > > > > > >> The very reason why we should apply appropriate > > > mindfulness and catch the > > > arising anger before it gets any bigger and out of > > > control. > > > > > > So far the best way to achieve mindfulness that I know > > > of is through > > > practicing proper meditation. If you have any > > > suggestion that we can better > > > achieve mindfulness, I would love to know. > > > >Actually, Mike, there is no self to apply mindfulness or do anything. >This > >doesn’t mean ‘give up’ and it doesn't mean 'sit' or 'don't sit', it means > >learn > >more about what mindfulness really is, what the objects of mindfulness >are > >and > >develop understanding (by understanding , not doing) of these same > >realities at > >any time. This is what I call bhavana or meditation. > > > >One or two practical suggestions: > > > >1) Join DSG, go to ‘Useful Posts’ at this link and scroll down to ‘new to > >Dhamma’ for some suggestions or other topics that look interesting. > > > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > > >2) Keep asking questions here....be patient for replies and ignore posts > >that > >are too technical for now. > > > >3) Go to this website and read anything that doesn’t seem too hard > >http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > > > >Hope to hear more form you, > > > >Best wishes, > >Sarah > > > > 7824 From: frank kuan Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 1:31am Subject: Can we enjoy without attachment? My comments are at the end. -fk [ken] > Whenever you are attached to either good 'feel' or bad 'feel' about the > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things you do, they are still > attachement. Attachments = dukka [rob e] Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would just say that I think it is possible to enjoy something without being attached to it. What do you think? [ken] > In my humble opinion as long as there is an an ego, whenever/whatever we enjoy, > there will be an attachment. Sometimes it is very subtle that we could not > observe it. Technically speaking when we enjoy something, there is an attachment > because there arise a feeling of pleasure, be it observable or subtle. Hence in > my personal perspective, I do not think we could at present enjoy something > without being not attached to it. If we are detach from what we are doing, then > the feeling of pleasure will not arise because we are not attached. And again > techniccally speaking this means there will not be any enjoyment as there is no > arise a feeling of pleasure. [rob e] I am no expert, but it seems to me, Kenneth, that you are equating pleasureable feelings or sensations with attachment itself. It seems to me for the path to function through mindfulness, there must be a possibility of any experience being able to be non-attached to through looking at it with awareness and becoming aware of its characteristics of not-self, emptiness and impermanence. Does seeing the insubstantial nature of an object or experience remove the sensation or feeling of pleasure, and does pleasure or enjoyment only arise as an outgrowth of attachment? These are interesting questions. I think that it is possible to enjoy something but not cling to it and to let it go when it is over. I think this is more possible when encountering it with mindfulness and not getting absorbed by the experience. I recognize that this would be hard, however, and if you are saying mainly that in our current state this would be extremely unlikely, then I can understand your point of view. But if one is free of attachment, I do not imagine that this person would necessarily be like a robot, seeing what is there but with absolutely no experience of a response to it. Can one have a response and be non-attached at the same time? That is again an interesting question which I am not in a position to answer. I have met a few people in my life whom I believe by reputation and experience were enligthtened, and they were certainly capable of laughing at a joke or enjoying a meal. They merely did not have a notion of self or dharma being real or self-existent. Although I am anxious to let go of clingings and attachments, to objects as well as views, [as well as the one I am expressing here ], I want to also be careful not to fall into annihilationism and to think that I must therefore hold onto aversion to those things. I think it was the ascetics that Buddha criticized for being so averse to psychophysical clinging that they abused and neglected their bodies, and that this did not create an appropriate state of mind for realization. [mike nease] Attachment (as I understand it in this context) refers to identification with one of the khandhas. Since there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be attached, I think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) to a khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), or clinging to (identification with) a pleasant feeling. A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without lobha (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm enjoying this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I think--but maybe that's just 'me'. "The Tathagata enjoys non-ill will, delights in non-ill will. To him -- enjoying non-ill will, delighting in non-ill will -- this thought often occurs: 'By this activity I harm no one at all, whether weak or firm.' "The Tathagata enjoys seclusion, delights in seclusion. To him -- enjoying seclusion, delighting in seclusion -- this thought often occurs: 'Whatever is unskillful is abandoned.' Itivuttaka 38 The Group Of Twos http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/itivuttaka/iti2.html It seems to me that sukkha vedanaa will arise when the conditions for it exist (I don't know think that attachment is a necessary condition for pleasant feeling), even when there is no ego--just that lobha and vedanna upaadaana won't arise. But maybe I'm mistaken. What do you think? Thanks for letting me join in your discussion. [rob e] Thanks, Mike, I appreciate the discussion. It's sort of an important topic to me, and I'll try to explain why. I understand your point, and I probably agree, that for us folks on the way here it's probably a long shot to have enjoyments without attachment or unpleasant experiences without aversion. But it's important to me to point at a model of experience that does not involve being attached to aversion or averse to attachment. It seems to me that if the model is 'anti-experience' based on the addictive nature of experience, that new karmic effects are created on top of the ones that already need to be released. I am saying that when enjoyment or pleasure arises, that the subtle response 'I shouldn't be enjoying this because it will cause attachment' may be in the mind of the practitioner, and that this is a mistake. That this is not an expression of mindfulness but of thought-reaction to what is arising. If one instead takes the attitude that I believe the Buddha prescribes, if I am correct, one would simply want to say: 'See pleasure as pleasure, and if attachment is present, see attachment as attachment', etc. I think that it is important to not only look at primary attachment and aversion, but attachment to aversion and aversion to attachment. I would consider these a practioner's problems, because they would only arise for someone who sincerely cared about the path. But I think they're very important to someone who has already committed themselves to not feeding attachment. Does any of this make sense? [rob e commenting on sutta references] Thanks, Mike. I think these are good examples of Buddha describing a kind of benign enjoyment and delight, and is part of what I was hinting at. It may be for advanced states only, but is still something to understand, so that we don't see all pleasant experience as being inherently expressions of attachment. Wouldn't it be a shame if we were meant to enjoy, without attachment, the subtle flavor of the advanced portion of the path to enlightenment, and instead suppressed this, thinking it erroneously to represent attachment? Perhaps lower enjoyments that attach us to the things of the world are suspect, but the enjoyment of the path itself may not be attached, but may be natural expressions of the correct mood on the way to Nirvana. I also recall some discussion of the jhanas or other progressive states where it is mentioned in each stage how pleasant and enjoyable each state is. Perhaps someone else can remind me where the Buddha speaks this way. [fk] I don't have anything enlightening to add, just some more thoughts to add to the confusion :-) 1) Rob E already beat me to the punch, but looking at how the progressive jhana states become more subtle and the pleasure is more refined, moving from physical pleasure toward mental bliss towards pure equanimity, it gives us an idea of what kind of pleasure the noble ones could "enjoy without attachment". 2) On a mundane level, even the noble ones experience pleasant, unpleasant, and neither pleasant nor unpleasant feelings. 3) Often, when non-noble ones and people who haven't attained proficiency in the jhanas start pulling the "enjoyment without attachment" card, I seriously wonder if there is just a rationalization to pleasure seek. (not attacking or accusing anyone here, if anything, I have to guard myself from that tendency :-) An excerpt from Samyutta I just read last night that always helps me to put things in perspective: page 648, first volume BB translation: "Bhikkhus, one who seeks delight in the earth element seeks delight in suffering. ONe who seeks delight in suffering, I say , is not freed from suffering. (repeat for other 3 elements of form aggregate...) One who does not seek delight in the earth element does not seek delight in suffering. ONe who does not seek delight in suffering, I say, is freed from suffering." -fk 7825 From: Howard Date: Mon Sep 3, 2001 11:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Jon - Thank you for this! It is a very detailed, informative, and reasonable (to me) offering. Much appreciated! I have a brief question and brief comment. The question pertains to: ********************************* 1. After developing samatha The footnote says that this refers to one who makes tranquillity the vehicle of his practice (samatha-yaanika). Tranquillity here refers to access concentration, the jhanas or the formless attainments. ******************************** (Is the last sentence part of the footnote? It surprises me that access concentration is included here.) My comment pertains to: ********************************** 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha [This is the instance of insight being 'based on' jhana. The insight arises after emerging from jhana, and takes the jhana moments as its object. This is the 'yoked/conjoined' instance.]. ********************************* (This is the approach reportedly taken by Sariputta.) ============================= With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/3/01 8:38:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Binh) - > > This is an interesting sutta you quote below, particularly the > > last > > paragraph, apparently indicating a jhana-less approach to arahantship: > > On my reading, 2 of the 4 approaches given here (ie. numbers 2 and 4 > below) indicate a jhana-less approach. (By 'jhana-less' I mean in the > sense of not requiring prior development of mundane jhana. But all 4 ways > are accompanied by concentration that is jhana-equivalent in its force.) > > Here are the 4 ways again, with extracts from footnotes to the translation > [passages in square brackets are mine]: > > 1. After developing samatha > The footnote says that this refers to one who makes tranquillity the > vehicle of his practice (samatha-yaanika). Tranquillity here refers to > access concentration, the jhanas or the formless attainments. > > 2. Before developing samatha > The commentary reads: "This refers to one who by his natural bent first > attains to insight and then, based on insight produces concentration > (samadhi)." The sub-com reads: "This is one who makes insight the > vehicle (vipassanaa-yaanika)." > > 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha > [This is the instance of insight being 'based on' jhana. The insight > arises after emerging from jhana, and takes the jhana moments as its > object. This is the 'yoked/conjoined' instance.]. > > 4. By overcoming the corruptions (ie without any part being played by > samatha) > The footnote reads: 'According to AA [the commentary], the "agitation" > (uddhacca) meant here is a reaction to the arising of the ten "corruptions > of insight" when they are wrongly taken as indication path-attainment. > The term dhammavitakka, "thoughts about higher states" is taken to refer > to the same ten corruptions. …' > > Regarding the 4th way just given, you observe: > > > AN IV, 165 > > Translation 'Numerical Discourses of the Buddha' > > 83. Ways to Arahantship > > "Or again, friends, a monk's mind is seized by agitation caused by > > higher > > states of mind. But there comes a time when his mind becomes internally > > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated; then the path arises in > > him. . He now pursues, develops and cultivates that path, and while he > > is > > doing so the fetters are abandoned and the underlying tendencies > > eliminated." > > ************************************************* > > The questions that occur to me are the following: > > > > 1) What is meant by "higher states of mind"? > > > > 2) What sort of agitation would arise as a result of them? > > > > 3) Exactly what is the state wherein one's "mind becomes > > internally > > steadied, composed, unified and concentrated"? It sounds like it *could* > be > > access concentration or khanika samadhi (moment-to-moment > > concentration). > > That would be interesting. This would, indeed, suggest an approach to > > complete enlightenment, one out of four, that does not have jhanic > > attainment > > as a requirement at all, though it still requires a strong and rather > > stable > > one-pointedness of mind. > > Your questions (1) and (2) are covered by the footnote, I think. > > On your Q.3, we need to keep in mind the distinction between samatha and > samadhi. > > Samatha bhavana (tranquillity development) refers to the development of > kusala by concentration on a single object, eventually to a degree of > absorption in the object where all sense-door impressions, and the akusala > associated with those experiences, are suppressed. Being (temporarily) > freed from akusala, the mind becomes exceedingly tranquil. > > Samadhi cetasika (concentration mental factor) is a cetasika whose > function is to fix the citta on whatever object is the object of the citta > at that moment. It accompanies every citta. At moments of enlightenment > (magga citta) samadhi cetasika arises and performs its function with an > intensity equivalent to that of the jhanas. It is developed to this > 'jhana-equivalent' level during the course of the development of mundane > insight over the many (millions of) lifetimes it has taken to attain to > enlightenment. In other words, every moment of satipatthana during this > lifetime means the further development and accumulation of khanika > samadhi. > > So, yes, it may well be that 'concentration' in the passage from the sutta > refers to khanika samadhi; but this does not connote the development of > samatha bhavana. > > I think the important point to realise about all this is as follows, if my > understanding is correct: > > Regardless of which of the 4 ways of enlightenment one is talking about, > attainment of supramundane path consciousness (enlightenment) is always > the culmination of the development of mundane path consciousness (ie. > mundane insight--vipassana bhavana). In other words, it is not the > culmination of samatha bhavana. Even those whose attainment is 'based on' > jhana (No. 3 in the series above) cannot attain unless mundane insight has > been developed to the necessary degree. > > So on a practical level, it always comes back to the development of > awareness of realities appearing at the present moment, as taught in the > Satipatthana Sutta--for this is how mundane insight is developed. > > 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) 7826 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 6:02am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Jon, I appreciate your comments, and I would expect that Buddha would account for mindfulness being cultivated within all of the activities of living. At the same time, it still seems that certain attentional or energetic correspondences to the meditative process do indeed take place when sitting on the floor with gently upright spine. I would ask, if all positions are equally good for cultivating satipatthana, why is it that everyone who wants to practice serious Buddhist meditation sits cross-legged on the floor? Or at least most do........ I would be seriously interested in your answer. Whatever the answer is, I will still agree, even if sitting in the traditional way is necessary, it doesn't mean that mindfulness cannot be cultivated the rest of the time, or that there aren't other ways of doing it. I'm just looking for the special significance that this posture and bearing seems to have on promoting mindfulness, samatha and insight. Best, Robert E. --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > You raise an interesting point. If samatha/jhana 'practice' is a > > > necessary part of the development of the path, is a person with stiff > hips > > > or jogger's knees handicapped in the quest for enlightenment?! ;--)) > ;--)) > > > > My immediate response is 'no' and then my secondary response is 'yes'. > > I think > > it's 'no' in the sense that no physical obstacle should be sufficient to > > bar > > someone from exercising mindfulness. On the other hand, I can't say > > that > > meditating lying down is going to have the same effect as meditating > > sitting up, > > or that slumping over is going to have the same effect as sitting up > > straight, or > > that sitting with tension in body and breathing is going to have the > > same effect > > as sitting with gentle uprightness. > > > > I am not aware of what the Buddha said on posture and position, but I > > know that if > > I sit cross-legged on the floor and watch the breath it is a very > > different > > experience in some ways than what happens if I lie down [which I do when > > falling > > asleep] and watch the breath. > > In the Satipatthana Sutta (in the section on The Modes of Deportment), the > Buddha had this to say about posture and position: > > "And further, O bhikkhus, when he is going, a bhikkhu understands: 'I am > going'; > when he is standing, he understands: 'I am standing'; > when he is sitting, he understands: 'I am sitting'; > when he is lying down, he understands: 'I am lying down'; > or just as his body is disposed so he understands it…. > Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body…." > > The 4 postures and positions described here--going, standing sitting and > lying down--between them cover all postures that may be assumed at any > time. This helps us to understand that satipatthana (ie. mundane insight) > is not limited as to posture or time. > > Nor is it limited as to kind of activity. In the same sutta, Section on > The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, the Buddha said: > > "And further, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a > person practising clear comprehension; > in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person > practising clear comprehension; > in bending and in stretching, … in wearing the robes and bowl, … in regard > to what is eaten, drunk, chewed and savoured, … in defecating and in > urinating, … in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in > sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person > practising clear comprehension. … > Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body…" > > This likewise covers all activities at any time of the day. > > So although things do seem different depending on whether we are, for > example, sitting or lying down, being quiet or rushing around, with the > family or 'in practice', satipatthana as taught by the Buddha is something > that cuts across all these differences. It is something that is > independent of situation or occasion. > > It can be useful to ask ourselves whether our understanding of what > satipatthana is consistent with this, or whether we have an idea of > satipatthana that requires that certain conditions as to posture, activity > or time need to be satisfied in order for it to arise. > > Jon > > > > > ===== 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" 7827 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 8:50am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: toeing the party line....;-) Thanks, Ken, --- Ken wrote: > Mike > > You wrote; > > " . . . These rebukes of the Buddha are always > bracingly instructive. I've read this one before, > (though I think the translation was 'you foolish > man'), but forget the source--can you cite it?" > Gladly. The reference given by Walpola Rahula > ("What the > Buddha Taught" p24), for the Mahatanhasamkhaya-sutta > is > M I (PTS), p256 ff. > > I tried to find it on the net but without success. Here's a link, mistakenly identified on the home page as the cula, rather than the mahaa: "Foolish man, to whom do you know me having preached this Teaching. Haven’t I told, in various ways that consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, you foolish man, because of your wrong grasp, blame me, destroy yourself, and accumulate much demerit and that will be for your undoing and unpleasantness for a long time". http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/037-culatanhasankhaya-sutta-e1.htm > Are you making a collection of these rebukes? No, but I think it's a great idea. Someday, maybe! > I'd > like to make a > collection of the various ways of seeing the Four > Foundations of > Mindfulness as "the Middle Way." Your recent > comment; "In this > context I think satipatthaana could be called the > middle path > between 'dealing with akusala' and ignoring it," > will make a good > start. Thanks again, but I owe the idea entirely to the patience of the 'elders' of dsg--I would never have come to this (tentative) conclusion without their patient encouragement. mike 7828 From: frank k Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 9:22am Subject: Re: Simile of saw, evil/kind mistress, right speech Thanks for the correction Robert. I also want to clarify that I'm not opposed to the extremely graphic similes that the Buddha uses across the board. It's just that particular one with the saw that I didn't connect with. In other suttas, the graphic nature of some of the similes really serves to emphasize the importance of the topic. An example: in the MN simile comparing the painful burning side effects of leprosy to sensual desire, that analogy is just SO PERFECT. If you guys don't know which one I'm talking about, write me an offline email and I'll post an excerpt from it when I have more free time. -fk --- Robert wrote: > Dear Frank, > I agree with the gist of your post. Just a small correction. the > commentary to the sutta about the monk who committed suicide notes > that the monk was not yet enlightened when he cut his throat. The > pain was an object for satipatthana and he went though the vippasana > insights and stages of enlightenment from the time of cutting his > throat and before finally collapsing and dieing. It can happen very > fast when the conditions are right. 7829 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 9:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Dear Robert, As usual we're generally in agreement. --- Robert Epstein wrote: > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > > > Hope you don't mind my butting in (again). > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good > 'feel' > > > or bad 'feel' about the > > > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things > you > > > do, they are still > > > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > > > Kind regards > > > > Kenneth > > > > > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would > just > > > say that I think it is possible > > > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Attachment (as I understand it in this context) > refers > > to identification with one of the khandhas. Since > > there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be > attached, I > > think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) > to a > > khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), > or > > clinging to (identification with) a pleasant > feeling. > > > > A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without > lobha > > (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana > > (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm > enjoying > > this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I > > think--but maybe that's just 'me'. > > > > mike > > Thanks, Mike, I appreciate the discussion. It's > sort of an important topic to me, > and I'll try to explain why. I understand your > point, and I probably agree, that > for us folks on the way here it's probably a long > shot to have enjoyments without > attachment or unpleasant experiences without > aversion. But it's important to me > to point at a model of experience that does not > involve being attached to aversion > or averse to attachment. I think we're still in agreement. That model is satipatthaana, as I understand it. That is that, in a moment of satipatthaana, aversion to attachment (or anything else) can't occur--but it can--and reoccur too, many times after (and before and in between). > It seems to me that if the > model is 'anti-experience' > based on the addictive nature of experience, that > new karmic effects are created > on top of the ones that already need to be released. I see your point and if I understand you correctly, agree. That is that, the kammic result (thought, speech or action) of, say, aversion to 'the addictive nature of experience', does add to kamma/vipakka. > I am saying that when > enjoyment or pleasure arises, that the subtle > response 'I shouldn't be enjoying > this because it will cause attachment' may be in the > mind of the practitioner, and > that this is a mistake. Agreed. > That this is not an > expression of mindfulness but of > thought-reaction to what is arising. Agreed. > If one instead > takes the attitude that I > believe the Buddha prescribes, if I am correct, one > would simply want to say: 'See > pleasure as pleasure, and if attachment is present, > see attachment as attachment', > etc. I think that it is important to not only look > at primary attachment and > aversion, but attachment to aversion and aversion to > attachment. Yes, I think so too. I know I don't need to remind you that it's dangerous to think that there's anyone to adopt any attitude. > I would consider > these a practioner's problems, because they would > only arise for someone who > sincerely cared about the path. But I think they're > very important to someone who > has already committed themselves to not feeding > attachment. I think all of these are very real problems (or rather obstacles) not to anyone, but to the arising of understanding (as I think you understand). In any moment lacking satipatthaana, attachment is always, I think, being nourished, but not by you or me. Which opens the door to another (though related) subject, that of 'nourishment'. Don't know much about this. > Does any of this make sense? Yes, all of it--hope I haven't misconstrued your words. My comments are (as usual) vague and imprecise. I mean to correct my own views rather than anyone else's--corrections welcomed. mike 7830 From: Fa Hui Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 6:48am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Hello, My name is Fa Hui, I am a Lay disciple of the Yunmen monastery in China of the Ch'an tradition. However, I do study various elements of the Pali Canon. I came upon this study group through a friend. I would just like to say that you can achieve any meditative absorbtion doing practically anything. What enlightenment means to me is that it is only in this very moment and that the Buddha did not discover the way TO enlightenment but the way OF enlightenment. The only reason that meditation is done a great deal in the cross-legged posture is due to the fact that it was just the posture they used for meditation 2545 years ago. And quite frankly it's still in use, of course. May you reach Enlightenment in this lifetime, Fa Hui 7831 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 11:51am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Can we enjoy without attachment? Dear Frank, Thanks for your helpful assemblage of the discussion on attachment. It looks very interesting when laid out this way. I think we can probably agree that lower pleasures involved in the world probably have a greater chance of arising from and containing attachment than the subtle pleasures of an advanced practitioner who has learned to enjoy seclusion and subtle development of jhanas. This person has already defeated many of the attachments that are most difficult, almost impossible, for most people. I think your ending comment and your ending quote point in two useful directions, so I will repeat them here: ------------------------------ 3) Often, when non-noble ones and people who haven't attained proficiency in the jhanas start pulling the "enjoyment without attachment" card, I seriously wonder if there is just a rationalization to pleasure seek. (not attacking or accusing anyone here, if anything, I have to guard myself from that tendency :-) -------------------------------------- [This is probably true and a useful warning. -Robert E.] -------------------------------------- An excerpt from Samyutta I just read last night that always helps me to put things in perspective: page 648, first volume BB translation: "Bhikkhus, one who seeks delight in the earth element seeks delight in suffering. ONe who seeks delight in suffering, I say , is not freed from suffering. (repeat for other 3 elements of form aggregate...) One who does not seek delight in the earth element does not seek delight in suffering. ONe who does not seek delight in suffering, I say, is freed from suffering." ---------------------------------------------- This quote, Frank, points in the direction of attachment being part and parcel of the involvement in the physical and earthly life. It points to the possibility of seeking delight and pleasure in that which is *not* suffering, and I speculate based on the other quotes in this thread, that Buddha allowed for those higher enjoyments which did not lead to attachment and suffering. I would speculate further that one who was a fully realized Arahat might be able to engage in worldly and physical activities without experiencing attachment, but that is more of a speculation. So far I have nothing to back that idea up. And I have heard a number of comments here that an arahat would not engage in any activities that were unwholesome, so it is a question of what activities would be in the unwholesome category. Is there such a thing as an arahant householder, who continues to live with a spouse and children and continues to have all the involvements of those relationships? Or are all arahats, once fully realized, either monks or recluses? 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" 7832 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 11:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] (to sarah) need for sitting meditation --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > Thanks Sarah, > > From your post I learnt the following important point: > > No point of comparing myself with others (even to the extent of the status > of the mind.). I am myself and I am where I am and I have to act according > to that state of mind or the situation ...etc. > > Ofcoures I knew it throuht my life but your post made me really understand > it. It was like a missing peace which made the picture complete. > > Also, yesterday I heard in a sermon over here in Sri Lanka (from Rev. Uduwe > Dhammaloka) that when ever you are in troble, having problems...etc Buddha > has told to do 2 things. > > 1. To adhere to the five percepts > 2. Try to control your mind > > No 1 will solve most of the problems itseems. for example you may end all > the lies you have told and you have to tell just by telling the truth once > (ofcourse there might be a bomb blast after you tell the truth but at least > your problem is going to be over) and you may stop drinking is you are in to > drinking. > > And by no 2 you can avoid yourself falling into more problems by being > mindful. > > But again we have to use the above wisely. Should not tell the truth like a > fool. > > Now I have to ask this. There are some situations in life that it may seem > easier not to tell the truth. Say like this. If I tell the truth another > person will get hurt. If I dont tell, I will get hurt. So I will not tell > the truth because the other person will get hurt. > > How should these situations be handled? Dear Ranil, Just an idea, but it may be possible to be discreet and withhold harmful information without actually lying or being untruthful. 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" 7833 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 11:57am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > As usual we're generally in agreement. > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > > Dear Robert, > > > > > > Hope you don't mind my butting in (again). > > > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > > --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > > > > > > > Whenever you are attached to either good > > 'feel' > > > > or bad 'feel' about the > > > > > wholesome things you do or unwholesome things > > you > > > > do, they are still > > > > > attachement. Attachments = dukka > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > Kenneth > > > > > > > > Thanks, Kenneth. This makes sense. I would > > just > > > > say that I think it is possible > > > > to enjoy something without being attached to it. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > Attachment (as I understand it in this context) > > refers > > > to identification with one of the khandhas. Since > > > there's really no 'you' to enjoy or to be > > attached, I > > > think the question is, does clinging (upaadaana) > > to a > > > khandha occur (in this case vedanupaadaana(sp?), > > or > > > clinging to (identification with) a pleasant > > feeling. > > > > > > A pleasant feeling (enjoyment?) arising without > > lobha > > > (another kind of attachment) and vedanaa-upaadaana > > > (identification with (pleasant) feeling--"I'm > > enjoying > > > this") is a very long shot for us puthujjanas, I > > > think--but maybe that's just 'me'. > > > > > > mike > > > > Thanks, Mike, I appreciate the discussion. It's > > sort of an important topic to me, > > and I'll try to explain why. I understand your > > point, and I probably agree, that > > for us folks on the way here it's probably a long > > shot to have enjoyments without > > attachment or unpleasant experiences without > > aversion. But it's important to me > > to point at a model of experience that does not > > involve being attached to aversion > > or averse to attachment. > > I think we're still in agreement. That model is > satipatthaana, as I understand it. That is that, in a > moment of satipatthaana, aversion to attachment (or > anything else) can't occur--but it can--and reoccur > too, many times after (and before and in between). > > > It seems to me that if the > > model is 'anti-experience' > > based on the addictive nature of experience, that > > new karmic effects are created > > on top of the ones that already need to be released. > > I see your point and if I understand you correctly, > agree. That is that, the kammic result (thought, > speech or action) of, say, aversion to 'the addictive > nature of experience', does add to kamma/vipakka. > > > I am saying that when > > enjoyment or pleasure arises, that the subtle > > response 'I shouldn't be enjoying > > this because it will cause attachment' may be in the > > mind of the practitioner, and > > that this is a mistake. > > Agreed. > > > That this is not an > > expression of mindfulness but of > > thought-reaction to what is arising. > > Agreed. > > > If one instead > > takes the attitude that I > > believe the Buddha prescribes, if I am correct, one > > would simply want to say: 'See > > pleasure as pleasure, and if attachment is present, > > see attachment as attachment', > > etc. I think that it is important to not only look > > at primary attachment and > > aversion, but attachment to aversion and aversion to > > attachment. > > Yes, I think so too. I know I don't need to remind > you that it's dangerous to think that there's anyone > to adopt any attitude. > > > I would consider > > these a practioner's problems, because they would > > only arise for someone who > > sincerely cared about the path. But I think they're > > very important to someone who > > has already committed themselves to not feeding > > attachment. > > I think all of these are very real problems (or rather > obstacles) not to anyone, but to the arising of > understanding (as I think you understand). In any > moment lacking satipatthaana, attachment is always, I > think, being nourished, but not by you or me. Which > opens the door to another (though related) subject, > that of 'nourishment'. Don't know much about this. > > > Does any of this make sense? > > Yes, all of it--hope I haven't misconstrued your > words. My comments are (as usual) vague and > imprecise. I mean to correct my own views rather than > anyone else's--corrections welcomed. > > mike Dear Mike, I think you understood what I meant to say right down the line. Your caution not to think that these experiences are taking place for someone are also apt. It's easy to imply that there is someone being averse or attached, especially in language. And I won't claim that I don't have a subtle or sometimes not-so-subtle attachment to the idea of self, because that would probably be lying! Robert E. 7834 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 11:59am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Fa Hui wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Fa Hui, I am a Lay disciple of the Yunmen monastery in China of > the Ch'an tradition. However, I do study various elements of the Pali Canon. > I came upon this study group through a friend. Dear Fa Hui, Thank you for your comments. If you wold like to say more about yourself, and the Ch'an work you do as a monk, and how you relate to the Pali Canon, I would be very interested. Best, Robert E. ---------------- > I would just like to say that you can achieve any meditative absorbtion doing > practically anything. What enlightenment means to me is that it is only in > this very moment and that the Buddha did not discover the way TO > enlightenment but the way OF enlightenment. The only reason that meditation > is done a great deal in the cross-legged posture is due to the fact that it > was just the posture they used for meditation 2545 years ago. And quite > frankly it's still in use, of course. > > May you reach Enlightenment in this lifetime, > > Fa Hui > > > > > > > ===== 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" 7835 From: Fa Hui Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 8:15am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Well, I'm not a monk, although my teacher often calls me young monk, I do love to study the dharma. I like a few sutras of the Pali Canon because of their basic application to daily life. Mahasatipatthana, Anapansati, Mahanidana and few others are personal favorites of mine and really contribute to Ch'an practice. These days I really think that we will see the wall between Theravadin and Ch'an crumble and have them be a great way to practice. As I have learned and still learning, mindfulness is the key. Fa Hui 7836 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 0:27pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Fa Hui, Very pleased to meet you. --- Fa Hui wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Fa Hui, I am a Lay disciple of the Yunmen > monastery in China of > the Ch'an tradition. However, I do study various > elements of the Pali Canon. > I came upon this study group through a friend. Our good luck, I think. > I would just like to say that you can achieve any > meditative absorbtion doing > practically anything. Agreed! (Or that, absorption can arise with practically any object). > What enlightenment means to > me is that it is only in > this very moment and that the Buddha did not > discover the way TO > enlightenment but the way OF enlightenment. The > only reason that meditation > is done a great deal in the cross-legged posture is > due to the fact that it > was just the posture they used for meditation 2545 > years ago. Yes--I'm fairly sure that this style of meditation (as well as many others) was commonplace before the Buddhasassana. Please do continue! Best wishes, Sir, mike 7837 From: Binh A Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 1:52pm Subject: Right Concentration (Re: Samatha-Vipassana) G'day, For your information, John Bullitt has just uploaded a Dhamma essay by Ajahn Suwat Suvaco on Right Concentration, translated by Ajahn Thanissaro, at: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/suwat/concentration.html Enjoy reading and contemplating! Metta, Binh 7838 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 2:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach That is true mindulness is the key. But discernment is also impt because it is the door :) To me why do pple sit in mediation. Logically thinking if we lay down, we tend to get sleepy. If we stand up, we tend to get tired easily. If we walk or eat, we tend to get distracted. I think that is why sitting is the prefer method:) Kind regards Kenneth Ong Fa Hui wrote: Well, I'm not a monk, although my teacher often calls me young monk, I do love to study the dharma. I like a few sutras of the Pali Canon because of their basic application to daily life. Mahasatipatthana, Anapansati, Mahanidana and few others are personal favorites of mine and really contribute to Ch'an practice. These days I really think that we will see the wall between Theravadin and Ch'an crumble and have them be a great way to practice. As I have learned and still learning, mindfulness is the key. Fa Hui 7839 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 2:04pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Fa Hui wrote: > Well, I'm not a monk, although my teacher often calls me young monk, I do > love to study the dharma. > > I like a few sutras of the Pali Canon because of their basic application to > daily life. Mahasatipatthana, Anapansati, Mahanidana and few others are > personal favorites of mine and really contribute to Ch'an practice. These > days I really think that we will see the wall between Theravadin and Ch'an > crumble and have them be a great way to practice. As I have learned and > still learning, mindfulness is the key. > > Fa Hui Thanks for your response. I hope you will say more and contribute to the dialogue between Ch'an and Theravada. I have been more oriented towards Ch'an/Zen myself, but I have become very interested in the teachings of the Theravadin path through this group, and reading some of the basic sutras which seem to create very clear and solid foundations and distinctions. Anyway, welcome! Robert E. 7840 From: Ranil Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 3:49pm Subject: Re: (to sarah) need for sitting meditation > Dear Ranil, > Just an idea, but it may be possible to be discreet and withhold harmful > information without actually lying or being untruthful. > > Robert E. Yes Robert, You are correct. Thank you, Ranil 7841 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 3:57pm Subject: The leash Dear group, A favourite sutta: The "Kindred Sayings"(III, Khandha vagga, Middle Fifty, Ch V, par. 99, The Leash) Just as, monks, a dog tied up by a leash to a strong stake or pillar, keeps running round and revolving round and round that stake or pillar, even so, monks, the untaught many folk... regard body as self, regard feeling, perception, activities, consciousness as self... they run and revolve round and round from body to body, from feeling to feeling, from perception to perception, from activities to activities, from consciousness to consciousness...they are not released therefrom, they are not released from rebirth, from old age and decay, from sorrow and grief, from woe, lamentation and despair... they are not released from dukkha, I declare... " The Buddha then says that the ariyan disciple who does not take any dhamma for self is released from dukkha. How does this relate to satipatthana? One of the things that perhaps most of us have been through is the idea that the path involves getting very pure and calm and that this will by itself lead to insight. However, I think we see that this idea can be a type of silabataparamsa. While all kusala - sila, dana and samatha is supportive it is not the same as the path. The firm and right understanding is the most essential element (apart from prior wholesome accumulations, pubbekata punnata); and it takes time to develop. The intellectual understanding supports direct awareness but direct awareness helps the conceptual understanding to grow too. I think it would be hard to have firm understanding of anatta if there had never been direct awareness. Theoretical and direct understanding grow together- and other faculties such as saddha, confidence also naturally become powerful as insight develops. There are also the paramis (perfections leading to enlightenment -see http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm )which are a vital part of the exceedingly long path to parinibbana(the final extinction of nama and rupa). These are very much linked to right understanding though. Take khanti(patience parami): when there is regular, profound contemplation of the khandas one is able to accept anything with patience. One sees that the stories of monks of old who were patient (with awareness )while being killed was not just legend. One of these was a putthujana (worldling) who gained full insight while being devoured by a tiger. One knows that one could endure anything too when panna and sati are present. At those times no dhamma is attached too; whatever appears is experienced with a degree of detachment, each khanda is seen as alien, anatta, uncontrollable, not me or mine. Correspondingly one sees that whenever one is upset or worried or excited, happy or sad over some event, that this is because there is no understanding of the conditioned nature of dhammas, that one is lost in a world of concept, with attachment and ignorance of the true nature of dhammas. The commentary to the UDANA says "it is ignorance since it darts among those things which do not actually exist (i.e.men, women, beings) and since it does not dart among those things that do exist (i.e.it cannot understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas).endquote. This is clear. But one doesn't expect there to be always/often awareness- or even right thinking- because it should be known that this is conditioned- it can't be conjured up. Before learning Dhamma I was good sometimes and bad sometimes - just like now. The difference: it was ALL self. (now only 99.99%) robert 7842 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 5:51pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: >--- Robert Epstein wrote: > Jon, > > > I'm still a little unsure what role sila plays in one's development, > > according to > > Theravada doctrine, and whether one should 'work on' one's impurities or > > just > > leave them alone. Or is the idea to just treat everything with > > mindfulness and > > let things work themselves out. Dear Jon, Once King Kosol met Buddha and asked whether there is one dhamma to achieve nirvana and a good family life both. Buddha said Yes. King Kosol asked what it is? Then Buddha said "Appamado" - Means not to be late. Not to be late for what ? 