17000 From: James Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 9:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Jon, I feel that these are excellent observations, reflective of deep insight. Therefore, humbly, I have a line of questioning(s) for you (or others on-list) if you may consider it/them: What do you relect about the usefulness of koans in disrupting discursive thought to reach pure awareness? Is there a significant difference between discursive thought and pure awareness? If so, what is that difference? Do you believe it is possible to disrupt discursive thought, or simply to minimize it? Is either necessary for pure awareness? Could the Abhidhamma be viewed as a method of turning discursive thought into a vehicle for pure awareness (like an 'Intellectual Koan') or is it pure awareness itself? Thank you for considering my questions. Metta, James ps. For ESL members: dis·cur·sive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d- skûrsv)adj. Covering a wide field of subjects; rambling. Proceeding to a conclusion through reason rather than intuition. 17001 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 0:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 25, Comm. Hi Christine, Thanks for this link concerning the hindrances and their abandonment. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html I think it deserves careful study. Maybe I'll post some excerpts. It occured to me that insight as a remedy for the hindrances belongs in the dhammanupassana section where they are taken as object. In this section, Way 25, they are treated in a more conventional way that is applied to any practice of satipatthana or jhana. What are your thoughts on this section and satipatthana up to this point? I notice you never have any questions or comments. Not interested? Larry 17002 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 0:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 25, Comm. Hi Larry, :) I just knew you were going to ask about my interest at some point. Sorry for the silence, but please don't interpret it as lack of interest or support. I am vitally interested, but way behind. I am just having one of those periods from Hell at work, barely treading water, so can reply to posts that only require a little rambling thought but I don't currently have the energy/ability to apply reason, study, or reflect intelligently on scripture. Also trying to read and understand some of K. Sujin's 'Survey' (in the Files Section) before leaving for Hong Kong and Bangkok next Sunday. I read all the posts you put up Larry, and I'm taking 'Way of Mindfulness' with me - with some of the additional posts printed off as well. I've ruled a line after each of your Way posts and listed the additional posts made on that section, so I can quickly revise and catch up. Having three weeks off work should give me the delightful and refreshing opportunity to immerse myself in the Dhamma. :) Then you'll probaby groan when you see my name appear on the Posts List. :) I hope you know how grateful I am that you undertook the onerous job of conscientiouly posting the excerpts - I know you also will have times when work or private worlds can feel overwhelming - but you still do not fail us. Your interest and enthusiam is infectious, and I look forward to being more active in The Way corner in a week or so. with admiration, gratitude and metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Thanks for this link concerning the hindrances and their abandonment. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html > > I think it deserves careful study. Maybe I'll post some excerpts. It > occured to me that insight as a remedy for the hindrances belongs in the > dhammanupassana section where they are taken as object. In this section, > Way 25, they are treated in a more conventional way that is applied to > any practice of satipatthana or jhana. > > What are your thoughts on this section and satipatthana up to this > point? I notice you never have any questions or comments. Not > interested? > > Larry 17003 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Way 26, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued on, "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, and mindful, having overcome in this world covetousness and grief." By the instruction dealing with the overcoming of covetousness and grief, yogic power and yogic skill are shown. [Tika] Yogic power is the power of meditation. Yogic skill is dexterity in yoking oneself in meditation. Freedom from satisfaction and discontent in regard to bodily happiness and misery, the forbearing from delighting in the body, the bearing-up of non-delight in the course of body-contemplation, the state of being not captivated by the unreal, and the state of not running away from the real -- these, when practiced produce yogic power; and the ability to practice these is yogic skill. There is another method of interpretation of the passage: (A bhikkhu) lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, and so forth. "Contemplating" refers to the subject of meditation. "Lives": lives protecting the subject of meditation which here is the body. In the passage beginning with "ardent", Right Exertion [sammappadhana] is stated by energy [atapa]; the subject of meditation proper in all circumstances [sabbatthika kammatthana] or the means of protecting the subject of meditation [kammatthana pariharana upaya], is stated by mindfulness and clear comprehension [sati sampajañña]; or the quietude that is obtained [patiladdha samatha] by way of the contemplation on the body [kayanupassana] is stated by mindfulness; insight [vipassana] by clear comprehension; and the fruit of inner culture [bhavana phala] through the overcoming of covetousness and grief [abhijjha domanassa vinaya]. [T] The subject of meditation useful in all circumstances is stated by referring to (the laying hold on) mindfulness and clear comprehension, because through the force of these two qualities there is the protection of the subject of meditation and suitability of attention for its unbroken practice. [T] Further, of these two qualities, mindfulness and clear comprehension, the following is stated in the commentary to the Atthasalini, Mula Tika, "To all who have yoked themselves to the practice of any subject of meditation, to all yogis, these two are things helpful, at all times, for the removal of obstruction and the increase of inner culture." 17004 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 4:40pm Subject: commentary break Dear group, At this point we will take approximately a one month break in posting further excerpts from the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary. However we could continue to discuss, particularly on the points we have touched on so far and any additional material anyone would like to bring in would be most welcome. Larry 17005 From: robmoult Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 5:46pm Subject: Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi All, According to the Visuddhi Magga (XIV 128), the proximate cause of unpleasant mental feeling (domanassa) is "heart basis". I am using the BPS version of Visuddhi Magga. Can somebody check another version to see if this should be "heart base" (hadaya vatthu). This section of the Visuddhi Magga mentions the characterisitic / function / manifestation / proximate cause for all five types of feeling. Everything makes sense to me except for the proximate cause of domanassa. I cannot see how heart base could be the proximate cause. Any ideas? Thanks, Rob M :-) 17006 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 7:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob, "Heart basis" is how Bh Nyanamoli translates "hadaya-vatthu", see index under "heart". I don't understand either joy or grief. How can tranquility be the proximate cause of joy (somanasa)? What is the heart basis? Larry 17007 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 8:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi again Rob, Heart base is proximate cause of unpleasant mental feeling in the same sense as body faculty is proximate cause of pleasure or pain. Here 'proximate cause' apparently means 'base'. B. Bodhi suggests another way of looking at proximate cause would have 'contact' as p.c. Following that logic I would say heart base would be the 'base' proximate cause of pleasant mental feeling also. Apparently the commentaries say tranquility (passaddhi) is proximate cause only of meditative pleasant mental feeling. Larry 17008 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 9:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob M & Larry, This is an interesting discussion you’re having and you're raising difficult qus. I think as Larry says, heart base is proximate cause because it is base oo support for mind-door consciousness and mental states in the way that eye-base is the support for seeing and body faculty for (bodily) pleasure and pain. I believe one or two other kinds of consciousness, such as santirana (investigating) consciousness have heart base as proximate cause too. I’ve never questioned why tranquillity (pasaddhi)is the proximate cause of pleasant mental feeling before and any comments are speculative on my part only.(Larry, yr comments just given are v.interesting. Can you give me a reference to where the commentaries discuss tranquility as prox cause for ‘meditative pleasant mental feeling’ only, which makes sense. I take ‘meditative’ to refer to sobhana which raises the qu of unwholesome pleasant mental feelings....) From the Atthasalini, kaya passaddhi and citta passaddhi(the 2 kinds of calm - of cittas and cetaskikas) “taken together have the characteristic of pacifying the suffering of both mental factors and of consciousness; the function of crushing the suffering of both; and have mental factors and consciousness as proximate cause. They are the opponents of the corruptions, such as distraction (uddhacca), which cause the disturbance of mental factors and of consciousness.”(1,iV,ch1-130). From the Sammohavinodani, they are also defined as the “tranquillisation of distress” in the aggregates and consciousness. In other words, they are the opposite of uddhacca (restlessness) which accompanies all unwholesome states including lobha (attachment, so perhaps this ‘tranquillisation of distress’ or ‘pacifying the suffering’aspect is the reason it is prox cause??? Just thinking out loud. As we know, there are always many conditions at work, not just prox cause. In case you haven’t seen it, there is an interesting note in the BPS Visuddhimagga (X1V, n26)on the ‘heart-basis’. It gives an indication of how carefully we have to read the texts (esp. abhidhamma and commentaries) before jumping to any conclusions about ‘inconsistency’. Anyway, the first part is this: “The heart-basis....the support for the mind-element anf for the mind-consciousness-element”:how is that to be known? 1)From scriptures and 2)from logical reasoning. ‘the scripture is this: “The materiality dependent on which the mind-element and mind-consciousness-element occur is a condition, as a support condition, for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element and what is associated therewith (Ptn 1,4)” ***** There has also been quite a lot of discussion on hadaya-vatthu (heart-base) before on DSG. Those who are interested/sceptical, may find it helpful to read the posts under heart or hadaya in “useful posts”. Rob K wrote several detailed ones. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Thanks again Rob M and Larry. Keep discussing and I’ll also try to raise any points left unresolved on proximate causes when we are in Bkk. Sarah ====== 17009 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 10:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, I got the bit about tranquility being only the proximate cause of pleasant meditative feeling from B. Bodhi's note 1 in ch. 3 of CMA. There are so many different kinds of pleasant mental feeling I couldn't sort it out. One difficulty with saying heart base is proximate cause of all pleasant mental feeling is that there are no physical bases in the immaterial plane. Is there pleasant mental feeling there? Also I didn't understand the proximate cause of equanimity (neutral feeling): "Its proximate cause is consciousness without happiness."[piti] Does that have a physical base or not with respect to immaterial or other planes/spheres (eg. supramundane consciousness)? There is a footnote on this in Vism that I didn't understand at all. Larry 17010 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 10:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Wendy, --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally Robert > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or a file, > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > Abhidhamma? .... You raise some sensible and practical suggestions here. Like you are finding, ADL has also been invaluable for me....when I first read the first couple of pages ( a long time ago) they had a great impact. Not everyone responds in the same way, however (ask James.....well, maybe don’t ask;-)). Seriously, there is a section in the U.P. for “New to the list and New to Dhamma” and one for “Pali links” (or sth similar). I think a section for Abhidhamma - Beginner’s Guide would be very helpful, if anyone, like CHRISTINE, would like to write a post as you suggest above with links and some kind of ‘order of difficulty’ as she did for the Pali one. Of course, any list or suggestions are always ‘personal’, and as we see here, the interests and ways of study are very different. Perhaps you can also write a post with your suggestions when you feel able/willing to do this. In the bookmarks section, there are links to several websites containing a lot of helpful material too, but I know this can be somewht overwhelming without guidance. For me, I’ve never separated abhidhamma from other parts of the tipitaka and never considered any of the sections separately or ever formally studied abhidhamma. I consider the realities appearing now in daily life to be abhidhamma and without the understanding of elements, of phenomena and of anatta (at least intellectually), I’m not sure how the suttas can be comprehended. I think you’ll also find anything on Rob K’s websites to be useful for your study. (There’s a helpful essay by a Burmese monk on abhidhamma and vipassana as well there which relates to my last point - ). http://www.abhidhamma.org/ http://www.vipassana.info/ Thanks for this prompt, Wendy and keep up your great qus and considerations. Asking the ‘right’ questions as you’re doing, can help a lot when we are lost;-) Sarah ===== 17011 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali: sati sampajanna Dear Nina & Larry, Thank you both for your excellent contributions and dialogue on the Way to-date. Nina, we’d all be quite lost without your assistance and a special thanks for the time, patience and inspiration you have been providing for us all on DSG for the last many months on all the other topics as well. I hope you and Lodevick have a good flight and we look f/w to seeing you soon. A few brief comments: 1. Nina, I found your translation notes on the sampajano, satimaa section helpful and interesting. I didn’t see the detail about the 4 meditation subjects (metta etc) in Soma Thera’s transl. Perhaps eventually there will be a complete transl of sutta, comm and sub-com. Pls don’t be concerned about grammar mistakes - as Jim always says, any traslation is a ‘work-in-progress’ and we shouldn’t wait for perfect posts or translations. 2. The reference to ‘bare mindfulness’, I take to be referring to sati (bare=just sati), so the commentator speaks of ‘energy and so forth’, i.e the other factors which are essential for satipatthana to arise as discussed before: “....Are there not many other factors of the way, namely, understanding, thinking, speech, action, livelihood, effort, and concentration, besides mindfulness? To be sure there are. But all these are implied when the Arousing of Mindfulness is mentioned, because these factors exist in union with mindfulness”. This is how I read it. I’ll be interested to hear more when you’ve looked at the Pali after your trip. ***** Nina, I also appreciated your quote from A.Sujin on patience. “There can be patience even with regard to uttering useless speech. Before we are going to speak we should consider whether what we want to say is beneficial or not. If it is not beneficial there should be patience and we should refrain from that speech, because it is not helpful for anybody. Sati-sampajañña performs its function in such matters and we should investigate whether it has further developed.>” We can see the test of what we read in the Satipatthana sutta is in daily life, ‘in all circumstances’, including all kinds of communication;-) In appreciation, Sarah ===== 17012 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi All, My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of equanimity being "consciousness without hapiness" relates to the fourth jhana (which has hapiness) gives away to the fifth jhana (which has equanimity). My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of joy being tranquility also relates to jhanas; to reach the first jhana, one must develop tranquility. So the proximate cause of equanimity and joy relate to jhanas. This leaves pain, pleasure and unpleasant mental feeling. After thinking about it, I suspect that if Vis. could not relate the state to jhana, it defaulted to a base; ergo: - Pleasure: body base - Pain: body base - Unpleasant mental feeling: heart base Does this make sense? Thanks, Rob M :-) 17013 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 0:58am Subject: Scrambled Egg-less 1 Hi James, I have a few comments I’d like to make on a few of your points from different posts, so this is going to be somewhat ‘scrambled’. 1. internet rules & standards ==================== It’s a rather sensitive subject and so I don’t want to discuss details but I’d just like to say that the argument that the ‘internet is a face-less, name-less...’ method of communciation with its own set of rules ‘accepted universally’ is only part of the picture imho and not the main determintion of whether there is any intended deception or not. As it said in the original quote I gave, if a false impression is given, it can be considered as false speech. We can only know for ourselves in this regard. If I turn up tomorrow with a cyber-name and the intention that everyone should think I’m a newcomer or should be misled in anyway, I’d consider it to be ‘lying or deceiving’. If I joined the ‘Highrise Gardeners Club’ with a cyber-name that was obviously just that, it would be different. You thought the member who was concerned about the ‘morality’ of a cyber-name and ‘started to use his own name was just being paranoid about his karma’. I disagree with your assessment and have respect for his concern . I’ve been reflecting quite a lot on right speech with my students. I’m used to playing tricks and jokes (which of course everyone enjoys). Kom, I think,quoted the part from the Rahula sutta about not even creating a false impression in fun which I can’t help reflecting on everytime I get out my collection of spiders, snakes or whatever;-( As Rob M would say, in the big course of things, these are not big-deal issues, but it doesn’t hurt to consider them. 2. Vinaya corner =========== You suggest the rules are ‘for the proper and smooth functioning of the Sangha, not as omnipresent, moral guidelines.’ I would suggest they are for both purposes. There is plenty we can learn about right speech and other aspects of morality and the danger of various kinds of unwholesome thought and action fom the rules ourselves. In a post to Larry, I wrote about the 4 kinds of morality (catuparisudhi-sila). The first was restraint with regard to the monks’ rules (patimokkha-samvara-sila): “Here the monk is restrained in accordance with the monks’ Disciplinary Code, is perfect in conduct and behaviour, and perceiving danger even in the least offences, he trains himself in the rules he has taken upon him”.(Nyantiloka dict, quoting from Vinaya sources). I take ‘perceiving danger’ as referring to the danger of accumulating unwholesome states at the present moment. ***** more 'scrambled' comments to follow very soon..... 17014 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 1:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Scrambled Egg-less 2 contd from Scrambled 1 to James 3 Testing Abhidhamma ================= You suggest that (the abhidhamma) “From untestable, undescribed observation, it then reaches a hypothesis of the nature of ultimate and conventional reality. It doesn’t invite others to test this theory because it doesn’t give the method by which it was reached.” This was written about 3 days ago (Rubbish 1), so it may be redundant by now, I’m not sure;-). Nothing could be further from how I read and understand the abhidhamma which is described in detail and to be tested out at this very moment. The ‘method’ is that of sati sampajanna or sati and panna, assisted by other factors, as we’re discussing in the ‘Way’corner. No ‘me’ or ‘you’ to do anything. 4.Rupas ====== I’m not sure if you see rupas as ‘in’ or ‘out’ at the moment. Pls just ignore any of my comments which are no longer relevant. In Rubbish 3 you suggested the theory was ‘arrived at through simple observtion and philosophical pondering’ and ask whether it is an accurate way ‘of describing ultimate reality’ ‘Not according to modern scientific discoveries’. I agree with the last sentence, but it means little to me. The dhammas which we read about in the texts (inc the abhidhamma) were ‘arrived at’ by direct understanding, highly developed panna and the omniscience of a Buddha. As you said elsewhere, we could have a scholarly discussion about the origins which would be quite useless. The only way to test the validity of paramattha dhammas (ultimate realities) is by the development of panna. I still think you will find it usefu, nonetheless, to read the series I wrote from the Vinaya commentary, if only to understand why some of us don’t accept comments dismissing the Abhidhamma as the word/Teachings of the Buddha and how according to the commentaries, the Abhidhamma was recited (for the most part) at the 1st Council. 5. Effective dialogues =============== You gave many helpful pointers (inc. those for the ‘facilitators) which I appreciated. I don’t agree (I’m avoiding that word ‘question’ which sounded too polite to you;-))that the Buddha didn’t speak much about ‘how to conduct effective dialogues...’ However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue. We can only communicate according to the degree of wisdom, morality and other wholesome states accumulated and also according to our tendencies and natural inclinations. We’re all bound to make plenty of mistakes as a result. Hopefully some learning is taking place for us all. As I’ve mentioned to you already, I’m really learning a lot from your generous, skilful and very imaginative posts to the starkids. They’ve really been enjoying these and the other helpful ones from everyone else and so have I. 6. DSG standards ============= “This group is excellent, but not perfect either. I mean, to let rif-raf like me in it doesn’t say much for its standards! LOL! j/k. Seriously, there is no reason to rest on any laurels. Mara will take any opportunity to strike and ‘true dialogue’ is one area where Mara excels.” Oh, yikes.....sounds like trouble...thanks for the reminder....rif-raf in dialogue with Mara is a sure recipe for nightmares.....;-) Good point about using experiences ‘to learn dharma’. maybe we also ‘learn dharma’ to use in experience. This is more than enough for now. Thank you for all the helpful topics and comments. Sarah ======= 17015 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 2:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob M, Caution: I’m on very unsure ground with any comments I make on this thread....... --- robmoult wrote: > Hi All, > > My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of > equanimity being "consciousness without hapiness" relates to the > fourth jhana (which has hapiness) gives away to the fifth jhana > (which has equanimity). ..... Do you have any reason or reference for this? The section we’re discussing is under ‘the Agregates’ in the section on Panna (understanding) in the vism. It is referring to all kinds of feelings as I understand as included in the khandha. In the note to equanimity (n56 ) It explains from the Pm (and I’ve seen in several other places) that the seeing, hearing, smelling & tasting consciousiness might ‘logically be associated with pleasure and pain’, in fact they are ‘associated with equanimity’ because of the gentle impact ‘like that of two pieces of cotton wool’....(so Larry, I think ‘consciousness without happiness’ refers to seeing etc). > My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of joy > being tranquility also relates to jhanas; to reach the first jhana, > one must develop tranquility. .... I’ve just seen the note Larry skilfully found of B. Bodhi’s. It’s just a footnote of his which says “tranquillity (passaddhi), it seems, is the proximte cause only for the joyful feeling that arises in meditative development.” This would certainly make it sound like it could refer to jhanas but I’d like to know where ‘it seems’ can be found - i.e a reference and more exact details. Again, in the Vis the suggestion as I read it, is that all pleasant mental feelings are being referred to. I’m sure there must be reference in other commentaries, but I’m out of time and Tai chi is calling (Howard, I’m now using the silver balls for a new movement which is great for my wrists;-)). ..... > So the proximate cause of equanimity and joy relate to jhanas. This > leaves pain, pleasure and unpleasant mental feeling. > > After thinking about it, I suspect that if Vis. could not relate the > state to jhana, it defaulted to a base; ergo: > - Pleasure: body base > - Pain: body base > - Unpleasant mental feeling: heart base > > Does this make sense? .... It sounded good when I first saw it (as did Larry’s theories), but I’ll have to leave you to it for now;-) Sarah (rushing out) ============= 17016 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Wendy, and all, I hope you may find the short articles helpful to give you 'bite- sized' perspectives on the Abhidhamma. All of them helped me in some way to understand just a little, and it proved enough to give me the courage and patience to tackle longer texts. I found any questions could be confidently put to the dsg members, no question is too simple. I have also included links to some of the books, texts, and websites related to Abhidhamma. Personally, I'd read the articles first. Then your own interest will take you anywhere and everywhere. :) (I hope the links all work.) metta, Christine Article: Abhidhamma and Practice http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhidhamma_and_practice.htm Article: Be here now http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm Article: 'Abhidhamma Notes' http://www.dhammastudy.com/Introduction.html Article: Understanding Reality http://www.abhidhamma.org/understanding%20reality.html Article: 'Some Introductory Notes on Abhidhamma' http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/abhi1.html The Abhidhamma Philosophy (about nine pages) http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm Fourteen essays by members of a group of lay people who studied the Abhidhamma http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ Article: Abhidhamma and Vipassana http://www.abhidhamma.org/sitagu%20sayadaw.htm e-books online: http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm e-Books in multiple formats on-line: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Articles and books graded as to level of difficulty: http://www.dhammastudy.com/engindex.html And anytime is a good time for wandering around in the dsg 'Useful Posts'. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Wendy, > > --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally Robert > > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or a file, > > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > > Abhidhamma? 17017 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 4:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Selfishness/Jonothan Tom Thanks for these interesting points and observations. --- proctermail wrote: > Hello Jonothan ... > I qoute... > > As far as selfish motives are concerned, these are an inherent > aspect > > of our lives. Like it or not, the intrinsic nature of us all is > > 'unwholesome' and tending to become more so, ... > > are you implying that modern capitalist society seems breed > selfishness? this is something i believe and was made into a > seroius > argument by Weber in 'Protestant ethic and the spirit of > capitalism' I think what I was implying was that regardless of how well-meaning we may be (or how ideologically sound our thinking), selfishness is going to pervade almost everything we do. Recognising that this is how things are, and always have been (regardless of the political or social structure of the time), can be very beneficial in the long run because it allows us to face up to what I would describe as 'the real problem'. > i take your point about little animals that are inevitably going to > get caught unknowingly under our feet...i guess its more about > being aware. I was actually trying to suggest that what is most relevant and important in this area is knowing the difference between intentional action on the one hand and unintentional action (whether done with or without knowledge) on the other hand. Jon (keeping it short, too) 17018 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with interest. --- James wrote: > Jon, > > I feel that these are excellent observations, reflective of deep > insight. ... If only, if only ... > ... Therefore, humbly, I have a line of questioning(s) for you > (or others on-list) if you may consider it/them: What do you > relect > about the usefulness of koans in disrupting discursive thought to > reach pure awareness? Is there a significant difference between > discursive thought and pure awareness? If so, what is that > difference? Do you believe it is possible to disrupt discursive > thought, or simply to minimize it? Is either necessary for pure > awareness? Could the Abhidhamma be viewed as a method of turning > discursive thought into a vehicle for pure awareness (like > an 'Intellectual Koan') or is it pure awareness itself? Thank you > for considering my questions. To my understanding, awareness is a mental factor like any other mental factor (they come in both wholesome and unwholesome varieties). That is to say, it arises with a moment of consciousness and experiences the same object as the moment of consciousness. It may be a weak or strong, of short or long duration, depending on the conditioning factors. It will arise intermingled with other moments of consciousness, sometimes wholesome but mainly unwholesome. Awareness may have as its object any reality (dhamma). Discursive thinking, being one kind of reality, may be the object of awareness. For the person interested in developing awareness, discursive thinking is not something to be 'disrupted', but is simply another object that if presently arising is to be known as it truly is. I hope this is to the point of your questions (please say if it's not). Looking forward to following this along further. Jon 17019 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:07am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less 2 Hi James, I have a few comments I'd like to make on a few of your points from different posts, so this is going to be somewhat `scrambled'. (Hi Sarah, It was very interesting to see this post to say the least. Some of these topics go back kinda far. I'm surprised you didn't respond `in the heart of the battle'. Like Christine wrote in another post, some posts are easy to respond to and some posts require deep thought, study, and reflection time to respond to. I consider my posts to be more the former than the latter; but it is good to have both kinds I guess. I will just make a few quick comments about the sections: 1. internet rules & standards ==================== (Put simply, this forum is about thought, not about personality. The only thing I agree with about your assessment, and you really didn't raise this point but I was thinking this to be where we would be in agreement, bhikkhu's should follow a higher standard of morals than lay people and if there is ever any doubt, they should always take the high road. However, I didn't want to state that in my earlier post because I can see how valuable this group can be to bhikkhus, especially those in isolation. So I wanted to `cut them some slack', since it is a grey area. If you wanted to rejoin the group as an anonymous person, I don't see a problem with that; but maybe for a bhikkhu to do that it would be a little questionable. If Kom doesn't want to joke, that is his right. I know that the Buddha did joke, however, and appreciated a 'lightness' and joy in approaching life and the dharma. Everyone has their own personality.) 