12200 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 2:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Frank Frank --- frank kuan wrote: > Hi Jon, > I see your point about the 8foldpath being a > culmination and just a STARTING point for advanced > practice, but the fact that the 8foldpath contains > some limbs which are redundant tells me that it's > meant to be a complete solution for practitioners of > all levels from householder to the saintly. > Right action, right livelihood, right speech for > example, are redundant corollaries if an advanced > practitioner already has a good understanding of right > view, right effort. With one practicing right > mindfulness, right view, right effort, how can wrong > speech, wrong action, wrong livelihood occur? The fact > that those 3 limbs are spelled out tells me it's there > to provide a support for those who don't have a good > understanding of right view yet, i.e., worldly > householders. > > -fk It's of course true that at the moment of right mindfulness or right view there cannot be wrong speech, action or livelihood. But this is so at any moment of kusala (e.g., dana, observing sila, metta), not just at moments of vipassana bhavana. Our own experience teaches us, however, that any moment of kusala can be followed by moments of wrong speech, wrong action or wrong livelihood or any other form of akusala. If the latent tendencies for the akusala are there, nothing can stop it from manifesting (other than on a very temporary basis). My point is that you can't deduce the nature of the Noble Eightfold Path just by looking at the description of the path factors. Rather it's the other way around; you can only understand the significance of the factors by understanding what is meant by the Noble Eightfold Path (one of the Four Noble Truths). I believe that, properly understood, none of the path factors are 'redundant'. The Visuddhimagga makes it clear that all 8 factors arise at any (supramundane) path moment (i.e., moment of enlightenment), while 5 (or sometimes 6) of the path factors arise at any mundane path moment (i.e., moment of insight). There are plenty of examples in the suttas of people who had very wrong speech, action or livelihood right up to the time of their enlightenment! Jon 12201 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 2:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Seems pretty easy to me. Just read one of Nina's or Ken O's emails. > They're oozing with tranquility and reading them is cultivating > tranquilty. Every word of the tipitaka is about tranquility, peace, few > activities. Tranquility is nothing less than an imperfect nibbana; > insight is the bicycle we use to get there. I admit, getting off the > bicycle is difficult. Cultivating isn't quite perfecting. Great sense of humour, Larry! I take your bicycle as the modern-day equivalent of the raft mentioned in the suttas ;-)) Jon > Larry > ------------------- > Jon wrote: > Larry > --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > My definition of samatha bhavana is "cultivating tranquility", what's > yours? > Larry > Great definition (and you can never go far wrong with a literal > translation!). I guess my problem then becomes matching "cultivating > tranquility" with "Not making special efforts and waiting around for > aeons for results". Maybe it's obvious to others! > I can't improve on your definition, but I do think it's something that's > a lot easier said than done. But nonetheless possible in daily life, I > believe. > Jon 12202 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana - Rob Ep Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi Jon! > I know I've been absent lately, but I always intend to pop back in, and > here I am, > manifesting my intention!! [no one to do that of course, but it's an > awkward way > of saying 'it happens'.] > > This probably sounds like an old record, but if one can indeed > 'cultivate > tranquility', why not do so through samatha meditation? 'Cultivate tranquillity' and 'samatha meditation' are terms that are often used as a translation for the same Pali term, 'samatha bhavana'. So the question, as ever, is what exactly *is* samatha bhavana? > There's no doubt that > breathing meditation, slowing and lengthening the breath, etc., creates > 'tranquility'. You could even say it 'cultivates' it. Like all terms used by the Buddha, samatha bhavana has a very specific meaning. The tranquillity ('samatha') is the tranquillity that comes from the *quality of kusala*, and the cultivation ('bhavana') connotes the fact that the kusala in question is *accompanied by panna*. Now when it comes to breathing meditation, there is nothing *necessarily* kusala about focussing on one's breath. Focussing on the breath is not like, say, metta which is something intrinsically kusala (if it's not kusala then it's not metta). It's something that anyone can do at any time. So if breathing meditation is to be samatha bhavana, one needs to know where the kusala and the panna come in (you cannot just equate breathing meditation with samatha bhavana). I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this. > I suppose this can be done > in 'everyday life' as well, although if you meditate regularly, then > meditation is > part of your 'everyday life' so I guess it would qualify as a 'double > cultivation vehicle'. No doubt breath can be the object of one's attention in daily life, but I was not saying that samatha bhavana based on mindfulness of breath is something that can be developed in daily life, since breath is said to be an extremely difficult object for samatha bhavana. > Although samatha may suppress defilements and thus mask akusala states, > this is > true of any tranquility, not just the meditative kind, so if one is > indeed to > 'cultivate tranquility', one may as well do it in a skillful way. At > least part of the time. I don't think I've ever made this comment ('masking akusala states') about samatha, and I don't see that as a reason for not developing it. > Hope to post more as time allows, as I work my way backwards > through....oh my > G**...three hundred some odd posts. Welcome back, and look forward to hearing more from you, Rob. Jon 12203 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 2:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > "What is the stream? > > "This Noble Eightfold Path is the stream; that is, right view, right > > intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, > > fright mindfulness, right concentration. > > "What is a stream-enterer? > > "One who possesses this Noble Eightfold Path is a stream-enterer: > this > > venerable one of such a name and clan." > > Jon, > I think another interpretation of this section of the Sutta is one that > makes > sense to me: That the Noble Eightfold Path is the 'stream' which all > Buddhists > approach through attempting to cultivate various aspects of the eight elements; > and that a 'Stream Enterer' is one who 'possesses' this Noble Eightfold Path, in > other words, one who has accomplished, mastered, these eight elements to an > adequate extent. They are no longer trying to enter the stream, but > have entered > that same stream and will then be carried along by it. Interesting, Rob. I don't recall ever having seen the stream used in the context you suggest, but I'll keep this possibility in mind when reading the texts. However, I'm not sure that it makes any difference, since even on this interpretation, the factors for attaining stream-entry, as given in the same sutta in the passage just before the passage you quote, are not the individual factors of the Noble Eightfold Path but another set of factors altogether (namely, association with superior persons, hearing the true Dhamma, careful attention, and practice in accordance with the Dhamma). It's true that the 4th Noble Truth (the Noble Eightfold Path) is a truth that is 'to be developed', but this refers to the path itself rather than the individual factors. I do not recall seeing in the texts reference to the development of the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path -- the reference is always to the development of the path i.e., the path as an eightfold entity. There is an important distinction to be made here between a *single entity comprising a number of factors* and a *grouping of separate factors that share a common feature or function*. An example of the latter would be the 37 bodhi-pakkhiya dhamma (factors pertaining to enlightenment). The Noble Eightfold Path is an example of the former. The style of the name ('eightfold') gives a clue to its nature. Jon > I think it makes sense to say that we are all fumbling around with the eight > elements of the Noble Eightfold Path as long as we have not mastered them. > Certainly, if the Jhanas are the definition of Right Concentration, > which I'll > take as given just for this example, we know it is exceedingly difficult to > accomplish the first jhana, and even harder to get into the second, > third or > fourth. So we are struggling with one or another element, both > progressively and > sporadically. When we have enough mastery to be able to accomplish these > elements, we 'possess' the Path and enter the Stream. This view is both > progressive and ultimate. It neither necessitates nor denies the idea of the > elements all taking place at the same time or separately, but allows for gradual > cultivation, as well as skillful accomplishment, when the eight elements all come > together. > To me, this makes the most sense and seems to satisfy the sense of what I read in > the Sutta. > > Best, > Robert Ep. 12204 From: Sarah Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 2:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (was: The Two Truths (for Howard) (II)) Dear Ken H, Always good to hear from you.....I'll leave this thread to you and Rob Ep (and Erik);-) Your post has come into my 'inbox' right down at the bottom of the page and supposedly a few days after you sent it. I notice you use a hotmail account and I have an idea that yahoo 'blacklists' hotmail...;-( Chris and I already 'see' ourselves brunching and chatting with you and other friends by the Noosa waves in July;-) Sarah ========== {??w14 wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > I agree. > > > > robert ep. > > > > ====== > > > > > > Hi, > > I disagree. > > Which is the better guide to the Dhamma; `gut feeling,' or wise, > carefully considered opinion accompanied, on all points, by > references to the ancient Theravadin texts? > > No contest. > > Kind regards > Ken H > > > --- rikpa21 wrote: ................ 12205 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 5:46pm Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n Dear Howard, In my blurry way of thinking this is what came to my mind; The Buddha taught about conditions and anatta. What ever dhamma arises now has already fallen aw?y. Sati would have arisen or not depends on conditions. K. Sujin often reminds us that the right results must follow the right cause. To me the conditions that cause a dhamma to arise are very very complex. I have absolutely no idea how and when satipatthana can arise, considering the accumulations it would seem impossible that sati can ever arise in me, but actually I can never know. According to what I've heard, it would be panna not me(lobha/ dosa/ moha) which will help condition the arising of satipatthana. If at this moment the conditions are right for panna and sati to arise, it would. If not, thinking that I can do something about it, would in my understanding, not be the work of panna. On the other hand, someone might come to the conclusion after extensive reading of the texts, that what the Buddha taught was a step-by-step program as conditions for the arising of sati, I think to some extent that this can condition the false view that understanding cannot happen now. And an idea that there are a more ideal time and place for practice. This I think is 'doubt'. Doubt that there are dhammas arising now and that they can be known if conditions are right. I had other thoughts too, but I am very blurred now. Maybe if I hear your response I would remember. But I have the fear that I will be getting tough questions from you, ones I won't be able to resopnd to. :-) Have mercy. Best, Sukin. -----Original Message----- From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] Sent: Friday, March 29, 2002 12:03 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 3/29/02 1:31:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukin@k... writes: > Dear Howard, > I think you are right, only I think it is a little more precise > than that. If it is not about understanding the dhammas right now, > but instead one thinks that one has to follow a prescribed program > of practice, then surely there is still doubt, no? > What do you think? > Best, > Sukin. ============================= Could you say a bit more? I'm afraid I don't quite understand what you mean. 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) 12206 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 5:56pm Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n Dear Christine, Nice to know that my words can be useful too. I must say though, that I am not struggling with 'mana' particularly, but due to ignorance, there is struggle here with EVERYTHING. Ken O. should write more, his posts are a condition for good cheer. Best wishes, Sukin. Dear Sukin and Howard, I am enjoying your discussion as it touches on 'doubt', ...thanks for raising additonal aspects to consider. And, Sukin, it is reassuring (in some strange way) to know, as you mentioned in a previous post, that others struggle with 'mana' too.:-) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Sukinder" wrote: > Dear Howard, > I think you are right, only I think it is a little more precise > than that. If it is not about understanding the dhammas right now, > but instead one thinks that one has to follow a prescribed program > of practice, then surely there is still doubt, no? > What do you think? > Best, > Sukin. 12207 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 3:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (was: The Two Truths (for Howard) (II)) Dear Ken H, July in Noosa - kilometres of beautiful unspoiled, uncrowded, sandy, surf beaches. There is a reason for the uncrowded part.:) :) And those that are there are wearing wetsuits...... Ken, I wonder if it is unskillful not to tell Sarah and Jon that July is mid-winter in Queensland. Air temperatures down to between 21C Max.(69.8F) and 8C Min.(46.4F) I'm not sure about water temperatures.....never put even a toe in until November! :) But this seems to indicate great conditions for Dhamma discussions over hot chocolate, hot tea, hot coffee, or food of any description as long as it's hot, in a heated coffee shop or heated restaurant. .......Let's just let them find out for themselves, experience is the best teacher after all. :) metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Ken H, > > Always good to hear from you..... <<<<>>>>> > Chris and I already 'see' ourselves brunching and chatting with you and > other friends by the Noosa waves in July;-) > > Sarah > ========== 12208 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Mar 25, 2002 8:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tibetan tanka question Frank, In my occasional experience of Thankas in Nepal, I always saw the curtain rolled up in a cylindrical fashion and then tied with two little ribbons that generally hang on top, so it just sits like a little roll above the Thanka. Most Thankas also have a string which runs above the top and attaches to the top two corners, and this hangs on a nail or picture hook or whatever. When the Thanka is not on display, the ribbons are untied, and the curtain covers the full length and breadth of the Thanka to protect it from dust and wear. I think it is that simple, but I could be wrong. When the Thankas were stored, the curtain would cover the Thanka, and then the whole Thanka would be rolled up into a roll, then tied with the two ribbon ties. Robert Ep. ============== --- frank kuan wrote: > My ashtanga yoga teachers have a tibetan tanka (cloth > painting of a buddha) hanging in the studio. > > There's a yellow/red curtain thingie at the top of the > tanka that's currently rolled up, and they wanted to > know what the proper way to drape the curtain around > the painting. > > Does anyone know the answer? Someone with quicker lama > access than me? Thanks. > > While I'm personally not a big fan of peripheral > aspects of cultural buddhist rites and rituals, it > doesn't hurt to make some brownie points with my yoga > friends. Help me look smart :-) Besides, now that > they've asked me to advise on this thinking I'm a > Buddhist who knows stuff, I would hate to give > erroneous advice and have one of the wrathful dharma > protectors come down from the deva realms to kick my > ass. Actually, that would be pretty cool. Devas don't > mess with dhamma practitioners who haven't > accomplished anything, so if I get attacked, it means > I'm signifigant enough to warrant their attention :-) > > -fk 12209 From: yuzhonghao Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 8:01am Subject: Which Victor? Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi Christine, Frank, and Robert, Christine, I am glad that you enjoyed. Frank, perhaps I was giving you the impression that I was on another plane(t). Robert, I don't think I measure up to you in volubility. Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > Don't take any notice of the(jolly) jokers below ...:) :) > > I enjoyed reading the verses from the Dhammapada, plus your linking > the building metaphors of Heidegger and the Buddha in this post. > I especially liked your last paragraph - > "However, the truth is that any dwelling in the world such as house, > or > brahma vihara, or any jhana, or any intellectual field of constructs > (mathematics, for instance), is construction, building, fabrications, > formations, subject to destruction, disintegration, change, does not > offer > freedom, peace, security." > > > metta, > Christine > 'It is to be seen as it actually is with right > discernment thus: "This is not mine. This I am not. This is not my > self."' [Sorry Victor, withdrawal symptoms....] > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., frank kuan wrote: > > > > --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > > wrote: > > > --- > > > Victor, > > > You're becoming almost voluble. I have nothing to > > > add except to say I > > > appreciate you giving us extra details to consider. > > > kind regards > > > robertt > > > > > > > I had to check the sender line on the post heading > > to make sure it was Victor Yu and not a new Victor on > > the list. And then I had to check the calendar to make > > sure it wasn't April 1st yet. And then I scanned the > > message again to look for secret references to anatta. > > And even after all this, I still suspect some alien > > abducted Victor and replaced him with someone else, or > > a buddhist friend is borrowing his account and using > > it without his knowledge. So prankster friend or > > alien, we don't know what you're up to, but we demand > > you return the REAL Victor. > > > > -fk > > p.s. :-) 12210 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Mar 25, 2002 8:05pm Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) --- Sukinder wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > You said: > "concepts and ideas are defintely impermanent." > > I do not understand this. To me concepts have no reality whatsoever, > so how can it have the characteristic of impermanence? From my > experience it is because of concepts that the illusion of permanence > is formed? > But my understanding is not very good so I would greatly appreciate some > elaboration. > Thanks in advance. > Sukin. I would say that it's incorrect to think that concepts have 'no reality whatsoever'. If you take a look at what this means, it would mean that they do not even come into being as concepts. But since we refer to them, and can be fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more accurate to say that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim to represent realities which they do not'. In other words, they are illusory, but not non-existent. In the famous illusion of the rope and the snake, where a rope is mistaken for a snake, one would normally say that the snake does not exist at all. I would say this incorrect. The rope exists as an actual object [in conventional terms] while the snake *does* exist, but only as an image or hallucination. So it is more correct to say that the snake in this case is an image formed by the mind, or a trick of the mind, rather than to say that it is non-existent. This is important, because then we can start to look at the status of the things that arise in the mind and in the senses, rather than talking about them in a general way. Now I think the way that concepts are looked at in Abhidhamma is a little more confusing and technical, because it is said that concepts do not have a characteristic which can be experienced as a reality, while thoughts I believe do have an identifiable 'actual' characteristics -- I'm ready for more correction on this one -- but I don't think anyone would say that the occurence of a concept as a part of a thought *does not actually take place*. The thought refers to the concept and references it in either language or image, so as the referent in a thought or sentence, the concept exists. The reason it doesn't have its own characteristic, I am guessing, is because a concept disguises itself as something other than what it is. Therefore it falls apart on closer inspection, in terms of what it claims to be. If I say 'I'm thinking of a rock', the 'rock' in that thought pretends to be an actual rock in the thought. The thought will think that it is indeed thinking of a rock. In fact it is thinking of an image or idea of a rock, not a real rock, and so the rock referred to is a concept, not a 'reality'. When these concepts are confused with the reality they are trying to talk or think about, we are thrice removed from the reality of experience: 1/ we are removed from knowing that we are dealing with a concept not a reality; 2/ we are removed from the reality itself by dealing with a substitute image or definition as represented in the concept; and 3/ we are removed from the rupa that is occuring in the moment by looking at the reality as an object beyond the moment. But the concept is still only illusory, not nonexistent. It arises as part of a thought, a part of a thought that makes thought think it is more or other than merely a fabrication in the moment. I'm now ready to be deconstructed, reconstructed, dissected, corrected, or whatever else is necessary. Robert Ep. 12211 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 8:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Doubt Christine, dsg, Here is an interesting comment from "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma"; it concerns akusala consciousness rooted in dilusion (mohamulacittani). ----------------- Associated with doubt (vicikicchasampayutta): The commentators give two etymological explanations of the word "vicikiccha": (i) vexation due to perplexed thinking; and (ii) being devoid of the remedy consisting in knowledge.* Both these explanations indicate that vicikiccha, doubt, means perplexity, skepticism or indecisiveness, due to the prevalence of delusion. The citta associated with this doubt is the first type of consciousness rooted in delusion. *(i) Vici (vicinato) = inquiring + kicchi, to be vexed; (ii) vi = devoid of + cikiccha = remedy. 12212 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 4:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi, Robert - I find what you write here to be very well put! Your understanding on this issue and mine are very close. With metta, Howard In a message dated 3/29/02 11:48:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > I would say that it's incorrect to think that concepts have 'no reality > whatsoever'. If you take a look at what this means, it would mean that > they do > not even come into being as concepts. But since we refer to them, and can > be > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more accurate to > say > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim to represent > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are illusory, but not > non-existent. > > In the famous illusion of the rope and the snake, where a rope is mistaken > for a > snake, one would normally say that the snake does not exist at all. I > would say > this incorrect. The rope exists as an actual object [in conventional > terms] while > the snake *does* exist, but only as an image or hallucination. So it is > more > correct to say that the snake in this case is an image formed by the mind, > or a > trick of the mind, rather than to say that it is non-existent. This is > important, > because then we can start to look at the status of the things that arise in > the > mind and in the senses, rather than talking about them in a general way. > > Now I think the way that concepts are looked at in Abhidhamma is a little > more > confusing and technical, because it is said that concepts do not have a > characteristic which can be experienced as a reality, while thoughts I > believe do > have an identifiable 'actual' characteristics -- I'm ready for more > correction on > this one -- but I don't think anyone would say that the occurence of a > concept as > a part of a thought *does not actually take place*. The thought refers to > the > concept and references it in either language or image, so as the referent > in a > thought or sentence, the concept exists. The reason it doesn't have its > own > characteristic, I am guessing, is because a concept disguises itself as > something > other than what it is. Therefore it falls apart on closer inspection, in > terms of > what it claims to be. If I say 'I'm thinking of a rock', the 'rock' in > that > thought pretends to be an actual rock in the thought. The thought will > think that > it is indeed thinking of a rock. In fact it is thinking of an image or > idea of a > rock, not a real rock, and so the rock referred to is a concept, not a > 'reality'. > When these concepts are confused with the reality they are trying to talk > or think > about, we are thrice removed from the reality of experience: 1/ we are > removed > from knowing that we are dealing with a concept not a reality; 2/ we are > removed > from the reality itself by dealing with a substitute image or definition as > represented in the concept; and 3/ we are removed from the rupa that is > occuring > in the moment by looking at the reality as an object beyond the moment. > > But the concept is still only illusory, not nonexistent. It arises as part > of a > thought, a part of a thought that makes thought think it is more or other > than > merely a fabrication in the moment. > > I'm now ready to be deconstructed, reconstructed, dissected, corrected, or > whatever else is necessary. > > Robert Ep. > /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) 12213 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 9:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma / akusala citta ADL ch. 1 (4,5,6) Thanks Robert, I'm still not 100% clear on this. Kamma is an intention to act initiated by kusala/akusala citta. What makes it kamma isn't so much the activity but that the activity is qualified by the intention, which in turn was initiated by kusala/akusala citta. So the resultant consciousness (vipakacitta) is an appraisal of the actual activity which arises independent of the intention because intention cannot control activity. However, this appraisal is based on the intention and due to the discrepancy between intention and actuality the stage is set for the arising of new kusala/akusala citta which in turn produces another round of kamma and vipaka citta. Just thinking with my fingers. If you would care to correct this I would appreciate it, a little ;-) Larry ------------------------ Robert wrote: Dear Larry, This is a somewhat complex matter. Sometimes the texts don't distinguish between akusala/kusala citta and akusala/kusala kamma However at times they make distinctions between kilesa (all defilements) and akusala kamma. For examaple there is the three rounds : kamma-vatta(action), vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements such as craving and ignorance). The actual moments of experience through the doorways are vipaka (result) but immediately there is (or may be) reaction which is defilement(kilesa-vatta) and this is a condition for kamma-vatta (deed). Then again when they classify akusala (such as dosa) they make distinctions. Such as the following three levels: anusaya: defilements still latent pariyutthána: rising up; here kilesa(including slight dosa or craving) are present. vítikkama: this is when the 10 types of unwholesome action are committed. _- On the other hand, in the example about the three rounds above, when we consider the Paticcasamuppada from the point of view of occuring in one moment (it can be considered over lifetimes as well)then kilesa-vatta and kamma-vatta are essentially the same. Thus is why it gets complex. But anyway it is useful to know that akusala comes in different degrees. best wishes robert 12214 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 10:39am Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hello Robert E, Another element to add to this discussion of concept. In my very limited reading I have not yet seen where concept is explicitly said to be unreal. Rather, usually it is said that concept obscures the experience of paramattha dhammas which I take to mean wholeness obscures partness. I have yet to see "unreality" established as a category nor have I seen any discussion of truth and illusion or true and false. Perhaps someone could give us some insight into "adhamma", if it is a word. Also I would like to point out that impermanence must be a concept; there isn't an impermanence citta or impermanence cetasika or impermanence rupa. The only thing left is concept. I'm hoping there will be an indepth discussion of the functioning of mind sense in ADL. I think that would go a long way toward clarifying the nature of concept. Larry 12215 From: Date: Mon Mar 25, 2002 9:08pm Subject: ADL ch. 1 (7-13) from "Abhidhamma In Daily Life" by Nina Van Gorkom chapter 1, paragraphs 7-13 7. Cittas can be classified by way of jati' (literally means 'birth' or 'nature'). There are four jatis: akusala, kusala, vipaka, kiriya. 8. It is important to know which jati a citta is. We cannot develop wholesomeness in our life if we take akusala for kusala or if we take akusala for vipaka. For instance, when we hear unpleasant words, the moment of experiencing the sound (hearing-consciousness) is akusala vipaka, the result of an unwholesome deed we performed ourselves. But the aversion which may arise very shortly afterwards is not vipaka, but it arises with akusala citta. 9. Another way of classifying citta is by plane of consciousness (bhumi). There are four different planes of consciousness: kamavacara citta, rupavacara citta, arupavacara citta, lokuttara citta. 10. The sensuous plane of consciousness (kamavacara cittas) is the plane of sense-impressions, for examples: seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and receiving impressions through the body-sense. 11. There are other planes of citta which do not experience sense-impressions. Those who cultivate samatha (tranquil meditation) and attain absorption (jhana), have jhanacittas. The jhanacitta is another plane of citta; it does not experience sense-impressions. The lokuttara citta ('supramundane' consciousness) is the highest plane of consciousness because it is the citta which directly experiences nibbana. 12. There are still other ways of classifying citta and if we consider the different intensities of citta there are many more differences between cittas. For instance, akusala cittas, which are rooted in lobha (attachment), dosa (aversion) and moha (ignorance), can be of many different intensities. Sometimes they may motivate deeds, sometimes they may not, depending on the degree of akusala. Kusala cittas too are of many different intensities. 13. There are altogether eighty-nine or one hundred and twenty-one types of citta. The classification by way of a hundred and twenty-one types includes the cittas of the ariyans who cultivated both jhana (absorption) and vipassana and who could experience nibbana with absorption. 12216 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 9:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi, Larry (and Robert .. and Sarah! ;-) - In a message dated 3/29/02 1:41:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hello Robert E, > > Another element to add to this discussion of concept. In my very limited > reading I have not yet seen where concept is explicitly said to be > unreal. Rather, usually it is said that concept obscures the experience > of paramattha dhammas which I take to mean wholeness obscures partness. > I have yet to see "unreality" established as a category nor have I seen > any discussion of truth and illusion or true and false. Perhaps someone > could give us some insight into "adhamma", if it is a word. Also I would > like to point out that impermanence must be a concept; there isn't an > impermanence citta or impermanence cetasika or impermanence rupa. The > only thing left is concept. I'm hoping there will be an indepth > discussion of the functioning of mind sense in ADL. I think that would > go a long way toward clarifying the nature of concept. > > Larry > ======================== I'm not sure that I'm satisfied that the breakdown of dhammas into the two classes of paramattha dhammas and pa~n~natti (which we can take to mean concepts and their reducible referents, I suppose) is really complete. Impermanence is a characteristic of (conditioned) dhammas, a lakkhana. There *is* the concept of impermanence, but impermanence and the concept of impermanence can't be the same. Impermanence isn't listed in the Abhidhamma as either citta or cetasika, is it? Yet impermanence is one of the chief things to be known by wisdom! (And it is claimed that pa~n~natti cannot be known by wisdom!) So this is a bit of a conundrum, no? Something's got to be WRONG here! ;-)) 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) 12217 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 11:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 1 (4,5,6) Dear Larry and ADL group, << In this paragraph, below, it seems to be an act. But in your answer I thought you said it was a_cause_ of an act. Maybe there are two different senses of kamma ……>> Yes, cetana has double functions. Let me refer to Nina-Cetasika:Cetana section. http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas6.html Cetana can be classified by the time relative to the action: 1.Before the action, 2.During the action, 3.Right after the action and 4.Long after the action. Again we talked somewhat in a paramattha frame of reference, single moment of citta at a time. Action can refer to a long series of cittas. Have to run. Num 12218 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 11:23am Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n <> Dear K.Sukin, I really appreciate your message here. A very good reminder. Have to run, Num 12219 From: Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 5:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi Howard, I agree the reality status of impermanence is a puzzle. One clue could be that it is a kind of relationship so all "real" relationships (conditional relationships for example) would be in the same boat. Larry 12220 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 7:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n --- Sukin:. "According to what I've heard, it would > be panna not me(lobha/ dosa/ moha) which will help condition the > arising of satipatthana. If at this moment the conditions are right for > panna and sati to arise, it would. If not, thinking that I can do > something about it, would in my understanding, not be the work of > panna. > On the other hand, someone might come to the conclusion after > extensive reading of the texts, that what the Buddha taught was a > step-by-step program as conditions for the arising of sati, I > think to some extent that this can condition the false view that > understanding cannot happen now. And an idea that there are a more > ideal time and place for practice.>> > > --------- This is very useful to consider Sukin. There is a strong tendency to think that understanding is something that should happen in the future once "I" do something to make it happen. And this belief means that instead of be?ng aware of the present moment there is a subtle trying (tanha) that wants conditions to be other than they are right now. thanks robert 12221 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 9:10pm Subject: Is Anicca a concept or a reality? (was: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)) Hi Howard, Nice to hear from you. Since impermanence is to 'realized', not 'understood as a concept', we must look at what anicca might be other than merely a conceptual understanding of the fact that things are constantly changing. I guess we all have the concept at this point, but can we 'spot' it in the moment. I see anicca as a 'characteristic' of a dhamma, and I think it may be defined as a 'characteristic'. A characteristic, I think tentatively, is not a thing in its own right which can be perceived in its own right, it can only be perceived as an aspect of a dhamma, or I guess dhatu or element [not very clear on what the 'elements' are distinct from 'dhammas', but that's a whole different confusion]. So how do we concretely realize anicca? My own experience is that when I conceptualize about anicca, it is kind of dry in a way. I can see that all things are impermanent, but it doesn't seem to touch me directly. But a few times I've gotten into the 'stream of seeing anica' for a moment or two, and the effect is stunning. I suddenly start to see that nothing can be defined, as I look at something I see that at that very moment it is changing and that I am getting continual 'flashes' of dhamma, rather than a continuous experience of 'one stable solid thing'. I see that even my thoughts about it are disappearing as I think them, and anicca leads inevitably to the conclusion that there is absolutely nothing that can be held onto. It is like everything turns into quicksand, and things all disappear into themselves, into the continuous shifting of physical change and perceptual and conceptual shifts. Everything is flying all over the place, but we have the illusion that it is all nailed down quite neatly. To me, this is the power of anicca in the moment. The characteristic that keeps things from being 'something' because all definitions of what something is or will be are eluded even at the moment they are formed. Anicca leads inevitably to anatta. If everything is constantly shifting and changing and there is nothing to hold onto, there can be no stable central entity in anything. Whatever we think something is, is just part of its shifting, indefineable fabric. Without stability and without definitional congruity, even the idea of entity no longer makes any sense. It's all part of an inevitable flow that leads nowhere but to more inevitable flow. Try to define the shapes that are formed in a flowing river and that is the exact experience of seeing anatta as a characteristic of present objects. so I do think that these major characteristics of all things can be realized as presences in the moment: anatta, anicca and dukkha. It is a matter of seeing objects for what they are, which is nothing but what is present, and a flow of constant becoming. In the moment it becomes clear that there is no entity in that flow, that it cannot be held onto or controlled, and that it is nonsensical to seek satisfaction or reassurance from something that cannot be grasped or defined. I think this is available on a pre-conceptual level by perceiving things deeply as they are. Of course, all of that lasts only a little while through concentrated awareness that is trying to see what is there, until such time as it becomes second nature, which in my case seems a ways off. And most of the time even concentrated awareness doesn't create that dizzying effect of suddenly seeing that everything is as constantly shifting as a hill of sand. Robert Ep. =========================== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry (and Robert .. and Sarah! ;-) - > > In a message dated 3/29/02 1:41:07 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... > writes: > > > > > > Hello Robert E, > > > > Another element to add to this discussion of concept. In my very limited > > reading I have not yet seen where concept is explicitly said to be > > unreal. Rather, usually it is said that concept obscures the experience > > of paramattha dhammas which I take to mean wholeness obscures partness. > > I have yet to see "unreality" established as a category nor have I seen > > any discussion of truth and illusion or true and false. Perhaps someone > > could give us some insight into "adhamma", if it is a word. Also I would > > like to point out that impermanence must be a concept; there isn't an > > impermanence citta or impermanence cetasika or impermanence rupa. The > > only thing left is concept. I'm hoping there will be an indepth > > discussion of the functioning of mind sense in ADL. I think that would > > go a long way toward clarifying the nature of concept. > > > > Larry > > > ======================== > I'm not sure that I'm satisfied that the breakdown of dhammas into the > two classes of paramattha dhammas and pa~n~natti (which we can take to mean > concepts and their reducible referents, I suppose) is really complete. > Impermanence is a characteristic of (conditioned) dhammas, a lakkhana. There > *is* the concept of impermanence, but impermanence and the concept of > impermanence can't be the same. Impermanence isn't listed in the Abhidhamma > as either citta or cetasika, is it? Yet impermanence is one of the chief > things to be known by wisdom! (And it is claimed that pa~n~natti cannot be > known by wisdom!) So this is a bit of a conundrum, no? Something's got to be > WRONG here! ;-)) > > 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) 12222 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 9:13pm Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Thanks for your interesting comments, Larry. And hi! Nice to meet you. As I said to Howard, I think 'anicca' is a characteristic of an object, rather than a concept. It is not an object in its own right, but can be seen directly as part of the way an object functions. Hope to hear more from you on this. Best, Robert Ep. ====== --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hello Robert E, > > Another element to add to this discussion of concept. In my very limited > reading I have not yet seen where concept is explicitly said to be > unreal. Rather, usually it is said that concept obscures the experience > of paramattha dhammas which I take to mean wholeness obscures partness. > I have yet to see "unreality" established as a category nor have I seen > any discussion of truth and illusion or true and false. Perhaps someone > could give us some insight into "adhamma", if it is a word. Also I would > like to point out that impermanence must be a concept; there isn't an > impermanence citta or impermanence cetasika or impermanence rupa. The > only thing left is concept. I'm hoping there will be an indepth > discussion of the functioning of mind sense in ADL. I think that would > go a long way toward clarifying the nature of concept. > > Larry 12223 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 9:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > I find what you write here to be very well put! Your understanding on > this issue and mine are very close. > > With metta, > Howard Glad to hear from you on this, Howard. Well, we're back in agreement for the moment, and that is a nice familiar feeling! Robert Ep. ======================= > In a message dated 3/29/02 11:48:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > I would say that it's incorrect to think that concepts have 'no reality > > whatsoever'. If you take a look at what this means, it would mean that > > they do > > not even come into being as concepts. But since we refer to them, and can > > be > > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more accurate to > > say > > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim to represent > > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are illusory, but not > > non-existent. > > > > In the famous illusion of the rope and the snake, where a rope is mistaken > > for a > > snake, one would normally say that the snake does not exist at all. I > > would say > > this incorrect. The rope exists as an actual object [in conventional > > terms] while > > the snake *does* exist, but only as an image or hallucination. So it is > > more > > correct to say that the snake in this case is an image formed by the mind, > > or a > > trick of the mind, rather than to say that it is non-existent. This is > > important, > > because then we can start to look at the status of the things that arise in > > the > > mind and in the senses, rather than talking about them in a general way. > > > > Now I think the way that concepts are looked at in Abhidhamma is a little > > more > > confusing and technical, because it is said that concepts do not have a > > characteristic which can be experienced as a reality, while thoughts I > > believe do > > have an identifiable 'actual' characteristics -- I'm ready for more > > correction on > > this one -- but I don't think anyone would say that the occurence of a > > concept as > > a part of a thought *does not actually take place*. The thought refers to > > the > > concept and references it in either language or image, so as the referent > > in a > > thought or sentence, the concept exists. The reason it doesn't have its > > own > > characteristic, I am guessing, is because a concept disguises itself as > > something > > other than what it is. Therefore it falls apart on closer inspection, in > > terms of > > what it claims to be. If I say 'I'm thinking of a rock', the 'rock' in > > that > > thought pretends to be an actual rock in the thought. The thought will > > think that > > it is indeed thinking of a rock. In fact it is thinking of an image or > > idea of a > > rock, not a real rock, and so the rock referred to is a concept, not a > > 'reality'. > > When these concepts are confused with the reality they are trying to talk > > or think > > about, we are thrice removed from the reality of experience: 1/ we are > > removed > > from knowing that we are dealing with a concept not a reality; 2/ we are > > removed > > from the reality itself by dealing with a substitute image or definition as > > represented in the concept; and 3/ we are removed from the rupa that is > > occuring > > in the moment by looking at the reality as an object beyond the moment. > > > > But the concept is still only illusory, not nonexistent. It arises as part > > of a > > thought, a part of a thought that makes thought think it is more or other > > than > > merely a fabrication in the moment. > > > > I'm now ready to be deconstructed, reconstructed, dissected, corrected, or > > whatever else is necessary. > > > > Robert Ep. 12224 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 9:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Concentration - Rob Ep Dear Jon, With great respect and continued interest in this subject [don't you hate it when someone says that before they're about to disagree with you?] I don't see the great value in outlining a path that is so unified in nature that all the elements must spontaneously arise together whether one has done any work on any of them or not. Why not just call it the Noble Onefold Path and talk about the factors that lead to its arising, if it is so unified as one 'Eightfold' event? If the Eight Factors which make up the Eightfold Path are not to be cultivated as individual factors which are amenable to a kind of benign effort, then they are in fact not the factors that lead to Enlightenment, but merely its first fruit. To me, this seems to greatly put the cart before the horse in terms of the way the Buddha talks in the limited readings which I can confess to. He talks extensively, does he not?, of each factor in turn, describing what it consists of and how it is to be cultivated. How can this kind of progressive and element-specific talk about each factor be ignored in favor of a vision which leaves the arising of the Eightfold factors completely out of the hands of the practitioner? If Abhidhamma has any seeming prejudice [and I would contend that every single system, including every system of Buddhism does, including my own 'favorites'] it is the idea that discernment of realities alone is really of utmost value, and that other efforts or practices are either distracting or ineffectual. For instance, there have been discussions lately about Right Concentration and whether it is constituted of the jhanas. Although the Buddha seems to explicitly state that it is constituted by the jhanas, this is interpreted in an indirect way to mean something else, because cultivation would take the factor out of the exclusive realm of the stages of enlightenment. It is also pointed out that the difficulty of attaining the jhanas is beyond the capability of most people, enormously difficult. But I would say that the discernment of namas and rupas is equally hard, and so why not cultivate the former as well as the latter? However many lifetimes it may take, if we are to follow the Buddha's advice, we should be cultivating all that he advises, and let the process begin at the stage that we're at. In the description that makes sense to me, the factors have a dual nature, prior to enlightenment and during the cultivation of enlightened stages. It is progressive. One cultivates the eight separate factors and develops skill in their practice. One engages in a job that allows for the other factors to be developed. One meditates to engage progressive stages of concentration. One reads the Suttas to learn about the correct way to cultivate the path and what the fruit of different actions are. One acts accordingly, cultivating right action, to avoid creating more kamma and more suffering, and to create merit and happiness. These sorts of cultivation make a lot of sense, and define a good Buddhist lifestyle and practice. When the cultivation has reached the point that one has a skillful relationship to Right Understanding, Concentration, Livelihood, Action and Speech, etc., one is living with a decent degree of mindfulness and insight, and one is able to apprehend impermanence and non-ego to a decent extent. At this point, one becomes a stream-entrant and the eight factors solidify into a person who becomes the expression of the Eightfold Path. It then becomes the Noble Eightfold Path and becomes the journey of one who has basic realization of reality, and is cultivating it into the higher stages in a more or less natural or spontaneous way, since the eight factors are no longer a mystery to this person, or a struggle, but are somewhat reflexive. This vision makes sense to me, and it seems to be indicated by the things the Buddha says about each quality to be developed, whether this development should be merely through awareness of the factors, or through direct cultivation and effort. I don't see how this could be contrary to the Buddha's sense and intention. Best, Robert Ep. ==================== --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob Ep > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > "What is the stream? > > > "This Noble Eightfold Path is the stream; that is, right view, right > > > intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, > > > fright mindfulness, right concentration. > > > "What is a stream-enterer? > > > "One who possesses this Noble Eightfold Path is a stream-enterer: > > this > > > venerable one of such a name and clan." > > > > Jon, > > I think another interpretation of this section of the Sutta is one that > > makes > > sense to me: That the Noble Eightfold Path is the 'stream' which all > > Buddhists > > approach through attempting to cultivate various aspects of the eight > elements; > > and that a 'Stream Enterer' is one who 'possesses' this Noble Eightfold > Path, in > > other words, one who has accomplished, mastered, these eight elements to > an > > adequate extent. They are no longer trying to enter the stream, but > > have entered > > that same stream and will then be carried along by it. > > Interesting, Rob. I don't recall ever having seen the stream used in the > context you suggest, but I'll keep this possibility in mind when reading > the texts. > > However, I'm not sure that it makes any difference, since even on this > interpretation, the factors for attaining stream-entry, as given in the > same sutta in the passage just before the passage you quote, are not the > individual factors of the Noble Eightfold Path but another set of factors > altogether (namely, association with superior persons, hearing the true > Dhamma, careful attention, and practice in accordance with the Dhamma). > > It's true that the 4th Noble Truth (the Noble Eightfold Path) is a truth > that is 'to be developed', but this refers to the path itself rather than > the individual factors. I do not recall seeing in the texts reference to > the development of the factors of the Noble Eightfold Path -- the > reference is always to the development of the path i.e., the path as an > eightfold entity. > > There is an important distinction to be made here between a *single entity > comprising a number of factors* and a *grouping of separate factors that > share a common feature or function*. An example of the latter would be > the 37 bodhi-pakkhiya dhamma (factors pertaining to enlightenment). The > Noble Eightfold Path is an example of the former. The style of the name > ('eightfold') gives a clue to its nature. > > Jon > > > I think it makes sense to say that we are all fumbling around with the > eight > > elements of the Noble Eightfold Path as long as we have not mastered > them. > > Certainly, if the Jhanas are the definition of Right Concentration, > > which I'll > > take as given just for this example, we know it is exceedingly difficult > to > > accomplish the first jhana, and even harder to get into the second, > > third or > > fourth. So we are struggling with one or another element, both > > progressively and > > sporadically. When we have enough mastery to be able to accomplish > these > > elements, we 'possess' the Path and enter the Stream. This view is both > > progressive and ultimate. It neither necessitates nor denies the idea > of the > > elements all taking place at the same time or separately, but allows for > gradual > > cultivation, as well as skillful accomplishment, when the eight elements > all come > > together. > > To me, this makes the most sense and seems to satisfy the sense of what > I read in > > the Sutta. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. 12225 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 10:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Larry, Concepts are certainly unreal. People doubt this but they can prove it to themself if there is direct insight. That is what the development of satipatthana reveals - that it is only ignorance that takes concepts for realities. As the Abhidhammathasangaha says about concepts like human, person, man, chariot that "All such different things , though they do not exist in the ultimate sense , become objects of consciousness in the form of shadows of ultimate things (paramattha dhammas)"(bodhi p.326 Just to be explicit: the thinking process consists of different cittas and cetasikas all arising and passing away rapidly. These are paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities. let us consider a couple of thinking. 1. Think of a flying purple elephant. The process of thinking that imagines this, whether a graphic visualisation or your no-frills, idea only version, consists of cittas and cetasikas. The object of this thinking is a concept, not real. 2. Think of your mother or father (whether alive or not). Again same process - the cittas and cetasikas of the thinking process are real but the object, mother and father, is concept- not real. 3. If your mother and father were right in front of you now (talking to you) and you think of them, again the object is concept, not real; but the thinking process is real. The colours are real, the sounds are real, but mother and father is concept. Obviously example 1 is easily understood. It is number 2 and especially number 3 that in daily life we get confused by. Satipatthana can only take paramattha dhammas for object, not concepts. Does this mean we should try not to think of concepts? Some would have us do this but this is not the middle way. All the arahants thought of concepts but they could never confuse concept for reality. Panna and sati can understand dhammas directly even during the processes of thinking that take concepts for objects. Now there is thinking happening that is trying to comprehend what was just read. The process of thinking is real and it might be rooted in lobha (desire) that wants to understand. The lobha is real - is it seen as just a dhamma , not you. There is also feeling; if you liked what was written this will be pleasant feeling - is it seen as just a conditioned dhamma, not you. And if you didn't like it there was unpleasant feeling, not you. These present objects must be seen wisely otherwise there will always be doubt and one will not gain confidence. Or one will settle for attachment to the Dhamma rather than insight. Or worse become someone whose aim is to look for little flaws thinking that this is proper investigation. I just heard on a tape from bangkok where someone said he rarely studies because he doesn't like reading (from childhood)- yet it is clear to me that he understands the heart of Dhamma. This, I believe, is because he sees how to apply it in the present moment. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hello Robert E, > > Another element to add to this discussion of concept. In my very limited > reading I have not yet seen where concept is explicitly said to be > unreal. Rather, usually it is said that concept obscures the experience > of paramattha dhammas which I take to mean wholeness obscures partness. > I have yet to see "unreality" established as a category nor have I seen > any discussion of truth and illusion or true and false. Perhaps someone > could give us some insight into "adhamma", if it is a word. Also I would > like to point out that impermanence must be a concept; there isn't an > impermanence citta or impermanence cetasika or impermanence rupa. The > only thing left is concept. I'm hoping there will be an indepth > discussion of the functioning of mind sense in ADL. I think that would > go a long way toward clarifying the nature of concept. > > Larry 12226 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 10:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana - Rob Ep --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Rob Ep > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi Jon! > > I know I've been absent lately, but I always intend to pop back in, and > > here I am, > > manifesting my intention!! [no one to do that of course, but it's an > > awkward way > > of saying 'it happens'.] > > > > This probably sounds like an old record, but if one can indeed > > 'cultivate > > tranquility', why not do so through samatha meditation? > > 'Cultivate tranquillity' and 'samatha meditation' are terms that are often > used as a translation for the same Pali term, 'samatha bhavana'. So the > question, as ever, is what exactly *is* samatha bhavana? > > > There's no doubt that > > breathing meditation, slowing and lengthening the breath, etc., creates > > 'tranquility'. You could even say it 'cultivates' it. > > Like all terms used by the Buddha, samatha bhavana has a very specific > meaning. The tranquillity ('samatha') is the tranquillity that comes from > the *quality of kusala*, and the cultivation ('bhavana') connotes the fact > that the kusala in question is *accompanied by panna*. > > Now when it comes to breathing meditation, there is nothing *necessarily* > kusala about focussing on one's breath. Focussing on the breath is not > like, say, metta which is something intrinsically kusala (if it's not > kusala then it's not metta). It's something that anyone can do at any > time. So if breathing meditation is to be samatha bhavana, one needs to > know where the kusala and the panna come in (you cannot just equate > breathing meditation with samatha bhavana). I'd be interested to hear > your thoughts on this. I agree with you. In fact one can focus on the breath in a way that explicitly causes more tension, pain and delusion. The breath in and of itself is no guarantee of anything. However, the breath is a worthy object for calming the body and mind, because when it is slowed, relaxed and extended, there is a physiological mechanism which induces calm and peacefulness through the autonomic nervous system with which the breath is associated. Beyond this, the concentration of the mind *in a relaxed and released manner* tends to slow down thoughts, enhance perception and create a mind and nervous system that is more available for discernment and intelligent reflection. This in itself is not enlightenment, is not even insight. It is just setting up positive conditions. Can we know whether the state thus achieved is kusala or akusala? This is one of the arguments we have had before. You say that we can be misled into thinking it's a kusala state because it's calm. I say that's no reason not to do it, as we will get more skillful and more discerning if our intention is to keep looking into the matter and become more skillful at it. Because it is like any other skill. Eventually, one can tell that it either works or doesn't work. If we are not cultivating true peacefulness, we may suppress a lot of junk for a while and think it is true peacefulness, but the human feedback system is such that those things don't stay down for long. They will spring up with an expression of negativity and give us a sign that we are on the wrong track. Accompanied by suttas, spiritual friends and continued self-questioning to look at what the state is really like, I see no reason why a person would not make gradual progress. The idea that one would follow the Buddha's teachings, seek spiritual advice, do concentrated breathing meditation with the intention to reach a state of peace where greater insight becomes possible, because a lot of errant thoughts and feelings have been gotten out of one's?face for a while, allowing us to concentrate better, and in a less restless and reactive state of mind, and that with all this one could consistently still be going down the wrong path and in fact cultivating akusala states, seems unnecessarily pessimistic. And I don't see why the gradual cultivation of another path, namely reading suttas and discerning the present reality in everyday life, is going to have any greater chance of success, if akusala is *that* devious that we have no hope of discerning it, even with repeated efforts. So it seems like a false argument that somehow the breath is not a worthy object for achieving samatha because if used wrongly it may *not* lead to a kusala state. That's true of everything. That's all for now. I will be interested to hear back from you. I know I was pretty direct, so I'm braced for an 'equal and opposite reaction', as someone once said. Best, Robert Ep. ===================== 12227 From: Robert Epstein Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 10:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > Holy catfish! You're going to drive me back underground!!! > > Oh no!!! I thought that as you'd just read 300 in reverse AND followed the > links, that an extra 20 would be a 'piece of cake' to you;-) > > > But seriously, thanks. I will try to look into these, and indeed am > > fascinated by > > what may be discussed on this subject. > > Pls do. If it's really chore, let me know and I'll do some > spoon-feeding;-) if you have the chance......... Best, Robert Ep. ======================================== > Thanks for your other questions which I'll look at later. I know Howard > will also be glad to have your input. > > We've just got back from a big hike and swim and I really shouldn't let > you distract me here before I've attended to boring chores;-) > > Sarah 12228 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Mar 29, 2002 10:35pm Subject: Re: reviews, comments on abidhamma book? Dear Frank, I'm a bit late replying to your post, but you may like to look at a four page review of "Abhidhamma Studies: Buddhist Explorations of Consciousness and Time" by Douglas W. Shrader of the State University of New York at Oneonta. http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/pew/50.4shrader.pdf "This book is essential reading for any serious student of Buddhism. Additionally, it will appeal to those interested in a wide variety of both phenomenological and ontological issues: the manifold of experience, the nature of consciousness, the analysis of time, concepts of anatta (ego selflessness) and paticca-samuppada(dependent originiation), and so forth. An intermediate to advanced level of familiarity and understanding of basic Buddhist doctrines is recommended. It will prove particularly useful to scholars and students who have been intimidated by the vast, often cryptic, Abhidhamma literature." He then reviews each of the chapters, and ends by saying "I heartily recommend reading this relatively brief text from cover to cover." Also, while on Abhidhamma and Ven. Nyanaponika - much of "The Abhidhamma Philosophy" by Ven. Nyanaponika Thera is on-line at: http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm metta, Christine Its estimation in the past and its value for the present from the book Abhidhamma Studies: Researches in Buddhist Psychology, by Ven. Nyanaponika Thera High Esteem of Abhidhamma in Buddhist Tradition The Abhidhamma as System and Method Clarification of Terms Analysis of Consciousness The Anatta Doctrine Abhidhamma and Meditation Abhidhamma: Requirement for the Teachers of Dhamma Evaluation of Abhidhamma & Question of its Authenticity Concluding Remarks and a Warning Originally pubished by Buddhist Publication Society - Sri Lanka --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., frank kuan wrote: > > I'm thinking about getting this. Anyone have comments, > recommendations on this? > > http://wisdompubs.org/productsZoom/0861711351.cfm > > Abhidhamma Studies > Buddhist Explorations of Consciousness and Time > Nyaponika Thera, Author > Bhikkhu Bodhi, Introduction > Science of Mind / Philosophy / Theravadan Buddhism > List Price: $16.95 > Discount Price: $13.56 (20% Off!) > Size: 6 x 9 > Binding: Paper > ISBN: 0-86171-135-1 > Available > > > Add to Cart! 12229 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 0:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts & realities (was, ADL ch 1 (2)-Lucy) Lucy (and somewhat unintentionally, Howard and Sarah, and later Victor) [Health warning: Long and technical, possibly headache-inducing] --- Lucy wrote: > > Hi Larry & all > Are these "paramattha dhamma" like building blocks of experience - > that's why they're "irreducible"? Yes, I think this is exactly how the Abhidhammattha Sangaha and its commentaries describe paramattha dhammas. The *irreducibility* of these dhammas has quite a part to play in that description and seems to be what earns them the label of *ultimate*. As I think you appreciate, 'irreducibility' here has nothing to do with size (like the atom), but rather refers to the fact that dhammas are phenomena that, from the viewpoint of our experience, appear in their most basic form and accordingly are not capable of being broken down into further component parts. With apologies in advance for the repetition, I would like to quote again what the CMA says about 'paramatthato' ('ultimate realities') : [from Ch I, Guide to para 2 -- the *emphasis* is mine] "Ultimate realities are things that exist by reason of their own extrinsic nature (sabhaava). These are the dhammas: the final, *irreducible components of existence*, the *ultimate entities*. "Such existents *admit of no further reduction*, but are themselves the *final terms of analysis*, the true constituents of the complex manifold of experience (and hence the word ‘paramattha’ is applied to them, which is derived from ‘parama’ = ultimate, highest, final, and ‘attha’ = reality, thing)." Ultimate realities are contrasted with 'conventional (saammuti) realities'. Note that both are called 'realities', so it is perhaps not necessary to be concerned too much about that term alone. Rather it is the distinction that is being drawn between the so-called ultimate and the so-called conventional/conceptual that is the important thing to note. Here is the passage on conventional realities: "Conventional realities are the referents of ordinary conceptual thought (pannatti) and conventional modes of expression (vohaara). They include such entities as living beings, men, women, animals, and the apparently stable persisting objects that constitute our unanalyzed picture of the world. "The Abhidhamma philosophy maintains that these notions do not possess *ultimate validity*, for the objects which they signify [Jon: i.e. the living beings, men, women, animals etc] do not exist in their own right as *irreducible realities*. "They are products of mental construction (parikappanaa), not realities existing by reason of their own nature." So to summarise, conventional realities such as people and things are the product of mental construction and are not realities that exist by reason of their own nature. This observation is I think easier to understand if considered from the perspective of the present moment of experience, and not as a cosmological truth (although neither is it wrong in that sense, I would suggest). Considered in this light, I would suggest that concepts that have conventional objects (i.e., people and things) as their referents cannot be distinguished from concepts that have ultimate phenomena (e.g., hardness, visible object) as their referents or concepts with entirely imaginary or abstract 'things' (e.g. flying elephants, [no] satisfaction) as their referents. All are equally 'mental constructions' in the sense that at that particular moment of thinking no paramattha dhamma is the object of the consciousness, and the referents are at that very moment equally 'products of mental construction'. So on a purely moment-to-moment basis, there is no difference to be found between the thought moments that are more 'grounded' in reality and those that are not. On a more general note, I suggest that the distinction between 'realties' and 'concepts' as so defined is crucial to the insight that the teachings are all about. To my understanding, satipatthana and vipassana deal exclusively with the development of awareness of and insight into realities, not concepts. I appreciate that this is a controversial statement, especially perhaps to those coming from a Mahayana background, but I wish only to say that it does represent the orthodox Theravadin point of view, as I think can be seen from the extract from 'Buddhist Dictionary' pasted below**. [As to whether concepts have any characteristic capable of being the object of panna/insight, this is an interesting question for discussion but one which I think I should leave for another post!] > And then there are all the different ways of > classification : 4 paramattha dhamma, OR five khandha (aggregates) OR > dhattu OR etc. It may be like classifying what makes up a building into > frames, walls and space OR into bricks and mortar OR into steel, wood, > sand, cement.. > All 4 "realities" are anatta. Three of them are conditioned / caused, > impermanent, dukkha. The 4th, nibbana, is unconditioned / uncaused, > unchanging, not-dukkha - it's an altogether different sort of > "experience". > What's common to all 4? Or, why is nibbana in the same classification > system as nama & rupa ? Is it because they can all be experienced > directly > (outside the flow of conceptual thought - like in a meditative state)? > [yes, better leave Nibbana till last !!! ] As I understand it, what's common to all 4 is that all are 'sabhaava' (having individual essence) and have the characteristic of being anatta. My apologies for going well beyond your original point. I have drifted into Howard and Sarah territory and touched on a Victor point (and will amend the salutation accordingly), but one thing somehow seemed to lead to another … Jon PS Got a headache to nurse now? Well, you can't say you weren't warned. **Nyanatiloka's 'Buddhist Dictionary' "paramattha : "(As in paramattha-sacca[truth], -vacana[term], -desaná[exposition] "'Truth (or term, exposition) that is true *in the highest (or ultimate) sense*', as contrasted with the 'conventional truth' (vohára-sacca), which is also called '*commonly accepted* truth' (sammuti-sacca). "The Buddha, in explaining his doctrine, sometimes used conventional language and sometimes the philosophical mode of expression which is in accordance whith undeluded insight into reality. … "Thus, whenever the suttas speak of man, woman or person [Jon: or parts of the body], or of the rebirth of a being, this must not be taken as being valid in the ultimate sense, but as a mere conventional mode of speech (vohára-vacana). … "In the Sutta Pitaka there are many expositions in terms of ultimate language (paramattha-desaná), namely, wherever these texts deal with the groups (khandha), elements (dhátu) or sense-bases (áyatana), and their components; and wherever the 3 characteristics (ti-lakkhana) are applied. The majority of Sutta texts, however, use the conventional language, as appropriate in a practical or ethical context … "The two truths - ultimate and conventional - … are implied in a sutta-distinction of 'explicit (or direct) meaning' (nítattha) and 'implicit meaning (to be inferred)' (neyyattha). "Further, the Buddha repeatedly mentioned his reservations when using conventional speech, e.g. in D. 9: "These are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world, which the Perfect One (Tathágata) uses without misapprehending them." > These "realities" are also said to be universal. For an ant, a little > mound > of earth would be a "mountain" (concept), for a human it's a "little > mound > of earth" (concept) - so a same object is different for the ant and the > human, the common thing is that the object is "rupa" - and it would be > rupa > for any other being. Or, my cat: for me she's a "friend" (concept), for > another human, she's a "cat" (concept), for a flea she's "lodging and > food" (concept), the cat believes she's a "self" (concept) --- the > concepts > are very different, but what's common to all observers and observed > objects > is : nama-rupa... > > Off to read more messages and nurse a headache. > > Lucy 12230 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 1:27am Subject: anatta and kamma Dear All, Anatta still seems such a hard thing to consider ...truth, yes,.... reality, yes,.... but such a lonely doctrine. (I wonder if anyone has turned back from it for that very reason...) Can anyone remind me of how 'results of kamma' and 'no-self go' together? As well, any links to suttas and articles would be appreciated. I've found some on them separately, but not together. In the Visuddhi Magga it is said: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found. The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there. Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it. The path is, but no traveller on it is seen," "No doer of the deeds is found, No being that may reap their fruits. Empty phenomena roll on! This is the only right view." metta, Christine 12231 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 3:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Nina Nina --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon, > Your post is wonderful for considering. I had read this sutta, but now I > understand more the deep meaning, especially with regard to the Noble > Eightfold Path. > Howard is very sincere saying that we all read in a text what we like to > read. Still, this can be cured, at least partly, by reading the > commentaries, and also reading all of the scriptures, not only a few > suttas, and studying the Abhidhamma. I'm glad you found something useful in my comments. There are many gems within the suttas that go unnoticed, until one day you suddenly see a new significance in a familiar passage. Thanks very much for the information from the commentaries (below). I particularly enjoyed reading about the kalla-citta and sayambhu-nana (both new to me). It's interesting I think to consider exactly what brought about the kalla-citta, the state of a mind that was 'prepared, pliant, free from obstacles, elevated and lucid' and so ready to hear about the Four Noble Truths. Listening to a talk on giving, virtue, the heavens, the danger in sensual pleasures and the blessing of renunciation may not meet our conception of final preparation for enlightenment (speaking for myself, anyway), but perhaps we should take that as a reflection of some mis-conception on our part as to what the development of the path is all about (a useful bit of 'contrary evidence'!). Also we see in the progressive instruction a working example of the 4 'factors for enlightenment' (sotapattiyanga) that I mentioned recently in another post -- association with superior persons, hearing the true Dhamma, careful attention, practice in accordance with the Dhamma. This shows I think how these factors are not just for the beginner but have relevance right up to the moment of enlightenment. Jon > I looked up the Co to this sutta (in Thai), about the gradual teaching, > anupubbikathaa. It shows the order of the different subjects, and heaven > coming after sila. The Co states: they do > not last.> In short and in my own words, it explains that one should not > aim > for them by desire for them. Therefore the Buddha spoke after that about > the > disadvantages of kaama, sense pleasures and the benefit of nekkhamma, > detachment. The Co mentions from the sutta the word . > This > means pure or ready. The Buddha speaks by saya.mbhuu ~naana, and this is > his > self dependent wisdom, an epithet used with reference to the Buddha. > This > wisdom is not common to other people. noble Truths>. The Co states that Upali became a sotapanna. > As I said, it is helpful to compare other parts of the teachings. A > similar > passage in Dialogues of the Buddha I, no. 5, Kutadanta Sutta, at the > end: > Then the Blessed One discoursed to Kutadanta the Brahman in due order:.. > in > similar words. Here the Buddha spoke in the context of sacrifices: what > is > the highest sacrifice. On the preceding page we find the explanation on > sila, guarding of the doorways, mindfulness, contentment , solitude, the > five hindrances, the jhanas, and the highest sacrifice: destruction of > the > asavas. > My own comments: here is a similar wording as in the Fruits of > Recluseship. > The jhanas are included here, this concerns the monk who strives after > arahatship, the ideal recluse. > In the case of Upali and in the case of Kutadanta, the four noble Truths > are > realized at the attainment of enlightenment. This means that dukkha must > be > penetrated, the characteristic of impermanence of all conditioned > realities. > At which moment? Now. The eye, seeing, contact, feeling, they arise and > fall > away. No matter someone develops jhana or not, the impermanence of > realities > must be penetrated. > We read in the Co to the end of the Kutadanta Sutta: > vikkhambhita-niivara.nata.m sandhaaya vutta.m> And again, it is said, > kalla-citta, the citta that is ready. This is said with reference to > having > discarded the hindrances, beginning with the experience of the gradual > teaching. (I do like to be corrected, it is a coarse translation of the > Pali text I have). > With appreciation, Nina. > > > op 22-03-2002 11:53 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > > > > As you know, I believe the teaching on Right Concentration and all the > > other factors of the Noble Eightfold Path can only be understood by > > properly understanding the nature of the Noble Eightfold Path itself. > > > > In this regard I thought the following passage might be of interest. > It > > is a passage I'm sure you're familiar with, as it appears quite often > in > > the suttas. It's known as the 'gradual/progressive instruction' > > (aanupubbii-kathaa), and it's the instruction given by the Buddha to > those > > who were ready for enlightenment. > > > > This particular example comes from MN 56 'To Upaali' (trans. 'Middle > > Length Discourses of the Buddha' BB) > > > > "18. Then the Blessed One gave the householder Upaali progressive > > instruction, that is, talk on giving, talk on virtue, talk on the > heavens; > > he explained the danger, degradation, and defilement in sensual > pleasures > > and the blessing of renunciation. When he knew that the householder > > Upaali's mind was ready, receptive, free from hindrances, elated, and > > confident, he expounded to him the teaching special to the Buddha's: > > suffering, its origin, cessation, and the path." > > > > The sutta goes on to say that even as Upaali sat there, 'the spotless, > > immaculate vision of the Dhamma arose in him: "All that is subject to > > arising is subject to cessation."' and he attained stream-entry. > > > > What I find interesting here is the fact that the Four Noble Truths > are > > the very culmination of the progressive instruction, and the teaching > > about them is given only when the listener's understanding is so > highly > > developed that he is ready for immediate enlightenment. > > > > Specifically, it is the Buddha's teaching of the Noble Eightfold Path > (as > > the 4th Noble Truth) that is the last part of the progressive > instruction > > heard by the listener before attaining enlightenment. > > > > I don't know if you've ever considered the significance of this > passage as > > regards the nature of the Noble Eightfold Path. To me, it very much > puts > > the Noble Eightfold Path as a description of the moment of path > > consciousness about to be attained by the listener, rather than as an > > 8-step program for development towards that (very imminent) path > moment. > > > > Also of interest in the progressive instruction is the reference to > the > > listener's mind being 'free from hindrances'. This I believe is a > freedom > > brought about by the kusala engendered by the preceding part of the > > progressive instruction on dana, sila and renunciation of > sense-desires > > (and does not refer to the suppression of the hindrances as a result > of > > the concentration associated with samatha bhavana). > > > > Jon > > > 12232 From: Sarah Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 4:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 outline Hi Larry and ADL corner, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Num, > > I got a little bit ahead because I had some free time today. I think > we're still going with one chapter per week. I don't know about the > outline. Is it useful? should we do it differently? do something else? > its all kamma!!! What do the ladies think? I think there are a couple (read Rob Ep and Herman) who are already in chapters 22-24 mode (jhanas and enlightenment), then there are a bunch of us ( inc. Howard, Lucy, Sukin, myself ) who will probably keep plodding away in chapter 1 indefinitely (but at least we're not taking a long nap....) and then there are the well-behaved students (Christine, Num and yourself) who are following the schedule, doing their homework and setting a fine pace and example to the rest of us;-) I looked at your outline and it was excellent, so just keep it all up and we'll follow along as best we can;-) Many thanks, Sarah ========== 12233 From: Sarah Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 4:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment Hi Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > Pls do. If it's really chore, let me know and I'll do some > > spoon-feeding;-) > > > > > if you have the chance......... I feared that might be your response...see how well we know you now;-) First of all, you have to do just a little work for the spoon (ask Emmy;-))- How about telling us what the specific questions are. (If you ask what the abhidhamma says about jhanas, it's hard not to direct you to the entire abhidhamma pitaka). Maybe if you ask one or two specific questions at a time and the reasons for asking them, that would be best. If you mention KOM's name in the greeting and subject heading at the top, you may get a very helpful reponse indeed;-) Always fun, having you and Emmy around, Rob. Sarah p.s. Apologies, Kom;-) ================= 12234 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 2:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi, Larry - In a message dated 3/29/02 8:43:48 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, I agree the reality status of impermanence is a puzzle. One > clue could be that it is a kind of relationship so all "real" > relationships (conditional relationships for example) would be in the > same boat. > > Larry > > ======================= You might be onto something about their being in the same boat, at least if mathematicians see things at all correctly. Mathematicians sometimes *represent* properties as special cases of relations. // The mathematics involved: An n-ary relation among members of a set (for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, ...) is represented by a collection of n-tuples of elements from that set (each n-tuple indicating the holding of the relation among its n elements in the given order); a property of objects in a set is represented by a subset of that set (the members of the subset being those that have that property). These two representations coincide for n-ary relations with n = 1. // That is, mathematicians identify properties with 1-ary relations. In any case, leaving mathematics aside, characteristics and relations are certainly basic aspects the various realms of conditioned dhammas, and certainly anicca, anatta, and conditionality (as in paticcasamuppada) are among the things that are discernable by wisdom. So that would seem to rule them out as pa~n~natti according to (at least some) orthodox Abhidhammic interpretation. However, I haven't seen them described as cittas or cetasikas either. So .. it is a puzzlement! ;-)) 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) 12235 From: frank kuan Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 7:56am Subject: yahoo email/groups scumback spamming tactic alert yahoo scum tactics -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i'm passing on this public service announcememnt by a recent poster on the now moribund yahoo ashtanga site: I am sending this message to all of my groups. If you have ever registered at Yahoogroups, or have a Yahoo email address, or WERE in a Yahoogroup at any time in the past, this will effect you. I have personally checked this out for myself, and it is true. Yahoo made a change in your personal accounts. This is an advertising change that effects you with email, phone soliciting, and advertisements that come through the U.S. mail. Yahoo has made a sneaky change and if you had selected to not receive ads, or spams, etc., or didn't even know there was a choice (like me), Yahoo has changed this setting without even telling you what they have done. They have marked "yes" to several advertising opportunities for you to receive. You will need to change this marketing strategy to "NO" if you do not want to get all kinds of spams and ads through email, phone, and U.S. mail.' Your listowner cannot do this for you. It must be done individually. Here is how to make the change. It took me a few minutes to find this, so when you get going, look hard at the pages to find what I'm talking about: 1. Go to Yahoo Groups (groups.yahoo.com) and sign in. If you can't remember your password, you'll need to follow the guidelines to get your password. I don't have your password. If you were a member of any of my em ail groups BEFORE we switched our lists off of Yahoo, Yahoo automatically registered you. You will need to choose a password in order to get to your settings. When you enter your password, DO NOT put in your zip code (it is still optional), or you will get ads in the U.S. mail. 2. Click on "My Groups" 3. After you click on "My Groups", up in the very top right hand side of the screen, in tiny letters, is "Account Info". Click on it. 4. It will take you to a screen where they ask for your password, again. Type in your password. 5. Another screen comes up. It will say, "Yahoo ID card". Click on 'Edit your Marketing Preferences'. This is located under "member information" and a bit under a yellow strip of color. It is written in blue ink. 6. A screen saying, "Special offers and Marketing Communications". YOu will need to change all of the boxes marked "YES" to "NO". At the very bottom under "delivery options" are two more boxes. U.S. Mail, and Phone. Click "no". If your name and address/phone appear to the right of these boxes, you will need to go and click on "edit" to the right of your name and address. My husband changed his address to "somewhere" for the road, and "anywhere" for the city, and he couldn't change or remove the state. He also had to put 00000-0000 for his zip code and the same for his phone number. It wouldn't allow him to take these off. 7. If you make a change to your address and phone, you will need to go back to the "Special Offers and Marketing Communications" and change the boxes back to "NO". You MUST save all of your changes, or it will automatically flip back. Don't forget, press "save changes" when you are finished. Good Luck and pass the word!! Julia 12236 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 10:07am Subject: ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Abhidhamma in Daily Life http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html Chapter 2 THE FOUR PARAMATTHA DHAMMAS 1. The Buddha discovered the truth of all phenomena. He knew the characteristic of each phenomenon by his own experience. Out of compassion he taught other people to see reality in many different ways, so that they would have a deeper understanding of the phenomena in and around themselves. When realities are classified by way of paramattha dhammas (absolute realities), they are classified as: citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana. 2. Citta, cetasika and rupa are conditioned realities (sankhara dhammas). They arise because of conditions and fall away again; they are impermanent. One paramattha dhamma, nibbana, is an unconditioned reality (visankhara dhamma); it does not arise and fall away. All four paramattha dhammas are anatta, not self. 3. Citta, cetasika and rupa which are conditioned realities, can be classified by way of the five khandhas. Khandha means 'group' or 'aggregate'. They are: 1. Rupakkhandha, which are all physical phenomena. 2. Vedanakkhandha, which is feeling (vedana). 3. Sannakkhandha, which is perception (sanna). 4. Sankharakkhandha, comprising fifty cetasikas. 5. Vinnanakkhandha, comprising all cittas. 4. The fifty-two kinds of cetasika are classified as three khandhas: a cetasika which is feeling (vedana) is classified as one khandha, the vedanakkhandha; a cetasika which is perception (sanna) is classified as one khandha, the sannakkhandha; as regards the other tiny cetasikas, they are classified all together as one khandha, the sankharakkhandha. For example, in sankharakkhandha are included the following cetasikas: 'intention' (cetana), attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa), ignorance (moha), lovingkindness (metta), generosity (alobha) and wisdom (panna). Sankharakkhandha is sometimes translated as 'activities' or 'mental formations'. 5. As regards citta, all cittas are one khandha: vinnanakkhandha. The Pali terms vinnana, mano and citta are three terms for the same reality: that which has the characteristic of knowing or experiencing something. When citta is classified as khandha the word vinnana is used. Thus, the five khandhas are grouped as one rupakkhandha, and four namakkhandha. Three namakkhandhas are fifty-two cetasikas; the other namakkhandha is eighty-nine or one hundred and twenty-one cittas. 6. Nibbana is not a khandha; it is void of khandha (in Pali: khandha-vimutti). 12237 From: Mom Bongkojpriya (Betty) Yugala Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 9:50am Subject: Re: impermanence and reality Dear Howard and Larry, After lurking for quite a while and now having gotten up to date (somewhat), I'd like to add my 2 cents worth to your discussion about impermanence. Impermanence is not a reality (paramatha dhamma). It is, however, one of the characteristics of 3 of the paramatha dhammas: citta, cetasika and rupa (Nibbana, the 4th paramatha dhamma, does not have these characteristics). The other 2 main characteristics of these dhammas are anatta (non-self) and dukkha (unsatisfactoriness). This you already know. But, obviously, when we talk about them, we talk in terms of concepts; for it is only on the pannatti (concept) level that "we" (also a concept) can talk about them. Even the paramatha dhammas are pannatti, as is Dhamma, when we talk about them. However, panna (a cetasika) does not need words nor concepts to understand anicca (impermanence), anatta and dukkha and the paramatha dhammas; it just performs its function, that of understanding, when it arises (when the conditions are there for it to arise). As understanding deepens (it is incremental), it increasingly comprehends the nature of the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and non-self, the nature of the paramatha dhammas, as well as the "nature" of the concepts created by the "mind". As these are more deeply understood, increasing detachment from kilesas (defilements) can take place as a result. If something is illusory, it cannot be reality; nor can it actually exist. even for an instant. The concept of it seems to exist only because our "minds" created it; it does not exist in reality and is illusion. The various aramana received/experienced by citta through the 5 sense doors (and the "mind" door) are the sole realities that "we" (cittas and cetasikas) actually perceive. However, in order to function in a pannatti world, "we", "our minds", form concepts about these realities and in avijja (ignorance), "we" think the concepts are real and therefore exist. "We" are usually not aware of the actual realities that are picked up/experienced by cittas and cetasikas, but instead we think the concepts are the realities. Therefore, the "practice" taught by the Buddha, is "developing" the increasing arising of sati (awareness-also a cetasika) of the aramana which come through the sense doors and mind door not as concepts, but as realities, types of rupa and nama. When sati is aware of them in this way, then it conditions panna, understanding, to arise and comprehend these at increasingly deeper and more subtle levels. Please forgive the rambling, but in having to put this into words (concepts again), it at least helped me to understand it better, but on the pariyati (intellectual) level of understanding. When deeper levels of understanding arise, the concepts, the words, are irrelevant. I hope that may help clear up some confusion about what is impermanence and reality, but I hope it also provokes more discussion. Howard, amvery much looking forward to meeting you in NY; will call you when I arrive on the 29th of April (late evening) or the next morning. with metta, Betty _______________________ Mom Bongkojpriya Yugala 38 Soi 41 Phaholyothin Road Bangkok 10900, Thailand tel: 662-579-1050; 661-826-7160 e-mail: beyugala@k... > Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2002 12:10:50 EST > From: upasaka@a... > Subject: Re: BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) > >> epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > I would say that it's incorrect to think that concepts have 'no reality > > whatsoever'. If you take a look at what this means, it would mean that > > they do > > not even come into being as concepts. But since we refer to them, and can > > be > > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more accurate to > > say > > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim to represent > > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are illusory, but not > > non-existent. . . > > > > . . .Now I think the way that concepts are looked at in Abhidhamma is a little > > more > > confusing and technical, because it is said that concepts do not have a > > characteristic which can be experienced as a reality, while thoughts I > > believe do > > have an identifiable 'actual' characteristics -- I'm ready for more > > correction on > > this one -- but I don't think anyone would say that the occurence of a > > concept as > > a part of a thought *does not actually take place*. The thought refers to > > the > > concept and references it in either language or image, so as the referent > > in a > > thought or sentence, the concept exists. The reason it doesn't have its > > own > > characteristic, I am guessing, is because a concept disguises itself as > > something > > other than what it is. Therefore it falls apart on closer inspection, in > > terms of > > what it claims to be. If I say 'I'm thinking of a rock', the 'rock' in > > that > > thought pretends to be an actual rock in the thought. The thought will > > think that > > it is indeed thinking of a rock. In fact it is thinking of an image or > > idea of a > > rock, not a real rock, and so the rock referred to is a concept, not a > > 'reality'. > > When these concepts are confused with the reality they are trying to talk > > or think > > about, we are thrice removed from the reality of experience: 1/ we are > > removed > > from knowing that we are dealing with a concept not a reality; 2/ we are > > removed > > from the reality itself by dealing with a substitute image or definition as > > represented in the concept; and 3/ we are removed from the rupa that is > > occuring > > in the moment by looking at the reality as an object beyond the moment. > > > > But the concept is still only illusory, not nonexistent. It arises as part > > of a > > thought, a part of a thought that makes thought think it is more or other > > than > > merely a fabrication in the moment. > > > > I'm now ready to be deconstructed, reconstructed, dissected, corrected, or > > whatever else is necessary. > > > > Robert Ep. > > > > > ======================== > I'm not sure that I'm satisfied that the breakdown of dhammas into the > two classes of paramattha dhammas and pa~n~natti (which we can take to mean > concepts and their reducible referents, I suppose) is really complete. > Impermanence is a characteristic of (conditioned) dhammas, a lakkhana. There > *is* the concept of impermanence, but impermanence and the concept of > impermanence can't be the same. Impermanence isn't listed in the Abhidhamma > as either citta or cetasika, is it? Yet impermanence is one of the chief > things to be known by wisdom! (And it is claimed that pa~n~natti cannot be > known by wisdom!) So this is a bit of a conundrum, no? Something's got to be > WRONG here! ;-)) > > With metta, > Howard 12238 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: impermanence and reality Hi, Betty (and Larry) - In a message dated 3/30/02 1:10:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, beyugala@k... writes: > > Dear Howard and Larry, > After lurking for quite a while and now having gotten up to date > (somewhat), > I'd like to add my 2 cents worth to your discussion about impermanence. > Impermanence is not a reality (paramatha dhamma). It is, however, one of > the > characteristics of 3 of the paramatha dhammas: citta, cetasika and rupa > (Nibbana, the 4th paramatha dhamma, does not have these characteristics). > The other 2 main characteristics of these dhammas are anatta (non-self) and > dukkha (unsatisfactoriness). This you already know. > > But, obviously, when we talk about them, we talk in terms of concepts; for > it is only on the pannatti (concept) level that "we" (also a concept) can > talk about them. Even the paramatha dhammas are pannatti, as is Dhamma, > when > we talk about them. However, panna (a cetasika) does not need words nor > concepts to understand anicca (impermanence), anatta and dukkha and the > paramatha dhammas; it just performs its function, that of understanding, > when it arises (when the conditions are there for it to arise). As > understanding deepens (it is incremental), it increasingly comprehends the > nature of the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and non-self, the > nature of the paramatha dhammas, as well as the "nature" of the concepts > created by the "mind". As these are more deeply understood, increasing > detachment from kilesas (defilements) can take place as a result. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The nature of anicca still remains unclear. If it is not a paramattha dhamma, what is left (according to orthodox view) is pa~n~natti. Yet (according to orthodox view) pa~n~natti is not discernable with wisdom. I see a problem here. ------------------------------------------------------ > > If something is illusory, it cannot be reality; nor can it actually exist. > even for an instant. The concept of it seems to exist only because our > "minds" created it; it does not exist in reality and is illusion. The > various aramana received/experienced by citta through the 5 sense doors > (and > the "mind" door) are the sole realities that "we" (cittas and cetasikas) > actually perceive. However, in order to function in a pannatti world, "we", > "our minds", form concepts about these realities and in avijja (ignorance), > "we" think the concepts are real and therefore exist. "We" are usually not > aware of the actual realities that are picked up/experienced by cittas and > cetasikas, but instead we think the concepts are the realities. > > Therefore, the "practice" taught by the Buddha, is "developing" the > increasing arising of sati (awareness-also a cetasika) of the aramana which > come through the sense doors and mind door not as concepts, but as > realities, types of rupa and nama. When sati is aware of them in this way, > then it conditions panna, understanding, to arise and comprehend these at > increasingly deeper and more subtle levels. > > Please forgive the rambling, but in having to put this into words (concepts > again), it at least helped me to understand it better, but on the pariyati > (intellectual) level of understanding. When deeper levels of understanding > arise, the concepts, the words, are irrelevant. > > I hope that may help clear up some confusion about what is impermanence and > reality, but I hope it also provokes more discussion. > > Howard, amvery much looking forward to meeting you in NY; will call you > when > I arrive on the 29th of April (late evening) or the next morning. --------------------------------------------------- I look forward to meeting you as well. I'm very pleased that I have time available then! --------------------------------------------------- > > with metta, > ======================== 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) 12239 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 11:30am Subject: RE: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment: Kom Uh, yes, Sarah, I do read messags with my name in the message first (like this one). Writing a response to a message is an entirely different story and is totally subjected to my compulsion (or is that impulsion?) ;-) kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] > Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 4:49 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment > be best. If you mention > KOM's name in the greeting and subject heading at > the top, you may get a > very helpful reponse indeed;-) > 12240 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 0:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Thanks, Robert K, you made the distinction I was looking for: thinking is real but the object of thinking is not; I would call it the reality of illusion. I'm still interested in learning more about how the mind sense works (good topic for a phd thesis). Larry ---------------- Robert K wrote: Dear Larry, Concepts are certainly unreal. People doubt this but they can prove it to themself if there is direct insight. That is what the development of satipatthana reveals - that it is only ignorance that takes concepts for realities. As the Abhidhammathasangaha says about concepts like human, person, man, chariot that "All such different things , though they do not exist in the ultimate sense , become objects of consciousness in the form of shadows of ultimate things (paramattha dhammas)"(bodhi p.326 Just to be explicit: the thinking process consists of different cittas and cetasikas all arising and passing away rapidly. These are paramattha dhammas, ultimate realities. let us consider a couple of thinking. 1. Think of a flying purple elephant. The process of thinking that imagines this, whether a graphic visualisation or your no-frills, idea only version, consists of cittas and cetasikas. The object of this thinking is a concept, not real. 2. Think of your mother or father (whether alive or not). Again same process - the cittas and cetasikas of the thinking process are real but the object, mother and father, is concept- not real. 3. If your mother and father were right in front of you now (talking to you) and you think of them, again the object is concept, not real; but the thinking process is real. The colours are real, the sounds are real, but mother and father is concept. Obviously example 1 is easily understood. It is number 2 and especially number 3 that in daily life we get confused by. Satipatthana can only take paramattha dhammas for object, not concepts. Does this mean we should try not to think of concepts? Some would have us do this but this is not the middle way. All the arahants thought of concepts but they could never confuse concept for reality. Panna and sati can understand dhammas directly even during the processes of thinking that take concepts for objects. Now there is thinking happening that is trying to comprehend what was just read. The process of thinking is real and it might be rooted in lobha (desire) that wants to understand. The lobha is real - is it seen as just a dhamma , not you. There is also feeling; if you liked what was written this will be pleasant feeling - is it seen as just a conditioned dhamma, not you. And if you didn't like it there was unpleasant feeling, not you. These present objects must be seen wisely otherwise there will always be doubt and one will not gain confidence. Or one will settle for attachment to the Dhamma rather than insight. Or worse become someone whose aim is to look for little flaws thinking that this is proper investigation. I just heard on a tape from bangkok where someone said he rarely studies because he doesn't like reading (from childhood)- yet it is clear to me that he understands the heart of Dhamma. This, I believe, is because he sees how to apply it in the present moment. best wishes robert 12241 From: Sukin Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 0:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Rob, My wife warned me at the dinner party we attended earlier not to have the coffee they were serving saying that I won't be able to sleep. I told her that coffee usually doesn't affect my sleep, so I went ahead and had two cups. Maybe its not the coffee(the rupa), maybe its because I am curious about if anyone would reply to my mail, maybe its lobha/ chanda to read the mails from dsg in general( I did not have the chance to open my mailbox before this). But actually it must be many many factors working together. But thought is linear, it projects only one thing at a time, hence quite unreliable when it comes to understanding conditions( parmattha dhamma), I think. But let me go to your response to my post;( I hope you don't mind if I state something you have already considered. I think you consider things not only deeply but also widely, my consideration is usually a step or two behind yours and so I may be misrepresenting you) > I would say that it's incorrect to think that concepts have 'no reality > whatsoever'. If you take a look at what this means, it would mean that they do > not even come into being as concepts. Would it be more accurate to say that concepts do not have a reality in the same way that citta and cetasikas have ie. they do not have the characteristic of rise and fall and unsatifactoriness therefore they are not considered to be paramattha dhamma? But since we refer to them, and can be > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more accurate to say > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim to represent > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are illusory, but not > non-existent. As I expressed my understanding to Howard, there are paramattha dhammas arising which are responsible for the concept of something out there. But the concept itself is unreal. Not only they misrepresent reality in varying degrees as you stated below, but I think the limit of vitaka? or what ever cetasikas responsible, is in part, to make 'representations' of what is experienced( I think I am going beyond what I know here and I might be very off the mark). Whatever concepts are formed, and here I include non- verbal reaction to the field of awareness even in new born babies before they can recognize anything, depend upon amongst other things, our accumulation of panna and kilesa. Even with accumulations to level of satipatthana, the concept formed would still be, in the words of Rob K. 'shadows' of ultimate realities. Would you say that sati and panna of the level of satipatthana see the same thing as concepts? Suddenly I'm very sleepy( many hours since I last slept). Don't mind my abrupt ending. Perhaps I'll write more tomorrow. Best wishes, Sukin. > In the famous illusion of the rope and the snake, where a rope is mistaken for a > snake, one would normally say that the snake does not exist at all. I would say > this incorrect. The rope exists as an actual object [in conventional terms] while > the snake *does* exist, but only as an image or hallucination. So it is more > correct to say that the snake in this case is an image formed by the mind, or a > trick of the mind, rather than to say that it is non-existent. This is important, > because then we can start to look at the status of the things that arise in the > mind and in the senses, rather than talking about them in a general way. > > Now I think the way that concepts are looked at in Abhidhamma is a little more > confusing and technical, because it is said that concepts do not have a > characteristic which can be experienced as a reality, while thoughts I believe do > have an identifiable 'actual' characteristics -- I'm ready for more correction on > this one -- but I don't think anyone would say that the occurence of a concept as > a part of a thought *does not actually take place*. The thought refers to the > concept and references it in either language or image, so as the referent in a > thought or sentence, the concept exists. The reason it doesn't have its own > characteristic, I am guessing, is because a concept disguises itself as something > other than what it is. Therefore it falls apart on closer inspection, in terms of > what it claims to be. If I say 'I'm thinking of a rock', the 'rock' in that > thought pretends to be an actual rock in the thought. The thought will think that > it is indeed thinking of a rock. In fact it is thinking of an image or idea of a > rock, not a real rock, and so the rock referred to is a concept, not a 'reality'. > When these concepts are confused with the reality they are trying to talk or think > about, we are thrice removed from the reality of experience: 1/ we are removed > from knowing that we are dealing with a concept not a reality; 2/ we are removed > from the reality itself by dealing with a substitute image or definition as > represented in the concept; and 3/ we are removed from the rupa that is occuring > in the moment by looking at the reality as an object beyond the moment. > > But the concept is still only illusory, not nonexistent. It arises as part of a > thought, a part of a thought that makes thought think it is more or other than > merely a fabrication in the moment. > > I'm now ready to be deconstructed, reconstructed, dissected, corrected, or > whatever else is necessary. > > Robert Ep. 12242 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 0:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana - Rob Ep Hello Robert E, you wrote: "Can we know whether the state thus achieved is kusala or akusala?" I think "kusala" is largely conceptual, a reference point, a goal to strive toward. Unless we are arahats we are infected with lobha, dosa, and moha and if we are arahats neither kusala nor akusala dwells in our "house". Larry 12243 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 1:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] anatta and kamma Hello Christine, I feel exactly the same and I don't have any advice that actually works. With that disclaimer I would say just look at those feelings. Don't particularly try to reason them away. See what happens. Larry ps: I'm going to borrow your quote to answer a question I will be asking about nibanna in ADL ch. 2 ----------------------------------- Christine wrote: Dear All, Anatta still seems such a hard thing to consider ...truth, yes,.... reality, yes,.... but such a lonely doctrine. (I wonder if anyone has turned back from it for that very reason...) Can anyone remind me of how 'results of kamma' and 'no-self go' together? As well, any links to suttas and articles would be appreciated. I've found some on them separately, but not together. In the Visuddhi Magga it is said: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found. The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there. Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it. The path is, but no traveller on it is seen," "No doer of the deeds is found, No being that may reap their fruits. Empty phenomena roll on! This is the only right view." metta, Christine 12244 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: Is Anicca a concept or a reality? (was: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)) Greetings all, Here's one answer from Vsm XXI note 4: "These modes, [that is, the three characteristics,] are not included in the aggregates because they are states without individual essence (asabhava-dhamma); and they are not separate from the aggregates because they are unapprehendable without the aggregates. But they should be understood as appropriate conceptual differences (pannatti-visesa) that are reason for differentiation in the explaining of dangers in the five aggregtes, and which are allowable by common usage in respect of the five aggregates" (Pm.825) 12245 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 1:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Thanks Howard, I think this deserves a special place in the Useful Posts File. Sarah, what do you think??? Larry ------------------------ Howard wrote: You might be onto something about their being in the same boat, at least if mathematicians see things at all correctly. Mathematicians sometimes *represent* properties as special cases of relations. // The mathematics involved: An n-ary relation among members of a set (for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, ...) is represented by a collection of n-tuples of elements from that set (each n-tuple indicating the holding of the relation among its n elements in the given order); a property of objects in a set is represented by a subset of that set (the members of the subset being those that have that property). These two representations coincide for n-ary relations with n = 1. // That is, mathematicians identify properties with 1-ary relations. 12246 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 2:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) "All four paramattha dhammas are anatta, not self." Hi all, Why is nibanna not self you might ask. The only answer I could find relates to this passage in Vsm XVI 90: [concerning the 4 noble truths] Hence this is said; 'For there is suffering, but none who suffers; doing exists although there is no doer; extinction is but no extinguished person; although there is a path, there is no goer'. Or alternatively: So void of lastingness, and beauty, pleasure, self, is the first pair, and void of self the deathless state, and void of lastingness, of pleasure and of self is the path too; for such is voidness in these four. In XVI note 25: It may be noted in passing that the word "anatta" (not self) is never applied direct to nibbana in the Suttas (and Abhidhamma), or in Bh. Buddaghosa's commentaries. ....in the Saddhammappakasini: '....[Thirdly] all dhammas formed and unformed, are void of self because of the non-existence of any person (puggala) called "self (atta)".' endquote My take on this is that the Buddha's usual reasons for anatta are impermanence and no control which obviously wouldn't apply to nibbana. Taking a cue from madhyamaka (mahayana philosophy) I would say the above quotes point to the fact that a self is not found when a seeming-self (feeling for example) is rigorously analyzed. More simply, a person is not found. Nibbana is obviously not a person, neither is a feeling. It should be noted that both nibbana and samsara are without self, but samsara doesn't know it. So there is plenty of "apparent" company here. There is said to be a kind of bliss in nibbana. Who knows? The question one might ask is, is company a good (satisfactory) thing? Larry 12247 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 9:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Heh, heh, heh!! ;-)) I do love your sense of humor, Larry!! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 3/30/02 4:41:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Thanks Howard, I think this deserves a special place in the Useful Posts > File. Sarah, what do you think??? > > Larry > ------------------------ > Howard wrote: > You might be onto something about their being in the same boat, at least > if mathematicians see things at all correctly. Mathematicians sometimes > *represent* properties as special cases of relations. // The mathematics > involved: An n-ary relation among members of a set (for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, > ...) is represented by a collection of n-tuples of elements from that > set (each n-tuple indicating the holding of the relation among its n > elements in the given order); a property of objects in a set is > represented by a subset of that set (the members of the subset being > those that have that property). These two representations coincide for > n-ary relations with n = 1. // That is, mathematicians identify > properties with 1-ary relations. > > /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) 12248 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 9:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Hi, Larry - In a message dated 3/30/02 5:39:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > "All four paramattha dhammas are > anatta, not self." > > Hi all, > > Why is nibanna not self you might ask. The only answer I could find > relates to this passage in Vsm XVI 90: [concerning the 4 noble truths] > > Hence this is said; > > 'For there is suffering, but none who suffers; doing exists although > there is no doer; extinction is but no extinguished person; although > there is a path, there is no goer'. > > Or alternatively: > > So void of lastingness, and beauty, pleasure, self, is the first pair, > and void of self the deathless state, and void of lastingness, of > pleasure and of self is the path too; for such is voidness in these > four. > > In XVI note 25: > > It may be noted in passing that the word "anatta" (not self) is never > applied direct to nibbana in the Suttas (and Abhidhamma), or in Bh. > Buddaghosa's commentaries. ....in the Saddhammappakasini: '....[Thirdly] > all dhammas formed and unformed, are void of self because of the > non-existence of any person (puggala) called "self (atta)".' > > endquote > > My take on this is that the Buddha's usual reasons for anatta are > impermanence and no control which obviously wouldn't apply to nibbana. > Taking a cue from madhyamaka (mahayana philosophy) I would say the above > quotes point to the fact that a self is not found when a seeming-self > (feeling for example) is rigorously analyzed. More simply, a person is > not found. Nibbana is obviously not a person, neither is a feeling. > > It should be noted that both nibbana and samsara are without self, but > samsara doesn't know it. So there is plenty of "apparent" company here. > There is said to be a kind of bliss in nibbana. Who knows? The question > one might ask is, is company a good (satisfactory) thing? > > Larry > > ============================== I think the following might be also be said: 1) Nibbana does not have control, and is not an agent, these being conditions - and nibbana is beyond all conditions, and 2) A self, in traditional Indian philosophy, is (or has) true being, true essence, but nibbana is the ultimate emptiness. 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) 12249 From: Michael Newton Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 5:27pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment: Kom --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Uh, yes, Sarah, > > I do read messags with my name in the message first > (like > this one). Writing a response to a message is an > entirely > different story and is totally subjected to my > compulsion > (or is that impulsion?) ;-) > > kom > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] > > Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 4:49 AM > > > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [dsg] Formal sitting > meditation/Enlightenment > > > be best. If you mention > > KOM's name in the greeting and subject heading at > > the top, you may get a > > very helpful reponse indeed;-) > > > Hello!Kom; Thanks for your help and thanks for forwarding Khun Sujin's upcoming California visit.Things are going good here.I'm going to try and connect with the group maybe when Khun Sujin visits the fabulous Muir woods in the Bay Area.Khun Sujin has a quite itinerary in the States. YOURS IN DHAMMA WITH METTA,MICHAEL 12250 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 5:35pm Subject: Michael (ation/Enlightenment: Kom --- Dear Michael, Good to hear from you, just wanted to say I appreciated hearing about the 'ol days in Sri lanka that you wrote about( before my time ). best wishes robert > > > > > Hello!Kom; > Thanks for your help and thanks for forwarding > Khun Sujin's upcoming California visit.Things are > going good here.I'm going to try and connect with > the group maybe when Khun Sujin visits the fabulous > Muir woods in the Bay Area.Khun > Sujin has a quite itinerary in the States. > YOURS IN DHAMMA WITH METTA,MICHAEL 12251 From: Michael Newton Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 5:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Michael (ation/Enlightenment: Kom --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- Dear Michael, > Good to hear from you, just wanted to say I > appreciated hearing about > the 'ol days in Sri lanka that you wrote about( > before my time ). > best wishes > robert > Hello!Robert; Thanks for the feedback.Yes that was quite a time ago,before all these internet breakthroughs.I'm truly amazed of the speed and efficiency how we can communicate with each other these days.Back during my monk days in Sri Lanka,I never could have imagined all this we are doing now to be possible.The world isn't as big as I once thought it was.YOUR IN DHAMMA,MICHAEL > > > > > > > > Hello!Kom; > > Thanks for your help and thanks for forwarding > > Khun Sujin's upcoming California visit.Things are > > going good here.I'm going to try and connect with > > the group maybe when Khun Sujin visits the > fabulous > > Muir woods in the Bay Area.Khun > > Sujin has a quite itinerary in the States. > > YOURS IN DHAMMA WITH METTA,MICHAEL > 12252 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 6:29pm Subject: [dsg] Re: impermanence and reality --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > Howard: > The nature of anicca still remains unclear. If it is not a paramattha > dhamma, what is left (according to orthodox view) is pa~n~natti. Yet > (according to orthodox view) pa~n~natti is not discernable with wisdom. I see > a problem here. > ------------------------------------------------------ > Dear Howard, Visuddhimagga xxi8"The five aggregates are impermanent. Why? Because they rise and fall or because of their non-existence after having been. Rise and fall ARE the characterisitic of impermanence...in other words non-existence after having been is the characteristic of impermanence". Xx "the characteristic of impermanence becomes evident to him through seeing rise and fall according to instant owing to his discovery of non-existence after having been" . best wishes robert hhhh"these same aggregates are not self...Why?`Because there is no exercising of power over them. The mode of insusceptibilty to the exercise of power is the characteristic of not-self" 12253 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 6:35pm Subject: Re: impermanence and reality --- Dear Betty, Thank you for this very clear explanation. You really consider Dhamma. best robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Mom Bongkojpriya \(Betty\) Yugala" wrote: >> dukkha (unsatisfactoriness). This you already know. > > But, obviously, when we talk about them, we talk in terms of concepts; for > it is only on the pannatti (concept) level that "we" (also a concept) can > talk about them. Even the paramatha dhammas are pannatti, as is Dhamma, when > we talk about them. However, panna (a cetasika) does not need words nor > concepts to understand anicca (impermanence), anatta and dukkha and the > paramatha dhammas; it just performs its function, that of understanding, > when it arises (when the conditions are there for it to arise). As > understanding deepens (it is incremental), it increasingly comprehends the > nature of the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and non-self, the > nature of the paramatha dhammas, as well as the "nature" of the concepts > created by the "mind". As these are more deeply understood, increasing > detachment from kilesas (defilements) can take place as a result. > > If something is illusory, it cannot be reality; nor can it actually exist. > even for an instant. The concept of it seems to exist only because our > "minds" gg 12254 From: Ven. Dr. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 5:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Hi Larry, It is impossible for Nibbána to be anatta or to be atta! Why? Because Nibbána is the crowning and infrangible, absolute, unambiguous, unequivocal deliverance from all future rebirth, old age, disease and death, from all suffering and misery. It is not a place or destination, nor is it a goal in the mundane sense of the term at all. If we read ahead below to the defining words to give some idea, the key word to reflect upon is: extinguishment --- as in "to extinguish a fire". This is a very difficult concept to understand... it is expereinced by the wise practitioner more than s/he can relate that same experience communicatively (verbally). We define Nibbána thus: Nibbána, (Sanskrit nirvána): lit. 'extinction' (nir + Ö va, to cease blowing, to become extinguished); according to the commentaries, 'freedom from desire' (nir+ vana). Nibbána constitutes the highest and ultimate goal of all Buddhist aspirations, i.e. absolute extinction of that life-affirming will manifested as greed, hate and delusion, and convulsively clinging to existence; and therewith also the ultimate and absolute deliverance from all future rebirth, old age, disease and death, from all suffering and misery. Cf. Parinibbána. "Extinction of greed, extinction of hate, extinction of delusion: this is called Nibbána" (S. XXXVIII. 1). The 2 aspects of Nibbána are: (1) The full extinction of defilements (kilesa-parinibbána), also called sa-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41), i.e. 'Nibbána with the groups of existence still remaining' (s. upádi). This takes place at the attainment of Arahatship, or perfect holiness (s. ariya-puggala). (2) The full extinction of the groups of existence (khandha-parinibbána), also called an-upádi-sesa-nibbána (s. It. 41, A. IV, 118), i.e. 'Nibbána without the groups remaining', in other words, the coming to rest, or rather the 'no-more-continuing' of this physico-mental process of existence. This takes place at the death of the Arahat. - (App.: Nibbána). Sometimes both aspects take place at one and the same moment, i.e. at the death of the Arahat; s. sama-sísí. "This, o monks, truly is the peace, this is the highest, namely the end of all formations, the forsaking of every substratum of rebirth, the fading away of craving, detachment, extinction, Nibbána" (A. III, 32). "Enraptured with lust (rága), enraged with anger (dosa), blinded by delusion (moha), overwhelmed, with mind ensnared, man aims at his own ruin, at the ruin of others, at the ruin of both, and he experiences mental pain and grief. But if lust, anger and delusion are given up, man aims neither at his own ruin, nor at the ruin of others, nor at the ruin of both, and he experiences no mental pain and grief. Thus is Nibbána visible in this life, immediate, inviting, attractive, and comprehensible to the wise" (A. III, 55). "Just as a rock of one solid mass remains unshaken by the wind, even so neither visible forms, nor sounds, nor odours, nor tastes, nor bodily impressions, neither the desired nor the undesired, can cause such a one to waver. Steadfast is his mind, gained is deliverance" (A, VI, 55). "Verily, there is an Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed. If there were not this Unborn, Unoriginated, Uncreated, Unformed, escape from the world of the born, the originated, the created, the formed, would not be possible" (Ud. VIII, 3). One cannot too often and too emphatically stress the fact that not only for the actual realization of the goal of Nibbána, but also for a theoretical understanding of it, it is an indispensable preliminary condition to grasp fully the truth of anattá (q.v.), the egolessness and insubstantiality of all forms of existence. Without such an understanding, one will necessarily misconceive Nibbána - according to one's either materialistic or metaphysical leanings - either as annihilation of an ego, or as an eternal state of existence into which an ego or self enters or with which it merges. Hence it is said: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deed is, but no doer of the deed is there; Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." (Vis.M.XVI) Literature: For texts on Nibbána, see Path, 36ff. - See Vis.M. XVI. 64ff. - Anattá and Nibbána, by Nyanaponika Thera (WHEEL 11); The Buddhist Doctrine of Nibbána, by Ven. P. Vajiranana & F. Story (WHEEL 165/166). Reply continued below in context: ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 5:32 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) > "All four paramattha dhammas are > anatta, not self." > > Hi all, > > Why is nibanna not self you might ask. The only answer I could find > relates to this passage in Vsm XVI 90: [concerning the 4 noble truths] > There are many references to what you are referring to but it takes a bit of hard study and a long period of practice with Teachings, as well as a practice in and of itself to find what you seek. > Hence this is said; > > 'For there is suffering, but none who suffers; doing exists although > there is no doer; extinction is but no extinguished person; although > there is a path, there is no goer'. > > Or alternatively: > > So void of lastingness, and beauty, pleasure, self, is the first pair, > and void of self the deathless state, and void of lastingness, of > pleasure and of self is the path too; for such is voidness in these > four. > Here is a more exact translation for you: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > In XVI note 25: > > It may be noted in passing that the word "anatta" (not self) is never > applied direct to nibbana in the Suttas (and Abhidhamma), or in Bh. > Buddaghosa's commentaries. ....in the Saddhammappakasini: '....