1. To do things which has to be done 2. To stop things which has to be stoped 1. what has to be done? in very short - Kusala (the opposite of below) 2. what has to be stoped in very short - Akusala (greed, hetred & delution) What is the way to do these two? 1. Sila - good activities in speech and bodyly acts 2. Samadhi - concentration 3. Prangna - wisdom why sila - for happiness (now we are going towards meditation) why happiness - for the feeling of not having the weight of your body (now we are going towards samadhi) why the feeling of not having the weight of your body - for concentration - samadhi (now we are going towards pranngna or wisdom) why concentration - to understand the reality why understand the reality - for not clinging why not clinging - for vimukkthi - releaf from Duka why vimukkthi (releaf from Duka) - for Nirvana :-) Our goal ~meththa Ranil 7843 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 8:57pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Dear Ranil, Thanks for this great post. Appamaada is also translated as 'vigilance' or 'earnestness' and was also one of the very last exhortations of the Buddha. Unless I'm mistaken, it's also a synonym for mindfulness (corrections welcomed). As I understand it, in a moment of mindfulness silaa, samaadhi and paññaa are all present as the mundane path-factors (the eight, minus right speech, action & livelihood as these are not paramattha dhammas--corrections welcomed again). Could you please tell us where to find this sutta in the Tipitaka? Thanks again, mike --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > >--- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Jon, > > > > > I'm still a little unsure what role sila plays > in one's development, > > > according to > > > Theravada doctrine, and whether one should 'work > on' one's impurities or > > > just > > > leave them alone. Or is the idea to just treat > everything with > > > mindfulness and > > > let things work themselves out. > > Dear Jon, > > Once King Kosol met Buddha and asked whether there > is one dhamma to achieve > nirvana and a good family life both. Buddha said > Yes. King Kosol asked what > it is? Then Buddha said "Appamado" - Means not to be > late. > > Not to be late for what ? > 1. To do things which has to be done > 2. To stop things which has to be stoped > > 1. what has to be done? > in very short - Kusala (the opposite of below) > > 2. what has to be stoped > in very short - Akusala (greed, hetred & delution) > > What is the way to do these two? > 1. Sila - good activities in speech and bodyly acts > 2. Samadhi - concentration > 3. Prangna - wisdom > > > > why sila - for happiness > > (now we are going towards meditation) > > why happiness - for the feeling of not having the > weight of your body > > (now we are going towards samadhi) > > why the feeling of not having the weight of your > body - for > concentration - samadhi > > (now we are going towards pranngna or wisdom) > > why concentration - to understand the reality > why understand the reality - for not clinging > why not clinging - for vimukkthi - releaf from Duka > why vimukkthi (releaf from Duka) - for Nirvana :-) > Our goal > > ~meththa > Ranil > > > > > > 7844 From: Fa Hui Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 5:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Oh I agree on that Discernment is just as important. It wouldn't be mindfulness without it. I mean once I started contemplating feelings within the feelings, it really just seem to help a great deal and I felt better too. Fa Hui 7845 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 9:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Howard --- Howard wrote: > Hi, Jon - > > Thank you for this! It is a very detailed, informative, and > reasonable > (to me) offering. Much appreciated! > I have a brief question and brief comment. The question pertains > to: > > ********************************* > 1. After developing samatha > The footnote says that this refers to one who makes tranquillity the > vehicle of his practice (samatha-yaanika). Tranquillity here refers to > access concentration, the jhanas or the formless attainments. > ******************************** > (Is the last sentence part of the footnote? It surprises me that > access concentration is included here.) Yes, straight from the footnote. But no source is given, so presumably it does not come from the commentary to the sutta. (I thought you'd find this snippet interesting!) > My comment pertains to: > > ********************************** > 3. In conjunction with the development of samatha > [This is the instance of insight being 'based on' jhana. The insight > arises after emerging from jhana, and takes the jhana moments as its > object. This is the 'yoked/conjoined' instance.]. > ********************************* > (This is the approach reportedly taken by Sariputta.) Thanks for this comment, Howard Jon 7846 From: Fa Hui Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 5:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Foundations are necessary and thats what I think the teachings of the Pali Canon help to do, lay a really good foundation. Not that Pali or Theravadin is just "basic" but that it has a good basis to start out at so that one can progress and see what's really going on. Fa Hui 7847 From: Anders Honore Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 10:03pm Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Anders, > The Buddha encourages us to understand the paramattha dhammas which are > appearing now and can be known now. These are the conditioned realities > appearing through the 6 doorways which as you said, should be known by panna. > He doesn't talk about a primal mind or bodhi citta appearing through one of > these doorways because these are concepts, along with nibbana (until realised) > that cannot be known directly. The concern in the teachings is with realities > to be known right now. All I can say is that what the Buddha did say was that whenever the was the (false) notion of self, it is always (categorically) in relation to the kandhas. However the most important teaching on this (imo) is that among the false views of self he refuted were: I have a self" as well as "I have no self." > > Again, how does your own understanding of anatta accord with the > > criterions in the Kalama sutta? > > In the Kalama Sutta, the emphasis is on understanding directly those states > which are wholesome and those which are unwholesome, those which bring `good' > results and those which bring `bad' results. As I just stressed on the tricky > jhana post, there cannot be any bhavana (mental development or meditation) of > either samatha or vipassana if there is no understanding of the difference > between wholesome and unwholesome moments. When I read these suttas, they > remind me right now to develop awareness and understand whether the citta which > is directing these words and the acompanying mental states are wholesome or > unwholesome. Are we lost in stories now? Is there seeing and visible object > now? Is there any self or primal mind in the seeing or is it just the nama > which experiences an object for a moment, and then gone? > > Very much look forward to more in due course, Anders. Yes. It's about the direct experience of things. Not the conceptual understanding, which ultimately brings no liberation. How big a role does relinquishing views (of all kinds) feature in your practise? For me it's essential. 7848 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 10:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS dear anders, u said-> > Well, writings such as the Mahaparinirvana Sutra does not even make > any pretense: It says outright that there is a self (Nirvana/Buddha- > nature). I couldnt find this in Mahaparinibbana sutta, if you have time pls help me to get the correct reference. If nibbana is self then there should be I-ness or Mine-ness there, but in Mulpariyaya sutta(MN1) buddha says like this, "There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma -- He perceives Nibbana as Nibbana .Perceiving Nibbana as Nibbana , he conceives things about Nibbana , he conceives things in Nibbana , he conceives things coming out of Nibbana , *he conceives Nibbana as 'mine,' * he delights in Nibbana . Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you. " "A monk who is a trainee (at least a sotapanna[stream-winner], at most an anagamin[non-returner])-- yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled -- He directly knows Nibbana as Nibbana . Directly knowing Nibbana as Nibbana , let him not conceive things about Nibbana , let him not conceive things in Nibbana , let him not conceive things coming out of Nibbana ,* let him not conceive Nibbana as 'mine,'* let him not delight in Nibbana . Why is that? So that he may comprehend it. " "A monk who is a Worthy One(arahant), devoid of mental fermentations -- who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge -- He directly knows Nibbana as Nibbana . Directly knowing Nibbana as Nibbana , he does not conceive things about Nibbana , does not conceive things in Nibbana , does not conceive things coming out of Nibbana , *does not conceive Nibbana as 'mine,'* does not delight in Nibbana . Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you. " rgds gayan 7849 From: Howard Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 7:22pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Hi, Fa Hui - Welcome to the list! In a message dated 9/4/01 12:16:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Fa Hui writes: > Well, I'm not a monk, although my teacher often calls me young monk, I do > love to study the dharma. > > I like a few sutras of the Pali Canon because of their basic application to > daily life. Mahasatipatthana, Anapansati, Mahanidana and few others are > personal favorites of mine and really contribute to Ch'an practice. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Your favorites are probably the favorites of most of those Buddhists who primarily identify themselves as "Theravadin". ---------------------------------------------------------- These > days I really think that we will see the wall between Theravadin and Ch'an > crumble and have them be a great way to practice. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I have long thought that Ch'an was the branch of Mahayana closest to Theravada. By the way, I meditated at a sitting group (and took a brief course) at the Ch'an Center of New York, where the master is Ven.Sheng-Yen. As a Theravadin I felt very comfortable there. (Also, the people there were so lovely that it would be difficult for anyone not tobe comfortable there!) ---------------------------------------------------------- As I have learned and > still learning, mindfulness is the key. > > Fa Hui > ============================ With metta/maitri, 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) 7850 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 11:49pm Subject: Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-Mike Dear Mike, Sarah and Friends How are you? Mike wrote: "I wonder if it would be accurate to say that the bhavangas don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but still pass along (potential) subtle defilements (anusaya). Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated kamma etc. could continue to be passed along from each citta to the next, creating (among other things) the illusion of continuity." For normal human beings, the bhavangas are healthy resultant minds, according to Atthasalini. (Please check my earlier post "Deep Sleep As having Sati for references.) So they won't have any form of defilements. But, when we do serious misdeeds with unhealthy minds, these actions could generate undesirable results (unhealthy resultant minds )and replace healthy bhavangas with unhealthy ones. If one dies with an unhealthy mind, the dying consciousness would be an unhealthy resultant mind for one to be reborn in undesirable circumstances. Having said that, as the bhavangas and the dying consciousness are the resultant minds, even if we die with a healthy dying consciousness for us to be reborn as human beings, it would pass along latent mental defects (anusaya). So your reasoning that bhavangas pass along anusayas is correct because an instance of them would become a dying consciounsess (cuti cittam) eventually. Hope this message makes sense to you! Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- Sarah wrote: > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > > Yes, I read Jim's earlier post and appreciated it. > > Somehow, though, your post citing N.'s footnote > > (again?) really helped to clarify this. > > yes, sometimes it has to be the right note at the right time....;-)) > > > > Something I still don't understand is a question I > > asked once before (Nina kindly responded). I wonder > > if it would be accurate to say that the bhavangas > > don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but still > > pass along (potential) subtle defilements (anusaya). > > Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated kamma > > etc. could continue to be passed along from each citta > > to the next, creating (among other things) the > > illusion of continuity. > > yes, all the anusaya are passed along from citta to citta regardless of which > jati (plane) the citta is (i.e whether kusala- wholesome, akusala- unwholesome, > vipaka-result or kiriya-inoperative), so even with the bhavanga cittas, with no > gap or interval between them. We have to go back to the paccaya (conditions) to > understand the intricacies of how this happens and how the citta arising now > could not be any other citta than it is. Excuse this brief answer for now (I'm > jhana-ed out)! Others may add more detail too. > > Thanks for your other comments about the comentaries, Mike. > > Btw when I mentioned the verse in 'Good Grief' posts was a little more tricky, > I didn't realise how tricky;-)) > > Speak soon, > > Sarah > > 7851 From: Howard Date: Tue Sep 4, 2001 8:16pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Samatha-Vipassana Hi, Jon - In a message dated 9/4/01 9:27:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > ********************************* > > 1. After developing samatha > > The footnote says that this refers to one who makes tranquillity the > > vehicle of his practice (samatha-yaanika). Tranquillity here refers to > > access concentration, the jhanas or the formless attainments. > > ******************************** > > (Is the last sentence part of the footnote? It surprises me that > > access concentration is included here.) > > Yes, straight from the footnote. But no source is given, so presumably it > does not come from the commentary to the sutta. (I thought you'd find > this snippet interesting!) > ===================== Yes. ;-) 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) 7852 From: frank kuan Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 0:22am Subject: SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying There's a section of suttas (repetitive with minor variations) in Samyutta that goes something like this: Buddha: With my ability to emcompass the minds of others with my own mind (i.e. mind reading), I noticed that one of you virtuous monks in this assembly who would not tell a deliberate lie for a silver bowl filled with gold, or tell a lie to save the life of your own mother, has told a lie for the sake of reputation, fame, and honor. -======================= Does anyone know SPECIFICS? Like exactly what the lie is? From the commentary notes, it looks like the motivation would be to have fame among lay supporters so they could be invited more often and for better quality of food, robes, offered. I'm really curious to know exactly what kind of lie, and how subtle the lie, and how subtle their motivation these monks used in seeking fame/honor/reputation. I'm short on time at the moment, but if necessary I can look up exact page numbers and section numbers in the next couple of days. -fk 7853 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 1:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying Hi Frank, Sorry I can't provide the specific lies mentioned in this sutta, but monks performing various kinds of wrong speech and many other shenanigans seems to have been fairly commonplace in the Buddha's time (as in the present time), and often for exactly the reasons you cited from the commentary. If you can get your hands on a copy of the Vinaya, you can read accounts of the amazing array of misdeeds by bhikkhus that led gradually to the creation of the 226 precepts (and then some--many are no longer included in the patimokkha(sp?). It's fascinating reading. mike --- frank kuan wrote: > There's a section of suttas (repetitive with minor > variations) in Samyutta that goes something like > this: > > Buddha: With my ability to emcompass the minds of > others with my own mind (i.e. mind reading), I > noticed > that one of you virtuous monks in this assembly who > would not tell a deliberate lie for a silver bowl > filled with gold, or tell a lie to save the life of > your own mother, has told a lie for the sake of > reputation, fame, and honor. > > -======================= > Does anyone know SPECIFICS? Like exactly what the > lie > is? From the commentary notes, it looks like the > motivation would be to have fame among lay > supporters > so they could be invited more often and for better > quality of food, robes, offered. > > I'm really curious to know exactly what kind of lie, > and how subtle the lie, and how subtle their > motivation these monks used in seeking > fame/honor/reputation. > > I'm short on time at the moment, but if necessary I > can look up exact page numbers and section numbers > in > the next couple of days. 7854 From: frank kuan Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 5:05am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying (from dhammastudygroup@ list) Hi Mike, --- "m. nease" wrote: > Sorry I can't provide the specific lies mentioned in > this sutta, but monks performing various kinds of > wrong speech and many other shenanigans seems to > have > been fairly commonplace in the Buddha's time (as in > the present time), and often for exactly the reasons you cited from the commentary. It's not that monks of the past, present, and future commit wrong speech and performed other shenanigans that puzzled me. Naturally when the order of monks and nuns grows to a large number, they can't all be Sariputtas and Mogallanas. Sooner or later Curly, Larry, and Moe get ordained, and then you get a long list of rules in vinaya. What really caught my attention was that the sutta said that the monks who were so virtuous that they would not tell a lie to save their mother's life! They commited some kind of lie for the sake of reputation and honor. To resolve these two dissonant statements, I have to conclude that the virtuous monk must be doing some very subtle kind of lying, because they obviously wouldn't tell a blatant lie. That's why I'm so interested to find out exactly what the lie is. -fk --- frank kuan wrote: > There's a section of suttas (repetitive with minor > variations) in Samyutta that goes something like > this: > > Buddha: With my ability to emcompass the minds of > others with my own mind (i.e. mind reading), I > noticed > that one of you virtuous monks in this assembly who > would not tell a deliberate lie for a silver bowl > filled with gold, or tell a lie to save the life of > your own mother, has told a lie for the sake of > reputation, fame, and honor. > > -======================= > Does anyone know SPECIFICS? Like exactly what the > lie > is? From the commentary notes, it looks like the > motivation would be to have fame among lay > supporters > so they could be invited more often and for better > quality of food, robes, offered. > > 7855 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 5:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying Frank, --- frank kuan wrote: > It's not that monks of the past, present, and future > commit wrong speech and performed other shenanigans > that puzzled me. Naturally when the order of monks > and > nuns grows to a large number, they can't all be > Sariputtas and Mogallanas. Sooner or later Curly, > Larry, and Moe get ordained, and then you get a long > list of rules in vinaya. Hah! A good way to put it and really true--some of those scamps in the Vinaya were truly ridiculous. > What really caught my attention was that the sutta > said that the monks who were so virtuous that they > would not tell a lie to save their mother's life! > They > commited some kind of lie for the sake of reputation > and honor. To resolve these two dissonant > statements, > I have to conclude that the virtuous monk must be > doing some very subtle kind of lying, because they > obviously wouldn't tell a blatant lie. That's why > I'm > so interested to find out exactly what the lie is. You're right of course and this is interesting. I'd somehow missed the import of your original question (reading too fast I guess). I guess it could be that these guys were so villainous that they wouldn't lie to save their mothers' lives (out of pure selfishness), but would for the sake of status, conceit (what a great monk I am) etc. A chilling thought but just speculation of course. certainly very strict conduct can also be very superficial and unwholesomely motivated. I hope someone will be able to answer your interesting question authoritatively. mike > -fk > > --- frank kuan wrote: > > There's a section of suttas (repetitive with minor > > variations) in Samyutta that goes something like > > this: > > > > Buddha: With my ability to emcompass the minds of > > others with my own mind (i.e. mind reading), I > > noticed > > that one of you virtuous monks in this assembly > who > > would not tell a deliberate lie for a silver bowl > > filled with gold, or tell a lie to save the life > of > > your own mother, has told a lie for the sake of > > reputation, fame, and honor. > > > > -======================= > > Does anyone know SPECIFICS? Like exactly what the > > lie > > is? From the commentary notes, it looks like the > > motivation would be to have fame among lay > > supporters > > so they could be invited more often and for better > > quality of food, robes, offered. 7856 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 2:46am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS I don't think we should think of there not actually being a self nor a non-self. The Buddha told people that there was no self because they believed in a self, his intention was for them to transcend dualistic thought. If you told him there is no self, then I think that he would tell you there is just so that you can transcend dualistic thinking. My advice is not to think about dualism nor non-dualism but to be who you are at this very moment. Fa Hui 7857 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 2:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach In a message dated 9/4/01 8:37:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time, Howard writes: > 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) > > > > > > That phrase as always been a personal favorite of mine. It teaches a wonderful technique of focus for your meditation. It is like using the five aggregates as meditation, which I find to be quite refreshing. Fa Hui 7858 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 2:53am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying For me, I think it means that you will not tell a lie for money, the life of your mom, but you will to receive reputation, fame, and honor. It seems that he is saying that there are you hypocrites out there say you would not lie for one thing but rather lie for another. Fa Hui 7859 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 8:43am Subject: Re: SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying > For me, I think it means that you will not tell a lie for money, the life of > your mom, but you will to receive reputation, fame, and honor ____________ I think Fahui and Mike are right. I don't have the sutta handy but I beieve it was one where the Buddha was extolling the dangers of praise and fame. Thus even a good man could be turned by these dangers. Khun Sujin calls praise the axe that falls from heaven. robert 7860 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 8:47am Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS > I don't think we should think of there not actually being a self nor a > non-self. The Buddha told people that there was no self because they > believed in a self, his intention was for them to transcend dualistic > thought. If you told him there is no self, then I think that he would tell > you there is just so that you can transcend dualistic thinking. My advice is > not to think about dualism nor non-dualism but to be who you are at this very > moment. > > Fa Hui > _____________--- Visuddimagga xix19 "phenomena alone flow on- no other view than this is right" robert 7861 From: Binh A Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 9:46am Subject: SN 22.95 : A lump of foam (Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach) > > 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) ---------- > That phrase as always been a personal favorite of mine. It teaches a > wonderful technique of focus for your meditation. It is like using the five > aggregates as meditation, which I find to be quite refreshing. > > Fa Hui ================================================================= BA: Perhaps you might also like to consider these lines: " ... The Sublime One, the Teacher, further said this: 1. Form is like a lump of foam, Feeling like a water bubble; Perception are like a mirage, Constructions like a plantain trunk, And consciousness like an illusion: So explained the Kinsman of the Sun. 2. However one may ponder it, Or properly investigate, It appears but hollow and void When one sees it properly. 3. With reference to this body The One of Broad Wisdom has taught That with the abandoning of three things One sees this form discarded. 4. When vitality, heat, and consciousness Depart from this physical body, Then it lies there cast away: Food for others, without volition. 5. Such is this continuum, This illusion, beguiler of fools. It is taught to be a murderer, Here no substance can be found. 6. A bhikkhu with energy aroused Should look upon the aggregates thus, Whether by day or by night, Comprehending, ever mindful. 7. He should discard all the fetters And make a refuge for himself; Let him fare as if with head ablaze, Yearning for the imperishable state." (SN 22.95, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi) -ooOoo- Metta, Binh 7862 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 11:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Fa Hui wrote: > Foundations are necessary and thats what I think the teachings of the Pali > Canon help to do, lay a really good foundation. Not that Pali or Theravadin > is just "basic" but that it has a good basis to start out at so that one can > progress and see what's really going on. > > Fa Hui Thanks, Fa Hui, that's the way I feel about it too, and the more I learn about the details of the Theravadin path, the more I feel that I know where my feet are stepping. This doesn't dissolve my interest in Ch'an/Zen in any way, just expands it. Robert E. 7863 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 11:54am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Thanks, Ranil. I think the importance of Sila is clear in the Sutra below. Robert E. ================ --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > >--- Robert Epstein wrote: > Jon, > > > > > I'm still a little unsure what role sila plays in one's development, > > > according to > > > Theravada doctrine, and whether one should 'work on' one's impurities or > > > just > > > leave them alone. Or is the idea to just treat everything with > > > mindfulness and > > > let things work themselves out. > > Dear Jon, > > Once King Kosol met Buddha and asked whether there is one dhamma to achieve > nirvana and a good family life both. Buddha said Yes. King Kosol asked what > it is? Then Buddha said "Appamado" - Means not to be late. > > Not to be late for what ? > 1. To do things which has to be done > 2. To stop things which has to be stoped > > 1. what has to be done? > in very short - Kusala (the opposite of below) > > 2. what has to be stoped > in very short - Akusala (greed, hetred & delution) > > What is the way to do these two? > 1. Sila - good activities in speech and bodyly acts > 2. Samadhi - concentration > 3. Prangna - wisdom > > > > why sila - for happiness > > (now we are going towards meditation) > > why happiness - for the feeling of not having the weight of your body > > (now we are going towards samadhi) > > why the feeling of not having the weight of your body - for > concentration - samadhi > > (now we are going towards pranngna or wisdom) > > why concentration - to understand the reality > why understand the reality - for not clinging > why not clinging - for vimukkthi - releaf from Duka > why vimukkthi (releaf from Duka) - for Nirvana :-) Our goal > > ~meththa > Ranil > > > > > ===== 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" 7864 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 11:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying Dear Fa Hui, That's my impression too. I hope someone will come forth with more reliable information than my intuitive sense. Best wishes, sir, mike --- Fa Hui wrote: > For me, I think it means that you will not tell a > lie for money, the life of > your mom, but you will to receive reputation, fame, > and honor. It seems > that he is saying that there are you hypocrites out > there say you would not > lie for one thing but rather lie for another. > > Fa Hui > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > 7865 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 0:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying --- frank kuan wrote: > What really caught my attention was that the sutta > said that the monks who were so virtuous that they > would not tell a lie to save their mother's life! They > commited some kind of lie for the sake of reputation > and honor. To resolve these two dissonant statements, > I have to conclude that the virtuous monk must be > doing some very subtle kind of lying, because they > obviously wouldn't tell a blatant lie. That's why I'm > so interested to find out exactly what the lie is. Frank, As I reflect on this, I think the point that is being made is that the last thing to go is the protection and promotion of the subtle sense of self. I think the idea is that even though these monks were at a level of high moral development as regards outer behavior, they were still indulging subtly and possibly unconsciously in protecting and promoting their own subtle selves, which they still believed subtly to be real, and that they were even lying and deceiving to serve their reputations and honor, which are the most direct possessions of the ego. The Buddha, wonderful teacher that he was and brilliant psychologist, brought these hidden flaws to the surface and made the monks aware of what was taking place so that it could be treated with awareness and discernment. Robert E. 7866 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 0:06pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-Mike Dear Suan, Fascinating, as always. --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > For normal human beings, the bhavangas are healthy > resultant minds, > according to Atthasalini. (Please check my earlier > post "Deep Sleep > As having Sati for references.) (I did read this with considerable interest). > So they won't have > any form of > defilements. > > But, when we do serious misdeeds with unhealthy > minds, these actions > could generate undesirable results (unhealthy > resultant minds) and > replace healthy bhavangas with unhealthy ones. If > one dies with an > unhealthy mind, the dying consciousness would be an > unhealthy > resultant mind for one to be reborn in undesirable > circumstances. > > Having said that, as the bhavangas and the dying > consciousness are > the resultant minds, even if we die with a healthy > dying > consciousness for us to be reborn as human beings, > it would pass > along latent mental defects (anusaya). So, what, if not subtle kilesas, are latent mental defects? > So your reasoning that bhavangas pass along anusayas > is correct > because an instance of them would become a dying > consciounsess (cuti > cittam) eventually. So my question is, how can the bhavangas pass along anusayas and yet be free from (subtle or potential) defilement? > Hope this message makes sense to you! It does, sir, as your messages always do--just think I must be missing something. I guess the question is, what's the difference between a healthy and an unhealthy bhavanga? Thanks in advance, mike > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > --- Sarah > wrote: > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > > > > Yes, I read Jim's earlier post and appreciated > it. > > > Somehow, though, your post citing N.'s footnote > > > (again?) really helped to clarify this. > > > > yes, sometimes it has to be the right note at the > right time....;-)) > > > > > > Something I still don't understand is a question > I > > > asked once before (Nina kindly responded). I > wonder > > > if it would be accurate to say that the > bhavangas > > > don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but > still > > > pass along (potential) subtle defilements > (anusaya). > > > Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated > kamma > > > etc. could continue to be passed along from each > citta > > > to the next, creating (among other things) the > > > illusion of continuity. > > > > yes, all the anusaya are passed along from citta > to citta > regardless of which > > jati (plane) the citta is (i.e whether kusala- > wholesome, akusala- > unwholesome, > > vipaka-result or kiriya-inoperative), so even with > the bhavanga > cittas, with no > > gap or interval between them. We have to go back > to the paccaya > (conditions) to > > understand the intricacies of how this happens and > how the citta > arising now > > could not be any other citta than it is. Excuse > this brief answer > for now (I'm > > jhana-ed out)! Others may add more detail too. > > > > Thanks for your other comments about the > comentaries, Mike. > > > > Btw when I mentioned the verse in 'Good Grief' > posts was a little > more tricky, > > I didn't realise how tricky;-)) > > > > Speak soon, > > > > Sarah 7867 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 3:06pm Subject: No self By Nyanatiloka thera I saw this succint and easy to understand essay on anatta by venerable Nyanatiloka tttp://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nynatlo1.htm robert 7868 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 3:10pm Subject: Re: No self By Nyanatiloka thera(correction --- sorry wrong url this is the one http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nynatlo1.htm 7869 From: Sarah Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 5:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Fa Hui, I'm glad your friend introduced you to dsg and I'm very glad to see all your comments. --- Fa Hui wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Fa Hui, I am a Lay disciple of the Yunmen monastery in China of > the Ch'an tradition. Thanks for this info. So we're in the same country! You're actually the first member here to have introduced yourself as living on the Mainland (as we refer to the rest of China here in Hong Kong). May I ask where the Yunmen monastery is? is it in Yunnan province, or just a similar name? Where are you from originally (as you certainly sound like a native English speaker)? >However, I do study various elements of the Pali Canon. > > I came upon this study group through a friend. You've obviously studied widely (like many other members here) and I look forward to more of your succinct comments like these below. Just ignore my mundane questions if you prefer! Thanks again, Sarah > > I would just like to say that you can achieve any meditative absorbtion doing > > practically anything. What enlightenment means to me is that it is only in > this very moment and that the Buddha did not discover the way TO > enlightenment but the way OF enlightenment. The only reason that meditation > is done a great deal in the cross-legged posture is due to the fact that it > was just the posture they used for meditation 2545 years ago. And quite > frankly it's still in use, of course. > > May you reach Enlightenment in this lifetime, > > Fa Hui 7870 From: Sarah Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 5:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: toeing the party line....;-) --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks, Ken, > > "Foolish man, to whom do you know me having preached > this Teaching. Haven’t I told, in various ways that > consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a cause, > there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, you foolish > man, because of your wrong grasp, blame me, destroy > yourself, and accumulate much demerit and that will be > for your undoing and unpleasantness for a long time". I just came across this note in the Atthasaalanii (ch 3, Sutta Phrases): 'States established in fools are termed 'foolish'. They are so called figuratively after the customary name of 'fools,' given to persons in whom they are established. from being established in the wise, states are called 'wise.' They are so called figuratively after the customary name of 'wise,' given to persons in whom they are established. Or 'foolish' from producing folly, 'wise' from producing wisdom. Of course, in theory, we can refer to a practice or state or person as foolish (or idiotic even ?) with kusala cittas, but it's unlikely that the kusala would be appreciated, so I wouldn't recommend it ;-)) Sarah 7871 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 5:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying When Buddha talks abt the eight noble path, he talk abt not lieing. why lieing is so emphasis on this sutta, because when you lie, you desire to protect something . When you wish to protect something, there is a strong attachment to a self. Buddha always state that in order to gain enlightment we got to be frank and honest. These monks are superficially virtuous and they are hypocrites. they lie to protect their namesake while in order to promote their name or reputation further so that others will