2. Vinaya corner =========== You suggest the rules are `for the proper and smooth functioning of the Sangha, not as omnipresent, moral guidelines.' (I was referring to the rules for bhikkhu's, not the first five precepts. I see the first five as moral rules and the remainder as training rules. I believe the remaining rules are not `moral' rules: sleeping in high beds, wearing makeup, carrying an umbrella on the street, etc. They are special rules for monks and not intrinsically `moral'. If they were intrinsically moral, then we all should follow them. Since we don't, I would guess that would make daily life very unmoral for the layperson by your definition of the morality of the training rules. I believe the morality comes in the fact that the monk has made a vow to follow the rules to the letter of the law. If the monk doesn't, then that becomes a breach of morality.) ***** 3 Testing Abhidhamma ================= You suggest that (the abhidhamma) "From untestable, undescribed observation, it then reaches a hypothesis of the nature of ultimate and conventional reality. It doesn't invite others to test this theory because it doesn't give the method by which it was reached." Nothing could be further from how I read and understand the abhidhamma which is described in detail and to be tested out at this very moment. (Quick reply—I was speaking only of Rupa, not Nama. Nama can be known through meditation, but how can the nature of matter outside of the body, when not observed directly, be known through meditation? But this is a dead issue now. I understand that the Abhidhamma is not approaching the subject of `rupa' like that. Frankly, it doesn't care about scientific proof. As Rob M and others explained. Sorry to drag you through my growing pains, but I am sure there are some lurkers who have the same questions but are afraid to ask/comment.) 4.Rupas ====== I'm not sure if you see rupas as `in' or `out' at the moment. (I see rupas as `in'. I think I understand how they fit within the abhidhamma's methodology. I don't know if this particular method fits my personality or style, but I will continue to lurk, read, and decide. I am not going to comment much more on that subject until I understand it first-hand for myself. And if I disagree, I won't comment at all. There won't be a need to `disprove' a philosophy. 5. Effective dialogues =============== You gave many helpful pointers (inc. those for the `facilitators) which I appreciated. I don't agree (I'm avoiding that word `question' which sounded too polite to you;-))that the Buddha didn't speak much about `how to conduct effective dialogues...' However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue. (I agree ultimately, but not conventionally. I don't know of a sutta where he spelled it out in black-and-white. He didn't encourage his monks to dialogue with each other…actually he praised them the most when they didn't talk at all.) 6. DSG standards ============= LOL! Your comments were funny. And the other post I read about `don't ask James about the Abhidhamma' made me laugh too. Maybe I need a special `Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy in regards to the Abhidhamma! :-) Thank you for all the helpful topics and comments. (You're very welcome.) Metta, James ps. Thanks for not putting my name in the subject heading. "Scambled Egg-less for James" would have made me hungry, and I'm on a diet! :-) 17020 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 8:27am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > James > > Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with > interest. (Thank you. It makes me smile when you write 'many posts'. Yes, I do write a lot of posts because they are like 'thinking outloud' to me. Since I think a lot, I write a lot. That is why this subject of discursive thought and awareness really interests me at the present. ) > > To my understanding, awareness is a mental factor like any other > mental factor (they come in both wholesome and unwholesome > varieties). That is to say, it arises with a moment of consciousness > and experiences the same object as the moment of consciousness. It > may be a weak or strong, of short or long duration, depending on the > conditioning factors. It will arise intermingled with other moments > of consciousness, sometimes wholesome but mainly unwholesome. (It was my understanding, which is probably incorrect, that discursive thinking will 'corrupt' awareness and make it unwholesome. Perhaps that is from too much Zen, Beginner's mind reading. Taming the monkey mind and what-not. What do you mean by wholesome and unwholesome? The Buddha used those terms to mean different things in different situations...at least by translation. Those words really lack the depth of meaning they should probably have...do you think?. They make me think that thoughts, mental objects, and mental states are either 'chaste' or 'naughty' :-) > > Awareness may have as its object any reality (dhamma). Discursive > thinking, being one kind of reality, may be the object of awareness. > For the person interested in developing awareness, discursive > thinking is not something to be 'disrupted', but is simply another > object that if presently arising is to be known as it truly is. (Wow. This is probably the first time I have seen this position about discursive thought and awareness. I have felt it was probably true, but thougt that to make discursive thought the subject of awareness was much like 'playing with fire.' What do you think? And how are you able to do this without the discrusive thought interrupting awareness of discursive thought? I know this is a tough question. Sorry for the efforts on your part to explain to me, but I do appreciate it.) > > I hope this is to the point of your questions (please say if it's > not). Looking forward to following this along further. > (Good, because you have raised probably more questions, at least in my mind, with your answers. But we can stop at any point if you like or feel I am not ready/able to understand at this point in my practice.) Metta, james 17021 From: Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 4:18am Subject: To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, Jon (and all) - I found the following post of yours in the Useful Posts section of the DSG Files, under "Accumulations": ************************************* From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:20 pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] meditation, hatred ,and fear Mike > By the way, I've noticed that the term > 'accumulations' is often used in the group's > correspondence. Does this refer to vipaka? > Sankhaara? Both? Neither? Yes, there are some terms we have been using for so long that we forget they are not standard use! Thanks for raising this. "Accumulations" as I used it refers to those various tendencies we all have that make up the distinct personality and character by which we are conventionally known. For example, our preferences for particular tastes or colours, our good and bad qualities, the way we walk and talk and so on. Being easily angered or being interested in the dhamma would be other examples. They are called accumulations because, of course, they have been accumulated during the past. The defilements (kilesas) are those akusala inclinations we have accumulated. They come in different strengths, the subtle ones being the latent tendencies referred to in Kom’s post. Actually, since every citta is conditioned (in among other ways) by the citta which immediately precedes it, each citta contains the sum of all previous cittas. So in fact there is much more that is accumulated than the tendencies I have referred to. I hope this makes sense. Jonothan ******************************************** The notion of accumulations is an intuitively understandable one. Yet I am unclear as to specifics. From the Abhidhammic perspective, any mind-moment consists solely of an act of citta/vi~n~nana/discernment together with associated cetasikas, all involved with the same object of experience. For the accumulations to be found, they must lie among the cetasikas. Exactly where? The most likely would be, it seems to me, cetana. However, during a single mind-moment, can there be multiple cetanas operative? If not, how is the near-infinite collection of accumulations, existing and to be "passed on", accounted for? (Of course, nothing is passed on - currently occurring conditions are merely conditions for the arising of subsequent conditions.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17022 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:29am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less-PS Sarah, A Post Script to my message: You state in your post that the Buddha composed the Abhidhamma and he would, being enlightened, know the nature of rupa not directly observed. I cannot say that with such confidence. I do not presume to know the mind of a Buddha and have no idea if enlightenment is like omniscience. The Buddha simply said he was awake, he didn't say he was 'all knowing'. What do you think? Metta, James 17023 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:29am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less-PS Sarah, A Post Script to my message: You state in your post that the Buddha composed the Abhidhamma and he would, being enlightened, know the nature of rupa not directly observed. I cannot say that with such confidence. I do not presume to know the mind of a Buddha and have no idea if enlightenment is like omniscience. The Buddha simply said he was awake, he didn't say he was 'all knowing'. What do you think? Metta, James 17024 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Christine and Sarah, Thank you for your posts. They are indeed very helpful to me. I will take my time read through them and check through the links, and who knows, I may one day come back to construct a page of my own: "Abhidhamma for Dummies". with metta, Wendy ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth" Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 2:16 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma > Hi Wendy, and all, > > I hope you may find the short articles helpful to give you 'bite- > sized' perspectives on the Abhidhamma. All of them helped me in some > way to understand just a little, and it proved enough to give me the > courage and patience to tackle longer texts. I found any questions > could be confidently put to the dsg members, no question is too > simple. > > I have also included links to some of the books, texts, and websites > related to Abhidhamma. > Personally, I'd read the articles first. Then your own interest will > take you anywhere and everywhere. :) (I hope the links all work.) > > metta, > Christine > > Article: Abhidhamma and Practice > http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhidhamma_and_practice.htm > Article: Be here now > http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm > Article: 'Abhidhamma Notes' > http://www.dhammastudy.com/Introduction.html > Article: Understanding Reality > http://www.abhidhamma.org/understanding%20reality.html > Article: 'Some Introductory Notes on Abhidhamma' > http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/abhi1.html > The Abhidhamma Philosophy (about nine pages) > http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm > Fourteen essays by members of a group of lay people who studied the > Abhidhamma > http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ > Article: Abhidhamma and Vipassana > http://www.abhidhamma.org/sitagu%20sayadaw.htm > > > e-books online: > http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm > e-Books in multiple formats on-line: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > Articles and books graded as to level of difficulty: > http://www.dhammastudy.com/engindex.html > > And anytime is a good time for wandering around in the dsg 'Useful > Posts'. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Hi Wendy, > > > > --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > > > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally > Robert > > > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > > > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or > a file, > > > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > > > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > > > Abhidhamma? > 17025 From: Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 5:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah and Rob, Sarah thanks for explaining about the cotton and the hammer; I think I get it, sort of. Maybe the reason 'heart base' isn't given as proximate cause for pleasant mental feeling and neutral feeling is because it isn't proximate in the way it is for unpleasant mental feeling. One peculiar thought that occurred to me is that it almost seems like the absence of pleasant mental feeling causes pleasant mental feeling, baring interference by unpleasant mental feeling. Consciousness without happiness causes neutral feeing; neutral feeling is almost the same as tranquility; tranquility causes pleasant mental feeling. Therefor consciousness without happiness causes happiness. Larry 17026 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:28pm Subject: Abhidhamma1 " Dear group. A letter I wrote a while ago "stvrn" wrote: > > In Theravadhee Sri Lankan Pali "Dhamma Sangini" and Vibhanga goes into > various unnecessary analysis. When reading these Abhidharma books one > do not get the same serene joy reading suttas. Initial simple suttas, > preached by Lord Buddha, was unnecessarily anlyzed and its original > broad meaning was blurred. >___________________ Dear stvrn, It may be that some or many people do not get serene joy from considering the Abhidhamma - but certainly some do, and I can attest to that. The Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis of ancient times also did: The Atthasalini(Pali text Society)translation by Pe Maung Tin of Burma: ""The bhikkhus who study the Abhidhamma experience infinite rapturous joy in reflecting: As though grouping the mutitude of stars in the sky (into consteallations) the Teacher taught things mental and material dividing them into various parts and portions - things subtle and abstruse such as the unique conetnt of aggreagates (khandhas) sense-organs (ayatanas) elements(dhatus) , controlling factors, powers factors of wisdom, kamma and its result; and the distinction between mind and matter.""(p14) There is more about the joy that comes through considering the profound insights explained in the Abhidhamma and how it can lead to arahantship. In the Intro. to the Vibhanga(Abhidhamma pitaka)(Pali text society) Iggelden writes "It is all very well to say 'I know what needs to be done to break the continuity of rebirth and death'. In fact very few people know of even the most elementary reasons for the continuity of process, let alone of breaking it. It is the detailed description, analysis and reasons given for this cyclic process that the scriptures spend so much care in putting before us. It is all very well to say 'What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for, it only clutters the mind?'The question is, though, how many people when they seriously ask themselves as to the extent and range of some such apparently simple terms as greed, hatred and ignorance, can know their full and proper implications and manifestations within their own thoughts and actions..This the scriptures are at pains to make clear to even the dullest reader.."Endquote. He goes on in a similar vein for pages. It is natural that some people see the benefits of Abhidhamma and others don't. All of us have accumulated vastly different experiences during our very long stay in samsara vatta (the round of births and deaths) - we have different tastes, opinions and practices because of this. I hope you have the opportunity to investigate more the wisdom in the Abhidhamma and the rest of the Tipitaka. I find it all helpful; the vinaya, the suttas, the Jatakas, the Dhammapada; everything was taught for our benefit and handed on faithfully by the order of bhikkhus and bhikkhuni over these last millenia. How wonderful the Sangha, the Buddha and the Dhamma. Robert --- End forwarded message --- 17027 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:37pm Subject: Abhidhamma3 Dear Group, Some quotes from the Sutta Pitaka and Vinaya: The Abhidhamma in the Vinaya. (Vin, 1V,344): "If without any intention of reviling the Vinaya one were to instigate another, saying, Pray study the Suttas or Gathas or Abhidhamma first and afterwards you will learn the Vinaya - there is no offence in him," In the Bhikkhuni Vibhanga Vin,1V,344( "Abhikkhuni is guilty of a minor offence) if she questions on the Abhidhamma or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Suttanta, or on the Suttanta or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Abhidhamma, or on the suttanta or Abhidhamma after getting permission (to question) on the Vinaya."...... Sanghadisesa VII, in the Book of Discipline, PTS, translated by I.B. Horner: "Then the venerable Dabba, the Mallian, being so chosen, assigned one lodging in the same place for those monks who belonged to the same company. For those monks who knew the Suttantas he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "These will be able to chant over the Suttantas to one another." For those monks versed in the Vinaya rules, he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "They will decide upon the Vinaya with one another." For those monks teaching dhamma he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "They will discuss dhamma[ in the actual Pali this is specified as ABHIDHAMMA] with one another." Sutta: The Mahagosinga sutta (MN 1, 218) Mahamoggalana said `Brother Sariputta, in the religion the talk of two bhikkhus on the ABHIDHAMMA, each asking and answering the other without faltering, is in accord with the Dhamma. Now such a bhikkhu, brother Sariputta, might enhance the beauty of the Gosinga Sala Forest. "" There are other references to the Abhidhamma in the sutta pitaka too: Petavatthu: "at that time the Buddha the exalted one was residing on the Pandukambala stone at the foot of the great coral tree in tavimtimsa (deva world) [expounding the abhidhamma] At that time devas and brahmas of the 10,00 fold universe held a meeting and approached the buddha. Buddhavamsa(about past buddha's): 1. Dipankara Buddha: "at the time when dipankara Buddha expounded the Dhamma in the tavitimsa world 90,000 crores of devas and brhamas realised the four noble truths..." It repeats for sevral other buddhas. Also the Abhidhamma pitaka can be called different names: In the Atthasalini it says "Thus as rehearsed at the (first)council, the Abhidhamma is Pitaka by Pitaka classification, Khuddaka-Nikaya by Nikaya classification, Veyyakarana by part classification and constitutes two or three thousand untis of text by the classification of textual units" . Sometimes you will read suttas where the Buddha refers to those bhikkhus who are skilled in the veyyakarana - and this may refer to the Abhidhamma. In the end I think historical studies can't satisfy us. We have to look at the Abhidhamma in depth to understand why it has been held up as the word of the Buddha, to see why it must have been the province of omnniscient wisdom. The Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha to his mother and a myriad of other devas in the Tavitimsa deva world, it was not something to be revealed later. While he was teaching in the Deva world he also - by means of a created double - taught Sariputta (a human). Sariputta then taught his 500 students who all became arahant upon completion. It was not kept only for later times and was very much a part of the Dhamma while the Buddha was alive. From the atthasalini: "The textual order of the Abhidhamma originated with Sariputta; the numerical series in the Great Book was also determined by him. In this way the elder, without spoiling the unique doctrine, laid down the numerical series in order to make it easy to learn, remember, study and teach the Law. Such being the case, was the elder the very first to understand the Abhidhamma? Nay, it was the supreme Buddha who first understood the Abhidhamma...." It is very natural that many doubt the Abhidhamma. Even less than 300 hundred years after the Buddha died there was a sect called the Sautrantikas who believed only the Sutta and vinya were the original word of the Buddha. They said that there was no Tipitaka but only a Dvipitaka. (ti means three and dvi two). By the nature of the sasana the respect with which the Abhidhamma is held (and the understanding of it) will continue to diminish the further away from the parinibbana of the Buddha. Until finally the last section of the Abhidhamma, the Patthana will disapear and be heard no more until the next Buddha sasana. For now it is still available and I believe it well rewards those who contemplate it. We read in the Atthasalini how when the Buddha first contemplated the Patthana in the seventh week after his attainment of supreme enlightenment: "Rays of six colours -indigo, golden, red, white, tawny, and dazzling - issued from the Teacher's body, as he was contemplating the subtle and abstruse Law by his omniscience which had found such opportunity" when he "began to contemplate the twenty- four universal causal relations of condition, of presentation, and so on....". Robert 17028 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:40pm Subject: Abhidhamma2 --- Dear Jerry, I think the Abhidhamma should not be seen as different from any other aspect of the Dhamma. Some people will study it and cling to the words it is true. But I think it unlikely that its study leads to self view as the whole Abhidhama has only one flavour : that of anatta. What is more dangerous is that - like any rigorous subject -- those who gain some proficiency, no matter how superficial, may fall prey to conceit. Still if there is genuine investigation of the present moment, based on what is said in the Abhidhamma and the rest of the Tipitaka, then conceit should(but no guarantee) become more apparent - and thus gradually its ugly nature discerned. The Book of Analysis (Vibhanga,Ch 17, 832) gives a list of the objects on account of which pride and conceit can arise: "Pride of birth; pride of clan; pride of health; pride of youth; pride of life; pride of gain; pride of being honoured; pride of being respected; pride of prominence; pride of having adherents; pride of wealth; pride of appearance; pride of erudition; pride of intelligence; pride of being a knowledgeable authority; pride of being (a regular) alms collector; accomplishment; pride of popularity; pride of being moral; pride of jhana; pride of dexterity; pride of being tall; pride of (bodily) proportion; pride of form; pride of (bodily) perfection..." 