[Thirdly] > all dhammas formed and unformed, are void of self because of the > non-existence of any person (puggala) called "self (atta)".' > > endquote > Perhaps you can see that there is more than one place to find the evidence you are presenting. > My take on this is that the Buddha's usual reasons for anatta are > impermanence and no control which obviously wouldn't apply to >[Nibb[á]na. This is an error. Your "take"on this incorrect. Define anatta. > Taking a cue from madhyamaka (mahayana philosophy) I would say the above > quotes point to the fact that a self is not found when a seeming-self > (feeling for example) is rigorously analyzed. More simply, a person is > not found. Nibbana is obviously not a person, neither is a feeling. > True, but the view is incomplete. And while this is true, you have missed a very important andmost crucial point: Anatta is "the" "central doctrine" of Buddhism, without understanding which a real knowledge of Buddhism is altogether impossible. It is the only really specific Buddhist doctrine, with which the entire Structure of the Buddhist teaching stands or falls. All the remaining Buddhist doctrines may, more or less, be found in other philosophic systems and religions, but the anattá-doctrine has been clearly and unreservedly taught only by the Buddha, wherefore the Buddha is known as the anattá-vádi, or 'Teacher of Impersonality'. Whosoever has not penetrated this impersonality of all existence, and does not comprehend that in reality there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena, and that there is no separate ego-entity within or without this process, he will not be able to understand Buddhism, i.e. the teaching of the 4 Noble Truths (sacca, q.v.), in the right light. He will think that it is his ego, his personality, that experiences suffering, his personality that performs good and evil actions and will be reborn according to these actions, his personality that will enter into Nibbána, his personality that walks on the Eightfold Path. Thus it is said in Vis.M. XVI: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbána is, but not the man that enters it; The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > It should be noted that both nibbana and samsara are without self, but > samsara doesn't know it. Not quite so, or there would be no rebirth! What "makes" Samsára? When you ever think of or reflect upon Samsára, you must also reflect upon these: tilakkhana, anattá, paramattha, patisandhi. So, your statem,ent above is faulted --- incorrect. And do not get into the conundrum that Nibbána and Samsára are the same --- this is often touted by those who claim to be Mahayana practitioners but lack the essential understanding of the doctrines the Buddha Himself has taught. > So there is plenty of "apparent" company here. > There is said to be a kind of bliss in nibbana. Who knows? Bliss "in" Nibbána? Impossible! Nibbána IS NOT A PLACE NOR IS IT A DESTINATION! One does not go to Nibbána or get "in" to Nibbána! > The question > one might ask is, is company a good (satisfactory) thing? > What are you talking about? At a certain point in practice, it would only seem perfectly natural to want the compnay of the kalyána-mitta. Do you know what the kalyána-mitta is or not? > Larry > Metta cittena, VBD > 12255 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 7:26pm Subject: Re: anatta and kamma --- Dear Christine, AS usual your questions are central to what the Dhamma , and thus what life , is all about. So many ways to discuss this but you might appreciate it hearing about it in relation to the Paticcasamuppada. As we have discusssed before this teaching shows that no-self exists but that only these factors are occuring. It is indeed to preven the wrong idea of self that it was taught: "with ignorance as condition there are formations' prevents seeing a maker ; the clause with 'with formations as condition consciousness prevenst seeing the transmigration of a self; the clause with concsiousness as condition, mentality and materiality' prevents perception of compactness because it shows the analysis of the basis conjectured to be 'self'; and the clauses beginning 'With nama-rupa as condition the six-fold base' prevent seeing any self that sees , cognises, touches , feels, craves, clings, becomes , is born, ages and dies" Visuddhimagga XVII302 An aspect of the Paticcasamuppada I like to contemplate is The three rounds : kamma-vatta(action), vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements ). These three cover all 12 links of the Paticcasamuppada. Kilesa vatta consists of avijja(ignorance), tanha(desire), and upadana (grasping). Kamma vatta consists of sankhara (formations)and kamma-bhava. Vipaka vatta connsists of vinnana (consciousness), nama-rupa, salayatana (six bases), phassa (contact), vedana(feeling), jati (birth), upapatti-bhava, jara-marana (decay and death). The actual moments of experience through the doorways (seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling) are vipaka (result) but immediately there may be reaction which is defilement(kilesa) and this conditions kamma. These rounds are all spinning now, continually, as they always have in samsara. The three rounds are all conditioned and closely related. Someone sees an expensive car: that is the concept. What actually happens is visible object conditions seeing consciousness (vipaka). Because kilesa (avijja and lobha)the root cause are not eliminated they may condition kamma (such as working extra hard to get money - or maybe even stealing the car). In the future that kamma will bring a suitable result (vipaka vatta)... and so the round goes on and on...But no self anywhere. Of course the example above is just a to give a broad idea. In fact kilesa vatta and kamma vatta can be considered to be occuring also in the same moment - it depends in what ways we are considering it. That is why paticcasamupadda is so deep and hard to understand. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear All, > > Anatta still seems such a hard thing to consider ...truth, yes,.... > reality, yes,.... but such a lonely doctrine. (I wonder if anyone > has turned back from it for that very reason...) Can anyone remind me > of how 'results of kamma' and 'no-self go' together? As well, any > links to suttas and articles would be appreciated. I've found some on > them separately, but not together. > > In the Visuddhi Magga it is said: > "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found. > The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there. > Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it. > The path is, but no traveller on it is seen," > > "No doer of the deeds is found, > No being that may reap their fruits. > Empty phenomena roll on! > This is the only right view." > > metta, > Christine 12256 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 7:34pm Subject: Re: anatta and kamma(correction) One of the sentences in my last post was clumsy. This is better. Christine, AS usual your questions are central to what the Dhamma , and thus what life , is all about. So many ways to discuss this but you might appreciate it hearing about it in relation to the Paticcasamuppada. As we have discusssed before this teaching shows that no-self exists but that only these factors are occuring. It is indeed to prevent the wrong idea of self that it was taught: "with ignorance as condition there are formations' prevents seeing a maker ; the clause with 'with formations as condition consciousness prevents seeing the transmigration of a self; the clause with concsiousness as condition, mentality and materiality' prevents perception of compactness because it shows the analysis of the basis conjectured to be 'self'; and the clauses beginning 'With nama-rupa as condition the six-fold base' prevent seeing any self that sees , cognises, touches , feels, craves, clings, becomes , is born, ages and dies" Visuddhimagga XVII302 An aspect of the Paticcasamuppada I like to contemplate is The three rounds : kamma-vatta(action), vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements ). These three cover all 12 links of the Paticcasamuppada. Kilesa vatta consists of avijja(ignorance), tanha(desire), and upadana (grasping). Kamma vatta consists of sankhara (formations)and kamma-bhava. Vipaka vatta connsists of vinnana (consciousness), nama-rupa, salayatana (six bases), phassa (contact), vedana(feeling), jati (birth), upapatti-bhava, jara-marana (decay and death). The actual moments of experience through the doorways (seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling) are vipaka (result) but because of defilement(kilesa) arises kamma. These rounds are all spinning now, continually, as they always have in samsara. The three rounds are all conditioned and closely related. Someone sees an expensive car: that is the concept. What actually happens is visible object conditions seeing consciousness (vipaka). Because kilesa (avijja and lobha)the root cause are not eliminated they may condition kamma (such as working extra hard to get money - or maybe even stealing the car). In the future that kamma will bring a suitable result (vipaka vatta)... and so the round goes on and on...But no self anywhere. Of course the example above is just a to give a broad idea. In fact kilesa vatta and kamma vatta can be considered to be occuring also in the same moment - it depends in what ways we are considering it. That is why paticcasamupadda is so deep and hard to understand. best wishes robert 12257 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 8:33pm Subject: Wholeness and uncorruptedness of the Teachings? Dear All, I remember reading in Ninas' extract from India about the predicted disappearance of the Teachings and being very thankful that they were still available at this time, and realising that it was a duty to learn and understand all that I was capable of in the time (does anyone know how long) left in this life-time. Since coming to Buddhism I have always accepted what I believed to be a widely held conviction that the Pali Canon was absolutely to be relied on. Increasingly, phrases like "the Teachings are 'relatively' intact" have been coming to my attention. Very frequently the Abhidhamma, the Commentaries, and use of Pali are spoken of in a dismissive (if not derogatory) manner on some lists. Mostly this was by followers of other traditions. Recently, I have 'heard' Theravadins imply that some teachings may have been lost or corrupted before being recorded, some lines in Suttas may have disappeared, meanings and words may have been changed, translators may have made mistakes or been strongly influenced by the views of the cultures from which they came. Buddhism, to me, is an 'all or nothing' way to live my life. But a life, like a building, needs an absolutely solid foundation....but if the very ground on which it is built is shaky... Don't you think that if the Teachings are regarded with doubt or reservations, the task is so much harder, if not impossible? metta, Christine 12258 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 8:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n op 30-03-2002 01:23 schreef srnsk@a... op srnsk@a...: Sukin: < The Buddha taught about conditions and anatta. What ever dhamma > arises now has already fallen away. Sati would have arisen or not > depends on conditions. K. Sujin often reminds us that the right > results must follow the right cause. To me the conditions that > cause a dhamma to arise are very very complex. I have absolutely > no idea how and when satipatthana can arise, considering the > accumulations it would seem impossible that sati can ever arise in me, > but actually I can never know. According to what I've heard, it would > be panna not me(lobha/ dosa/ moha) which will help condition the > arising of satipatthana. If at this moment the conditions are right for > panna and sati to arise, it would. If not, thinking that I can do > something about it, would in my understanding, not be the work of > panna. > On the other hand, someone might come to the conclusion after > extensive reading of the texts, that what the Buddha taught was a > step-by-step program as conditions for the arising of sati, I > think to some extent that this can condition the false view that > understanding cannot happen now. And an idea that there are a more > ideal time and place for practice.>> > Num: Dear K.Sukin, > > I really appreciate your message here. A very good reminder. > Have to run, > > Num I just want to join Num in my appreciation of this excellent reminder, Nina. 12259 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 8:57pm Subject: Re: Wholeness and uncorruptedness of the Teachings? -- Dear Christine, It is wonderful that you can see that the Dhamma has been faithfully preserved by the elders - such great merit that they held firm even over all these centuries when others tried to introduce false ideas. they did it for us so that we can develop too. There are occasional variant readings in different scripts - a copyist missed a diacritic when he was etching the words on to the palm leaves or mispelled something left out a word etc. That is why the translators should get many different old copies of the pali to compare. One text I know all copies are apparently very corrupted - the Petakopadesa (an ancient commentary). But out of all the many, many teachings this is a very minor matter. And it is so rare that we have a chance to learn this amazing Dhamma which is sometimes lost for thousands of aeons of time. I too sometimes feel sad when I see the tradition being disparaged but it has been like this since the beginning and will keep increasing. Now when I see this happen I try to develop compassion for those who do this and if I think it will help I might write something. But everyone has accumulated unique types of kilesa and so we can't expect anyone to be other than how they are. When I read what you wrote I felt such strong mudita. kind regards robert - In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear All, > > I remember reading in Ninas' extract from India about the predicted > disappearance of the Teachings and being very thankful that they were > still available at this time, and realising that it was a duty to > learn and understand all that I was capable of in the time (does > anyone know how long) left in this life-time. > Since coming to Buddhism I have always accepted what I believed to be > a widely held conviction that the Pali Canon was absolutely to be > relied on. Increasingly, phrases like "the Teachings > are 'relatively' intact" have been coming to my attention. Very > frequently the Abhidhamma, the Commentaries, and use of Pali are > spoken of in a dismissive (if not derogatory) manner on some lists. > Mostly this was by followers of other traditions. Recently, I > have 'heard' Theravadins imply that some teachings may have been lost > or corrupted before being recorded, some lines in Suttas may have > disappeared, meanings and words may have been changed, translators > may have made mistakes or been strongly influenced by the views of > the cultures from which they came. > Buddhism, to me, is an 'all or nothing' way to live my life. But a > life, like a building, needs an absolutely solid foundation....but if > the very ground on which it is built is shaky... Don't you think > that if the Teachings are regarded with doubt or reservations, the > task is so much harder, if not impossible? > > metta, > Christine 12260 From: Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 9:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Dear Ven. Dr. Bhikkhu Dhammapiyo, Thank you for your extensive corrections. I'm sure we can all learn from them. To clarify one small point, the discussion of "company" was in reference to an earlier question of Christine's regarding a feeling of lonliness when considering anatta. Here is a comment on nibbana I found in my brief research on this topic. It gives a slightly different picture of nibbana than what I had assumed. Vsm VIII note 72: Modern etymology derives the word 'nibbana (Skr. nirvana)' from the negative prefix nir plus the root va (to blow). The original literal meaning was probably 'extinction' of a fire by ceasing to blow on it with bellows (a smith's fire for example). This emphasizes the idea of extinction by _ceasing_ which is particularly easy for me to forget. metta, Larry 12261 From: Sarah Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 10:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Rob Ep. Sorry for the delay...I'm a bit behind myself;-) Your qus have probably been answered by now, but let me respond in brief if I may. ..... --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > A worthy and interesting discussion to me, not at all just quibbling. I > would > like to ask two questions: > > 1/ Would the Buddha say that only those phenomena which are directly > observeable, > ie, the paramatha dhammas, are 'real'? ..... Yes, in an 'ultimate' rather than conventional or wordly sense. ..... > 2/ Would the Buddha say that the 'assemblage' by which one forms the > concept of > an object *is* deductively real, but simply cannot be directly observed? ..... Yes, exactly ..... > In other > words, the concept is 'intelligent' as to what exists in the world, but > is not > itself 'actual', since it is a representation of various views that have > been > developed? ..... That sounds fine to me. We certainly need these 'intelligent' concepts, but it's so very helpful to know they are only concepts and inherently therefore not of any real value. ..... > I hope you see the difference between 1/ and 2/, which is hard to > express, and can > shed some light for me. ..... This is the difference between sammuti sacca (conventional knowledge or truth) and paramattha sacca which you've expressed clearly. I noticed in the Sivaka Sutta & Com that Nina gave the Pali for, it mentioned the sammuti sacca (worldly view or understanding was the translation given, I think). This is always in contrast to the ultimate truth or right understanding ..... > Lastly, a comment: It is so hard not to see the 'assembled perceptions' > by which > a concept of object is formed as the 'actual object', the reality, as > opposed to > that which we actually perceive in the moment, which is always just an > 'aspect', > or a 'quality', never a 'whole object'. ..... Yes, the truth is always covered by ignorance. The Buddha didn't say it was easy. What you refer to as an 'aspect' or 'quality', we'd refer to as a reality or characteristic of reality. At a moment of samma sati and panna there is no doubt, no difficulty, no confusion for a moment. The reality is seen for what it is. Afterwards, of course, there are likely to be the confusions, doubts and ideas of wholes again while we're still beginners. ..... > This leads to the inevitable conclusion that there are in fact no direct > 'objects' > for human perception, that objects per se are only accessible by mental > concept, > and that thus, either we as perceivers, or the whole idea of objects > that do not > continuously change and arise in separate aspects, is severely limited. ..... This sounds like thinking about more concepts about concepts;-) Sorry, i don't quite follow you here but I suspect you're underestimating the power of sati and panna to perform their tasks. ..... Very glad to hear your comments here, Rob and appreciating all the other discussions. Sarah ============= 12262 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 11:34pm Subject: Re: Wholeness and uncorruptedness of the Teachings? Dear Robert, Thank you for your post - it was comforting and reassuring. I'll try to develop compassion for those who undermine the authority of the Canon, - at this moment though, I usually feel either alarm or aversion....... most likely this will lessen with more study and more practice and experience as a Buddhist. (I often feel a little envious of the assurance of those further along the Path). As you say "it has been like this since the beginning and will keep increasing." metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > -- > Dear Christine, > It is wonderful that you can see that the Dhamma has been faithfully > preserved by the elders - such great merit that they held firm even > over all these centuries when others tried to introduce false ideas. > they did it for us so that we can develop too. > There are occasional variant readings in different scripts - a > copyist missed a diacritic when he was etching the words on to the > palm leaves or mispelled something left out a word etc. That is why > the translators should get many different old copies of the pali to > compare. > One text I know all copies are apparently very corrupted - the > Petakopadesa (an ancient commentary). > But out of all the many, many teachings this is a very minor matter. > And it is so rare that we have a chance to learn this amazing Dhamma > which is sometimes lost for thousands of aeons of time. > I too sometimes feel sad when I see the tradition being disparaged > but it has been like this since the beginning and will keep > increasing. Now when I see this happen I try to develop compassion > for those who do this and if I think it will help I might write > something. But everyone has accumulated unique types of kilesa and so > we can't expect anyone to be other than how they are. When I read > what you wrote I felt such strong mudita. > kind regards > robert > > > - In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > I remember reading in Ninas' extract from India about the predicted > > disappearance of the Teachings and being very thankful that they > were > > still available at this time, and realising that it was a duty to > > learn and understand all that I was capable of in the time (does > > anyone know how long) left in this life-time. > > Since coming to Buddhism I have always accepted what I believed to > be > > a widely held conviction that the Pali Canon was absolutely to be > > relied on. Increasingly, phrases like "the Teachings > > are 'relatively' intact" have been coming to my attention. Very > > frequently the Abhidhamma, the Commentaries, and use of Pali are > > spoken of in a dismissive (if not derogatory) manner on some > lists. > > Mostly this was by followers of other traditions. Recently, I > > have 'heard' Theravadins imply that some teachings may have been > lost > > or corrupted before being recorded, some lines in Suttas may have > > disappeared, meanings and words may have been changed, translators > > may have made mistakes or been strongly influenced by the views of > > the cultures from which they came. > > Buddhism, to me, is an 'all or nothing' way to live my life. But a > > life, like a building, needs an absolutely solid foundation....but > if > > the very ground on which it is built is shaky... Don't you think > > that if the Teachings are regarded with doubt or reservations, the > > task is so much harder, if not impossible? > > > > metta, > > Christine 12263 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 11:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] anatta and kamma Dear Larry, Just knowing someone else has experienced a similar feeling is of help. Thank you for sharing. I think it is more than coming closer to a better understanding of Anatta - I think it also has something to do with Easter Sunday, and living among those devoted to another faith, and remembering emotions once joyfully shared. Though firmly treading another Path, and in no danger of going along the old one again, I think how wonderful it must be for families who live and practice together in a Buddhist country. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hello Christine, > > I feel exactly the same and I don't have any advice that actually works. > With that disclaimer I would say just look at those feelings. Don't > particularly try to reason them away. See what happens. > > Larry > > ps: I'm going to borrow your quote to answer a question I will be asking > about nibanna in ADL ch. 2 > ----------------------------------- > Christine wrote: > Dear All, > Anatta still seems such a hard thing to consider ...truth, > yes,.... reality, yes,.... but such a lonely doctrine. (I wonder if > anyone has turned back from it for that very reason...) Can anyone > remind me of how 'results of kamma' and 'no-self go' together? As well, > any links to suttas and articles would be appreciated. I've found some > on them separately, but not together. > In the Visuddhi Magga it is said: > "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found. The deeds are, but no doer > of the deeds is there. Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it. The > path is, but no traveller on it is seen," > "No doer of the deeds is found, > No being that may reap their fruits. > Empty phenomena roll on! > This is the only right view." > metta, > Christine 12264 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 11:46pm Subject: Re: anatta and kamma(correction)/RobertK Thanks for this Robert, like most of your posts I need to print it and think about it before I can decide if there are any questions. I am interested to see you mention the three rounds - I remember in BKK that this was mentioned, but it was at a time when I was already a little overwhelmed with what I had heard in the discussions, so I just let it flow over me..... afterwards I wondered and wished I'd asked a question. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > One of the sentences in my last post was clumsy. This is better. > Christine, > AS usual your questions are central to what the Dhamma , and thus > what life , is all about. > So many ways to discuss this but you might appreciate it hearing > about it in relation to the Paticcasamuppada. As we have discusssed > before this teaching shows that no-self exists but that only these > factors are occuring. > It is indeed to prevent the wrong idea of self that it was > taught: "with ignorance as condition there are formations' prevents > seeing a maker ; the clause with 'with formations as condition > consciousness prevents seeing the transmigration of a self; the > clause with concsiousness as condition, mentality and materiality' > prevents perception of compactness because it shows the analysis of > the basis conjectured to be 'self'; and the clauses beginning 'With > nama-rupa as condition the six-fold base' prevent seeing any self > that sees , cognises, touches , feels, craves, clings, becomes , is > born, ages and dies" Visuddhimagga XVII302 > > An aspect of the Paticcasamuppada I like to contemplate is > The three rounds : kamma-vatta(action), > vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements ). These three > cover all 12 links of the Paticcasamuppada. > Kilesa vatta consists of avijja(ignorance), tanha(desire), and > upadana (grasping). > Kamma vatta consists of sankhara (formations)and kamma-bhava. > Vipaka vatta connsists of vinnana (consciousness), nama-rupa, > salayatana (six bases), phassa (contact), vedana(feeling), jati > (birth), upapatti-bhava, jara-marana (decay and death). > > The actual moments of experience > through the doorways (seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling) > are vipaka (result) but because of defilement(kilesa) > arises kamma. These rounds are all spinning now, > continually, as they always have in samsara. > The three rounds are all conditioned and closely related. > Someone sees an expensive car: that is the concept. > What actually happens is visible object conditions seeing > consciousness (vipaka). Because kilesa (avijja and lobha)the root > cause are not eliminated they may condition kamma (such as working > extra hard to get money - or maybe even stealing the car). In the > future > that kamma will bring a suitable result (vipaka vatta)... and so the > round goes > on and on...But no self anywhere. > > Of course the example above is just a to give a broad idea. In fact > kilesa vatta and kamma vatta can be considered to be occuring also in > the same moment - it depends in what ways we are considering it. That > is why paticcasamupadda is so deep and hard to understand. > best wishes > robert 12265 From: Sarah Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 11:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Co Sivakasutta Dear Nina & Num, --- srnsk@a... wrote: > Dear Nina, > > Thanks for the translation of both the sutta and atthakatha. I have to > read > and think about it more in detail. > _____________________________________________ I’d also like to express my appreciation. It’s very helpful to see the pali as well as your translation. My sincere thanks for all your work and trouble, Nina. ..... Nina: > N: Someone says, length > of) my lifespan> and (therefore) he performs generosity, observes > morality, > keeps the observance day, and thus, in his case wholesome feelings > arise. ***** > Remarks, the reaction to the bile is different in the case of different > people, different feelings: kusala, akusala or avyakata, indeterminate. > The > indeterminate, avyakata, must be here the feeling accompanying the > kiriyacitta of the arahat. The above examples are interesting, are they > not ? > > ______________________________________________________ There are so many good reminders (mostly snipped). It’s so common for kusala or akusala cittas to arise on account of what is experienced through the bodysense. Only the arahat has no more kusala or akusala cittas. We can see how kamma can be an indirect cause for kusala and akusala, but there are always so many factors and other conditions which play a part. Many factors (as discussed at length before) determine when or if kamma will have result and then there are many factors which will determine whether the cittas following the vipaka are kusala or akusala and of what strength and so on. Num, I always like your medical snippets and appreciated the Vism quote you gave very much. You also wrote: Num: > My assumption, this paragraph covers the topics of bile, a gall bladder, > a > bile duct obstruction, a gall-bladder infection, and organic brain > syndrome > from severe toxic liver failure and/or sepsis from gall-bladder > infection. > (yellow: jaundice, eye-rolling: nystagmus, limbs shaking: tremor, > itching: > excoriation, and "beings turn mad; with corrupt thought they abandon > their > sense of shame and dread of blame, do what ought not to be thought" : > delirium (acute confusional stage or organic brain syndrome: > disorientation, > fluctuation of level of consciousness, memory and perceptual > disturbance(auditory hallucination, visual hallucination and/or > delusion). ..... It’s interesting to consider the relationship between bodily experiences and akusala cittas. We may think we would never ‘turn mad’ and ‘abandon sense of shame’ and so on, but we really have no idea under what circumstances this may happen unless a very high level of enlightenment has been obtained. There are even examples of sotapannas who became very disturbed or dies of broken hearts. These examples (you’ve given) should encourage us to develop understanding while we have the chance. ********** Diversion for NUM, others may ignore;-) ..... I’m also reminded about ayurvedic medicine which I believe is the oldest form of medicine and was probably prevalent in the Buddha’s time.I believe the oldest medical texts are Ayurvedic and come from Banares and Nalanda, I think (?). According to Ayurveda, vata, pitta and kapha are names for these three principles of movement and heat , which combine to determine each person's mind/body type or constitution. I’m just quoting from a book before I get mixed up: “Vata controls all movement in the body such as respiration, circulation, elimination and the flow of nerve impulses to and from the brain. Pitta governs digestion and assimilation of food and liquids throughout the body. Kapha governs protection through the mucus membranes and stability through bone structure.” Anyway, I started on this diversion when I read the Pali below (pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi) for ‘produced by (disorders of the) bile’ and immediately thought of the ayurvedice ‘pitta’ types and disorders. Usually they are firy and easily irritable. ..... ``pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi kho, siivaka, idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti. saamampi kho eta.m, siivaka, veditabba.m yathaa pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti; lokassapi kho eta.m, siivaka, saccasammata.m yathaa pittasamu.t.thaanaanipi idhekaccaani vedayitaani uppajjanti. "Produced by (disorders of the) bile, there arise, Sivaka, certain kinds of feelings. That this happens, can be known by oneself; also in the world it is accepted as true.” ..... It also reminded me (along with Victor’s Anglosaxon references;-)) to Chaucer’s early English references in the Canterbury Tales to those having bilious attacks and being easily angered and I’ve just found one of the references (online) which was in the back of my mind from school days (not quite as long ago as yours, Nina;-)) “Dreams are, God knows, a matter for derision. Visions are generated by repletions And vapours and the body's bad secretions Of humours overabundant in a wight. Surely this dream, which you have had tonight, Comes only of the superfluity Of your bilious irascibility, Which causes folk to shiver in their dreams For arrows and for flames with long red gleams, For great beasts in the fear that they will bite, For quarrels and for wolf whelps great and slight;” ********** > Without surgical intervention and antibiotics treatment, the mortality > rate > from those illnesses is very high. ..... Hope you’ve enjoyed these diversions, Num. In the Canterbury Tales, they list all the various herbal treatments used and I’m sure the ayurvedic systems have other ways of treatment too! ..... > For me it's very easy to agree that not everything is a result of kamma. > But > then I think if every kaya-vinnana-citta is vipaka-jati, though the > cause of > those feeling are from medical/physical disorders, then kamma should > have > some roles in this, or not? Sound like an ajinteyya question to me > !!?? > > I remember the same theme of discussion is also mentioned in > Milindapanya, > not everything is a result of kamma. ..... Kamma must play a role, but other conditions are also palying their roles too. The ajinteyya (unthinkable) question concerns what kamma played what role to produce the result. I’m also reminded how we think of an illness or bodily condition as ‘something’ again and forget there are just moments of bodily consciousness experiencing various rupas, followed by other cittas The jaundice or tumour or whatever, is once again a concept that we take for being so real. Nina, sorry about the diversions for Num. I join him in looking forward to the rest of your commentary translation notes (no hurry). Sarah ======= 12266 From: Sarah Date: Sat Mar 30, 2002 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: impermanence and reality Hi Betty. Let me second Rob K's comments.....some very wise reflections, clearly expressed, thank you. I'm sure you and Howard will enjoy the NY DSG get together and perhaps we can all have a brief 'report' ( &??photo);-). Sarah ===================================================== --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- > Dear Betty, > Thank you for this very clear explanation. You really consider > Dhamma. > best > robert 12267 From: Sarah Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi Larry (& Howard), --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Thanks Howard, I think this deserves a special place in the Useful Posts > File. Sarah, what do you think??? I've just attended a Useful Committee Meeting and we've decided the special place needs a special Heading. Maybe you'd like to choose one. Here are a few suggestions: a) The Mathematics of Enlightenment b) Einstein: My Guru c) Dhamma by Numbers d) The n-fold Path in Simple Steps e) N-ary Relations: Reality or Concept? ********** Sarah in silly holiday mood;-) ------------------------ > Howard wrote: > You might be onto something about their being in the same boat, at least > if mathematicians see things at all correctly. Mathematicians sometimes > *represent* properties as special cases of relations. // The mathematics > involved: An n-ary relation among members of a set (for n = 1, 2, 3, 4, > ...) is represented by a collection of n-tuples of elements from that > set (each n-tuple indicating the holding of the relation among its n > elements in the given order); a property of objects in a set is > represented by a subset of that set (the members of the subset being > those that have that property). These two representations coincide for > n-ary relations with n = 1. // That is, mathematicians identify > properties with 1-ary relations. > 12268 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 0:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] question on pleasant feeling... Manji --- manji wrote: > If at any time there is searching for pleasant feeling, is there dosa? > By this I mean always. This is different than vipaka. This is more > "actively" seeking, applied thought etc. I'm not sure if I've understood your question, but I'll have a stab at answering. If we desire pleasant feeling, but it is not present, there is likely to be dosa because of the 'separation from the desired'. The consciousness at such moments would be 'unwholesome' consciousness (it is 'rooted in' the dosa, one of the 3 unwholesome roots). As you say, the dosa arising on those occasions is not the feeling that arises at moments of vipaka. Vipaka consciousness is 'resultant' consciousness, a completely different type of consciousness. It is not rooted in dosa, but it may be the result of unwholesome consciousness rooted in dosa. There are 2 kinds of vipaka citta, wholesome and unwholesome. When applied to vipaka citta, the terms 'wholesome' and 'unwholesome' refer not to the nature of the vipaka citta itself but to the wholesome or unwholesome citta(s) of which the vipaka citta is a result. Thus kusala kamma (kamma performed with kusala citta) results in the experiencing of a pleasant object ('kusala vipaka'), and the citta that experiences that pleasant object is a 'kusala vipaka citta'. If dosa arises as a result of the object experienced, be that object intrinsically pleasant or unpleasant, then this would be another instance of an unwholesome consciousness rooted in dosa. In practice, the vipaka cittas and the resultant feeling conditioned by the objects arise so quickly and are so closely intermingled that we don’t distinguish one from the other. However, either can be the object of developed panna and in that way can be known as it really is. Hope this is at least partly relevant to your question! Jon 12269 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Sarah, Thanks for your helpful clarifications. Only one comment below, to clarify my 'confusing' talk at the end. --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep. > > Sorry for the delay...I'm a bit behind myself;-) Your qus have probably > been answered by now, but let me respond in brief if I may. > ..... > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > A worthy and interesting discussion to me, not at all just quibbling. I > > would > > like to ask two questions: > > > > 1/ Would the Buddha say that only those phenomena which are directly > > observeable, > > ie, the paramatha dhammas, are 'real'? > ..... > Yes, in an 'ultimate' rather than conventional or wordly sense. > ..... > > 2/ Would the Buddha say that the 'assemblage' by which one forms the > > concept of > > an object *is* deductively real, but simply cannot be directly observed? > ..... > Yes, exactly > ..... > > In other > > words, the concept is 'intelligent' as to what exists in the world, but > > is not > > itself 'actual', since it is a representation of various views that have > > been > > developed? > ..... > That sounds fine to me. We certainly need these 'intelligent' concepts, > but it's so very helpful to know they are only concepts and inherently > therefore not of any real value. > ..... > > > I hope you see the difference between 1/ and 2/, which is hard to > > express, and can > > shed some light for me. > ..... > This is the difference between sammuti sacca (conventional knowledge or > truth) and paramattha sacca which you've expressed clearly. I noticed in > the Sivaka Sutta & Com that Nina gave the Pali for, it mentioned the > sammuti sacca (worldly view or understanding was the translation given, I > think). This is always in contrast to the ultimate truth or right > understanding > ..... > > > Lastly, a comment: It is so hard not to see the 'assembled perceptions' > > by which > > a concept of object is formed as the 'actual object', the reality, as > > opposed to > > that which we actually perceive in the moment, which is always just an > > 'aspect', > > or a 'quality', never a 'whole object'. > ..... > Yes, the truth is always covered by ignorance. The Buddha didn't say it > was easy. What you refer to as an 'aspect' or 'quality', we'd refer to as > a reality or characteristic of reality. At a moment of samma sati and > panna there is no doubt, no difficulty, no confusion for a moment. The > reality is seen for what it is. Afterwards, of course, there are likely to > be the confusions, doubts and ideas of wholes again while we're still > beginners. > ..... > > > This leads to the inevitable conclusion that there are in fact no direct > > 'objects' > > for human perception, that objects per se are only accessible by mental > > concept, > > and that thus, either we as perceivers, or the whole idea of objects > > that do not > > continuously change and arise in separate aspects, is severely limited. What I was trying to express, is that our ability to perceive 'whole objects directly' is very limited, or else objects do not exist as such. Probably the latter is true according to the dhamma. But it is very hard to conceive of what is actually there, if only the momentary quality of an object is real. Obviously, for panna and sati this is not a problem. But for my poor little brain, it is. Best, Robert Ep. ================ > > This sounds like thinking about more concepts about concepts;-) Sorry, i > don't quite follow you here but I suspect you're underestimating the power > of sati and panna to perform their tasks. > ..... > > Very glad to hear your comments here, Rob and appreciating all the other > discussions. > > Sarah > ============= 12270 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 1:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha bhavana - Rob Ep (Larry, Jon) Hi Larry. I think you have a valid point. The issue for me is whether we can know we are making progress in the right direction by following certain principles and practices. I personally believe this to be the case, and that we are capable of making corrections as we go along and gradually become wiser, but Jon seems to believe that we may possibly go forward on what seems to be the correct path and be sorely misdirected. This is a debate that is difficult to resolve, and unfortunately raises doubt for me. Best, Robert Ep. =========================== --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hello Robert E, > > you wrote: "Can we know whether the state thus achieved is kusala or > akusala?" > > I think "kusala" is largely conceptual, a reference point, a goal to > strive toward. Unless we are arahats we are infected with lobha, dosa, > and moha and if we are arahats neither kusala nor akusala dwells in our > "house". > > Larry 12271 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 2:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) --- Sukin wrote: > Dear Rob, > My wife warned me at the dinner party we attended earlier not to have the > coffee they were serving saying that I won't be able to sleep. I told her > that coffee > usually doesn't affect my sleep, so I went ahead and had two cups. Thanks for this story. I am now left to contemplate why I am awake and responding to your message at 5 am in the morning!! > Maybe its not the coffee(the rupa), maybe its because I am curious about if > anyone would reply to my mail, maybe its lobha/ chanda to read the mails > from dsg in general( I did not have the chance to open my mailbox before > this). These are worthy late-night ruminations. > But actually it must be many many factors working together. But thought is > linear, it projects only one thing at a time, hence quite unreliable when it > comes > to understanding conditions( parmattha dhamma), I think. A good introduction to the nature of concepts!! > But let me go to your response to my post;( I hope you don't mind if I state > something > you have already considered. I appreciate the fact that you are responding, and will enjoy whatever thoughts you have. I think you consider things not only deeply but > also > widely, my consideration is usually a step or two behind yours and so I may > be > misrepresenting you) Thanks for your kind comment. > > I would say that it's incorrect to think that concepts have 'no reality > > whatsoever'. If you take a look at what this means, it would mean that > they do > > not even come into being as concepts. > > Would it be more accurate to say that concepts do not have a reality in the > same way > that citta and cetasikas have ie. they do not have the characteristic of > rise and fall and > unsatifactoriness therefore they are not considered to be paramattha dhamma? Yes, I think to see that concepts posit illusory objects is very valuable. I just think it's good to see that the concept itself is an 'arising' of a kind, just not one that teaches the truth of paramatha dhammas. I also think it's interesting to look at whether concepts truly do not rise or fall. Like all phenomena they cannot be permanent beyond the moment, they can only appear to be so. Therefore it is very interesting to look into the nature of this illusion: That concepts keep re-constituting themselves from moment to moment as if they had not fallen and re-arisen, but in fact they change at each moment and then must be reconstructed like any phenomena. When we think we are seeing the same concept for a period of time, we must really be seeing a serious of concepts which are 'clones' of each other, fashioned in each other's image in order to create the illusion of continuity. There may be real continuity in the information passed from one citta to the next, but the continuity which makes a concept appear to last in duration must be an illusion. > But since we refer to them, and can be > > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more accurate to > say > > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim to represent > > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are illusory, but not > > non-existent. > As I expressed my understanding to Howard, there are paramattha dhammas > arising which are responsible for the concept of something out there. > But the concept itself is unreal. I would say that the object the concept contains is unreal, not the concept as concept. I can stand to be corrected on this, but to me it seems that concept exists as an experience, but not as a reality. It is like when I see a film. The content of the film is totally fabricated, those people are just characters and none of the events have actually taken place. But the experience of seeing a film is still an experience. It is real as an experience, but not as a reality. I once heard from a spiritual teacher that when one awakens from the dream of this life one first sees that this life was nothing but a dream. A moment later one realizes that not only was it a dream, but that it was a dream that never was, that actually never even took place. If that latter statement is true, it is very difficult for me to fathom. If that is what can be said about concepts, that they are not only illusory but do not even take place or exist, that is very difficult for me to grasp. Surely, the concept, as unreal as it is, still arises as an experience and makes an impression upon the mental capacity at the moment it arises. Not only they misrepresent reality in > varying > degrees as you stated below, but I think the limit of vitaka? or what ever > cetasikas > responsible, is in part, to make 'representations' of what is experienced( I > think > I am going beyond what I know here and I might be very off the mark). > Whatever > concepts are formed, and here I include non- verbal reaction to the field of > awareness even in new born babies before they can recognize anything, depend > upon amongst other things, our accumulation of panna and kilesa. Even with > accumulations to level of satipatthana, the concept formed would still be, > in the words of Rob K. 'shadows' of ultimate realities. I would agree with this. A concept can never be anything but a 'shadow' of what is actual. It is like a photograph that takes an impression of something in the 'real world' and turns it into an image which is no longer active and alive in the world. It has been framed and set up as a particular way of defining or looking at a reality, but it itself has been removed from a direct understanding of anything real. Would you say that > sati and panna of the level of satipatthana see the same thing as concepts? I am not quite sure about this sentence. If you mean does satipatthana apprehend illusory concepts, I would say that it would instantly recognize them as unreal. Whether they arise or not on that level is way beyond my understanding. But what happens to concepts at the level of insight and wisdom is a very interesting question. One that is just speculation for me. > Suddenly I'm very sleepy( many hours since I last slept). > Don't mind my abrupt ending. Perhaps I'll write more tomorrow. > Best wishes, > Sukin. Well, I very much enjoyed your discussion, and look forward to hearing more on this. Have a nice rest, and send me wishes that I will also put myself to bed in the near future. Best, Robert Ep. 12272 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 2:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment (Sarah, Kom) Ha ha, My apologies to Kom too! Okay, let me cogitate for a moment..... I am interested in the Abhidhamma view of meditation as a means to enter jhanas; the possibility of realizing Nibbana without experienceing the jhanas, whether samatha is closely related to Nibbana by any characteristics; whether samatha can be cultivated by means other than meditation; whether samatha is a prerequisite in any way to the development of vipassana, sati and panna; whether one can achieve insight, sati and panna through contemplation of the dhamma alone in conjunction with discernment of the moment in everyday life, whether deep samadhi states must be passed through as part of the path to Nibbana, and if so, whether these samadhis can be cultivated by means other than meditation. I realize this is quite an extensive list, but just wanted to get my jhana cards on the table. I will be very content to have references to one or two of these at a time. Thanks for opening Pandora's box for me! Best Regards, Robert Ep. ===================== Okay, --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > Pls do. If it's really chore, let me know and I'll do some > > > spoon-feeding;-) > > > > > > > > > > if you have the chance......... > > I feared that might be your response...see how well we know you now;-) > > First of all, you have to do just a little work for the spoon (ask > Emmy;-))- > > How about telling us what the specific questions are. (If you ask what the > abhidhamma says about jhanas, it's hard not to direct you to the entire > abhidhamma pitaka). Maybe if you ask one or two specific questions at a > time and the reasons for asking them, that would be best. If you mention > KOM's name in the greeting and subject heading at the top, you may get a > very helpful reponse indeed;-) > > Always fun, having you and Emmy around, Rob. > > Sarah > > p.s. Apologies, Kom;-) > ================= 12273 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Nina Dear Nina, Your description below is very helpful to me in getting some orientation towards the jhanas and realization of anicca, as well as other points. Thanks very much. Is there any convenient way to read or reprint the page that speaks of "...the explanation > on sila, guarding of the doorways, mindfulness, contentment, solitude, the > five hindrances, the jhanas, and the highest sacrifice: destruction of > the > asavas...." If it exists on-line, I'd love to read that commentary. Thanks, Robert Ep. ================ A > similar > passage in Dialogues of the Buddha I, no. 5, Kutadanta Sutta, at the > end: > Then the Blessed One discoursed to Kutadanta the Brahman in due order:.. > in > similar words. Here the Buddha spoke in the context of sacrifices: what > is > the highest sacrifice. On the preceding page we find the explanation on > sila, guarding of the doorways, mindfulness, contentment , solitude, the > five hindrances, the jhanas, and the highest sacrifice: destruction of > the > asavas. > My own comments: here is a similar wording as in the Fruits of > Recluseship. > The jhanas are included here, this concerns the monk who strives after > arahatship, the ideal recluse. > In the case of Upali and in the case of Kutadanta, the four noble Truths > are > realized at the attainment of enlightenment. This means that dukkha must > be > penetrated, the characteristic of impermanence of all conditioned > realities. > At which moment? Now. The eye, seeing, contact, feeling, they arise and > fall > away. No matter someone develops jhana or not, the impermanence of > realities > must be penetrated. 12274 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 2:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi Ken. I don't think anyone's point here was 'gut feeling' over 'dhamma + wise opinion'. It was the dhamma as it is plainly spoken by the Buddha over scholarly interpretations of what he said. What I am in agreement with here has nothing to do with gut feeling, but does have to do with the following: 1/ The Suttas, when they say something plainly and clearly should be accepted as being what the Buddha meant without creating a contrary interpretation based on one's own philosophical views. That goes for me as much as it goes for anyone who's views I might disagree with. The Suttas themselves are the final authority, not 'wise opinions' however wise they may be. If they contradict the direct and plain meaning of a Sutta, they are wrong. Obviously, there are many suttas that are not that clear and plain, and require commentary and discussion, but some are pretty obvious and state exactly what they mean to say. 2/ I agreed with Eric that the Buddha plainly states that the eightfold factors that lead to enlightenment should be cultivated. There is disagreement about this, and my reading is limited, but where the Buddha discusses Right Concentration, Right Livelihood, etc., it is hard to see how these would all arise together at the moment of enlightenment rather than being cultivated gradually, leading to the accomplishment of the eightfold path. 3/ I agree that the Buddha plainly stated that Right Concentration consists of the jhanas. I have not heard anyone quote Sutta so far to contradict this. 4/ I agree with Howard that the suppression of the defilements in samatha meditation and the jhanas makes the cultivation of peace and insight much more possible, and is a major tool directly prescribed by the Buddha in order to make progress past the inevitable defilements we all carry. If you disagree with these statements above, I am happy to consider your arguments and any quotes you may have from Buddhist scripture. Thanks, Robert Ep. ============== --- khow14 wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > I agree. > > > > robert ep. > > > > ====== > > > > > > Hi, > > I disagree. > > Which is the better guide to the Dhamma; `gut feeling,' or wise, > carefully considered opinion accompanied, on all points, by > references to the ancient Theravadin texts? > > No contest. > > Kind regards > Ken H > > > --- rikpa21 wrote: > > > > > > Hey Howard (grat to see you on dhamma-l too BTW, where we can > still > > > get the benefit of the wisdom of the incomparable Richard Hayes), > > > > > > Just a couple of comments... > > > > > > > Howard: > > > > My point is only the following: Right Concentration is > one > > > arm of the > > > > 8-fold path, and Right Concentration, defined as the first four > > > jhanas, was > > > > advocated repeatedly. I have never read of any of the eight > arms > > > being > > > > dismissed by the Buddha as unneccesary. Some folks have written > > > that sila, > > > > for example, is eliminable. I don't believe that either. The > > > Buddha taught > > > > all eight steps, and never backed off from that as far as I > know. > > > > > > Nor as far as I know. In fact, the Buddha repeatedly mentioned > that > > > liberation is obtained through this eightfold path. Not > sevenfold. > > > Nor fivefold. Nor singular. But rather the path comprises the > > > necessary elements determined by the omniscient mind of the > Buddha > > > to lead to the cessation of dukkha. > > > > > > You can build what appears to be a perfect automobile, but if you > > > forget some element, like the carbueretor, the crankshaft, > whatever, > > > you have a nice showroom piece you can ogle; but you won't have > > > anything that gets you from point A (suffering) to point B > (kilesa > > > nirodha). The Eighfold path contains all the essential components > to > > > do just that: "And what is the noble truth of the path of > practice > > > leading to the cessation of stress? Just this very noble > eightfold > > > path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, > right > > > livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration." > > > > > > "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. > > > > > > That these passages should generate such controversy is hard for > me > > > to swallow. Certainly there is no denial of the need for just > this > > > from my Tibetan or Zen or Theravada teachers. On this they all > agree > > > completely. So what gives here in DSG? > > > > > > So then, to be direct, why is what's stated plainly here such a > > > problem for some here in DSG? Why? Who's more likely to be on the > > > mark? The one who actually takes what the Buddha taught directly > and > > > applies it as instructed to the point of gnosis, or those who > argue > > > over whether or not concentration to the degree SPECIFICALLY > taught > > > by the Buddha in everyone's favorite Sutta (Maha Satipatthana) is > > > necessary? > > > > > > If I had to lay my bets on what's accurate Dhamma, I'd lay it on > the > > > words reputed to be PLAINLY spoken by the Buddha (how ambiguous > is > > > the section on right concentration--it's obviously jhana!), not > on > > > interpretations of those who do not give these teachings their > > > proper due (by actually putting them into practice, which would > > > reveal just how effective these tools are, by the way). > > > > > > If I could be sure in some way, through some sort of clear > evidence > > > that some of the methods advocated here in DSG led to gnosis > you'd > > > see no quarrel from me. I am open to all kinds of methods that > can > > > lead to understanding and cessation of suffering after thorough > > > investigation. After months of careful sifting, testing, trying > out, > > > listening, reflecting, I only have more questions now than I ever > > > have whether some of the methods advocated here lead to gnosis > and > > > liberation, or someplace else. > > > > > > Rather than feeling like I'm hearing the Dhamma I feel like I'm > > > hearing something that sounds, due to its complexity and > > > intellectual subtlety--what sounds very close to the Dhamma. But > in > > > my gut I can't shake the feeling that it is just off enough to > miss > > > the mark, the spirit, the essence, if you will, of the intent and > > > meaning the Buddha was trying to transmit. As one Zen master > said, > > > to miss by the distance of a hair is to miss by the distance of > > > heaven and earth. And I know them's fightin' words for some, > > > perhaps, but I feel a need to say things as I see them. And > anyway, > > > this is just one nobody's opinion, so it's of no real importance > > > anyway. > > > > > > > Howard: > > > > If the suppression were the whole story, I would agree. > But > > > the > > > > suppression of the hindrances makes even further concentration, > > > calm and > > > > mindfulness possible, and under those conditions, investigation > of > > > dhammas > > > > can proceed effectively, wisdom can arise, and liberation > result. > > > > > > Sadhu! Sadhu! Sadhu! > > > > > > Off in the corner, Mister Bojangles is strummin' his seven- > stringed > > > lute in perfect pitch. > > > > 12275 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) ------ Dear Rob. Ep., In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > 3/ I agree that the Buddha plainly stated that Right Concentration consists of > the jhanas. I have not heard anyone quote Sutta so far to contradict this. > >___________- I quoted this sutta several months back. You probably forgot. Could you look at the 4 types of right concentration and see what is said. Also you believe that you need jhana before any insight is possible. Is that correct? Could you explain your experience with jhana. I ask because there seems to be some difference of opinion about what jhana is. Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 Samadhi Sutta "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which four? There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. There is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents. Number 1:"And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now.>>endquote Robert: This is the mundane jhanas, the pleasnt abiding here and now. They are right concentration but are only right concentration of the eightfold path when they are used as the basis fore insight by those who take that path. Number2:"And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision? There is the case where a monk attends to the perception of light and is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any hour of the day]. Day [for him] is the same as night, night is the same as day. By means of an awareness open & unhampered, he develops a brightened mind. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. Robert: This is a special type of mundane jhana that gives one certain powers. "knowledge and vision" here is not of the type that is part of the eightfold path. Number3"And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. Number 4: "And what is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such its origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents. "These are the four developments of concentration. +++++++ In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Hi Ken. > I don't think anyone's point here was 'gut feeling' over 'dhamma + wise opinion'. > It was the dhamma as it is plainly spoken by the Buddha over scholarly > interpretations of what he said. > > What I am in agreement with here has nothing to do with gut feeling, but does have > to do with the following: > > 1/ The Suttas, when they say something plainly and clearly should be accepted as > being what the Buddha meant without creating a contrary interpretation based on > one's own philosophical views. That goes for me as much as it goes for anyone > who's views I might disagree with. The Suttas themselves are the final authority, > not 'wise opinions' however wise they may be. If they contradict the direct and > plain meaning of a Sutta, they are wrong. Obviously, there are many suttas that > are not that clear and plain, and require commentary and discussion, but some are > pretty obvious and state exactly what they mean to say. > > 2/ I agreed with Eric that the Buddha plainly states that the eightfold factors > that lead to enlightenment should be cultivated. There is disagreement about > this, and my reading is limited, but where the Buddha discusses Right > Concentration, Right Livelihood, etc., it is hard to see how these would all arise > together at the moment of enlightenment rather than being cultivated gradually, > leading to the accomplishment of the eightfold path. > > 3/ I agree that the Buddha plainly stated that Right Concentration consists of > the jhanas. I have not heard anyone quote Sutta so far to contradict this. > > 4/ I agree with Howard that the suppression of the defilements in samatha > meditation and the jhanas makes the cultivation of peace and insight much more > possible, and is a major tool directly prescribed by the Buddha in order to make > progress past the inevitable defilements we all carry. > > If you disagree with these statements above, I am happy to consider your arguments > and any quotes you may have from Buddhist scripture. > > Thanks, > Robert Ep. > > ============== > > --- khow14 wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein 12276 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Loka:lokiya:the world Hello Sarah and Christine (at the end), Sarah, thanks for the good oil on Yahoo and Hotmail. Yahoo bring me dsg, so, if they want me to use their email service, that's what I'll do (have done). Now I'd better unsubscribe under the old address - something I thought I'd never do. There is something else you may be able to help me with; you wrote to Howard (message# 12131): "We're so very used to thinking in terms of conventional or scientific eyes, ears, and hearts that it's not easy to even intellectually understand the impermanent eye-sense or eye-base and so on as rupas and not `things'." ---------- Yes, and the problems I'm having with the examples you have given, tell me I have a long way to go yet. I have read Robert K and Nina on previous occasions, explaining how the various sense bases are situated within the sense organs. I know the problem lies with me and not with them, but I have to say I find it somewhat contradictory to tie a rupa so very closely to a concept. Now you have quoted the Atthasalini, which I assume, is yet another very reliable source, and it says the same thing: > As to the "sentient eye" or eyesense, this is to be found, according to the "Atthasalini", in the middle of the black circle, surrounded by white circles, and it permeates the ocular membranes "as sprinkled oil permeates seven cotton wicks." < I would have thought that, while there is a close correlation between ultimate, conditioned reality and conceptual reality, the two are literally worlds apart. But here we see a rupa so closely identified with the eye organ, we can almost measure it (smaller than the black circle) and almost attribute shape to it (in that it permeates the ocular membranes). I'm sorry I don't have a definite question to put to you on this, I was just wondering if you could see where I'm going wrong. Kind regards, Ken H Christine, re Jon and Sarah's trip to Noosa: I had assumed that we would be following the standard COME ON IN, THE WATERS FINE, procedure. Remember, bookings can be cancelled, so let's not play the honesty card too early! KH 12277 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Neutral(avyakata) and a topic at the foundation.(Jon and Nina) Num Thanks for this useful summary of avyakata dhammas. I was interested in the rupa aspect because I was familiar with avyakata as applied to namas but not to rupas. This has neatly clarified the position for me. Thanks for taking the time and trouble to do the translation from the Thai. Much appreciated. Jon --- srnsk@a... wrote: > < context of rupas.