gain respect for them, they pretend not to lie to protect their parents. They are very attached to pple recogntion, and only by using virtuous actions like not lieing for the sake of a bowl of gold or protecting their mother, they are able to increase their reputation further. Kind regards Kenneth Ong Robert Epstein wrote: --- frank kuan wrote: > What really caught my attention was that the sutta > said that the monks who were so virtuous that they > would not tell a lie to save their mother's life! They > commited some kind of lie for the sake of reputation > and honor. To resolve these two dissonant statements, > I have to conclude that the virtuous monk must be > doing some very subtle kind of lying, because they > obviously wouldn't tell a blatant lie. That's why I'm > so interested to find out exactly what the lie is. Frank, As I reflect on this, I think the point that is being made is that the last thing to go is the protection and promotion of the subtle sense of self. I think the idea is that even though these monks were at a level of high moral development as regards outer behavior, they were still indulging subtly and possibly unconsciously in protecting and promoting their own subtle selves, which they still believed subtly to be real, and that they were even lying and deceiving to serve their reputations and honor, which are the most direct possessions of the ego. The Buddha, wonderful teacher that he was and brilliant psychologist, brought these hidden flaws to the surface and made the monks aware of what was taking place so that it could be treated with awareness and discernment. Robert E. 7872 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 7:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No self By Nyanatiloka thera Thanks, Robert: "But of one thing I wish to warn all those who are working for the propagation of Buddhism, namely: not to allow themselves to become influenced or carried away by seemingly identical theosophical, Christian or, what is still worse, materialistic teachings. For all these are, in essence and substance, very often diametrically opposed to the Buddha's doctrines and prevent a real understanding and realization of the profound law discovered and proclaimed by the Buddha". Exerpted from EGOLESSNESS By NYANATILOKA MAHATHERA --- Erik wrote: > I saw this succint and easy to understand essay on > anatta by > venerable Nyanatiloka > tttp://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nynatlo1.htm > robert 7873 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 7:58pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No self By Nyanatiloka thera Thanks, Robert: "But of one thing I wish to warn all those who are working for the propagation of Buddhism, namely: not to allow themselves to become influenced or carried away by seemingly identical theosophical, Christian or, what is still worse, materialistic teachings. For all these are, in essence and substance, very often diametrically opposed to the Buddha's doctrines and prevent a real understanding and realization of the profound law discovered and proclaimed by the Buddha". Exerpted from EGOLESSNESS By NYANATILOKA MAHATHERA --- Erik wrote: > I saw this succint and easy to understand essay on > anatta by > venerable Nyanatiloka > tttp://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nynatlo1.htm > robert 7874 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 8:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] No self By Nyanatiloka thera Thanks, Robert: "But of one thing I wish to warn all those who are working for the propagation of Buddhism, namely: not to allow themselves to become influenced or carried away by seemingly identical theosophical, Christian or, what is still worse, materialistic teachings. For all these are, in essence and substance, very often diametrically opposed to the Buddha's doctrines and prevent a real understanding and realization of the profound law discovered and proclaimed by the Buddha". Exerpted from EGOLESSNESS By NYANATILOKA MAHATHERA --- Erik wrote: > I saw this succint and easy to understand essay on > anatta by > venerable Nyanatiloka > tttp://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nynatlo1.htm > robert 7875 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 8:14pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: toeing the party line....;-) Right you are, Sarah, For internal use only! mike --- Sarah wrote: > --- "m. nease" wrote: > Thanks, > Ken, > > > > "Foolish man, to whom do you know me having > preached > > this Teaching. Haven’t I told, in various ways > that > > consciousness is dependently arisen. Without a > cause, > > there is no arising of consciousness. Yet, you > foolish > > man, because of your wrong grasp, blame me, > destroy > > yourself, and accumulate much demerit and that > will be > > for your undoing and unpleasantness for a long > time". > > I just came across this note in the Atthasaalanii > (ch 3, Sutta Phrases): > > 'States established in fools are termed 'foolish'. > They are so called > figuratively after the customary name of 'fools,' > given to persons in whom they > are established. from being established in the > wise, states are called 'wise.' > They are so called figuratively after the customary > name of 'wise,' given to > persons in whom they are established. Or 'foolish' > from producing folly, > 'wise' from producing wisdom. > > Of course, in theory, we can refer to a practice or > state or person as foolish > (or idiotic even ?) with kusala cittas, but it's > unlikely that the kusala would > be appreciated, so I wouldn't recommend it ;-)) > > Sarah > > > > 7876 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 9:07pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS dear fa hui, what buddha says is that dhammas(phenomena) are not-self, alien, can't be claimed as 'mine' or an 'I'. > I don't think we should think of there not actually being a self nor a > non-self. one cannot 'be' a self or a non-self, " I have self,"," I have no self ", both are wrong as per buddha. Dhammas are anatta , thats what buddha says. >The Buddha told people that there was no self because they > believed in a self, his intention was for them to transcend dualistic > thought. If you told him there is no self, then I think that he would tell > you there is just so that you can transcend dualistic thinking. My advice is > not to think about dualism nor non-dualism but to be who you are at this very > moment. > at this very moment , only empty phenomena roll-on, no 'I' or 'You'. rgds gayan PS: Thanks for the 'alien' , Robert :o) 7877 From: frank kuan Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 9:07pm Subject: How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? First person to correctly answer this question receives a grand prize of NOTHING! (what a good buddhist wants) There is a dhammic reason for my asking this seemingly irrelevant question (sutta reference to this, I'll post details later) So how long does it take? Someone with dairy experience can probably answer this for me. 2 seconds? More likely it's referring to the average time it takes to empty out the cow, or just enough for one serving of milk at breakfast? Please advise. -fk 7878 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 9:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Howard > Howard: > What you wrote in this post is very interesting to me, and I > certainly > do accept that there is a "supermundane" path. But I also have some > serious > reservations about your interpretation of the Noble Eightfold Path. The > examples you choose above, plus right view and possibly right intention > are > ones I would have chosen as well to make your point. However, other > choices > such as right speech, action, and livelihood are far more problematical. Jon: Among the 52 cetasikas (mental factors), there are 3 which are called the abstinences (virati). These are the abstinences of speech, action and livelihood. In one who is not enlightened, these factors arise only when deliberately refraining from wrong speech, action or livelihood, and then only 1 of the 3 can arise at any time (ie. the one appropriate to what is being refrained from). However, at a moment of path consciousness all 3 arise together, each performing the function of abolishing their opposite quality. Howard: > Also, if one looks over the 8 limbs of the path as described > below, > for the most part they do not read like facets of a transcendent mind > state, > but rather as conventional descriptions of patterns of behaviour over > time … Jon: As I said in a previous post, the 8 limbs of the path must be read in their proper context, namely as an elaboration of the statement of the 4th Noble Truth. And they should also be read in the context of the understanding of realities appearing at the present moment. It is only at a moment of enlightenment, and not before, that the 4 noble truths are realised. At the same time, it is this moment of realisation that the 4th Noble Truth itself is describing. The Eightfold Path is both a description of the moment of attainment as well as the truth realised at that moment. Coming to the particular limb of right view… Howard: > (… including that part of right view which is " knowledge with > regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress"). Jon: … the reference to " knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress" is a reference to the 4th Noble Truth. In this passage, the elaboration of Right View is given in terms of the knowledge of the 4 Noble Truths. This is a description of what is being realised at that moment. Howard, this is a difficult area, of which I have a very inadequate grasp. I hope what I have said makes some sense. Jon > > > > "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard to stress, knowledge > > > with regard to the origination of stress, knowledge with regard to > > > the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard to the way of > practice > > > leading to the cessation of stress: This is called right view. > > > > > > "And what is right resolve? Aspiring to renunciation, to freedom > from > > > ill will, to harmlessness: This is called right resolve. > > > > > > "And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive > > > speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called > > > right speech. > > > > > > "And what is right action? Abstaining from taking life, from > > > stealing, & from sexual intercourse. This is called right action. > > > > > > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a noble > > > disciple, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life > going > > > with right livelihood: This is called right livelihood. > > > > > > "And what is right effort? There is the case where a monk generates > > > desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent > > > for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that > > > have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, > > > unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising > > > > of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... (and) for the > > > maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & > > > culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This is called > > > right effort. > > > > > > "And what is right mindfulness? There is the case where a monk > > > remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & > > > mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the > > > world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind > > > > in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, > > > alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to > > > > the world. This is called right mindfulness. > > > > > > "And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk -- > > > quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) > > > qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure > > > > born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. > > > With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & > > > remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, > > > unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- > > > internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in > > > equanimity, mindful & alert, physically sensitive of pleasure. He > > > enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones > > > declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With > > > the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier > > > disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the > > > fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure > > > nor pain. This is called right concentration. > > > > > > ================================ > With metta, > Howard 7879 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 10:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Jon, Quick question--I've misunderstood this yet again, specifically why the abstinences are not included in the fivefold path. I speculated that they were not cetasikas so not paramattha dhammas, obviously I was mistaken. Can you give an idea of why they're excluded from the mundane path and included in the supramundane path? Thanks in advance, mike 7880 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 10:30pm Subject: Right View? Jon, We've talked a lot about 'right view' on this list, and apparently have been using the term very loosely. If right view arises only at the moment of enlightenment, then what we're talking about when we talk about conventional understanding is something different. Or can this term be properly used in a conventional as well as an ultimate sense? mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard > > > Howard: > > What you wrote in this post is very > interesting to me, and I > > certainly > > do accept that there is a "supermundane" path. But > I also have some > > serious > > reservations about your interpretation of the > Noble Eightfold Path. The > > examples you choose above, plus right view and > possibly right intention > > are > > ones I would have chosen as well to make your > point. However, other > > choices > > such as right speech, action, and livelihood are > far more problematical. > > Jon: > Among the 52 cetasikas (mental factors), there are 3 > which are called the > abstinences (virati). These are the abstinences of > speech, action and > livelihood. > > In one who is not enlightened, these factors arise > only when deliberately > refraining from wrong speech, action or livelihood, > and then only 1 of the > 3 can arise at any time (ie. the one appropriate to > what is being > refrained from). > > However, at a moment of path consciousness all 3 > arise together, each > performing the function of abolishing their opposite > quality. > > Howard: > > Also, if one looks over the 8 limbs of the > path as described > > below, > > for the most part they do not read like facets of > a transcendent mind > > state, > > but rather as conventional descriptions of > patterns of behaviour over > > time … > > Jon: > As I said in a previous post, the 8 limbs of the > path must be read in > their proper context, namely as an elaboration of > the statement of the 4th > Noble Truth. And they should also be read in the > context of the > understanding of realities appearing at the present > moment. > > It is only at a moment of enlightenment, and not > before, that the 4 noble > truths are realised. At the same time, it is this > moment of realisation > that the 4th Noble Truth itself is describing. The > Eightfold Path is both > a description of the moment of attainment as well as > the truth realised at > that moment. > > Coming to the particular limb of right view… > > Howard: > > (… including that part of right view which is " > knowledge with > > regard to the way of practice leading to the > cessation of stress"). > > Jon: > … the reference to " knowledge with regard to the > way of practice leading > to the cessation of stress" is a reference to the > 4th Noble Truth. In > this passage, the elaboration of Right View is given > in terms of the > knowledge of the 4 Noble Truths. This is a > description of what is being > realised at that moment. > > Howard, this is a difficult area, of which I have a > very inadequate grasp. > I hope what I have said makes some sense. > > Jon > > > > > > > > "And what is right view? Knowledge with regard > to stress, knowledge > > > > with regard to the origination of stress, > knowledge with regard to > > > > the cessation of stress, knowledge with regard > to the way of > > practice > > > > leading to the cessation of stress: This is > called right view. > > > > > > > > "And what is right resolve? Aspiring to > renunciation, to freedom > > from > > > > ill will, to harmlessness: This is called > right resolve. > > > > > > > > "And what is right speech? Abstaining from > lying, from divisive > > > > speech, from abusive speech, & from idle > chatter: This is called > > > > right speech. > > > > > > > > "And what is right action? Abstaining from > taking life, from > > > > stealing, & from sexual intercourse. This is > called right action. > > > > > > > > "And what is right livelihood? There is the > case where a noble > > > > disciple, having abandoned dishonest > livelihood, keeps his life > > going > > > > with right livelihood: This is called right > livelihood. > > > > > > > > "And what is right effort? There is the case > where a monk generates > > > > desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, > upholds & exerts his intent > > > > for the sake of the non-arising of evil, > unskillful qualities that > > > > have not yet arisen... for the sake of the > abandoning of evil, > > > > unskillful qualities that have arisen... for > the sake of the arising > > > > > > of skillful qualities that have not yet > arisen... (and) for the > > > > maintenance, non-confusion, increase, > plenitude, development, & > > > > culmination of skillful qualities that have > arisen: This is called > > > > right effort. > > > > > > > > "And what is right mindfulness? There is the > case where a monk > > > > remains focused on the body in & of itself -- > ardent, alert, & > > > > mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with > reference to the > > > > world. He remains focused on feelings in & of > themselves... the mind > > > > > > in & of itself... mental qualities in & of > themselves -- ardent, > > > > alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & > distress with reference to > > > > > > the world. This is called right mindfulness. > > > > > > > > "And what is right concentration? There is the > case where a monk -- > > > > quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn > from unskillful (mental) > > > > qualities -- enters & remains in the first > jhana: rapture & pleasure > > > > > > born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed > thought & evaluation. > > > > With the stilling of directed thought & > evaluation, he enters & > > > > remains in the second jhana: rapture & > pleasure born of composure, > > > > unification of awareness free from directed > thought & evaluation -- > > > > internal assurance. With the fading of rapture > he remains in > > > > equanimity, mindful & alert, physically > sensitive of pleasure. He > > > > enters & remains in the third jhana, of which > the Noble Ones > > > > declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a > pleasurable abiding.' With > > > > the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with > the earlier > > > > disappearance of elation & distress -- he > enters & remains in the > > > > fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & > mindfulness, neither pleasure > > > > nor pain. This is called right concentration. > > > > > > > > > ================================ > === message truncated === 7881 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 10:32pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Cetana (volition, intention)is controllable? (was kusa... Erik --- Erik wrote: > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > This is why I feel that when the Buddha talks about putting forth > effort > > we should be wary of taking him to mean effort of the conventional > > 'intentional' kind. > > Indeed. Why listen to the Buddha's very simple words, for > example: "generating desire, arousing persistence, upholding and > exerting one's intent for the abandoning of unskillful qualities that > have already arisen" when personal interpretations of commentaries > and subcomentaries are so much more helpful? The question is, as ever, what is meant by those words. As regards the effort of the eightfold path, here is the position stated in the commentaries and subcommentaries (as collated by Ven Buddhaghosa in the Visuddhimagga), verbatim and unsullied by any 'personal interpretations' of mine: Vism XVI, -- 'THE TRUTH OF THE WAY' "75. In the description of the way leading to the cessation of suffering eight things are given. Though they have, of course, already been explained as to meaning in the Description of the Aggregates, still we shall deal with them here in order to remain aware of the difference between them *when they occur in a single moment on the occasion of the path*." [Then follows, as indicated above, a description of the 8 path factors that arise in a single moment at the moment of enlightenment, beginning with right view. As regards the factor of right effort, it says…] "81. When he is established on that plane of virtue called right speech, right action, and right livelihood, his energy, which is in conformity and associated with that right view, cuts off idleness, and that is called right effort. It has the characteristic of exerting. Its function is the non-arousing of unprofitable things, and so on. It is manifested as the abandoning of wrong effort." Clearly, this describes effort as a factor, an 'it', 'his energy', that has a function, not as something 'we do/generate'. > Being the simpleton that I am, prefer the elementary stuff like the > Suttas and the clear teachings on mindfulness I've been taught by my > kind teachers here at Wat Mahatat. But without their personal interpretations, I trust! > On that note I will, like Anders, be taking a break from DSG, and > intentionally place my efforts in a more fruitful direction like > applied meditation--keeping my eye on the Far Shore and my hand > gently on the tiller of my storm-tested little raft; and leave this > dry-docked state-of-the-art battleship of the Abhidhamma to those who > find it necessary to have a Ph.D. in nuclear physics before setting > sail. Erik, we will probably appreciate the relative calm--for at least a day or so, and then wish you were back again. Take care. Jon 7882 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 10:37pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Yes, your answer to Ander's does clarify what the commentaries say > about the 8-fold path, even though it doesn't answer this nagging > questions about why certain suttas are presented in a certain way. I don't know the actual reason for this. I have wondered the same thing myself. I tend to put it down to differences of time, language and (most importantly) the level of understanding of the listeners then as compared to us now. Jon PS This form of presentation seems to have been a well-established practice, though. Consider the passage from the Visuddhimagga that I quoted in my post to Erik sent a short time ago, describing the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path. Although it clearly states that it is describing mental factors that arise together in a single moment of consciousness, it still uses fairly conventional 'situational' language, so that if you took the descriptive part without reading the introductory words it would be difficult (for any of us) to see the true meaning. 7883 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 10:49pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > This is interesting to me because how one > deals with their tendencies is such a gigantic issue in all cultures and > religions. Christianity, I believe, would ask the believer to suppress > and > abolish the akusala by main force. Psychotherapy would have the akusala > accepted, > worked through and 'corrected' by analyzing and grappling with it. > > What you are saying, it seems to me, is that mindfulness *is* an > antidote to > akusula in the moment, and I recall another quote from a recent post in > which the > bhikku goes through a process of seeing the hindrance, becomes fully > aware of it, > and becomes aware that the hindrance has been abolished and will not > return. I > can't remember the exact wording. > > But you caution that this is not 'oneself' 'dealing' with the akusala, > because > that makes it a cause to feed the notion of self, and will create more > problems, > rather than abolishing the ones at hand. We all tend to regard our impure tendencies (kilesa) as being a problem, a big problem even, perhaps THE problem. However, according to what the Buddha taught, the real problem with our kilesas is nothing more nor less than the problem that exists with any other moment or reality in our life. That is, that we don't see the reality for what it is--we take it to be lasting, satisfactory and 'self', whereas the opposite is the reality. The only 'cure' for this problem, again as taught by the Buddha, is the development of the panna (wisdom/understanding) that sees realities as they are, namely as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not-self. The cure is the same for all realities and all moments of our life, including this present moment of seeing and visible object, hardness, memory, thinking and all the other 'innocuous' moments and realities--if they are not penetrated by panna they remain a problem. The idea that we should pay particular attention to the kilesa that we see arising from time to time is perhaps to miss the bigger picture. The kilesa-s that we notice represent only a minuscule portion of the kilesas that have been accumulated over the aeons and are lying latent (anusaya) in the citta waiting for an opportunity to arise. Nothing within the span of a single lifetime can have any significant effect on these latent accumulations (except of course in the lifetime in which enlightenment is attained). The Buddha taught that the path leading directly to enlightenment is satipatthana--the development of awareness of the reality appearing at the present moment. This is mundane insight, the insight that when accumulated to sufficient strength over a sufficient number of lifetimes results in supramundane insight (enlightenment). Each and every moment of mundane insight that arises in the present lifetime means the accumulation and strengthening of the path factors, the factors that together will culminate in the eradication of the kilesa-s at the moment of enlightenment. (Only with final eradication have we managed to 'deal with' the kilesas.) One of these path factors is right effort, which is viriya (energy) cetasika. The function of this cetasika *as a path factor* is to prevent the arising of unarisen unwholesome states, to maintain arisen wholesome states etc (the standard 4-fold description). At each moment of mundane insight this factor is being accumulated and strengthened, and it chips away at the latent accumulations (anusaya). So rather than striving to have less akusala now, since that really does nothing to address the fundamental problem, the aim should be to develop the conditions that lead to the awareness and understanding that if developed will eventually result in the total eradication of akusala. For this awareness and understanding, the object can be any reality whatsoever that appears at the present moment, since all realities must be known and penetrated by wisdom if enlightenment is to be attained. Jon 7884 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 11:01pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > > Quick question--I've misunderstood this yet again, > specifically why the abstinences are not included in > the fivefold path. I speculated that they were not > cetasikas so not paramattha dhammas, obviously I was > mistaken. Can you give an idea of why they're > excluded from the mundane path and included in the > supramundane path? > > Thanks in advance, > > mike Quick answer. They are not actually excluded from the 5-fold path, but they only arise if and when there is the refraining from the'wrong' counterpart. I.e. right speech can only arise if one was inclined for a moment to wrong speech, but refrained. At such a path moment, the 5-fold path would actually be 6-fold, but nevertheless it is commonly referred to as the 5-fold path. Since actual restraint from wrong speech, action and livelihood cannot take place at the same moment, only one of the abstinences can ever arise at any one mundane path moment, so the mundane path is never more than 6-factored. Hope that's clear! Jon 7885 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 11:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Right View? Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > > We've talked a lot about 'right view' on this list, > and apparently have been using the term very loosely. > If right view arises only at the moment of > enlightenment, then what we're talking about when we > talk about conventional understanding is something > different. Or can this term be properly used in a > conventional as well as an ultimate sense? > > mike Very briefly, I hope i haven't said that right view arises only at the moment of enlightenment, and my apologies for not making myself clear on this. Right view (aka panna) is one of the factors of the mundane path also, so it accompanies any moment of mundane insight (satipatthana). Right view is also sometimes used to refer to an understanding of the law of kamma and vipaka, and i undersand that in this context it need not be a mundane path moment ie. the panna of these moments would be not of the level of vipassana (but I'm not entirely sure on this point). I think in the posts you are referring to I was focussing on how references in the suttas to the Noble Eightfold Path should be read--i was not trying to give a comprehensive coverage of right view. Please feel free to follow up, as this is just a brief reply. Jon 7886 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 7:18pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS One of the things that always strikes me is that the Buddha said that what he taught was not a philosophy, not something that was right opposed to something that was or is wrong but I a means to meditate. These are what he discovered in his meditations, he called in a certain thing. We may see the same thing only call it something different. I feel, to become enlightened one must let go of all things, including the dhamma. Fa Hui 7887 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 11:33pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Jon, Yes, that does clarify it--thanks again. mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Mike > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > > > > Quick question--I've misunderstood this yet again, > > specifically why the abstinences are not included > in > > the fivefold path. I speculated that they were > not > > cetasikas so not paramattha dhammas, obviously I > was > > mistaken. Can you give an idea of why they're > > excluded from the mundane path and included in the > > supramundane path? > > > > Thanks in advance, > > > > mike > > Quick answer. They are not actually excluded from > the 5-fold path, but > they only arise if and when there is the refraining > from the'wrong' > counterpart. I.e. right speech can only arise if > one was inclined for a > moment to wrong speech, but refrained. At such a > path moment, the 5-fold > path would actually be 6-fold, but nevertheless it > is commonly referred to > as the 5-fold path. > > Since actual restraint from wrong speech, action and > livelihood cannot > take place at the same moment, only one of the > abstinences can ever arise > at any one mundane path moment, so the mundane path > is never more than > 6-factored. > > Hope that's clear! > > Jon > > 7888 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 11:59pm Subject: Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Dear Mike How are you? You asked: "So my question is, how can the bhavangas pass along anusayas and yet be free from (subtle or potential) defilement?" Thank you for your profound and tricky question. (I don't mean you are tricky.) Although I did not expect your question, I did ask myself the same question after posting my message. And I did come up with an answer, which now becomes handy for your question. I will answer without providing textual references for the time being so that you can quickly get the underlying principle behind a somewhat paradoxical phenomenon. In a sense, the answer is a synthesis of abhidhamma method and a suttanta method. Now please let me construct a scenario for the answer. "I want to be reborn as a powerful deva in a higher deva loka. I want to have hundreds of beautiful devis as my wives and girlfriends." Now what did you see in the above scenario? You will see my greed for power and my big lust for a very promiscuous luxurious sex life. But, the problem is that I won't get those things without doing good deeds with the healthy minds of the highest quality. So we have another scenario as follows. "I begin to observe five precepts, or ten precepts. I begin to become generous by donating whatever I can to the monks and the needy. I begin to practise mental cultivation. I begin to learn dhamma to understand the nature of realities." Now what did you see in the second scenario? You will see my efforts to remove greed, anger, and ignorance, which are the very opposites of my desires in the first scenario. And, as I am dying to get the lifestyle of a powerful promiscuous deva in my next life, I must behave myself in this life by doing only the good things and having only the healthy minds all of my life. And to make a long story short, I make sure my dying consciousness (cuti cittam) is the highest quality sensuous healthy resultant mind (the maha kamavacara kusala vipaka cittam). And, as expected, I was reborn as a powerful promiscuous deva in a higher deva loka. Now what did you see in the whole story above? My dying consciousness is the healthy resultant mind, so it has no defilements. This is in line with abhidhamma. But, precisely due to this faultless healthy resultant mind, my power- hungry, lustful godly lifestyle became a reality. And my latent mental defects or defilements also came to ripen for unbriddled gratification. This is along the lines of the suttanta approach. How about that, Mike? Hope the answer in this message solves a paradoxical question! With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Suan, > > Fascinating, as always. > > --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > For normal human beings, the bhavangas are healthy > > resultant minds, > > according to Atthasalini. (Please check my earlier > > post "Deep Sleep > > As having Sati for references.) > > (I did read this with considerable interest). > > > So they won't have > > any form of > > defilements. > > > > But, when we do serious misdeeds with unhealthy > > minds, these actions > > could generate undesirable results (unhealthy > > resultant minds) and > > replace healthy bhavangas with unhealthy ones. If > > one dies with an > > unhealthy mind, the dying consciousness would be an > > unhealthy > > resultant mind for one to be reborn in undesirable > > circumstances. > > > > Having said that, as the bhavangas and the dying > > consciousness are > > the resultant minds, even if we die with a healthy > > dying > > consciousness for us to be reborn as human beings, > > it would pass > > along latent mental defects (anusaya). > > So, what, if not subtle kilesas, are latent mental > defects? > > > So your reasoning that bhavangas pass along anusayas > > is correct > > because an instance of them would become a dying > > consciounsess (cuti > > cittam) eventually. > > So my question is, how can the bhavangas pass along > anusayas and yet be free from (subtle or potential) > defilement? > > > Hope this message makes sense to you! > > It does, sir, as your messages always do--just think I > must be missing something. > > I guess the question is, what's the difference between > a healthy and an unhealthy bhavanga? > > Thanks in advance, > > mike > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > > --- Sarah > > wrote: > > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes, I read Jim's earlier post and appreciated > > it. > > > > Somehow, though, your post citing N.'s footnote > > > > (again?) really helped to clarify this. > > > > > > yes, sometimes it has to be the right note at the > > right time....;-)) > > > > > > > > Something I still don't understand is a question > > I > > > > asked once before (Nina kindly responded). I > > wonder > > > > if it would be accurate to say that the > > bhavangas > > > > don't manifest coarse or medium defilements but > > still > > > > pass along (potential) subtle defilements > > (anusaya). > > > > Otherwise I don't understand how accumulated > > kamma > > > > etc. could continue to be passed along from each > > citta > > > > to the next, creating (among other things) the > > > > illusion of continuity. > > > > > > yes, all the anusaya are passed along from citta > > to citta > > regardless of which > > > jati (plane) the citta is (i.e whether kusala- > > wholesome, akusala- > > unwholesome, > > > vipaka-result or kiriya-inoperative), so even with > > the bhavanga > > cittas, with no > > > gap or interval between them. We have to go back > > to the paccaya > > (conditions) to > > > understand the intricacies of how this happens and > > how the citta > > arising now > > > could not be any other citta than it is. Excuse > > this brief answer > > for now (I'm > > > jhana-ed out)! Others may add more detail too. > > > > > > Thanks for your other comments about the > > comentaries, Mike. > > > > > > Btw when I mentioned the verse in 'Good Grief' > > posts was a little > > more tricky, > > > I didn't realise how tricky;-)) > > > > > > Speak soon, > > > > > > Sarah > 7889 From: Howard Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 8:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Eightfold path - Description of path factors Hi, Jon - In a message dated 9/5/01 9:42:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Jonothan Abbott writes: > Howard > > > Howard: > > What you wrote in this post is very interesting to me, and I > > certainly > > do accept that there is a "supermundane" path. But I also have some > > serious > > reservations about your interpretation of the Noble Eightfold Path. The > > examples you choose above, plus right view and possibly right intention > > are > > ones I would have chosen as well to make your point. However, other > > choices > > such as right speech, action, and livelihood are far more problematical. > > Jon: > Among the 52 cetasikas (mental factors), there are 3 which are called the > abstinences (virati). These are the abstinences of speech, action and > livelihood. > > In one who is not enlightened, these factors arise only when deliberately > refraining from wrong speech, action or livelihood, and then only 1 of the > 3 can arise at any time (ie. the one appropriate to what is being > refrained from). > > However, at a moment of path consciousness all 3 arise together, each > performing the function of abolishing their opposite quality. > > Howard: > > Also, if one looks over the 8 limbs of the path as described > > below, > > for the most part they do not read like facets of a transcendent mind > > state, > > but rather as conventional descriptions of patterns of behaviour over > > time … > > Jon: > As I said in a previous post, the 8 limbs of the path must be read in > their proper context, namely as an elaboration of the statement of the 4th > Noble Truth. And they should also be read in the context of the > understanding of realities appearing at the present moment. > > It is only at a moment of enlightenment, and not before, that the 4 noble > truths are realised. At the same time, it is this moment of realisation > that the 4th Noble Truth itself is describing. The Eightfold Path is both > a description of the moment of attainment as well as the truth realised at > that moment. > > Coming to the particular limb of right view… > > Howard: > > (… including that part of right view which is " knowledge with > > regard to the way of practice leading to the cessation of stress"). > > Jon: > … the reference to " knowledge with regard to the way of practice leading > to the cessation of stress" is a reference to the 4th Noble Truth. In > this passage, the elaboration of Right View is given in terms of the > knowledge of the 4 Noble Truths. This is a description of what is being > realised at that moment. > > Howard, this is a difficult area, of which I have a very inadequate grasp. > I hope what I have said makes some sense. > > Jon > ========================== I understand, to at least some extent, the view you are putting forward, and I think it is a very clever one (in the best sense). However, to me it seems a bit of a contrived one which re-works conventional teachings of the Buddha to fit the Abhdhammic mold. Perhaps more sustained study on my part will change my perspective on this. We shall see! ;-) 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) 7890 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 2:07am Subject: paramis Dear Jon and all, before my vacation Jonothan mentioned the paramis and asked about the three levels of them. In B. Bodhi's translation of the Co. to the cariyapitaka (p. 312 in the book, but it is also on the site of Abh Org, just before Robert's Web) the ten paramis are also classified as thirty:ten basic paramis, ten intermediate paramis (upaparami) and ten ultimate paramis (paramatthaparami). Then classifications of these thirty by different teachers follow. After that it is said: Then examples are given for the other perfections with these three bases as mentioned under the perfection of giving. I would say, for us, ordinary people, the basic perfections are already difficult enough. But this reminds us that it is never enough. How far should our patience with unpleasant people, or in trying circumstances go? It is never enough. Khun Sujin stressed many times that not one of these perfections should be neglected. , the commentary states. And one should recognize wisdom < to be the cause for the purification of all the paramis.