'end quote Earlier today I quoted a sutta "In the same manner consciousness on account is eye and forms is eye consciousness. Consciousness on account of ear and sounds is ear consciousness." These dhammas need to be known. And visible object is arising now, as is the consciousness that experiences it- the only question is whether there is any direct insight into its actual nature or not. Is there sati or is there neglect. Or is there some sort of imitation sati that knows something about the characteristic of seeing but with the subtle idea that "I" made the sati arise? Only we ourselves can know and even then we may fool ourselves or overstimate our understanding. According to Sammohavinodani (commentary to Vibhanga Abhidhamma)p. 147 there are 60,000 methods by which the eighfold path can be penetrated. We have to find out for ourself what helps, what leads towards self-effacement . It's bound to be intellectual and unclear in the beginning, but perhaps gradually a little more understanding grows that is a little more refined and understands a more precisely for an instant only. In between there is thinking (not necessarily in words) and wondering and doubting, but these are all realities which are explained in the Abhidhamma and which should be known too. Then we may just get lost in the world of concepts and that's so normal I think- and conditioned to be that way. Metta Robert 17029 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 8:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi James, You wrote to Jon: > Yes, I do write a lot of posts because they are like 'thinking outloud' to me. Since I think a lot, I write a lot. > And you wrote to Sarah: > Sorry to drag you through my growing pains, but I am sure there are some lurkers who have the same questions but are afraid to ask/comment.) > That's certainly true in my case, and if I don't share all your questions, I still learn from them and the replies. Unlike you, I have trouble writing (even though I think a lot). When I do write, I find it easier to offer answers than to ask questions. So, for the benefit of us lurkers, please continue the way you're going, with your mix of questions and answers. Sarah wrote; >> However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue," >> to which you replied: > I agree ultimately, but not conventionally. I don't know of a sutta where he spelled it out in black-and-white. > Several months ago, a dsg member (I forget who), quoted a sutta which seemed to spell it out in black and white. It involved a group of novice monks who had been isolated for the duration of the rains retreat. (I suppose the relevance of this is that they didn't have a senior monk to instruct them). The Buddha asked them what they had done during that time and they replied that, on their own initiative, they had kept `noble silence.' He rebuked them, saying they had wasted a valuable opportunity for discussing the Dhamma. Kind regards, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > James > > > > Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with > > interest. > (Thank you. It makes me smile when you write 'many posts'. > 17030 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi James & Ken H, --- kenhowardau wrote: > > That's certainly true in my case, and if I don't share > all your questions, I still learn from them and the > replies. Unlike you, I have trouble writing (even though > I think a lot). When I do write, I find it easier to > offer answers than to ask questions. So, for the benefit > of us lurkers, please continue the way you're going, with > your mix of questions and answers. ..... ....there you go James - a green flag from the lurkers represented by Ken H;-) Actually, you do us all a BIG favour if you can find the key to unlock Ken’s draft folder and encourage him to talk more. He has many pearls of wisdom to share and I’m not joking here (for once). ..... > Several months ago, a dsg member (I forget who), quoted a > sutta which seemed to spell it out in black and white. > It involved a group of novice monks who had been isolated > for the duration of the rains retreat. ..... Thanks very much for this prompt. There may have been another more recent post about this, but I think you (James) will find these 2 of interest on this topic (it also relates nicely to our vinaya corner): From U.P. “Silence” 6445, 6572 Hope to hear you both talking together...... thanks Ken H for the suggestion. Sarah ===== 17031 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Dear `Lurker' (AKA Ken H.) J: Thank you for the letter. I am glad that you appreciate the questions I raise in my posts. I know that many people are hesitant to `go out on a limb', especially in a public setting, and there is really nothing wrong with that. All a matter of `affluents' (not to be confused with `affluence' J. I have always felt that meaningful dialogue is important to discovering the practicality of the dharma. As I wrote in my introduction to this group, "My outlook is pretty unique; I like to think about Buddhism in modern terms and how it applies to daily life; and I have been known to be a little shocking to inspire thought…" So everyone should see, I gave ample warning! But I also wrote in that introduction, "I know a lot about Buddhism but I have a lot to learn about life. I hope that this group will welcome me so that I may learn." I am not in this group to offer too many answers (except to children…who need them); I mainly offer questions. But you see, I don't think I need to offer any answers because when it comes to dharma we all have the answers within us…it just takes some `shocking' questions to bring it out. I am eager to read and know that sutta you refer to. If it was posted in this group, surely someone knows about it. I cannot do much at my end, but if you or someone else could find it, I think it would benefit us all to re-examine it. I know that it would benefit me. Metta, James PS. I composed this in Word and then saw Sarah's post. I knew she would come to the rescue. I am going to keep it as it is to reflect what I was thinking at the time. But, Ken H., if you are holding out on us all of your 'pearls of wisdom', I am not too 'well for that.' Seems those CLAMS always have the best loot! :-) Please help where you can. 17032 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Dear Wendy & Christine,then James (& vinaya corner), --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: >.... I may one day come back to construct a > page of my own: "Abhidhamma for Dummies". ..... That would be great;-) Meanwhile, Chris, you are a marvel....as James put far more politely, some of us are still in snailmail or even seamail mode whilst others like yourself are exemplary example's of internet efficiency. Many thanks. (Now if that wasn't too demanding - I mean it came back so fast even though you're testing out the hell realms at work - then perhaps, just perhaps, you might consider doing the same for other topics in the U.P. while all the reading is fresh in your mind). Hmmm....talking about right communication, I'd better stop before this slips further into unwise speech;-( ***** Here are a few relevant reminders from the Vinaya for daily life (I’m quoting from the Sammohavinodani for now, sect 17): 1.“Unnahanaa (persuading) is going on tying (people) up thus: ‘Lay followers, formerly you ued to give first-fruit alms at such a time; why do you not do so now?’ until they say: ‘We shall give, venerable sir, we have had no opportunity’ and so on; “entangling” (ve.thanaa) is what is meant........” 2. “Ukkaacanaa (suggesting) is insinuating (kaacanaa) and sugesting by specifying thus: “That family alone understands me; if there is anything to be given there, they give it to me only;’ “pointing out” is what is meant........” 3. “Anuppiyabha.nitaa (“ingratiating chatter”) is endearing chatter repeated again and again without regard to whether it is in conformity with truth and dhamma.” 4. “Caatukamyataa (“flattery”) is speaking in a humble manner, always maintaining an attitude of inferiority.” 5. “Muggasuupyataa (“bean-soupery”) is a resemblance to bean soup. for just as when beans are being cooked only a few do not get cooked, the rest get cooked; so the person in whose speech only a little is true, the rest being false, is called “bean soup”; his state is “bean-soupery”." ***** James, I agreed with your apt comments about the rules and morality. Your points are well-taken and we shouldn’t try to imitate the monk’s life or set of rules. However, I think that by reflecting on the rules, the reasons for the rules and the meaning behind many of them, such as in these examples, we can learn more about sila in daily life and about our various mental states. Even ones like the rule you quoted about not speaking to someone holding an umbrella etc which seems quite irrelevant, can be helpful if we consider the purpose: there’s no use talking about dhamma to someone who is not interested to hear or at an inappropriate time. Thanks for your other comments too - maybe more by sea-mail later;-) Sarah ===== 17033 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:57pm Subject: On my way. Dear Friends, Tomorrow very early I start my journey to North Carolina. This morning I broke my small toe in my right foot. So you are getting a very sore and limping monk. See you in the evening. Ven. Yanatharo 17034 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Dear Rob M & Larry, Actually, reviewing these references I gave before and then checking a few more afterwards, I’m not sure how rigidly we should view poximate causes and there may be variants in different contexts perhaps. What do you think? From my post a little while back: ***** "Immediate occasion (pada.t.thaana.m) means proximate cause. Thus wherever we speak of characteristics, etc, their mutual difference should be understood in this wise." Atthasalini transl PTS p84 ..... As I understand pada.t.thaana literally means 'footprint' from pada-foot. Now I understand better the use of 'footing' in the PTS Netti transl which you also have. 'footing' is translated from pada.t.thaana as in: " 'Investigate yourselves, launch out' are the footing for energy. (The words) 'Devote yourselves in the Enlightened One's Dispensation' are the footing for concentration. (The words) 'Scatter the armies of Mortality as does an elephant a hut of reeds' are the footing for understanding...."(Netti, 40 p65 in transl) ..... Also under the "Mode of conveying Footings"(Netti, 104 p140 in transl): " 'So let his cognizance be guarded': this is the footing for the three kinds of good conduct. 'Having for pasture right intention': this is the footing for quiet. 'Giving right view first place': this is the footing for insight. 'Through knowing rise and fall: this is the footing for the plane of seeing (as the path of Stream Entry). 'Transcending drowsing and lethargy a bhikkhu may': this is the footing for energy. 