>> > > Dear Jon and Nina; > > > Ok, let me try doing it then. > > Vy_akata, according to Pali-Eng Dict. By R.Davids and W.Stede, p.653: I. > > Answered, explained, declared, decided. II. Predicted, and III. Settled, > > determined. "A" is a negative prefix. > > The first classification in the matrix of the triads (tika-matika) in > Dhammasangani is kusaladhamma, akusaladhamma and avyakatadhamma. > > The following quote is from the first two paragraphs of Rupakanda, > Dhammasangani. (My own rough translation, I looked it up from various > sources.) (The similar manner of treatment can be found in Vibhanga, but > it > was sliced much more in detail.) > > << > Which phenomena are karmically neutral (avyakata)? Those > 'karma-results' > (vipaka) which belong the sensuous-sphere, the fine-material-sphere, and > the > immaterial-sphere or supramundane (lokuttara), consisting of feeling > (vedanakhandha), perception (sanna), sankarakhanda (other 50 cetasikas), > and > vinnanakhandha (citta). Further, those karmically neutral, functional > (kiriya), neither kusala, neither akusala, nor karmic-result (vipaka). > All > rupa, unconditioned dhamma (asankatadhamma). These thing are karmically > > neutral (avyakata). > > In all karmically neutral dhamma (avyakatadhamma), what is rupa? The > > four-great-element (4 mahabhutaruapa) and the rupas which derived and > depended on the four-great-element, (upada-rupa), these are called > rupas. > >> > > Kusala and akusala can be a factor for future result, but vipakacitta, > kiriya > citta and the accompanied cetasika are not the factors for future > result. > Rupa is also not a factor for future result (vipakadhamma-dhamma). Rupa > though can have citta or kamma as a cause but rupa itself is still not a > > result (vipaka), nor a factor for future result. And, nibbana is neither > > result (viapaka) nor a factor for future result (vipakadhamma-dhamma). > > > Nina: this week at the foundation, the discussion topic is about factors > to > fulfill homicide-parajika. As in your message to Dan, this issue(karma) > is > extremely intricate. There are a lot of factors involve. Vinaya is very > in > detail. Both abhidhhamma and suttanta have a lot of roles in vinaya. > > Best wishes, > > Num 12278 From: Sarah Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Rob Ep, You've been making some good points about concepts and realities. I liked these comments too from a post you wrote to Howard: > I see anicca as a 'characteristic' of a dhamma, and I think it may be > defined as a > 'characteristic'. A characteristic, I think tentatively, is not a > thing in its > own right which can be perceived in its own right, it can only be > perceived as an > aspect of a dhamma, or I guess dhatu or element Back in brief to the one you just wrote to me: --- Robert Epstein wrote: > What I was trying to express, is that our ability to perceive 'whole > objects > directly' is very limited, or else objects do not exist as such. > Probably the > latter is true according to the dhamma. Yes, I agree. there's no problem conceiving --and sanna (perception)marking at each moment--'whole objects'. This doesn't make them real. But it is very hard to conceive > of what > is actually there, if only the momentary quality of an object is real. > > Obviously, for panna and sati this is not a problem. But for my poor > little > brain, it is. I don't mean to sound condescending in any way, Rob, but I really think you're on the right track. While we still think 'wholes' or concepts can be objects of awareness and directly known, it doesn't seem so difficult. When panna begins to realize that the 'wholes' are an illusion, quite different from the *real* 'momentary quality' of a paramattha dhamma, there is the slow realization of the fantasy world we've been living in, I think. Because the sati and panna are very weak and infrequent and the 'momentary qualities' are not very clear at all in the beginning, there is bound to be a lot of thinking, wondering and brain-ache in between. it may seem lonely as Chris suggested or we may feel inclined to give up all this anatta stuff. Of course, this is just thinking with dosa (aversion), doubt and unease. It's equally impermanent and at another moment of awareness of the thinking, aversion or doubt, there's momentary calm and relief from the kilesa (defilements) and no question at all about the value. However, we do need to keep hearing, considering and being reminded of what the realities are, what the characteristics of those realities are, in order for sati and panna to perform their functions. Sarah =========== 12279 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:09am Subject: Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Robert, Something seems be very slowly changing in my slight understanding of anatta (e.g.I don't find the 'puppet' example you once used in discussions of anatta and no-control, so very resistible anymore). Now I seem to intellectually agree with no-self no-control most of the time - but slip back into the old 'soul' way of thinking frequently. It is easy to do with the whole country thinking and talking that way - especially at Easter..... I remember when first hearing about "beginingless time" I felt a frisson of awe at such an unimaginable thing. But after a while, seeing the words many times, they lost their impact. Thinking about the Paticcasamuppada affects me with a greater awe, verging on fear. But this may be a good thing, to prevent complacency, to encourage study and mindfulness..... I found this verse in the Visuddhi Magga about the three rounds, and a number of links about Paticasamuppada as well which I'll look at more closely as time allows. Are there any readings you would recommend? http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism//tdaing1.htm http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/mahasip6.htm#86 http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/mahasi-paticca/paticca-00.htm Visuddhi Magga XVII.298 (p672) [Wheel of becoming] 298 "4. With the triple round it spins for ever. Here formations and becoming are the round of kamma. Ignorance, craving and clinging are the round of defilements. Consciousness, mentality-materiality sixfold base, contact and feeling are the round of result. So the Wheel of becoming, having a triple round with these three rounds, should be understood to spin, revolving again and again, for ever; for the conditions are not cut off as long as the round of defilement is not cut off." Some questions - the Vipaka vatta - the actual moment of experience through the doorways, is this 'result' because even to be born in the human realm with six senses is the fruit of kamma? Or, is each moment of experience the 'result' of a particular word or deed in another time? Could kamma be that intricate? This is where 'things get blurry' for me (as Sukin would say)..... Each person does experience the result of their own past actions, don't they? There is no general pool of suffering that, if the right conditions occur in someones' life, it attracts the 'result' of "anyones'" past action? (I feel a little silly asking that last question - but, if I don't, I'll always wonder.) It is just here where I get confused with anatta and kamma, about things like "there is suffering, but no one who suffers", or when reading of a murder that there is "no gun, no bullet, and no-one who kills or is killed"; and yet 'murder' is produces severe kammic consequences...... metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > One of the sentences in my last post was clumsy. This is better. > Christine, > AS usual your questions are central to what the Dhamma , and thus > what life , is all about. > So many ways to discuss this but you might appreciate it hearing > about it in relation to the Paticcasamuppada. As we have discusssed > before this teaching shows that no-self exists but that only these > factors are occuring. > It is indeed to prevent the wrong idea of self that it was > taught: "with ignorance as condition there are formations' prevents > seeing a maker ; the clause with 'with formations as condition > consciousness prevents seeing the transmigration of a self; the > clause with concsiousness as condition, mentality and materiality' > prevents perception of compactness because it shows the analysis of > the basis conjectured to be 'self'; and the clauses beginning 'With > nama-rupa as condition the six-fold base' prevent seeing any self > that sees , cognises, touches , feels, craves, clings, becomes , is > born, ages and dies" Visuddhimagga XVII302 > > An aspect of the Paticcasamuppada I like to contemplate is > The three rounds : kamma-vatta(action), > vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements ). These three > cover all 12 links of the Paticcasamuppada. > Kilesa vatta consists of avijja(ignorance), tanha(desire), and > upadana (grasping). > Kamma vatta consists of sankhara (formations)and kamma-bhava. > Vipaka vatta connsists of vinnana (consciousness), nama-rupa, > salayatana (six bases), phassa (contact), vedana(feeling), jati > (birth), upapatti-bhava, jara-marana (decay and death). > > The actual moments of experience > through the doorways (seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling) > are vipaka (result) but because of defilement(kilesa) > arises kamma. These rounds are all spinning now, > continually, as they always have in samsara. > The three rounds are all conditioned and closely related. > Someone sees an expensive car: that is the concept. > What actually happens is visible object conditions seeing > consciousness (vipaka). Because kilesa (avijja and lobha)the root > cause are not eliminated they may condition kamma (such as working > extra hard to get money - or maybe even stealing the car). In the > future > that kamma will bring a suitable result (vipaka vatta)... and so the > round goes > on and on...But no self anywhere. > > Of course the example above is just a to give a broad idea. In fact > kilesa vatta and kamma vatta can be considered to be occuring also in > the same moment - it depends in what ways we are considering it. That > is why paticcasamupadda is so deep and hard to understand. > best wishes > robert 12280 From: Sarah Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:26am Subject: Help for the Pali challenged: Kom Hi Kom & DSG Newbies, --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Uh, yes, Sarah, > > I do read messags with my name in the message first (like > this one). Writing a response to a message is an entirely > different story and is totally subjected to my compulsion > (or is that impulsion?) ;-) ;-) as long as it's not subjected to any repulsion, that sounds fine...... To all dsg newbies, may I mention that there is a basic Pali glossary which Kom has recently been updating on the files section of the homepage. I hope this link still works: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Pali_Glossary As quite a lot of Pali terms get used here and sometimes we forget to add translations (or can't think of the right translation), it may be helpful to print out the glossary to have handy. Maybe it can be cut up into flash cards even. I'm sure if anyone has a list of extra terms they think should be included, Kom will be happy to have these off-list. Thanks, Kom for this and all your other considerable 'behind the scenes' help with technical and other problems. Sarah ====== 12281 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:33am Subject: Ken and Noosa Ken said:"Christine, re Jon and Sarah's trip to Noosa: I had assumed that we would be following the standard COME ON IN, THE WATERS FINE, procedure. Remember, bookings can be cancelled, so let's not play the honesty card too early! KH" ---------------------------------------------------- O.K. Ken - I'm with you on this....I can quickly pick up on a hint......so I won't say a word about the stingers, the grey nurse sharks, or the sea lice, either hey? :-) Chris 12282 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 4:08am Subject: Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Christine, I secretly hope whenever I write about Paticcasamuppada that I won't get any hard questions as it is so deep. When I was in Bangkok in January that I spoke at length with Acharn Sujin about it. She started with avijja paccaya sankhara and that was so difficult. I said a couple of times 'Ok shall we move to the next link' but she knew I hadn't properly understood the first... Anyway .. you asked: In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: >> > Some questions - the Vipaka vatta - the actual moment of experience > through the doorways, is this 'result' because even to be born in the > human realm with six senses is the fruit of kamma? Or, is each > moment of experience the 'result' of a particular word or deed in > another time? Could kamma be that intricate? This is where 'things > get blurry' for me (as Sukin would say)..... ++++++++ Vipaka vatta (result) connsists of vinnana (consciousness), nama- rupa, salayatana (six bases), phassa (contact), vedana(feeling), jati (birth), upapatti-bhava, jara-marana (decay and death). Here vinnana (consciousness means both the vipaka cittas (seeing , hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, ) and also other vipaka conciousness including the actual rebirth consciousness (and all bhavanga cittas during this life). We are human because of the kamma (kamma-vatta)that conditioned the rebirth consciousness . It was a good kamma, but we cannot know what it was. Now the moments of vipaka citta through the sense doors (that arise countless times in a day) can be either from this same kamma that conditioned this life or they can be from other kammas. We can see this because some of the vipaka is very unpleasant - it could not come from the same wholesome kamma that conditioned this human birth. To sum up only one kamma conditioned this birth but other kammas can produce results during the course of life. Another example: animals are born as a result of akusala kamma. Yet they may experience many moments of pleasant vipaka - for example some pampered pets - during their life. Kamma is so intricate that only a Buddha can truly fathom it. ========= Each person does > experience the result of their own past actions, don't they? There > is no general pool of suffering that, if the right conditions occur > in someones' life, it attracts the 'result' of "anyones'" past > action? (I feel a little silly asking that last question - but, if I > don't, I'll always wonder.) __________ Yes, it is entirely ones own kamma and result. However, a lifespan can be cut short by anothers wrong action (murder). There is no murderer (in the deepest sense) but there is kamma(action) being done and that action will brings its unpleasant results in the near or distant future (vipaka -vatta). Thus does the wheel spin. If someone had an enormous store of good kamma then no killer could kill them no matter what : the Buddha for instance had so many attempts on his life but all failed. Most of us though are not so endowed. Moggallana had great powers but at the third attempt on his life for a short time they suddenly left him - this was because of an obstructive kamma done in the past. He was beaten to death. I used to think alot on these major moments such as accident and illness in relation to kamma. But then I started to see more about the mundane moments - like seeing right now. And that is just as important as death moment actually. You see cakkhupasada (eyebase) is also vipaka-vatta and for seeing to occur it must arise , as must the visible object and the seeing consciousness. They come together as ayatana (meeting place) for an infinitely short moment - conditioned by kamma and many other conditions. Many spiritual seekers (I was one) are looking for special happenings; but if they could see how miraculous is this moment now. Then they would want to understand it more. I do like Ven. Bodhi's "the Great Discourse on causation" his translation of the mahanidana sutta and commentaries, 140pp. kind regards robert It is just here where I get confused > with anatta and kamma, about things like "there is suffering, but no > one who suffers", or when reading of a murder that there is "no gun, > no bullet, and no-one who kills or is killed"; and yet 'murder' is > produces severe kammic consequences...... > > metta, > Christine > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > wrote: > > One of the sentences in my last post was clumsy. This is better. > > Christine, > > AS usual your questions are central to what the Dhamma , and thus > > what life , is all about. > > So many ways to discuss this but you might appreciate it hearing > > about it in relation to the Paticcasamuppada. As we have discusssed > > before this teaching shows that no-self exists but that only these > > factors are occuring. > > It is indeed to prevent the wrong idea of self that it was > > taught: "with ignorance as condition there are formations' prevents > > seeing a maker ; the clause with 'with formations as condition > > consciousness prevents seeing the transmigration of a self; the > > clause with concsiousness as condition, mentality and materiality' > > prevents perception of compactness because it shows the analysis of > > the basis conjectured to be 'self'; and the clauses beginning 'With > > nama-rupa as condition the six-fold base' prevent seeing any self > > that sees , cognises, touches , feels, craves, clings, becomes , is > > born, ages and dies" Visuddhimagga XVII302 > > > > An aspect of the Paticcasamuppada I like to contemplate is > > The three rounds : kamma-vatta(action), > > vipaka-vatta(result) and kilesa-vatta (defilements ). These three > > cover all 12 links of the Paticcasamuppada. > > Kilesa vatta consists of avijja(ignorance), tanha(desire), and > > upadana (grasping). > > Kamma vatta consists of sankhara (formations)and kamma-bhava. > > Vipaka vatta connsists of vinnana (consciousness), nama-rupa, > > salayatana (six bases), phassa (contact), vedana(feeling), jati > > (birth), upapatti-bhava, jara-marana (decay and death). > > > > The actual moments of experience > > through the doorways (seeing, hearing, tasting, touching, smelling) > > are vipaka (result) but because of defilement(kilesa) > > arises kamma. These rounds are all spinning now, > > continually, as they always have in samsara. > > The three rounds are all conditioned and closely related. > > Someone sees an expensive car: that is the concept. > > What actually happens is visible object conditions seeing > > consciousness (vipaka). Because kilesa (avijja and lobha)the root > > cause are not eliminated they may condition kamma (such as working > > extra hard to get money - or maybe even stealing the car). In the > > future > > that kamma will bring a suitable result (vipaka vatta)... and so > the > > round goes > > on and on...But no self anywhere. > > > > Of course the example above is just a to give a broad idea. In fact > > kilesa vatta and kamma vatta can be considered to be occuring also > in > > the same moment - it depends in what ways we are considering it. > That > > is why paticcasamupadda is so deep and hard to understand. > > best wishes > > robert 12283 From: Sarah Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 4:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ken and Noosa Dear Christine & Ken, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Ken said:"Christine, re Jon and Sarah's trip to Noosa: > I had assumed that we would be following the standard COME ON IN, > THE WATERS FINE, procedure. Remember, bookings can be cancelled, > so let's not play the honesty card too early! > KH" > ---------------------------------------------------- > O.K. Ken - I'm with you on this....I can quickly pick up on a > hint......so I won't say a word about the stingers, the grey nurse > sharks, or the sea lice, either hey? :-) > Chris I can see you're both struggling with various kilesa here;-).....What you obviously don't appreciate is that honesty will bring us even more enthusiastically~ To give you a couple of quick examples (says she wondering fast laterally about how she can introduce a dhamma spin): 1. We were the couple that one September, drove down the Californian coast checking out every surf beach from San Fran to San Diego (having been brought up with the Beach Boys). Unlike the Beach Boys, we were the only white bodies in the water at each stop. 2. I used to think I was accumulating a lot of merit by swimming in the ENGLISH Channel on boxing days (yes, mid winter in ENGLAND) for charity. Now a little wiser, it seems a rather high price to pay for that merit. 3. Most of this Easter weekend in Hong Kong, we've either had the remotest beach and sea to ourselves in the cold rain or been hiking on the hills to ourselves in the cold rain or sitting under an umbrella on the Peak brunching and read dsg posts......(you guessed it, in the drizzle at least). At least we don't have a problem with crowds in Hong Kong like most other people;-) So what have you learnt from this? Accumulations can be very strange and unpredictable and you never know what surprise you are in for;-) ..... Meanwhile, Chris, I was chatting to my mother in her English Christian village where she shares the same beliefs as the community. She was also feeling somewhat wistful...everyone else was with family and she was rather 'alone' and reflecting on all those happy family Easters when we'd all go to church together, eat a big lunch, Easter eggs and so on......My little point is that the 'wistful' feeling (and maybe that little touch of self-pity), surely comes from attachment to oneself, feelings, memories and so on, regardless of one's faith, belief or saddha.... I think we're very fourtunate to have such fine friends here to share and care with and let me assure you, I'm not averse to the hot choc indoors afterwards;-) Appreciating all your references, quotes questions and comments as always. Sarah ========= 12284 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 4:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Loka:lokiya:the world --- Dear ken, Nice to hear from you and sorry I'll miss the noosa barbie. Comments below. In dhammastudygroup@y..., "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Howard (message# 12131): > "We're so very used to thinking in terms of conventional or > scientific eyes, ears, and hearts that it's not easy to even > intellectually understand the impermanent eye-sense or eye-base and > so on as rupas and not `things'." > ---------- > Yes, and the problems I'm having with the examples you have given, > tell me I have a long way to go yet. > > I have read Robert K and Nina on previous occasions, explaining how > the various sense bases are situated within the sense organs. I know > the problem lies with me and not with them, but I have to say I find > it somewhat contradictory to tie a rupa so very closely to a > concept. Now you have quoted the Atthasalini, which I assume, is > yet another very reliable source, and it says the same thing: > > > As to the "sentient eye" or eyesense, this is to be found, > according to the "Atthasalini", in the middle of the black circle, > surrounded by white circles, and it permeates the ocular > membranes "as sprinkled oil permeates seven cotton wicks." < > > I would have thought that, while there is a close correlation between > ultimate, conditioned reality and conceptual reality, the two are > literally worlds apart. But here we see a rupa so closely identified > with the eye organ, we can almost measure it (smaller than the black > circle) and almost attribute shape to it (in that it permeates the > ocular membranes). > > I'm sorry I don't have a definite question to put to you on this, I > was just wondering if you could see where I'm going wrong. > > Kind regards, > Ken H > ___________ I wrote a little about related matters a while back so I give these links and maybe you could comment after reading them. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5395 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5410 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5470 This is an except from one: Dear friend, All of us are much conditioned by an age where scientific discoveries seem so testable and provable. It is natural that doubts arise on this matter. The visuddhimagga (viii, 111)says about hadaya-vatthu (heart basis): they describe the heart and then note that inside the heart "there is hollow the size of a punnaga seeds bed where half a pastata measure of blood is kept, with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur." Note that it is not the heart itself that is the hadaya-vatthu NOR is it the blood inside the heart but rather as the Paramatthamanjusa (see vis.xiii note 5 ) says "the heart basis occurs with this blood as its support". You see the actual hadaya-vatthu is incredibly sublime - in scientific measure it wouldn't even amount to a tiny fraction of a gram. It might even be so refined as to be unmeasuarable by scientific instruments. This applies also to the other sense organs (pasada rupa). The Atthasalini remarks that the very purpose of using the term pasada is to dismiss the popular misconception of what we think an eye or an ear is. (see karunadasa p45)The actual sensitive matter in the eye and ear is very refined. If someone dies then the ear-sense and eye sense (sotapasada and cakkhu-pasada ) are immediately no longer produced (they are produced by kamma only) yet one would not notice much outward change looking at the eye and ear(at least for the first few minutes before decomposition sets in). The same applies to the heart - the blood in the heart would have the same volume after death and yet the hadaya-vatthu is no longer present. best regards robert 12285 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 6:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Dear Larry, I appreciate the trouble you take giving part of the chapters. There is a printing failure, but this is not in my book, from the Web? tine cetasikas has to be: fifty cetasikas. Moreover, khandha vimutta is more correct, because vimutti is freedom. The adjective is vimutta. From which print is what is on line that you took? Is it from Zolag Web? My latest edition is 1997, printed by Alan Weller. Does it happen that errors come in when writings are put on web? The problem is that I am not able to check all my writings on web. I enjoy the way you find answers of questions in the Visuddhimagga. Nibbana is included among: all dhammas are anatta. The fact that it is not taken separately as: nibbana is anatta, could be, I think, just my own thought, that not many details are given in the Tipitaka about nibbana. It can only be directly realized by the lokuttara citta. When the Buddha explains about the truth of realities he spoke often about conditioned dhammas that people could experience her and now in their daily life as impermanent, dukkha and anatta. I appreciate very much all the texts given by Ven. Dhammapiyo about nibbana as the extinction of all defilements and the end of dukkha. With appreciation, Nina. op 30-03-2002 19:07 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Abhidhamma in Daily Life http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html > > Chapter 2 > > THE FOUR PARAMATTHA DHAMMAS sannakkhandha; as regards the other tiny cetasikas, they are classified > all together as one khandha, the sankharakkhandha. 6. Nibbana is not a khandha; it is void of khandha (in Pali: khandha-vimutti). 12286 From: Lucy Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 6:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts & realities (was, ADL ch 1 (2)-Lucy) Dear Jon Thanks for your comments. "Final terms of analysis" makes things a lot clearer and avoids confusion with terms like "ultimate" that mean something different in other contexts. I also like the use of "realities" for both. The conventional is "real" in the same way a dream or an illusionist's tricks are "real". This is still rather obscure to me: > "They [conventional realities] are products of mental construction (parikappanaa), not >realities existing by reason of their own nature." What does "own nature" mean here? I can't find sabhaava in Nyanantiloka's Dictionary. > > On a more general note, I suggest that the distinction between 'realties' > and 'concepts' as so defined is crucial to the insight that the teachings > are all about. To my understanding, satipatthana and vipassana deal > exclusively with the development of awareness of and insight into > realities, not concepts. I appreciate that this is a controversial > statement, especially perhaps to those coming from a Mahayana background, Actually, not so controversial. If anything, the "conceptual" are stepping stones leading to the non-conceptual (= direct realization / direct seeing / pure awareness, etc.). I don't see a big difference. > > PS Got a headache to nurse now? Well, you can't say you weren't warned. No headache, it's good to have a little more time to ponder on (ruminate?) these things. Lucy 12287 From: Lucy Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 7:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) Dear Sarah Thanks for expanding on rupa. The direct experience of rupa is still no clear to me but, as you say, much of this will be explained later. I should hold on the questions till the process of perception is explained further on in the book...Only one niggling question: if rupa can be experienced directly, why is it always described in terms of qualities or properties (hardness, cohesion, support, etc., etc.)? These properties are what citta experiences, so they are mental images of something, but not necessarily the raw "something"...anyway, I'm happy to wait until all this process is discussed in more detail in the book - probably in my case this will also need a lot of "sitting" ; ) Lucy PS: I'm behind in the files because Larry's been racing on ahead, not knowing that we've just had a spell of Spring weather here (something one can't afford to miss when it happens!!!) > Dear Lucy & Larry, > > > > So rupa can only be known indirectly by physical > > > sensing and reason (sanna?), both nama. > > > > Hi Larry > > That's how I tend to think too. > > Then it wouldn't be the direct wisdom and development of satipatthana > which leads to stages of insight and enlightenment. Rupas appearing > through the sense doors and experienced by seeing, hearing, smelling, > tasting as well as body consciousness, can be objects of direct awareness > and understanding. The awareness and understanding (as will become clearer > soon in ADL) arise either in the same 'process' of sense door > consciousness or the mind door process following it and take the same > object, e.g. visible object or sound as object. It is not indirect or > theoretical at all. No thinking is involved when sati is aware of a rupa. > > Contact with "rupa" (visual object, > > sound, > > smell, etc.) is processed by consciousness (citta), so the experience of > > "rupa" is always indirect. If there is no sense consciousness / citta to > > process the information, there can't be any perception. Like a deaf > > person > > cannot hear the noise others are hearing.. Immediately after, "reason" > > (a > > succession of innumerable citta) adds to the bare experience and a > > "concept" is created in the mind - I think what we perceive is the last > > step of all these processes: the "concept". Which is very far from the > > object (rupa) > > Rupa lasts longer (17x) than citta and so the same rupa is the object of > many cittas in a process. Sanna (perception) arises with each citta. Sati > and panna arise with particular kusala ones only in the javana process. > This will become clearer.It is direct experience, but there may well be > other mind door processes where concepts are 'created in the mind' as you > say. > > > So how do we reach the first stage of vipassana nanna, the distiction of > > nama and rupa? > > By developing 'direct' understanding of the characteristics of various > namas and rupas over and over again. At the moments of understanding, > there is no counting or wondering about processes or speed of rupas, but > we need to hear details to remove doubts and understand what these namas > and rupas are. > > >I can't see how it could ever be a direct experience of > > rupa - At best, we can reach the stage where the subsequent reasoning > > doesn't happen (the concept), but the perception of "rupa" is always a > > citta (consciousness), not the object / rupa itself... > > The aim is not to reach any stage where 'the subsequent reasoning doesn't > happen' in that reasoning with concepts is essential for daily > functioning. Of course, the more direct awareness develops, the fewer > conditions there will be for reasoning with doubts and trying to 'work it > out'. When there is samma sati, for that instant, it is clear that the > rupa, eg the visible object or hardness appearing, is a rupa and not > citta. > > In another post Lucy also asks about the rupa referred to in the Vism > quote about nama and rupa depending on each other for occurrence. These > rupas don't just refer to 'the body' but to all rupas experienced through > the various doorways. For example, visible object cannot be experienced > without seeing and seeing cannot see without visible object. Also you > raise the question of rupas appearing through 'body sense consciousness > door' and ask about hunger and thirst. Actually, the only rupas > experienced through body sense are temperature (hot/cold), solidity > (hardness/softness) and air (motion). Again these will all be discussed in > more detail. > > One more question of Lucy's relates to visual objects in dreams. We've > discussed this before, but in brief, when the eyes are closed and we're > dreaming, there is no seeing and no visual object being experienced. In > dreams, the visual objects are pannatti and not 'real'. > > I've tried to incorporate a couple of Larry's questions too, but I know > there are still some outstanding and others may be replying from other > angles. > > Hope this helps a little and I'll be happy to hear any other > understandings as usual;-) > > Sarah > 12288 From: Lucy Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 7:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas Hi Larry & all (sorry about my several days silence) Chapter 2 is actually entitled "THE FIVE KHANDHAS". The text you posted seems OK (though Nina noticed some errors), but the title is wrong. I think the pdf version of the book may be more recent (at least the Preface is a lot longer and there may be other differences too) Now a question. Does anyone know why are there two (probably more, but I only know these 2) different classifications of realities (5 khandhas or 4 paramattha dhamma)? Do they serve different purposes (different types of meditation or practice) or explain different things or are they directed to suit different people??? Is it a matter of personal choice which one to concentrate on / "study", what appears clearer to the individual ? The 5 khandhas is the one found normally in the suttas and also in the scriptures from non-Theravada traditions. It's said that the paramattha dhammas are implicit in many suttas but I'm still not sure if there is any sutta that deals with these more explicitly? References anyone? Also, all the versions of the paticca sammupada that I know of are based on the khandhas - is there another version where the terms are explained on the basis of paramattha dhamma??? Lucy ----- Original Message ----- From: Abhidhamma in Daily Life http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html Chapter 2 THE FOUR PARAMATTHA DHAMMAS 1. The Buddha discovered the truth of all phenomena. He knew the characteristic of each phenomenon by his own experience. Out of compassion he taught other people to see reality in many different ways, so that they would have a deeper understanding of the phenomena in and around themselves. When realities are classified by way of paramattha dhammas (absolute realities), they are classified as: citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana. 2. Citta, cetasika and rupa are conditioned realities (sankhara dhammas). They arise because of conditions and fall away again; they are impermanent. One paramattha dhamma, nibbana, is an unconditioned reality (visankhara dhamma); it does not arise and fall away. All four paramattha dhammas are anatta, not self. 3. Citta, cetasika and rupa which are conditioned realities, can be classified by way of the five khandhas. Khandha means 'group' or 'aggregate'. They are: 1. Rupakkhandha, which are all physical phenomena. 2. Vedanakkhandha, which is feeling (vedana). 3. Sannakkhandha, which is perception (sanna). 4. Sankharakkhandha, comprising fifty cetasikas. 5. Vinnanakkhandha, comprising all cittas. 4. The fifty-two kinds of cetasika are classified as three khandhas: a cetasika which is feeling (vedana) is classified as one khandha, the vedanakkhandha; a cetasika which is perception (sanna) is classified as one khandha, the sannakkhandha; as regards the other tiny cetasikas, they are classified all together as one khandha, the sankharakkhandha. For example, in sankharakkhandha are included the following cetasikas: 'intention' (cetana), attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa), ignorance (moha), lovingkindness (metta), generosity (alobha) and wisdom (panna). Sankharakkhandha is sometimes translated as 'activities' or 'mental formations'. 5. As regards citta, all cittas are one khandha: vinnanakkhandha. The Pali terms vinnana, mano and citta are three terms for the same reality: that which has the characteristic of knowing or experiencing something. When citta is classified as khandha the word vinnana is used. Thus, the five khandhas are grouped as one rupakkhandha, and four namakkhandha. Three namakkhandhas are fifty-two cetasikas; the other namakkhandha is eighty-nine or one hundred and twenty-one cittas. 6. Nibbana is not a khandha; it is void of khandha (in Pali: khandha-vimutti). 12289 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 7:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Lucy" wrote: >> Now a question. Does anyone know why are there two (probably more, but I > only know these 2) different classifications of realities (5 khandhas or 4 > paramattha dhamma)? Do they serve different purposes (different types of > meditation or practice) or explain different things or are they directed to > suit different people??? Is it a matter of personal choice which one to > concentrate on / "study", what appears clearer to the individual ? >_____________ Dear Lucy, This is perhaps relevant: From the Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (no English translation completed yet): "There are people who like short explanations, there are people who like explanations of medium length, and there are people who like detailed explanations. Those among the different groups who are slow in understanding as regards mentality can understand realities as explained by way of five khandhas, because mentality is classified by way of four khandhas, thus, in a more extensive way. Those who are slow in understanding as regards physical phenomena (rupa) can understand realities as explained by way of åyatanas. The five senses and the five sense objects are ten kinds of rúpa which are åyatanas. As to dhammåyatana this comprises both nåma and rúpa. Thus in this classification rúpa has been explained more extensively. Those who are slow in understanding as to both nåma and rúpa can understand realities as explained by way of elements, dhåtus, because in this classification both nåma and rúpa have been explained in detail." > The 5 khandhas is the one found normally in the suttas and also in the > scriptures from non-Theravada traditions. _______ I think you will find hundreds of suttas where the ayatanas (sense fields ) are explained. It's said that the paramattha > dhammas are implicit in many suttas but I'm still not sure if there is any > sutta that deals with these more explicitly? References anyone? ______ Paramattha dhammas (except for nibbana) ARE the five khandas (or the ayatanas or dhatus. For example when they say vedana(feeling) is a paramattha dhamma it is no different from saying it is a khanda. best wishes robert 12290 From: Lucy Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Concepts & realities (was, ADL ch 1 (2) sabhaava Lucy asked > What does "own nature" mean here? I can't find sabhaava in Nyanantiloka's > Dictionary. Then went to Google and found this article : "The Ontology of the Prajnaparamita" by Edward Conze at: http://pears2.lib.ohio-state.edu/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/conze3.htm QUOTE When one sees the dharmas as they really are in themselves, one sees their "own-being"(sva-bbaava).The Praj~naapaaramitaa presupposes a knowledge of this term also.We are fortunate that Candrakirti has, in his Prasannapadaa,(4)given a fairly elaborate philosophical account of it. According to him,Buddhist tradition uses the term "own-being" in at least three ways: 1.It may mean the essence, or special property, of a thing.A concrete fire is a "thing," and heat is its "own-being." This kind of own-being is defined as "that attribute which always accompanies the object, because it is not tied to anything else."(5) 2.It may be the essential feature of a dharma.(6) The own-being is that which carries its own mark.(7) Each dharma, as a separate entity,(8) carries one single mark, no more than one. In a sense, "own-being" and "own-mark" are, therefore,one and the same thing. In one passage(8) the Praj~naapaaramitaa,gives a survey of the "own-marks" which define thirty basicdharmas.The definitions concern either the function of the activities, or the effects of the entities considered.Thus, the marks of feeling, perception, impulses,and consciousness are, respectively, "experiencing, taking up, together-making, and being aware." The marks of the skandhas, elements and sense-fields are that they are "suffering,venomous snakes, and doors to misfortune." 3.Finally, "own-being" may be defined as the opposite of "other-being." Then it is that which looks only to itself, and not to anything outside.It is what we call the "Absolute," compared with which all separate dharmas are parabhaava (relative). The mark (lak.sa.na) of that own-being is that it is not contingent, not conditioned, not related to anything other than itself.(10) Own-being, therefore, implies full and complete ownership and control.(11) END QUOTE 12291 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi Sarah, Yes, I see how we would have to keep being reminded of the reality that we are aiming to perceive, since there are so many aversions and resistances that come up and get in the way, not to mention plain old ignorance which constantly muddies up the waters. Some more comments interspersed below. --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > You've been making some good points about concepts and realities. I liked > these comments too from a post you wrote to Howard: > > > I see anicca as a 'characteristic' of a dhamma, and I think it may be > > defined as a > > 'characteristic'. A characteristic, I think tentatively, is not a > > thing in its > > own right which can be perceived in its own right, it can only be > > perceived as an > > aspect of a dhamma, or I guess dhatu or element > > Back in brief to the one you just wrote to me: > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > > What I was trying to express, is that our ability to perceive 'whole > > objects > > directly' is very limited, or else objects do not exist as such. > > Probably the > > latter is true according to the dhamma. > > Yes, I agree. there's no problem conceiving --and sanna > (perception)marking at each moment--'whole objects'. This doesn't make > them real. > > But it is very hard to conceive > > of what > > is actually there, if only the momentary quality of an object is real. > > > > Obviously, for panna and sati this is not a problem. But for my poor > > little > > brain, it is. > > I don't mean to sound condescending in any way, Rob, but I really think > you're on the right track. I don't find this condescending but encouraging. Thanks! If I get pointed in the right direction from time to time, that is great. If you think I'm heading in the right direction, if only for the moment, that's even better. > While we still think 'wholes' or concepts can be objects of awareness and > directly known, it doesn't seem so difficult. When panna begins to realize > that the 'wholes' are an illusion, quite different from the *real* > 'momentary quality' of a paramattha dhamma, there is the slow realization > of the fantasy world we've been living in, I think. I like the way you put that. I'm kind of curious what the 'real world' looks like when the fantasy has been dispelled. It doesn't seem like there's much to it, since there aren't complete and permanent objects, and they have no actual entity. The whole thing sounds pretty thin, doesn't it? So I'm very curious what the whole thing is like from the point of view of panna and sati. Guess I'll be waiting a while to find out........ > Because the sati and panna are very weak and infrequent and the 'momentary > qualities' are not very clear at all in the beginning, there is bound to > be a lot of thinking, wondering and brain-ache in between. it may seem > lonely as Chris suggested or we may feel inclined to give up all this > anatta stuff. Of course, this is just thinking with dosa (aversion), > doubt and unease. It's equally impermanent and at another moment of > awareness of the thinking, aversion or doubt, there's momentary calm and > relief from the kilesa (defilements) and no question at all about the > value. > > However, we do need to keep hearing, considering and being reminded of > what the realities are, what the characteristics of those realities are, > in order for sati and panna to perform their functions. Thanks, Sarah, one sometimes starts to get a glimpse of the process we are in, if not necessarily the result, and it is heartening to even have a glimpse that the process is real, that it will eventually lead to freedom. Having a supportive conversation about moving in the right direction is helpful and encouraging, as I said. Thanks. Robert Ep. 12292 From: Robert Epstein Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi Rob, Thanks for reprinting and commenting on this discussion of the four types of Right Concentration. Sometimes it's worth making a partially ignorant statement to bring out the truth from someone who knows what they're talking about. However, my statement was not completely ignorant. I want to study these stanzas more thoroughly and I really appreciate them. Here are my preliminary reactions: 1/ It is obvious that Right Concentration consists of more than *just* the jhanas, especially #4 which is very important and does point to direct discernment as a form of contemplation of reality, not meditative absorption. Whether this fourth type of Right Concentration is dependent on prior experience of the jhanas is another question, which I am not able to answer at the moment, due to ignorance of the full discussion in the suttas. 2/ I want to clarify that I never said, and do not believe, that there is no insight without the jhanas. What I did say, and believe from what I recall in the suttas [can't remember which ones, but you may know] is that the Buddha said that one cannot reach enlightenment without passing through the jhanas. Is this wrong? In any case, that is the popular notion among some of the 'better' Theravadan teachers. It was, I believe, the teaching of Ajahn Chah, and is the teaching of his disciple, Ajahn Brahmavamso, among others, that the jhanas are a most essential tool for passage into the realm of enlightenment. 3/ I do think that insight is possible without jhana. The question is how far can vipassana progress without having experience of the deep peace of the more absorbed meditative states. Another way of asking the question is whether it is possible to achieve deep abiding realization without any passage through the deep samadhi states. I have heard samadhi somewhat disparaged here at times as a trap that may seem kusala while merely suppressing defilements and not leading to real insight, but the question is whether one can reach deep insight without *true* meditative, kusala, absorption, at some point in the career of the aspirant. 5/ My own experience of the jhanas, I would say without hesitation, is zero!! What I have experienced is what I consider and understand to be preliminary stages of peacefulness/concentration/absorption at the 'doorway' to the first and/or second jhana. And my experience, for what it's worth, of these preliminary states is that they are deeply peaceful and absorptive, as one might expect. They also seem to give a kind of stillness and clarity that appears to me to be conducive to getting a better look at what is arising in the moment. I know that my sense of this can be challenged. There is no way to prove whether or not I am experiencing what I think I am. But my efforts have been sincere, and lacking in forcefulness. I have learned over the years not to push for results on the path, and I am much more patient than I used to be. This seems kusala to me compared to past reactions. I hope that is true. I do not say that to bolster my 'self' in any way, only to look clearly at my own progress, or at least seeming progress. This progress in discernment and patience is so slight to what I figure is required, that I do not puff up my ego much by saying it. It is just a drop of progress that is a bit of a relief from very obvious sufferings of the past. That's enough for now. I'd be very interested in your response, and I will study the good material that you have sent me!! Best, Robert Ep. =================== --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > ------ Dear Rob. Ep., > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > 3/ I agree that the Buddha plainly stated that Right > Concentration consists of > > the jhanas. I have not heard anyone quote Sutta so far to > contradict this. > > > >___________- > I quoted this sutta several months back. You probably forgot. Could > you look at the 4 types of right concentration and see what is said. > Also you believe that you need jhana before any insight is possible. > Is that correct? Could you explain your experience with jhana. I ask > because there seems to be some difference of opinion about what jhana > is. > Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 > Samadhi Sutta > > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which four? > There is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now. There is the > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > the attainment of knowledge & vision. There is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & > alertness. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents. > > Number 1:"And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now? > There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, > withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & remains in the first > jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by > directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought > & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & > pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from > directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading > of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically > sensitive to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of > which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a > pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as > with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & > remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, > neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development of concentration > that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the > here & now.>>endquote > Robert: This is the mundane jhanas, the pleasnt abiding here and now. > They are right concentration but are only right concentration of the > eightfold path when they are used as the basis fore insight by those > who take that path. > > Number2:"And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision? > There is the case where a monk attends to the perception of light and > is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any hour of the day]. > Day [for him] is the same as night, night is the same as day. By > means of an awareness open & unhampered, he develops a brightened > mind. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. > Robert: This is a special type of mundane jhana that gives one > certain powers. "knowledge and vision" here is not of the type that > is part of the eightfold path. > > Number3"And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the > case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as > they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as > they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts > are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they > subside. This is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. > > > Number 4: "And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is > the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with > reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging: 'Such is > form, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, > such its origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such > its origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such > their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, > such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > the ending of the effluents. > > "These are the four developments of concentration. > > +++++++ > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Hi Ken. > > I don't think anyone's point here was 'gut feeling' over 'dhamma + > wise opinion'. > > It was the dhamma as it is plainly spoken by the Buddha over > scholarly > > interpretations of what he said. > > > > What I am in agreement with here has nothing to do with gut > feeling, but does have > > to do with the following: > > > > 1/ The Suttas, when they say something plainly and clearly should > be accepted as > > being what the Buddha meant without creating a contrary > interpretation based on > > one's own philosophical views. That goes for me as much as it goes > for anyone > > who's views I might disagree with. The Suttas themselves are the > final authority, > > not 'wise opinions' however wise they may be. If they contradict > the direct and > > plain meaning of a Sutta, they are wrong. Obviously, there are > many suttas that > > are not that clear and plain, and require commentary and > discussion, but some are > > pretty obvious and state exactly what they mean to say. > > > > 2/ I agreed with Eric that the Buddha plainly states that the > eightfold factors > > that lead to enlightenment should be cultivated. There is > disagreement about > > this, and my reading is limited, but where the Buddha discusses > Right > > Concentration, Right Livelihood, etc., it is hard to see how these > would all arise > > together at the moment of enlightenment rather than being > cultivated gradually, > > leading to the accomplishment of the eightfold path. > > > > 3/ I agree that the Buddha plainly stated that Right Concentration > consists of > > the jhanas. I have not heard anyone quote Sutta so far to > contradict this. > > > > 4/ I agree with Howard that the suppression of the defilements in > samatha > > meditation and the jhanas makes the cultivation of peace and > insight much more > > possible, and is a major tool directly prescribed by the Buddha in > order to make > > progress past the inevitable defilements we all carry. > > > > If you disagree with these statements above, I am happy to consider > your arguments > > and any quotes you may have from Buddhist scripture. > > > > Thanks, > > Robert Ep. > > > > ============== > > > > --- khow14 wrote: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein 12293 From: Lucy Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 10:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas From: "robertkirkpatrick.rm" _____________ Paramattha dhammas (except for nibbana) ARE the five khandas (or the ayatanas or dhatus. For example when they say vedana(feeling) is a paramattha dhamma it is no different from saying it is a khanda. best wishes robert _____________ Dear Robert Doh! And I've been puzzled all this long... : ) So: rupa = rupa, vedana = cetasika, sanna = cetasika, sanskhara = all other cetasikas, citta = vinnana...yes? Is citta an exact synonym of vinnana? (in other schools these terms are sometimes used with different meanings, but the differences are rather subtle and tend to vary for different authors - when not for a same author in different worls !) I wonder what's the investigation suggested for someone who needs very detailed explanation and with a slow understanding of practically everything ? (especially those who agonise over why is one word used here and another there for a same thing ) Lucy 12294 From: sukinderpal Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 10:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Rob, Again tonight I am late in responding, but I hope you are not reading this at an odd hour. As long as we have not developed eyes that can see at night, I think we still remain essentially day- creatures. Night is for the bhavanga cittas. But let me comment a little on your post; You said: > I also think it's interesting to look at whether concepts truly do not rise or > fall. Like all phenomena they cannot be permanent beyond the moment, they can > only appear to be so. Therefore it is very interesting to look into the nature of > this illusion: That concepts keep re-constituting themselves from moment to > moment as if they had not fallen and re-arisen, but in fact they change at each > moment and then must be reconstructed like any phenomena. When we think we are > seeing the same concept for a period of time, we must really be seeing a serious > of concepts which are 'clones' of each other, fashioned in each other's image in > order to create the illusion of continuity. There may be real continuity in the > information passed from one citta to the next, but the continuity which makes a > concept appear to last in duration must be an illusion. I wasn't thinking about concepts that seem to last for an extended time, but was thinking of it in terms a momentary occurance. Before perhaps it is even acknowledged and recognized. There must be I think, a seperating out of an identifiable object from the field of experience. For eg. the taste, not necessarily to the point of identifiable as sweet or sour, but just as one taste distinct from another. If it is not just taste as an element but something experienced by somebody at some location in this physical body, then the experience must be conceptual. Let me give you an illustration(a simple minded one) to help express my position if not to convince you about the correctness of it( even I have little confidence in my analysis). Standing at the border where sea meets land, on one side is the sea, on the other land. We can look it as land bordering sea, or we can see it as sea bordering land. Or we can say land and sea touching each other or water on one side and earth on the other. We can just say left is one thing and right is another. The sense of having a left side as opposed to a right. All these are, as I think you would agree, conceptual, mental constructs. I do not deny the use of these distinctions, for example I wouldn't walk towards te sea expecting it to support my body as would land. But even water (or earth) is not real. There can be experiences of it through the different doorways. There can be visible object, taste, cohesion etc., all these are rupas and they are real. But the assemblage formed by the mind based on the experience of those rupas which we may or may not identify as water, is not real on any level. > > But since we refer to them, and can be > > > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more accurate to > > say > > > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim to represent > > > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are illusory, but not > > > non-existent. Can't we say that ignorance of reality is the cause for us being fooled? That not seeing realities as they are we see that which is not? Being fooled IS the seeing that which is not? > I would say that the object the concept contains is unreal, not the concept as > concept. I can stand to be corrected on this, but to me it seems that concept > exists as an experience, but not as a reality. It is like when I see a film. The > content of the film is totally fabricated, those people are just characters and > none of the events have actually taken place. But the experience of seeing a film > is still an experience. It is real as an experience, but not as a reality. I think I agree with this last part, but I am wondering what you mean by 'concept as concept is real'. Is it objective or subjective as you later imply? > I would agree with this. A concept can never be anything but a 'shadow' of what > is actual. It is like a photograph that takes an impression of something in the > 'real world' and turns it into an image which is no longer active and alive in the > world. It has been framed and set up as a particular way of defining or looking > at a reality, but it itself has been removed from a direct understanding of > anything real. At first I thought that we were on full agreement, but when you said that ( this is how I understood you, but I may be wrong) at one time the concept represented actual realities but became invalid in a later moment when those realities have actually fallen away, I think I could ask the question below again. > Would you say that > > sati and panna of the level of satipatthana see the same thing as concepts? Why I asked this is because i believe awarenss and understanding realities as they are is the function sati of panna. And concept can never 'be' of the same level as these. In fact a thousand explanations would not be adquate to represent one moment of satipatthana(just guessing). Did I misunderstand you? Sorry if I have. Must go to sleep now. Best wishes, Sukin. 12295 From: Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 7:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi, Sarah (and Larry) - In a message dated 3/31/02 3:07:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > > Hi Larry (& Howard), > > --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Thanks Howard, I think this deserves a > special place in the Useful Posts > > File. Sarah, what do you think??? > > I've just attended a Useful Committee Meeting and we've decided the > special place needs a special Heading. Maybe you'd like to choose one. > Here are a few suggestions: > > a) The Mathematics of Enlightenment > > b) Einstein: My Guru > > c) Dhamma by Numbers > > d) The n-fold Path in Simple Steps > > e) N-ary Relations: Reality or Concept? > > ********** > > Sarah in silly holiday mood;-) > > ========================= I see nothing at all silly about this matter!!! :-(( This is a very serious isue, and the headings you propose are all quite suitable! Don't you know that Buddhist frivolity is not to be countenanced???!!!! More seriously ... or not, I particularly like heading (a) as it sounds like something produced by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's organization! ;-)) Thinking about them also brings to mind yet another possible heading, "The Mathematics of Levitation and Levity: a Formal Analysis of the Jhanas as the Gateway to Giggling." With mettamatics (and deep mettaphysics), 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) 12296 From: Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi, Robert (and Robert E) - The sutta you quote, Robert, I must admit, is quite persuasive to me in establishing two forms of concentration, numbers 3 and 4, distinguishable from that which leads to jhanas, number 1, and which support progress towards enlightenment. I think they make a good case for the dry-insight approach, strong but less-than-jhanic concentration is a factor. The only thing that I might question is what relationship might (or might not) exist between jhanic concentration and the concentrations # 3 and # 4. This is not dealt with in this sutta. It *might* be the case that these latter two types of concentration have jhanas as their base! Elsewhere, of course, the defining of Right Concentration as the first 4 jhanas is standard. Moreover, the is ample evidence in the suttas for using the jhanas as a basis for cultivation of insight and final liberation. Jhanic-level concentration is still good "old standard", but this sutta you quote certainly *might* imply that it is not the *only*standard ... or, it might not. Whatever the case, I would still like to point out the importance of concentration to the practice. With metta, Howard In a message dated 3/31/02 6:00:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > ------ Dear Rob. Ep., > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > 3/ I agree that the Buddha plainly stated that Right > Concentration consists of > > the jhanas. I have not heard anyone quote Sutta so far to > contradict this. > > > >___________- > I quoted this sutta several months back. You probably forgot. Could > you look at the 4 types of right concentration and see what is said. > Also you believe that you need jhana before any insight is possible. > Is that correct? Could you explain your experience with jhana. I ask > because there seems to be some difference of opinion about what jhana > is. > Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 > Samadhi Sutta > > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which four? > There is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now. There is the > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > the attainment of knowledge & vision. There is the development of > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & > alertness. There is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents. > > Number 1:"And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now? > There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, > withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & remains in the first > jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by > directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought > & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & > pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from > directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading > of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically > sensitive to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of > which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a > pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as > with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & > remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, > neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development of concentration > that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the > here & now.>>endquote > Robert: This is the mundane jhanas, the pleasnt abiding here and now. > They are right concentration but are only right concentration of the > eightfold path when they are used as the basis fore insight by those > who take that path. > > Number2:"And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision? > There is the case where a monk attends to the perception of light and > is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any hour of the day]. > Day [for him] is the same as night, night is the same as day. By > means of an awareness open & unhampered, he develops a brightened > mind. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & > pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. > Robert: This is a special type of mundane jhana that gives one > certain powers. "knowledge and vision" here is not of the type that > is part of the eightfold path. > > Number3"And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the > case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as > they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as > they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts > are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they > subside. This is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. > > > Number 4: "And what is the development of concentration that, when > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is > the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with > reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging: 'Such is > form, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, > such its origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such > its origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such > their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, > such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > the ending of the effluents. > > "These are the four developments of concentration. > > /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) 12297 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 2:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas Dear Lucy, There are only a few alternatives that I employ (Using vinnana as an example) - 1(a). Search on Google (always exciting (!) e.g. Did you know there are 929 references if search is made under 'vinnana' and 72,700 references if search is made under 'consciousness buddhism'. ...... So choice 1(a) is for those who hope to have a long life and don't need variety. 1(b) Search on Google can also turn up treasures like - "Western science now acknowledges that the mind is not just a program in the brain, but that its processes are distributed throughout the body. This acknowledgment ends centuries of mind/body splitting in Western discourse. More importantly, it ends overvaluation of mind at the expense of body." hmmm, maybe I'll just read this.....and then the whole morning is gone, hopping around in Google-land..... So choice 1 (b) is for those who hope to have a long life and can't resist variety. 2. Check out The Manual of Buddhist Terms by Nyanatiloka at http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm Fraught with the same risks as 1(b). 3. Try 1(a), 1(b) and 2 above (briefly), scan the screen, check books owned by self, resist hopping around in various other interesting topics, give up, and post a question on dsg. Still a risk, but usually provides a pointer to where to go next. Contrary to what Sarah and RobEp are saying, most members won't spoon-feed but will give just so much and actually expect you to work at it yourself. (the nerve!!) which then leads in a loop back through 1(a) 1(b) and 2, on and on and on....Google Paticcasamupadda?.... I've decided the motto of dsg is NOT Ehi-Passiko (come and see) - it's "go and look, consider, reflect and then if you have any further questions come back to us" (whatever the Pali is for that......) :):) metta, Christine viññána: 'consciousness', is one of the 5 groups of existence (aggregates; khandha, q.v.); one of the 4 nutriments (áhára, q.v.); the 3rd link of the dependent origination (paticcasamuppáda, q.v.); the 5th in the sixfold division of elements (dhátu, q.v.). Viewed as one of the 5 groups (khandha), it is inseparably linked with the 3 other mental groups (feeling, perception and formations) and furnishes the bare cognition of the object, while the other 3 contribute more specific functions. Its ethical and karmic character, and its greater or lesser degree of intensity and clarity, are chiefly determined by the mental formations associated with it. Just like the other groups of existence, consciousness is a flux (viññána-sotá, 'stream of c.') and does not constitute an abiding mind-substance; nor is it a transmigrating entity or soul. The 3 characteristies (s. ti-lakkhana), impermanence, suffering and no- self, are frequently applied to it in the texts (e.g., in the Anattalakkhana Sutta, S.XXII, 59). The Buddha often stressed that "apart from conditions, there is no arising of consciousness' (M 38); and all these statements about its nature hold good for the entire range of consciousness, be it "past, future or presently arisen, gross or subtle, in oneself or external, inferior or lofty, far or near" (S. XXII, 59). According to the 6 senses it divides into 6 kinds, viz. eye- (or visual) consciousness (cakkhu-v.), etc. About the dependent arising of these 6 kinds of consciousness, Vis.M. XV, 39 says: 'Conditioned through the eye, the visible object, light and attention, eye- consciousness arises. Conditioned through the ear, the audible object, the ear-passage and attention, ear-consciousness arises. Conditioned, through the nose, the olfactive object, air and attention, nose-consciousness arises. Conditioned through the tongue, the gustative object, humidity and attention, tongue-consciousness arises. Condlitioned through the body, bodily impression, the earth- element and attention, body-consciousness arises. Conditioned through the subconscious mind (bhavanga-mano), the mind-object and attention, mind-consciousness arises." The Abhidhamma literature distinguishes 89 crasses of consciousness, being either karmically wholesome, unwholesome or neutral, and belonging either to the sense-sphere, the fine-material or the immaterial sphere, or to supermundane consciousness. See Table I. viññána-kicca: 'functions of consciousness' <<>> --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Lucy" wrote: > > From: "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > _____________ > > Paramattha dhammas (except for nibbana) ARE the five khandas (or the > ayatanas or dhatus. For example when they say vedana(feeling) is a > paramattha dhamma it is no different from saying it is a khanda. > best wishes > robert > > _____________ > > Dear Robert > > Doh! And I've been puzzled all this long... : ) > So: rupa = rupa, vedana = cetasika, sanna = cetasika, sanskhara = all other > cetasikas, citta = vinnana...yes? > Is citta an exact synonym of vinnana? (in other schools these terms are > sometimes used with different meanings, but the differences are rather > subtle and tend to vary for different authors - when not for a same author > in different worls !) > I wonder what's the investigation suggested for someone who needs very > detailed explanation and with a slow understanding of practically > everything ? (especially those who agonise over why is one word used here > and another there for a same thing ) > > Lucy 12298 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:08pm Subject: Re: Ken and Noosa Dear Sarah (and Ken), reply in context below: --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > I can see you're both struggling with various kilesa here;- ).....What you > obviously don't appreciate is that honesty will bring us even more > enthusiastically~ ---------------------------------------- Ahhh! honesty ...... so I have to drop the story about the sea- gulls breeding with the sea-eagles and attacking any heads bobbing in the surf? Maybe just one tale about 'land-crabs' in plague proportions in hotels and houses? And what about the new Council charges per entry to the water? (I see you probably incline towards the teaching of Thanissaro Bhikkhu on humour and The Buddha on Right Speech....that's O.K., I can accommodate honesty :)). ---------------------------------------- > To give you a couple of quick examples (says she wondering fast laterally > about how she can introduce a dhamma spin): -------------------------------------------- :) :) Perhaps we could look at it as giving examples of 'Papanca and how it occurs?' ... ------------------------------------------- <<<<>>>> > > So what have you learnt from this? Accumulations can be very strange and > unpredictable and you never know what surprise you are in for;-) > ..... ------------------------------------------- :) Actually, it wasn't accumulations but masochism that sprang to mind! ------------------------------------------- > > Meanwhile, Chris, I was chatting to my mother in her English Christian > village where she shares the same beliefs as the community. She was also > feeling somewhat wistful...everyone else was with family and she was > rather 'alone' and reflecting on all those happy family Easters when we'd > all go to church together, eat a big lunch, Easter eggs and so on......My > little point is that the 'wistful' feeling (and maybe that little touch of > self-pity), surely comes from attachment to oneself, feelings, memories > and so on, regardless of one's faith, belief or saddha.... ----------------------------------------- Thank you Sarah, I needed the reminder and I really do appreciate your care..... :) ----------------------------------------- > I think we're very fourtunate to have such fine friends here to share and > care with ---------------------------------------- As do I, well said. ---------------------------------------- and let me assure you, I'm not averse to the hot choc indoors > afterwards;-) ----------------------------------------- Thank goodness! So I don't have to borrow the life-savers' loud hailer or rescue-boat to have Dhamma discussions! ------------------------------------------ > Appreciating all your references, quotes questions and comments as always. > > Sarah > ========= metta, Chris 12299 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 3:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Lucy" wrote: > > From: "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > _____________ > > Paramattha dhammas (except for nibbana) ARE the five khandas (or the > ayatanas or dhatus. For example when they say vedana(feeling) is a > paramattha dhamma it is no different from saying it is a khanda. > best wishes > robert > > _____________ > > Dear Robert > > Doh! And I've been puzzled all this long... : ) > So: rupa = rupa, vedana = cetasika, sanna = cetasika, sanskhara = all other > cetasikas, citta = vinnana...yes? > Is citta an exact synonym of vinnana? (in other schools these terms are > sometimes used with different meanings, but the differences are rather > subtle and tend to vary for different authors - when not for a same author > in different worls !) > I wonder what's the investigation suggested for someone who needs very > detailed explanation and with a slow understanding of practically > everything ? (especially those who agonise over why is one word used here > and another there for a same thing ) > > Lucy > _____________ Dear Lucy, I much appreciate the careful study you, Larry and others are doing. You write:"" And I've been puzzled all this long... : ) > So: rupa = rupa, vedana = cetasika, sanna = cetasika, sankhara = all other > cetasikas, citta = vinnana...yes? -------- Exactly. -------------- > Is citta an exact synonym of vinnana?>>> yes an exact synonym for vinnana. "the words vinnana, citta and mano are one in meaning" Visuddhimagga XIV84 kind regards robert 12300 From: Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 5:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Dear Nina & ADL group, Nina, thank you for pointing out these errors. I have been copying the text from here http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html which I believe is Robert K's web site (not sure). The date at the bottom of the chapters is Dec. 19, 2000. ADL group, my internet hookup cannot download an adobe acrobat to read pdf files from the Zolag web site so someone else will have to post the chapters or we will have to forget about doing this and just discuss the chapter in general without taking it in any particular order. Either way is fine with me. Sarah wanted to post chapters to keep lurkers up to date. So you 5 (Sarah, Christine, Lucy, Azita, Num) will have to decide what to do. I can get by using the version I have been posting. If there are errors in a quotation I may make, feel free to point them out. Larry 12301 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 5:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Hi Larry, Nina and All, The text on Amara's site http://www.dhammastudy.com/abhid.html also includes the error. Clearly an original transcribing error, so wouldn't it be worth sticking with the way Larry is doing things and keeping an eye out for errors - this way the book on the two sites is being proof-read as well, and maybe corrections can be made? I'm happy to compare what Larry pastes on dsg, to my copy given to me in BKK, a 1990 edition. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Dear Nina & ADL group, > > Nina, thank you for pointing out these errors. I have been copying the > text from here http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html which I believe is > Robert K's web site (not sure). The date at the bottom of the chapters > is Dec. 19, 2000. > > ADL group, my internet hookup cannot download an adobe acrobat to read > pdf files from the Zolag web site so someone else will have to post the > chapters or we will have to forget about doing this and just discuss the > chapter in general without taking it in any particular order. Either way > is fine with me. Sarah wanted to post chapters to keep lurkers up to > date. So you 5 (Sarah, Christine, Lucy, Azita, Num) will have to decide > what to do. > > I can get by using the version I have been posting. If there are errors > in a quotation I may make, feel free to point them out. > > Larry 12302 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 5:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) --- Hi Nina and larry, I took the book from dhammastudy.com as I don't have pdf capabilities on my website so couldn't get it from zolag.co.uk robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Dear Nina & ADL group, > > Nina, thank you for pointing out these errors. I have been copying the > text from here http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html which I believe is > Robert K's web site (not sure). The date at the bottom of the chapters > is Dec. 19, 2000. > > ADL group, my internet hookup cannot download an adobe acrobat to read > pdf files from the Zolag web site so someone else will have to post the > chapters or we will have to forget about doing this and just discuss the > chapter in general without taking it in any particular order. Either way > is fine with me. Sarah wanted to post chapters to keep lurkers up to > date. So you 5 (Sarah, Christine, Lucy, Azita, Num) will have to decide > what to do. > > I can get by using the version I have been posting. If there are errors > in a quotation I may make, feel free to point them out. > > Larry 12303 From: Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 7:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas Dear dsg, I was lying in bed this morning observing my thoughts and it occurred to me that _all_ akusala citta are conceptual, even if there are no words involved. Can this be true????? If so there are serious consequences. If we separate concept from khandha, what is the basis of suffering in the khandhas. It would seem to me that conditionality or impermanence is not enough to condition suffering. Doesn't there also have to be a concept of self?????????? My conclusion here is that to see reality as it is (without concept) is to escape suffering. What about lobha, dosa, and moha????? Perhaps they can be seen as they are as accomplices to concept and from that perspective seen as not embodying concept, which is the usual view. If that makes sense.... very confused, Larry 12304 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Sutta and Co. op 31-03-2002 12:17 schreef Robert Epstein op epsteinrob@Y...: > Your description below is very helpful to me in getting some orientation > towards > the jhanas and realization of anicca, as well as other points. Thanks very > much. > > > Is there any convenient way to read or reprint the page that speaks of > "...the explanation >> on sila, guarding of the doorways, mindfulness, contentment, solitude, the >> five hindrances, the jhanas, and the highest sacrifice: destruction of >> the >> asavas...." > > If it exists on-line, I'd love to read that commentary. Dear Rob Ep, Yes, and commentary, translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi, and I think it is likely to be on line. Nina. 12305 From: Sarah Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:33pm Subject: Nina, Many Happy Returns Nina, Many Happy Returns of the Day and may you have many more filled with dhamma reminders, joy and wisdom. metta, Sarah & Jon ======================== Dhammaaraamo dhammarato dhamma"m anuvicintaya"m dhamma"m anussara"m bhikkhu saddhammaa na parihaayati (Dhp 364) The Bhikkhu who dwells in the Dhamma, who delights in the Dhamma, who meditates on the Dhamma, who well remembers the Dhamma, does not fall away from the dhmma sublime. (Narada Thera trans.) 12306 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) --- Dear Rob. E. Thanks for explaining more what you mean. I appreciate your honesty in saying you haven't experienced jhana. As has been said before according to the texts there are three broad paths to enlightenment. That of one who develops mastery of jhana and uses this as the basis , the one who develops jhana and insight at the same time and the one who develops insight alone (although at the moment of experiencing nibbana he has supramundane jhana). The Netti-pakarana p168 "Tattha Bhagava tikkhindriyassa samatham upadassati, majjhindriyassa Bhagava samathavipassanam upadissati, mudindriyassa Bhagava vipassanam upadassati. Herein the Blessed one teaches samatha to one of keen faculties; The blessed one teaches samatha and insight to one of medium faculties and the blessed one teaches insight [alone] to one of blunt faculties. Thus for the great ones, the wise ones, indeed the path of samatha preceeding insight can be developed. For the blunt, slow ones it shows that insight alone is the way, inferior though it is. The post of Erik's that you say you agree with said: .......>>>>>>[quoting a sutta on the jhanas]...fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration.' That these passages should generate such controversy is hard for me to swallow. Certainly there is no denial of the need for just this from my Tibetan or Zen or Theravada teachers. On this they all agree completely. So what gives here in DSG? So then, to be direct, why is what's stated plainly here such a problem for some here in DSG? Why? Who's more likely to be on the mark? The one who actually takes what the Buddha taught directly and applies it as instructed to the point of gnosis, or those who argue over whether or not concentration to the degree SPECIFICALLY taught by the Buddha in everyone's favorite Sutta (Maha Satipatthana) is necessary? If I had to lay my bets on what's accurate Dhamma, I'd lay it on the words reputed to be PLAINLY spoken by the Buddha (how ambiguous is the section on right concentration--it's obviously jhana!), <>>>>>>> _______ You say > "In any case, that is the popular notion among some of the 'better' Theravadan > teachers. It was, I believe, the teaching of Ajahn Chah, and is the teaching of > his disciple, Ajahn Brahmavamso, among others, that the jhanas are a most > essential tool for passage into the realm of enlightenment.>>>>>> _______ As it has been said there are several paths to nibbana , among them that of samathayanika - the one who uses jhana as a basis for insight. There have been also many quotes from the ancient commentaries showing that there is also another path called sukkavippasaka (dry insight worker) where mundane jhana is not attained prior to the stage of enlightenment (but as as often being said at that moment of enlightenment there is supramundane jhana). However, I think perhaps you feel that modern teachers are more reliable than the ancient commentaries so I did an internet search and came up with two urls for you to read over by different present teachers. They demonstrate, I think, that dsg is not the only place where it is thought that sukkavipassaka is a valid path. I chose short essays so perhaps you could read them. Note: I certainly am not endorsing all that these essays say , just the general point about sukkavipassaka. One booklet called 'Questions and Answers' by U Hla Myint Kyaw,Translated by U Hla Maung even has this in it "Some very thick books of Pa Auk Sayadaw in English which were sent to Myanmar from Taiwan have been banned and prohibited from distribution by the Maha Nayaka Sayadaws of the Myanmar Religious Affairs Department in Kaba Aye, Yangon." Now this book by Pa Auk is one that emphasises samathayanika (using jhana as a basis). But it goes against current Burmese orthdoxy of the mahasi sayadaw system which believes in sukkhavipassaka. It amazed me that they would ban it but it shows that a fair number of present Buddhists are reasonably convinced that the Buddha did teach the sukkavipassaka path (as well as samathayanika). Here is a quote from a very popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. =Mindfulness in Plain English.= ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a part of the passing show within.."endquote Now for the urls . http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt3n2p4.html http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p6.html Finally , I want to say that if you feel that you should follow the path of samathayanika then I wish you much success. It is, of course, the very wonderful, most complete way of development, that the great disciples such as Rahula and Moggalana went by. Also I think it is great to develop samatha as a practice in itself - but if one does so it is good to know about the details of the dhamma as these can help one not to take subtle clinging for sammasamadhi. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > 3/ I do think that insight is possible without jhana. The question is how far > can vipassana progress without having experience of the deep peace of the more > absorbed meditative states. Another way of asking the question is whether it is > possible to achieve deep abiding realization without any passage through the deep > samadhi states. I have heard samadhi somewhat disparaged here at times as a trap > that may seem kusala while merely suppressing defilements and not leading to real > insight, but the question is whether one can reach deep insight without *true* > meditative, kusala, absorption, at some point in the career of the aspirant. > > 5/ My own experience of the jhanas, I would say without hesitation, is zero!! > What I have experienced is what I consider and understand to be preliminary stages > of peacefulness/concentration/absorption at the 'doorway' to the first and/or > second jhana. And my experience, for what it's worth, of these preliminary states > is that they are deeply peaceful and absorptive, as one might expect. They also > seem to give a kind of stillness and clarity that appears to me to be conducive to > getting a better look at what is arising in the moment. I know that my sense of > this can be challenged. There is no way to prove whether or not I am experiencing > what I think I am. But my efforts have been sincere, and lacking in forcefulness. 12307 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 10:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Doubt > ********** > “Vicikiccha or doubt is another akusala cetasika and this can accompany > only one type of citta, namely the type of moha-mula-citta which is > called: moha-mula-citta vicikiccha sampayutta (rooted in ignorance, > accompanied by doubt). > > The reality of vicikiccha is not the same as what we mean by doubt > in > conventional language. Vicikiccha is not doubt about someone's name or > about the weather. Vicikiccha is doubt about realities, about nama and > rupa, about cause and result, about the four noble Truths, about the > "Dependant Origination". The Atthasalini (lI, Pan IX, Chapter III, 259) > defines vicikiccha as follows: > > ... It has shifting about as characteristic, mental wavering as > function. > indecision or uncertainty in grasp as manifestation, unsystematic > thought > (unwise attention) as proximate cause, and it should be regarded as a > danger to attainment.” > ********** k: Sarah, thanks for the definition. When Buddha speaks about kalama sutta, to me it is use in a conventional sense. He knew that humans are always bound by traditions and culture. Hence there is a need to protect the dhamma from being affected by such inherent problem. k: As from your definition, I agree that doubt is serious when we doubt what Buddha says about reality and I like Robert K quote from another sutta. ( I never saw it before) I beleive that it is true that Buddha is the only one that could declare that he is enlighted and the ten thousand system would shake. To me the word doubt used in kamala tends to be convention rather than paramattha. Its application is different from the doubt use in paramattha. Hence there could arise a confusion if one does not realise the definition and its application. Kind regards Ken O 12308 From: wangchuk37 Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 11:22pm Subject: Buddhist bibliography April update the April update to the Buddhist bibliography is now online at : http://www.cyberdistributeur.com/buddbib.html I have listed new Buddhist web sites at : http://www.cyberdistributeur.com/buddlinks.html if you see that a Buddhist web site is not listed please do not hesitate to let me know and i'll include it a.s.a.p. enjoy your reading ! Roger 12309 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 11:43pm Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi Sukin As what you have said, concepts have no reality. (that is when we are talking in Abhidhamma language). This was written in conventional sense to Victor :). Kind rgds Ken O --- Sukinder wrote: > Dear Ken O, > > You said: > "concepts and ideas are defintely impermanent." > > I do not understand this. To me concepts have no reality whatsoever, > so how can it have the characteristic of impermanence? From my > experience it is because of concepts that the illusion of permanence > is formed? > But my understanding is not very good so I would greatly appreciate some > > elaboration. > Thanks in advance. > Sukin. > > > > --- yuzhonghao wrote: > Sarah, > > > > "The intellect disintegrates. Ideas disintegrate. Consciousness at > > the intellect consciousness disintegrates. Contact at the intellect > > disintegrates. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on > > contact at the intellect -- experienced as pleasure, pain or neither- > > pleasure-nor-pain -- that too disintegrates. > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-082.html > > > > As I see it, ideas disintegrate. > > > > Texts aside, Sarah, are ideas permanent or impermanent? > > > > > > Regards, > > Victor 12310 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Mar 31, 2002 11:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Nina Hi RobEp, Regarding the Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, if you can't find it on-line, it is available from Buddhist Publication Society (delivery takes a while). http://www.lanka.com/dhamma/bps/bps_main.htm (under Translations from Pali) The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship The Såmaññaphala Sutta and Its Commentaries Translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi In reply to a question on the fruits of the monk's life, the Buddha traces the entire progress of the disciple from the first step of the path to its culmination in the attainment of Nibbåna. The sutta and commentaries together give extensive treatment to such subjects as the monk's moral precepts, contentment, mindfulness and clear comprehension, the abandoning of the five hindrances, jhånas, higher knowledges, etc. 1989, 200 pp.; 5.5" x 8.5"; $10.00; BP 212S As well as the articles RobertK mentioned re Vipassana/Jhana, there is another one you may find worth looking at, where the opinions of five well-known modern teachers are mentioned. Vipassana & Jhana: What The Masters Say - by Ven. Visuddhacara http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14.html metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > Dear Nina, > Your description below is very helpful to me in getting some orientation towards > the jhanas and realization of anicca, as well as other points. Thanks very much. > > > Is there any convenient way to read or reprint the page that speaks of > "...the explanation > > on sila, guarding of the doorways, mindfulness, contentment, solitude, the > > five hindrances, the jhanas, and the highest sacrifice: destruction of > > the > > asavas...." > > If it exists on-line, I'd love to read that commentary. > > Thanks, > Robert Ep. 12311 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 0:01am Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n Hi Sukin If there is such a program please let me enrol first :) Thanks for the good piece of article :) kind regards Ken O --- srnsk@a... wrote: > < The Buddha taught about conditions and anatta. What ever dhamma > arises now has already fallen away. Sati would have arisen or not > depends on conditions. K. Sujin often reminds us that the right > results must follow the right cause. To me the conditions that > cause a dhamma to arise are very very complex. I have absolutely > no idea how and when satipatthana can arise, considering the > accumulations it would seem impossible that sati can ever arise in me, > but actually I can never know. According to what I've heard, it would > be panna not me(lobha/ dosa/ moha) which will help condition the > arising of satipatthana. If at this moment the conditions are right for > panna and sati to arise, it would. If not, thinking that I can do > something about it, would in my understanding, not be the work of > panna. > On the other hand, someone might come to the conclusion after > extensive reading of the texts, that what the Buddha taught was a > step-by-step program as conditions for the arising of sati, I > think to some extent that this can condition the false view that > understanding cannot happen now. And an idea that there are a more > ideal time and place for practice.>> > > Dear K.Sukin, > > I really appreciate your message here. A very good reminder. > > Have to run, > > Num 12312 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 0:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2)n Hi Robert K :) :) :) Kind regards Ken O --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- Sukin:. "According to what I've heard, it would > > be panna not me(lobha/ dosa/ moha) which will help condition the > > arising of satipatthana. If at this moment the conditions are right > for > > panna and sati to arise, it would. If not, thinking that I can do > > something about it, would in my understanding, not be the work of > > panna. > > On the other hand, someone might come to the conclusion after > > extensive reading of the texts, that what the Buddha taught was a > > step-by-step program as conditions for the arising of sati, I > > think to some extent that this can condition the false view that > > understanding cannot happen now. And an idea that there are a more > > ideal time and place for practice.>> > > > > > --------- > This is very useful to consider Sukin. There is a strong tendency to > think that understanding is something that should happen in the > future once "I" do something to make it happen. And this belief means > that instead of being aware of the present moment there is a subtle > trying (tanha) that wants conditions to be other than they are right > now. > thanks > robert > 12313 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi Sukin >I told her that coffee usually doesn't affect my sleep, so I went ahead and had two cups. Maybe its not the coffee(the rupa), maybe its because I am curious about if> anyone would reply to my mail, maybe its lobha/ chanda to read the mails from dsg in general. k: same here Kind regards Ken O 12314 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 0:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi Robert Ep > > 4/ I agree with Howard that the suppression of the defilements in > samatha meditation and the jhanas makes the cultivation of peace and insight much more possible, and is a major tool directly prescribed by the Buddha in order to make progress past the inevitable defilements we all carry. k: Where did Buddha says that right concentration is the suppressing of the defilements. If we read the satipatthana or Anapanasati Sutta there is no where it said that such actions suppress defilements. Was this the intention of concentration to enter jhana? Suppression only lead to conventional jhana and not right jhana as described by Buddha. Right concentration is in fact I believe for the ariyan disciples. Anyone could develop high level of concentraion (we could see this in Ripley Believe it Or Not) using mediation to withstand coldness and heat. I believe concentration is developed not in the motive of suppression but in the aim of knowing the present moment, other disturbing thoughts are not being attend to and it is let go. Kind regards Ken O 12315 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 0:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Time Hi Kom > >Kom writes > >In the Buddha's teaching (I believe), nothing is really changed (each > reality has its > >own unchangeable, uncontrollable characteristics), but it is > >replaced by something else that is similar in characteristics. k: this sounds like a permanent stuff not subject to anicca. I find it a bit contridictary to Abhidhamma principles. Kind regards Ken O 12316 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 0:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Time Hi Kom Sorry and forget abt this qn as you have answered it in another email address to Stegan kind regards Ken O --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Kom > > > > >Kom writes > > >In the Buddha's teaching (I believe), nothing is really changed (each > > > reality has its > > >own unchangeable, uncontrollable characteristics), but it is > > >replaced by something else that is similar in characteristics. > > > k: this sounds like a permanent stuff not subject to anicca. I find it > a > bit contridictary to Abhidhamma principles. > > > Kind regards > Ken O > 12317 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Robert Ep > > 4/ I agree with Howard that the suppression of the defilements in > > samatha meditation and the jhanas makes the cultivation of peace and > insight much more possible, and is a major tool directly prescribed by the > Buddha in order to make progress past the inevitable defilements we all > carry. > > k: Where did Buddha says that right concentration is the suppressing of > the defilements. If we read the satipatthana or Anapanasati Sutta there > is no where it said that such actions suppress defilements. Was this the > intention of concentration to enter jhana? Suppression only lead to > conventional jhana and not right jhana as described by Buddha. Right > concentration is in fact I believe for the ariyan disciples. Anyone could > develop high level of concentraion (we could see this in Ripley Believe it > Or Not) using mediation to withstand coldness and heat. I believe > concentration is developed not in the motive of suppression but in the aim > of knowing the present moment, other disturbing thoughts are not being > attend to and it is let go. Dear Kenneth, Hi. I agree that the ideal of the jhanas as part of Right Concentration is to 'burn up' the defilements through the meditative power of the jhanas. I also agree that any form of suppression is not really 'Right Concentration'. In fact I don't think I said that it was, but I can understand how it might seem like I was saying this. If you look at the quote from me that you have copied above, you will not see any reference to 'suppression' being a part of 'Right Concentration'. What I was saying is that one of the effects of the jhanas is that it temporarily suppresses defilements, allowing one to enter a deep meditative state that in some ways mimics the experience of Nibbana. As a practical matter, the jhanas are known to temporarily suppress the defilements so that the practitioner can get an experience of peaceful concentration. This later becomes a 'true' state of the practitioner, but the value of having such an early experience before the defilements have really been surpassed cannot be overemphasized. It is very important, just as a glimpse of insight can stand as a guide for a long time to come, even though enlightenement is a very far way off. Here is part of an interesting talk about the jhanas by Bikkhu Gunaratana: The practice of serenity meditation aims at developing a calm, concentrated, unified mind as a means of experiencing inner peace and as a basis for wisdom. The practice of insight meditation aims at gaining a direct understanding of the real nature of phenomena. Of the two, the development of insight is regarded by Buddhism as the essential key to liberation, the direct antidote to the ignorance underlying bondage and suffering. Whereas serenity meditation is recognized as common to both Buddhist and non-Buddhist contemplative disciplines, insight meditation is held to be the unique discovery of the Buddha and an unparalleled feature of his path. However, because the growth of insight presupposes a certain degree of concentration, and serenity meditation helps to achieve this, the development of serenity also claims an incontestable place in the Buddhist meditative process. Together the two types of meditation work to make the mind a fit instrument for enlightenment. With his mind unified by means of the development of serenity, made sharp and bright by the development of insight, the meditator can proceed unobstructed to reach the end of suffering, Nibbana. Pivotal to both systems of meditation, though belonging inherently to the side of serenity, is a set of meditative attainments called the jhanas. Though translators have offered various renderings of this word, ranging from the feeble "musing" to the misleading "trance" and the ambiguous "meditation," we prefer to leave the word untranslated and to let its meaning emerge from its contextual usages. From these it is clear that the jhanas are states of deep mental unification which result from the centering of the mind upon a single object with such power of attention that a total immersion in the object takes place. The early suttas speak of four jhanas, named simply after their numerical position in the series: the first jhana, the second jhana, the third jhana and the forth jhana. In the suttas the four repeatedly appear each described by a standard formula which we will examine later in detail. The importance of the jhanas in the Buddhist path can readily be gauged from the frequency with which they are mentioned throughout the suttas. The jhanas figure prominently both in the Buddha's own experience and in his exhortation to disciples. In his childhood, while attending an annual ploughing festival, the future Buddha spontaneously entered the first jhana. It was the memory of this childhood incident, many years later after his futile pursuit of austerities, that revealed to him the way to enlightenment during his period of deepest despondency (M.i, 246-47). After taking his seat beneath the Bodhi tree, the Buddha enter the four jhanas immediately before direction his mind to the threefold knowledge that issued in his enlightenment (M.i.247-49). Throughout his active career the four jhanas remained "his heavenly dwelling" (D.iii,220) to which he resorted in order to live happily here and now. His understanding of the corruption, purification and emergence in the jhanas and other meditative attainments is one of the Tathagata's ten powers which enable him to turn the matchless wheel of the Dhamma (M.i,70). Just before his passing away the Buddha entered the jhanas in direct and reverse order, and the passing away itself took place directly from the fourth jhana (D.ii,156). The Buddha is constantly seen in the suttas encouraging his disciples to develop jhana. The four jhanas are invariably included in the complete course of training laid down for disciples. [1] They figure in the training as the discipline of higher consciousness (adhicittasikkha), right concentration (sammasamadhi) of the Noble Eightfold Path, and the faculty and power of concentration (samadhindriya, samadhibala). Though a vehicle of dry insight can be found, indications are that this path is not an easy one, lacking the aid of the powerful serenity available to the practitioner of jhana. The way of the jhana attainer seems by comparison smoother and more pleasurable (A.ii,150-52). The Buddha even refers to the four jhanas figuratively as a kind of Nibbana: he calls them immediately visible Nibbana, factorial Nibbana, Nibbana here and now (A.iv,453-54). To attain the jhanas, the meditator must begin by eliminating the unwholesome mental states obstructing inner collectedness, generally grouped together as the five hindrances (pancanivarana): sensual desire, ill will, sloth and torpor, restlessness and worry and doubt.[2] The mind's absorption on its object is brought about by five opposing mental states -- applied thought, sustained thought, rapture, happiness and one pointedness [3] -- called the jhana factors (jhanangani) because they lift the mind to the level of the first jhana and remain there as its defining components. After reaching the first jhana the ardent meditator can go on to reach the higher jhanas, which is done by eliminating the coarser factors in each jhana. Beyond the four jhanas lies another fourfold set of higher meditative states which deepen still further the element of serenity. These attainments (aruppa), are the base of boundless space, the base of boundless consciousness, the base of nothingness, and the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.[4] In the Pali commentaries these come to be called the four immaterial jhanas (arupajhana), the four preceding states being renamed for the sake of clarity, the four fine-material jhanas (rupajhana). Often the two sets are joined together under the collective title of the eight jhanas or the eight attainments (atthasamapattiyo). The four jhanas and the four immaterial attainments appear initially as mundane states of deep serenity pertaining to the preliminary stage of the Buddhist path, and on this level they help provide the base of concentration needed for wisdom to arise. But the four jhanas again reappear in a later stage in the development of the path, in direct association with liberating wisdom, and they are then designated the supramundane (lokuttara) jhanas. These supramundane jhanas are the levels of concentration pertaining to the four degrees of enlightenment experience called the supramundane paths (magga) and the stages of liberation resulting form them, the four fruits (phala). Finally, even after full liberation is achieved, the mundane jhanas can still remain as attainments available to the fully liberated person, part of his untrammeled contemplative experience. Etymology of Jhana The great Buddhist commentator Buddhaghosa traces the Pali word "jhana" (Skt. dhyana) to two verbal forms. One, the etymologically correct derivation, is the verb jhayati, meaning to think or meditate; the other is a more playful derivation, intended to illuminate its function rather than its verbal source, from the verb jhapeti meaning to burn up. He explains: "It burns up opposing states, thus it is jhana" (Vin.A. i, 116), the purport being that jhana "burns up" or destroys the mental defilements preventing the developing the development of serenity and insight. 12318 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Nina Dear Christine, Thank you for the excellent references. These are too good to bypass, and so I feel that I have been 'trapped' and will have to do a minimum amount of homework, and report back to you on the results. Thanks again. Robert Ep. ============= --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hi RobEp, > > Regarding the Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, if you can't > find it on-line, it is available from Buddhist Publication Society > (delivery takes a while). > http://www.lanka.com/dhamma/bps/bps_main.htm (under Translations from > Pali) > The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship > The Såmaññaphala Sutta and Its Commentaries > Translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi > In reply to a question on the fruits of the monk's life, the Buddha > traces the entire progress of the disciple from the first step of the > path to its culmination in the attainment of Nibbåna. The sutta > and > commentaries together give extensive treatment to such subjects as > the monk's moral precepts, contentment, mindfulness and clear > comprehension, the abandoning of the five hindrances, jhånas, > higher > knowledges, etc. > 1989, 200 pp.; 5.5" x 8.5"; $10.00; BP 212S > > As well as the articles RobertK mentioned re Vipassana/Jhana, there > is another one you may find worth looking at, where the opinions of > five well-known modern teachers are mentioned. > Vipassana & Jhana: What The Masters Say - by Ven. Visuddhacara > http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14.html > > metta, > Christine > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > Dear Nina, > > Your description below is very helpful to me in getting some > orientation towards > > the jhanas and realization of anicca, as well as other points. > Thanks very much. > > > > > > Is there any convenient way to read or reprint the page that > speaks of > > "...the explanation > > > on sila, guarding of the doorways, mindfulness, contentment, > solitude, the > > > five hindrances, the jhanas, and the highest sacrifice: > destruction of > > > the > > > asavas...." > > > > If it exists on-line, I'd love to read that commentary. > > > > Thanks, > > Robert Ep. > > 12319 From: lucy25777 Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Lucy, > > There are only a few alternatives that I employ (Using vinnana as an > example) - 1(a). Search on Google (always exciting (!) e.g. Did you > know there are 929 references if search is made under 'vinnana' and > 72,700 references if search is made under 'consciousness > buddhism'. ...... So choice 1(a) is for those who hope to have a > long life and don't need variety. > Dear Christine Looks like you too suffer from chronic sleep deprivation : ) I tend to "google" late at night and then go on and on aand on ... thus am always late for work. But note: there were only 17 Google entries for "sabhaava", most of them in Vietnamese and none from a Theravada source ... so it's not perfect ! As for Nyanantiloka's dictionary, I've bever yet been able to limit myself to the one word I was looking for initially ! Lucy 12320 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Dear Robert, Perhaps Eric's statement and my agreement with it was a little too glib. I think that everything you say here has merit, and while samatha meditation towards vipassana, and the role of the jhanas as a profound tool towards enlightenment has been emphasized in both the Suttas and by modern Theravadan teachers, I stand corrected that there is indeed a path of 'dry insight' that is a valid path and that is not dependent on samatha and the jhanas. I would not say that I know with any surety that cultivation of jhanas is the correct path for me, or even that I am suited for it. As you and others have pointed out, cultivating the jhanas is extremely difficult, and I am not known for my amazing powers of prolonged concentration. All I can say is that it is part of my 'kamma' to have encountered the description of the jhanas and to be deeply moved by their possibility, to have a natural deep attraction for what I have heard. All I can do is follow the steppingstones as they appear before me and see where they lead. Who knows? This may turn out to be something I needed to hear about but not do. If I look at my personality, I might categorize myself as an 'intellectual type', and maybe 'dry insight' is what I'm most suited for. I won't try to judge this for myself, just see how things unfold. I think it is worthwhile to see what a profound tool the jhanas potentially are, and how samatha may pave a path for vipassana to occur. But I think it would be a mistake, as you point out, to either engage in such a practice blindly, without understanding the aims and goals of such work, or to ignorantly think that there is no other way to proceed. Thanks for your corrections. As you know, I sometimes find out what is real and unreal by prematurely drawing conclusions and getting corrections. I hope that eventually we will be able to have an equally clear resolution of the 'luminous mind' sutta , but I don't hold out any high hopes! Weirdly enough, I was never attracted to samatha at all in the past. I have tended towards insight and understanding, and it is only recently that a sort of door opened up in my thoughts to develop an interest in the idea of calming and pacifying the mind. I think in my case it's a sense of balance in seeing samatha, which requires surrender in order to be developed, as having equal value to the development of insight, which at least *appears* to be a more willful, or self-initiated path. Thanks again. I think the way you put things here is very balanced and helpful. Best, Robert Ep. ========================== --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- > Dear Rob. E. > Thanks for explaining more what you mean. I appreciate your honesty > in saying you haven't experienced jhana. > As has been said before according to the texts there are three broad > paths to enlightenment. That of one who develops mastery of jhana and > uses this as the basis , the one who develops jhana and insight at > the same time and the one who develops insight alone (although at the > moment of experiencing nibbana he has supramundane jhana). > The Netti-pakarana p168 > "Tattha Bhagava tikkhindriyassa samatham upadassati, majjhindriyassa > Bhagava samathavipassanam upadissati, mudindriyassa Bhagava > vipassanam upadassati. > Herein the Blessed one teaches samatha to one of keen faculties; > The blessed one teaches samatha and insight to one of medium > faculties and the blessed one teaches insight [alone] to one of blunt > faculties. > > Thus for the great ones, the wise ones, indeed the path of samatha > preceeding insight can be developed. For the blunt, slow ones it > shows that insight alone is the way, inferior though it is. > The post of Erik's that you say you agree with said: > > .......>>>>>>[quoting a sutta on the jhanas]...fourth jhana: purity > of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure > nor pain. This is called right concentration.' > That these passages should generate such controversy is hard > for me to swallow. Certainly there is no denial of the need for just > this from my Tibetan or Zen or Theravada teachers. On this they > all agree completely. So what gives here in DSG? > So then, to be direct, why is what's stated plainly here such > a problem for some here in DSG? Why? Who's more likely to be on > the mark? The one who actually takes what the Buddha taught > directly and applies it as instructed to the point of gnosis, or > those who argue over whether or not concentration to the degree > SPECIFICALLY taught by the Buddha in everyone's favorite Sutta (Maha > Satipatthana) is necessary? > If I had to lay my bets on what's accurate Dhamma, I'd lay it > on the words reputed to be PLAINLY spoken by the Buddha (how > ambiguous is the section on right concentration--it's obviously > jhana!), <>>>>>>> > _______ > You say > > "In any case, that is the popular notion among some of the 'better' > Theravadan > > teachers. It was, I believe, the teaching of Ajahn Chah, and is > the teaching of > > his disciple, Ajahn Brahmavamso, among others, that the jhanas are > a most > > essential tool for passage into the realm of enlightenment.>>>>>> > _______ > As it has been said there are several paths to nibbana , among them > that of samathayanika - the one who uses jhana as a basis for > insight. > There have been also many quotes from the ancient commentaries > showing that there is also another path called sukkavippasaka (dry > insight worker) where mundane jhana is not attained prior to the > stage of enlightenment (but as as often being said at that moment of > enlightenment there is supramundane jhana). However, I think perhaps > you feel that modern teachers are more reliable than the ancient > commentaries so I did an internet search and came up with two urls > for you to read over by different present teachers. They demonstrate, > I think, that dsg is not the only place where it is thought that > sukkavipassaka is a valid path. I chose short essays so perhaps you > could read them. Note: I certainly am not endorsing all that these > essays say , just the general point about sukkavipassaka. > > One booklet > called 'Questions and Answers' by U Hla Myint Kyaw,Translated by U > Hla Maung even has this in it "Some very thick books of Pa Auk > Sayadaw in English which were sent to Myanmar from Taiwan have been > banned and prohibited from distribution by the Maha Nayaka Sayadaws > of the Myanmar Religious Affairs Department in Kaba Aye, Yangon." > Now this book by Pa Auk is one that emphasises samathayanika (using > jhana as a basis). But it goes against current Burmese orthdoxy of > the mahasi sayadaw system which believes in sukkhavipassaka. It > amazed me that they would ban it but it shows that a fair number of > present Buddhists are reasonably convinced that the Buddha did teach > the sukkavipassaka path (as well as samathayanika). > > Here is a quote from a very popular book by Venerable Gunaratana. > =Mindfulness in Plain English.= > ""One of the most difficult things to learn is that mindfulness > is not dependent on any emotional or mental state. > .......You don't need to move at a snail's pace to be mindful. > You don't even need to be calm. You can be mindful while solving > problems in intensive calculus. You can be mindful in the middle > of a football scrimmage. You can even be mindful in the midst of > a raging fury. Mental and physical activities are no bar to > mindfulness. If you find your mind extremely active, then simply > observe the nature and degree of that activity. It is just a > part of the passing show within.."endquote > > Now for the urls . > http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt3n2p4.html > > http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p6.html > > Finally , I want to say that if you feel that you should follow the > path of samathayanika then I wish you much success. It is, of course, > the very wonderful, most complete way of development, that the great > disciples such as Rahula and Moggalana went by. > Also I think it is great to develop samatha as a practice in itself - > but if one does so it is good to know about the details of the dhamma > as these can help one not to take subtle clinging for sammasamadhi. > best wishes > robert > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > > > > > > > 3/ I do think that insight is possible without jhana. The > question is how far > > can vipassana progress without having experience of the deep peace > of the more > > absorbed meditative states. Another way of asking the question is > whether it is > > possible to achieve deep abiding realization without any passage > through the deep > > samadhi states. I have heard samadhi somewhat disparaged here at > times as a trap > > that may seem kusala while merely suppressing defilements and not > leading to real > > insight, but the question is whether one can reach deep insight > without *true* > > meditative, kusala, absorption, at some point in the career of the > aspirant. > > > > 5/ My own experience of the jhanas, I would say without > hesitation, is zero!! > > What I have experienced is what I consider and understand to be > preliminary stages > > of peacefulness/concentration/absorption at the 'doorway' to the > first and/or > > second jhana. And my experience, for what it's worth, of these > preliminary states > > is that they are deeply peaceful and absorptive, as one might > expect. They also > > seem to give a kind of stillness and clarity that appears to me to > be conducive to > > getting a better look at what is arising in the moment. I know > that my sense of > > this can be challenged. There is no way to prove whether or not I > am experiencing > > what I think I am. But my efforts have been sincere, and lacking > in forcefulness. > > 12321 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi Howard. I think your point is good. Unfortunately, we are not in control in any case of whether we are able to enter the jhanas or not, but we can certainly cultivate 'Right Concentration' both in daily life and in meditation. I have found with some resignation that I am not even in control of how often I have either the discipline or the opportunity to engage in meditation, but this does not stop me from having the intention to cultivate Right Concentration and to make the attempt over an dover again. As we each cultivate Right Concentration in whatever way we have the temperament to do, we will then have a basis for as much peaceful contemplation and insight as we are capable of in this lifetime. Best, Robert Ep. ======== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert (and Robert E) - > > The sutta you quote, Robert, I must admit, is quite persuasive to me > in establishing two forms of concentration, numbers 3 and 4, distinguishable > from that which leads to jhanas, number 1, and which support progress towards > enlightenment. I think they make a good case for the dry-insight approach, > strong but less-than-jhanic concentration is a factor. The only thing that I > might question is what relationship might (or might not) exist between jhanic > concentration and the concentrations # 3 and # 4. This is not dealt with in > this sutta. It *might* be the case that these latter two types of > concentration have jhanas as their base! Elsewhere, of course, the defining > of Right Concentration as the first 4 jhanas is standard. Moreover, the is > ample evidence in the suttas for using the jhanas as a basis for cultivation > of insight and final liberation. Jhanic-level concentration is still good > "old standard", but this sutta you quote certainly *might* imply that it is > not the *only*standard ... or, it might not. > Whatever the case, I would still like to point out the importance of > concentration to the practice. > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 3/31/02 6:00:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, > robertkirkpatrick@r... writes: > > > > > > ------ Dear Rob. Ep., > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > > > 3/ I agree that the Buddha plainly stated that Right > > Concentration consists of > > > the jhanas. I have not heard anyone quote Sutta so far to > > contradict this. > > > > > >___________- > > I quoted this sutta several months back. You probably forgot. Could > > you look at the 4 types of right concentration and see what is said. > > Also you believe that you need jhana before any insight is possible. > > Is that correct? Could you explain your experience with jhana. I ask > > because there seems to be some difference of opinion about what jhana > > is. > > Anguttara Nikaya IV.41 > > Samadhi Sutta > > > > "Monks, these are the four developments of concentration. Which four? > > There is the development of concentration that, when developed & > > pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now. There is the > > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > > the attainment of knowledge & vision. There is the development of > > concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & > > alertness. There is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents. > > > > Number 1:"And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the here & now? > > There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, > > withdrawn from unskillful qualities -- enters & remains in the first > > jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by > > directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought > > & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & > > pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from > > directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading > > of rapture he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically > > sensitive to pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of > > which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a > > pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as > > with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & > > remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, > > neither pleasure nor pain. This is the development of concentration > > that, when developed & pursued, leads to a pleasant abiding in the > > here & now.>>endquote > > Robert: This is the mundane jhanas, the pleasnt abiding here and now. > > They are right concentration but are only right concentration of the > > eightfold path when they are used as the basis fore insight by those > > who take that path. > > > > Number2:"And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision? > > There is the case where a monk attends to the perception of light and > > is resolved on the perception of daytime [at any hour of the day]. > > Day [for him] is the same as night, night is the same as day. By > > means of an awareness open & unhampered, he develops a brightened > > mind. This is the development of concentration that, when developed & > > pursued, leads to the attainment of knowledge & vision. > > Robert: This is a special type of mundane jhana that gives one > > certain powers. "knowledge and vision" here is not of the type that > > is part of the eightfold path. > > > > Number3"And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness? There is the > > case where feelings are known to the monk as they arise, known as > > they persist, known as they subside. Perceptions are known to him as > > they arise, known as they persist, known as they subside. Thoughts > > are known to him as they arise, known as they persist, known as they > > subside. This is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to mindfulness & alertness. > > > > > > Number 4: "And what is the development of concentration that, when > > developed & pursued, leads to the ending of the effluents? There is > > the case where a monk remains focused on arising & falling away with > > reference to the five aggregates for sustenance/clinging: 'Such is > > form, such its origination, such its passing away. Such is feeling, > > such its origination, such its passing away. Such is perception, such > > its origination, such its passing away. Such are fabrications, such > > their origination, such their passing away. Such is consciousness, > > such its origination, such its disappearance.' This is the > > development of concentration that, when developed & pursued, leads to > > the ending of the effluents. > > > > "These are the four developments of concentration. 12322 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Sukin, I don't really think we are in disagreement. My point is so technical, it is almost too nit-picking, but I find it important just in order to make a distinction about what actually arises and exists in consciousness. It is a very small point, but what I am saying is that the concept as something that arises is a real event, and we shouldn't make it more foggy by saying the concept is unreal. We should be more technical and say that the 'object' of the concept is unreal. This indicates that we really do conceptualize, but those conceptualizations are all illusions. So we are able to look at this function of mind clearly, rather than saying it is 'unreal', and we can also see that it posits something which *is* totally unreal -- the concept of a self-existent object. When i say that concept as concept is real, I am making the point that concepts do exist. They are a kind of thought, but they are not real objects, they are thoughts of unrealities. But in a true categorization of the function of mind, we must see that concepts are an actual form of thought that does arise. I think that when others say that concepts are unreal, they are thinking of the 'concept' as the 'object posited', in other words, the concept = table. When I say that the concept is real but it's object is not, I mean that the thought of table is a real thought, but the table in the thought is unreal. These may just be two ways of saying the same thing, but I prefer to separate the act of forming the concept, which is a real event, from the object of the concept which is an illusion. I never think that the concept is real, even at the initial moment of its arising, and then later becomes unreal, so if I seemed to say this, I apologize for being unclear. I think the concept is illusory from beginning to end. Hope this clarifies things, and now I too will go to sleep, according to my wife's instructions. Well, I'm a couple of hours late, but I've never been any good at following orders. Best Regards, Robert Ep. ============== --- sukinderpal wrote: > Dear Rob, > Again tonight I am late in responding, but I hope you are not > reading this at an odd hour. As long as we have not developed eyes > that can see at night, I think we still remain essentially day- > creatures. Night is for the bhavanga cittas. > But let me comment a little on your post; > You said: > > > I also think it's interesting to look at whether concepts truly do > not rise or > > fall. Like all phenomena they cannot be permanent beyond the > moment, they can > > only appear to be so. Therefore it is very interesting to look > into the nature of > > this illusion: That concepts keep re-constituting themselves from > moment to > > moment as if they had not fallen and re-arisen, but in fact they > change at each > > moment and then must be reconstructed like any phenomena. When we > think we are > > seeing the same concept for a period of time, we must really be > seeing a serious > > of concepts which are 'clones' of each other, fashioned in each > other's image in > > order to create the illusion of continuity. There may be real > continuity in the > > information passed from one citta to the next, but the continuity > which makes a > > concept appear to last in duration must be an illusion. > > I wasn't thinking about concepts that seem to last for an extended > time, but was thinking of it in terms a momentary occurance. Before > perhaps it is even acknowledged and recognized. There must be I > think, a seperating out of an identifiable object from the field of > experience. For eg. the taste, not necessarily to the point of > identifiable as sweet or sour, but just as one taste distinct from > another. If it is not just taste as an element but something > experienced by somebody at some location in this physical body, then > the experience must be conceptual. > Let me give you an illustration(a simple minded one) to help express > my position if not to convince you about the correctness of it( even > I have little confidence in my analysis). > Standing at the border where sea meets land, on one side is the sea, > on the other land. We can look it as land bordering sea, or we can > see it as sea bordering land. Or we can say land and sea touching > each other or water on one side and earth on the other. We can just > say left is one thing and right is another. The sense of having a > left side as opposed to a right. All these are, as I think you would > agree, conceptual, mental constructs. I do not deny the use of these > distinctions, for example I wouldn't walk towards te sea expecting > it to support my body as would land. > But even water (or earth) is not real. There can be experiences of it > through the different doorways. There can be visible object, taste, > cohesion etc., all these are rupas and they are real. But the > assemblage formed by the mind based on the experience of those rupas > which we may or may not identify as water, is not real on any level. > > > > > But since we refer to them, and can be > > > > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more > accurate to > > > say > > > > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim > to represent > > > > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are > illusory, but not > > > > non-existent. > > Can't we say that ignorance of reality is the cause for us being > fooled? That not seeing realities as they are we see that which is > not? Being fooled IS the seeing that which is not? > > > I would say that the object the concept contains is unreal, not > the concept as > > concept. I can stand to be corrected on this, but to me it seems > that concept > > exists as an experience, but not as a reality. It is like when I > see a film. The > > content of the film is totally fabricated, those people are just > characters and > > none of the events have actually taken place. But the experience > of seeing a film > > is still an experience. It is real as an experience, but not as a > reality. > > I think I agree with this last part, but I am wondering what you > mean by 'concept as concept is real'. Is it objective or subjective > as you later imply? > > > I would agree with this. A concept can never be anything but > a 'shadow' of what > > is actual. It is like a photograph that takes an impression of > something in the > > 'real world' and turns it into an image which is no longer active > and alive in the > > world. It has been framed and set up as a particular way of > defining or looking > > at a reality, but it itself has been removed from a direct > understanding of > > anything real. > > At first I thought that we were on full agreement, but when you said > that ( this is how I understood you, but I may be wrong) at one time > the concept represented actual realities but became invalid in a > later moment when those realities have actually fallen away, I think > I could ask the question below again. > > > Would you say that > > > sati and panna of the level of satipatthana see the same thing > as concepts? > > Why I asked this is because i believe awarenss and understanding > realities as they are is the function sati of panna. And concept can > never 'be' of the same level as these. In fact a thousand > explanations would not be adquate to represent one moment of > satipatthana(just guessing). > > Did I misunderstand you? Sorry if I have. > Must go to sleep now. > Best wishes, > Sukin. 