> I appreciate it very much that you always speak about the development of understanding of what appears now through the six doors. I also liked very much Sarah's recent posts to Eric about adosa, to Mike Chu, to Frank. These contain excellent reminders of patience with the development of understanding, patience in daily life. Because nama and rupa are the same in trying circumstances or at the moments when we have no disturbances, but how much do we cling when there is quiet. I can't get enough of such reminders, most helpful. , Sarah reminded us. Best wishes, Nina. 7891 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 2:56am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No self By Nyanatiloka thera(correction Many thanks for the great url, Robert rgds gayan ----- Original Message ----- From: Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2001 3:10 AM Subject: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: No self By Nyanatiloka thera(correction > --- sorry wrong url > this is the one > http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nynatlo1.htm > > > 7892 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 6:42am Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- Fa Hui wrote: > One of the things that always strikes me is that the Buddha said that what he > taught was not a philosophy, not something that was right opposed to > something that was or is wrong but I a means to meditate. These are what he > discovered in his meditations, he called in a certain thing. We may see the > same thing only call it something different. I feel, to become enlightened > one must let go of all things, including the dhamma. > > Fa Hui __________________ Dear Fa hui, This article by Bhikkhu Bodhi is worth reading http://www.abhidhamma.org/essay25.html robert 7893 From: Fa Hui Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 3:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Thank you. I think that what I meant by letting go of the Dhamma was to niether hold on nor not hold on. Like that of the reflection in the water of the moon, there the moon sits but not grasped by the water. Fa Hui 7894 From: Sarah Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 3:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Hi Anders, glad you're still 'hanging in'.. --- Anders Honore > All I can say is that what the Buddha did say was that whenever the > was the (false) notion of self, it is always (categorically) in > relation to the kandhas. However the most important teaching on this > (imo) is that among the false views of self he refuted were: I have a > self" as well as "I have no self." Maybe I'll leave this to Gayan's helpful quote (many thanks Gayan;-))and to one or two other recent posts on anatta. What are being experienced now are the khandhas, so these are what should be understood. Any idea of substantiality or a 'thing' or 'I have' anything should be refuted. > H > Yes. It's about the direct experience of things. Not the conceptual > understanding, which ultimately brings no liberation. How big a role > does relinquishing views (of all kinds) feature in your practise? For > me it's essential. Anders, this is a difficult question (for me;-)). The reason it’s difficult, I think, is because firstly I don’t have any idea of ‘my practise’. When we talk about practising the piano or tennis, we have an idea of steps to be taken to ‘go over’ what we’ve learnt at certain time of day. When it comes to the dhamma, what I find of interest is to hear and consider the Buddha’s Teachings so that panna can develop, not by trying or practising with an idea of ‘thing-to do’ (thanks Dan & Jon), but by understanding the nature of realities appearing now more and more precisely. As this panna develops, wrong views are relinquished naturally and gradually until the 1st stage of enlightenment when all wrong views are totally eradicated. Meanwhile the right views (of the nature of realities as not self) become more and more established, not by ‘my practise’ but by the power of panna. Of course clinging (lobha) is so firmly entrenched that it is not eradicated until arahatship. As perhaps you suggest, even right views are inherently unsatisfactory (dukkha) and not worthy of being clung to. Again it is at moments of panna that any lobha is seen for what it is, regardless of time and place. As panna develops, more and more subtle kinds of lobha and wrong view become apparent and the very little panna that has been developed to date shows me what a very long path this is, Anders! ...................................................................................... "What is the accomplishment of wisdom? "Herein a householder is wise: he is endowed with wisdom that understands the arising and cessation (of the five aggregates of existence); he is possessed of the noble penetrating insight that leads to the destruction of suffering. This is called the accomplishment of wisdom." Anguttara Nikaya VIII.54 Vyagghapajja Sutta (Dighajanu Sutta) Conditions of Welfare http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-054.html ....................................................................................... Has this answered your question? I’m not sure. Sarah 7895 From: Ranil Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 3:39pm Subject: Sex, desire, attachment Hi Mike and Robert Sorry for the late reply. The part below was taken from a book written about Ven. Buddhaghosa and his book Visuddhimagga. Now an english translation of Visuddhimagga is available. Title: The Path of Purification The visuddhimagga Authour Bhikkhu Nanamoli (This is a translation of the book Visuddhimagga written by Ven Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa). ~meththa to all Ranil > > why sila - for happiness > > > > (now we are going towards meditation) > > > > why happiness - for the feeling of not having the > > weight of your body > > > > (now we are going towards samadhi) > > > > why the feeling of not having the weight of your > > body - for > > concentration - samadhi > > > > (now we are going towards pranngna or wisdom) > > > > why concentration - to understand the reality > > why understand the reality - for not clinging > > why not clinging - for vimukkthi - releaf from Duka > > why vimukkthi (releaf from Duka) - for Nirvana :-) > > Our goal 7896 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 3:54pm Subject: Re: How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? Dear Frank, I absolutely should know better than to reply to this, but..... It depends.......... It depends on where you are counting from: from when you secure her into the cow bails and give her lucerne to keep her occupied up one end while you are occupied down the other? from when you wash and disinfect your hands and the teats with WARM water? O.K. - maybe from when you have positioned the stainless steel bucket and started milking? One teat or two at a time? It depends on the cow and the milker. My Jersey house cow was a very assertive female and would not 'let her milk down' quickly for three out of four milkers in the family, no matter how much yanking, bunting and pulling went on. Or even if you tried to trick her by letting the calf attach for a while first.... What about delays for getting hit in the face with a tail? How about if she moves (deliberately) and stands on your foot? What about if she defecates or urinates, and you fall off the stool trying to avoid splashes? What if her calfs' piteous bawling distracts her and she kicks the bucket over? And what about if the phone rings half-way through? Adult or child milker? skilled milker or learner? A Cow who has just delivered a calf and is in full milk?, or at the end of her lactation? Sorry Frank - it just depends.... That's just life - we hardly ever get the answers we wanted!!! :-)) :-)) :-)) metta, Christine --- frank kuan wrote: > How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? > > First person to correctly answer this question > receives a grand prize of NOTHING! (what a good > buddhist wants) > > There is a dhammic reason for my asking this seemingly > irrelevant question (sutta reference to this, I'll > post details later) > > So how long does it take? Someone with dairy > experience can probably answer this for me. > > 2 seconds? More likely it's referring to the average > time it takes to empty out the cow, or just enough for > one serving of milk at breakfast? Please advise. > > -fk > 7897 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 4:35pm Subject: Re: How long does it take to pull a cow's udder?/2 Dear Frank, Does this refer to the sutta to Venerable Bhuumija re wrong view, action, etc.? "Bhuumija, it is like a man in search of milk, come to a young cow with calf, milking the cow from the horn, it is not possible to obtain milk. Milking the cow, with attachment, without attachment, with and without attachment, neither with nor without attachment it is not possible to obtain milk from the horn. What is the reason? Bhuumija it is not the right and true method to obtain milk.." Though you did mention 'udder' and not 'horn' - that is probably the only mistake I didn't make with Cinders....I knew which end was which! I really shouldn't be posting for the next ten days or so - 'Uni assignment hysteria' - so please satisfy my curiosity quickly! :-)) metta, Christine > --- frank kuan wrote: > > How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? > > > > First person to correctly answer this question > > receives a grand prize of NOTHING! (what a good > > buddhist wants) > > > > There is a dhammic reason for my asking this seemingly > > irrelevant question (sutta reference to this, I'll > > post details later) > > > > So how long does it take? Someone with dairy > > experience can probably answer this for me. > > > > 2 seconds? More likely it's referring to the average > > time it takes to empty out the cow, or just enough for > > one serving of milk at breakfast? Please advise. > > > > -fk > > 7898 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 4:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS that is true but how do we let go of everything. How do practise in let go then? Even thoughts are "things" including breathing, then how do we practise then. I believe that indeed we got to let go of everything in order to be enlighted but at this stage I do not think human can do it unless they first learn to let go of their basic attachment, the self. To my humble understanding, when Buddha talks about let go of everything, this is for people who has reached a certain level of training i.e. at least an Arahant. Let go means signless, labelless, notionless, there is no dualism and there is no oneness, there is no such thing as self or non self or in between. What is is then, it could only be experience and cannot be explain or described. Cheers and kind regards Kenneth Ong Fa Hui wrote: One of the things that always strikes me is that the Buddha said that what he taught was not a philosophy, not something that was right opposed to something that was or is wrong but I a means to meditate. These are what he discovered in his meditations, he called in a certain thing. We may see the same thing only call it something different. I feel, to become enlightened one must let go of all things, including the dhamma. Fa Hui 7899 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 4:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: How long does it take to pull a cow's udder?/2 FK hmm you got to wait till i could talk to the cow and ask the cow for permission:) cheers Kenneth Ong > --- frank kuan wrote: > > How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? > > > > First person to correctly answer this question > > receives a grand prize of NOTHING! (what a good > > buddhist wants) > > > > There is a dhammic reason for my asking this seemingly > > irrelevant question (sutta reference to this, I'll > > post details later) > > > > So how long does it take? Someone with dairy > > experience can probably answer this for me. > > > > 2 seconds? More likely it's referring to the average > > time it takes to empty out the cow, or just enough for > > one serving of milk at breakfast? Please advise. > > > > -fk > > 7900 From: Sarah Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 5:09pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] SN: puzzling suttas about monks lying Dear Frank, Mike, Kenneth & co, Ranil (at end) I’ve been following this thread with interest. I don’t have explanations, just considerations here;-) --- frank kuan wrote: > (from dhammastudygroup@ list) > What really caught my attention was that the sutta > said that the monks who were so virtuous that they > would not tell a lie to save their mother's life! They > commited some kind of lie for the sake of reputation > and honor. To resolve these two dissonant statements, > I have to conclude that the virtuous monk must be > doing some very subtle kind of lying, because they > obviously wouldn't tell a blatant lie. That's why I'm > so interested to find out exactly what the lie is. > > Does anyone know SPECIFICS? Like exactly what the > > lie > > is? From the commentary notes, it looks like the > > motivation would be to have fame among lay > > supporters > > so they could be invited more often and for better > > quality of food, robes, offered. Firstly there are many examples in the Vinaya, as Mike has mentioned, of monks telling lies or dropping hints for physical gains or praise. I like this example in particular and it can be added to Mike’s collection of ‘foolish men’;-)) These monks had kept well-fed and healthy during a famine by suggesting attainments they or fellow monks had ‘reached’: ‘It is unsuitable, foolish men, it is not becoming, it is not proper, it is not fitting for a recluse, it is unlawful, it is not to be done. How can you, foolish men, for the sake of your stomachs, speak praise to householders concerning this or that state of further-men (uttarimanussadhamaa)? It would be better for you, foolish men, that your bellies should be cut open with a sharp butcher’s knife, than that you, for the sake of your stomachs, should speak praise to householders concerning this or that state of further-men......’(Vin, 1, 111, 88) Of course, it helps to remember that it is the intentions rather than the words that count. So if someone says something like ‘you’re so wise, you must be enlightened’, we can tell a lie by a subtle nod of the head to suggest agreement or even by silence. This quote from the Vism may be helpful and it stresses the intention as key (by 1st knowledge is meant sotapanna and so on): ‘In the case of the wrongnesses, wrong view, false speech, wrong action, and wrong livelihood are eliminated by the first knowledge. Wrong thinking, malicious speedch, and harsh speech are eliminated by the third knowledge. And here only volition is to be understood as speech. Gossip, wrong effort, wrong mindfulness, wrong concentration, wrong deliverance, and wrong knoledge are eliminated by the fourth knowledge. In the case of the worldly states, resentment is eliminated by the third knowledge, and approval is eliminated by the fourth knowledge. Some say that approval of fame and praise is eliminated by the fourth knowledge.’ (Vism, XX11, 66-67) When we are dishonest, it is because we want to obtain something for ourselves and at that moment there is no hiri and ottappa (shame and dread) which shrinks from the unwholesome speech. there is no concern or kindness or metta for others at these times. I’m just reflecting how even if we don’t tell lies, we can be very forgetful about our speech in a day. I spend a lot of time with people and find it only too easy to ‘answer back’ or ‘defend’ myself or be a little sarcastic or harsh and so on. Sometimes I’d like it to be different and not have these ‘weaknesses’ but then when we think like this, it shows more clinging to the self again! Only with the development of wisdom, is there less clinging to self and more chance of abstaining from even the more subtle forms of wrong speech. --- ranil wrote: > Now I have to ask this. There are some situations in life that it may seem > easier not to tell the truth. Say like this. If I tell the truth another > person will get hurt. If I dont tell, I will get hurt. So I will not tell > the truth because the other person will get hurt. > > How should these situations be handled? Ranil, I’m just reminded of your question and will just add a short note (to Rob E’s good reply). I think that understanding is the key again. People have so many reasons about why they use harsh speech or tell lies in gross or subtle forms....’I’m in marketing’, ‘the political/social/medical/other cause is so important’, ‘I don’t want to hurt his feelings’ and so on. Really aren’t these all just excuses and justifications? The real reason is that at those moments, there are no conditions for sati, hiri, ottappa, vaci-ducarita virati (abstaining from wrong speech) and the other wholesome states to arise and perform their skilful functions. Knowing more about different mental states and the difference between kusala and akusala cittas (wholesomene and unwholesome consciousness) is the way that there will be more and more conditions to follow the precepts under any circumstance as the sotapanna does naturally and effortlessly. I think we just find other ways of ‘dealing’ with situations which hopefully don’t cause hurt but don’t involve wrong speech. Being honest doesn’t mean deliberately being confrontational! Please let us know if you have more questions about this issue. Hope you don’t mind me combining posts Thanks (all) for the good reminders and for all your contributions. Sarah p.s. Frank, would you give me a ref. for the sutta in question next time you write? Thanks. 7901 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 5:11pm Subject: Re: How long does it take to pull a cow's udder?/2 Hi Kenneth! :-)) I didn't know you spoke 'Cowish' or is it 'Cowsian'? Oops! Oh Dear, sorry, couldn't resist it! metta, Christine --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > FK > hmm you got to wait till i could talk to the cow and ask the cow for permission:) > cheers > Kenneth Ong > > > > --- frank kuan wrote: > > > How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? > > > > > > First person to correctly answer this question > > > receives a grand prize of NOTHING! (what a good > > > buddhist wants) > > > > > > There is a dhammic reason for my asking this seemingly > > > irrelevant question (sutta reference to this, I'll > > > post details later) > > > > > > So how long does it take? Someone with dairy > > > experience can probably answer this for me. > > > > > > 2 seconds? More likely it's referring to the average > > > time it takes to empty out the cow, or just enough for > > > one serving of milk at breakfast? Please advise. > > > > > > -fk > > > 7902 From: m. nease Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 11:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Sex, desire, attachment Thanks, Ranil, I have a copy of Visuddhimagga. Is this from a particular passage, or just a more general abstract? Thanks again, mike --- Ranil wrote: > Hi Mike and Robert > > Sorry for the late reply. The part below was taken > from a book > written about Ven. Buddhaghosa and his book > Visuddhimagga. Now an > english translation of Visuddhimagga is available. > > Title: > The Path of Purification > The visuddhimagga > Authour Bhikkhu Nanamoli > > (This is a translation of the book Visuddhimagga > written by Ven > Bhadantacariya Buddhaghosa). > > ~meththa to all > Ranil > > > > > why sila - for happiness > > > > > > (now we are going towards meditation) > > > > > > why happiness - for the feeling of not having > the > > > weight of your body > > > > > > (now we are going towards samadhi) > > > > > > why the feeling of not having the weight of your > > > body - for > > > concentration - samadhi > > > > > > (now we are going towards pranngna or wisdom) > > > > > > why concentration - to understand the reality > > > why understand the reality - for not clinging > > > why not clinging - for vimukkthi - releaf from > Duka > > > why vimukkthi (releaf from Duka) - for Nirvana > :-) > > > Our goal 7903 From: frank kuan Date: Thu Sep 6, 2001 11:26pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: How long does it take to pull a cow's udder?/2 Hi Christine, it's not that sutta. I'll post the sutta friday night or this weekend. (my work is busy too, sorry to keep you in suspense - use it as opportunity to practice the parami of patience :-) -fk --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Frank, > > Does this refer to the sutta to Venerable Bhuumija > re wrong view, > action, etc.? > > "Bhuumija, it is like a man in search of milk, come > to a young cow > with calf, milking the cow from the horn, it is not > possible to > obtain milk. Milking the cow, with attachment, > without attachment, > with and without attachment, neither with nor > without attachment it > is not possible to obtain milk from the horn. What > is the reason? > Bhuumija it is not the right and true method to > obtain milk.." > > Though you did mention 'udder' and not 'horn' - that > is probably the > only mistake I didn't make with Cinders....I knew > which end was > which! > > I really shouldn't be posting for the next ten days > or so - 'Uni > assignment hysteria' - so please satisfy my > curiosity quickly! :-)) > > metta, > Christine > > > --- frank kuan > wrote: > > > How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? > > > > > > First person to correctly answer this question > > > receives a grand prize of NOTHING! (what a good > > > buddhist wants) > > > > > > There is a dhammic reason for my asking this > seemingly > > > irrelevant question (sutta reference to this, > I'll > > > post details later) > > > > > > So how long does it take? Someone with dairy > > > experience can probably answer this for me. > > > > > > 2 seconds? More likely it's referring to the > average > > > time it takes to empty out the cow, or just > enough for > > > one serving of milk at breakfast? Please advise. > > > > > > -fk > > > > 7904 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 1:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-and bhavanga op 05-09-2001 17:59 schreef Suan Lu Zaw op Suan Lu Zaw: >> > "I want to be reborn as a powerful deva in a higher deva loka. I want > to have hundreds of beautiful devis as my wives and girlfriends." >> > "I begin to observe five precepts, or ten precepts. I begin to become > generous by donating whatever I can to the monks and the needy. I > begin to practise mental cultivation. I begin to learn dhamma to > understand the nature of realities." > Dear Suan, In the scenarios above you gave a good example how akusala can condition kusala, and this is by way of upanissaya paccaya, natural dependance (or support) condition, which is very wide. Kusala can also condiiton akusala by this condition. I just want to remark something about the dying-consciousness. >You remark: > And to make a long story short, I make sure my dying consciousness > (cuti cittam) is the highest quality sensuous healthy resultant mind > (the maha kamavacara kusala vipaka cittam). And, as expected, I was > reborn as a powerful promiscuous deva in a higher deva lok >> > My dying consciousness is the healthy resultant mind, so it has no > defilements. This is in line with abhidhamma. > >Nina: Whatever we do during life, the dying-consciousness cannot change, since it is the same type of vipakacitta as the rebirth-consciousness and as all bhavanga-cittas during that life. Maybe you were thinking of the last javanacittas, kusala or akusala, arising just before the cuti-citta? These are conditioned by kamma, and if akusala kamma conditions them there will be an unhappy rebirth. If kusala kamma conditions them there will be a happy rebirth. Relatives try to help dying people to have kusala cittas before they die, but the very last moment is just cuti-citta, vipakacitta arising and falling away. It conditions the succeeding rebirth-consciousness by way of contiguity condition, anantara paccaya. And, as you said before, latent tendencies are passed on from one life to the next, from the dying-consciousness to the rebirth-consciousness. But the dying-consciousness does not produce rebirth, it is itself result. There was also a discussion going on whether bhavangacitta could be changed if one attains enlightenment, since latent tendencies, anusayas, are eradicated. It is true that latent tendencies are eradicated at the subsequent stages of enlightenment, but why should we connect those only with the bhavanga-citta. Latentent tendencies go on from one moment of citta to the next, and we should not see them as being static, and as only accumulated in the bhavanga-citta. The bhavanga-citta is always the same type as the rebirth-consciousness, no matter one attains enlightenment or not. If someone attains enlightenment his bhavanga-citta is anyway tihetuka, accompanied by three wholesome roots, thus, by panna. But, accumulations is a difficult subject. Best wishes, Nina. 7905 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 1:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: paccayas op 19-08-2001 22:29 schreef Num op Num: > Hi Kom and Nina, > > Hope you guys don't mind I try to get in the discussion about paccaya. It's > hard for me reading about paccaya. Again, please do correct me and I always > appreciate every input. This is only my opinion. > Nina: Hi Num, I am glad you are back. All you write about jhana-paccaya and magga-paccaya is correct. A. Sujin said that we should not be frightened of the terms connected with paccaya. Take object-condition, it is so daily, at each moment, when you are with your students. Some objects are pleasant, others are unpleasant, and we find this so important. But it is only an object conditioning the citta to experience it, it is a condition by being its object. That is all, and then gone immediately. It cannot last. We react with kusala citta or akusala citta: this is conditioned by root-condiiton, hetu-paccaya, and by other conditions. We may find it important what types of hetus arise in a day, but it is all conditioned and conditioning. Just a few thoughts, Nina. 7906 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 1:24am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Right View as to kamma and vipaka op 05-09-2001 17:13 schreef Jonothan Abbott op Jonothan Abbott: > Mike > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, >> >> We've talked a lot about 'right view' on this list, >> and apparently have been using the term very loosely. >> If right view arises only at the moment of >> enlightenment, then what we're talking about when we >> talk about conventional understanding is something >> different. Or can this term be properly used in a >> conventional as well as an ultimate sense? Right view is also sometimes used to refer to an understanding of the law > of kamma and vipaka, and i undersand that in this context it need not be a > mundane path moment ie. the panna of these moments would be not of the > level of vipassana (but I'm not entirely sure on this point). Dear Jon and all, A.Sujin spoke in India about the understanding of kamma and vipaka, kammassakata ~naa.na (saka meaning one's own, kamma that is one's own), see my in Asoka's Footsteps, Ch 3, Zolag Web. She explained that there is this understanding at each stage of insight. At those moments there is no self, no world, no doer of deeds, nobody who receives results. Panna can realize seeing as a conditioned element. It realizes seeing as nama. Panna can realize immediately that seeing is vipaka, different from kusala or akusala, no need to think. We read in the Sumangala Vilasini, Co to Sangiti Sutta (D.N.) that the panna that is kammasakata ~naa.na is vipassana adhipanna, higher panna of vipassana. We may have theoretical understanding of kamma and vipaka,and this is a level of panna, but the deep understanding is developed through satipatthana. Nina. 7907 From: m. nease Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 2:35am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Right View as to kamma and vipaka Dear Nina, Thanks for this response. --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > A.Sujin spoke in India about the understanding of > kamma and vipaka, > kammassakata ~naa.na (saka meaning one's own, kamma > that is one's own), see > my in Asoka's Footsteps, Ch 3, Zolag Web. She > explained that there is this > understanding at each stage of insight. At those > moments there is no self, > no world, no doer of deeds, nobody who receives > results. Panna can realize > seeing as a conditioned element. It realizes seeing > as nama. Panna can > realize immediately that seeing is vipaka, different > from kusala or akusala, > no need to think. > We read in the Sumangala Vilasini, > Co to Sangiti Sutta > (D.N.) that the panna that is kammasakata ~naa.na is > vipassana adhipanna, > higher panna of vipassana. So I take it that on this level, right view would be synonymous with wisdom, insight and the 5- or 6- (or ultimately 8-) fold path... > We may have theoretical > understanding of kamma > and vipaka,and this is a level of panna, ...but on this level it wouldn't--but could still be called right view. Could the same be said for the other right-factors, or no? Can there be thought, for example, that could be called right thought even though it doesn't arise with the path? Or is right view unique in this sense among the factors? > but the > deep understanding is > developed through satipatthana. Understood--thanks again. mike 7908 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 5:37am Subject: Re: Path-factors with/without the asavas Dear Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > I don't know the actual reason for this. I have wondered the same thing > myself. I tend to put it down to differences of time, language and (most > importantly) the level of understanding of the listeners then as compared > to us now. > > Jon Thanks for being persistent in answering the questions. Somehow, Nina's post on another topics: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/7906 clears some things up for me. With the explanation in the post, it can be inferred that: 1) Knowing that there is kamma = knowing cetana -> different from vipaka 2) that there is vipaka = knowing seeing, hearing, etc -> different from kamma 3) that mother and father are benefactors = knowing kusala dhammas when kusala actions being peformed->inferring the beneficiency of mother and father. 4) that there are brahmins who have realized this world and next world by themselves = knowing the citta and cetasikas of such abhinna dhammas, or perhaps knowing the pacayas of the dhammas This would neatly package the 8-fold path (and the 5, and the 6, and the 7!) as being strictly satipathanna and the lokuttara cittas. In retrospect, this shouldn't be surprising as the Buddhas always encouraged us to have direct knowledge rather than conceptual. All those knowledge that the Buddhas taught must all be somehow directly provable! Thanks, Jon (and Nina, A. Sujin, and V. Buddhaghosa), this thread is a real gem for me. kom > > PS This form of presentation seems to have been a well-established > practice, though. Consider the passage from the Visuddhimagga that I > quoted in my post to Erik sent a short time ago, describing the factors of > the Noble Eightfold Path. Although it clearly states that it is > describing mental factors that arise together in a single moment of > consciousness, it still uses fairly conventional 'situational' language, > so that if you took the descriptive part without reading the introductory > words it would be difficult (for any of us) to see the true meaning. 7909 From: Num Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 2:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: paccayas Dear Nina, Sarah and Kom, <<....it is a condition by being its object. That is all, and then gone immediately. It cannot last. We react with kusala citta or akusala citta: this is conditioned by root-condiiton, hetu-paccaya, and by other conditions. We may find it important what types of hetus arise in a day, but it is all conditioned and conditioning. >> Thanks Nina, I appreciate. Welcome back. Never enough for a reminder. It's hard to not to cling to pleasant feeling and not to dissatisfy the unpleasant feeling. I read Aj.Sujin's writing about parami last week, I really appreciate her writing. Esp. about viriya. Thanks Sarah, I wonder whether you ever let any mails go unread. Always good to see your detailed comments and input. I am impressed with the amount of mails on dsg lately. I have to admit that I skip some of the mails. Alright, I should better go home early today to see tennis US Open. Another distraction for me for this whole week. This evening between the two young Aussy and American, Lleyton and Andy. Anumodhana in your deeds. Appreciate. Num 7910 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Sep 5, 2001 9:05am Subject: anatta - nyanatiloka This short article by the german monk Nyanatiloka(died 1957) puts the Buddhist understanding of not-self in a succint way. http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nynatlo1.htm 7911 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 11:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Sex, desire, attachment Dear Jon, What a great explanation, very thorough and helpful. This makes a lot of sense. I have two points or questions that I might ask you to comment on: 1. If all realities present an equal opportunity for insight, why are the kilesas sometimes emphasized as faults to be corrected? Fro instance, when the Buddha, in a recent quote, admonished the monks for lying to promote their reputations, was he not admonishing them to change their unwholesome behavior? Rather than presenting this as an object for insight, it seemed that he was making a moral distinction and pointing out the monks' impurity. If Buddha wished to make the point that you make below, that we should focus on the conditions which lead to the overall eradication of kilesas, rather than obsessing on individual problems one by one, why would the Buddha not make this distinction clear when discussing moral and ethical faults? The manner in which it is discussed seems like it would lead to individuals inspecting and trying to correct their moral and ethical shortcomings, a major distraction on the path, according to your wise words below. 2. I assume that while one should not waste their energy trying to chase after their problems and shortcomings, in other words to eradicate kilesas, that accumulating virtues is somewhat different and that the virtues can be directly cultivated through effort? If this is not the case, and attempting to purposefully cultivate virtue is also a distraction and cannot be effected by will, then where would the role of Sila be left in the path? Thanks, Robert ===================== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > This is interesting to me because how one > > deals with their tendencies is such a gigantic issue in all cultures and > > religions. Christianity, I believe, would ask the believer to suppress > > and > > abolish the akusala by main force. Psychotherapy would have the akusala > > accepted, > > worked through and 'corrected' by analyzing and grappling with it. > > > > What you are saying, it seems to me, is that mindfulness *is* an > > antidote to > > akusula in the moment, and I recall another quote from a recent post in > > which the > > bhikku goes through a process of seeing the hindrance, becomes fully > > aware of it, > > and becomes aware that the hindrance has been abolished and will not > > return. I > > can't remember the exact wording. > > > > But you caution that this is not 'oneself' 'dealing' with the akusala, > > because > > that makes it a cause to feed the notion of self, and will create more > > problems, > > rather than abolishing the ones at hand. > > We all tend to regard our impure tendencies (kilesa) as being a problem, a > big problem even, perhaps THE problem. > > However, according to what the Buddha taught, the real problem with our > kilesas is nothing more nor less than the problem that exists with any > other moment or reality in our life. That is, that we don't see the > reality for what it is--we take it to be lasting, satisfactory and 'self', > whereas the opposite is the reality. > > The only 'cure' for this problem, again as taught by the Buddha, is the > development of the panna (wisdom/understanding) that sees realities as > they are, namely as impermanent, unsatisfactory and not-self. The cure is > the same for all realities and all moments of our life, including this > present moment of seeing and visible object, hardness, memory, thinking > and all the other 'innocuous' moments and realities--if they are not > penetrated by panna they remain a problem. > > The idea that we should pay particular attention to the kilesa that we see > arising from time to time is perhaps to miss the bigger picture. The > kilesa-s that we notice represent only a minuscule portion of the kilesas > that have been accumulated over the aeons and are lying latent (anusaya) > in the citta waiting for an opportunity to arise. Nothing within the span > of a single lifetime can have any significant effect on these latent > accumulations (except of course in the lifetime in which enlightenment is > attained). > > The Buddha taught that the path leading directly to enlightenment is > satipatthana--the development of awareness of the reality appearing at the > present moment. This is mundane insight, the insight that when > accumulated to sufficient strength over a sufficient number of lifetimes > results in supramundane insight (enlightenment). > > Each and every moment of mundane insight that arises in the present > lifetime means the accumulation and strengthening of the path factors, the > factors that together will culminate in the eradication of the kilesa-s at > the moment of enlightenment. (Only with final eradication have we managed > to 'deal with' the kilesas.) > > One of these path factors is right effort, which is viriya (energy) > cetasika. The function of this cetasika *as a path factor* is to prevent > the arising of unarisen unwholesome states, to maintain arisen wholesome > states etc (the standard 4-fold description). At each moment of mundane > insight this factor is being accumulated and strengthened, and it chips > away at the latent accumulations (anusaya). > > So rather than striving to have less akusala now, since that really does > nothing to address the fundamental problem, the aim should be to develop > the conditions that lead to the awareness and understanding that if > developed will eventually result in the total eradication of akusala. For > this awareness and understanding, the object can be any reality whatsoever > that appears at the present moment, since all realities must be known and > penetrated by wisdom if enlightenment is to be attained. > > Jon 7912 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 11:49am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Dear Suan, This is very interesting metaphysics. My question then is, when the mind without defilement creates the life of sensuality and lust, is there still a mind left capable of enjoying the resultant birth? Does the resultant 'being' go ahead and enjoy his hundred wives, or is he no longer interested and instead spends the lifetime meditating? The defilement has been passed on by a healthy mind. Do the defilements then come back and defile that healthy mind when they come to fruition, or does that mind, free of defilements, remain free of any influence below its level of attainment? Robert E. ================================ --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > Dear Mike > > How are you? > > You asked: > > "So my question is, how can the bhavangas pass along > anusayas and yet be free from (subtle or potential) > defilement?" > > Thank you for your profound and tricky question. (I don't mean you > are tricky.) > > Although I did not expect your question, I did ask myself the same > question after posting my message. And I did come up with an answer, > which now becomes handy for your question. > > I will answer without providing textual references for the time being > so that you can quickly get the underlying principle behind a > somewhat paradoxical phenomenon. > > In a sense, the answer is a synthesis of abhidhamma method and a > suttanta method. > > Now please let me construct a scenario for the answer. > > "I want to be reborn as a powerful deva in a higher deva loka. I want > to have hundreds of beautiful devis as my wives and girlfriends." > > Now what did you see in the above scenario? You will see my greed for > power and my big lust for a very promiscuous luxurious sex life. > > But, the problem is that I won't get those things without doing good > deeds with the healthy minds of the highest quality. > > So we have another scenario as follows. > > "I begin to observe five precepts, or ten precepts. I begin to become > generous by donating whatever I can to the monks and the needy. I > begin to practise mental cultivation. I begin to learn dhamma to > understand the nature of realities." > > Now what did you see in the second scenario? You will see my efforts > to remove greed, anger, and ignorance, which are the very opposites > of my desires in the first scenario. > > And, as I am dying to get the lifestyle of a powerful promiscuous > deva in my next life, I must behave myself in this life by doing only > the good things and having only the healthy minds all of my life. > > And to make a long story short, I make sure my dying consciousness > (cuti cittam) is the highest quality sensuous healthy resultant mind > (the maha kamavacara kusala vipaka cittam). And, as expected, I was > reborn as a powerful promiscuous deva in a higher deva loka. > > Now what did you see in the whole story above? > > My dying consciousness is the healthy resultant mind, so it has no > defilements. This is in line with abhidhamma. > > But, precisely due to this faultless healthy resultant mind, my power- > hungry, lustful godly lifestyle became a reality. And my latent > mental defects or defilements also came to ripen for unbriddled > gratification. This is along the lines of the suttanta approach. > > How about that, Mike? > > Hope the answer in this message solves a paradoxical question! > > > With regards, > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > > > ===== 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" 7913 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 8:43pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Rob E > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > > I think that what I am calling 'intention' would be the 'active' > form of > > > a 'view'. > > > If I think the world is all about money and power, my intention > will be > > > to get > > > money and power, etc. I understand the desire to use 'view' in > terms of > > > Right > > > View and the other views that are stuck in one or another concept of > > > reality. I > > > think 'intention' is probably just another aspect of the same thing. > > > > > > > Robert E. > > > > Agreed. And I would only add that the intention (ie. in your example, > to > > get money) has its roots in the wrong thinking (ie. that the world is > all > > about money and power), so that as long as the latter remains the > former > > must continue to manifest in some guise or another. > > I see what you mean, it's the chicken and the egg. You are saying that > the Buddha > [I assume] attributes the wrong intention to the wrong view, and I was > attributing > the view to the intention. > > I guess it would be against the rules to ask, 'then what causes Wrong > View to > arise?' > > Smilingly, > Robert E. A perfectly reasonable question! Wrong view is a kind of akusala classified as lobha (attachment). It takes realties for what they are not ie. it takes the impermanent as permanent, the not-self as self etc. However, all akusala is rooted ultimately in ignorance. Ignorance is not knowing realties. If I may anticipate your next question, ignorance of the past is a condition for the ignorance that arises now. Jon 7914 From: m. nease Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 8:46pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Dear Robert and Suan, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > when the mind without > defilement creates the life of sensuality and lust, > is there still a mind left > capable of enjoying the resultant birth? Does the > resultant 'being' go ahead and > enjoy his hundred wives, or is he no longer > interested and instead spends the > lifetime meditating? I think what is passed along by the undefiled bhavanga is the latent tendency for the arising of defilement. So it isn't the being that's reborn, or a mind left, capable of anything, but rather the defilement itself that's reborn in the form of akusala citta. > The defilement has been passed on by a healthy mind. > Do the defilements then come > back and defile that healthy mind when they come to > fruition, or does that mind, > free of defilements, remain free of any influence > below its level of attainment? The defilements can't defile the healthy mind--the 'healthy mind' here refers (I think) to the (always undefiled) bhavanga citta which arises at different moments from the moments of defilement. Of course all these 'minds' (cittas) arise and fall away instantaneously. The idea of a continuous mind, healthy or unhealthy, is an illusion I think. I don't know this material well at all and welcome corrections, thanks in advance. mike 7915 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 8:54pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] paramis Nina Welcome back. Thanks very much for the useful summary of the paramis and the reference to the materials on the internet, which i will look at when we get back to Hong Kong. It is useful to be reminded that panna is the key to the development of the paramis. Otherwise there may be a tendency to think that it is the other way around--that it is the paramis that are necessary for the development of panna Jon --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon and all, before my vacation Jonothan mentioned the paramis and > asked about the three levels of them. In B. Bodhi's translation of the > Co. > to the cariyapitaka (p. 312 in the book, but it is also on the site of > Abh > Org, just before Robert's Web) the ten paramis are also classified as > thirty:ten basic paramis, ten intermediate paramis (upaparami) and ten > ultimate paramis (paramatthaparami). Then classifications of these > thirty > by different teachers follow. After that it is said: perfection > of giving is the relinquishing of one's children, wives, and belongings > such > as wealth; the intermediate perfection of giving, the relinquishing of > one's > limbs; the ultimate perfection of giving , the relinquishing of one's > life...