'Abandon all bad destinations': this is the footing for keeping in being (as the attainment of the three higher paths)." ***** new === Sammohavinodani (commentary to Vibhanga) examples: cruelty(vihimsa)- prox. cause: annoyance feeling (pleasure and pain)-prox.cause: contact (as in dep. orignination) enjoyment - prox.cause: desirable object also Netthi example: feeling - prox cause: contact (as above) (Btw, the Netthippakara.na is transl by B.Nanamoli as The Guide (PTS)and was written 2000 yrs ago as a guide for commentators. “It deals with scaffolding, not with architecture”(intro) and ‘tradition places the Guide as a product of the First council’.The intro on the history and authorship is very long & detailed) ***** Sarah ====== 17035 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 10:03am Subject: meditation subjects, vipaka, heartbase. Dear Sarah and all, The four meditation subjects on all occasions were only in the Tika, that is why Ven. Soma did not translate them. They are very fitting: At any time there can be recollection of the Buddha, since he taught about realities now. Metta: we are so often with other people, and it helps most of all to see them as conditioned nama and rupa. Prevents irritation and distress about unpleasant behaviour and also attachment. Mindfulness of Death: especially in the ultimate sense: birth and death at each moment, of nama and rupa now. The foulness of the body: it can appear time and again in our own body or other's body, when eating, chewing, etc. Thank you for your kind words Sarah. I feel Larry thinking already of the next question: < the state of being not captivated by the unreal, and the state of not running away from the real -- these, when practiced produce yogic power; and the ability to practice these is yogic skill.> Larry may ask: what is in Pali? I shall look at it, later on. I made a note. And thank you, Larry, for all your work with the Way, and your enthusiasm in studying and asking questions. As we read in the Suttas, this and considering, investigating, is so essential for the development of understanding. You helped us all to consider what we read. Meanwhile I found: abhuuta.m apakkhipanto bhuuta~nca anapanento yogasamattho hotiiti : abhuuta.m, not real.apakkhipanto: not enclosing, inserting. Bhuuta`nca, and the real, anapanento, not removing... Is the skill of the meditator. Thus, he translated it freely with: not running away. As to bare mindfulness: I heard meditation teachers use it, that is why I asked for the Pali on the Pali list where they also discussed choiceless awareness. They may not have time to answer me. Rob M wrote some posts on kamma with questions and a whole list. I thought of it but had no time to asnwer then. I believe that we have to be very careful in making conclusions, kamma and vipaka is the field of Buddhas. Is kusala with somanassa higher than with upekkha? But when we consider understanding with upekkha is that not higher than giving with pleasure, for example? But, I think that we should not measure at all, it depends on conditions what kind of kusala will arise. I saw one remark in your post: it seemed someone believed that each akusala citta is akusala kamma, bringing a result. I did not keep the post, sorry if I misunderstood this. Such a belief will make people distressed. Reading the news paper with akusala citta or laughing is not akusala kamma in the sense of an evil deed. There is akusala cetana with each akusala citta, but it does not always have the intensity of motivating a bad deed. So many cittas rooted in moha arise time and again, these are not akusala kamma. They are impure, but you do not harm others. When we read the Vinaya, we can learn many details about akusala citta and akusala kamma. Monks were scrupulous and thought they had committed a heavy transgression, and the Buddha asked whether they had the intention to do this or that. You also mentioned that there is a belief that one can make up for akusala kamma by kusala citta. Again, how can we measure. It depends on conditions what type of citta arises and best of all: understand whatever arises. If we think of making up, it seems that we can control vipaka in future. The Buddha taught Dhamma to help people, not with the aim to make them scrupulous or distressed. This reminds me of the passages where the Buddha spoke about rebirth in hell planes. I think about people's worries about the last javana cittas before the dying-consciousness. When the Buddha spoke about hell planes he explained about cause and effect. It can remind us not to waste our time, letting opportunities for developing understanding go by. When we are afraid there is dosa, we miss such opportunities and that was not the Buddha's aim of teaching us cause and effect. When we worry we miss the point of his teaching. Unhappy feeling and the heartbase: Vis. XIV, 128: Its proximate cause is invariably the heart-base. In the arupa-Brahma planes there is no unhappy feeling and also no heartbase, there is no rupa. But, as we read, it always needs a physical base, the heartbase. Somanassa and upekkha can arise in those planes, they do not need a base in that case. We read in the Dispeller I, Aggregates, feeling, about the feelings which are with base, and also: those with base and without base. This will solve the question. When compared with somanassa and upekkha, domanassa invariably needs a base, the heartbase. As to proximate cause: I have to correct what I said before, that it is always at the same time as the dhamma which is involved: rupa is weak at its arising moment and cannot condition nama, it has to arise before. By the way, Sarah, I also have in the same nice edition Patimokkha, the rule for Buddhist Monks. Same edition as The Entrance to the Vinaya. It may be available in the Mahamakut bookshop, opposite Wat Bovornives, Soi Phra Sumera. Nina. 17036 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: bare mindfulness Dear Larry, Rob Ed helped me to find the passage: >[Tika] "Arousing of Mindfulness". Here bare mindfulness is meant. >Therefore, the commentator speaks of "the things that make up the >condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness." These things are >energy and so forth, associated necessarily with mindfulness. Condition >[anga] = reason [karana].> Yasmaa satiyevettha satipa.t.thaana.m vuttaa, tasmaassa sampayuttaa dhammaa viiriyaadayo an.ganti aaha: "sampayogan.ga~ncassa dassetvaa" ti. An.ga-saddo cettha kaara.napariyaayo da.t.thabbo. Satiyevettha is: sati eva (ettha is: here), means: just mindfulness. No technical term. I shall continue later on. Nina. 17037 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Dear Sarah, I like your post on the Netti and now understand footing. I looked it up. op 19-11-2002 14:06 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > ***** > "Immediate occasion (pada.t.thaana.m) means proximate cause. Thus > wherever we speak of characteristics, etc, their mutual difference should > be understood in this wise." Atthasalini transl PTS p84 > ..... > As I understand pada.t.thaana literally means 'footprint' from pada-foot. > > Now I understand better the use of 'footing' in the PTS Netti transl which > you also have. 'footing' is translated from pada.t.thaana as in: 17038 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma1 Dear Rob K, I like your series on Abh, I never have enough of this subject. Very helpful. Nina. op 19-11-2002 03:28 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > > It may be that some or many people do not get serene joy from > considering the Abhidhamma - but certainly some do, and I can attest > to that. The Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis of ancient times also did: 17039 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali: sati sampajanna Hi Nina, I thought you left already. I have several comments on Way 24 that I was going to save until you got back. Should we discuss now? Larry 17040 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, What"s the difference between pada.t.thaana.m (proximate cause) and anantarapaccaya (proximity condition). Does anantarapaccaya relate only to 'mental states'? (see guide 13 ch. VIII CMA) Larry 17041 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Nina and all, I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in mind for "bare attention". Maybe someone familiar with Burmese could track this down. Can you make a distinction between satiyevettha and sukkha-vipassana? Here is a snippet from "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation" by Nyanaponika Thera: Bare attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens *to* us and *in* us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called 'bare', because it attends just to the bare facts of a perception as either through the five physical senses or through the mind which, for Buddhist thought, constitutes the sixth sense. When attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is kept to a bare registering of the facts observed, without reacting to them by deed, speech or by mental comment which may be one of self-reference (like, dislike, etc), judgement or reflection. If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them. L: This seems rather rigid and formal to me. I wonder where insight comes in. I may well be wrong, but I think Khun Sujin's objection to this is that it doesn't address or recognize the mind behind the discipline and it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind'. Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments? Larry 17042 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 7:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Larry, I am jumping in to what I see as a valuable topic. Please forgive my profuse comments after being absent for so long. I can only pop in when I'm able these days, but I'm glad to see that these interesting questions are still brewing here at dsg. And hello to everyone. Comments below. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Nina and all, > > I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in > mind for "bare attention". ... > Bare attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually > happens *to* us and *in* us, at the successive moments of perception. It > is called 'bare', because it attends just to the bare facts of a > perception as either through the five physical senses or through the > mind which, for Buddhist thought, constitutes the sixth sense. When > attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is > kept to a bare registering of the facts observed, without reacting to > them by deed, speech or by mental comment which may be one of > self-reference (like, dislike, etc), judgement or reflection. If during > the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any > such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of > Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are > dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them. > > L: This seems rather rigid and formal to me. What do you think is there to be more informal about, aside from perception and the working of the mind? With respect, and with a sense of 'devil's advocate', it 'feels' like this mechanical model may offend your sense of 'self'. Is it possible that there is some further romance beyond the mechanism of the kandhas that you are looking to include by being less clinical? Why not be this rigid? I know for myself that I would like to think there is something warmer and more personal going on in this collection of responses known as 'Robert' [Robert Ep. around here], but isn't this exactly the insistence on a subtle level that there is a 'self' with its own reality, personality and poetic attributes? If one were to be 'less rigid' as you propose, what kind of mindfulness description would seem preferable to you? I wonder where insight > comes in. I think