12323 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:46am Subject: question in abhi dhamma Dear friends, Please forgive me if this question has been discussed before. I have a question in Abidhamma. There are 121 citas totally. the 121 citas are 12 akusal (note here1) 8 kusal 8 kusala vipaka (note here2) 8 kusala kriya 7 ahethuka akusal vipaka 8 ahethuka kusala vipaka (note here3) 3 ahethuka kriya 15 rupavachara jhana 12 arupavachara jhana 40 lookonthara ---------- 121 total ========== (note 1) question: where are the 12 akusala vipaka citas? (note 2) question: in kusala there are 8 kusala vipaka citas (note 2) and 8 ahethuka kusala vipaka (note 3) why not the same for akusala? Thank you very much......... ~meththa ranil 12324 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas Dear Lucy, --- lucy25777 wrote > Looks like you too suffer from chronic sleep deprivation : ) I tend > to "google" late at night and then go on and on aand on ... thus am > always late for work. Sounds like I'm missing out on the google parties:-) (and btw, sukin, if you discourage Rob Ep from posting at very odd hours, we won't hear from him.... I'm just impressed at the clarity from all you sleep-deprived posters;-)) > But note: there were only 17 Google entries for "sabhaava", most of > them in Vietnamese and none from a Theravada source ... so it's not > perfect ! The article you posted was interesting. Maybe I can give a couple more suggestions which may be quicker than learning Vietnamese (though I bet Binh and Alex have some suggestions for this) 1) the Mystery run around: Go to escribe for dsg and key in sabhava....it'll get you many more entries than Google, I promise http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ 2) the shortcut to Nibbana: Go to Useful Posts and run down to sabhava http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts 3)Follow the Rob Ep Spoon-Fed Technique for the above: Sabhava (essence) 4221, 4254, 8045, 8104, 10464 4) The Google Alternative: key in sabhava in the quick, simple, Buddhist search engine on Rob K's website: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > As for Nyanantiloka's dictionary, I've bever yet been able to limit > myself to the one word I was looking for initially ! I agree, it's very helpful and clear, (even if there are some very occasional discrepancies)... Hope to hear from you again after you've followed the sabhava run-around. Sarah ======= 12325 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 2:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) --- Dear Rob, thanks for the nice post which shows your real consideration of these matters. Just one point I want to discuss: In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > . I think in my case it's a sense of balance in seeing samatha, > which requires surrender in order to be developed, as having equal value to the > development of insight, which at least *appears* to be a more willful, or > self-initiated path. >____________ Interesting you say this because fairly recently it seems to me that vipassana is really not a 'willful or self-initiated path' . It seems that way in the beginning (willful) I think ,but really it is not a matter of 'doing' as of 'seeing'. Nothing has to be done for seeing or sound or smell or feeling to appear. These are part of vipaka- vatta (round of result). And you know the following craving or not craving, insight or no insight too are completely uninterested in the sense that they are just phenomena with no self controlling or behind them. I think one of the things that obstructs insight is the idea that there is a self who should be initiating something to make insight occur - but this brings in hidden craving or wrong practice. Anyway just something to think about. best wishes robert 12326 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 3:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Hi Larry & All, I'll add my vote to Christine's. Maybe someone can keep a list of errors to submit to the website owners at the end and meanwhile we'll all study, keeping in mind there are some typos (which we're pretty used to here, I think;-) Nina, I'm sorry, I have no more idea than you how the system works, but I remember being puzzled one time by a difference in my Cetasikas Text and what I copied to use from a website. Now, I understand there can be some errors. Thanks for all your good work, Larry and I've really been appreciating your Vism quotes on nibbana and other points. Some helpful reflections and questions too. Sarah ===================== --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hi Larry, Nina and All, > > The text on Amara's site > http://www.dhammastudy.com/abhid.html also includes the error. > Clearly an original transcribing error, so wouldn't it be worth > sticking with the way Larry is doing things and keeping an eye out > for errors - this way the book on the two sites is being proof-read > as > well, and maybe corrections can be made? > I'm happy to compare what Larry pastes on dsg, to my copy given to me > in BKK, a 1990 edition. 12327 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 3:23am Subject: Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Robert, Thank you for this post. I smiled when you said you secretly hope you won't get any hard questions, not from me at least, maybe in two or three years....something to aim for. :) Apart from being a necessity, I think the study of Paticcasamupadda could be quite fascinating (though difficult), even though my understanding is extremely minimal. It seems to be a lifetime study in itself... I have ordered Ven. Bodhi's "the Great Discourse on Causation" from Adyar in Sydney. Maybe they'll have it in stock, maybe, like last time, it'll take four months to get a book from Sri Lanka. But I feel happy as (miraculously) I found Ven. B's The Great Discourse' on-line in pdf format. It is quite difficult to read on- screen, had to magnify it to 400%, but in the interim until the paper copy arrives, I'll soldier on. http://www.bhavanasociety.org/Readings.htm As well as reading from the other links I've found, I can listen to Ven. Bodhi talking about Paticcasamupadda (and a lot of other things) on: http://www.watthai.net/sounds.htm metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > Dear Christine, > I secretly hope whenever I write about Paticcasamuppada that I won't > get any hard questions as it is so deep. When I was in Bangkok in > January that I spoke at length with Acharn Sujin about it. She > started with avijja paccaya sankhara and that was so difficult. I > said a couple of times 'Ok shall we move to the next link' but she > knew I hadn't properly understood the first... > Anyway .. you asked: > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > >> > > Some questions - the Vipaka vatta - the actual moment of experience > > through the doorways, is this 'result' because even to be born in > the > > human realm with six senses is the fruit of kamma? Or, is each > > moment of experience the 'result' of a particular word or deed in > > another time? Could kamma be that intricate? This is > where 'things > > get blurry' for me (as Sukin would say)..... > ++++++++ > Vipaka vatta (result) connsists of vinnana (consciousness), nama- > rupa, salayatana (six bases), phassa (contact), vedana(feeling), jati > (birth), upapatti-bhava, jara-marana (decay and death). > > Here vinnana (consciousness means both the vipaka cittas (seeing , > hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, ) and also other vipaka > conciousness including the actual rebirth consciousness (and all > bhavanga cittas during this life). We are human because of the kamma > (kamma-vatta)that conditioned the rebirth consciousness . It was a > good kamma, but we cannot know what it was. Now the moments of vipaka > citta through the sense doors (that arise countless times in a day) > can be either from this same kamma that conditioned this life or they > can be from other kammas. We can see this because some of the vipaka > is very unpleasant - it could not come from the same wholesome kamma > that conditioned this human birth. To sum up only one kamma > conditioned this birth but other kammas can produce results during > the course of life. > Another example: animals are born as a result of akusala kamma. Yet > they may experience many moments of pleasant vipaka - for example > some pampered pets - during their life. > Kamma is so intricate that only a Buddha can truly fathom it. > ========= > Each person does > > experience the result of their own past actions, don't they? There > > is no general pool of suffering that, if the right conditions occur > > in someones' life, it attracts the 'result' of "anyones'" past > > action? (I feel a little silly asking that last question - but, if > I > > don't, I'll always wonder.) > > __________ > Yes, it is entirely ones own kamma and result. However, a lifespan > can be cut short by anothers wrong action (murder). There is no > murderer (in the deepest sense) but there is kamma(action) being done > and that action will brings its unpleasant results in the near or > distant future (vipaka -vatta). Thus does the wheel spin. > If someone had an enormous store of good kamma then no killer could > kill them no matter what : the Buddha for instance had so many > attempts on his life but all failed. Most of us though are not so > endowed. Moggallana had great powers but at the third attempt on his > life for a short time they suddenly left him - this was because of an > obstructive kamma done in the past. He was beaten to death. > > I used to think alot on these major moments such as accident and > illness in relation to kamma. But then I started to see more about > the mundane moments - like seeing right now. And that is just as > important as death moment actually. You see cakkhupasada (eyebase) is > also vipaka-vatta and for seeing to occur it must arise , as must the > visible object and the seeing consciousness. They come together as > ayatana (meeting place) for an infinitely short moment - conditioned > by kamma and many other conditions. Many spiritual seekers (I was > one) are looking for special happenings; but if they could see how > miraculous is this moment now. Then they would want to understand it > more. > I do like Ven. Bodhi's "the Great Discourse on causation" his > translation of the mahanidana sutta and commentaries, 140pp. > kind regards > robert > > It is just here where I get confused > > with anatta and kamma, about things like "there is suffering, but > no > > one who suffers", or when reading of a murder that there is "no > gun, > > no bullet, and no-one who kills or is killed"; and yet 'murder' is > > produces severe kammic consequences...... > > > > metta, > > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > > wrote: 12328 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 3:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) Dear Lucy, --- Lucy wrote: > Dear Sarah > > Thanks for expanding on rupa. The direct experience of rupa is still no > clear to me but, as you say, much of this will be explained later. I > should > hold on the questions till the process of perception is explained > further > on in the book... I'm not sure....sometimes better to ask as you go along;-) >Only one niggling question: if rupa can be experienced > directly, why is it always described in terms of qualities or properties > (hardness, cohesion, support, etc., etc.)? These properties are what > citta > experiences, so they are mental images of something, but not necessarily > the raw "something" Like this question. it's good to clarify now. When we talk about hardness, softness, heat, cold and motion/vibration, these ARE rupas (to be directly known). They are the rupas being experienced now through the bodysense. (Cohesion or water is also a rupa but it is not experienced through the body-sense and I'm not sure what support is). Cittas experience namas and rupas, so as you suggest, cittas (body consciousness in this case) experience hardness, softness and so on. They are directly being experienced now, regardless of whether there is any understanding of them. They are not mental images in other words, but there may be mental images following the experience. ...anyway, I'm happy to wait until all this process > is > discussed in more detail in the book - probably in my case this will > also > need a lot of "sitting" ; ) Let me know if I missed your point, Lucy. Please ask rather than wait if it' s not clear and if the "sitting" doesn't doesn't provide the answers;-) (Or in Larry's case, the "lying in bed";-)) > Lucy > > PS: I'm behind in the files because Larry's been racing on ahead, not > knowing that we've just had a spell of Spring weather here (something > one > can't afford to miss when it happens!!!) I think you have to have a word to Num and educate him about precious English Spring days.....see if he can adjust his schedule round them. Anyway, I understand. You could ask for 2 chapters a week in the English winter and half a chapter in summer;-) Sarah ========= 12329 From: egberdina Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 3:40am Subject: Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > __________ > I used to think alot on these major moments such as accident and > illness in relation to kamma. Please let me know what you think abou the following: I wonder whether accidents and illness are objective realities, with pre-determined qualities to be known, or whether it is kamma that determines the way in which one will interpret whatever configuration rupas/namas take at any time. A car running into a tree, the driver dies. The driver does not know the moment of their death. The driver's judgments on their hitting the tree are unknown. The driver does not know they have died. Nobody knows their death. It is the observers kamma that says : This has happened, this is a tree, this is a car, this is a dead person, this is good, or this has happened etc etc, this is bad. It is kamma that turns a configuration of rupas/namas into a request for a determination, and it is kamma that largely determines the determination, if made. And so on and so All the best Herman 12330 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Larry Thanks for this interesting post. --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > "All four paramattha dhammas are > anatta, not self." > > Hi all, … > In XVI note 25: > > It may be noted in passing that the word "anatta" (not self) is never > applied direct to nibbana in the Suttas (and Abhidhamma), or in Bh. > Buddaghosa's commentaries. ....in the Saddhammappakasini: '....[Thirdly] > all dhammas formed and unformed, are void of self because of the > non-existence of any person (puggala) called "self (atta)".' > endquote > > My take on this is that the Buddha's usual reasons for anatta are > impermanence and no control which obviously wouldn't apply to nibbana. > Taking a cue from madhyamaka (mahayana philosophy) I would say the above > quotes point to the fact that a self is not found when a seeming-self > (feeling for example) is rigorously analyzed. More simply, a person is > not found. Nibbana is obviously not a person, neither is a feeling. I am just wondering if there could be another explanation for the fact that 'the word "anatta" (not self) is never applied direct to nibbana in the Suttas'. Nibbana itself (as distinct from someone's concept of nibbana) cannot be taken as self; it is not among the upadana-khandha, the khandhas that are object of clinging. In which case, there would be no need for it to be directly declared as being 'not-self'. Of course, nibbana would nonetheless be included in any reference to all dhammas being not-self. Jon 12331 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 5:57am Subject: Re: anatta and kamma(correction) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "egberdina" wrote: > Dear Robert, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > wrote: > > __________ > > I used to think alot on these major moments such as accident and > > illness in relation to kamma. > > Please let me know what you think abou the following: > > I wonder whether accidents and illness are objective realities, with > pre-determined qualities to be known, or whether it is kamma that > determines the way in which one will interpret whatever configuration > rupas/namas take at any time. > > A car running into a tree, the driver dies. The driver does not know > the moment of their death. The driver's judgments on their hitting > the tree are unknown. The driver does not know they have died. Nobody > knows their death. It is the observers kamma that says : This has > happened, this is a tree, this is a car, this is a dead person, this > is good, or this has happened etc etc, this is bad. It is kamma that > turns a configuration of rupas/namas into a request for a > determination, and it is kamma that largely determines the > determination, if made. > > And so on and so > > All the best > > > Herman ______________ Dear Herman, I think I see what you mean. And it is true that when we think about someone who died etc we make judgements and speculations. As Buddhists we interpret: "oh, that was because of kamma", and that thinking is conditioned by our present beliefs - and these may be right or wrong. So what we can really know is the present moment and perhaps come to see a little of how nama and rupa is conditioned now. That means any inferences we make about death and the kamma of others is more grounded in true insight. By this I mean the inferences come from realising that this moment is like last moment and the moment before that -infinitely regressing- and so the future will be the same. It is inference but it is clearer than just speculation. I don't know if this is to the point - best wishes robert 12332 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Nina Hi, Christine and Rob - In a message dated 4/1/02 2:59:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Hi RobEp, > > Regarding the Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, if you can't > find it on-line, it is available from Buddhist Publication Society > (delivery takes a while). > http://www.lanka.com/dhamma/bps/bps_main.htm (under Translations from > Pali) > The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship > The Såmaññaphala Sutta and Its Commentaries > Translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi > In reply to a question on the fruits of the monk's life, the Buddha > traces the entire progress of the disciple from the first step of the > path to its culmination in the attainment of Nibbåna. The sutta > and > commentaries together give extensive treatment to such subjects as > the monk's moral precepts, contentment, mindfulness and clear > comprehension, the abandoning of the five hindrances, jhånas, > higher > knowledges, etc. > 1989, 200 pp.; 5.5" x 8.5"; $10.00; BP 212S > > As well as the articles RobertK mentioned re Vipassana/Jhana, there > is another one you may find worth looking at, where the opinions of > five well-known modern teachers are mentioned. > Vipassana & Jhana: What The Masters Say - by Ven. Visuddhacara > http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14.html > > metta, > Christine > > ============================ Also, there is an entire book by Ayya Khema that is an extended commentary on that sutta. The book, by Shambala, is entitled VISIBLE HERE AND NOW. It is worthwhile, in my opinion, as are all her writings. 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) 12333 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 1:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi, Robert - I think that there is a strong possibility that, as Robert K thinks, the Samadhi Sutta does make a case for dry-insight meditation. Frankly, I hope that is so. While I do think that the use of the jhanas as a base for the cultivation of insight is the very best way to go, and while I have a "touch of jhana" in my meditative history, I am miles away from being in a position to use the jhanas as a base for mindfulness and investigation, and, so, the possibility of successfully proceeding with less than jhanic-level concentration is quite encouraging to me. With metta, Howard In a message dated 4/1/02 4:36:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Hi Howard. > I think your point is good. Unfortunately, we are not in control in any > case of > whether we are able to enter the jhanas or not, but we can certainly > cultivate > 'Right Concentration' both in daily life and in meditation. I have found > with > some resignation that I am not even in control of how often I have either > the > discipline or the opportunity to engage in meditation, but this does not > stop me > from having the intention to cultivate Right Concentration and to make the > attempt > over an dover again. As we each cultivate Right Concentration in whatever > way we > have the temperament to do, we will then have a basis for as much peaceful > contemplation and insight as we are capable of in this lifetime. > > Best, > Robert Ep. > /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) 12334 From: Lucy Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 7:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas (sabhava) ----- From: "Sarah" > The article you posted was interesting. Maybe I can give a couple more > suggestions which may be quicker than learning Vietnamese (though I bet > Binh and Alex have some suggestions for this) > > 1) the Mystery run around: > Go to escribe for dsg and key in sabhava....it'll get you many more > entries than Google, I promise > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ > > 2) the shortcut to Nibbana: > Go to Useful Posts and run down to sabhava > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > 3)Follow the Rob Ep Spoon-Fed Technique for the above: > Sabhava (essence) > > 4221, 4254, 8045, 8104, 10464 > > 4) The Google Alternative: > key in sabhava in the quick, simple, Buddhist search engine on Rob K's > website: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/ > Thanks Sarah, I'd forgotten about the dsg archives. Sure enough, another source of distractions for the insomniac : ) I spent hours reading (bank holiday today, and by definition:WET). On sabhava the score is DSG archives 200+ Google 17 (actually, gave up on the score count for the "mystery run-around" in the archive)...It didn't come up with a FINAL answer (he-he-he), only a lot more interesting questions and points for reflection. Like: how to distinguish sabhava from lakkana ? Is there any example anywhere of the sabhava for any dhamma? To be consistent, sabhava (leaving nibbana aside) has to be causal/conditioned, then how can it be a dhamma's own-being? Or is it that sabhava = the causal/conditioned nature...which would be like saying that sabhava is sunyata...which is where my questions probably started from.... : ) Lucy 12335 From: Lucy Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 8:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) From: "Sarah" > >Only one niggling question: if rupa can be experienced > > directly, why is it always described in terms of qualities or properties > > (hardness, cohesion, support, etc., etc.)? These properties are what > > citta > > experiences, so they are mental images of something, but not necessarily > > the raw "something" > > Like this question. it's good to clarify now. When we talk about hardness, > softness, heat, cold and motion/vibration, these ARE rupas (to be directly > known). They are the rupas being experienced now through the bodysense. > (Cohesion or water is also a rupa but it is not experienced through the > body-sense Aaaaaah! ...Actually, I think it was starting to appear that way to me after much simmering at the back of my brain...though there is an immediate "thought-interpretation" every time - so the "rupa" and the "interpretation" mingle. But then come MORE questions: what happens to rupa when it isn't being experienced, is it there or isn't it ? does it disappear together with the citta? (or after 17+ citta to be precise) --- what is actually "matter" in the sense of the stuff out there made out of atoms etc.? (of course, in terms of modern physics that "stuff" out there is just as illusory !) (and probably quite irrelevant to "training" / dhamma study) > and I'm not sure what support is). > It's one of the functions of the wind/air element. At least it was in a manual of meditation I read, where it mentioned the spine as being supported by the wind element --- since then, I feel like an inflatable doll every time I sit ! > Cittas experience namas and rupas, so as you suggest, cittas (body > consciousness in this case) experience hardness, softness and so on. They > are directly being experienced now, regardless of whether there is any > understanding of them. They are not mental images in other words, but > there may be mental images following the experience. > Yup. I can "work" with this. Thanks! Lucy 12336 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 8:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL errors in text op 01-04-2002 03:20 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > > Nina, thank you for pointing out these errors. I have been copying the > text from here http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html which I believe is > Robert K's web site (not sure). The date at the bottom of the chapters > is Dec. 19, 2000. > > ADL group, my internet hookup cannot download an adobe acrobat to read > pdf files from the Zolag web site so someone else will have to post the > chapters or we will have to forget about doing this and just discuss the > chapter in general without taking it in any particular order. Either way > is fine with me. Sarah wanted to post chapters to keep lurkers up to > date. So you 5 (Sarah, Christine, Lucy, Azita, Num) will have to decide > what to do. > > I can get by using the version I have been posting. If there are errors > in a quotation I may make, feel free to point them out. > Dear Larry, it is fine the way you are doing, and if possible we can correct errors here, and tell Robert K and Amara about them. They may also be on Alan's web. I can check with him. Christine mentioned a 1990 edition, and this was in English adapted to the Thai translation. Over all it is O.K. but I did not always agree with the text, here and there too much adapted to Thai language. In THailand they wanted to match a page of Thai with a page of English. So I made another edition which is the one Alan printed in 1997. Also that one has a printing error in Ch 20, in the graphics, planes of existence. Usually, errors are minor. Only tiny cetasikas was a bit strange to me. And in my new edition I preferred for nibbana: unconditioned dhamma (asankhata dhamma), and here I added a foornote. Asankhata is used more often than visankhara. I have more footnotes in this ed. When I have time I could add them here. Nina. 12337 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:45am Subject: RE: [dsg] Time Dear Ken O, Thanks for this consideration and letting me know! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn@y...] > Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 12:39 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] Time > > > Hi Kom > > Sorry and forget abt this qn as you have answered it in another email > address to Stegan > > kind regards > Ken O > 12338 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 11:17am Subject: RE: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment (Sarah, Kom) Dear Rob E, Now that you have got my attention ;-). I will give "short" opinion (not answers!) to the questions you raised: > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:epsteinrob@Y...] > Ha ha, > My apologies to Kom too! > Okay, let me cogitate for a moment..... > > I am interested in the Abhidhamma view of meditation as a means > to enter jhanas; > the possibility of realizing Nibbana without experienceing the > jhanas, This is, of course, a long-time controversial point on DSG and in the Buddhist community. The only way for us to really resolve this is obviously: 1) Believe in the opinion of others 2) Study the texts and commentaries and see what they say and make judgement for ourselves. I personally believe that it is possible to reach magga without practicing Jhana. Note that it is said that the strength of samma-samathi at magga (even without the priori attainment of jhana states), when nibbana is experienced, is equivalent to that of the jhana states. > whether > samatha is closely related to Nibbana by any characteristics; Answering in one way, nothing can be close to nibbana. We can describe jhana states by words, but no words can truly describes nibbana. This is because words are commonly used to explain conditioned realities, which we all are used to, but no words can be used to describe nibbana, an unconditioned reality. Answering in another way, if we realize that samatha (even at the everyday life level, not at the jhana level) is peaceful, we can appreciate/speculate how truly peaceful nibbana would be. > whether samatha can > be cultivated by means other than meditation; whether samatha is Jhana cannot be reached any other way but through sitting meditations. However, samatha can be developed in daily life anywhere, anytime, and any postures. Whenever there is kusala, there is samatha. When there is samatha, samma-samathi (at the samatha level, and not vipassana) arises. If we realize what samatha is, know the conditions of which it arises, then we can develop it further. Jhana is such also. It is impossible to develop jhana unless we deeply understand the differences between kusala (samatha) and akusala, knows the way (which is different for each person) which these samatha states arises, and knows the way of which even more refined states of samatha arises. > a prerequisite in > any way to the development of vipassana, sati and panna; The buddha said any samatha (kusala states) supports the realization of nibbana. Magga cannot be reached unless both vipassana, and samatha (specifically, the 10 perfections) are developed. Jhana is another story (Q 1). > whether > one can achieve > insight, sati and panna through contemplation of the dhamma alone > in conjunction > with discernment of the moment in everyday life, whether deep If you notice, some of the people here advocates something that goes further than that. They say, without listening to the Buddha's words, and deeply understands what he said (by further contemplations), it is impossible for higher levels of panna (like satipatthana and vipassana) to arise. Listening and contemplation is a *pre-requisite* to the development of satipathana and vipassana. > samadhi states must > be passed through as part of the path to Nibbana, and if so, whether these > samadhis can be cultivated by means other than meditation. If one understands what samatha is, and knows the conditions of which the samatha arises, then one knows how to develop it further to a higher degree. The most important point is the development of panna. One cannot reach the path without panna; however, samatha is *automatic* when panna arises. When panna arises often in daily life, samma-samathi follows automatically. The more panna you have, the more peaceful your life truly is, but only magga can make your life truly peaceful, as some of the non-peaceful states are forever eliminated. > > I realize this is quite an extensive list, but just wanted to get > my jhana cards > on the table. I will be very content to have references to one > or two of these at > a time. > Sorry for not being a reference person! I always truly appreciate the patience of other members who posted extensive references to DSG. It really shows metta, patience, and often wisdom of all these members. kom 12339 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL errors in text Dear Larry, Nina and ADL group and everuone; I have the 1989 ADL Eng.-Thai edition. I looked it up the word "tiny" is "fifty" in the book. The khandhavimutti is the same in both places. Larry I sent the ADL in word2000 version to you this morning. Sorry, you cannot have any more excuses: ) : ) hehehe. ; ) I also found some errors in Cetasikas on dhammastudy website and told K.Amara. She said that because a scanner scanned it in so at times there could be some errors in transferring the writing format into computer lformat. I agree that errors are minor and it can help us somewhat alert and attentive of what we are reading. There are couples of errors in Thai tipitaka as well. Appreciate all the hard and tedious work by the authors, translators, proofreaders, webmasters and everyone who give me a chance to glimpse those texts. Anumodana. Num 12340 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:50am Subject: vimutti and vimutta Dear Nina and everyone: << Moreover, khandha vimutta is more correct, because vimutti is freedom. The adjective is vimutta.>> Hmm, I am just curious about this, mainly because my Pali is very limited and I have never heard the word vimutta before. So I hope you do not mind me trying to learn some Pali along on dsg ;). I do not know how to change verb or noun into adjective in Pali. Here is what I got from Ven. Narada Thera's "Elementary Pali" : ---------------------------------------------------- " Vi-" is a prefix (upasagga) = -apart, separate, not, free from, special, around, clear, different, opposed to; " -ti " is affixed (kitaka) to roots to form feminine abstract noun. Muca + ti = mutti : release Vimutti : perfect release --------------------------------------------------- Vimutti (PTS Pali-Eng. Dict. online, p. 632) (f.) [fr. vimuccati] release, deliverance, emancipation. -------------------------------------------------- I also looked up the word "vimut, vimutti and mutti" in my tipitaka, Vism., AbMS., Milindapanha and a Pali-Thai dictionary by Ven. Pradhammapitaka. They are in my PC. The followings are what I have found. ---------------------------------------------- From Pratipitaka: -Vimuttisukha: bliss by nibbana. -Vimuttikhandha: dhammas that lead to vimutti. -5 Vimuttayatana: temperament of attaining nibbana << sanggiti-sutta, Dhiganikaya>>. -Nanadhimuttikannana: the 5th/10 Buddha's powers: knowing different natures and temperaments of beings. -Anuttaravimutti: a release that nothing else is better, nibbana. -Adhivimutti -Ariyavimutti: the great vimutti. -Vijjavimutti: a wisdom that leads to vimutti. -Vimuttanuttariya -Sadhavimutti -Miccavimutti/Sammavimutti -Cetovimutti/Upatopagavimutti: being calm by samadhi: this pair refers to the arahant who attains nibbana by both jhana and magga (upato: two, paga: compartment). -Pannavimutti: this means for the arahant who attains nibbana only by nnana (wisdom), <>. ------------------------------------------ From Vism. And AbMS: -Sankaravimutti: nibbana. -Khandhavimutti: nibbana. -Dvaravimutti, -Vithivimutti/-Vithimuttacitta: this refers to patisandhi and cuti moments. -Kalavimutti/kalavimutta: this refers to nibbana and pannatti. I do not know why at times kalavimutti is used and at times kalavimutta is used! -Saccavimutti: maggacittas and the accompanied cetasikas. -5 Pahana or 5 Vimutti: Tadangavimutti (sila) Vinakkhammavimutti(samadhi) Samucchetavimutti(magga) Patipassatdhivimutti (pala) Nissaranavimutti(nibbana) -Vimuttirasa: the flavor or the taste of nibbana <>. -Vimuttinnana: vipassanannana that has nibbana as it object. -Vimuttinnanadassana: the knowledge in vipassanannana, which has nibbana as it object, means for arahatapala. -Vimuttikatha: a speech that leads to vimutti. -------------------------------------- This is a good review for me. Hope the Pali words do not become an unpleasant object to anyone ; ) :) Feed back and correction are appreciated. Best wishes, Num 12341 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 5:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Hi Jon, I agree, I am sure there are innumerable reasons why nibbana is not self but I wanted to see something from tipitaka or commentary. I have a notion that the way of reasoning found in Vsm concerning not self (no doer of deeds for example) is proto-madhyamaka eventhough it comes about 2 or 3 hundred years after Nagarjuna. Bh Buddhaghosa prided himself on not expressing his own views and the Great Monastery was strictly traditional but perhaps the Sinhalese commentaries he was working with (which would have been roughly contemporary with Nj.) related new ways of reasoning which were 'in the air', so to speak. Wherever it came from, I would say this is a new way of looking at things. Also, I'm interested in this question (is nibbana not self) because I have studied vedanta a little and I think someone could make a reasonable argument that the vedanta *experience* of Self is the same as nibbana. They are both concerned with exposing the fallacy of a conventional self and even have the same, or a very similar, stepping stone from here to there, sati in buddhism and witness consciousness in vedanta. I had better stop there. This is way off topic; suffice it to say, interesting papanca. Larry ---------------- Jon wrote: I am just wondering if there could be another explanation for the fact that 'the word "anatta" (not self) is never applied direct to nibbana in the Suttas'. Nibbana itself (as distinct from someone's concept of nibbana) cannot be taken as self; it is not among the upadana-khandha, the khandhas that are object of clinging. In which case, there would be no need for it to be directly declared as being 'not-self'. Of course, nibbana would nonetheless be included in any reference to all dhammas being not-self. Jon 12342 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 5:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas (sabhava) Hi Lucy, my own opinon (which is useless) is that sabhava refers to basic element of experience and is more or less synonymous with paramattha dhamma. Anything can be infinitely divided analytically but there are probably limits to experience. Of course some of this stuff (like bhavanga citta) was only experienced by the Buddha and maybe a few arahats. Larry 12343 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 6:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL errors in text Thanks Nina, I'm really glad these errors aren't going to bother you too much. Actually "tiny cetasikas" made sense to me; I thought it meant minor as compared to sanna and vedana. Larry 12344 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 8:02pm Subject: ADL ch. 2 (7-11) from: http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html a corrected printing can be found at: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Abhidhamma In Daily Life chapter 2 paragraphs 7-11 7. The 'visuddhimagga' (XX,96) explains about the arising and falling away of nama and rupa: There is no heap or store of unarisen nama-rupa (existing) prior to its arising. When it arises it does not come from any heap or store; and when it ceases. it does not go in any direction. There is nowhere any depositor in the way of a heap or store or hoard of what has ceased. But just as there is no store, prior to its arising, of the sound that arises when a lute is played, nor does it come from any store when it arises, nor does it go in any direction when it ceases, nor does it persist as a store when it has ceased, but on the contrary, not having been, it is brought into being owing to the lute, the lute's neck, and the man's appropriate effort, and having been, it vanishes - - so too all material and immaterial states (rupa and nama), not having been, are brought into being, having been, they vanish. 8. The khandhas are real; we can experience them. We experience Rupakkhandha when, for example, we feel hardness. It does not stay; it arises and falls away. Not only rupas of the body, but the other physical phenomena are rupakkhandha as well. For example, sound is rupakkhandha; it arises and falls away, it is impermanent. 9. Vedanakkhandha (feeling) is real; we can experience feelings. Vedanakkhandha comprises all kinds of feeling. Feeling can be classified in different ways. Sometimes feelings are classified as threefold: pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling, neutral feeling. 10. Sometimes they are classified as fivefold: pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and indifferent feeling, bodily pleasant feeling, bodily painful feeling. 11. Bodily feeling is feeling which has body-sense, the rupa which has the capacity to receive bodily impressions, as condition. The feeling itself is nama, but it has rupa (body-sense) as condition. When an object contacts the body-sense, the feeling is either painful or pleasant; there is no indifferent bodily feeling. When the bodily feeling is unpleasant it is akusala vipaka (the result of an unwholesome deed), and when the bodily feeling is pleasant it is kusala vipaka (the result of a wholesome deed). 12345 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 8:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (7-11) Greetings dsg, I'm not understanding akusala citta and its vipakka. It seems like we are switching from ethics to mere feelings. If an action (kamma) motivated by attachment (akusala citta - lobha) results in (conditions) a citta (vipaka) (which is always accompanied by a feeling), why does that feeling have to be unpleasant? It would seem that many actions motivated by attachment result in pleasant feeling. Conversly, why does a pleasant feeling vipaka signify kusala (virtuous) motivation.? thanks, Larry ----------------------- "11. Bodily feeling is feeling which has body-sense, the rupa which has the capacity to receive bodily impressions, as condition. The feeling itself is nama, but it has rupa (body-sense) as condition. When an object contacts the body-sense, the feeling is either painful or pleasant; there is no indifferent bodily feeling. When the bodily feeling is unpleasant it is akusala vipaka (the result of an unwholesome deed), and when the bodily feeling is pleasant it is kusala vipaka (the result of a wholesome deed)." 12346 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 9:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Doubt Dear Ken O, Nina and the *Doubt* study group, Thanks for your comments and interest, Ken O and always glad to see you ‘keeping an eye’ on us;-) --- Kenneth Ong wrote: > >> k: Sarah, thanks for the definition. When Buddha speaks about kalama > sutta, to me it is use in a conventional sense. He knew that humans are > always bound by traditions and culture. Hence there is a need to > protect > the dhamma from being affected by such inherent problem. .......... Let me add a few points: 1.From Nina’s post earlier (many thanks, Nina), it seems the Pali words used for doubt are kankhaa and vicikicchaa. She mentioned that in the commentary to the Sutta (Kesaputtiya/Kalama Sutta), it is clear in this context that they are synonyms. ..... 2. Vicikiccha, from all definitions I’ve read, always refers to doubts about realities, not to conventional doubts. ..... 3. When the Buddha uses conventional language (as he does in this sutta), he is still talking about and referring to realities and the development of understanding. For example, he is encouraging the listeners to understand and have confidence in the difference between kusala and akusala states. ..... 4.In the dictionary entry for kankhaa which Christine posted, Nyantiloka suggests kankha may in some contexts refer to intellectual (conventional) doubt too and that it isn’t necessarily unwholesome or ‘discouraged’. I had seen this entry before I wrote, but as there weren’t any references given to the latter, I hesitated to use it. ..... 5. Subsequently, I followed references to a few other uses of kankha in suttas, (usually used together with viccikiccha as here ), specifically to 3 others in AN as this is where this sutta comes from. Two of them refer to doubts about the Teachings/paramattha dhammas: “It may be, however, monks, that some of you has doubt or misgiving as to the Buddha, Dhamma or Order or the Way or the Practice.”AN ii,79 and “...If anyone has a doubt or perplexity, then what is the use of his questioning and my explaining , when here face to face with us is the Teacher...”ANii,160 The third one uses kiccha in more of a conventional sense initially, but only by way of a an analogy for doubt about the Truth: “It is just as if a man skilled in the sound of conches, while going along the highroad, should her the sound of a conch. He would have no doubt or uncertainty as to whether it was the sound of a conch or not, but would just conclude that it was so. In the same way, monks, a monk masters Dhamma.”ANii,185 ********** (Incidentally, the latter quote is from a very interesting Sutta “Heard with the Ear’ (PTS trans) which discusses the various advantages from ‘frequent verbal practice of teachings heard with the ear, from considering them in the mind, from thoroughly penetrating them by view” AN, Bk of 4s, the Great Chapter. Details another time;-)) ********** So, in conclusion here, I haven’t found any references to any use of kankha that are not ‘discouraged’ or are considered skilful and would be interested to see them. ..... 6. In Dhammasangani (PTS trans), the first book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, there is a very long footnote on vicikiccha and kankha on p106.for those who have the text. Far too much to mention here.Again it stresses that doubt is contrary to saddha (confidence). It mentions: “kanka, however, is not one of any important category of ethical tems, as is vicikiccha” and often “when the term recurs (Dsg 1004), Buddhagosa refers it to kiccho--to “the fatigue incurred through inability to come to a decision”. The refs referred to at 1004 are to ‘perplexity’(kanka) about the Teachings, including “..as to whether there be an assignable cause of states causally determined- it is this kind of doubt, this working of doubt, this dubiety, puzzlement, perplexity, distraction, standing at cross-roads; collapse, uncertainty of grasp; evasion, hesitation, in capacity of grasping thoroughly, stiffness in mind, mental sacrifying, that is called perplexity.” ********** I’m still hoping to see a breakdown in the Pali translation for the lines from the Sutta Christine quoted before, but without these, I have to continue to question the suggested translation that the Kalamas were being encouraged to *doubt* rather than it being natural that they would still *doubt* what they hear. Sarah ============== 12347 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:11pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Formal sitting meditation/Enlightenment (Sarah, Kom) Dear Kom, Thank you so much for your thoughts! I really appreciate it. It adds to my perspective on these issues and sort of whets my appetite for all the things you mentioned: study of Dhamma, cultivation of samatha through understanding it better and thus cultivating correctly; understanding of kusala states; deep study of the Buddha's teachings; cultivation of samatha/vipassana through various means -- if only my temperament and circumstances were such that I could dive into all of the above with great devotion of time; but I will have to wait until arising circumstances and kamma conspire to allow me more of a strong focus. Until then, I continue to investigate as I can, and cultivate as I can. I will digest your words for a while, and then hopefully have some more specific things to say back on your good points. Thanks again! Robert Ep. ====== --- Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Rob E, > > Now that you have got my attention ;-). I will give "short" opinion (not > answers!) to the questions you raised: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:epsteinrob@Y...] > > > Ha ha, > > My apologies to Kom too! > > Okay, let me cogitate for a moment..... > > > > I am interested in the Abhidhamma view of meditation as a means > > to enter jhanas; > > the possibility of realizing Nibbana without experienceing the > > jhanas, > > This is, of course, a long-time controversial point on DSG and in the > Buddhist community. The only way for us to really resolve this is > obviously: > 1) Believe in the opinion of others > 2) Study the texts and commentaries and see what they say and make judgement > for ourselves. > > I personally believe that it is possible to reach magga without practicing > Jhana. Note that it is said that the strength of samma-samathi at magga > (even without the priori attainment of jhana states), when nibbana is > experienced, is equivalent to that of the jhana states. > > > whether > > samatha is closely related to Nibbana by any characteristics; > > Answering in one way, nothing can be close to nibbana. We can describe > jhana states by words, but no words can truly describes nibbana. This is > because words are commonly used to explain conditioned realities, which we > all are used to, but no words can be used to describe nibbana, an > unconditioned reality. > > Answering in another way, if we realize that samatha (even at the everyday > life level, not at the jhana level) is peaceful, we can appreciate/speculate > how truly peaceful nibbana would be. > > > whether samatha can > > be cultivated by means other than meditation; whether samatha is > > Jhana cannot be reached any other way but through sitting meditations. > However, samatha can be developed in daily life anywhere, anytime, and any > postures. Whenever there is kusala, there is samatha. When there is > samatha, samma-samathi (at the samatha level, and not vipassana) arises. If > we realize what samatha is, know the conditions of which it arises, then we > can develop it further. Jhana is such also. It is impossible to develop > jhana unless we deeply understand the differences between kusala (samatha) > and akusala, knows the way (which is different for each person) which these > samatha states arises, and knows the way of which even more refined states > of samatha arises. > > > a prerequisite in > > any way to the development of vipassana, sati and panna; > > The buddha said any samatha (kusala states) supports the realization of > nibbana. Magga cannot be reached unless both vipassana, and samatha > (specifically, the 10 perfections) are developed. Jhana is another story (Q > 1). > > > > whether > > one can achieve > > insight, sati and panna through contemplation of the dhamma alone > > in conjunction > > with discernment of the moment in everyday life, whether deep > > If you notice, some of the people here advocates something that goes further > than that. They say, without listening to the Buddha's words, and deeply > understands what he said (by further contemplations), it is impossible for > higher levels of panna (like satipatthana and vipassana) to arise. > Listening and contemplation is a *pre-requisite* to the development of > satipathana and vipassana. > > > samadhi states must > > be passed through as part of the path to Nibbana, and if so, whether these > > samadhis can be cultivated by means other than meditation. > > If one understands what samatha is, and knows the conditions of which the > samatha arises, then one knows how to develop it further to a higher degree. > The most important point is the development of panna. One cannot reach the > path without panna; however, samatha is *automatic* when panna arises. When > panna arises often in daily life, samma-samathi follows automatically. The > more panna you have, the more peaceful your life truly is, but only magga > can make your life truly peaceful, as some of the non-peaceful states are > forever eliminated. > > > > > I realize this is quite an extensive list, but just wanted to get > > my jhana cards > > on the table. I will be very content to have references to one > > or two of these at > > a time. > > > > Sorry for not being a reference person! I always truly appreciate the > patience of other members who posted extensive references to DSG. It really > shows metta, patience, and often wisdom of all these members. > > kom 12348 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi Howard! Nice to be talking to you again. I feel pretty much as you do about this. I've had what I consider and hope to be some spontaneous 'insight' experiences, and some pretty intense altered states which I think gave me some perspective into what may be some clues as to what may be on some aspects of the path, but in truth, not having had a reliable teacher at those times who could tell me the status of these things, it is somewhat speculative. In any case, these experiences don't last, and whatever impact they have is absorbed into one's general state, which again, is difficult to assess without being part of a lineage. I still don't know what my lineage is! Hopefully one day I'll find out!! I have a feeling, especially having had such a strong reaction to hearing about the jhanas -- strange also that I've been around as long as I have without really hearing much about them -- that if the time were right and I had the right conditions, I might be able to cultivate jhana. But that is a fantasy, since that is really not the case in my life. I have a family, I have a business that takes a lot of work, and I have a three-year old, whom I devote an awful lot of time to taking care of. This is obviously my 'path' right now, and I think I have my priorities in the right place. I could do as some others do, and put my child into perpetual daycare in order to spend more time on my own spiritual pursuits, but this would not only seem selfish to me, but would break my over-sensitive heart. So I am more than happy to pay more attention to her and her budding process in life. Meanwhile, like yourself, I hope that my limited meditation schedule and my constant preoccupation with the Buddhist vision of reality will yield its own fruit in my path. And that this 'dry' involvement with scriptures and contemplation of realities will be fruitful. Given a growing sense that I am getting increasing familiarity with what Buddhism is really about as I proceed, I have some hope that this is the case. In any case, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Robert Ep. ========== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > I think that there is a strong possibility that, as Robert K thinks, > the Samadhi Sutta does make a case for dry-insight meditation. Frankly, I > hope that is so. While I do think that the use of the jhanas as a base for > the cultivation of insight is the very best way to go, and while I have a > "touch of jhana" in my meditative history, I am miles away from being in a > position to use the jhanas as a base for mindfulness and investigation, and, > so, the possibility of successfully proceeding with less than jhanic-level > concentration is quite encouraging to me. > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 4/1/02 4:36:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > Hi Howard. > > I think your point is good. Unfortunately, we are not in control in any > > case of > > whether we are able to enter the jhanas or not, but we can certainly > > cultivate > > 'Right Concentration' both in daily life and in meditation. I have found > > with > > some resignation that I am not even in control of how often I have either > > the > > discipline or the opportunity to engage in meditation, but this does not > > stop me > > from having the intention to cultivate Right Concentration and to make the > > attempt > > over an dover again. As we each cultivate Right Concentration in whatever > > way we > > have the temperament to do, we will then have a basis for as much peaceful > > contemplation and insight as we are capable of in this lifetime. > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > 12349 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Noble Eightfold Path and Right Concentration - Nina thanks, Howard! : ] robert --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Christine and Rob - > > In a message dated 4/1/02 2:59:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, > cforsyth@v... writes: > > > > Hi RobEp, > > > > Regarding the Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship, if you can't > > find it on-line, it is available from Buddhist Publication Society > > (delivery takes a while). > > http://www.lanka.com/dhamma/bps/bps_main.htm (under Translations from > > Pali) > > The Discourse on the Fruits of Recluseship > > The Såmaññaphala Sutta and Its Commentaries > > Translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi > > In reply to a question on the fruits of the monk's life, the Buddha > > traces the entire progress of the disciple from the first step of the > > path to its culmination in the attainment of Nibbåna. The sutta > > and > > commentaries together give extensive treatment to such subjects as > > the monk's moral precepts, contentment, mindfulness and clear > > comprehension, the abandoning of the five hindrances, jhånas, > > higher > > knowledges, etc. > > 1989, 200 pp.; 5.5" x 8.5"; $10.00; BP 212S > > > > As well as the articles RobertK mentioned re Vipassana/Jhana, there > > is another one you may find worth looking at, where the opinions of > > five well-known modern teachers are mentioned. > > Vipassana & Jhana: What The Masters Say - by Ven. Visuddhacara > > http://www.quantrum.com.my/bwc/vtribune/vt4n2p14.html > > > > metta, > > Christine > > > > > ============================ > Also, there is an entire book by Ayya Khema that is an extended > commentary on that sutta. The book, by Shambala, is entitled VISIBLE HERE AND > NOW. It is worthwhile, in my opinion, as are all her writings. > > With metta, > Howard 12350 From: Robert Epstein Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 10:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- > Dear Rob, > thanks for the nice post which shows your real consideration of these > matters. Just one point I want to discuss: > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Robert Epstein wrote: > > . I think in my case it's a sense of balance in seeing samatha, > > which requires surrender in order to be developed, as having equal > value to the > > development of insight, which at least *appears* to be a more > willful, or > > self-initiated path. > >____________ > Interesting you say this because fairly recently it seems to me that > vipassana is really not a 'willful or self-initiated path' . It seems > that way in the beginning (willful) I think ,but really it is not a > matter of 'doing' as of 'seeing'. Nothing has to be done for seeing > or sound or smell or feeling to appear. These are part of vipaka- > vatta (round of result). And you know the following craving or not > craving, insight or no insight too are completely uninterested in the > sense that they are just phenomena with no self controlling or behind > them. I think one of the things that obstructs insight is the idea > that there is a self who should be initiating something to make > insight occur - but this brings in hidden craving or wrong practice. > Anyway just something to think about. > best wishes > robert yes, I figured this is the correct view, which is why I put *appears* in there in cyber-italics. I appreciate your further clarification, which I think is true. It is in letting go of volition that both samatha and vipassana probably find room to operate, rather than in willfully trying to effort into them. in any case, there is no peace while view of self is straining to see itself as real and justify its seeming existence with acts of volition. Jon I hope will be happy to hear me thinking along these lines. Robert Ep. 12351 From: Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 5:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/2/02 1:24:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > Hi Howard! > Nice to be talking to you again. I feel pretty much as you do about this. > I've > had what I consider and hope to be some spontaneous 'insight' experiences, > and > some pretty intense altered states which I think gave me some perspective > into > what may be some clues as to what may be on some aspects of the path, but > in > truth, not having had a reliable teacher at those times who could tell me > the > status of these things, it is somewhat speculative. In any case, these > experiences don't last, and whatever impact they have is absorbed into > one's > general state, which again, is difficult to assess without being part of a > lineage. I still don't know what my lineage is! Hopefully one day I'll > find > out!! > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: We seem to have had an interestingly similar "spiritual history"! :-) BTW, whatever out lineage may be, I think that it is the "change of lineage" that is of greatest importance! ;-) ------------------------------------------------ > > I have a feeling, especially having had such a strong reaction to hearing > about > the jhanas -- strange also that I've been around as long as I have without > really > hearing much about them -- that if the time were right and I had the right > conditions, I might be able to cultivate jhana. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: I have no doubt that I have a "facililty" in that direction as well. But events seem to have their own logic. ---------------------------------------------------- But that is a fantasy, since that> > is really not the case in my life. I have a family, I have a business that > takes > a lot of work, and I have a three-year old, whom I devote an awful lot of > time to > taking care of. This is obviously my 'path' right now, and I think I have > my > priorities in the right place. I could do as some others do, and put my > child > into perpetual daycare in order to spend more time on my own spiritual > pursuits, > but this would not only seem selfish to me, but would break my > over-sensitive > heart. So I am more than happy to pay more attention to her and her > budding > process in life. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I understand and empathize with you in this. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Meanwhile, like yourself, I hope that my limited meditation schedule and my > constant preoccupation with the Buddhist vision of reality will yield its > own > fruit in my path. And that this 'dry' involvement with scriptures and > contemplation of realities will be fruitful. Given a growing sense that I > am > getting increasing familiarity with what Buddhism is really about as I > proceed, I > have some hope that this is the case. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: What can really give the "dry" approach a *major* boost is an occasional meditation retreat. I strongly recommend it. ------------------------------------------------------ > > In any case, thanks for sharing your thoughts. > > Robert Ep. > > ============================ 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) 12352 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 1, 2002 11:44pm Subject: Erik's Controversial Comments;-) Dear Rob Ep & Erik (and Howard), Erik’s last post (hope you're still around, Erik) has generated quite a lot of interest from those agreeing with points and those disagreeing. I’d just like to raise a few more ‘personal’ considerations (in no special order) from this and some of Rob Ep’s more recent posts and hope that I’m not just repeating what others have said more succinctly and clearly (like Kom's recent one). Please excuse the point form here, hoping to prevent another marathon;-) 1.Are jhanas necessary for Nibbana debate? Personally, I wonder whether it will make any difference whether we answer this point or not. As Rob Ep has been pointing out very well, “we are not in control in any case of whether we are able to enter the jhanas or not”. We all agree that any references to jhanas or developed samatha at any level refers to very fine, wholesome states to be encouraged. Wishing to have these states -- or thinking they are essential-- will not make them arise. 