> Then examples are given for the other perfections with these > three > bases as mentioned under the perfection of giving. > I would say, for us, ordinary people, the basic perfections are already > difficult enough. But this reminds us that it is never enough. How far > should our patience with unpleasant people, or in trying circumstances > go? > It is never enough. Khun Sujin stressed many times that not one of these > perfections should be neglected. practice > of the other paramis>, the commentary states. And one should recognize > wisdom < to be the cause for the purification of all the paramis.> > I appreciate it very much that you always speak about the development of > understanding of what appears now through the six doors. I also liked > very > much Sarah's recent posts to Eric about adosa, to Mike Chu, to Frank. > These > contain excellent reminders of patience with the development of > understanding, patience in daily life. Because nama and rupa are the > same in > trying circumstances or at the moments when we have no disturbances, but > how > much do we cling when there is quiet. I can't get enough of such > reminders, > most helpful. object now>, Sarah reminded us. > Best wishes, Nina. > > > > > 7916 From: m. nease Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 9:21pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] paramis Dear Jon, I can certainly see that the development of paññaa (by pariyatti and satipathaana) must precede that of the paaramiis (otherwise what would motivate their development?). Is it not true, though, that the two are mutually supportive once the paaramiis have begun to be developed? Or am I mistaken about this? mike --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > It is useful to be reminded that panna is the key to > the development of > the paramis. Otherwise there may be a tendency to > think that it is the > other way around--that it is the paramis that are > necessary for the > development of panna 7917 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 9:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Descriptive vs. path of action --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob E > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > Rob E > > > > > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think that what I am calling 'intention' would be the 'active' > > form of > > > > a 'view'. > > > > If I think the world is all about money and power, my intention > > will be > > > > to get > > > > money and power, etc. I understand the desire to use 'view' in > > terms of > > > > Right > > > > View and the other views that are stuck in one or another concept of > > > > reality. I > > > > think 'intention' is probably just another aspect of the same thing. > > > > > > > > > > Robert E. > > > > > > Agreed. And I would only add that the intention (ie. in your example, > > to > > > get money) has its roots in the wrong thinking (ie. that the world is > > all > > > about money and power), so that as long as the latter remains the > > former > > > must continue to manifest in some guise or another. > > > > I see what you mean, it's the chicken and the egg. You are saying that > > the Buddha > > [I assume] attributes the wrong intention to the wrong view, and I was > > attributing > > the view to the intention. > > > > I guess it would be against the rules to ask, 'then what causes Wrong > > View to > > arise?' > > > > Smilingly, > > Robert E. > > A perfectly reasonable question! > > Wrong view is a kind of akusala classified as lobha (attachment). It > takes realties for what they are not ie. it takes the impermanent as > permanent, the not-self as self etc. > > However, all akusala is rooted ultimately in ignorance. Ignorance is not > knowing realties. > > If I may anticipate your next question, ignorance of the past is a > condition for the ignorance that arises now. > > Jon And how it started in the first place is one of the questions you're not supposed to ask because it is impossible to answer? Robert E. 7918 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 9:55pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > I think what is passed along by the undefiled bhavanga > is the latent tendency for the arising of defilement. > So it isn't the being that's reborn, or a mind left, > capable of anything, but rather the defilement itself > that's reborn in the form of akusala citta. > > > The defilement has been passed on by a healthy mind. > > Do the defilements then come > > back and defile that healthy mind when they come to > > fruition, or does that mind, > > free of defilements, remain free of any influence > > below its level of attainment? > > The defilements can't defile the healthy mind--the > 'healthy mind' here refers (I think) to the (always > undefiled) bhavanga citta which arises at different > moments from the moments of defilement. Of course all > these 'minds' (cittas) arise and fall away > instantaneously. The idea of a continuous mind, > healthy or unhealthy, is an illusion I think. > > I don't know this material well at all and welcome > corrections, thanks in advance. > > mike I'm just a little confused about where the akusala mind is 'passed along' to. If there is reincarnation in an 'elevated' state, what is turning up there, and how do those minds, both healthy and unhealthy, manifest in the reincarnated state? Thanks, 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" 7919 From: m. nease Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 10:42pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Dear Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > I'm just a little confused about where the akusala > mind is 'passed along' to. As I understand it, the akusala is passed along from citta to citta. In the case of the bhavangas (and many other cittas) I THINK it's passed along as a latent tendency--not certain about this. > If > there is reincarnation in an 'elevated' state, what > is turning up there, and how > do those minds, both healthy and unhealthy, manifest > in the reincarnated state? I don't know! But I'm inclined to think of rebirth in terms of rebirths of dhammas, rather than the reincarnation of beings. I really don't know how useful or pertinent this is to your question... mike 7920 From: Suan Lu Zaw Date: Fri Sep 7, 2001 11:59pm Subject: Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Robert E Dear Robert How are you? You wrote: "My question then is, when the mind without defilement creates the life of sensuality and lust, is there still a mind left capable of enjoying the resultant birth?" My answer is Yes because the life of sensuality and lust has been created for the very purpose of enjoyment. You also asked: "Does the resultant 'being' go ahead and enjoy his hundred wives, or is he no longer interested and instead spends the lifetime meditating?" My guess is that he would be enjoying his hundred wives. You also wrote and asked: "The defilement has been passed on by a healthy mind. Do the defilements then come back and defile that healthy mind when they come to fruition, or does that mind, free of defilements, remain free of any influence below its level of attainment?" My answer is that when the defilements come back, there won't be any healthy mind for them to defile. This is because they will come in the unhealthy minds. This does not mean that healthy minds will never happen again. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw http://www.bodhiology.org/ 7921 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Sep 8, 2001 0:25am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Maybe this would help, the sutra, "Elucidation of Consiousness" translated by Buddhist Association of the United States" "Wise Protector, the consciousness in its self-nature, pervades everywhere [in the body] not it is not tainted by any part. Although it dwells in the six sense organs, the six sense objects and the five aggregates which are defiled, it is not stained by any of them, it only function though them. Wise Protector, a wooden puppet strung up somewhere can give a variety of perfomances, such as walking, prancing, jumping, throwing, playing and dancing. What do you think? By whose power can the wooden puppet do so? Wise Protector said to the Buddha "I am not intelligent enough to know the answer" The Buddha told Wise Protector "You should know that it is by the power of the puppeteer. The puppeteer is out of sight; only the operation of his intelligence can be seen. Similarly, the body does everything by the power of consciousness. All beings in the various planes of existences all depend on the power of consciousness to act. The body is exactly like the wooden puppet. Consiousness is devoid of form and substance but it upholds all in the dharmahatu; it is fully endowed with the power of wisdom and can even know events of past lives" "Sunlight impartially illuminates the evildoers and such filthy things as stinking corpses without being tainted by their foulness. Similarly consciousness may reside in a pig, a dog or a being of another miserable planes who eats dirty food, but is stained by none of them." "Wise Protector, after leaving the body, the consciousness [takes birth again] with its good and evil karmas to undergo other karmic results. The wind becomes fragrant if it enters a grove of fragant campaka flowers after coming out of a deep valley. However if the wind passes through stinking, dirty place where there are excrement and corpses, it catches an offensive smell. If the wind passes through a place which is permeated with both a fragrant odor and an offensive one, it carries good and bad odors at the same time, but the stronger of the two predominates. The wind is deviod of form or substance. Fragrance and stench too, have no shape, however the wind can carry both fragrance and stench far away. The consciousness takes good and evil karma with it from one body to another to undergo different karmic results." Kind regards Kenneth Robert Epstein wrote: --- "m. nease" wrote: > I think what is passed along by the undefiled bhavanga > is the latent tendency for the arising of defilement. > So it isn't the being that's reborn, or a mind left, > capable of anything, but rather the defilement itself > that's reborn in the form of akusala citta. > > > The defilement has been passed on by a healthy mind. > > Do the defilements then come > > back and defile that healthy mind when they come to > > fruition, or does that mind, > > free of defilements, remain free of any influence > > below its level of attainment? > > The defilements can't defile the healthy mind--the > 'healthy mind' here refers (I think) to the (always > undefiled) bhavanga citta which arises at different > moments from the moments of defilement. Of course all > these 'minds' (cittas) arise and fall away > instantaneously. The idea of a continuous mind, > healthy or unhealthy, is an illusion I think. > > I don't know this material well at all and welcome > corrections, thanks in advance. > > mike I'm just a little confused about where the akusala mind is 'passed along' to. If there is reincarnation in an 'elevated' state, what is turning up there, and how do those minds, both healthy and unhealthy, manifest in the reincarnated state? Thanks, Robert E. 7922 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Sep 8, 2001 3:06am Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > > dear anders, > > u said-> > > Well, writings such as the Mahaparinirvana Sutra does not even make > > any pretense: It says outright that there is a self (Nirvana/Buddha- > > nature). > > I couldnt find this in Mahaparinibbana sutta, if you have time pls help me > to get the correct reference. I referred to the Sanskrit Mahayana version of the Buddha's death, which is quite different from the Pali. A few relevant quotes from it: "Bhiksus, you should know that the heretics have said that the self is like the insect who eats wood, mates, and makes offspring merely. This is why the Tathagata proclaims that in the Buddha-dharma there is no self. It is for the sake of taming sentient beings, knowing the time, and that such selflessness has been the cause and condition that he also says that there is a self. He is like that physician who well knew the elixirs that were medicinal and not medicinal. It is not like that self the ordinary man reckons to be his own or the ordinary man who meets someone and reckons that they have a self. Some have said that it is as large as the thumb and finger, some that it is like the mustard seed, some that it is like a grain a dust. The Tathagata says that the self is not like any of these. This is why he says that things (dharmas) are selfless. Really it is not that there is no self. What is the self? If something is the true, the real, the constant, the master, the foundation with a nature that is unchanging, this is called the self. Just as that great doctor well understand the medicinal elixir, the Tathagata is also so. For the sake of sentient beings, in the Dharmas that he speaks there really is a self. You and the four assembles must thus cultivate the Dharma." ...................... The Buddha again addressed Kasyapa, "What are the four inverted views? "Giving rise to afflicting ideas about what is not afflicted, that is called an inverted view. The unafflicted is called the Tathagata. [If he] gives rise to afflicted ideas, that would mean the Tathagatas are impermanent, change, and vary. If it is said that the Tathagata is impermanent, he would be called a great and wicked affliction. Or if it is stated that the Tathagata abandons his afflicted body to enter Nirvana, just as when the fuel is gone the flame ceases, this is called being unafflicted and then giving rise to afflicted ideas. And so that is also called an inverted view. "Suppose I were to say, `If the Tathagata were eternal, then this would be a view of self. Because of that view of self, this is immeasurably wicked. This is why it should be said that the Tathagata is impermanent.' And having thus spoken, I am made happy. But the Tathagata's impermanence [648a] would then be an affliction. If it is an affliction, how can there arise happiness from it? Because this is an idea of happiness arising out of affliction, it is called an inverted view. Happiness arising from afflicted ideas is also called an inverted view. The happy one is the Tathagata. The afflicted one is the Tathagata who is impermanent. If it is said that the Tathagata is impermanent, that is called giving rise to afflicted ideas about of happy. The Tathagata who eternally abides is called happy. "Suppose I were to say, `If the Tathagata is eternal, how then could he enter into Nirvana? If it is said that the Tathagata is not the afflicted one, how could he abandon the body and seize the freedom of cessation (nirvana)?' Because this is giving rise to afflicted ideas abou the happy, this is called an inverted view. That is the first of the inverted views. "Thinking that the impermanent is permanent or thinking that the permanent is impermanent is called having inverted views. The impermanent is called not cultivating emptiness. Because one does not cultivating emptiness, his lifespan is brief. Suppose someone says, `Not cultivating emptiness and tranquility, one attains a long lifespan'. This is called an inverted view. This is called the second inverted view. "Thinking that the self is the selfless or thinking that the selfless is the self, this is called having inverted views. The worldly person surely says that there is a self. And those in the Buddha Dharma also say that there is a self. Although worldly person says there is a self, there is no the Buddha-nature [in that]. This then is called being in the selfless and giving rise to the idea of a self. This is called an inverted view. Those of the Buddha Dharma have a self that is the Buddha-nature. The worldly person says that the Buddha Dharma has no self. This called from within the self giving rise to the idea of the selfless. If it is said that the Buddha Dharma neccesarily is established to be selfless, then this is the reason the Tathagata admonishes the disciples who cultivate the selfless. This is called an inverted view. This is called the third inverted view. "Thinking that the pure is impure or thinking that the impure is pure, these are called inverted views. The pure then is the Tathagata who eternally abides. It is not the body of various components, not the afflicted body, nor the body of flesh. It is not a body of muscle, bone, tendons, or connective tissues. If there is someone says, `The Tathagata is impermanent, the body of various components ... a body of muscle, bone, tendons, and connective tissues. The Dharma and Sangha's liberation is complete cessation.' This is called an inverted view. Thinking that the impure is pure is called an inverted view. If there is someone who says, `In this body of mine, there is not a single dharma that is impure. It is by there being no impurities that one will be able to enter the abode of purity. The Tathagata has thus explained the practice of meditation on the impure.' Such words are empty and delusive talk. This is called an inverted view. This then is called the fouth inverted view." _________________________________ It's a damn long Sutra, but if you wanna read it, it's available on my website under Zen /Ch'an Writings. ************************************************* Leaves from the Buddha's Grove: http://hjem.get2net.dk/civet-cat/ ************************************************* > If nibbana is self then there should be I-ness or Mine-ness there, > > but in Mulpariyaya sutta(MN1) buddha says like this, I don't agree. It depends on the definition of self really. Any *perception* of self, I would say is inherently inverted, which is why he doesn't delight in Nibbana as *mine*, since there is intrinsically no one to delight in it. Any definition of self as moving (taking delight, etc.) I would say is inverted. He perceives Nibbana as Nibbana .Perceiving > Nibbana as Nibbana , he conceives things about Nibbana , he conceives things > in Nibbana , he conceives things coming out of Nibbana , *he conceives > Nibbana as 'mine,' * he delights in Nibbana . Why is that? Because he has > not comprehended it, I tell you. " 7923 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Sep 8, 2001 3:14am Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- Sarah wrote: > Maybe I'll leave this to Gayan's helpful quote (many thanks Gayan;- ))and to one > or two other recent posts on anatta. What are being experienced now are the > khandhas, so these are what should be understood. Any idea of substantiality or > a 'thing' or 'I have' anything should be refuted. On that we are in agreement. I would say that from a practical point of view, there is no self, since any view of self is inherently flawed. All I am doing is pointing out that a view of no self is too, and might not neccesarily find support in the Pali Canon. > H > Yes. It's about the direct experience of things. Not the conceptual > > understanding, which ultimately brings no liberation. How big a role > > does relinquishing views (of all kinds) feature in your practise? For > > me it's essential. > > Anders, this is a difficult question (for me;-)). The reason it's difficult, I > think, is because firstly I don't have any idea of `my practise'. When we talk > about practising the piano or tennis, we have an idea of steps to be taken to > `go over' what we've learnt at certain time of day. When it comes to the > dhamma, what I find of interest is to hear and consider the Buddha's Teachings > so that panna can develop, not by trying or practising with an idea of > `thing-to do' (thanks Dan & Jon), but by understanding the nature of realities > appearing now more and more precisely. > > As this panna develops, wrong views are relinquished naturally and gradually > until the 1st stage of enlightenment when all wrong views are totally > eradicated. Meanwhile the right views (of the nature of realities as not self) > become more and more established, not by `my practise' but by the power of > panna. As I see it, where ever clinging to views are, Panna cannot be, as Panna is direct seeing of reality, whereas views are *about* reality, hence separation is created. Thus you only have to uproot the views in order to let the innate Panna manifest. > Of course clinging (lobha) is so firmly entrenched that it is not eradicated > until arahatship. As perhaps you suggest, even right views are inherently > unsatisfactory (dukkha) and not worthy of being clung to. Again it is at > moments of panna that any lobha is seen for what it is, regardless of time and > place. That is certainly true. > As panna develops, more and more subtle kinds of lobha and wrong view become > apparent and the very little panna that has been developed to date shows me > what a very long path this is, Anders! Yes :-) Nonetheless, I believe that the path can always be made more fficient than it is now. > .................................................................... .................. > "What is the accomplishment of wisdom? > > "Herein a householder is wise: he is endowed with > wisdom that understands the arising and cessation (of > the five aggregates of existence); he is possessed of > the noble penetrating insight that leads to the > destruction of suffering. This is called the > accomplishment of wisdom." > > Anguttara Nikaya VIII.54 > Vyagghapajja Sutta > (Dighajanu Sutta) > Conditions of Welfare > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an08-054.html > .................................................................... ................... > Has this answered your question? I'm not sure. Yes, the scripture answered my question. But imagine this: If you could not rely on any knowledge which you've taken from the scriptures, how much would your understanding of the Dhamma amount to? 7924 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Sat Sep 8, 2001 4:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS dear anders, > I referred to the Sanskrit Mahayana version of the Buddha's death, > which is quite different from the Pali. Yes indeed, it IS different! :o) many thanks for the text. > I don't agree. It depends on the definition of self really. What is the correct definition of 'self'? ( as you understand) rgds, gayan 7925 From: Anders Honore Date: Sat Sep 8, 2001 6:38pm Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > > I don't agree. It depends on the definition of self really. > > What is the correct definition of 'self'? ( as you understand) Hmmm, my own understanding of self doesn't really differ from the text I just quoted. But I wouldn't really say I support it. Any *view* of self is inherently inverted. As long as there is a view of self (whether it be no self exists or self is Nibbana), then it's not real. All I can say is that in my reading of the Pali Canon, I see the Buddha explaining in great great detail how every conditioned phenomena is anatta, and refuting all views of self. He even says: "Whatever ascetics or recluses, monks, there may be who consider self in various forms, they are all considering the five aggregates of clinging or one of them." (Khandha Samyutta 47) That pretty much shows how all self-*views* are all tied up in the kandhas. But he never touches upon the anatta of Nibbana, nor does he ever categorically denies the existence of self. I'm not trying to spread the view that Nibbana is self here. I'm just trying to point to the possibility that the view that there is no self might also be wrong, and should thus be abandoned. 7926 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 8, 2001 8:38pm Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Ranil Thanks for posting this precis of sutta and commentary. I think the sutta in question is from SN I, 3.17 (numbering of Wisdom edition) 'Diligence'. As Mike suggested, the Pali term is appamaada. --- ranil gunawardena wrote: > Dear Jon, > > Once King Kosol met Buddha and asked whether there is one dhamma to > achieve > nirvana and a good family life both. Buddha said Yes. King Kosol asked > what > it is? Then Buddha said "Appamado" - Means not to be late. I think your 'not late' might be a typo for 'not lazy', since the translation I have reads 'diligence'. The 2 kinds of good in this translation are 'good pertaining to the present life and that pertaining to the future life'. The com and subcom explain 'diligence' as diligence that motivates one to engage in the three bases of meritorious deeds [punna kiriya vatthu?] of dana, sila and bhavana, and describes diligence, though mundane, as chief among the supramundane states because it is the cause for their attainment. Jon > Not to be late for what ? > 1. To do things which has to be done > 2. To stop things which has to be stoped > > 1. what has to be done? > in very short - Kusala (the opposite of below) > > 2. what has to be stoped > in very short - Akusala (greed, hetred & delution) > > What is the way to do these two? > 1. Sila - good activities in speech and bodyly acts > 2. Samadhi - concentration > 3. Prangna - wisdom > > > > why sila - for happiness > > (now we are going towards meditation) > > why happiness - for the feeling of not having the weight of your body > > (now we are going towards samadhi) > > why the feeling of not having the weight of your body - for > concentration - samadhi > > (now we are going towards pranngna or wisdom) > > why concentration - to understand the reality > why understand the reality - for not clinging > why not clinging - for vimukkthi - releaf from Duka > why vimukkthi (releaf from Duka) - for Nirvana :-) Our goal > > ~meththa > Ranil > > 7927 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 8, 2001 8:52pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Suan & Mike May I just come in here to make a quick observation? The anusaya (latent unwholseome tendencies) are carried forward not just in the bhavanga citta but in every citta, including the kusala citta. So the explanation for this might not be quite as intricate as Suan has described in his interesting example. It just happens to be that way, in the saem way that every moment of sanna is also passed on in every citta. It has to do perhaps with the relationship (conditions/paccaya) between one citta and the next, and the fact that there is no 'gap' between the 2. Jon --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > > > Dear Mike > > How are you? > > You asked: > > "So my question is, how can the bhavangas pass along > anusayas and yet be free from (subtle or potential) > defilement?" > > Thank you for your profound and tricky question. (I don't mean you > are tricky.) > > Although I did not expect your question, I did ask myself the same > question after posting my message. And I did come up with an answer, > which now becomes handy for your question. > > I will answer without providing textual references for the time being > so that you can quickly get the underlying principle behind a > somewhat paradoxical phenomenon. > > In a sense, the answer is a synthesis of abhidhamma method and a > suttanta method. > > Now please let me construct a scenario for the answer. > > "I want to be reborn as a powerful deva in a higher deva loka. I want > to have hundreds of beautiful devis as my wives and girlfriends." > > Now what did you see in the above scenario? You will see my greed for > power and my big lust for a very promiscuous luxurious sex life. > > But, the problem is that I won't get those things without doing good > deeds with the healthy minds of the highest quality. > > So we have another scenario as follows. > > "I begin to observe five precepts, or ten precepts. I begin to become > generous by donating whatever I can to the monks and the needy. I > begin to practise mental cultivation. I begin to learn dhamma to > understand the nature of realities." > > Now what did you see in the second scenario? You will see my efforts > to remove greed, anger, and ignorance, which are the very opposites > of my desires in the first scenario. > > And, as I am dying to get the lifestyle of a powerful promiscuous > deva in my next life, I must behave myself in this life by doing only > the good things and having only the healthy minds all of my life. > > And to make a long story short, I make sure my dying consciousness > (cuti cittam) is the highest quality sensuous healthy resultant mind > (the maha kamavacara kusala vipaka cittam). And, as expected, I was > reborn as a powerful promiscuous deva in a higher deva loka. > > Now what did you see in the whole story above? > > My dying consciousness is the healthy resultant mind, so it has no > defilements. This is in line with abhidhamma. > > But, precisely due to this faultless healthy resultant mind, my power- > hungry, lustful godly lifestyle became a reality. And my latent > mental defects or defilements also came to ripen for unbriddled > gratification. This is along the lines of the suttanta approach. > > How about that, Mike? > > Hope the answer in this message solves a paradoxical question! > > > With regards, > > > Suan Lu Zaw > > http://www.bodhiology.org/ > > > > 7928 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 9, 2001 0:10am Subject: Re: Sex, desire, attachment (was: [DhammaStudyGroup] Erik saves my day ; it was Re: Dear Jon & Ranil, Thanks Jon for ID'ing this sutta. Here's a link to a translation: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/sam/sn3-17.htm --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > The com and subcom explain 'diligence' as diligence > that motivates one to > engage in the three bases of meritorious deeds > [punna kiriya vatthu?] of > dana, sila and bhavana, and describes diligence, > though mundane, as chief > among the supramundane states because it is the > cause for their > attainment. I think I remember that appamaada is (sometimes?) a synonym for satipatthaana. If this is correct, wouldn't appamaada also be chief among mundane states? mike 7929 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 9, 2001 1:07am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Jon, --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > The anusaya (latent > unwholesome tendencies) are carried forward not just > in the bhavanga citta > but in every citta, including the kusala citta. Understood--also latent wholesome tendencies etc. > So the explanation for this might not be quite as > intricate as Suan has > described in his interesting example. It just > happens to be that way, in > the same way that every moment of sanna is also > passed on in every citta. > It has to do perhaps with the relationship > (conditions/paccaya) between > one citta and the next, and the fact that there is > no 'gap' between the 2. Yes, this makes sense. I'm thinking that maybe 'passed along' or 'carried forward' are somewhat misleading expressions (to me). Maybe what's accumulated and inherited by each citta is more like history--that is that each citta inherits the 'history' (conditions/paccaya?) of all the cittas preceding it. I've been thinking of it as something like data or information or memory. I suppose saññaa is largely latent too (like anusaya), or wouldn't recognition of everything experienced be occurring all the time? So that this 'history' is the condition that makes it possible for latent perception, or kusala or akusala citta to (re)arise when conditions are right. Still, it seems somehow to carry a lot of 'information'. I still don't get it--maybe someday... mike 7930 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Sun Sep 9, 2001 6:27am Subject: Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: > Jon, > Still, it seems somehow to carry a lot of > 'information'. I still don't get it--maybe someday... > > mike > > __________________________________________________ Dear Mike, Yes it is a lot of information but this helps us to understand the difference between nama and rupa. If citta was like rupa it could never carry on so much, it would explode . But nama is entirely different and so this is just the way it works. robert 7931 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 9, 2001 10:41pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Right View as path factor op 06-09-2001 20:35 schreef m. nease op m nease: > > So I take it that on this level, right view would be > synonymous with wisdom, insight and the 5- or 6- (or > ultimately 8-) fold path... > >> N : We may have theoretical >> understanding of kamma >> and vipaka,and this is a level of panna, > >M: ...but on this level it wouldn't--but could still be > called right view. > > M: Could the same be said for the other right-factors, or > no? Can there be thought, for example, that could be > called right thought even though it doesn't arise with > the path? Or is right view unique in this sense among > the factors? Dear Mike: There can be right thinking that is kusala but not a factor of the eightfold Path, such as vitakka in the development of samatha: it "thinks" of the meditation subject, this cetasika touches or hits the meditation subject again and again. Right thinking is a Path factor when it accompanies samma-ditthi of the eightfold Path, and this goes for all the other factors. Right thinking, samma-sankappa, of the eightfold Path touches the nama or rupa that appears right at the present moment, so that panna of the eightfold Path can develop. For example, when hardness appears, right thinking touches just that rupa, so that panna can realize its characteristic, and at that moment there is no thought of the whole body, or of the world, or of any concept. A.Sujin often said: we have to reduce ourselves from head to toe. Where is the whole body? As she explained (in Cambodia) when there is impingement on the bodysense, and hardness is experienced, only that one rupa appears; there is only that one rupa left. we know that we have arms, legs, a face, from memory, but these do not appear. When the eightfold Path is developed, the object is not a concept, only a paramattha dhamma. Nama and rupa are touched by vitakka as they appear one at a time, so that panna can developed and their different characteristics can be known. In different classifications different words for understanding are used, right understanding or right view, they are of different levels. Insight is used for the stages of insight knowledge that is developed. Nina. 7932 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 10, 2001 4:20pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Hi Anders, My turn to be rather behind.... --- Anders Honore wrote: > > What are being experienced now > are the > > khandhas, so these are what should be understood. Any idea of > substantiality or > > a 'thing' or 'I have' anything should be refuted. > > On that we are in agreement. I would say that from a practical point > of view, there is no self, since any view of self is inherently > flawed. All I am doing is pointing out that a view of no self is too, > and might not neccesarily find support in the Pali Canon. Let’s clarify one point: When the Buddha talks about right view, right understanding or wisdom (in the English translations), they are all referring to panna cetasika = samma ditthi. When they are used in the context of the development of the path or satipatthana, they always refer to direct knowing of realities as not self. Perhaps ‘view’ is a misleading translation? Before there are moments of ‘practise’(patipatti) with panna,there must however be the right consideration or intellectual understanding (pariyatti). Even at these moments, the cittas must be kusala (wholesome). > > As I see it, where ever clinging to views are, Panna cannot be, as > Panna is direct seeing of reality, whereas views are *about* reality, > hence separation is created. Thus you only have to uproot the views > in order to let the innate Panna manifest. Just a sec.....OK, no panna at moments of clinging (lobha), but even lobha can (and must) be object of panna and sati. As I’ve said, right view is panna and should be developed. Now wrong view (micha ditthi) should be understood (again by panna), but of course no self to uproot it. Maybe another confusion is because often we/the Teachings talk about ditthi (views) and in this case ditthi are referring to wrong views only. I’m not sure what the ‘separation’ is that you refer to. > > Has this answered your question? I'm not sure. > > Yes, the scripture answered my question. But imagine this: If you > could not rely on any knowledge which you've taken from the > scriptures, how much would your understanding of the Dhamma amount to? zero. That’s why unless we hear and consider the Dhamma (a lot), with intellectual right understanding/view in the first place, there is no chance of developing higher levels of panna which directly understand these dhammas (realities) as anatta. It’s also why so many in the Buddha’s time could develop very high levels of samatha and jhana, but could not understand the states and realities as anatta until they heard the Buddha’s Teaching.> I’m finding this correspondence very helpful and understanding (slowly) where you and I’m sure many others are ‘coming from’. Thanks for this. Let me know if we’re still on different tracks;-)) Hope the reflections are also helping with your 'regular' studies! Sarah 7933 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 10, 2001 5:17pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: paccayas- Num Hi Num, We just got back from a super 'dhamma' weekend in Bkk. --- Num wrote: > It's > hard to not to cling to pleasant feeling and not to dissatisfy the unpleasant > > feeling. I read Aj.Sujin's writing about parami last week, I really > appreciate her writing. Esp. about viriya. Yes, most the day we're chasing the pleasant feelings..blinded by lobha. We also talked a little about the paramis.....People have an idea of developing a parami, but again it's so often the self with some idea of selection and clinging to certain wholesome qualities. The important factor again is right understanding. As pa~n~na develops, it understands more and more precisely the different wholesome and unwholesome cittas and K.Sujin was stressing how we can talk about paramis being developed at each of these moments (of understanding) without being concerned about developing viriya or other qualities. Of course it's very helpful to read about all dhammas in order to have good (intellectual ) understanding of their nature, but the purpose should not be to cling more, she was stressing. > > Thanks Sarah, I wonder whether you ever let any mails go unread. Sometimes I get pretty behind. Like you, I have a very busy life....but sooner or later I catch up;-)) > Always good > to see your detailed comments and input. I am impressed with the amount of > mails on dsg lately. I have to admit that I skip some of the mails. Num, I've suspected this as you do seem to miss some addressed to you from time to time..maybe we'll have to add your name in the title as for Anders;-)) > Alright, I should better go home early today to see tennis US Open. Another > distraction for me for this whole week. This evening between the two young > Aussy and American, Lleyton and Andy. You know, you're a bad influence on me, Num...last time you had me running off to watch Jacky Chan and this morning your post was a condition for me to turn on the end of the US final instead of doing my Tai Chi or catching up here!! Anyway got to see the end of the 'young Aussie' from Jon's home town (Adelaide) giving Pete his thrashing.... Just joking! To get a little more on topic, I'm always so impressed at your appreciation of how we should live 'naturally' with dhamma. So many people think that if they study and 'practise' dhamma, this means they shouldn't watch movies or have the idea there can't be any sati during the tennis match. It's the understanding that's important and not whether one is watching tennis or talking dhamma. There are still the same realities, seeing, hearing and lots of lobha that follow us around at all these times as you appreciate so well. Still, it's true (as someone will no doubt point out) that we need to hear, read and consider the details a lot in order to appreciate how they are so anatta. Thanks for your examples and now the US Open is over, you have no excuse not to read ALL the posts;-)) > > Anumodhana in your deeds. > > Appreciate. Likewise....and look forward to more of your questions & comments. Sarah 7934 From: Sarah Date: Mon Sep 10, 2001 7:47pm Subject: paccaya (conditions) and anatta while eating Dear All, Writing to Num and reflecting on conditions and anatta reminds me that I meant to send this quote earlier to Ken, Mike and Howard when there were discussions about conditioned realities. This is a desciption of ‘eating’ which I’m sure Num will appreciate too. There are many other descriptions of daily life activities (in the same section) including one on how ‘inside there is no self which evacuates the bowels and makes water’, but let me just give the first one I had in mind for now. It’s from Sammohavinodani (Dispeller of Delusion, comm to Vibhanga), 12, Class. of Jhanas, 1782: 'Inside there is no self of any kind which devours. But the taking of the bowl comes about merely by means of the diffusion of the air element through the action of consciousness as aforesaid. The lowering of the hand into the bowl comes about by means of the diffusion of the air element, through the action of conciousness as aforesaid. The making up of the ball of food, the lifting of the ball and the opening of the mouth come about merely by means of diffusion of the air element through the action of conciousness. No-one opens the jaw-bones with a key or with a contrivance. The putting of the ball into the mouth, the accomplishing of the pestle-like function of the upper teeth, the accomplishing of the hand-like function by the tongue, come about merely by means of the diffusion of the air element through the action of consciousness. Thus that ball of food becomes smeared with the thin saliva at the tip of the tongue and with the thick saliva at the root of the tongue. When, in the mortar of the lower teeth, it has been turned over by the hand of the tongue, moistened with the water of the saliva and ground up by the pestle of the upper teeth, no-one puts it into the inside with a spoon or a ladle. It enters merely by means of the air element. There is no-one who supports it, when it has entered, by means of a straw mat. It stays there merely by means of the air element. While it stays there, there is no-one who cooks it by making an oven and lighting a fire. It is cooked merely by means of the fire element. As it gets cooked, there is no-one who pushes it out with a stick or a pole. It gets pushed out merely by means of the air element. So it is the air element that carries it forward, carries it to the side, supports it, turns it over, grinds it up, removes its moisture and pushes it out. It is the earth element that supports it, turns it over, grinds it up, removes its moisture and pushes it out. It is the water element that causes its cohesion and preserves its moisture. It is the fire element hat cooks it as it enters inside. It is the space element that is the passage way. It is the consciousness element, resulting from the right conjunction (of conditions) in this or that place, which is the ideation. Here ‘clear comprehension through non-delusion’ should be understood as the reflection that occurs in this way.’ Of course when there is wise reflection, it is not the same as direct understanding of realities. Still, reflecting in this way helps break down the ideas of any self or control and helps us to understand how all functions and realities at any moment are conditioned. It goes on to say that clear comprehension here refers to the reviewing of the repulsiveness of nutriment. When referred to wisely, it can condition moments of calm (samatha) at this very moment. Sarah 7935 From: Howard Date: Mon Sep 10, 2001 4:13pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] paccaya (conditions) and anatta while eating Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 9/10/01 7:49:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Sarah Procter Abbott writes: > Writing to Num and reflecting on conditions and anatta reminds me that I > meant > to send this quote earlier to Ken, Mike and Howard when there were > discussions > about conditioned realities. > > =========================== Thanks for thinking of me. This is a good piece - a delicacy! Bon appetit!! ;-)) With all-consuming 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) 7936 From: Anders Honore Date: Mon Sep 10, 2001 8:54pm Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- Sarah wrote: > Let's clarify one point: When the Buddha talks about right view, right > understanding or wisdom (in the English translations), they are all referring > to panna cetasika = samma ditthi. When they are used in the context of the > development of the path or satipatthana, they always refer to direct knowing of > realities as not self. Perhaps `view' is a misleading translation? > > Before there are moments of `practise'(patipatti) with panna,there must however > be the right consideration or intellectual understanding (pariyatti). Even at > these moments, the cittas must be kusala (wholesome). I would say that Panna is direct *intuitive* insight. Any knowledge that is reliant on memory is purely conceptual and not really liberative. > Just a sec.....OK, no panna at moments of clinging (lobha), but even lobha can > (and must) be object of panna and sati. As I've said, right view is panna and > should be developed. Well, I wouldn't say developed. I would rather it should be unveiled, as Panna lies inherent, merely clouded by ignorance. ignorance is not removed by adding extra layings of views and knowledge, but by chipping away the attachment to the views already accumulated. > Now wrong view (micha ditthi) should be understood (again > by panna), but of course no self to uproot it. One of the points I have been trying to make is that "wrong" and "right" are highly relative, and very much depends on factual information as well personal subjective interpretation. The only way to truly transcend wrong views, is to know directly and intuitively for yourself. That is a knowledge that doesn't require confirmation from any scripture or anything else. > Maybe another confusion is > because often we/the Teachings talk about ditthi (views) and in this case > ditthi are referring to wrong views only. I'm not sure what the `separation' is > that you refer to. Sorry, I'm moving into the realm of dualism here. > > Yes, the scripture answered my question. But imagine this: If you > > could not rely on any knowledge which you've taken from the > > scriptures, how much would your understanding of the Dhamma amount to? > > zero. I hope you do not take offence at my little quote here, but I think it's an important point: "Luangpor Teean once classified people who had been educated into two groups, and compared them as follows. In the first group are those who know clearly or really know: they are wise, and when they speak one can understand immediately. The second group comprises those whose knowledge is a matter only of familiarity and memorizing, so when they speak they will talk at great length and in a way that is evasive and extravagant, or else they will cite the texts a great deal in order to induce others to believe them: this is because they don't really know the truth for themselves." What I am trying to emphasise is that memorised knowledge has no fruit in terms of liberation. If you cannot say "all things are empty" based on your own experience of it, and not because you have been told by others, then it's really just useless knowledge. >That's why unless we hear and consider the Dhamma (a lot), with > intellectual right understanding/view in the first place, there is no chance of > developing higher levels of panna which directly understand these dhammas > (realities) as anatta. It's also why so many in the Buddha's time could develop > very high levels of samatha and jhana, but could not understand the states and > realities as anatta until they heard the Buddha's Teaching.> > > I'm finding this correspondence very helpful and understanding (slowly) where > you and I'm sure many others are `coming from'. Thanks for this. Let me know if > we're still on different tracks;-)) I think we are still on somewhat different tracks. I'd like to share on of my favourite suttas, which I think is very much relevant to our discussion (which, I must admit, I am finding more and more interesting): ==================================== Sutta Nipata IV.5 Paramatthaka Sutta When dwelling on views as "supreme," a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, &, from that, calls all others inferior and so he's not free from disputes. When he sees his advantage in what's seen, heard, sensed, or in precepts & practices, seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. That, too, say the skilled, is a binding knot: that in dependence on which you regard another as inferior. So a monk shouldn't be dependent on what's seen, heard, or sensed, or on precepts & practices; nor should he conjure a view in the world in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; shouldn't think himself inferior or superlative. Abandoning what he had embraced, abandoning self, not clinging, he doesn't make himself dependent even in connection with knowledge; doesn't follow a faction among those who are split; doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. One who isn't inclined toward either side -- becoming or not-, here or beyond -- who has no entrenchment when considering what's grasped among doctrines, hasn't the least preconceived perception with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. By whom, with what, should he be pigeonholed here in the world? -- this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. They don't conjure, don't yearn, don't adhere even to doctrines. A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, gone to the beyond -- Such -- doesn't fall back. ================================ How does this sutta accord with your understanding of the buddhadhamma? Sarah, if it is okay with you (?), I would love to continue this discussion via personal email Sincere regards Anders 7937 From: Fa Hui Date: Mon Sep 10, 2001 5:25pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS I had just recently finished reading the Brahamajala (spelling?) Sutta. This Sutta talks about the 62 Wrong Views and what the teaching is not. I thought it to be very interesting because I realized that the teaching cannot be speculated by any means whatsoever, it can only be experienced. I do not like Right View as the translation, I prefer Right Understanding. Why? Because a View, as Anders said, is based on conceptual knowledge, based on what you can read in books, that is not the true teaching. I also read the Potthapada Sutta just yesterday and what it said was that the Buddha did not declare anything other then the Four Noble Truths. The only reason he declared this was because of his own experience and his own Understanding. To me, Right Understanding means the true experience of knowing the Four Noble Truths, and unless you dont know what suffering truly is, you'll never know what Nibbana truly is. May you reach enlightenment in this lifetime, Fa Hui 7938 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Mon Sep 10, 2001 10:34pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS dear anders, in the sanskrit mahaparinirvana sutra text you mentioned it says ". Really it is not that there is no self. What is the self? If something is the true, the real, the constant, the master, the foundation with a nature that is unchanging, this is called the self. Just as that great doctor well understand the medicinal elixir, the Tathagata is also so. For the sake of sentient beings, in the Dharmas that he speaks there really is a self. You and the four assembles must thus cultivate the Dharma." it looks like that in this text when in pali tipitaka buddha explains the Nibbana. like " what is nibbana?, if something is the true the real,the constant,the master, the foundation with a nature that is unchanging, this is called Nibbana." "For the sake of sentient beings, in the Dharmas that he speaks there really is a Nibbana( a release )" so isnt it like using Nibbana and this "true self" are interchangeable in this sutra's context? Yes , then when one says 'Nibbana is not self' , it would have no meaning cause it amounts to 'Nibbana is not Nibbana'. > I'm not trying to spread the view that Nibbana is self here. This is obvious , anders. When mahayanists(people who have the mahayana background of dhamma) say word 'self' it may not the word 'self' that theravadins are used to(heard about), and vice versa. rgds, gayan 7939 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 0:52am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Robert E --- Suan Lu Zaw wrote: > > My answer is that when the defilements come back, there won't be any > healthy mind for them to defile. This is because they will come in > the unhealthy minds. This does not mean that healthy minds will never > happen again. Thanks,Suan. I appreciate your answers. I will now start preparing my mind for my next lifetime with hundreds of wives! [just kidding] Best, Robert E. 7940 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 1:00am Subject: pathfactors Hi Mike (N.), we just spoke about synonyms of panna and and mentioned insight, ~naa.na, that is used for the stages of vipassana, but, in that case the term vipassana ~naa.na is used. Kusala citta (any level) that is accompanied by panna is called kusala citta ~naa.na sampayutta. Thus, it all depends on the context what kind of panna and what level of panna is referred to. But, as A. Sujin said, we should not cling to names, but understand the realities. She said in Cambodia, if we do not develop understanding of the characteristic of the reality appearing now, we shall know just names and terms, and we shall stay on that level. In Amara's notes: . I shall give you now the quote from my translation of Cambodian talks that actually deals with reducing ourselves from head to toe: We should correctly understand that that which is real and has a characteristic that appears but which cannot know anything, is rúpa. If we have no eyes do we see rúpa? If we have no ears, can we hear the rúpa that is sound? We do not hear the sound of rúpa, but sound itself is rúpa. Are the rúpa that is seen and the rúpa that is heard, the same? They are not. There are many kinds of rúpa and each kind can appear through the appropriate doorway. Can rúpa sit? It cannot. If we understand this, it is correct understanding, because hardness does not sit, heat does not sit. Therefore, the rúpas of the body have the characteristics of cold, heat, softness, hardness, motion or pressure. If one truly understands this, one will be able to realize the arising and falling away of those rúpas. If one has right understanding one will see that of the rúpas all over the body only very little remains. But where do they remain? The rúpas from head to toe have all disappeared. Very little is left, but where? If one has a concept of a whole, of a sitting posture, the idea of self cannot be abandoned. Only the rúpa is left exactly at that point where it appears, no matter whether it is hardness, heat, motion or pressure, and this is according to the truth that rúpa cannot be self. The rúpas from head to toe, the great Elements (mahå-bhúta rúpas), we used to believe that they were present all the time. However, in reality those rúpas are only present when they appear one at a time, when they are experienced through body-contact. Although one has not attained vipassanå ñåùa, insight knowledge, can one understand that this is true? We should consider whether it is true or not that rúpa appears only at that point where it is experienced through body-contact. At other parts of the body there are no rúpas remaining. Everybody at this moment can remember that he has arms, legs, a face and familiar body he is familiar with, when he does not actually experience tactile object at that moment. Can one know whether something appears at those parts of the body? Does anything appear, such as the head, eyebrows, face, nose, mouth, if they are not experienced through body-contact? Is this true or not? We have to verify and investigate even at this moment whether this is the truth. Otherwise the wrong view of a self who exists cannot be abandoned. Insight knowledge is the penetration of the truth of realities as they naturally appear in daily life. The truth is that, apart from the rúpa where it appears through the bodysense, nothing remains. This is the truth, but at this moment one has no insight knowledge because paññå has not been developed to that degree. Paññå has not been developed that knows that in reality there is only a characteristic of rúpa when it appears, when it is experienced through touch. When the rúpa that arises because of its appropriate conditions is not experienced through body-contact, it just arises and falls away very rapidly and it does not appear. If we understand the truth and sammå-sati, right mindfulness can arise and be aware, there is only a characteristic of rúpa that appears, exactly the characteristic that sati is aware of. When the understanding of the characteristics of nåma and rúpa grows, no matter whether they appear through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body or the mind-door, one will gradually cling less to the wrong view of self. Insight knowledge that clearly realizes dhammas as they are, knows the truth because of paññå that can let go of the wrong view of self. Therefore, one should not do anything that is unnatural. At this moment of seeing nobody has to do anything special to cause its arising, because there are conditions that this reality arises and performs the function of seeing. At this moment there is no self who can perform a function of any reality. When a reality arises because of the appropriate conditions, it performs its own function. We should begin to understand correctly that there is no self who can do something. There are only realities that arise and perform their own functions. People who listened to the Dhamma understand in theory that seeing is a dhamma that is real, that arises because of the appropriate conditions and then falls away, and that it does not belong to anyone. Hearing is another reality that is not self. When there are the appropriate conditions it arises and hears sound and then it falls away. When understanding of realities is more developed, there will not be a concept of self. At this moment everything is dhamma, but one does not really know yet that there are only dhammas. Therefore one should develop paññå so that one will know the truth. End quote. Nina. 7941 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 1:00am Subject: Questions on lokuttara, sense-door, mind-door Hi Jonothan Sarah and all, I heard you had good discussions in Bgk. Amara sent some notes, and now I have some questions. As to the role of the three abstinences when the citta is lokuttara. I can understand that all 37 bhodipakkhiya dhammas have reached accomplishment. These three abstinence are among the eight path-factors. I understand that panna eradicates defilements. But my Q, is, do the three abstinences not also play their part in eradicating, although panna is the chief. I have some texts: in the Atth (II, Ch I, 219) it is said of right speech that is lokuttara that it cuts off the base of misconduct and fulfils the path-factor. See also Dhammasangani: Part I, Ch V, §299: right speech detroys the cause-way leading to them...What do you think of those texts? Another question: concerning my translation of Camb talks. In Cambodia, A. Sujin explains about the mind-door that is hidden by the sense-doors in our daily life. I understand. When there is no vipassana ~aa.na, the mind-door does not appear, although there is a mind-door process after each sense-door process. But also, A Sujin says, while thinking about names and concepts, the mind-door is hidden by the sense-doors, and we do not realize at such moments realities that arise and fall away. My feeling is: we think of concepts on account of the sense objects, and in between our thinking there are sense impressions time and again, the mind-door process does not appear. Is this the reason that even while thinking of concepts the mind-door process is hidden by the sense-door processes? Looking forward to your notes, Nina. 7942 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 1:33am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] pathfactors Hi Nina, Again this is exactly as I see it (though only somewhat vaguely and superficially, no doubt). To this I'm entirely indebted to you, TA Sujin and dsg, without whose patient explanations and re-explanations I would never have figured any of this out. Undoubtedly I'll need to hear all of this (and much more) many more times. I'm grateful for all opportunities to do so. mike --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Mike (N.), we just spoke about synonyms of panna > and and mentioned > insight, ~naa.na, that is used for the stages of > vipassana, but, in that > case the term vipassana ~naa.na is used. Kusala > citta (any level) that is > accompanied by panna is called kusala citta ~naa.na > sampayutta. Thus, it all > depends on the context what kind of panna and what > level of panna is > referred to. But, as A. Sujin said, we should not > cling to names, but > understand the realities. She said in Cambodia, if > we do not develop > understanding of the characteristic of the reality > appearing now, we shall > know just names and terms, and we shall stay on that > level. In Amara's > notes: the characteristic of > nama and rupa, otherwise we are just naming them>. > I shall give you now the quote from my translation > of Cambodian talks that > actually deals with reducing ourselves from head to > toe: > > We should correctly understand that that which is > real and has a > characteristic that appears but which cannot know > anything, is rúpa. If we > have no eyes do we see rúpa? If we have no ears, can > we hear the rúpa that > is sound? We do not hear the sound of rúpa, but > sound itself is rúpa. Are > the rúpa that is seen and the rúpa that is heard, > the same? They are not. > There are many kinds of rúpa and each kind can > appear through the > appropriate doorway. Can rúpa sit? It cannot. If we > understand this, it is > correct understanding, because hardness does not > sit, heat does not sit. > Therefore, the rúpas of the body have the > characteristics of cold, heat, > softness, hardness, motion or pressure. If one > truly understands this, one > will be able to realize the arising and falling away > of those rúpas. If one > has right understanding one will see that of the > rúpas all over the body > only very little remains. But where do they remain? > The rúpas from head to > toe have all disappeared. Very little is left, but > where? If one has a > concept of a whole, of a sitting posture, the idea > of self cannot be > abandoned. Only the rúpa is left exactly at that > point where it appears, no > matter whether it is hardness, heat, motion or > pressure, and this is > according to the truth that rúpa cannot be self. The > rúpas from head to toe, > the great Elements (mahå-bhúta rúpas), we used to > believe that they were > present all the time. However, in reality those > rúpas are only present when > they appear one at a time, when they are experienced > through body-contact. > Although one has not attained vipassanå ñåùa, > insight knowledge, can one > understand that this is true? We should consider > whether it is true or not > that rúpa appears only at that point where it is > experienced through > body-contact. At other parts of the body there are > no rúpas remaining. > > Everybody at this moment can remember that he has > arms, legs, a face and > familiar body he is familiar with, when he does not > actually experience > tactile object at that moment. Can one know whether > something appears at > those parts of the body? Does anything appear, such > as the head, eyebrows, > face, nose, mouth, if they are not experienced > through body-contact? Is this > true or not? We have to verify and investigate even > at this moment whether > this is the truth. Otherwise the wrong view of a > self who exists cannot be > abandoned. Insight knowledge is the penetration of > the truth of realities as > they naturally appear in daily life. The truth is > that, apart from the rúpa > where it appears through the bodysense, nothing > remains. This is the truth, > but at this moment one has no insight knowledge > because paññå has not been > developed to that degree. Paññå has not been > developed that knows that in > reality there is only a characteristic of rúpa when > it appears, when it is > experienced through touch. When the rúpa that arises > because of its > appropriate conditions is not experienced through > body-contact, it just > arises and falls away very rapidly and it does not > appear. If we understand > the truth and sammå-sati, right mindfulness can > arise and be aware, there is > only a characteristic of rúpa that appears, exactly > the characteristic that > sati is aware of. When the understanding of the > characteristics of nåma and > rúpa grows, no matter whether they appear through > the eyes, the ears, the > nose, the tongue, the body or the mind-door, one > will gradually cling less > to the wrong view of self. Insight knowledge that > clearly realizes dhammas > as they are, knows the truth because of paññå that > can let go of the wrong > view of self. > > Therefore, one should not do anything that is > unnatural. At this moment of > seeing nobody has to do anything special to cause > its arising, because there > are conditions that this reality arises and performs > the function of seeing. > At this moment there is no self who can perform a > function of any reality. > When a reality arises because of the appropriate > conditions, it performs its > own function. We should begin to understand > correctly that there is no self > who can do something. There are only realities that > arise and perform their > own functions. People who listened to the Dhamma > understand in theory that > seeing is a dhamma that is real, that arises because > of the appropriate > conditions and then falls away, and that it does not > belong to anyone. > Hearing is another reality that is not self. When > there are the appropriate > conditions it arises and hears sound and then it > falls away. When > understanding of realities is more developed, there > will not be a concept of > self. At this moment everything is dhamma, but one > does not really know yet > that there are only dhammas. Therefore one should > develop paññå so that one > will know the truth. > > End quote. Nina. 7943 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 0:43am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: ...I'm inclined to think of rebirth in > terms of rebirths of dhammas, rather than the > reincarnation of beings. I really don't know how > useful or pertinent this is to your question... > > mike It is useful, but mainly raises more questions. Do you think that the collections of skandhas we call 'beings' come back wholesale to live out their karmic effects, or do you really look at reincarnation as just the immediate carrying over of tendencies from moment to moment? Robert E. 7944 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 3:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Dear Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > ...I'm inclined to think of rebirth in > > terms of rebirths of dhammas, rather than the > > reincarnation of beings. I really don't know how > > useful or pertinent this is to your question... > > > > mike > > It is useful, but mainly raises more questions. Do > you think that the collections > of skandhas we call 'beings' come back wholesale to > live out their karmic effects, > or do you really look at reincarnation as just the > immediate carrying over of > tendencies from moment to moment? I think that the arising of each naama and each ruupa is created by its own unique set of conditions. The nearly-but-not-quite identical conditions of the naamas and ruupas in its immediate temporal/spatial vicinity make possible the illusion of 'the being', which is really only a concept. No being is born or dies, as I understand it--even the concept of 'a being' doesn't arise and subside in the sense that a paramattha dhamma does (except as a series of vitakkas). Of course I may be wrong about all of this! mike 7945 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 7:22am Subject: Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > ...I'm inclined to think of rebirth in > > terms of rebirths of dhammas, rather than the > > reincarnation of beings. I really don't know how > > useful or pertinent this is to your question... > > > > mike > > It is useful, but mainly raises more questions. Do you think that the collections > of skandhas we call 'beings' come back wholesale to live out their karmic effects, > or do you really look at reincarnation as just the immediate carrying over of > tendencies from moment to moment? > > Robert E. > ____________ Dear Robert E, At this moment all the khandas are arising and passing away . Now the rupas (materialty) and namas (mentality) that are appearing are different from the ones that occured when you began to read this message. Because of avijja (ignornace ), that is deeply embedded, we believe that it is the same person who exists now who existed a second ago. There is simply a stream of conditioned phenomena carrying on. the staream may look and feel more or les the same now as it did a minute ago but this is only because the conditions (see the 24 paccaya in the Patthana)are similar. The more understanding there is of this momentary birth and death the more we will understand that rebirth at conventional death is not so different. robert 7946 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 10:21am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Hi Kenneth, Sorry it's taken me so long to reply, still don't know quite what to make of this. Could you possible give the location in the tipitaka of the original, or the Pali title? Thanks in advance, mike --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > > Maybe this would help, the sutra, "Elucidation of > Consiousness" translated by Buddhist Association of > the United States" > "Wise Protector, the consciousness in its > self-nature, pervades everywhere [in the body] not > it is not tainted by any part. Although it dwells > in the six sense organs, the six sense objects and > the five aggregates which are defiled, it is not > stained by any of them, it only function though > them. > Wise Protector, a wooden puppet strung up somewhere > can give a variety of perfomances, such as walking, > prancing, jumping, throwing, playing and dancing. > What do you think? By whose power can the wooden > puppet do so? > Wise Protector said to the Buddha "I am not > intelligent enough to know the answer" > The Buddha told Wise Protector "You should know that > it is by the power of the puppeteer. The puppeteer > is out of sight; only the operation of his > intelligence can be seen. Similarly, the body does > everything by the power of consciousness. All > beings in the various planes of existences all > depend on the power of consciousness to act. The > body is exactly like the wooden puppet. > Consiousness is devoid of form and substance but it > upholds all in the dharmahatu; it is fully endowed > with the power of wisdom and can even know events of > past lives" > "Sunlight impartially illuminates the evildoers and > such filthy things as stinking corpses without being > tainted by their foulness. Similarly consciousness > may reside in a pig, a dog or a being of another > miserable planes who eats dirty food, but is stained > by none of them." > "Wise Protector, after leaving the body, the > consciousness [takes birth again] with its good and > evil karmas to undergo other karmic results. The > wind becomes fragrant if it enters a grove of > fragant campaka flowers after coming out of a deep > valley. However if the wind passes through > stinking, dirty place where there are excrement and > corpses, it catches an offensive smell. If the wind > passes through a place which is permeated with both > a fragrant odor and an offensive one, it carries > good and bad odors at the same time, but the > stronger of the two predominates. The wind is > deviod of form or substance. Fragrance and stench > too, have no shape, however the wind can carry both > fragrance and stench far away. The consciousness > takes good and evil karma with it from one body to > another to undergo different karmic results." > Kind regards > Kenneth 7947 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 0:10pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike --- "m. nease" wrote: No being is born or > dies, as I understand it--even the concept of 'a > being' doesn't arise and subside in the sense that a > paramattha dhamma does (except as a series of > vitakkas). Of course I may be wrong about all of > this! Dear Mike, Well, I certainly understand the basic principle that when there is an apparent being, such as all of us walking around in our bodies talking and reacting, seeming to be separate independent entities, that in fact there are no 'beings' present, and no specific entity can be found within the collection of kandhas that make up the body, mind and other factors. But I am just trying to imagine the practical implications of kamma and reincarnation, and whether the collection of kandhas that have been produced by and continue to produce various tendencies create a *physical* rebirth of those kandhas and tendencies. Or do the physical/mental factors that have accumulated for the particular embodied collection of kandhas that represents the apparent individual get reconstituted in a new body because of the continuing force of those kammic tendencies. I hate to put it like that, but I wanted to try to use language that did not imply that there was a unified being being brought back from a spiritual plane or something. I know the topic I'm about to mention in this regard has been discussed before, but perhaps not concluded, but it still seems to me that if one sees parinibbana as the cessation of the kandhas represented by the body of that particular individual, and that there is nothing beyond the body to reincarnate, that not only is the law of kamma meaningless, but it is also impossible to avoid an annihilationist view that the cessation of the body is the practical cessation of the 'self'. Even if there is no 'self' to be annihilated, if all deluded and nibbanic experience is dependent on the individual in this particular body, and it is ceased upon death of the body, then there is a practical implication that in fact this body is the vehicle of a separate individual and by positing that one has in fact posited a separate and independent entity, who rises and falls with his own physical life and death. And so the implication of an entity or being concordant with that body is there, even if one states that there is no entity within. If the body is in fact not the vehicle of an entity or being, and Buddhism is about removing the illusion of this bodily identification and the sense of a being within, then the life of the awareness that is thus liberated from identification with that body and seeming individuality must take place independent in some sense from the life and death of that body. If it is a false identification that is to be seen through, then that false identification cannot simply cease with the cessation of the body with which the illusory identity has taken place. If this were the case, the path is redundant, because death would end the illusion and would constitute an annihilationist liberation. Nibbana would likewise be unnecessary. And it would be meaningless to go to the trouble of trying to see the reality of dharmas and break down the process by which reality is constituted and attempt to perceive it directly. One could live their life as pleasantly as possible and wait for the certain liberation of death which would surely come in due course. It seems to me that Buddhism has no necessary purpose and makes no sense as a path, if some liberation beyond the death of the body is not required to free sentient beings from apparent suffering and the rounds of birth and death. If reincarnation is not literally of the kandhic conglomeration that has been formed by kammic tendencies and effects, then liberation is not really necessary and Buddhism makes little sense. Buddhism speaks of releasing [apparent] sentient beings from the interminable round of birth and death. Without rebirth, the suffering is not so great. The suffering is so immensely great because it is interminable and continues through aeons if not abated by insight and realization of Nibbana. It is the equivalent of eternal damnation and it is this fact that makes the Buddha's argument so powerful. I don't see it working without that factor in play. Don't get me wrong: I personaly would still want to understand how dhammas and the illusion of self are constituted through acts of perception, mental factors and apprehension by mind, but I take it that this is because I have a philosophical bent. But for the larger purpose of liberation, I think it is the idea of a universe bound up in interminable suffering and delusion that motivates the effort to see through it and stop accumulating the trappings of seeming entity. So I see these two factors: the continuty of kamma and its effects beyond death; and the continuing return of the seeming individual in a new body because the illusion of selfhood has not been penetrated, as absolutely essential to the process of Buddhism. This inherently involves a mystical view of the universe, in the sense that one cannot *only* speak of anatta and kandhas. One must recognize a positive process that is able to continue the accumulation of kandhas and effects of kamma on a non-physical level. These laws may be independent and impersonal, but they are not merely physical. Those who believe that parinibbana is the same as physical death I think must be mistaken. Parinibbana must refer to the physical death of an arahat who has obtained liberation and has no driving forces of kamma and cohesion of skandhas to bring forth his seeming individuality back into physical manifestation. Again, without this distinction, Parinibbana is meaningless and is only the same as death: the attainment that we all will get after living, without any great effort of understanding. For myself, I also wonder whether the Buddha ever settled definitively whether awareness, which makes the whole process of experiencing suffering and nibbana possible, exists only within the experience of beings in physical form, or whether the awareness continues beyond physical dissolution. I vaguely recall that this is one of the questions one is not supposed to ponder on, but I would be interested if anyone has an idea about this. Sorry to go on so long. I have purposely been redundant to some extent in order to try to be clear about these points. I hope that some of you in this group will have knowledge about some of these issues which you can share. Thanks, Robert E. 7948 From: frank kuan Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 1:19pm Subject: faq update, answer to "how long does it take to pull a cow's udder" http://www.geocities.com/fcckuan/ - buddha answers question about charity "how long does it take to pull a cow's udder?" - Mahakassapa answers the question, "why ordain?" - The Cat's Meow, an inspirational post from pannaguna - Do Arahants dream? - Form is like a lump of foam - the buddha (inspirational section) (thanks to a post from binh) - Is mindfulness "a way" or "the only way" to liberation? (a discussion with cybele, binh, wchu) 7949 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 0:23pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike --- Erik wrote: > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > > > ...I'm inclined to think of rebirth in > > > terms of rebirths of dhammas, rather than the > > > reincarnation of beings. I really don't know how > > > useful or pertinent this is to your question... > > > > > > mike > > > > It is useful, but mainly raises more questions. Do you think that > the collections > > of skandhas we call 'beings' come back wholesale to live out their > karmic effects, > > or do you really look at reincarnation as just the immediate > carrying over of > > tendencies from moment to moment? > > > > Robert E. > > > ____________ > Dear Robert E, > At this moment all the khandas are arising and passing away . Now the > rupas (materialty) and namas (mentality) that are appearing are > different from the ones that occured when you began to read this > message. Because of avijja (ignornace ), that is deeply embedded, we > believe that it is the same person who exists now who existed a > second ago. There is simply a stream of conditioned phenomena > carrying on. the staream may look and feel more or les the same now > as it did a minute ago but this is only because the conditions (see > the 24 paccaya in the Patthana)are similar. > The more understanding there is of this momentary birth and death > the more we will understand that rebirth at conventional death is not > so different. > robert Dear Robert, Thanks for you intelligent comment. I think what confuses the issue is the continuity of the physical form. These bodies that we are trucking around gives the strong apparent impression of separate continuous beings who have recognizeable characteristics and can interact with each other. I think if our physical material plane were a little more fluid and we woke up looking like different people every day in more obvious way [obviously we still are 'different people' every day but not apparently] it would be much easier to understand that everything is only seemingly continuous but is in fact always changing. So we have to observe our momentary experience in order to see the shifting nature of reality. If we look at ourselves casually in the mirror we will get the impression that thing are not really changing much, or very quickly. This is also my sticking point. For there to be reincarnation between lives, without the presence of a 'spiritual self' to be reincarnated into a 'new body', there has to be something that is getting reincarnated. Otherwise there is no kammic continuity. [Perhaps there is not, but just the general creation of new bodies, etc. But this would take away the idea that the round of birth and death has to be ceased by achieving individual awakening to Nibbana.] So I presume that what is being reincarnated into a new body is the tendencies of the former life which result in a particular configuration of kandhas creating a particularly formed new body with specific tendencies that have continuity to the last life. This means that the kammic tendencies are not merely of the physical body but transcend it in a metaphysical way to influence the formation of a new body-mind in the new life. I don't see how to avoid this implication, but it can be formulated without positing a spiritual entity that is reborn, and so it may still work in the scheme of Buddhism. It does not have to violate anatta to take place, in other words. This would still be the same process by which the realities are shifting at every moment, but it would simply mean that there is something more involved than physical reality, and I'm not sure how people feel about that. Also when you say the stream of conditioned phenomena may look and feel the same but is subtly really different and new, I wonder where you believe that stream is being apprehended. If it 'looks and feels the same' that has to be to a conditioned consciousness, correct? This consciousness is formed within awareness which is clouded by the conditioning. I wonder what the condition of this awareness is? Mahayana Buddhism posits this awareness as being unclouded in its true nature, but has the appearance of confusion and obstruction because of the conditioned consciousnesses that are arising within in. Does this basic awareness have a life beyond its occurence to a physical being? Does it only arise with the formation of the body and mind? It seems to me that if this is the case, then Buddhism is confined to the physical realm. If reincarnation takes place between physical lifetimes, then there are forces at work that are beyond the body. I would wonder what you think of these ideas and if both are so, how would they be reconciled? Best, Robert E. 7950 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 3:12pm Subject: Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike --- Dear Robert E, See my comments interspersed: Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Robert, > Thanks for you intelligent comment. I think what confuses the issue is the > continuity of the physical form. These bodies that we are trucking around gives > the strong apparent impression of separate continuous beings who have > recognizeable characteristics and can interact with each other. I think if our > physical material plane were a little more fluid and we woke up looking like > different people every day in more obvious way [obviously we still are 'different > people' every day but not apparently] it would be much easier to understand that > everything is only seemingly continuous but is in fact always changing. _______________ yes that is a good part of it. And if the effects of kamma were obvious then the conditionality of it would become clearer too. If say we stole something and 10 minutes later were reborn as a snake - and clearly saw the reason for it .... But actually this is what satipatthana does reveal - ever so gradually. By studying the present moment it does,very incrementally become a little clearer that there is no Robert but that there are just changing momes. The previous moment is one of the conditions for the present moment and so the changes are not so drastic in a split second (but can be if, for example, we are in a crash or explosion) Bynderstanding this in theory but the theory all points to this moment. By the second stage of vipassana according to the texts there can be no doubt about this matter because the present moment has been well insighted and so the conditions are seen deeply. Note that attaining the vippasanananas is not an easy matter as is sometimes suggested. So we > have to observe our momentary experience in order to see the shifting nature of > reality. If we look at ourselves casually in the mirror we will get the > impression that thing are not really changing much, or very quickly. This is also > my sticking point. For there to be reincarnation between lives, without the > presence of a 'spiritual self' to be reincarnated into a 'new body', there has to > be something that is getting reincarnated. Otherwise there is no kammic > continuity. [Perhaps there is not, but just the general creation of new bodies, > etc. But this would take away the idea that the round of birth and death has to > be ceased by achieving individual awakening to Nibbana.] So I presume that what > is being reincarnated into a new body is the tendencies of the former life which > result in a particular configuration of kandhas creating a particularly formed new > body with specific tendencies that have continuity to the last life. This means > that the kammic tendencies are not merely of the physical body but transcend it in > a metaphysical way to influence the formation of a new body-mind in the new life. > I don't see how to avoid this implication, but it can be formulated without > positing a spiritual entity that is reborn, and so it may still work in the scheme > of Buddhism. It does not have to violate anatta to take place, in other words. _____________ This is all explained in the visuddhimagga under the chapter on Paticcasamupada. None of the khandas - whether material or mental- actually passes over from life to life. In fact nothing passes over from moment to moment now. It all arises and passes away completely . A (over) simple analogy is that of dominoes. One domino hits the next , which hits the next..... The kamma done now - and there is kamma now been made while you consider this - is a condition, a force if you like, that conditions the next moments and so it goes on... If there are sufficient conditions even now there could arise understanding of a level that penetrates a dhamma and attains vipassna nana or even nibbana. No one could stop it happening if the conditions were strong. Robert I like yourquestions. Could I suggest that you read over the Book "Conditions" available online at www.zolag.co.uk which is an introduction to this core part of Dhamma. It is a summary of the Patthana - the last book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka. Your questions below may be answered after reading this. If you would like to comment or ask questions based on the book that be great. best wishes robert > > This would still be the same process by which the realities are shifting at every > moment, but it would simply mean that there is something more involved than > physical reality, and I'm not sure how people feel about that. > > Also when you say the stream of conditioned phenomena may look and feel the same > but is subtly really different and new, I wonder where you believe that stream is > being apprehended. If it 'looks and feels the same' that has to be to a > conditioned consciousness, correct? This consciousness is formed within awareness > which is clouded by the conditioning. I wonder what the condition of this > awareness is? Mahayana Buddhism posits this awareness as being unclouded in its > true nature, but has the appearance of confusion and obstruction because of the > conditioned consciousnesses that are arising within in. Does this basic awareness > have a life beyond its occurence to a physical being? Does it only arise with the > formation of the body and mind? It seems to me that if this is the case, then > Buddhism is confined to the physical realm. If reincarnation takes place between > physical lifetimes, then there are forces at work that are beyond the body. I > would wonder what you think of these ideas and if both are so, how would they be > reconciled? > > Best, > Robert E. > > > 7951 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 3:29pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] faq update, answer to "how long does it take to pull a cow's udder" Dear Frank, --- frank kuan wrote: > > http://www.geocities.com/fcckuan/ > > > - buddha answers question about charity > "how long does it take to pull a cow's udder?" > - Mahakassapa answers the question, "why ordain?" > - The Cat's Meow, an inspirational post from pannaguna I'm not sure if there is some incompatibility with just my imac computer or with apple computers in general, but twice I got frozen screens and other problems when trying to check your website. In fact I've just had to spend 40mins by telephone with a mechanic to get my internet access back. I just mention this in case anyone else with a similar computer tries or in case you're unaware of some problem;-(( I'm afraid I won't be trying again for some good while, so you'll just have to post the cow's udder response back here, having raised it here in the first place! (Christine, what an expert answer you gave, we had a very good laugh;-)) > - Do Arahants dream? > - Form is like a lump of foam - the buddha > (inspirational section) (thanks to a post from binh) > - Is mindfulness "a way" or "the only way" to > liberation? (a discussion with cybele, binh, wchu) > Frank , if you wish to put any posts from dsg on another website, we'd just ask that you check with the writers involved first as a courtesy (and for copyright reasons) unless they've already indicated there's no need. I assume the post I wrote to your friend went to him in its entirety?? Looking forward to your (promised) responses and also your friend's;-) Sarah 7952 From: Sarah Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 4:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS Hi Anders, Thanks for getting back so promptly;-)) --- Anders Honore wrote: > > I would say that Panna is direct *intuitive* insight. Any knowledge > that is reliant on memory is purely conceptual and not really > liberative. fine, agreed > > > Just a sec.....OK, no panna at moments of clinging (lobha), but > even lobha can > > (and must) be object of panna and sati. As I've said, right view is > panna and > > should be developed. > > Well, I wouldn't say developed. I would rather it should be unveiled, > as Panna lies inherent, merely clouded by ignorance. ignorance is not > removed by adding extra layings of views and knowledge, but by > chipping away the attachment to the views already accumulated. Now our tracks start running in different directions.... this sounds a bit like the nibbana argument again. ‘Panna lies inherent, merely clouded by ignorance’ suggests there is panna already, if only it could be seen. What the Buddha teaches instead is that the inherent nature of citta now is that of ignorance and it is this very avijja that is the reason for sankhara and the other paticca samuppada factors to arise. I agree about the ‘chipping away’ of attachment to (wrong) views, but this is done by samma ditthi (right views or understanding), the first factor of the 5fold or 8fold noble paths at the precious moments when it arises only. > > > One of the points I have been trying to make is that "wrong" > and "right" are highly relative, and very much depends on factual > information as well personal subjective interpretation. The only way > to truly transcend wrong views, is to know directly and intuitively > for yourself. That is a knowledge that doesn't require confirmation > from any scripture or anything else. Fa Hui kindly reminded me of the Brahmajala Sutta and the idea above reminds me somewhat of the ‘Equivocation views’ which I mentioned to Herman before: ‘...he does not declare anything to be wholesome or unwholesome. But when questioned about this or that point, he resorts to evasive statements and to endless equivovation: ‘I do not take it thus, nor do I take it in that way, do I take it in some other way. I do not say that it is not, nor do I say that it is neither this nor that.’ (p.72, B.Bodhi transl) We’ve both agreed that panna is the key or direct knowledge which doesn’tneed any other confirmation. We also know, however, that it’s very easy, because of all the accumulated wrong views, to take for panna what is not. > > > > Yes, the scripture answered my question. But imagine this: If you > > > could not rely on any knowledge which you've taken from the > > > scriptures, how much would your understanding of the Dhamma > amount to? > > > > zero. > > I hope you do not take offence at my little quote here, but I think > it's an important point: > > "Luangpor Teean once classified people who had been educated into two > groups, and compared them as follows. In the first group are those > who know clearly or really know: they are wise, and when they speak > one can understand immediately. The second group comprises those > whose knowledge is a matter only of familiarity and memorizing, so > when they speak they will talk at great length and in a way that is > evasive and extravagant, or else they will cite the texts a great > deal in order to induce others to believe them: this is because they > don't really know the truth for themselves." No offence at anything you write at all, Anders (and pls always assume that late responses from me are always a result of being busy only;-)) I understood your question to be asking how much of what ‘I’ understand about realities or dhammas is attributable to the study of the Teachings. The answer for everyone is everything. No one can understand the Dhamma by themselves. Even any accumulated understanding that we are born with in this lifetime is attributable to what we’ve heard in a previous lifetime. We don’t discover anything about the dhamma by ourselves. This is the same answer for us all. The enlightened ones are sometimes referred to as ‘bahu-sutta’ (sp?) which I understand means 'having listened much'. > > What I am trying to emphasise is that memorised knowledge has no > fruit in terms of liberation. If you cannot say "all things are > empty" based on your own experience of it, and not because you have > been told by others, then it's really just useless knowledge. I think we have agreed many times that memorised conceptual knowledge is not panna or direct understanding and i don't think I've ever written anything to suggest it is. > I think we are still on somewhat different tracks. Yes....;-(( > > I'd like to share on of my favourite suttas, which I think is very > much relevant to our discussion (which, I must admit, I am finding > more and more interesting): Good! > Sutta Nipata IV.5 > Paramatthaka Sutta > How does this sutta accord with your understanding of the > buddhadhamma? This is a sutta, like the Brahmajala sutta mentioned about wrong views. It was taught with reference to views held by teachers in Savatthi. When the King heard about their frequent disputes he ordered a group of blind men to touch an elephant. Each one described how the elephant appeared to him. The king then told the teachers that their different views were as unreliable as the blind men’s descriptions of the elephant! The Buddha then confirms the King’s words in this sutta. In other words, our judgements and understandings when based on wrong views are very unreliable. Of course, the nature of wrong view is to see it as being right! This is why the Buddha stresses that whatever we read or hear should be checked against his Teachings: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/dn16.html Maha-Parinibbana Sutta, Digha Nikaya 'Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu -- or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.'' This is why it also concerns me in one or two later Sutra texts you’ve given recently, statements are said to be made by the Buddha but in fact are quite different from the Buddha’s words in the Pali Tipitaka. (but I’ll leave that thread to Gayan and others ;-)) Just looking at another translation of the Paramatthaka sutta as we talk (by Ven Saddhatissa who also gave me my copy), it ends: ‘They neither form any particular dogma nor prefer anything. Dogmatic views are not esteemed by them. The brahmin is not led by rule and rite. Thus, the steadfast one has gone to the further shore, never more to return.’ Wrong views and adherence to rites and rituals (with wrong view) are eradicated by the sotapanna. ‘Never more to return’ of course refers to the arahat. Even the arahat, however, has right understanding or right views and thinks about concepts. No wrong view, ignorance or attachment though. > > Sarah, if it is okay with you (?), I would love to continue this > discussion via personal email Hey Anders, everyone here enjoys hearing from you...the list wouldn’t exist if everyone took their correspondence back to personal mail. Seriously, I try to avoid personal emails or keep them very brief as I just don’t have time for them or other lists either I’m afraid. Now, you’re not someone who gets shy, so hope to hear whenever you have time. Sarah p.s Did you read the this article by B.Bodhi which Rob posted?/ You may find it interesting: http://www.abhidhamma.org/essay25.html 7953 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Sarah, Still catching up. --- Sarah wrote: > As I mentioned, Khun Sujin stressed that it should > not be understood that tanha > was ever kusala in anyway. However tanha for > following the noble path is or > developing kusala is not as bad as other kinds of > tanha (connected to the 5 > sensualities) as it can be upanissaya paccaya for > kusala and this is what > should be understood. This is how I read the Thai > comm notes you provided, but > it may not sound convincing to others;-) The responses to this thread are mostly over my head, hope you don't mind if I drag it back down a little. The above is pretty much the way I've been thinking of it, with the addition of samvega (sometimes translated as anxiety, agitation or dismay). Sorry if I've overlooked the answer to this in the preceding notes, but do you think samvega could be the 'grief to be pursued'? mike 7954 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:53pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Anusaya-latent tendencies-An Answer To Mike Dear Robert, Thanks for this comprehensive response. I'll have to give it some thought before responding, thanks for your patience. mike --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > --- "m. nease" wrote: > > No being is born or > > dies, as I understand it--even the concept of 'a > > being' doesn't arise and subside in the sense that > a > > paramattha dhamma does (except as a series of > > vitakkas). Of course I may be wrong about all of > > this! > > Dear Mike, > Well, I certainly understand the basic principle > that when there is an apparent > being, such as all of us walking around in our > bodies talking and reacting, > seeming to be separate independent entities, that in > fact there are no 'beings' > present, and no specific entity can be found within > the collection of kandhas that > make up the body, mind and other factors. > > But I am just trying to imagine the practical > implications of kamma and > reincarnation, and whether the collection of kandhas > that have been produced by > and continue to produce various tendencies create a > *physical* rebirth of those > kandhas and tendencies. Or do the physical/mental > factors that have accumulated > for the particular embodied collection of kandhas > that represents the apparent > individual get reconstituted in a new body because > of the continuing force of > those kammic tendencies. > > I hate to put it like that, but I wanted to try to > use language that did not imply > that there was a unified being being brought back > from a spiritual plane or > something. > > I know the topic I'm about to mention in this regard > has been discussed before, > but perhaps not concluded, but it still seems to me > that if one sees parinibbana > as the cessation of the kandhas represented by the > body of that particular > individual, and that there is nothing beyond the > body to reincarnate, that not > only is the law of kamma meaningless, but it is also > impossible to avoid an > annihilationist view that the cessation of the body > is the practical cessation of > the 'self'. Even if there is no 'self' to be > annihilated, if all deluded and > nibbanic experience is dependent on the individual > in this particular body, and it > is ceased upon death of the body, then there is a > practical implication that in > fact this body is the vehicle of a separate > individual and by positing that one > has in fact posited a separate and independent > entity, who rises and falls with > his own physical life and death. And so the > implication of an entity or being > concordant with that body is there, even if one > states that there is no entity > within. > > If the body is in fact not the vehicle of an entity > or being, and Buddhism is > about removing the illusion of this bodily > identification and the sense of a being > within, then the life of the awareness that is thus > liberated from identification > with that body and seeming individuality must take > place independent in some sense > from the life and death of that body. If it is a > false identification that is to > be seen through, then that false identification > cannot simply cease with the > cessation of the body with which the illusory > identity has taken place. If this > were the case, the path is redundant, because death > would end the illusion and > would constitute an annihilationist liberation. > Nibbana would likewise be > unnecessary. And it would be meaningless to go to > the trouble of trying to see > the reality of dharmas and break down the process by > which reality is constituted > and attempt to perceive it directly. One could live > their life as pleasantly as > possible and wait for the certain liberation of > death which would surely come in > due course. > > It seems to me that Buddhism has no necessary > purpose and makes no sense as a > path, if some liberation beyond the death of the > body is not required to free > sentient beings from apparent suffering and the > rounds of birth and death. > > If reincarnation is not literally of the kandhic > conglomeration that has been > formed by kammic tendencies and effects, then > liberation is not really necessary > and Buddhism makes little sense. Buddhism speaks of > releasing [apparent] sentient > beings from the interminable round of birth and > death. Without rebirth, the > suffering is not so great. The suffering is so > immensely great because it is > interminable and continues through aeons if not > abated by insight and realization > of Nibbana. It is the equivalent of eternal > damnation and it is this fact that > makes the Buddha's argument so powerful. I don't > see it working without that > factor in play. > > Don't get me wrong: I personaly would still want to > understand how dhammas and > the illusion of self are constituted through acts of > perception, mental factors > and apprehension by mind, but I take it that this is > because I have a > philosophical bent. But for the larger purpose of > liberation, I think it is the > idea of a universe bound up in interminable > suffering and delusion that motivates > the effort to see through it and stop accumulating > the trappings of seeming > entity. > > So I see these two factors: the continuty of kamma > and its effects beyond death; > and the continuing return of the seeming individual > in a new body because the > illusion of selfhood has not been penetrated, as > absolutely essential to the > process of Buddhism. This inherently involves a > mystical view of the universe, in > the sense that one cannot *only* speak of anatta and > kandhas. One must recognize > a positive process that is able to continue the > accumulation of kandhas and > effects of kamma on a non-physical level. These > laws may be independent and > impersonal, but they are not merely physical. Those > who believe that parinibbana > is the same as physical death I think must be > mistaken. Parinibbana must refer to > the physical death of an arahat who has obtained > liberation and has no driving > forces of kamma and cohesion of skandhas to bring > forth his seeming individuality > back into physical manifestation. Again, without > this distinction, Parinibbana is > meaningless and is only the same as death: the > attainment that we all will get > after living, without any great effort of > understanding. > > For myself, I also wonder whether the Buddha ever > settled definitively whether > awareness, which makes the whole process of > experiencing suffering and nibbana > possible, exists only within the experience of > beings in physical form, or whether > the awareness continues beyond physical dissolution. > I vaguely recall that this > is one of the questions one is not supposed to > ponder on, but I would be > interested if anyone has an idea about this. > > Sorry to go on so long. I have purposely been > redundant to some extent in order > to try to be clear about these points. I hope that > some of you in this group will > have knowledge about some of these issues which you > can share. > > Thanks, > Robert E. > > 7955 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:57pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Rob E --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Jon, > I appreciate your comments, and I would expect that Buddha would account > for > mindfulness being cultivated within all of the activities of living. > > At the same time, it still seems that certain attentional or energetic > correspondences to the meditative process do indeed take place when > sitting on the > floor with gently upright spine. > > I would ask, if all positions are equally good for cultivating > satipatthana, why > is it that everyone who wants to practice serious Buddhist meditation > sits > cross-legged on the floor? Or at least most do........ I would be > seriously > interested in your answer. Whatever the answer is, I will still agree, > even if > sitting in the traditional way is necessary, it doesn't mean that > mindfulness > cannot be cultivated the rest of the time, or that there aren't other > ways of > doing it. I'm just looking for the special significance that this > posture and > bearing seems to have on promoting mindfulness, samatha and insight. I would ask, special significance according to whom? I don't find any special significance accorded this posture in the Pali texts (although I am aware that there are some who would disagree with me on this point!). I thought Fa Hui made a useful point when he said (in effect) that people have always adopted this posture in the past and will presumably always do so in the future. This explains at least in part why there are numerous references in the suttas to monks adopting this posture as they develop wholesomeness of different kinds. This doesn't however make it something that the Buddha taught as necessary or advisable of even as suitable for all. On needs to look closely at each passage in which it appears in order to understand the significance of the reference. To get back to an earlier part of your post: > At the same time, it still seems that certain attentional or energetic > correspondences to the meditative process do indeed take place when > sitting on the > floor with gently upright spine. No doubt, as they do when doing any of a number of 'practices'. But a practice that gives a similar experience doesn't make it the same practice or the same result in fact. I have long since learnt to be sceptical of my own perception when it comes to knowing whether something is the development of kusala of any kind or not. I would not for example undertake a practice of any kind, sitting or otherwise, simply because it led to a particlar experience, or it was something that a lot of other people claimed brought results, or it accorded with my intuitive sense of what the path to enlightenment should be all about, or whatever. Personally I find it helpful to keep in mind that, when it comes to 'practice', if it's not right then it must be wrong; there are no marks for honest but misplaced intentions. In other words, better no practice than wrong practice. Jon 7956 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:38pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Good Grief! Dear Sarah, Still catching up. --- Sarah wrote: > As I mentioned, Khun Sujin stressed that it should > not be understood that tanha > was ever kusala in anyway. However tanha for > following the noble path is or > developing kusala is not as bad as other kinds of > tanha (connected to the 5 > sensualities) as it can be upanissaya paccaya for > kusala and this is what > should be understood. This is how I read the Thai > comm notes you provided, but > it may not sound convincing to others;-) The responses to this thread are mostly over my head, hope you don't mind if I drag it back down a little. The above is pretty much the way I've been thinking of it, with the addition of samvega (sometimes translated as anxiety, agitation or dismay). Sorry if I've overlooked the answer to this in the preceding notes, but do you think samvega could be the 'grief to be pursued'? mike 7957 From: m. nease Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:45pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Simile of saw, evil/kind mistress, right speech Dear Frank, --- frank k wrote: > In other suttas, the graphic nature of > some of the > similes really serves to emphasize the importance of > the topic. An > example: in the MN simile comparing the painful > burning side effects > of leprosy to sensual desire, that analogy is just > SO PERFECT. I agree! Here's a link to an excerpt: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn075.html Thanks for the reminder, Frank. mike 7958 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 1:17am Subject: vinaya, suttanta, abhidhamma Dear friends, many times we discussed the methods of Sutta and Abhidhamma. We know that there is also Abhidhamma in the suttas, and Suan explained this very well recently. Now I would like to quote from A.Sujin's Cambodian talks about this subject. Her approach is directed towards the practice. She stresses all the time that right understanding should be developed of the characteristics of realities appearing now, through six doors, otherwise we shall only have theoretical understanding. Then we shall also understand the deep meaning of the methods of Vinaya, Suttanta and Abhidhamma. The method of the Vinaya is important, also for laypeople. When you are used to the idea of the Suttanta method as being the Dhamma explained in conventional terms, you may wonder why A.Sujin says that the Buddha in the suttas explained about confidence, moral shame and fear of blame. These accompany kusala citta, and the Suttanta method teaches us to see the benefit of kusala and the disadvantage of akusala. Moral shame, hiri, and fear of blame, ottappa, perform their functions when one sees the disadvantage of akusala. Again, the purpose is not the theory, but the practice. Now I quote: End quote. Nina. 7959 From: frank kuan Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 0:17am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] faq update, answer to "how long does it take to pull a cow's udder" Hi Sarah, cow udder question at very end of post for anyone that wants to skip ahead. --- Sarah wrote: > > http://www.geocities.com/fcckuan/ > > > I'm not sure if there is some incompatibility with > just my imac computer or > with apple computers in general, but twice I got > frozen screens and other > problems when trying to check your website. In fact > I've just had to spend > 40mins by telephone with a mechanic to get my > internet access back. I just > mention this in case anyone else with a similar > computer tries or in case > you're unaware of some problem;-(( Older versions of IE or mac's might have problems with the color version, but the monochrome version should work fine. If anyone else has problems, please email me privately. I wrote it in the most basic rudimentary HTML that I learned in 4 hours, so nothing complicated is going on. > > I'm afraid I won't be trying again for some good > while, so you'll just have to > post the cow's udder response back here, having > raised it here in the first > place! (Christine, what an expert answer you gave, > we had a very good laugh;-)) Christine, I did enjoy your response as well :-) > Frank , if you wish to put any posts from dsg on > another website, we'd just ask > that you check with the writers involved first as a > courtesy (and for copyright > reasons) unless they've already indicated there's no > need. I've cleared permissions with everyone AFAIK. > > I assume the post I wrote to your friend went to him > in its entirety?? Yes. > > Looking forward to your (promised) responses and > also your friend's;-) > > Sarah > I'll work on my response later this week hopefully. I'm still way behind on catching up... [17.1] Buddha responds Bhikkhus, if someone were to give away a hundred pots of food as charity in the morning, a hundred pots of food as charity at noon, and a hundred pots of food as charity in the evening, and if someone else were to develop a mind of loving-kindess even for the time it takes to pull a cow's udder, either in the morning, at noon, or in the evening, this would be more fruitful than the former. Therefore, bhikkhus, you should train yourselves thus: 'We will develop and cultivate the liberation of mind by lovingkindness, make it our vehicle, make it our basis, stabilize it, exercise ourselves in it, and fully perfect it.' Thus should you train yourselves." (SN: chap ix 20 opammasamyutta, vol1 p.707) [17.1.0] How long does it take to pull a cow's udder? Joy Russell: "We had goats when I was a kid, and my family came from the MidWest farm country, so....I'd guess about 5 seconds to get one good squeeze of milk from a cow's udder. 20 minutes or so to empty the cow by hand......my great uncle does it all by machine!" So the sutta seems to say we should do 5 seconds to 20 minutes of metta practice in a session. 7960 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Sep 11, 2001 8:59pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Fa Hui Hello and welcome. I'm glad you found us. Thanks for your comment below about the formal sitting posture, which I have just made use of in a post to Rob E. --- Fa Hui wrote: > Hello, > > My name is Fa Hui, I am a Lay disciple of the Yunmen monastery in China > of > the Ch'an tradition. However, I do study various elements of the Pali > Canon. > I came upon this study group through a friend. > > I would just like to say that you can achieve any meditative absorbtion > doing > practically anything. What enlightenment means to me is that it is only > in > this very moment and that the Buddha did not discover the way TO > enlightenment but the way OF enlightenment. The only reason that > meditation > is done a great deal in the cross-legged posture is due to the fact that > it > was just the posture they used for meditation 2545 years ago. And quite > > frankly it's still in use, of course. I think you are saying here that posture is not critical for the attainment of enlightenment? If so, I agree, and would add that if it's not critical for the moment of attainment, not could it be critical for the development of the path leading to that moment. > May you reach Enlightenment in this lifetime, > > Fa Hui Best wishes to you, too. Jon 7961 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 2:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Personally I find it helpful to keep in mind that, when it comes to > 'practice', if it's not right then it must be wrong; there are no marks > for honest but misplaced intentions. In other words, better no practice > than wrong practice. Thanks for your response, Jon. Maybe it is better to have no practice than a wrong practice. But is there any doubt that the Buddha himself and all his immediate adherents sat in full lotus or a variation and practiced mindfulness meditation? So the safe bet would be to do likewise, no? Best, Robert E. 7962 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 2:47am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach > Fa Hui > I think you are saying here that posture is not critical for the > attainment of enlightenment? If so, I agree, and would add that if it's > not critical for the moment of attainment, not could it be critical for > the development of the path leading to that moment. Dear Fa Hui, I think it is as speculative to think that there is no special significance to posture as it is to say that there is. We know from both Taoist, Indian and Buddhist history that two basic ways of meditation have been most popular in these traditions: sitting cross-legged and standing still. In Taoism both symmetrical and asymmetrical standing poses have been used, and the sitting position of choice in almost all cultures has been sitting cross-legged in lotus or some similar variation. The energetic association with the spine, in combination with the well-rooted and stable position, give the impression that these positions are especially suited for meditation. Lying down tends towards torpor, although it is possible, as in some Tibetan practices, to do a very serious lying-down meditation. Even so, a specific position is prescribed [lying on one side, etc.] because of it's effect on energy and consciousness. It is obvious to most that slumping the chest causes relaxation but also tends towards sleepiness and sometimes depression, while lifting the chest tends towards wakefulness, vitality, but in the extreme is also tension producing. So to me, the balance of a relaxed but upright posture and the energetic channel of the spine being supported, give a much better foundation for meditation than an arbitrary or skewed posture. That is not to say that every moment cannot be turned into part of 'practice' or that for some practice is in the opposite direction of the way they wish to progress. I understand those possible individual variations. But in terms of a meditative practice, once chosen, I cannot see that posture is irrelevant. Best, Robert E. 7963 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 0:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach The Buddha talked about practicing meditation and mindfulness in any posture, ie while sitting, standing, laying down, walking. Enlightenment is in the moment not in some future life or the future of this life. It is not called the Path to Enlightenment but the Path of Enlightenment. Thats how I see it. Take care, Fa Hui 7964 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 0:41am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach I dont find irrelevant nor have I said it was, I meditate in the sitting posture just as any good Buddhist. However, I do not think that you have to perform the sitting posture to become a Buddha. It is like the story told throughout the Zen circles: "One day Hui-neng was walking and saw a young monk meditating. He said, "Young monk, why are always so zealous to sit on the cushion?" The monk replied, "Because I wish to become a buddha." Hui-neng sits down and begins to polish a brick. The monk asked, "Master, what are you doing?" "I'm trying to make a mirror." Take care, Fa Hui 7965 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:14am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Fa Hui wrote: > "One day Hui-neng was walking and saw a young monk meditating. He said, > "Young monk, why are always so zealous to sit on the cushion?" > > The monk replied, "Because I wish to become a buddha." Hui-neng sits down > and begins to polish a brick. The monk asked, "Master, what are you doing?" > > "I'm trying to make a mirror." > > Take care, > > Fa Hui Ha ha. good story, Fa Hui. Obviously, many people spend a lot of time sitting and this in itself will not lead to realization. 