2. We all agree that Right Concentration is a ‘key’ ingredient in any bhavana (samatha or vipassana practice). I think we all agree that right Concentration is a conditioned mental factor and depends on many factors to arise. Perhaps we can all agree that without Right Understanding of the object of samatha development, Right Concentration or samadhi cannot develop. How can there be any knowing whether it is right or not for a start? We all agree, too, I’m sure, that any Right Concentration (in samatha development, the jhanas or vipassana) has nothing to do with conventional concentration, as Ken O pointed out. 3. Passaddhi (tranquillity) is crucial in any bhavana. Indeed, whenever there are wholesome states, there is tranquillity or samatha at these moments. However, it is essential to clearly know which moments are wholesome for samatha development, even at a very initial stage. Perhaps we can all agree that it is very difficult indeed to know the difference between attachment and calm when, for example, we’re listening to the waves or walking in the forest or even watching the breath. Both states are accompanied by pleasant feeling and both seem so very beneficial at the time. 4. I believe that if we fix on a particular object of samatha (eg breath or kasina) for practice, it is bound to be with attachment rather than understanding. However, there may be conditions now for metta or dana or reflection on dhamma or death. These can all be objects of samatha and condition the mind to be calm with right concentration for a moment without any desire. Recognising these wholesome states repeatedly will be a condition for them to accumulate and for the development of samatha. As Rob Ep suggested so wisely,we don’t know how much it will develop and minding about this is not helpful in anyway. 5. Erik has raised the questions about time frames and suggested that if we’re worrying about the credit card balance (I think this was his example), it’s not an appropriate time for development. On the contrary, I think that if we see the urgency of developing all kinds of kusala (including samatha bhavana), then there is no use in waiting for another time and place. If, by conditions, we’re checking the bank statements now, this is the only present moment for kusala to arise. Any idea of another time or the present one being an obstacle, as Sukin and Rob K have recently suggested, merely prolong the agony and (wrong) view of control. 6. We all have accumulated a lot of kilesa. As we all agree, these are not self. Any ideas that other mental states should be arising or the present ones are a hindrance for understanding -- and with it, rt concentration-- at this moment, show the clinging to self again. Instead of sounding discouraging as some find it, the emphasis on understanding realities at the present moment, detachment from self and acceptance of whatever is conditioned now, is very, very encouraging and inspiring to me. 7.. We read many, many details in the texts about many kinds of knowledge and attainment and detailed descriptions of mental states. We have to be very sincere and realistic about what is really known (by our very limited wisdom) at this moment and move forward from here rather than try to imitate those who were enlightened or attained jhanas. This doesn’t mean we cannot appreciate the extraordinary levels of attainment and wisdom experienced by the Buddha’s disciples in the texts and be inspired as Rob Ep finds. 8. Finally, Erik questioned whether ‘methods advocated here’ actually work or whether they aren’t somehow missing ‘the mark’. I think I can only say that I understand the doubts and concerns and I’m not sure anyone on dsg is suggesting anyone else should follow any particular ‘method’. I certainly don’t have a method or technique. All I’d suggest is that by considering carefully over and over, we may question our deep-seated views and slowly come closer to the ‘mark’, regardless of our day to day activities or practices, and slowly develop whatever wholesome states our particular accumulations allow. Understanding a little more about conditioned phenomena and the value of all wholesome states is how I understand (with great relief) we’re slowly released from the adherence to rights and rituals and other forms of wrong view. ********** This extract is from the end of the sutta I just referred to in my last post It is from AN, Bk of 4s, 191, Heard with the Ear (PTS) and discusses the advantages of listening, ‘practising verbally’, considering and ‘penetrating by view’: “It is just as if two playmates (sahaayaka) who used tp play at mud-pies together were to meet some time or other. Then one of them says to the other: “Say, old man (Samma), do you remember this? Do you remember that? And the other replies: “I do indeed remember, old man! I do remember!” Just in the same way, monks, a monk masters Dhamma..those teachings are thoroughly penetrated by view...that being very quickly reaches excellence. This, monks, is the fourth advantage to be looked for from the frequent verbal practice of teachings..from thoroughly penetrating them by view.” ********** Apologies for being somewhat long-winded in this post in spite of best intentions. I know there will be many comments that you disagree with. On a pesonal level, while I have been greatly appreciating references and comments from friends this weekend with might approximate and support my own understandings, I am always equally glad to hear of contrary ones as these help me to consider carefully again and again and it’s a cause for considerable joy that we can discuss them here. Metta, Sarah ================= 12353 From: Sukinder Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 2:55pm Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Rob, Had a good and long sleep last night. Glad that we agree on the basic idea. Generaly however, I don't expect any two persons to completely agree on anything. Not only because of the difference in backgound knowledge, but also because 'words' themselve have thier own limits and they condition the way we interpret anything. But more importantly, we have accumulated so much wrong view ( reinforced by our habitual use of words, rightly or wrongly), that we have a hard time agreeing with ourselves under different circumstances. Firm knowledge will come only when we have attained stream- entry. Then no matter what the limits of language is, there will be full agreement between any two ariyans( billions of years away for a different version of me). This is no excuse for using any word that comes to my mind, will be more careful next time.:-) Best wishes, Sukin. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Epstein [mailto:epsteinrob@Y...] Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 1:46 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Dear Sukin, I don't really think we are in disagreement. My point is so technical, it is almost too nit-picking, but I find it important just in order to make a distinction about what actually arises and exists in consciousness. It is a very small point, but what I am saying is that the concept as something that arises is a real event, and we shouldn't make it more foggy by saying the concept is unreal. We should be more technical and say that the 'object' of the concept is unreal. This indicates that we really do conceptualize, but those conceptualizations are all illusions. So we are able to look at this function of mind clearly, rather than saying it is 'unreal', and we can also see that it posits something which *is* totally unreal -- the concept of a self-existent object. When i say that concept as concept is real, I am making the point that concepts do exist. They are a kind of thought, but they are not real objects, they are thoughts of unrealities. But in a true categorization of the function of mind, we must see that concepts are an actual form of thought that does arise. I think that when others say that concepts are unreal, they are thinking of the 'concept' as the 'object posited', in other words, the concept = table. When I say that the concept is real but it's object is not, I mean that the thought of table is a real thought, but the table in the thought is unreal. These may just be two ways of saying the same thing, but I prefer to separate the act of forming the concept, which is a real event, from the object of the concept which is an illusion. I never think that the concept is real, even at the initial moment of its arising, and then later becomes unreal, so if I seemed to say this, I apologize for being unclear. I think the concept is illusory from beginning to end. Hope this clarifies things, and now I too will go to sleep, according to my wife's instructions. Well, I'm a couple of hours late, but I've never been any good at following orders. Best Regards, Robert Ep. ============== --- sukinderpal wrote: > Dear Rob, > Again tonight I am late in responding, but I hope you are not > reading this at an odd hour. As long as we have not developed eyes > that can see at night, I think we still remain essentially day- > creatures. Night is for the bhavanga cittas. > But let me comment a little on your post; > You said: > > > I also think it's interesting to look at whether concepts truly do > not rise or > > fall. Like all phenomena they cannot be permanent beyond the > moment, they can > > only appear to be so. Therefore it is very interesting to look > into the nature of > > this illusion: That concepts keep re-constituting themselves from > moment to > > moment as if they had not fallen and re-arisen, but in fact they > change at each > > moment and then must be reconstructed like any phenomena. When we > think we are > > seeing the same concept for a period of time, we must really be > seeing a serious > > of concepts which are 'clones' of each other, fashioned in each > other's image in > > order to create the illusion of continuity. There may be real > continuity in the > > information passed from one citta to the next, but the continuity > which makes a > > concept appear to last in duration must be an illusion. > > I wasn't thinking about concepts that seem to last for an extended > time, but was thinking of it in terms a momentary occurance. Before > perhaps it is even acknowledged and recognized. There must be I > think, a seperating out of an identifiable object from the field of > experience. For eg. the taste, not necessarily to the point of > identifiable as sweet or sour, but just as one taste distinct from > another. If it is not just taste as an element but something > experienced by somebody at some location in this physical body, then > the experience must be conceptual. > Let me give you an illustration(a simple minded one) to help express > my position if not to convince you about the correctness of it( even > I have little confidence in my analysis). > Standing at the border where sea meets land, on one side is the sea, > on the other land. We can look it as land bordering sea, or we can > see it as sea bordering land. Or we can say land and sea touching > each other or water on one side and earth on the other. We can just > say left is one thing and right is another. The sense of having a > left side as opposed to a right. All these are, as I think you would > agree, conceptual, mental constructs. I do not deny the use of these > distinctions, for example I wouldn't walk towards te sea expecting > it to support my body as would land. > But even water (or earth) is not real. There can be experiences of it > through the different doorways. There can be visible object, taste, > cohesion etc., all these are rupas and they are real. But the > assemblage formed by the mind based on the experience of those rupas > which we may or may not identify as water, is not real on any level. > > > > > But since we refer to them, and can be > > > > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more > accurate to > > > say > > > > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim > to represent > > > > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are > illusory, but not > > > > non-existent. > > Can't we say that ignorance of reality is the cause for us being > fooled? That not seeing realities as they are we see that which is > not? Being fooled IS the seeing that which is not? > > > I would say that the object the concept contains is unreal, not > the concept as > > concept. I can stand to be corrected on this, but to me it seems > that concept > > exists as an experience, but not as a reality. It is like when I > see a film. The > > content of the film is totally fabricated, those people are just > characters and > > none of the events have actually taken place. But the experience > of seeing a film > > is still an experience. It is real as an experience, but not as a > reality. > > I think I agree with this last part, but I am wondering what you > mean by 'concept as concept is real'. Is it objective or subjective > as you later imply? > > > I would agree with this. A concept can never be anything but > a 'shadow' of what > > is actual. It is like a photograph that takes an impression of > something in the > > 'real world' and turns it into an image which is no longer active > and alive in the > > world. It has been framed and set up as a particular way of > defining or looking > > at a reality, but it itself has been removed from a direct > understanding of > > anything real. > > At first I thought that we were on full agreement, but when you said > that ( this is how I understood you, but I may be wrong) at one time > the concept represented actual realities but became invalid in a > later moment when those realities have actually fallen away, I think > I could ask the question below again. > > > Would you say that > > > sati and panna of the level of satipatthana see the same thing > as concepts? > > Why I asked this is because i believe awarenss and understanding > realities as they are is the function sati of panna. And concept can > never 'be' of the same level as these. In fact a thousand > explanations would not be adquate to represent one moment of > satipatthana(just guessing). > > Did I misunderstand you? Sorry if I have. > Must go to sleep now. > Best wishes, > Sukin. 12354 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 0:38am Subject: RE: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) --- Sukinder wrote: > Dear Rob, > Had a good and long sleep last night. > Glad that we agree on the basic idea. > Generaly however, I don't expect any two persons to completely agree on > anything. > Not only because of the difference in backgound knowledge, but also because > 'words' > themselve have thier own limits and they condition the way we interpret > anything. > But more importantly, we have accumulated so much wrong view ( reinforced by > our habitual use of words, rightly or wrongly), that we have a hard time > agreeing > with ourselves under different circumstances. Firm knowledge will come only > when > we have attained stream- entry. Then no matter what the limits of language > is, there > will be full agreement between any two ariyans( billions of years away for a > different > version of me). > This is no excuse for using any word that comes to my mind, will be more > careful > next time.:-) I don't think you have anything to correct in your language. I just wanted to understand how I was using concept, but I don't even know if my usage makes sense to others. Whatever you think, I am happy to hear it. Best, Robert Ep. ================================= > Best wishes, > Sukin. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robert Epstein [mailto:epsteinrob@Y...] > Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 1:46 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) > > > Dear Sukin, > I don't really think we are in disagreement. My point is so technical, it > is > almost too nit-picking, but I find it important just in order to make a > distinction about what actually arises and exists in consciousness. > > It is a very small point, but what I am saying is that the concept as > something > that arises is a real event, and we shouldn't make it more foggy by saying > the > concept is unreal. We should be more technical and say that the 'object' of > the > concept is unreal. This indicates that we really do conceptualize, but > those > conceptualizations are all illusions. So we are able to look at this > function of > mind clearly, rather than saying it is 'unreal', and we can also see that it > posits something which *is* totally unreal -- the concept of a self-existent > object. > > When i say that concept as concept is real, I am making the point that > concepts do > exist. They are a kind of thought, but they are not real objects, they are > thoughts of unrealities. But in a true categorization of the function of > mind, we > must see that concepts are an actual form of thought that does arise. I > think > that when others say that concepts are unreal, they are thinking of the > 'concept' > as the 'object posited', in other words, the concept = table. When I say > that the > concept is real but it's object is not, I mean that the thought of table is > a real > thought, but the table in the thought is unreal. These may just be two ways > of > saying the same thing, but I prefer to separate the act of forming the > concept, > which is a real event, from the object of the concept which is an illusion. > > I never think that the concept is real, even at the initial moment of its > arising, > and then later becomes unreal, so if I seemed to say this, I apologize for > being > unclear. I think the concept is illusory from beginning to end. > > Hope this clarifies things, and now I too will go to sleep, according to my > wife's > instructions. Well, I'm a couple of hours late, but I've never been any > good at > following orders. > > Best Regards, > Robert Ep. > > ============== > > --- sukinderpal wrote: > > Dear Rob, > > Again tonight I am late in responding, but I hope you are not > > reading this at an odd hour. As long as we have not developed eyes > > that can see at night, I think we still remain essentially day- > > creatures. Night is for the bhavanga cittas. > > But let me comment a little on your post; > > You said: > > > > > I also think it's interesting to look at whether concepts truly do > > not rise or > > > fall. Like all phenomena they cannot be permanent beyond the > > moment, they can > > > only appear to be so. Therefore it is very interesting to look > > into the nature of > > > this illusion: That concepts keep re-constituting themselves from > > moment to > > > moment as if they had not fallen and re-arisen, but in fact they > > change at each > > > moment and then must be reconstructed like any phenomena. When we > > think we are > > > seeing the same concept for a period of time, we must really be > > seeing a serious > > > of concepts which are 'clones' of each other, fashioned in each > > other's image in > > > order to create the illusion of continuity. There may be real > > continuity in the > > > information passed from one citta to the next, but the continuity > > which makes a > > > concept appear to last in duration must be an illusion. > > > > I wasn't thinking about concepts that seem to last for an extended > > time, but was thinking of it in terms a momentary occurance. Before > > perhaps it is even acknowledged and recognized. There must be I > > think, a seperating out of an identifiable object from the field of > > experience. For eg. the taste, not necessarily to the point of > > identifiable as sweet or sour, but just as one taste distinct from > > another. If it is not just taste as an element but something > > experienced by somebody at some location in this physical body, then > > the experience must be conceptual. > > Let me give you an illustration(a simple minded one) to help express > > my position if not to convince you about the correctness of it( even > > I have little confidence in my analysis). > > Standing at the border where sea meets land, on one side is the sea, > > on the other land. We can look it as land bordering sea, or we can > > see it as sea bordering land. Or we can say land and sea touching > > each other or water on one side and earth on the other. We can just > > say left is one thing and right is another. The sense of having a > > left side as opposed to a right. All these are, as I think you would > > agree, conceptual, mental constructs. I do not deny the use of these > > distinctions, for example I wouldn't walk towards te sea expecting > > it to support my body as would land. > > But even water (or earth) is not real. There can be experiences of it > > through the different doorways. There can be visible object, taste, > > cohesion etc., all these are rupas and they are real. But the > > assemblage formed by the mind based on the experience of those rupas > > which we may or may not identify as water, is not real on any level. > > > > > > > > But since we refer to them, and can be > > > > > fooled by them into thinking they are realities, isn't it more > > accurate to > > > > say > > > > > that 'concepts exist momentarily as concepts, but they claim > > to represent > > > > > realities which they do not'. In other words, they are > > illusory, but not > > > > > non-existent. > > > > Can't we say that ignorance of reality is the cause for us being > > fooled? That not seeing realities as they are we see that which is > > not? Being fooled IS the seeing that which is not? > > > > > I would say that the object the concept contains is unreal, not > > the concept as > > > concept. I can stand to be corrected on this, but to me it seems > > that concept > > > exists as an experience, but not as a reality. It is like when I > > see a film. The > > > content of the film is totally fabricated, those people are just > > characters and > > > none of the events have actually taken place. But the experience > > of seeing a film > > > is still an experience. It is real as an experience, but not as a > > reality. > > > > I think I agree with this last part, but I am wondering what you > > mean by 'concept as concept is real'. Is it objective or subjective > > as you later imply? > > > > > I would agree with this. A concept can never be anything but > > a 'shadow' of what > > > is actual. It is like a photograph that takes an impression of > > something in the > > > 'real world' and turns it into an image which is no longer active > > and alive in the > > > world. It has been framed and set up as a particular way of > > defining or looking > > > at a reality, but it itself has been removed from a direct > > understanding of > > > anything real. > > > > At first I thought that we were on full agreement, but when you said > > that ( this is how I understood you, but I may be wrong) at one time > > the concept represented actual realities but became invalid in a > > later moment when those realities have actually fallen away, I think > > I could ask the question below again. > > > > > Would you say that > > > > sati and panna of the level of satipatthana see the same thing > > as concepts? > > > > Why I asked this is because i believe awarenss and understanding > > realities as they are is the function sati of panna. And concept can > > never 'be' of the same level as these. In fact a thousand > > explanations would not be adquate to represent one moment of > > satipatthana(just guessing). > > > > Did I misunderstand you? Sorry if I have. > > Must go to sleep now. > > Best wishes, > > Sukin. 12355 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 0:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "unpleasant words" -DAN Dear Dan, I meant to say before how much I appreciated your ‘Spring burst’ and hope you’re still around as we enjoy a few other ‘blooms’. Your posts are always amongst the most challenging, because they’re always well read and carefully considered. You raised many interesting points and I also much appreciated the replies from the others (Nina, Rob K and Jon). I particularly appreciated your comments on vipaka. I agree that we cannot tell whether any given moment of seeing or hearing is kusala or akusala vipaka as you suggested. Like you said here: --- zipdrive14850 wrote:paka) which is pleasant. > > Right. But there are no words in sota-vinyana; there is only sound and > hearing. The hearing is vipaka, born of kusala or akusala kamma. We > can't tell which by thinking about whether we interpret the words as > pleasant or unpleasant. The kusala-vipaka/akusala-vipaka-ness of the > sounds cannot depend on how we later interpret the words! The > commentaries seem to say that akusala kamma results in akusala-vipaka > (or at least not in kusala-vipaka) and that akusala-vipaka tends to > give rise to domanassa -- people tend to dislike unpleasant things. > However, akusala-vipaka can easily give rise to enjoyment of > unpleasant things and the perverted perception of the unpleasant as > pleasant. This happens with great frequency. To judge the vipaka on > the basis of the kamma stemming from it later is bound to cause > trouble. I believe the only time we can know for sure that it’s kusala vipaka is when we’re in front of the live Buddha (K.sujin mentioned this, but I don’t have a ref.). As Rob K mentioned, it’s not important to know either. > > > Sarah pointed out recently that even when we read a dhamma book > there > > could be many moments when the visible object is a slight stain on > > the page or something else (and at that moment akusala vipaka). > > Are you SURE seeing the stain is akusala vipaka? Just a quick word here. Like you, I had questioned whether we can say when-- as in Rob’s example before-- we are looking at a dhamma book, that it is kusala vipaka. As you have mentioned, we don’t know what kind of vipaka it is at the moments of seeing. If the book is stained, the seeing may well not be kusala vipaka when it sees its visible object. But there is no way of knowing. I know Rob appreciated this from his comments at the time but I also appreciate your precision. Otherwise it can lead to doubts. Sometimes, I think we can generalise and speak more conventionally too. For example, if someone is angry and shouts, perhaps it’s fair to mention the akusala vipaka of those that hear the sounds? Maybe not ? I’d be glad to hear any more of your considerations on this topic. ......... On the otherhand, your comments about whether we say ‘seeing sees/experiences visible object’ or ‘there is the experience of seeing (of visible object)’ seemed to be something of a quibble to me. Whilst there is clinging to a view of self, it will latch on with those views as we also discussed in the ‘skilful’ argument. It doesn’t mean it’s not helpful to consider the words in these cases and whether they are the most useful ones, but I feel it is the wrong understanding that really causes the problems here. I won’t say more in case you’re not around any more;-(. Thanks again for all the points you raised. Sarah ================================ 12356 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 0:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Erik's Controversial Comments;-) Sarah, I can't find anything in this post that I disagree with. Maybe I'm too tired, and should read it again in the morning. Thanks for your clarifications, which add a lot to the discussion. Robert Ep. ============ --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep & Erik (and Howard), > > > Erik’s last post (hope you're still around, Erik) has generated quite a > lot of interest from those agreeing with points and those disagreeing. I’d > just like to raise a few more ‘personal’ considerations (in no special > order) from this and some of Rob Ep’s more recent posts and hope that I’m > not just repeating what others have said more succinctly and clearly (like > Kom's recent one). Please excuse the point form here, hoping to prevent > another marathon;-) > > 1.Are jhanas necessary for Nibbana debate? > Personally, I wonder whether it will make any difference whether we answer > this point or not. As Rob Ep has been pointing out very well, “we are not > in control in any case of whether we are able to enter the jhanas or not”. > We all agree that any references to jhanas or developed samatha at any > level refers to very fine, wholesome states to be encouraged. Wishing to > have these states -- or thinking they are essential-- will not make them > arise. > > 2. We all agree that Right Concentration is a ‘key’ ingredient in any > bhavana (samatha or vipassana practice). I think we all agree that right > Concentration is a conditioned mental factor and depends on many factors > to arise. Perhaps we can all agree that without Right Understanding of the > object of samatha development, Right Concentration or samadhi cannot > develop. How can there be any knowing whether it is right or not for a > start? We all agree, too, I’m sure, that any Right Concentration (in > samatha development, the jhanas or vipassana) has nothing to do with > conventional concentration, as Ken O pointed out. > > 3. Passaddhi (tranquillity) is crucial in any bhavana. Indeed, whenever > there are wholesome states, there is tranquillity or samatha at these > moments. However, it is essential to clearly know which moments are > wholesome for samatha development, even at a very initial stage. Perhaps > we can all agree that it is very difficult indeed to know the difference > between attachment and calm when, for example, we’re listening to the > waves or walking in the forest or even watching the breath. Both states > are accompanied by pleasant feeling and both seem so very beneficial at > the time. > > 4. I believe that if we fix on a particular object of samatha (eg breath > or kasina) for practice, it is bound to be with attachment rather than > understanding. However, there may be conditions now for metta or dana or > reflection on dhamma or death. These can all be objects of samatha and > condition the mind to be calm with right concentration for a moment > without any desire. Recognising these wholesome states repeatedly will be > a condition for them to accumulate and for the development of samatha. As > Rob Ep suggested so wisely,we don’t know how much it will develop and > minding about this is not helpful in anyway. > > 5. Erik has raised the questions about time frames and suggested that if > we’re worrying about the credit card balance (I think this was his > example), it’s not an appropriate time for development. On the contrary, I > think that if we see the urgency of developing all kinds of kusala > (including samatha bhavana), then there is no use in waiting for another > time and place. If, by conditions, we’re checking the bank statements now, > this is the only present moment for kusala to arise. Any idea of another > time or the present one being an obstacle, as Sukin and Rob K have > recently suggested, merely prolong the agony and (wrong) view of control. > > 6. We all have accumulated a lot of kilesa. As we all agree, these are not > self. Any ideas that other mental states should be arising or the present > ones are a hindrance for understanding -- and with it, rt concentration-- > at this moment, show the clinging to self again. Instead of sounding > discouraging as some find it, the emphasis on understanding realities at > the present moment, detachment from self and acceptance of whatever is > conditioned now, is very, very encouraging and inspiring to me. > > 7.. We read many, many details in the texts about many kinds of knowledge > and attainment and detailed descriptions of mental states. We have to be > very sincere and realistic about what is really known (by our very limited > wisdom) at this moment and move forward from here rather than try to > imitate those who were enlightened or attained jhanas. This doesn’t mean > we cannot appreciate the extraordinary levels of attainment and wisdom > experienced by the Buddha’s disciples in the texts and be inspired as Rob > Ep finds. > > 8. Finally, Erik questioned whether ‘methods advocated here’ actually work > or whether they aren’t somehow missing ‘the mark’. I think I can only say > that I understand the doubts and concerns and I’m not sure anyone on dsg > is suggesting anyone else should follow any particular ‘method’. I > certainly don’t have a method or technique. All I’d suggest is that by > considering carefully over and over, we may question our deep-seated views > and slowly come closer to the ‘mark’, regardless of our day to day > activities or practices, and slowly develop whatever wholesome states our > particular accumulations allow. Understanding a little more about > conditioned phenomena and the value of all wholesome states is how I > understand (with great relief) we’re slowly released from the adherence to > rights and rituals and other forms of wrong view. > > ********** > > This extract is from the end of the sutta I just referred to in my last > post It is from AN, Bk of 4s, 191, Heard with the Ear (PTS) and discusses > the advantages of listening, ‘practising verbally’, considering and > ‘penetrating by view’: > > “It is just as if two playmates (sahaayaka) who used tp play at mud-pies > together were to meet some time or other. Then one of them says to the > other: “Say, old man (Samma), do you remember this? Do you remember > that? And the other replies: “I do indeed remember, old man! I do > remember!” Just in the same way, monks, a monk masters Dhamma..those > teachings are thoroughly penetrated by view...that being very quickly > reaches excellence. This, monks, is the fourth advantage to be looked for > from the frequent verbal practice of teachings..from thoroughly > penetrating them by view.” > > > ********** > > Apologies for being somewhat long-winded in this post in spite of best > intentions. > > I know there will be many comments that you disagree with. On a pesonal > level, while I have been greatly appreciating references and comments from > friends this weekend with might approximate and support my own > understandings, I am always equally glad to hear of contrary ones as these > help me to consider carefully again and again and it’s a cause for > considerable joy that we can discuss them here. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ================= 12357 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 0:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > Meanwhile, like yourself, I hope that my limited meditation schedule and my > > constant preoccupation with the Buddhist vision of reality will yield its > > own > > fruit in my path. And that this 'dry' involvement with scriptures and > > contemplation of realities will be fruitful. Given a growing sense that I > > am > > getting increasing familiarity with what Buddhism is really about as I > > proceed, I > > have some hope that this is the case. > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > What can really give the "dry" approach a *major* boost is an > occasional meditation retreat. I strongly recommend it. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard, This is very good advice, and I have been 'longing' for a retreat. I happen to have come upon a Tibetan Empowerment which I will attend this weekend, only the Saturday as my schedule is so full, on 'Chod' or 'Cutting Through' the delusion of self. I am looking forward to it. I have been wanting to follow in my old Vipassana/Yoga teacher's footsteps and do some retreats at the Insight Meditation Center in Barre, Mass., where a lot of good Theravadan teachers give retreats of different lengths, but so far haven't gotten there. Ah, kamma is a terrible inconvenience. My last retreat was about 15 years ago and had a profound impact on me. We just practiced basic Vipassana meditation in a long weekend of silent sitting, walking meditation, eating slowly with mindfulness, no shower, drinking collected rainwater in the country. It was very hard and very wonderful, with no talk, no technology, just each other's Dhamma company and the breath. It went a long way. But I think after 15 years it's time for another retreat, don't you? Best, Robert Ep. 12358 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Erik's Controversial Comments;-) Dear Rob Ep, --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Sarah, > I can't find anything in this post that I disagree with. Maybe I'm too > tired, and > should read it again in the morning. Well, with a 12 hour time difference, it would make your time now about 4.50 a.m. (close to the time some of us rise in the morning;-)) Thanks for your > clarifications, which > add a lot to the discussion. Thanks Rob....maybe I'll try to be more controversial next time Seriously, I'm happy to settle for a little agreement rather than another marathon for now. (Erik may not be so obliging;-)) Sweet dreams, Sarah =========== 12359 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 1:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] BEGINNERS ABHIDHAMMA - ADL ch 1 (2) Hi Howard (& Larry), --- upasaka@a... wrote: > I see nothing at all silly about this matter!!! :-(( > This is a very serious isue, and the headings you propose are all > > quite suitable! Don't you know that Buddhist frivolity is not to be > countenanced???!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > More seriously ... or not, I particularly like heading (a) as it > sounds like something produced by Maharishi Mahesh Yogi's organization! > ;-)) > Thinking about them also brings to mind yet another possible heading, > "The > Mathematics of Levitation and Levity: a Formal Analysis of the Jhanas as > the > Gateway to Giggling." ;-)) > With mettamatics (and deep mettaphysics), the latter may be too deep for me, I fear;-) Apologies, all....I'll try some self-moderation now;-( Sarah ========== 12360 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 1:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Hi Larry, Don't know if this will be of any help to you, but here are a couple of links: The Way to Nibbana - A collection of (13) articles on Ultimate Peace http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/nibbana.htm Nibbana - The Supreme Goal of Buddhism http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/panadi10.htm Nibbana and Anatta http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/nibban1.htm metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I agree, I am sure there are innumerable reasons why nibbana is not self > but I wanted to see something from tipitaka or commentary. I have a > notion that the way of reasoning found in Vsm concerning not self (no > doer of deeds for example) is proto-madhyamaka eventhough it comes about > 2 or 3 hundred years after Nagarjuna. Bh Buddhaghosa prided himself on > not expressing his own views and the Great Monastery was strictly > traditional but perhaps the Sinhalese commentaries he was working with > (which would have been roughly contemporary with Nj.) related new ways > of reasoning which were 'in the air', so to speak. Wherever it came > from, I would say this is a new way of looking at things. > > Also, I'm interested in this question (is nibbana not self) because I > have studied vedanta a little and I think someone could make a > reasonable argument that the vedanta *experience* of Self is the same as > nibbana. They are both concerned with exposing the fallacy of a > conventional self and even have the same, or a very similar, stepping > stone from here to there, sati in buddhism and witness consciousness in > vedanta. > > I had better stop there. This is way off topic; suffice it to say, > interesting papanca. > > Larry > ---------------- > Jon wrote: > I am just wondering if there could be another explanation for the fact > that 'the word "anatta" (not self) is never applied direct to nibbana in > the Suttas'. > Nibbana itself (as distinct from someone's concept of nibbana) cannot be > taken as self; it is not among the upadana-khandha, the khandhas that > are object of clinging. In which case, there would be no need for it to > be directly declared as being 'not-self'. > Of course, nibbana would nonetheless be included in any reference to all > dhammas being not-self. > Jon 12361 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 1:21am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Roberts, > -----Original Message----- > From: robertkirkpatrick.rm > > Moggallana had great powers but at the > third attempt on his > life for a short time they suddenly left him - > this was because of an > obstructive kamma done in the past. He was beaten > to death. Would you by any chance remember the sutta / the references to some place in the tipitaka when this happened? I haven't seen the text my self, but I have heard of another version of the story where Moggalana consented to being beaten as he realized it was inevitable. I do like the version you quoted better, though, as it is easier to understand. With the version I remember, I always got stuck with the question: why would Maha-mogallana, with his great wisdom and loving-kindness, allows anybody to beat him up knowing that it would result in great injuries for them. It would be nice to eventually read the stroy myself, though.... kom 12362 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 1:54am Subject: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) --- Dear Kom, there are two versions - in the English anyway. In the dhammapada commentary (or the translation) it says he knew it was inevitable, as you have previously heard. In another commentary - and unfortunately can't remember which one (although I do remember reading it , unless it is some hallucination) it says what I said below. If I come across the section in my reading I'll post it. best robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kom Tukovinit wrote: > Dear Roberts, > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: robertkirkpatrick.rm > > > > Moggallana had great powers but at the > > third attempt on his > > life for a short time they suddenly left him - > > this was because of an > > obstructive kamma done in the past. He was beaten > > to death. > > Would you by any chance remember the sutta / the references > to some place in the tipitaka when this happened? I haven't > seen the text my self, but I have heard of another version > of the story where Moggalana consented to being beaten as he > realized it was inevitable. > > I do like the version you quoted better, though, as it is > easier to understand. With the version I remember, I always > got stuck with the question: why would Maha-mogallana, with > his great wisdom and loving-kindness, allows anybody to beat > him up knowing that it would result in great injuries for > them. It would be nice to eventually read the stroy myself, > though.... > > kom 12363 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 2:52am Subject: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Hi Kom and RobertK, I have a book "Great Disciples of the Buddha" by Nyanaponika Thera and Hellmuth Hecker that on page102 and 103 tells the story and mentions two sources of Moggallana's death. One is the Dhammapada Commentary (to vv. 137-40) and the Jataka Commentary (to Jat. 523) He twice escaped attempts on his life by assassins hired by a group of naked ascetics who felt loss of prestige when the population of Magadha transferred its allegiance to the Enlightened One and his Sangha. For this they blamed the Venerable Mahamoggallana. EXCERPT "Moggallana's motivation in escaping was not fear of death. The reason he used his psychic powers to elude the gangsters was not to protect his body but to spare the would-be assassins the frightful kammic consequences of such a murderous deed, necessarily leading to rebirth in the hells. He wanted to spare them such a fate by giving them time to reconsider and abstain from their crime. But their greed for the promised money was so great that they persisted and returned again the following month (or on the seventh day in the Jataka account). This time there persistence was "rewarded", for at that moment Moggallana suddenly lost his psychic mastery over the body. The reason for this sudden change in fate lay in a terrible deed he had committed in the distant past. Many aeons ago, in a previous birth, Moggallana had brought about the death of his parents (in the Jataka version, however, he relents at the last moment and spares them). That heinous kamma had brought him to a rebirth in hell for countless ears, but it had not yet fully matured. A residue remained, and now, when he was in mortal danger, that residue suddenly ripened and confronted him with its fruit. Moggallana realised that he had no choice but to submit to destiny. The brigands entered, knocked him down, and "pounded his bones until they were as small as grains of rice". Then, thinking that he was dead, they threw his body behind a clump of bushes and fled, keen on collecting their reward." There is a also another booklet by Hellmuth Hecker called Maha- Moggallana at: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel263.html#ch10 metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- > Dear Kom, > there are two versions - in the English anyway. In the dhammapada > commentary (or the translation) it says he knew it was inevitable, as > you have previously heard. In another commentary - and unfortunately > can't remember which one (although I do remember reading it , unless > it is some hallucination) it says what I said below. If I come across > the section in my reading I'll post it. > best > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > Dear Roberts, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: robertkirkpatrick.rm > > > > > > Moggallana had great powers but at the > > > third attempt on his > > > life for a short time they suddenly left him - > > > this was because of an > > > obstructive kamma done in the past. He was beaten > > > to death. > > > > Would you by any chance remember the sutta / the references > > to some place in the tipitaka when this happened? I haven't > > seen the text my self, but I have heard of another version > > of the story where Moggalana consented to being beaten as he > > realized it was inevitable. > > > > I do like the version you quoted better, though, as it is > > easier to understand. With the version I remember, I always > > got stuck with the question: why would Maha-mogallana, with > > his great wisdom and loving-kindness, allows anybody to beat > > him up knowing that it would result in great injuries for > > them. It would be nice to eventually read the stroy myself, > > though.... > > > > kom 12364 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 3:16am Subject: For Azita Dear Azita, My message machine garbled your number, could you try again please? Or send it by email to: >cforsyth@v...< metta, Christine 12365 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 3:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Kom & Rob K, I just checked DictPPN (before you are mistakenly impressed by my memory;-)): I think Rob's version is the one at J. v.125ff It mentions the differences in the two accounts in the dict (several details) and uses the Jataka one for the main entry. Here's an extract: "They surrounded the Elder's cell in Kaa.lasilaa, but he, aware of their intentions, escaped through the keyhole. On six successive days this happened; on the seventh, they caught him and beat him, crushing his bones and leaving him for dead. Having recovered consciousness, with a great effort of will, he dragged himself to the Buddha in order to take his leave, and there he died, to the sorrow of the deva-worlds." Sarah, I'll check the Jataka later to see if there are any other useful details, but i'm sure you both have this. ======================== --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- > Dear Kom, > there are two versions - in the English anyway. In the dhammapada > commentary (or the translation) it says he knew it was inevitable, as > you have previously heard. In another commentary - and unfortunately > can't remember which one (although I do remember reading it , unless > it is some hallucination) it says what I said below. If I come across > the section in my reading I'll post it. > best > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > Dear Roberts, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: robertkirkpatrick.rm > > > > > > Moggallana had great powers but at the > > > third attempt on his > > > life for a short time they suddenly left him - > > > this was because of an > > > obstructive kamma done in the past. He was beaten > > > to death. > > > > Would you by any chance remember the sutta / the references > > to some place in the tipitaka when this happened? I haven't > > seen the text my self, but I have heard of another version > > of the story where Moggalana consented to being beaten as he > > realized it was inevitable. > > > > I do like the version you quoted better, though, as it is > > easier to understand. With the version I remember, I always > > got stuck with the question: why would Maha-mogallana, with > > his great wisdom and loving-kindness, allows anybody to beat > > him up knowing that it would result in great injuries for > > them. It would be nice to eventually read the stroy myself, > > though.... > > > > kom 12366 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 3:49am Subject: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) --- Thanks Sarah, I looked it up (vol5 p65 of Cowell) 'On the seventh day an act committed of old[in a past life]by the elder, carrying with it consequences to be recognised on some future occasion, got its cahnce for mischief.[he planned and almost murdered (stopped at last minute) his parents in a long past life]......This action for so long not finding its opportunity but ever biding its time, like a core of flame hidden under ashes, caught up and seized upon the man when he was reborn for the last time and the elder in conseqeunce of that action was unable to fly up into the air...His majic power that once quelled Nanda as the result of that action became mere feebleness. The brigands crushed his bones.......' I think i will order that dictionary even though I know the price is steep. What is the name again? best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Dear Kom & Rob K, > > I just checked DictPPN (before you are mistakenly impressed by my > memory;-)): > > I think Rob's version is the one at J. v.125ff > It mentions the differences in the two accounts in the dict (several > details) and uses the Jataka one for the main entry. Here's an extract: > > "They surrounded the Elder's cell in Kaa.lasilaa, but he, > aware of their intentions, escaped through the keyhole. On six successive > days this happened; on the seventh, they caught him and beat him, > crushing his bones and leaving him for dead. Having recovered > consciousness, with a great effort of will, he dragged himself to the > Buddha in order to take his leave, and there he died, to the sorrow of the > deva-worlds." > > Sarah, > > I'll check the Jataka later to see if there are any other useful details, > but i'm sure you both have this. > > ======================== > > > --- "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > > --- > > Dear Kom, 12367 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 4:33am Subject: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) ---Wow, I just saw this. This is a well-informed group. You might like posting this to d-l Christine as a few weeks back Stephen was saying how strange that Moggallana didn't use his powers. best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hi Kom and RobertK, > > I have a book "Great Disciples of the Buddha" by Nyanaponika Thera > and Hellmuth Hecker that on page102 and 103 tells the story and > mentions two sources of Moggallana's death. One is the Dhammapada > Commentary (to vv. 137-40) and the Jataka Commentary (to Jat. 523) > He twice escaped attempts on his life by assassins hired by a group > of naked ascetics who felt loss of prestige when the population of > Magadha transferred its allegiance to the Enlightened One and his > Sangha. For this they blamed the Venerable Mahamoggallana. > EXCERPT > "Moggallana's motivation in escaping was not fear of death. The > reason he used his psychic powers to elude the gangsters was not to > protect his body but to spare the would-be assassins the frightful > kammic consequences of such a murderous deed, necessarily leading to > rebirth in the hells. He wanted to spare them such a fate by giving > them time to reconsider and abstain from their crime. But their > greed for the promised money was so great that they persisted and > returned again the following month (or on the seventh day in the > Jataka account). This time there persistence was "rewarded", for at > that moment Moggallana suddenly lost his psychic mastery over the > body. > > The reason for this sudden change in fate lay in a terrible deed he > had committed in the distant past. Many aeons ago, in a previous > birth, Moggallana had brought about the death of his parents (in the > Jataka version, however, he relents at the last moment and spares > them). That heinous kamma had brought him to a rebirth in hell for > countless ears, but it had not yet fully matured. A residue > remained, and now, when he was in mortal danger, that residue > suddenly ripened and confronted him with its fruit. Moggallana > realised that he had no choice but to submit to destiny. The > brigands entered, knocked him down, and "pounded his bones until they > were as small as grains of rice". Then, thinking that he was dead, > they threw his body behind a clump of bushes and fled, keen on > collecting their reward." > > There is a also another booklet by Hellmuth Hecker called Maha- > Moggallana at: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel263.html#ch10 > > metta, > Christine > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > wrote: > > --- > > Dear Kom, > > there are two versions - in the English anyway. In the dhammapada > > commentary (or the translation) it says he knew it was inevitable, > as > > you have previously heard. In another commentary - and > unfortunately > > can't remember which one (although I do remember reading it , > unless > > it is some hallucination) it says what I said below. If I come > across > > the section in my reading I'll post it. > > best > > robert > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kom Tukovinit wrote: > > > Dear Roberts, > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: robertkirkpatrick.rm 12368 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 5:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Rob K, Thanks for saving me the trouble with the extract. I was glad to see Christine's post. that slim book she mentioned (which I can never quite find when I look as now) is very helpful too. We're actually on the 2nd set of the Dictionary (3 vols) after my first 2nd hand set (almost the first serious buddh bks I ever bought) rotted away. Now while others 'google' the night away, I could very easily do the same with these vols and though it's pricey, I'm sure I've got my money's worth in the first week of each purchase. Dict of Pali Proper Names, by Malalasekera, new ed PTS 1997 When I read the preface with the 'history' of how texts like these came to be, I feel so very grateful to the authors and all those who assisted. Sorry for the ramble. You'll get great use out of it, Rob. Sarah ======== "robertkirkpatrick.rm" wrote: > --- > Thanks Sarah, > I looked it up (vol5 p65 of Cowell) > 'On the seventh day an act committed of old[in a past life]by the > elder, carrying with it consequences to be recognised on some future > occasion, got its cahnce for mischief.[he planned and almost murdered > (stopped at last minute) his parents in a long past life]......This > action for so long not finding its opportunity but ever biding its > time, like a core of flame hidden under ashes, caught up and seized > upon the man when he was reborn for the last time and the elder in > conseqeunce of that action was unable to fly up into the air...His > majic power that once quelled Nanda as the result of that action > became mere feebleness. The brigands crushed his bones.......' > > I think i will order that dictionary even though I know the price is > steep. What is the name again? > best wishes > robert > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Dear Kom & Rob K, > > > > I just checked DictPPN (before you are mistakenly impressed by my > > memory;-)): 12369 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/2/02 3:53:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Robert - > > > > Meanwhile, like yourself, I hope that my limited meditation schedule > and my > > > constant preoccupation with the Buddhist vision of reality will yield > its > > > own > > > fruit in my path. And that this 'dry' involvement with scriptures and > > > contemplation of realities will be fruitful. Given a growing sense > that I > > > am > > > getting increasing familiarity with what Buddhism is really about as I > > > proceed, I > > > have some hope that this is the case. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > > What can really give the "dry" approach a *major* boost is an > > occasional meditation retreat. I strongly recommend it. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > Howard, > This is very good advice, and I have been 'longing' for a retreat. I > happen to > have come upon a Tibetan Empowerment which I will attend this weekend, only > the > Saturday as my schedule is so full, on 'Chod' or 'Cutting Through' the > delusion of > self. I am looking forward to it. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The topic of cutting through the illusion of self sounds very much to the point. I am personally unfamiliar with retreats other than Theravadin (although I've had many "all-day sits" at the Ch'an Center of New York). From my understanding, Tibetan Buddhism constitutes a rather large umbrella, covering many different approaches, schools, and sub-schools. I hope you have checked out this particular organization to the extent of being reasonably certain that this retreat will be "right" for you. In any case, may you find it to be very fruitful! ------------------------------------------------------ > > I have been wanting to follow in my old Vipassana/Yoga teacher's footsteps > and do > some retreats at the Insight Meditation Center in Barre, Mass., where a lot > of > good Theravadan teachers give retreats of different lengths, but so far > haven't > gotten there. Ah, kamma is a terrible inconvenience. > ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: About a year ago I attending a weekend (commuting) retreat in Greenwich Village, Manhattan, led by Larry Rosenberg under the auspices of New York Insight, the progeny of IMC. He is a wonderful retreat leader, and the experience was superb. What stands out mostly in my mind, from my personal perspective, was how incredible the walking meditation was! (A big surprise for me.) The depth of concentration and clarity of mind that was attained during the walking meditation amazed and delighted me. It was most unusual. If you ever get the opportunity to attend a retreat led by him, I encourage you to avail yourself of it. --------------------------------------------------------- > > My last retreat was about 15 years ago and had a profound impact on me. We > just > practiced basic Vipassana meditation in a long weekend of silent sitting, > walking > meditation, eating slowly with mindfulness, no shower, drinking collected > rainwater in the country. It was very hard and very wonderful, with no > talk, no > technology, just each other's Dhamma company and the breath. It went a > long way. > > But I think after 15 years it's time for another retreat, don't you? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes. ;-)) --------------------------------------------------- > > Best, > Robert Ep. > > =========================== 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) 12370 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 8:58am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) Dear Christine, Sarah, and Roberts, Thank you for the excellent quote. Very much appreciate it. Now, the story is complete! kom > -----Original Message----- > From: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 2:52 AM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Re: anatta and kamma(correction) > > > Hi Kom and RobertK, > > I have a book "Great Disciples of the Buddha" by > Nyanaponika Thera > and Hellmuth Hecker that on page102 and 103 tells > the story and > mentions two sources of Moggallana's death. One > is the Dhammapada > Commentary (to vv. 137-40) and the Jataka > Commentary (to Jat. 523) > He twice escaped attempts on his life by > assassins hired by a group > of naked ascetics who felt loss of prestige when > the population of > Magadha transferred its allegiance to the > Enlightened One and his > Sangha. For this they blamed the Venerable > Mahamoggallana. > EXCERPT > "Moggallana's motivation in escaping was not fear > of death. The > reason he used his psychic powers to elude the > gangsters was not to > protect his body but to spare the would-be > assassins the frightful > kammic consequences of such a murderous deed, > necessarily leading to > rebirth in the hells. He wanted to spare them > such a fate by giving > them time to reconsider and abstain from their > crime. But their > greed for the promised money was so great that > they persisted and > returned again the following month (or on the > seventh day in the > Jataka account). This time there persistence was > "rewarded", for at > that moment Moggallana suddenly lost his psychic > mastery over the > body. > > The reason for this sudden change in fate lay in > a terrible deed he > had committed in the distant past. Many aeons > ago, in a previous > birth, Moggallana had brought about the death of > his parents (in the > Jataka version, however, he relents at the last > moment and spares > them). That heinous kamma had brought him to a > rebirth in hell for > countless ears, but it had not yet fully matured. > A residue > remained, and now, when he was in mortal danger, > that residue > suddenly ripened and confronted him with its > fruit. Moggallana > realised that he had no choice but to submit to > destiny. The > brigands entered, knocked him down, and "pounded > his bones until they > were as small as grains of rice". Then, thinking > that he was dead, > they threw his body behind a clump of bushes and > fled, keen on > collecting their reward." > > There is a also another booklet by Hellmuth > Hecker called Maha- > Moggallana at: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/whee > l263.html#ch10 > > metta, > Christine > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robertkirkpatrick.rm" > wrote: > > --- > > Dear Kom, > > there are two versions - in the English anyway. > In the dhammapada > > commentary (or the translation) it says he knew > it was inevitable, > as > > you have previously heard. In another commentary - and > unfortunately > > can't remember which one (although I do > remember reading it , > unless > > it is some hallucination) it says what I said > below. If I come > across > > the section in my reading I'll post it. > > best > > robert > > > > In dhammastudygroup@y..., Kom Tukovinit > wrote: > > > Dear Roberts, > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: robertkirkpatrick.rm 12371 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 9:00am Subject: samatha and vipassana Dear Rob Ep, You were wondering about suttas mentioning dry insight, as I understood. Here is a post I wrote before, but you were absent at that time, and thus, I repost it. Little by little I shall look up other suttas about this subject. See below. Reposted: It has been explained in the Abhidhamma, Puggala Pannatti, Human Types, that some people develop samatha and vipassana and some only vipassana, they have , sukkha vipassana. I shall just quote a text from the Suttanta where this is explained. Kindred Sayings II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, Nidana vagga, II, 119: Susima: we read that Susima the wanderer was persuaded by his followers to join the Order so that he could learn the Dhamma and teach his followers. They wanted then to preach the Dhamma to the laity in order to receive honour and gain. Susima was ordained by Ananda and heard that many monks had attained arahatship. Susima asked them whether they had attained supranatural powers, rupa-jhana or arupa-jhana and they answered that they had not. When Susima asked them "How is that", they answered: "We have been freed by insight, friend Susima." Susima answered: "I do not know fully the matter stated concisely by the venerable ones. It would be well if the venerable ones were to state it so that I might come to know fully the matter they have stated concisely" "Whether you know it, friend Susima, or whether you do not know it, we have been freed by insight." Susima went to the Buddha who explained to him: "First comes knowledge of the law of cause (and effect) , afterwards comes knowledge about nibbana." The Buddha then asked him whether the body is permanent or impermanent, and whether what is impermanent is dukkha or pleasant, sukha, and whether one can take what is impermanent and dukkha for self. The Buddha asked him the same about the other khandhas, aggregates, and then taught him the Dependent Origination in order and in reverse order, which mmeans that with the ceasing of ignorance there is the end of the cycle of birth and death. The Buddha then asked him whether when he would know this, he would enjoy the supramundane powers, and whether he could attain arupa-jhana, he answered that he could not. The Buddha said: "Here then, Susima:- this catechism and the non-attainment of these things:-this is what we have done. " We read in the Kindred Sayings I, I, 190, Vangisa Sutta, Invitation, that with the Buddha were 500 monks who were arahats. The Buddha said to Sariputta: "There is nothing, Sariputta, for which I blame these five hundred Monks, in deed or word. Of these monks, sixty have the threefold knowledge, sixty have sixfold supernormal knowledge, sixty are emancipated in both ways, and then others are emancipated by insight (alone). " Thus we can conclude, the majority, 320, only developed insight. End of old post. Here is more: Gradual Sayings, Book of the Fours, Ch IX, § 9, Kinds of Recluses (c): Monks, these four persons are found in the world. What four? The unshaken recluse, the blue lotus recluse, the white lotus recluse and the recluse exquisite among recluses. And how, monks, is a person an unshaken recluse? Herein a monks is one of right view....right concentration... And how, monks, is a person a blue-lotus recluse? Herein a monk is of right view and the rest...he is one of right knowledge, of right release. Yet does he not abide experiencing with his own person the eight deliverances... And how, monks, is a person a white-lotus recluse? Herein a monk is of right view and the rest... he is one of right knowledge, of right release, and he abides experiencing with his own person the eight deliverances... And how is a person a recluse exquisite among recluses? Herein a monk, if invited, enjoys a plentiful supply of robes... Now monks, if rightly speaking one would speak about the recluse exquisite among recluses, it is just of me that he would rightly use the words... The eight deliverances, vimokkha, see Buddhist dictionary (Nyanatiloka): including both rupa-jhana and arupa-jhana. Co (in Thai), In the first group are included the seven (sekha), the ariyans of the three first stages, and the arahat who has attained magga, but not yet phala (fruit, that follows the magga-citta). Second group: the arahat who is sukha-vipassaka, who has dry insight. By the ten fold Path, or the eightfold Path plus the fruition consciousness of the arahat and the release of the fruition-consciousness of the arahat. The Co. states that the third person is twice liberated, ubhato bhaga-vimutta. The fourth person is the Buddha. As formerly explained in the sutta. All these texts are very intricate and without co. they are very difficult to understand, I find. But the Buddha thought of people with different accumulations. He praised samatha, and the person who deserves the highest respect is the person endowed with jhanas, supranatural powers and the four , patisambiddhas. In the Co. it has been explained that when further away from the Buddha's time the arahats have less excellent qualities, no more analytical knowledges. In the Co. to the In the ³Samantapåsådikå², in the Commentary to the Vinaya, to the Cullavagga, Ch X, on Nuns, the decline of Buddhism has been explained in the Buddha era of this Buddha, the Buddha Gotama. This Commentary explains about the degrees of paññå of ariyans in the different periods after the Buddha¹s passing away. During the period of the first thousand years there were still arahats with the four ³analytical knowledges², paìisambhidå . In the following period of thousand years there were only arahats who are sukkha vipassaka, those who had not attained any stage of jhåna, but who had developed only insight. In the third period of thousand years there are only people who have attained the state of non-returner, anågåmí, in the fourth period of thousand years there are only sakadågåmís and in the fifth period of thousand years there are only sotåpannas. Reading about all this is not enough, in the final analysis we should check citta. Jon and I corresponded on the mind that is , ready or pure, in the context of his post on the gradual training for Upali, where a person is ready to receive the Dhamma and attains enlightenment. Now, it is important to develop the perfections together with satipatthana, otherwise enlightenment cannot be attained. A good quality is a perfection only if not developed for one's own sake but with the aim to have less defilements, less clinging to a self. I recently heard a tape of A. Sujin that impressed me so much: when we believe that we develop kusala we should know whether we have expectations or not. Is there now something we expect or are hoping for? Then we better check whether there is some subtle clinging. But nobody else can give you the answer, only you yourself. I have to finish, this post becomes too long, with appreciation for your study and careful consideration, Nina. 12372 From: Lucy Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 1:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas (sabhava) From: > Hi Lucy, my own opinon (which is useless) No more or less useless than anyone else's opinion ; ) > is that sabhava refers to > basic element of experience > and is more or less synonymous with > paramattha dhamma. You may be right - but I still can't figure out what "own nature" in this context could be. I'm more used to the idea of everything lacking an "own nature" or "essence" since everything in samsara is the consequence of something else (this being, this comes to be, etc.). At first I thought sabhava (own nature) was anicca, dukkha & anatta - but these are laksana (characteristics) and somewhere I read that laksana and sabhava aren't the same thing... > Anything can be infinitely divided analytically but > there are probably limits to experience. Of course some of this stuff > (like bhavanga citta) was only experienced by the Buddha and maybe a few > arahats. Yes. I'm still trying to distinguish rupa from nama ... the current limits of my experience are utterly LIMITED ... . But... .... .... .... I'm curious !!! Lucy . 