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" 7966 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:12am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Fa Hui wrote: > The Buddha talked about practicing meditation and mindfulness in any posture, > ie while sitting, standing, laying down, walking. Enlightenment is in the > moment not in some future life or the future of this life. It is not called > the Path to Enlightenment but the Path of Enlightenment. What you say is true and I basically agree with you. But the Buddha himself sat under the Bodhi tree and I am just saying that sitting or standing still is one good way in which to fully concentrate the mind as he did. > Thats how I see it. > > Take care, > > Fa Hui ===== 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" 7967 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:55am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Hello Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > I understand those possible individual variations. > But in terms of a meditative > practice, once chosen, I cannot see that posture is > irrelevant. I think it's generally acknowledged by practitioners of concentrative meditation (who, of course, were commonplace before the Buddha sasana) that the lotus posture is an excellent one for the cultivation of concentration. For satipatthaana, however, the suttas leave no question (I think) that all postures are suitable. mike 7968 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 8:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui Dear Fa Hui I don't think you get fully the point here and I will be very frank with you. The point here is not about meditating in this or that posture, let's don't use 'euphemisms' at all. People here mostly DO NOT PRACTICE MEDITATION AT ALL in any posture for that matter. They believe that is possible develop right understanding only based on the knowledge assimilated from Abhidhamma and the consequent mindfulness arisen with right conditions and right accumulations observing reality as it is. The fact is that unlike you they do not 'meditate in the sitting posture as any good buddhist' - as a matter of fact they DON'T MEDITATE, meaning they don't resort to any traditional meditation techniques as you and everybody else does in monasteries or buddhist centres. Now I am honestly fed up of discussing this meditation issue here but I think it's fair clarifying in order to allow you to understand properly what values and mindfulness tools the disciples of Khun Sujin use. I am not judging or implying any condemn here. I really retain that is useless to keep discussing on this - it's very much an individual choice. I don't think to have such accumulations to give up meditation personally. Therefore I study the texts and I meditate as well. Simply and plain. Metta and appreciation for your posts Cybele > >I dont find irrelevant nor have I said it was, I meditate in the sitting >posture just as any good Buddhist. However, I do not think that you have >to >perform the sitting posture to become a Buddha. It is like the story told >throughout the Zen circles: > >"One day Hui-neng was walking and saw a young monk meditating. He said, >"Young monk, why are always so zealous to sit on the cushion?" > >The monk replied, "Because I wish to become a buddha." Hui-neng sits down >and begins to polish a brick. The monk asked, "Master, what are you >doing?" > >"I'm trying to make a mirror." > >Take care, > >Fa Hui > > >> 7969 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:03am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach I did not disagree with you, nor do I now. Fa Hui 7970 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:11am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui Thank you. I was unaware of what the practitioners here did and how they practiced. I'm sure there are those that would like to say things amybe in support or in defense, and I would love to hear from more about this. Take care, Fa Hui 7971 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 9:40am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui Dear Fa Hui I don't have many qualities but sincerity is one of them not always understood nor appreciated. If you are interested on the subject and in order to get acquainted with the mentality here I would suggest you to check the archives. Myself I had sustained various discussions on this issue in the past. Not implying that my posts are particularly illuminating. :-) I have been in China once, in Beijing and Shanghai. Struggled a bit with the language. Love Cybele --- Fa Hui wrote: > Thank you. I was unaware of what the practitioners > here did and how they > practiced. I'm sure there are those that would like > to say things amybe in > support or in defense, and I would love to hear from > more about this. > > Take care, > > Fa Hui > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > > > > > 7972 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 11:11am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Right View as path factor Dear Nina, I do think I understand you well enough. A lot of this may just have to do with a manner of speaking. The way I used to think of this was that there is (e.g.) thought (in the sense of paññati), right thought (in the sense of pariyatti) and Right Thought of the Eightfold path (arising with all the other path-factors and taking nibbaana as an object)--each a dimensional leap from the one preceding it--and the same for the other factors (only recently would I have added the fivefold path with one of the other paramattha dhammas as an object). Thanks to you and Jon, this now seems to me to be a typical oversimplification, though I'm not sure I've completely given up on it yet. Anyway I'm grateful to you both for your explanations. mike --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > op 06-09-2001 20:35 schreef m. nease op > m nease: > > > > So I take it that on this level, right view would > be > > synonymous with wisdom, insight and the 5- or 6- > (or > > ultimately 8-) fold path... > > > >> N : We may have theoretical > >> understanding of kamma > >> and vipaka,and this is a level of panna, > > > >M: ...but on this level it wouldn't--but could > still be > > called right view. > > > > M: Could the same be said for the other > right-factors, or > > no? Can there be thought, for example, that could > be > > called right thought even though it doesn't arise > with > > the path? Or is right view unique in this sense > among > > the factors? > Dear Mike: There can be right thinking that is > kusala but not a factor of > the eightfold Path, such as vitakka in the > development of samatha: it > "thinks" of the meditation subject, this cetasika > touches or hits the > meditation subject again and again. Right thinking > is a Path factor when it > accompanies samma-ditthi of the eightfold Path, and > this goes for all the > other factors. Right thinking, samma-sankappa, of > the eightfold Path touches > the nama or rupa that appears right at the present > moment, so that panna of > the eightfold Path can develop. For example, when > hardness appears, right > thinking touches just that rupa, so that panna can > realize its > characteristic, and at that moment there is no > thought of the whole body, or > of the world, or of any concept. A.Sujin often said: > we have to reduce > ourselves from head to toe. Where is the whole body? > As she explained (in > Cambodia) when there is impingement on the > bodysense, and hardness is > experienced, only that one rupa appears; there is > only that one rupa left. > we know that we have arms, legs, a face, from > memory, but these do not > appear. When the eightfold Path is developed, the > object is not a concept, > only a paramattha dhamma. Nama and rupa are touched > by vitakka as they > appear one at a time, so that panna can developed > and their different > characteristics can be known. > In different classifications different words for > understanding are used, > right understanding or right view, they are of > different levels. Insight is > used for the stages of insight knowledge that is > developed. > Nina. 7973 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 11:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Fa Hui wrote: > I did not disagree with you, nor do I now. > > Fa Hui > Sorry, Fa Hui, but I am not sure who you are addressing here. If you could quote a small part of the message you are responding to, it would make it easier to keep the continuity. Thanks, Robert E. 7974 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 11:32am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui --- Cybele Chiodi wrote: > > Dear Fa Hui > > I don't have many qualities You don't? I don't know you very well, Cybele, but it seems to me you have many qualities. Here are a few that I notice in your posts: sincerity, yes, playfulness, liveliness, intelligence, dedication, ebulience, intensity, charm, sensitivity, volatility. Those are just a few. ...but sincerity is one of > them not always understood nor appreciated. Well it is by me. > If you are interested on the subject and in order to > get acquainted with the mentality here I would suggest > you to check the archives. > Myself I had sustained various discussions on this > issue in the past. > Not implying that my posts are particularly > illuminating. :-) > I have been in China once, in Beijing and Shanghai. > Struggled a bit with the language. > > Love > Cybele > > --- Fa Hui wrote: > > Thank you. I was unaware of what the practitioners > > here did and how they > > practiced. I'm sure there are those that would like > > to say things amybe in > > support or in defense, and I would love to hear from > > more about this. > > > > Take care, > > > > Fa Hui > > ===== 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" 7975 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 11:27am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- "m. nease" wrote: > Hello Robert, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > I understand those possible individual variations. > > But in terms of a meditative > > practice, once chosen, I cannot see that posture is > > irrelevant. > > I think it's generally acknowledged by practitioners > of concentrative meditation (who, of course, were > commonplace before the Buddha sasana) that the lotus > posture is an excellent one for the cultivation of > concentration. For satipatthaana, however, the suttas > leave no question (I think) that all postures are > suitable. > > mike Thanks, Mike. That makes sense. Satipatthana should not just be practiced as an exercise, but should be practiced at every possible moment, under all the various conditions that the Buddha outlined. But since satipatthana and concentration are so closely connected, wouldn't the sitting cultivation of concentration be an important part of progressing with satipatthana? 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" 7976 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 0:15pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui Dear Robert > --- Cybele Chiodi wrote: > > > > Dear Fa Hui > > > > I don't have many qualities > > You don't? I don't know you very well, Cybele, but > it seems to me you have many > qualities. Here are a few that I notice in your > posts: sincerity, yes, > playfulness, liveliness, intelligence, dedication, > ebulience, intensity, charm, > sensitivity, volatility. Those are just a few. Thank you very much. This boost to my esteem arrives at the right circumstances as I dared to manifest non compliance with American politics in another list while the media are exploiting the chance to create 'the martyrdom of America' when this tragedy is a result of American imperialism all over the world and they (I mean government not individuals) are only collecting the fruits of violence from the seeds they planted. Hope also you don't get mad at me. By the way I have been many times tempted to interact with you in the subject of many mails. But you were skilfull enough and I just kept quiet supporting you 'silently'. ;-) > > ...but sincerity is one of > > them not always understood nor appreciated. > > Well it is by me. I really appreciate your remarks, I feel them as not mere flattering but something you FEEL. I believe much more in gut feelings than in intellectualizations. But perhaps by now you changed mind about this Che Guevara's daughter. Life is impermanence. :-)))) 'No paseran'! Love Cybele > > > If you are interested on the subject and in order > to > > get acquainted with the mentality here I would > suggest > > you to check the archives. > > Myself I had sustained various discussions on this > > issue in the past. > > Not implying that my posts are particularly > > illuminating. :-) > > I have been in China once, in Beijing and > Shanghai. > > Struggled a bit with the language. > > > > Love > > Cybele > > 7977 From: Fa Hui Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 9:22am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Robert Epstein, Sorry for the error, I was refering to you. =) Fa Hui 7978 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 0:34pm Subject: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Dear Cybele, I am somewhat radical by nature, but I have zero sympathy for the Afganistani/Libyan/Iraqi version of terrorism. They have nothing but the most brutal, harsh and cruel regimes and have nothing positive to say for themselves. Bin Laden is a cold-blooded opportunist. None of these people are freedom fighters. I have sympathy for the Palestinian people, but not when they chant for blood in the streets. They have descended into their own form of Satanic worship. It is beyond fighting for their rights. I believe in the peace process in the middle east and that everyone involved has to give something. But the Palestinians proved in the most liberal Israeli administration in history [Rabin's, who was murdered for trying to create an equitable peace] that they would not take 'yes' for an answer. If they are totally committed to destruction of another people, and do not really wish to coexist, it is they who will reap the rewards of their own violence. One cannot callously say that 'America' is reaping its karmic reward. The thousands of people who were slain in this brutal attack in New York and Washington [perhaps 10 - 20,000 people killed] were not receiving *their* appropriate reward. They were just going to work. I don't believe that oppression justifies the killing of innocent people. And it doesn't really work. Algeria was freed from imperialism by this method, but what did they reap in exchange? More hardship, dictatorship and religious oppression. There must be a way to end oppression without causing more suffering and violence for the innocent, which inevitably continues the cycle of suffering. Gandhi had the right idea. His genius was to practice ahimsa while refusing to cooperate with oppression. The British could not maintain their rule in the face of his movement. They never lifted a hand to hurt anyone. The Dalai Lama has provided a similar example. The Tibetans cannot defeat Chinese rule, but his refusal to fall into rage and violence has won the respect of the world for the Tibetan people. I ask you to take a look at your politics in the light of Buddhist principles, without giving up your desire for freedom and equality in the world. Best, Robert E. ================================ --- Cybele Chiodi wrote: > > Dear Robert > > > --- Cybele Chiodi wrote: > > > > > > Dear Fa Hui > > > > > > I don't have many qualities > > > > You don't? I don't know you very well, Cybele, but > > it seems to me you have many > > qualities. Here are a few that I notice in your > > posts: sincerity, yes, > > playfulness, liveliness, intelligence, dedication, > > ebulience, intensity, charm, > > sensitivity, volatility. Those are just a few. > > Thank you very much. > This boost to my esteem arrives at the right > circumstances as I dared to manifest non compliance > with American politics in another list while the media > are exploiting the chance to create 'the martyrdom of > America' when this tragedy is a result of American > imperialism all over the world and they (I mean > government not individuals) are only collecting the > fruits of violence from the seeds they planted. > Hope also you don't get mad at me. > > By the way I have been many times tempted to interact > with you in the subject of many mails. > But you were skilfull enough and I just kept quiet > supporting you 'silently'. ;-) > > > > > ...but sincerity is one of > > > them not always understood nor appreciated. > > > > Well it is by me. > > I really appreciate your remarks, I feel them as not > mere flattering but something you FEEL. > I believe much more in gut feelings than in > intellectualizations. > But perhaps by now you changed mind about this Che > Guevara's daughter. > Life is impermanence. :-)))) > 'No paseran'! > > Love > Cybele ===== 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" 7979 From: Robert Epstein Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 2:00pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach --- Fa Hui wrote: > Robert Epstein, > > Sorry for the error, I was refering to you. > > =) > okay. thanks for the clarification. Take care, Robert E. 7980 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 0:24pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach Dear Robert, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Thanks, Mike. That makes sense. Satipatthana > should not just be practiced as an > exercise, but should be practiced at every possible > moment, under all the various > conditions that the Buddha outlined. But since > satipatthana and concentration are > so closely connected, wouldn't the sitting > cultivation of concentration be an > important part of progressing with satipatthana? There are suttas where satipatthaana and samaadhi seem to be combined, or talked about more or less inseparably I THINK--I can't cite these off-hand, but others have mentioned them. Truthfully, though, no, I don't think that seated, concentrative meditation is important to the progress of satipatthaana. I think they CAN progress together (not certain about this) but sufficient concentration for vipassanaa can occur without samaadhi having been cultivated, I believe. I'm relying on recollection of what I've heard here, as well as my general understanding of the pariyatti and maybe a little personal experience. I hope someone better-read might provide some documentation. By the way, I meditated in the lotus posture pretty much every day for many years--and have been doing so again lately. Not for cultivation of satipatthaana, though (though I certainly don't try to exclude it!)--honestly, just for a 'peaceful abiding here and now', because I enjoy it and understand it to be kusala--maybe a bit like Sarah's yoga. After all, it was just yoga before the Buddha sasana, wasn't it? mike 7981 From: cybele chiodi Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 2:44pm Subject: Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Insightful discourse Robert which I respect but while I don't believe or encourage violence it happens that I have 'zero sympathy' for American politics. If you were born on the 'wrong side of America' you could be much more sympathetic with my opinion. Sorry to disappoint you. Hopefully we can agree to disagree on this issue. :-) Love Cybele >Dear Cybele, >I am somewhat radical by nature, but I have zero sympathy for the >Afganistani/Libyan/Iraqi version of terrorism. They have nothing but the >most >brutal, harsh and cruel regimes and have nothing positive to say for >themselves. >Bin Laden is a cold-blooded opportunist. None of these people are freedom >fighters. > >I have sympathy for the Palestinian people, but not when they chant for >blood in >the streets..... 7982 From: Robert Kirkpatrick Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 3:29pm Subject: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Dear American members, very glad to hear from Robert E. and Howard - both in cities hit by this tragedy. Hope your friends and family are ok too. This is a letter Amara wrote today about it: > Dear , > > A big warm hug for you and all of us who are victims of this great > tragedy, and you are right, we are still here to have a chance to > practice the brahma vihara and help those whom we are able to, if only > with friendship and understanding, over such great distance. We all > know things happen from causes and only the Buddha could pinpoint the > kamma involved, and that those who performed this bad kamma are and > will be expiating this just as victims and perpetrators of akusala > each day would do. This is the great danger of samsara, I was talking > to Erik who used to work in the area that has been destroyed, (whose > wife is safe, by the way) who was telling me that when he said he > would be coming to Thailand people said he was coming to an unsafe > country. But statistics aside, all that keeps us safe or unsafe are > our individual kamma (kammasakata). Such situations remind us of the > dangers of samsara where no one is really 'safe' despite the illusions > of well being. > > Distance doesn't mean there are less emotional victims, my own mother > who has a heart condition was relatively traumatized from watching the > news (and she is still following the reports closely), even though she > has studied the dhamma for a long time. These news come to us through > the eyes and ears, yet we can't help taking them for people suffering, > most of the time. An opportunity for us to try to practice the brahma > vihara as best we can and accumulate panna wherever possible, again, > we are lucky to have the chance to accumulate kusala in all > situations, even though we might not be able to stand being eaten > alive by a lion. These kinds of things could happen to us any minute > of the day, even when you cross the street, but it doesn't make it > less horrific to the victims and their relatives, and help them as > best we can at least through moral support, as fellow humans > throughout the world. > > May we practice the brahma vihara to the best of our abilities and > reach the end of the dangers of samsara as the Buddha intended in > teaching the dhamma, > > Amara 7983 From: Sarah Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:42pm Subject: Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Dear Friends, --- Erik wrote: > Dear American members, > very glad to hear from Robert E. and Howard - both in cities hit by > this tragedy. Hope your friends and family are ok too. Yes our thoughts and very best wishes go out to anyone here who is affected by this tragedy and likewise hope no one has family or friends who have perished. May it be a reminder to us all that we never know what vipaka (results of kamma) will be received at the next moment. May we see the urgency of developing more wisdom and all kinds of kusala while we have the chance. With best wishes and metta, Sarah p.s Rob, thanks for sharing Amara's excellent comments. We were just talking on Sunday about vipaka and she raised a dog-bite example and then just as we were leaving lunch to go to the airport, I was bitten by our friend's dog (not serious)..we just never know. 7984 From: Sarah Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 5:43pm Subject: Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Dear Friends, --- Erik wrote: > Dear American members, > very glad to hear from Robert E. and Howard - both in cities hit by > this tragedy. Hope your friends and family are ok too. Yes our thoughts and very best wishes go out to anyone here who is affected by this tragedy and likewise hope no one has family or friends who have perished. May it be a reminder to us all that we never know what vipaka (results of kamma) will be received at the next moment. May we see the urgency of developing more wisdom and all kinds of kusala while we have the chance. With best wishes and metta, Sarah p.s Rob, thanks for sharing Amara's excellent comments. We were just talking on Sunday about vipaka and she raised a dog-bite example and then just as we were leaving lunch to go to the airport, I was bitten by our friend's dog (not serious)..we just never know. 7985 From: Howard Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 4:50pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui Hi, Fa Hui (and Cybele, and all) - In a message dated 9/11/01 9:13:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Fa Hui writes: > Thank you. I was unaware of what the practitioners here did and how they > practiced. I'm sure there are those that would like to say things amybe in > support or in defense, and I would love to hear from more about this. > > Take care, > > Fa Hui > =========================== I would like to add just a drop of a (possibly clarifying) comment. Many of us on this list, including Cybele and me, and *possibly* including a few of the students of Khun Sujin, *do* engage in regular, formal meditation, sitting and/or walking, as well as maintaining a "general mindfulness" of mind and body in various positions and activities. However, it *does* seem that most of the followers of Khun Sujin on this list do *not* engage in formal meditation. Perhaps a few of them engage in no meditation at all. But most of her followers here, I think, *do* attempt to maintain a "general mindfulness" as described above. Because of this last, I think it may be not entirely accurate to say that they don't meditate at all. 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) 7986 From: m. nease Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 8:56pm Subject: Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Dear Friends, Thanks (from 'an American') for the kind thoughts regarding yesterday's events. Gayan's building was evacuated in Boston (he's OK) and I had a very nice note from him, among other things wishing the victims and terrorists well--excellent, as usual. The really dimensional difference between the friendliness, compassion, gladness and equanimity taught by the Buddha and their corresponding 'worldly' cetasikas is that the former are non-exclusive--they are for absolutely everyone and everything, everywhere, without exception. Confrontation with graphic depictions of death and destruction shocks people mostly, I think, because we're unaware of the absolutely constant nature of these things--everything is burning, burning, always. This reflection helps to inspire a sense of urgency to the pursuit of understanding, I think. I noticed, while watching the images on TV and on my computer screen, that interspersed between the moments of dosa and patigha and moments of karunaa for those suffering pain and fear, were moments of lobha--for the beautiful photography of the blue sky and the billowing clouds of flame and smoke; for the awareness of my relative personal safety; for the unfolding of the story; and even moments of none-of-the-above when hearing a sound or touching something tangible was predominant for a moment--in those moments, no dosa or patigha or karunaa at all with regards to these events (or rather my concepts of them)--just liking or disliking or indifference to those sense-impingements. Politics are so beside the point. What causes this kind of conduct, has always caused it? Just ignorance, aversion and desire--the very causes of politics themselves and of injustice. The only thing that even begins to address these root causes is, I think, The Buddhadhamma. The Buddha's last exhortation was, "Vayadhamma sankhara appamadena sampadetha." "Subject to loss are conditioned things--try to achieve heedfulness." (my poor translation). Please excuse my rambling, mike 7987 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 9:38pm Subject: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics [Cybele] > America' when this tragedy is a result of American > > imperialism all over the world No. It is the result of an intense hatred and ignorance. I can't imagine the cetasikas arising and passing away in the planning and execution of the attacks. And my friends who work in Manhattan really didn't "deserve" to be attacked. Vipaka isn't necessarily proportional. 7988 From: Anders Honore Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 10:21pm Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS --- "Gayan Karunaratne" wrote: > dear anders, > it looks like that in this text when in pali tipitaka buddha explains the > Nibbana. > like " what is nibbana?, if something is the true the real,the constant,the > master, the foundation with a nature that is > unchanging, this is called Nibbana." > "For the > sake of sentient beings, in the Dharmas that he speaks there really > is a Nibbana( a release )" > > so isnt it like using Nibbana and this "true self" are interchangeable in > this sutra's context? Yes. That's true. > Yes , then when one says 'Nibbana is not self' , it would have no meaning > cause it amounts to 'Nibbana is not Nibbana'. But is it anywhere stated specifically that Nibbana is anatta in the Sutta Pitaka? > > I'm not trying to spread the view that Nibbana is self here. > > This is obvious , anders. > When mahayanists(people who have the mahayana background of dhamma) say word > 'self' it may not the word 'self' that theravadins are used to (heard about), > and vice versa. I think that certainly has something to do with it. Words meaning different things to different people. 7989 From: Howard Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 6:31pm Subject: Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: R... Hi, Robert - In a message dated 9/12/01 3:30:38 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert Kirkpatrick writes: > Dear American members, > very glad to hear from Robert E. and Howard - both in cities hit by > this tragedy. Hope your friends and family are ok too. > ========================== Thank you very much, Robert! The emotional wound is still very raw. Thankfully, my friends, family, and I are okay - physically. With great 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) 7990 From: Num Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 7:02pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a... Hi Howard, Robert E and everyone > Thank you very much, Robert! The emotional wound is still very raw. > Thankfully, my friends, family, and I are okay - physically. Hope you are doing better and on a road of recovery, mentally as well as spiritually. Thanks Robert K for fwd K.Amara's mail and I appreciate your insightful sharing, Mike. With metta and karuna for the victims, the survivors, their families as well for the terrorists. Best wishes from St. Louis. Num 7991 From: Dan Dalthorp Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 11:10pm Subject: Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS > But is it anywhere stated specifically that Nibbana is anatta in the > Sutta Pitaka? All sankhara are anicca and dukkha. All dhamma are anatta--including Nibbana. This is in Dhammapada, I believe, but others here are much better versed in the Suttas than I am. 7992 From: Gayan Karunaratne Date: Wed Sep 12, 2001 11:44pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: (Not) Catching Up-ANDERS dear anders, > But is it anywhere stated specifically that Nibbana is anatta in the > Sutta Pitaka? > I found the 'sabbe dhamma anatta' and in Mulapariyaya where buddha said Nibbana is not to be conceived as 'mine' as saying Nibbana is anatta. And in another instance buddha says 'Vimutti saraa sabbe dhamma' which means 'release is the essence of all dhammas'. This vimutti is another word for nibbana, so I thought when buddha says 'sabbe dhamma' he includes nibbana in it. But now I understand that (after reading the sanskrit mahaparinirvana sutra) the word 'self' points to a somewhat different context in Mahayana. Many thanks for you for giving me the opportunity to take a look at Mahayana texts, which I had not done earlier. So if I had a mahayanic background and had read that mahaparinirvana sutra and other texts, those would have driven a different understanding of the 'bodhi','true self' for this end. > > I think that certainly has something to do with it. Words meaning > different things to different people. > Yep, buddha did a great job explaining this fine , 'not-easy-to-comprehend' dhamma using the worldly language with its inherent shortcomings. :o) rgds, gayan 7993 From: Cybele Chiodi Date: Thu Sep 13, 2001 6:30am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics [Cybele] Dear Dan Dear group I understand that for an American citizen the emotional contents of this terroristic episode are particularly shocking and intense; certainly much more that for somebody who is not 'directly' involved even being sympathetic. Nevertheless this is not a justification to misinterpret what I commented, whether you agree or disagree with it. I wish to clarify and be listened without prejudice but I suppose is not feasible, too early, too 'raw the wounds' as Howard expressed. I never intended any 'personal' insinuation that anybody in this tragedy 'deserved' such pain. Neither I attempted to penetrate the misteries of kamma making assertions I could not be clear-sighted about. I only expressed my point of view observing the situation and whether you like or dislike it I am not going to 'lie' to recover 'popularity'. Response in the context: --- Dan Dalthorp wrote: > > America' when this tragedy is a result of > American > > > imperialism all over the world > > No. It is the result of an intense hatred and > ignorance. I can't > imagine the cetasikas arising and passing away in > the planning and > execution of the attacks. Dan this hatred and ignorance were in the deeds of american politics all the same not only in the mind of who planned and executed this attack. What doesn't means I have no compassion for the people involved. However it seems that anything regarding America becomes a 'media sensation' and the millions who suffer tragedies all over the world which don't get all that publicity yet endure devastating suffering all the same are neglected. This certainly doesn't diminish the sorrow and grief of Americans but is a fact to consider in my opinion. And I have the right to express freely my opinion even if is not 'politically correct' for you. Too easy blame others, too hard and painful consider the political mistakes (equally fruit of hatred, greedy and ignorance) that conduce to such clamorous extremes. > And my friends who work in Manhattan really didn't > "deserve" to be > attacked. Vipaka isn't necessarily proportional. Dan, who 'deserves' ever being hurt, suffering injustice or whatever pain one may have to face? But there are seeds of violence who bears fruits of violence and I believe that this tragedy is one of the consequences of all this 'ignorance and hatred' in international politics. I was not exactly considering the results of kamma of your friends and I know very well that vipaka is not necessarily proportional. But a nation as an individual has kammic responsabilities in my view. And if a nation commit violence cannot expect indulgence from another nation particularly if actually we are speaking of fundamentalists, radical and exalted. I don't 'hate' americans but as I told Robert E. I have no sympathy for American internationl policy of continuous interference like in Vietnam who leads to much more suffering. I am sorry if this add more burden to your pain but many of us from the Third World, in South America, in Africa, in Asia had to suffer a lot as a result of American interference. This is a real fact and I am not going to deny reality. As I am not insensible or denying your or other people sufferings in this tragedy. I am not expecting you to accept my view but I thought would be fair to clarify my position. I know this is not going to bring me popularity but I am not a hypocritical. Metta Cybele 7994 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Thu Sep 13, 2001 6:55am Subject: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Dear Sarah,and List, What an oasis of Dhamma sanity this list is. Below is a sample of what Buddhists doing to each other and promoting through the various lists. The one wanting to 'pave everything between the Saudi peninsula and China with nuclear glass' is the Moderator and List Owner of one to the biggest Buddhist e-groups on the Net with over a thousand members. "> America, also have the courage to put this in > perspective.... 3 billion people in the world go > hungry, tens of thousands of innocent people and > children die of starvation every day. Perspective is not the issue here. Starvation cannot possibly be rationally compared to the deliberate act of taking thousands of lives. There are many precepts I cannot keep, and in this situation I am weak when the idea of a non-violent response is proposed. Perhaps I was raised wrong. Obviously I am not as enlightened as I would like to be. I wish I could advocate a turn-the-other-cheek reply. But my teeny-tiny little American brain just wants to pave everything between the Saudi peninsula and China with nuclear glass." This is NOT an extreme example - many of the personal attacks were worse. Your post below Sarah would have been met with virulent hostility and verbal violence directed personally at you because you were not 'compassionate enough.' Any mention of vipaka would have been termed 'sick'. The many ganged up on the few. Some openly enjoying the verbal violence that targeted people who may have previously aroused aversion in them. Many people kept silent after seeing how the first posters mentioning conditional causation were treated. Some of us only had enough courage to try to stop the demonizing of Dhamma brothers and sisters, and are now left despising ourselves because we could not stand more publicly for what the Buddha taught. I cry for the physical, and emotional hurt and damage to individual people and their lives, to a psychologically and emotionally damaged nation and its shaken view of itself and the world, but mostly I cry for the shattering of my understanding of Practice and the feeling I once had of refuge in a world wide group of Dhamma followers. metta, Christine --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Friends, > Yes our thoughts and very best wishes go out to anyone here who is affected by > this tragedy and likewise hope no one has family or friends who have perished. > > May it be a reminder to us all that we never know what vipaka (results of > kamma) will be received at the next moment. May we see the urgency of > developing more wisdom and all kinds of kusala while we have the chance. > > With best wishes and metta, > Sarah > > p.s Rob, thanks for sharing Amara's excellent comments. We were just talking on > Sunday about vipaka and she raised a dog-bite example and then just as we were > leaving lunch to go to the airport, I was bitten by our friend's dog (not > serious)..we just never know. > > 7995 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Sep 13, 2001 8:02am Subject: Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Thanks, Robert, for your and Amara's messages. People here are devestated by what has taken place. Thousands of people are dead and they are still trying to drag living people from the rubble. But it is true that one who is unattached to a notion of self can regret the suffering while noting that all arising conditions are impermanent and empty. We pray for healing, and we also pray for liberation from samsara for all beings. Robert E. ======================= --- <> wrote: > Dear American members, > very glad to hear from Robert E. and Howard - both in cities hit by > this tragedy. Hope your friends and family are ok too. > This is a letter Amara wrote today about it: > > Dear , > > > > A big warm hug for you and all of us who are victims of this great > > tragedy, and you are right, we are still here to have a chance to > > practice the brahma vihara and help those whom we are able to, if > only > > with friendship and understanding, over such great distance. We > all > > know things happen from causes and only the Buddha could pinpoint > the > > kamma involved, and that those who performed this bad kamma are and > > will be expiating this just as victims and perpetrators of akusala > > each day would do. This is the great danger of samsara, I was > talking > > to Erik who used to work in the area that has been destroyed, > (whose > > wife is safe, by the way) who was telling me that when he said he > > would be coming to Thailand people said he was coming to an unsafe > > country. But statistics aside, all that keeps us safe or unsafe > are > > our individual kamma (kammasakata). Such situations remind us of > the > > dangers of samsara where no one is really 'safe' despite the > illusions > > of well being. > > > > Distance doesn't mean there are less emotional victims, my own > mother > > who has a heart condition was relatively traumatized from watching > the > > news (and she is still following the reports closely), even though > she > > has studied the dhamma for a long time. These news come to us > through > > the eyes and ears, yet we can't help taking them for people > suffering, > > most of the time. An opportunity for us to try to practice the > brahma > > vihara as best we can and accumulate panna wherever possible, > again, > > we are lucky to have the chance to accumulate kusala in all > > situations, even though we might not be able to stand being eaten > > alive by a lion. These kinds of things could happen to us any > minute > > of the day, even when you cross the street, but it doesn't make it > > less horrific to the victims and their relatives, and help them as > > best we can at least through moral support, as fellow humans > > throughout the world. > > > > May we practice the brahma vihara to the best of our abilities and > > reach the end of the dangers of samsara as the Buddha intended in > > teaching the dhamma, > > > > Amara ===== 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" 7996 From: Howard Date: Thu Sep 13, 2001 5:32am Subject: A Missing Person Hi, all - There is a man from my neighborhood, Carlos Dominguez, who worked for an insurance company on the 95th floor of one of the twin towers whose wife has heard nothing from or about him. If anyone has any information about him or anyone from that company, please let me know. I know this is a "long shot", but it's worth a try. 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) 7997 From: Howard Date: Thu Sep 13, 2001 5:36am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a... Hi, Num - In a message dated 9/12/01 11:08:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Num writes: > Hi Howard, Robert E and everyone > > > Thank you very much, Robert! The emotional wound is still very raw. > > Thankfully, my friends, family, and I are okay - physically. > > Hope you are doing better and on a road of recovery, mentally as well as > spiritually. > ============================ I think I missed replying to this, Num. Thank you so much for your kind wishes. 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) 7998 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Sep 13, 2001 0:11pm Subject: Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a Buddhist Focus (was: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: Jhanas Are Within Our Reach - Fa Hui) Dear Christine, Please do not judge the dhamma, or even the community of practitioners, by our lapses into humanity. People are imperfect and are bound to be that way for a long time. This does not stop the path from continuing as it should. It just means, as we've always known, that the job is difficult and the path is long. When you see others get pulled in by hatred and clouded by ignorance, if you possibly can, try looking at it for what it really is: an arising phenomena which has a temporary and empty reality. As soon as you grant meaning to these displays of ignorance, you have thrown yourself into the thicket of darkness. So just pick yourself up, and continue your practice. I don't mean at all to be cold or even detached. I just think that it is the job of those who can see a little, to provide a foundation of sanity when everyone else seems to be acting crazy. Why not be part of the help to others by providing an example of how to continue practicing mindfulness under trying circumstances? Any stake that you put in the community of others acting rationally is in a sense to invest them with 'self'. Since they are just going to react to arising conditions at any given time, they cannot be depended on any more than you can depend on your own 'self' to be consistent in its illusory responses. You can just keep on the path and be as mindful as you can at all times. I hope that those who have expressed some sadness here but have not gotten caught up in hatred will be some comfort to you. But I also think we should all remember that there is nothing to depend on in the world of arising phenomena. This is the very basis of Buddhism, and we are part of the world of arising phenomena, so let's not put our stake in what is temporary and empty, but in the path that provides a way out. And we will go together on that path, and keep each other company, each at our own pace and according to our own capabilities. Yours in Dhamma, Robert E. ================================== --- Christine Forsyth wrote: > Dear Sarah,and List, > > What an oasis of Dhamma sanity this list is. Below is a sample of > what Buddhists doing to each other and promoting through the various > lists. The one wanting to 'pave everything between the Saudi > peninsula and China with nuclear glass' is the Moderator and List > Owner of one to the biggest Buddhist e-groups on the Net with over a > thousand members. > > "> America, also have the courage to put this in > > perspective.... 3 billion people in the world go > > hungry, tens of thousands of innocent people and > > children die of starvation every day. > Perspective is not the issue here. Starvation cannot possibly be > rationally compared to the deliberate act of taking thousands of > lives. > There are many precepts I cannot keep, and in this situation I am > weak when the idea of a non-violent response is proposed. Perhaps I > was raised wrong. Obviously I am not as enlightened as I would like > to be. I wish I could advocate a turn-the-other-cheek reply. But my > teeny-tiny little American brain just wants to pave everything > between > the Saudi peninsula and China with nuclear glass." > > This is NOT an extreme example - many of the personal attacks were > worse. > > Your post below Sarah would have been met with virulent hostility > and verbal violence directed personally at you because you were > not 'compassionate enough.' Any mention of vipaka would have been > termed 'sick'. The many ganged up on the few. Some openly enjoying > the verbal violence that targeted people who may have previously > aroused aversion in them. > Many people kept silent after seeing how the first posters > mentioning conditional causation were treated. Some of us only had > enough courage to try to stop the demonizing of Dhamma brothers and > sisters, and are now left despising ourselves because we could not > stand more publicly for what the Buddha taught. > > I cry for the physical, and emotional hurt and damage to individual > people and their lives, to a psychologically and emotionally damaged > nation and its shaken view of itself and the world, but mostly I cry > for the shattering of my understanding of Practice and the feeling I > once had of refuge in a world wide group of Dhamma followers. > > metta, > Christine > > --- Sarah wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > > Yes our thoughts and very best wishes go out to anyone here who is > affected by > > this tragedy and likewise hope no one has family or friends who > have perished. > > > > May it be a reminder to us all that we never know what vipaka > (results of > > kamma) will be received at the next moment. May we see the urgency > of > > developing more wisdom and all kinds of kusala while we have the > chance. > > > > With best wishes and metta, > > Sarah > > > > p.s Rob, thanks for sharing Amara's excellent comments. We were > just talking on > > Sunday about vipaka and she raised a dog-bite example and then just > as we were > > leaving lunch to go to the airport, I was bitten by our friend's > dog (not > > serious)..we just never know. > > > > ===== 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" 7999 From: Robert Epstein Date: Thu Sep 13, 2001 11:44am Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] Re: O/T: A Momentary Descent into Politics, But with a... --- Num wrote: > With metta and karuna for the victims, the survivors, their families as well > for the terrorists. Yes, Num, although it would not be popular, we should wish for the liberation of the terrorists as well. They have a long dark road to get to the light. Robert E.