12373 From: Lucy Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 1:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (7-11) From: > Greetings dsg, Greetings Larry ----------------- > I'm not understanding akusala citta and its vipakka. It seems like we > are switching from ethics to mere feelings. If an action (kamma) > motivated by attachment (akusala citta - lobha) results in (conditions) > a citta (vipaka) (which is always accompanied by a feeling), why does > that feeling have to be unpleasant? It would seem that many actions > motivated by attachment result in pleasant feeling. Conversly, why does > a pleasant feeling vipaka signify kusala (virtuous) motivation.? > ----------------------- If I may add another useless opinion...I think there are two different things here: One is kamma / vipaka. The other is the "mundane" apparent consequence / outcome of an action. The relation between kamma and vipaka is not normally observable (unless one is a Buddha), we can only speculate along the basis of what's taught in the scriptures - but that's all we can do. And as the Buddha warned, this isn't a simple action - retribution relation but a very complex one involving other factors and usualy spanning across lifetimes. I like the way B. Bodhi puts it: "labyrinthine complexity". The mundane action - outcome relation is an illusion (yet another one!). For instance: a swindler can spend the rest of his life in luxury enjoying the "results" of his crime, or someone who cares for the sick may end up catching the same disease and dying of it... But those "results" are actually vipaka from kusala actions performed in the "past" - and these past actions more probably were performed in other lifetime (s). The retribution simply happens when the conditions are right for it to show up. Not sure I'm making it clear - anyway, the intention was kusala --- although you may hit me with the Visdm. on the head and that would cause unpleasant feeling - vipaka for some wrong performed sometime, somewhere, by someone along this stream of citta.... Good night! Lucy 12374 From: yuzhonghao Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 1:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Hi Larry, Ask yourself this: "Is nibbana mine? Is nibbana what I am? Is nibbana my self?" Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I agree, I am sure there are innumerable reasons why nibbana is not self > but I wanted to see something from tipitaka or commentary. I have a > notion that the way of reasoning found in Vsm concerning not self (no > doer of deeds for example) is proto-madhyamaka eventhough it comes about > 2 or 3 hundred years after Nagarjuna. Bh Buddhaghosa prided himself on > not expressing his own views and the Great Monastery was strictly > traditional but perhaps the Sinhalese commentaries he was working with > (which would have been roughly contemporary with Nj.) related new ways > of reasoning which were 'in the air', so to speak. Wherever it came > from, I would say this is a new way of looking at things. > > Also, I'm interested in this question (is nibbana not self) because I > have studied vedanta a little and I think someone could make a > reasonable argument that the vedanta *experience* of Self is the same as > nibbana. They are both concerned with exposing the fallacy of a > conventional self and even have the same, or a very similar, stepping > stone from here to there, sati in buddhism and witness consciousness in > vedanta. > > I had better stop there. This is way off topic; suffice it to say, > interesting papanca. > > Larry > ---------------- > Jon wrote: > I am just wondering if there could be another explanation for the fact > that 'the word "anatta" (not self) is never applied direct to nibbana in > the Suttas'. > Nibbana itself (as distinct from someone's concept of nibbana) cannot be > taken as self; it is not among the upadana-khandha, the khandhas that > are object of clinging. In which case, there would be no need for it to > be directly declared as being 'not-self'. > Of course, nibbana would nonetheless be included in any reference to all > dhammas being not-self. > Jon 12375 From: yuzhonghao Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 2:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas (sabhava) Hi Lucy, Whatever one observes, whatever comes to one's experience, it is impermanent, is unsatisfactory/dukkha, is not self. Phenomena can be classified in terms of nama or rupa. They can also be classified in terms of five aggregates or in terms of six sense bases. However every phenomenon is classified, it is impermanent, is unsatisfactory, is not self. "Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with the body, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is depleted, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" See http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-059.html Regards, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Lucy" wrote: > > From: > > > > Hi Lucy, my own opinon (which is useless) > > No more or less useless than anyone else's opinion ; ) > > > is that sabhava refers to > > basic element of experience > > and is more or less synonymous with > > paramattha dhamma. > > You may be right - but I still can't figure out what "own nature" in this > context could be. I'm more used to the idea of everything lacking an "own > nature" or "essence" since everything in samsara is the consequence of > something else (this being, this comes to be, etc.). At first I thought > sabhava (own nature) was anicca, dukkha & anatta - but these are laksana > (characteristics) and somewhere I read that laksana and sabhava aren't the > same thing... > > > Anything can be infinitely divided analytically but > > there are probably limits to experience. Of course some of this stuff > > (like bhavanga citta) was only experienced by the Buddha and maybe a few > > arahats. > > Yes. I'm still trying to distinguish rupa from nama ... the current limits > of my experience are utterly LIMITED ... . > But... .... .... .... I'm curious !!! > > Lucy > . 12376 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 10:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (7-11) Dear Larry, Lucy&Sarah (at the end) and ADL group <<< If an action (kamma) motivated by attachment (akusala citta - lobha) results in (conditions) a citta (vipaka) (which is always accompanied by a feeling), why does that feeling have to be unpleasant? It would seem that many actions motivated by attachment result in pleasant feeling. Conversly, why does a pleasant feeling vipaka signify kusala (virtuous) motivation.? >>> I like what you put together in your outline, ADL ch.2: <<< upadanakkhandha = khandha is object of clinging, taken for self 4noble truths dukkha = upadanakkhandha arising of dukkha = craving for feeling, rebirth, no rebirth ceasing of dukkha = ceasing attachment to that craving way going to this ceasing = 8fold path "As long as there is still clinging to the khandhas there will be the arising of the khandhas in rebirth and this means sorrow" >>> What is not dukkha? All 5 khandhas are dukkha; kusalacitta, akusalacitta, kusala-vipaka-citta, akusala-vipaka-citta, all cittas and their accompanies cetasika, and all rupa as well. These all can be objects for grasping or clinging. You said that the arising of dukkha is from craving, craving in dukkha (upadanakhanda). Robert mentioned about vipakavatta, kilesavatta and kammavatta (vatta means round or cycle). In brief, because of ignorance and clinging (kilesa), then come volition and action (kamma or cetana (kusala or akusala)), and then come results (vipaka citta, contact, feeling, other cetasika and - - -). This is a vicious cycle (~kilesa-kamma-vipaka- - - - ~). Only through the body sense, that the accompanied feeling is pleasant or unpleasant. For other doorways sense cittas (eye, ear, nose, tongue), the accompanied feeling is neutral for both kusala-vipaka and akusala-vipaka. << why does a pleasant feeling (BODY) vipaka signify kusala (virtuous) motivation>> I added the word BODY there. For me, it's very easy to mix up mental pleasant feeling of attachment (lobha (kilesa)) with bodily pleasant feeling (vipaka). And also the bodily unpleasant feeling is not the same moment as mental unpleasant feeling. The Buddha and the arahat are still subjected to vipaka; neutral, pleasant and unpleasant. But they completely eradicate kilesa, so they break away from the cycle. I am not sure that you also implied to ask why good action brings good result or not. I do not know how to really answer this; it's a fact or nature of kamma (kamma-niyama). As Lucy said, the nature of kamma-vipaka is extremely complicated. It's only the Buddha who knows exactly how it works. The more we see and understand dhammas as the way they are, the less doubtful we become, I believe. I am not sure I clarify anything, or not. You always ask "right on the money" kind of questions. Hope someone else will add more. Hope we keep on listening and studying. Let me revise the ADL plan for April 1 Apr. Ch. 2 8 Apr. Ch. 3 5 Apr. Ch. 4 22 Apr. Ch. 5 29 Apr. Ch. 6 Anumodana. Num PS. For Lucy&Sarah: Spring report: The whole town is now golden with blooming Forsythia, Daffodil and Narcissus. Sweet Hyacinth is on its way. Cherry is just started to blossom. Soon will be the crap-apple, the redbud and dogwood, lilac and later the tulip tree. Birds are coming back but the Canadian geese are leaving, I will miss their honk. Well, some geese love it here and decide to settle down South, so soon will come the gosling and also the duckling. I could not wait to play tennis and run outdoor, yessss please! 12377 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 5:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Hi Victor, I know someone who would answer yes to these questions. But I wouldn't. best regards, Larry ---------------------------- Hi Larry, Ask yourself this: "Is nibbana mine? Is nibbana what I am? Is nibbana my self?" Regards, Victor 12378 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 5:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (7-11) Thanks Lucy, very clear on vipaka. I wonder what makes it kamma result as opposed to just cause and effect? Larry 12379 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 7:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas (sabhava) Dear Lucy, I don't know if the sutta below is relevant. Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it exists. Feeling...perception..volitional formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote best wishes robert --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "Lucy" wrote: > > From: > > > > Hi Lucy, my own opinon (which is useless) > > No more or less useless than anyone else's opinion ; ) > > > is that sabhava refers to > > basic element of experience > > and is more or less synonymous with > > paramattha dhamma. > > You may be right - but I still can't figure out what "own nature" in this > context could be. I'm more used to the idea of everything lacking an "own > nature" or "essence" since everything in samsara is the consequence of > something else (this being, this comes to be, etc.). At first I thought > sabhava (own nature) was anicca, dukkha & anatta - but these are laksana > (characteristics) and somewhere I read that laksana and sabhava aren't the > same thing... > > > Anything can be infinitely divided analytically but > > there are probably limits to experience. Of course some of this stuff > > (like bhavanga citta) was only experienced by the Buddha and maybe a few > > arahats. > > Yes. I'm still trying to distinguish rupa from nama ... the current limits > of my experience are utterly LIMITED ... . > But... .... .... .... I'm curious !!! > > Lucy > . 12380 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 7:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (7-11) Hi Num, I forgot about the justice. Are we saying that every feeling is a kamma vipaka? Also what is happening with that sutta you and Nina were discussing about the various illnesses? I thought the Buddha was saying don't be concerned with what you cannot know (or something like that). Seems like it would be relevant to this subject. Can you explain this a little more: N:"Only through the body sense, that the accompanied feeling is pleasant or unpleasant. For other doorways sense cittas (eye, ear, nose, tongue), the accompanied feeling is neutral for both kusala-vipaka and akusala-vipaka." The resultant eye consciosness would be neutral? Could you give an example. Also what about resultant mind consciousness? kusala vipaka, Larry 12381 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 7:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Hi Christine, thanks for the links. How do you have time to find all this stuff??? Larry 12382 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 8:14pm Subject: ADL ch. 2 (12-17) from: http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html a corrected printing can be found at: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Abhidhamma In Daily Life chapter 2, paragraphs 12 - 17 12. Since there are many different moments of feeling arising and falling away it is difficult to distinguish them from each other. For instance, we are inclined to confuse bodily pleasant feeling which is vipaka and the pleasant feeling which may arise shortly afterwards together with attachment to that pleasant bodily feeling. Or we may confuse bodily pain and unpleasant feeling which may arise afterwards together with aversion. 13. When there is bodily pain, the painful feeling is vipaka, it accompanies the vipakacitta which experiences the object impinging on the body-sense. Unpleasant (mental) feeling may arise afterwards; it is not vipaka, but accompanies the akusala citta. It arises because of our accumulated dosa (aversion). Though 'bodily' feeling and 'mental' feeling are both nama, they are entirely different kinds of feelings, arising because of different conditions. When there are no more conditions for dosa there can still be bodily painful feeling, but there is no longer (mental) unpleasant feeling. The arahat may still have akusala vipaka as long as his life is not terminated yet, but he has no aversion. 14. We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (I, Sagatha-vagga, the Marasuttas, Ch. II, par. 3, The Splinter): Thus have I heard: The Exalted One was once staying at Rajagaha, in the Maddakucchi, at the Deer-preserve. Now at that time his foot was injured by a splinter. Sorely indeed did the Exalted One feel it, grievous the pains he suffered in the body, keen and sharp, acute, distressing and unwelcome. He truly bore them, mindful and deliberate, nor was he cast down.... 15. Feelings are sixfold when they are classified by way of the six doors: there is feeling which arises through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the body-sense and the mind. All these feelings are different; they arise because of different conditions. Feeling arises and falls away together with the citta it accompanies and thus at each moment feeling is different. 16. We read in the 'Kindred Sayings' (IV, Salayatana-vagga, Part II, Kindred Sayings about Feeling, par. 8, Sickness II) that the Buddha said to the monks: …Monks, a monk should meet his end collected and composed. This is our instruction to you. ...Now, monks, as that monk dwells collected, composed, earnest, ardent, strenuous, there arises in him feeling that is pleasant, and he thus understands: 'There is arisen in me this pleasant feeling. Now that is owing to something, not without cause. It is owing to this contact. Now this contact is impermanent, compounded, arisen owing to something. Owing to this impermanent contact which has so arisen, this pleasant feeling has arisen : How can that be permanent?' Thus he dwells contemplating the impermanence in contact and pleasant feeling, contemplating their transience, their waning, their ceasing, the giving of them up. Thus as he dwells contemplating their impermanence.. the lurking tendency to lust for contact and pleasant feeling is abandoned in him. So also as regards contact and painful feeling...contact and neutral feeling.... 17. There are still many more ways of classifying feelings. If we know about different ways of classifying feelings it will help us to realize that feeling is only a mental phenomenon which arises because of conditions. We are inclined to cling to the feeling which has fallen away instead of being aware of the reality of the present moment as it appears through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body-sense or mind. In the passage of the 'Visuddhimagga' which was quoted above (XX, 96) nama and rupa are compared to the sound of a lute which does not come from any 'store' when it arises, nor goes in any direction when it ceases, nor persists as a 'store' when it has ceased. However, we cling so much to feelings that we do not realize that the feeling which has fallen away does not exist any more, that it has ceased completely. Vedanakkhandha (feeling) is impermanent. 12383 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 9:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (12-17) Hi Larry & All, I just checked Binh's website and I think the version there of ADL is correct, at least it starts with 'The Five Khandhas'. It may be easier for you to use this one if so and if it saves Num having to send you files: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/nina-abhidhamma/nina-abhi-02.htm --- Sarah ======= LBIDD@w... wrote: > from: http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhid.html > a corrected printing can be found at: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > > Abhidhamma In Daily Life > chapter 2, paragraphs 12 - 17 12384 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch. 2 (1-6) Khandhas (sabhava) Dear Lucy, --- Lucy wrote: >Like: how to distinguish sabhava from lakkana ..... That’s a very tricky one. In the Theravada texts, sabhava is really used very little whereas lakkana is common.The answer is that they are almost interchangeable I think. Let me quote from Vism V111 n.68 ********** QUOTE In such passages as “Dhammas that are concepts (Dhs p.1, 1308) even a non-entity (abhavaa) is thus called a “dhamma” since it is borne (dhaariiyati) and affirmed (avadhaariiyatti) by knowledge. That kind of dhamma is excluded by his saying “Dhammas (means) individual essences”. The act of becoming (bhavana), which constitutes existingness (vijjamaanataa) in the ultimate sense, is essence (bhaava); it is with essence (saha bhaavena), thus it is an individual essence (sabhaava); the meaning is that it is possible (labbhamaanaruupa) in the true sense, in the ultimate sense. For these are called “dhammas (bearers)” because they bear (dfhaarana) their own individual essences (sabhaava), and they are called “individual essences” in the sense already explained (Pm.282) ********** In other words, sabhava differentiates paramattha dhammas from concepts, but does not suggest atta as in the Mahayana use of the term, as I understand. continuing: QUOTE In the Pitakas the word sabhava seems to appear only once. It next appears in the Netti, (and) the Milindapanha. It is used extensively for exegetical purposes in the Visuddhimagga and main commentaries and likewise in the sub-commentaries. As has just been shown, it is narrower than dhamma. It often roughly corresponds to dhatu (element) and to lakkhana (characteristic), but less nearly to the vaguer and untechnical pakati (nature), or to rasa (function). The Atthasalini observes: “it is the individual essence, or the generality, of such and such dhammas that is called their characteristic’(DhsA630; on which the mula tika comments: “The individual essence consisting in, say, hardness as that of earth, or touching as that of contact, is not common to all dhammas.” ********** Let me also quote the following from Rob k’s earlier post where he quotes from the Mulapariyaya Sutta Commentary: QUOTE the majjhimanikaya tika (mulapariyaya sutta) has the following to say. I use bhikkhu bodhi's translation p39. It comments on the atthakatha which says "they bear their own characteristics, thus they are dhammas." The tika(subcommentary ) notes. "although there are no dhammas devoid of their own characteristics this is said fro the purpose of showing that mere dhammas endowed with their specific natures devoid of such attributes as being etc... whereas such entities as self, permanence or nature, soul, body etc are mere misconstructions due to craving and views...and cannot be discovered as ultinately real actualities, these dhammas (ie.those endowed with a specific sabhava) can. these dhammas are discovered as actually real actualties. And although there IS NO REAL DISTINCTION between these dhammas and their characteristics, still, in order to facilitate understanding, the exposition makes a distinction as a mere metaphorical device. Also they are borne, or they are discerned, known , acccording to their specific nature, thus they are dhammas" It should be noted that when it says they are real, essence etc. this doesn't imply existence in the usual sense of an independent lasting thing. All dhammas are conditioned in complex ways by other dhammas It is just a flux happening so fast that time itself can only be understood by reference to the change of dhamma ********** > Is there any example anywhere of the sabhava for any dhamma? To be > consistent, sabhava (leaving nibbana aside) has to be > causal/conditioned, > then how can it be a dhamma's own-being? Or is it that sabhava = the > causal/conditioned nature...which would be like saying that sabhava is > sunyata...which is where my questions probably started from.... : ) .......... In the Vism quote above it mentions the nature (sabhava) of hardness. As I understand (just from my own considering now), the nature of hardness when touched now is quite different to the nature of heat or cold. Furthermore the sabhava of the hardness experienced at this moment of touching is very different again from the sabhava of hardness experienced a moment later. Each reality has its own sabhava even though they have common characteristics (lakkhana) such as the tri-lakkhana which themselves are asabhava (without sabhava). If these realities had no sabhava and no lakkhana, they would not arise, fall away and be inherently unsatisfactory. Anatta (sunyata) is one of the lakkhana of all realities. We don’t talk about the conditioned nature of anatta, lakkhana or sabhava because they are always the characteristics and nature of the paramattha dhammas. ..... I hope I haven’t confused you more. It’s a topic of great interest (and confusion) for those from a Mahayana background studying the Theravada Texts, as I know as the term is used with very different meanings. Let me add one more quote used by Rob K on the topic (also just taken from Useful Posts) which relates well to the confusion of not understanding the difference between concepts and realities too: .......... QUOTE The Udanaatthakatha (trans. masefield p.878) Blind from birth chapter: "since they do not know Dhamma, they do not know that which is not Dhamma either. For these, on account of pervesenesses, take dhamma though skilled as unskilled, take dhamma though unskilled as skilled. And not only are they confused where dhamma and what is not dhamma are concerened, but also the ripening thereof are concerned..Similarly, they neither know dhamma to be a thing having an owm nature (sabhava), nor do they know that which is not dhamma to be a thing lacking an own nature.(Dhammam sabhavadhammam..adhammam asabhavadhammam) And as such they declare a thing having an own nature as though it were a thing lacking an own nature.... robert ********** This is an interesting and quite a new area for me to consider, thanks Lucy. Btw, I remember the WET English bank holidays (and of course in Snowdonia that means VERY WET ;-)) At least it gave you a good chance to catch up on dsg and keep up with Num’s schedule. Best wishes, Sarah ====================== 12385 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:17pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) Dear Lucy, > -----Original Message----- > From: Lucy [mailto:selene@c...] > "interpretation" mingle. But then come MORE > questions: what happens to rupa > when it isn't being experienced, is it there or > isn't it ? I believe in the model, rupas around us are all there, even though infinitsmally breifly, but TA. Sujin said even though they are there, they might as well not be there (as they are not being experienced by the cittas). We can't study dhammas that don't appear. Further, if it doesn't appear, assuming that it is there is a big iffy. How do you know the person speaking behind you just a moment ago is still there??? Maybe the person has already spontaneously combusted! > does it > disappear together with the citta? (or after 17+ > citta to be precise) --- Some rupas are quite independent of the cittas. A corpse (or a rock!) exists independently of the cittas. kom 12386 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:19pm Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) Just a little addendum... > -----Original Message----- > From: Kom Tukovinit [mailto:tikmok0@f...] > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 11:18 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) > > > > Some rupas are quite independent of the cittas. A corpse > (or a rock!) exists independently of the cittas. > But nothing appears (is known) without cittas! kom 12387 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] samatha and vipassana Thank you, Nina. I appreciated reading these excerpts. Anything else you post in this area will also be greatly enjoyed. They put the different approaches in a good perspective. I wonder if there is a special reason why Abhidhamma followers seem to emphasize the 'dry insight' approach. Am I mistaken about this? Is it because it is believed that those capable of the other approaches are no longer present in this age? Or is it more that the emphasis on suttas and contemplation of the truth of the Dhamma is more in line with the style and temperament of Abhidhamma? Best, Robert Ep. ====== --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > You were wondering about suttas mentioning dry insight, as I understood. > Here is a post I wrote before, but you were absent at that time, and thus, I > repost it. Little by little I shall look up other suttas about this subject. > See below. > Reposted: > It has been explained in the Abhidhamma, Puggala Pannatti, Human Types, that > some people develop samatha and vipassana and some only vipassana, they have > , sukkha vipassana. I shall just quote a text from the Suttanta > where this is explained. Kindred Sayings II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, > Nidana vagga, II, 119: Susima: we read that Susima the wanderer was > persuaded by his followers to join the Order so that he could learn the > Dhamma and teach his followers. They wanted then to preach the Dhamma to the > laity in order to receive honour and gain. Susima was ordained by Ananda and > heard that many monks had attained arahatship. Susima asked them whether > they had attained supranatural powers, rupa-jhana or arupa-jhana and they > answered that they had not. When Susima asked them "How is that", they > answered: > "We have been freed by insight, friend Susima." > Susima answered: "I do not know fully the matter stated concisely by the > venerable ones. It would be well if the venerable ones were to state it so > that I might come to know fully the matter they have stated concisely" > "Whether you know it, friend Susima, or whether you do not know it, we have > been freed by insight." > Susima went to the Buddha who explained to him: > "First comes knowledge of the law of cause (and effect) , afterwards comes > knowledge about nibbana." > The Buddha then asked him whether the body is permanent or impermanent, and > whether what is impermanent is dukkha or pleasant, sukha, and whether one > can take what is impermanent and dukkha for self. The Buddha asked him the > same about the other khandhas, aggregates, and then taught him the Dependent > Origination in order and in reverse order, which mmeans that with the > ceasing of ignorance there is the end of the cycle of birth and death. > The Buddha then asked him whether when he would know this, he would enjoy > the supramundane powers, and whether he could attain arupa-jhana, he > answered that he could not. The Buddha said: > "Here then, Susima:- this catechism and the non-attainment of these > things:-this is what we have done. " > > We read in the Kindred Sayings I, I, 190, Vangisa Sutta, Invitation, that > with the Buddha were 500 monks who were arahats. The Buddha said to > Sariputta: "There is nothing, Sariputta, for which I blame these five > hundred Monks, in deed or word. Of these monks, sixty have the threefold > knowledge, sixty have sixfold supernormal knowledge, sixty are emancipated > in both ways, and then others are emancipated by insight (alone). " > Thus we can conclude, the majority, 320, only developed insight. > End of old post. > Here is more: > Gradual Sayings, Book of the Fours, Ch IX, § 9, Kinds of Recluses (c): > > Monks, these four persons are found in the world. What four? > The unshaken recluse, the blue lotus recluse, the white lotus recluse and > the recluse exquisite among recluses. And how, monks, is a person an > unshaken recluse? > Herein a monks is one of right view....right concentration... > And how, monks, is a person a blue-lotus recluse? > Herein a monk is of right view and the rest...he is one of right knowledge, > of right release. Yet does he not abide experiencing with his own person the > eight deliverances... > And how, monks, is a person a white-lotus recluse? > Herein a monk is of right view and the rest... he is one of right knowledge, > of right release, and he abides experiencing with his own person the eight > deliverances... > And how is a person a recluse exquisite among recluses? > Herein a monk, if invited, enjoys a plentiful supply of robes... Now monks, > if rightly speaking one would speak about the recluse exquisite among > recluses, it is just of me that he would rightly use the words... > > The eight deliverances, vimokkha, see Buddhist dictionary (Nyanatiloka): > including both rupa-jhana and arupa-jhana. > Co (in Thai), In the first group are included the seven (sekha), > the ariyans of the three first stages, and the arahat who has attained > magga, but not yet phala (fruit, that follows the magga-citta). Second > group: the arahat who is sukha-vipassaka, who has dry insight. By the ten > fold Path, or the eightfold Path plus the fruition consciousness of the > arahat and the release of the fruition-consciousness of the arahat. > The Co. states that the third person is twice liberated, ubhato > bhaga-vimutta. > The fourth person is the Buddha. As formerly explained in the sutta. > > All these texts are very intricate and without co. they are very difficult > to understand, I find. But the Buddha thought of people with different > accumulations. He praised samatha, and the person who deserves the highest > respect is the person endowed with jhanas, supranatural powers and the four > , patisambiddhas. In the Co. it has been explained > that when further away from the Buddha's time the arahats have less > excellent qualities, no more analytical knowledges. In the Co. to the In the > 3Samantapåsådikå2, in the Commentary to the Vinaya, to the Cullavagga, Ch X, > on Nuns, the decline of Buddhism has been explained in the Buddha era of > this Buddha, the Buddha Gotama. This Commentary explains about the degrees > of paññå of ariyans in the different periods after the Buddha1s passing > away. During the period of the first thousand years there were still arahats > with the four 3analytical knowledges2, paìisambhidå . In the following > period of thousand years there were only arahats who are sukkha vipassaka, > those who had not attained any stage of jhåna, but who had developed only > insight. In the third period of thousand years there are only people who > have attained the state of non-returner, anågåmí, in the fourth period of > thousand years there are only sakadågåmís and in the fifth period of > thousand years there are only sotåpannas. > > Reading about all this is not enough, in the final analysis we should check > citta. Jon and I corresponded on the mind that is , ready > or pure, in the context of his post on the gradual training for Upali, where > a person is ready to receive the Dhamma and attains enlightenment. Now, it > is important to develop the perfections together with satipatthana, > otherwise enlightenment cannot be attained. A good quality is a perfection > only if not developed for one's own sake but with the aim to have less > defilements, less clinging to a self. I recently heard a tape of A. Sujin > that impressed me so much: when we believe that we develop kusala we should > know whether we have expectations or not. Is there now something we expect > or are hoping for? Then we better check whether there is some subtle > clinging. But nobody else can give you the answer, only you yourself. > I have to finish, this post becomes too long, with appreciation for your > study and careful consideration, > Nina. 12388 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Directed attention to dhammas (Ken H., Eric, Howard) Nice to hear your experience with Larry Rosenberg. That would indeed be a great experience. Robert Ep. =============== --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 4/2/02 3:53:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@Y... writes: > > > > > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Robert - > > > > > > Meanwhile, like yourself, I hope that my limited meditation schedule > > and my > > > > constant preoccupation with the Buddhist vision of reality will yield > > its > > > > own > > > > fruit in my path. And that this 'dry' involvement with scriptures and > > > > contemplation of realities will be fruitful. Given a growing sense > > that I > > > > am > > > > getting increasing familiarity with what Buddhism is really about as I > > > > proceed, I > > > > have some hope that this is the case. > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > Howard: > > > What can really give the "dry" approach a *major* boost is an > > > occasional meditation retreat. I strongly recommend it. > > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Howard, > > This is very good advice, and I have been 'longing' for a retreat. I > > happen to > > have come upon a Tibetan Empowerment which I will attend this weekend, only > > the > > Saturday as my schedule is so full, on 'Chod' or 'Cutting Through' the > > delusion of > > self. I am looking forward to it. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The topic of cutting through the illusion of self sounds very much to > the point. I am personally unfamiliar with retreats other than Theravadin > (although I've had many "all-day sits" at the Ch'an Center of New York). From > my understanding, Tibetan Buddhism constitutes a rather large umbrella, > covering many different approaches, schools, and sub-schools. I hope you have > checked out this particular organization to the extent of being reasonably > certain that this retreat will be "right" for you. In any case, may you find > it to be very fruitful! > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > I have been wanting to follow in my old Vipassana/Yoga teacher's footsteps > > and do > > some retreats at the Insight Meditation Center in Barre, Mass., where a lot > > of > > good Theravadan teachers give retreats of different lengths, but so far > > haven't > > gotten there. Ah, kamma is a terrible inconvenience. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > About a year ago I attending a weekend (commuting) retreat in > Greenwich Village, Manhattan, led by Larry Rosenberg under the auspices of > New York Insight, the progeny of IMC. He is a wonderful retreat leader, and > the experience was superb. What stands out mostly in my mind, from my > personal perspective, was how incredible the walking meditation was! (A big > surprise for me.) The depth of concentration and clarity of mind that was > attained during the walking meditation amazed and delighted me. It was most > unusual. If you ever get the opportunity to attend a retreat led by him, I > encourage you to avail yourself of it. > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > My last retreat was about 15 years ago and had a profound impact on me. We > > just > > practiced basic Vipassana meditation in a long weekend of silent sitting, > > walking > > meditation, eating slowly with mindfulness, no shower, drinking collected > > rainwater in the country. It was very hard and very wonderful, with no > > talk, no > > technology, just each other's Dhamma company and the breath. It went a > > long way. > > > > But I think after 15 years it's time for another retreat, don't you? > > > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes. ;-)) > --------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Best, > > Robert Ep. > > 12389 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Erik's Controversial Comments;-) --- Sarah wrote: > Dear Rob Ep, > > --- Robert Epstein wrote: > Sarah, > > I can't find anything in this post that I disagree with. Maybe I'm too > > tired, and > > should read it again in the morning. > > Well, with a 12 hour time difference, it would make your time now about > 4.50 a.m. (close to the time some of us rise in the morning;-)) > > Thanks for your > > clarifications, which > > add a lot to the discussion. > > Thanks Rob....maybe I'll try to be more controversial next time > Seriously, I'm happy to settle for a little agreement rather than another > marathon for now. (Erik may not be so obliging;-)) > > Sweet dreams, > : -) robert 12390 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Dear Larry, Two (nearly three) years of the conjunction of three happenings - finding the Teachings, not-finding a teacher, and buying a computer. From the beginning, I asked lots of questions, and used Google. Anything relevant was put in a Favourites Folder.....so if I see a question on a topic that I once wondered a lot about, the links are mostly already in a Folder. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Christine, thanks for the links. How do you have time to find all > this stuff??? > > Larry 12391 From: Sarah Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 0:59am Subject: Time for Kom Dear Kom & All, Your recent posts and my quotes from the Vism remind me that I meant to add more on Time as you requested. In the Vism (V111n68) it discusses (as we have done before) how “the individual essence of any formed dhamma is manifested in the three instants of its existence (atthitaa, vijjamaanataa), namely arising, presence (=ageing) and dissolution. It comes from nowhere and goes nowhere (XV,15) and is borne by the mind.” It then discusses how Space (aakaasa) and Time (kaala) are asabhava dhamma. It quotes the commentary to MN which says “Space, which is quite devoid of individual essence is called empty” and “Though time is determined by the kind of consciousness and is non-existent (avijjamaana) as to individual essence, yet as the non-entity (abhaava) before and after the moment in which those (conascent and co-present) dhammas occur, it is called the ‘container (adhikara.na)’; it is perceived only as the state of a receptacle (aadhaara-bhaava).” ********** In the Atthasalini (Commentary to Dhammasangani), there is a long explanation of the various meanings of samaya (time) “to show various distinct meanings”. including (as Nyanaponoka’s essay discusses) chronological time as above (kaalo=pavattikaalo, duration), concurrence (samvaaya) of co-existing conditions, condition (hetu), kha.na (moment for wholesome consciousnes), samuuha (aggregation). This may seem rather an academic topic to many, but when we consider the details, it can help understand different aspects of the Teachings, such as conditions; The Atthasalini (p.79) continues: “To expand: Of these, samaya in the sense of ‘harmony of antecedents’ shows occurrence from many causes. By showing this, the view that there is one single cause is contradicted. by ‘harmony of antecedents’ is meant the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result. Therefore it also shows there is no single agent. For when there is a cause (adequate) in its own nature, it is not fitting to look about for another cause. Thus by showing the non-existence of any one cause (the errroneous view) that pain and pleasure are created by oneself is contradicted.” One more brief quote from the same text for Christine’s interest in anatta and ‘no control”: “Samaya in the sense of ‘condition’ shows the ocurrence in dependence on another. the phrase ‘at what time’ connotes the occurrence of something when its condition exists, that is to say, of something on which it depends. By this word showing thus the condition, the conceit of one who believes that states unconditionally follow one’s own will (savasa) is subdued.” ********** I’m sure you (Kom) have access to this text to read more details. They all help us to understand more about paccaya (conditions) and anatta. On quite a different thread of Time and back to chronological time, I think, there is a relevant debate in Kathavatthu (Duration of Consciousness p124,PTS trans) which I like because it relates to a favourite dsg theme, i.e the speed of consciousness;-) One sect, the Andakas, suggested that “judging by the apparent continuity both of consciousness in Jhana and of sub-consciousness, a single state of consciousness lasted for a length of time”. I can’t quote the whole debate, but as I mentioned before, these debates are so similar to our discussions. Here are a few quotes only: .......... “Theravadan: “If your proposition is true, does one half of the day belong to the ‘nascent moment’ and one half to the ‘cessant moment’? You say no; but you have implied it. A similar admission is involved in affirming that a state of consciousnes lasts two days, or four........any number of aeons. Are there any other phenomena beside mind which arise and cease many times during one day? Yes, you say? Then do you contend that they come and go as quickly as mind? If you say no, then your proposition falls. If you say they do, was it not said by the Exalted One: “I consider, bhikkhus, that there is no phenomenon that comes and goes so quickly as mind. It is not easy to find a simile to show how quickly mind comes and goes’?(AN1,10) Again: ‘Just as a monkey faring through the dense forest catches one bough, and, letting it go, catches another, and then another, even so, bhikkhus, with what is called thought, or mind, or consciousness, by day as by night one arises when another perishes’? (SN11,95)” ********* They even use two of our favourite sutta quotes for the discussion (the first being *our* luminous mind favourite and the second being one I remember Dan and others discussing in just this manner. At the end of the debate, the Andaka asks: .......... “A: does then the mind of the devas who have reached the plane of space-infinity arise and cease moment by moment? Th: It does.” ********** Kom , hope you’ve found these quotes interesting. It's been fun for me to write them out as I'm on holiday still this week. Sarah ================ 12392 From: Sarah Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 1:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and 'not-self' (was, ADL ch. 2 (1-6)) Hi Larry (& Chris), --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Larry, > > Two (nearly three) years of the conjunction of three happenings - > finding the Teachings, not-finding a teacher, and buying a computer. > From the beginning, I asked lots of questions, and used Google. > Anything relevant was put in a Favourites Folder.....so if I see a > question on a topic that I once wondered a lot about, the links are > mostly already in a Folder. In other words, this is a very organised lady.....most impressive and so very helpful for us all, Chris. In admiration (and only just beginning to learn how to save links), Sarah =========== 12393 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 1:25am Subject: Equity Issue? Dear All, Hint for Moderators: n.b. - the dhamma related focus in the following post is wise attention, realities, the present moment, desire, clinging, no-control, anatta, kamma-vipaka, papanca, dukkha, vedana, compassion, ignorance -(must be in there somewhere, it's in everything else), probably wrong view, + I'm sure that the paticcasamupadda could have been worked into this but unfortunately I had too little time........ This is a serious issue and I hope you will all give it your earnest attention and consideration. I'm wondering what others think of Social Justice issues, particularly Inequity and Imbalance of Power, within this list. Far be it from me to hark back to old issues - there is nothing worse than someone who 'clings' to past occurrences, exaggerates them out of all proportion, maybe even ornaments the truth and fabricates (papanca-izes?) additional variations. However, the reality is that 'Some of Us' were (or at least representations of us were) posted to the Photos section by Others (no-control), and, 'Others of Us' willingly exposed ourselves to the gaze of 'Who knows Whom' - [perhaps 'why this is so' is a Ph. D. thesis in itself with an Appendix 1 exploring issues surrounding "Whether the list of all members names should be made available to other members"?] I seem to spend half my life reading and 'inwardly digesting' contributions on dsg (is this still papanca or have I moved on through exaggeration to delusion?) - I feel it would add to the ambience at this 'mealtime' if I could visualise each of the contributors as they really are. (I'm sure this involves nama and rupa). And what is my point exactly,I hear you ask? Well, whether you did or not, I'll tell you....... Azita, , Bhante D., Jaran, KenH , KKT, KenO, Larry, LaymanJohn, Lucy, Manji., Mike B, Michael N, Purnomo, Ranil, Stigan, Suan, Yulia and other posters who may have momentarily escaped my notice, and ALL lurkers........inserting passionate and possibly irrelevant appeal---- ->> How can you let 'Some of Us' and 'Others of Us' carry All the Burden of being "Viewed"? Isn't there something in the buddhist idea of compassionately sharing the tribulations of life? Do you want to be 'continually admonished' (nicer word than nagged) about this? Remember Submission is the ultimate virtue {oops! I'm wandering off onto a different spiritual path here}. I hope you don't feel I'm harassing, intimidating or embarrassing you, because as I've recently been learning, Ultimately "there is no- one to be harassed, intimidated or embarrassed; and there is no-one who does the harassing, intimidating or embarrassing." metta, Christine 12394 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 2:30am Subject: akusala a concept? Dear Larry, you were wonderin whether akusala citta can be a concept. Paramattha dhamma is difficult to understand for all of us. We know in theory: akusala citta is citta paramattha, dosa is cetasika paramattha, but when it appears how is our understanding? I heard recently again on tape about this subject and it was stressed by A. Sujin that we cannot alter paramattha dhammas, we cannot change their characteristics. When we have aversion, the characteristic of aversion cannot be changed into attachment or into something else. Aversion is always aversion, that is its nature, its characteristic. When it appears it manifests its characteristic, we do not doubt about it. The same about hearing. There is hearing now, it cannot be changed into seeing. You do not have to name it, you do not have to think about it, it presents itself already. When touching something, hardness may appear, and it cannot be changed into heat. We can call it the Element of Earth or the rupa that is solidity, but when it presents itself it manifests its own characteristic. We can change the name of a paramattha dhamma but not its charactyeristic. I do not know whether this approach helps you. When we merely think and wonder whether we think about a reality or a concept, or, when we think about a reality whether the paramattha dhamma changes into a concept, we will continue to have doubts. It is helpful to consider what presents itself at this moment. Best wishes from Nina. 12395 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 2:30am Subject: Co. to Sivakasutta, Part 2 Co. to Sivakasutta, Part 2: Co. Siivakasutta, Part 2. (I am sure to have made mistakes) saamampi kho etanti ta.m ta.m pittavikaara.m disvaa attanaapi eta.m veditabba.m. saccasammatanti bhuutasammata.m. N: < Also by one¹s own experience indeed this (can be known)>, meaning: when he has seen this change of the bile he should also know this by his own experience. , meaning: it is accepted as what has happened. lokopi hissa sariire sabalava.n.nataadipittavikaara.m disvaa ``pittamassa kupita''nti jaanaati. N: Also people in the world, when they have noticed in the body a change in appearance of the bile that has an outburst, etc. they know, tasmaati yasmaa saama~nca vidita.m lokassa ca saccasammata.m atidhaavanti, tasmaa. semhasamu.t.thaanaadiisupi eseva nayo. N: , in as far as it is known by one¹s own experience and as it is agreed upon in the world, therefore, they go too far. The same method goes for feelings arisen because of phlegm, and so on. ettha pana sannipaatikaaniiti ti.n.nampi pittaadiina.m kopena samu.t.thitaani. utupari.naamajaaniiti visabhaagaututo jaataani. N: Here again, as to the words < arisen because of the union of bodily humours>, also with reference to the (other of the) three factors of bile, etc. , they have originated from anger. As to the words, < arisen because of change of climate>, they have arisen because of climate that is not ordinary. ja"ngaladesavaasiina~nhi anupadese vasantaana.m visabhaago utu uppajjati, anupadesavaasiina~nca ja"ngaladeseti eva.m malayasamuddatiiraadivasenaapi utuvisabhaagataa uppajjatiyeva. tato jaataati utupari.naamajaataani naama. N: For those who live in the desert a climate that is not ordinary (to them) arises when they live in the countryside, and for those who live in the countryside a climate that is not common (to them) arises when they live in the desert or also at a seashore with (sandy) dust and so on. What arises from change of climate originates from (all ) that. visamaparihaarajaaniiti mahaabhaaravahanasudhaako.t.tanaadito vaa avelaaya carantassa sappa.da.msakuupapaataadito vaa visamaparihaarato jaataani. N: , by carrying a heavy load or by pounding lime and so on, or for a person who travels at an unfavorable time, who is then bitten by a snake or gadfly or falls into a well and so on, that means, arisen because of adverse behaviour. ****** 12396 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 2:30am Subject: Calm and Insight Dear Rob Ep and all, I have a few more texts about calm and insight that may be of interest. Gradual Sayings (II, Book of the Fours, Ch IX, § 7, Kinds of Recluses) Monks, these four persons are found existing in the world. What four? The unshaken recluse, the blue-lotus recluse, the white-lotus recluse, and the recluse who is exquisite among recluses. And how, monks, is one an unshaken recluse? Herein, monks, a monk is a pupil, one who has entered the way; he dwells aspiring for the unsurpassed rest of the toil.... And how, monks, is a person a blue-lotus recluse? Herein, a monk, by destroying the asavas, has reached the heart¹s release, the release by wisdom that is free from the asavas, and having realized it abides therein. Yet does he not abide experiencing with his own person the eight deliverances... And how, monks, is a person a white-lotus recluse? Herein, a monk, by destroying the asavas...abides therein, and abides experiencing with his own person the eight deliverances. And how, monks, is a person a recluse exquisite among recluses? Herein a monk when invited enjoys a plentiful supply of robes... The Commentary states that the seven learners, (sekha puggala), thus as in the previously quoted passage, are unshaken because they are rooted in confidence in the Teacher. Blue-lotus recluse is like the blue lotus (pundarika), the lotus in the pond that has less than hundred leaves. The Co explains that the Buddha spoke about the arahat who only developed vipassana. He is called blue-lotus recluse because his qualities are not complete, being without the jhanas or the supranatural powers. As to the white-lotus recluse, he is like the white lotus (paduma), that was planted into the pond complete with hundred leaves. The Buddha spoke of the arahat who has a twofold release. His qualities are complete, because he has the jhanas and the supranatural powers. As to the fourth kind of recluse, the Co. states that he is the Buddha. Thus we see that the blue-lotus recluse could still attain arahatship. We read in the Gradual Sayings, Book of the Fours( II, Ch XVI, §10, Coupled) that Anada said : Reverend sirs, when anyone, be it monk or nun, proclaaims in my presence that he has attained arahatship, all such do so by virtue of four factors or by one of these four. What are they? Herein, your reverences, a monk develops insight preceded by calm. In him thus developing insight preceded by calm is born the Way. He follows along that Way, makes it grow, makes much of it... the fetters are abandoned, the lurking tendencies come to an end. Or again, your reverences, a monk develops calm preceded by insight. In him thus developing calm preceded by insight is born the Way... the lurking tendencies come to an end. Yet again, your reverences, a monk develops calm-and-insight coupled. In him thus developing.. the Way is born... the lurking tendencies come to an end. Once more, your reverences, a monk¹s mind is utterly cleared of perplexities about dhamma. That is the time, your reverences, when his thought stands fixed in the very self, settles down, becomes one-pointed, is composed. In him the Way is born... the lurking tendencies come to an end. The Co explains that the Way is the first stage of enlightenment. As to the second factor, the monk is already used to developing insight and then samadhi arises. As to the third factor, he is aware and considers the sankharas, jhanafactors, in between the different stages of jhana he enters and emerges from. As to the fourth factor, he has abandoned the ten defilements of vipassana. He does not cling to samatha nor to vipassana. It is interesting that there is no special order, a person¹s way of development depends on his accumulations. I discussed calm and insight with A. Supee in India. He reminded me that whenever we read about calm, it is implied that it goes together with insight. For some people the factor calm is stronger, for others less strong. And as Kom explained, when insight is developed there are conditions for more calm, in a natural way. The sotapanna has more calm than the ordinary person, because he has less defilements. The sotapanna who has developed insight has such strong, unshakable confidence in the Triple gem, and when there are conditions he can have great calm while contemplating the Buddha¹s virtues. Only ariyans could attain jhana with this meditation subject. The person who has attained the third stage of enlightenment, the anagami, is no longer attached to sense objects, thus, naturally, he has a great deal of calm. When we read about the ideal Recluse, he goes forth with the aim to attain arahatship, and becomes endowed with the highest qualities. Taken into account that we are further away from the Buddha¹s time, we can draw our conclusions to what extent all such high qualities are still possible. Then, when we read about jhanas, we will understand all these passages in their right perspective. No more doubts whether all of us should develop jhana. Nina. 12397 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 4:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] akusala a concept? Dear Nina, I think I am having a question in the same line. Big help... *** I have not gone throuh this whole discussion you are having right now. so please forgive me if I am asking an already answered question.*** Anyway... here it goes, in kusal there are two kinds of Vipaka citas. 1. Sa + Hetu = Sahetuka (8 vipaka citas here) 2. A + Hetu = Ahetuka (8 vipaka citas here) Here "Hetu" means loba, dosa, moha, aloba, adosa, amoha. and "Sa" means - including "A" means - excluding. So we are having, 8 vipaka citas "Including" loba, dosa, moha, aloba, adosa, amoha and 8 vipaka citas "Excluding" loba, dosa, moha, aloba, adosa, amoha. Buuuuuuuuuutttttttttt, In akusal Only 7 vipaka citas "Excluding" loba, dosa, moha, aloba, adosa, amoha are present. That means 7 "A"+Hetu means 7 Ahethuka vipaka citas for Akusal. Now my doubt is, Why Akusal dont have vipaka citas "Including" loba, dosa, moha, aloba, adosa, amoha. What happend to that part? Thank you so much..... ~with meththa Ranil >From: Nina van Gorkom >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: >Subject: [dsg] akusala a concept? >Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 12:30:21 +0200 > >Dear Larry, you were wonderin whether akusala citta can be a concept. >Paramattha dhamma is difficult to understand for all of us. We know in >theory: akusala citta is citta paramattha, dosa is cetasika paramattha, but >when it appears how is our understanding? I heard recently again on tape >about this subject and it was stressed by A. Sujin that we cannot alter >paramattha dhammas, we cannot change their characteristics. When we have >aversion, the characteristic of aversion cannot be changed into attachment >or into something else. Aversion is always aversion, that is its nature, >its >characteristic. When it appears it manifests its characteristic, we do not >doubt about it. The same about hearing. There is hearing now, it cannot be >changed into seeing. You do not have to name it, you do not have to think >about it, it presents itself already. When touching something, hardness may >appear, and it cannot be changed into heat. We can call it the Element of >Earth or the rupa that is solidity, but when it presents itself it >manifests >its own characteristic. We can change the name of a paramattha dhamma but >not its charactyeristic. >I do not know whether this approach helps you. When we merely think and >wonder whether we think about a reality or a concept, or, when we think >about a reality whether the paramattha dhamma changes into a concept, we >will continue to have doubts. It is helpful to consider what presents >itself >at this moment. >Best wishes from Nina. 12398 From: Date: Tue Apr 2, 2002 11:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) Hi, Kom (and Sarah) - In a message dated 4/3/02 2:19:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, tikmok0@f... writes: > Just a little addendum... > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kom Tukovinit [mailto:tikmok0@f...] > > Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 11:18 PM > > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: RE: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) > > > > > > > > Some rupas are quite independent of the cittas. A corpse > > (or a rock!) exists independently of the cittas. > > > > But nothing appears (is known) without cittas! > > kom > ============================= Also - how can a corpse or rock exist independently of cittas when a corpse or rock is just a *concept*? (Right Sarah? ;-) While we're on that topic, it would seem that people in the Middle East are being wounded and killed at this very moment by concepts, namely rocks and bullets. Oh, but no one is really being wounded - it's only concepts wounding concepts, and sometimes creating other concepts, corpses! A tragedy, but only conceptual, right? So not really a tragedy, right? (Note: Please see my disclaimer about this paragraph at the end of this post.) Or is that not right? It seems to me that it is not right. It seems to me that the analysis of dhammas into so-called "realities" and "concepts" with nothing further said is simplistic to the extent of being misleading and hiding what is true. Well grounded concepts are thoughts and thought patterns which serve as shortcuts, as mental abbreviations into which huge amounts of genuine information is packed. When such a concept is correctly superimposed via sa~n~na on our direct experience, it provides knowledge of conditionality .. in the form of "When this is experienced, that will be experienced", such as "When the experience expressed as 'being hit by a sharp object' occurs, the experience of severe pain follows." Our conceptual knowledge is an abbreviation for large amounts of direct experiential knowledge, but is "translatable" into direct, experiential terms only with great difficulty. Packed into a piece of conceptual knowledge are a multitude of direct experiences and observed relations holding among them, and that packing allows for a predictive capability which would be absent without it. If we are *overcome* by the realization that there are only namas and rupas, and no trees, houses, and people, we can fall into an error similar to one of the then-existing philosophies criticized by the Buddha wherein there was seen to be no real harm done when putting a sword through a person, because it was just emptiness passing through emptiness. In my second paragraph of this post, I write in an extreme Jonathan Swift manner to make a point. That point is that we should be careful not to get carried away by our very own concepts of "concept" and "reality" to the extent of losing sight of and even denying conventional reality, for yes, that is a kind of "reality" as well, and deprecating that reality *beyond a certain degree* can lead to error. At least that's how I see it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 12399 From: robertkirkpatrick.rm Date: Wed Apr 3, 2002 4:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] ADL ch 1 (3) (Rupa) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > If we > are *overcome* by the realization that there are only namas and rupas, and no > trees, houses, and people, we can fall into an error similar to one of the > then-existing philosophies criticized by the Buddha wherein there was seen to > be no real harm done when putting a sword through a person, because it was > just emptiness passing through emptiness. > +++++++++++++ Dear Howard, In the situation you describe above which namas would be present? Wouldn't there be citta rooted in dosa (anger or hatred). And that level of dosamula citta - a reality - is of the degree that can result in rebirth in a plane where all vipaka (momentary namas) are unpleasant and undesirable (hell in conventional terms). Instead of making one think that no harm could be done by killing distinguishing reality from concept, the more it is known, makes one realise that even the slightest illdeed is dangerous. best wishes robert