that the 'bare attention' formulation above implies that insight comes from complete attention to 'what is', with a surgical precision. I don't see any difference between such precision and the idea of 'discernment', which means to see things as they are and in no other way [in other words, without delusion or ignorance]. of I may well be wrong, but I think Khun Sujin's objection to > this is that it doesn't address or recognize the mind behind the > discipline The 'mind behind the discipline' that you are looking for is the same exact mind that is included in the description you are questioning. After all, he does say that we are to pay attention to what takes place 'within and without' and describes the mental component as the traditional 'sixth sense' in Buddhism. If we observe the mind as well as the sensory content but do not react to it, this does not mean that we control the mind's initial 'natural' response, but that we steadily observe it, whatever it is. What if we smell rotten food and the response is disgust and aversion? We don't try to control the 'disgust' reaction, but we try not to react to the 'disgust' by generating more concept and explanation, but observe the disgust and see it for what it is. This merely stops the infinite regress of the mind - reacting to reaction to reaction and allows a space of basic discernment. Some may still feel this is tampering with the natural reaction of the mind, but I would think there has to be some interference, at least of the intention to discern what is happening, in order for mindfulness attention and insight upon its heels to take place. and it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind'. This idea that one can have 'only ordinary mind' as a Buddhist practitioner has always seemed very problematic to me. I have never seen the possiblity of somehow pretending that we are really observing the mind in complete naturalness and that somehow this is desireable or necessary. It is like walking on eggshells not to reveal ourselves to someone who already knows we're in the room. Once you are a Buddhist your observation of your 'natural mind' is as natural as a television interview. In these disputes about observing everyday mind vs. meditation with a specific object vs. the above 'natural attention', which lays out rules for observation, I would agree that each of them sets up a framework for a different 'skillful means' of coming to mindfulness and insight, but I will not agree that any of them are really truly natural, or could ever be. It would be fruitless to simply allow delusion to take its 'natural course' without any intervention to try to discern it, and it would be equally fruitless to try to force mindfulness or insight by desperately grasping at the ingredients of reality. If there is to be any success in the Buddhist endeavor to not only see reality but eventually to embody it with truth and wisdom, then one has to use skill, relaxation and insight and balance these ingredients according to one's level of advancement. Whatever framework one chooses to practice within, whether it be ordinary life-moments, concentrated or contemplative meditation, applied Dharma through Sutta study, or controlled non-reactive observation of the mind and senses, one must find the balance of ingredients that will lead to mindfulness, insight, wisdom and eventually enlightenment. These ingredients seem to include the practice of metta and sila, leading to kusala conditions, attention and mindfulness, discernment and insight, and enough samatha so that one can relax and allow the above to take place. All of these seem to be developed gradually by using all expedient means according to one's predisposition and what works for an individual. > Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a > bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments? I think it is possible that the 'living' quality is often left out from a contemplation of the operation of the kandhas, but it is by no means a simple problem. Buddha himself seems to leave it out, and it is much more common that the practitioner will romanticize the operation of the kandhas by invoking this 'living quality' as an actual reality that operates independent of the kandhas, and what does this lead to? It is simply another reinstatement of the idea of a self, an entity, a being, or a person who really really does exist, once this messy business of the kandhas is cleared away. I know I tend to do this, and it is the trick of all of us to try to reinstate the ego through some warm and fuzzy form. That is why I think that the resistances and reactions that rise up around a 'cold' formulation that just makes the person a mechanical device to be observed are very very valuable to observe in their own right. Why do we care if the 'flavour of the word "lives" is left out'? It can only be because we still desparately want there to be a *someone* who lives and we don't want him snuffed out. The business of the 'self' is endlessly tricky. On the other hand, what if one is denying the 'self-factors' that arise in the mind by insisting on a 'non-reactive' observer, and by doing so suppress the sentient responses that indicate the desire for a self and its possessions? This kind of suppression will not lead to enlightenment because it will cover up the very material that needs to be discerned. So it seems to me that the observation of arising events in the senses and mind do need to be 'cold', but the *content* of the mind that is being observed needs to be 'open', allowing all the mushy and fuzzy content that pertains to the self-concept and self-feeling to come up and be discerned. The pitfalls of self-observation are many, but if we keep looking at the moment with a degree of calm and openness we should be able to get a sense of what is really happening, at least in accord with our current level of understanding, which is all we can ever have. Best, Robert Ep. 17043 From: James Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:52pm Subject: The 12-Steps to Buddhahood- Pt. 1 Hey All, Just a post of some of my current thinking. "This body, Magandiya, is a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction. And yet you say, with reference to this body, which is a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction: 'This is that freedom from disease, master Gotama. This is that Unbinding,' for you don't have the noble vision with which you would know freedom from disease and see Unbinding."… Majjhima Nikaya 75, Magandiya Sutta (To Magandiya) The Buddha understood that we all suffer from a very serious disease, the disease of Desire/Clinging. And like Magandiya from the above passage, we often think that we can rid ourselves of this disease with the very thing that is causing it: ourselves. However, it isn't possible to rid disease with something that is diseased. Viewing desire as a `mental disease', which afflicts us all but there exists a cure; I have directed my thinking toward modern psychological disease treatments. The most successful and tested model of psychological disease treatment in our modern world is the 12-Step Program of Alcoholics Anonymous. This program, which emphases the `Anonymous' nature of all people with the disease of alcoholism, in my opinion, can provide a model of Buddhist outlook and a context for systematic practice in line with that intended by the Buddha. I thought I might share my analysis, thinking, with the members of this group. This analysis is not meant as a `prescription' for everyone, just a possible avenue for individual approach to our shared current state of disease. (Note: Term Substitutions for original steps: `Desire' for `Alcohol'; `The Triple Gem' for `God'; `Reflection' for `Prayer') STEP ONE: WE ADMIT WE ARE POWERLESS OVER DESIRE- THAT OUR LIVES HAVE BECOME UNMANAGEABLE. We admit that desire is something that is controlling us; we are not able to control desire. We, our egos, are the cause of this desire so we realize that `we' are powerless to stop it. Every attempt to do so through struggle, asserting power, control, dominance, etc. only increases the severity of the desire. We have the disease of desire and we are not going to be able to `cure' ourselves of it. We surrender the struggle for control and self-blame concerning this disease. We accept `our' powerlessness in this situation. Additionally, we admit that desire is making us behave and think in ways that are counterproductive to true happiness. In the past, we could see this and knew this, but we were powerless to stop it. Our lives, as they currently are, are harmful, unwholesome, and detrimental to others and ourselves because of desire. The first and most important step is to admit the existence and the nature of the disease of desire that we have and the reality of how it impacts our lives. STEP TWO: COME TO BELIEVE THAT A POWER GREATER THAN OURSELVES CAN RESTORE US TO SANITY. Presently, those who suffer the disease of desire do not believe that anything other than `the self' can rid `the self' of it. This makes the disease continue. It isn't until one `comes to believe' that a power greater than `the self' exists and can rid `the self' of desire, that true healing begins. This belief will be sincere and profound and often doesn't occur until the disease of desire has gotten so severe that the person realizes that `the self' will not be able to cure it. It is at this point that the possibility of hope for a cure becomes real and not just imagined. STEP THREE: MAKE A DECISION TO TURN OUR WILL AND OUR LIVES OVER TO THE TRIPLE GEM, AS WE UNDERSTAND IT. To `Take Refuge in The Triple Gem' doesn't mean simply having an intellectual understanding of it as if it is a philosophy. Taking Refuge means that we surrender ourselves-body, mind, and karma-to the power of The Triple Gem. We accept the higher power of the combined wisdom, compassion, and knowledge of The Buddha, The Dharma, and The Sangha to guide us and protect us. This means that we `turn our will' over to The Triple Gem. We consciously throw away what `we' as diseased individuals want and crave. We replace our selfish desires with sincere adherence to The Triple Gem. We also turn our lives over to The Triple Gem. Our diseased selves no longer determine what we do, and whom we associate with; our lives are determined by the wisdom of The Triple Gem. We make the decision that our `I' should no longer exist. Our `I' is diseased and there is a higher state of being to replace it. STEP FOUR: MAKE A SEARCHING AND FEARLESS MORAL INVENTORY OF OURSELVES. We determine just where desire manifests itself in `the self'. We all have lived for years in denial of our desire disease. People who have also lived in denial of their disease have surrounded us. Denial has become a way of life and support for our desire. Denial is stopped. We cast a light on the true nature of our diseased `selves' to begin the work of transformation. This requires `deep searching' and `fearlessness'. We are, naturally, going to have to search deep and long for the hidden features of the disease. The nature of any disease is to hide and survive at all costs. This makes it a formidable foe. But with `fearlessness', the reality of our faults comes more easily to the surface. Before we practice Sila, the first five precepts, we search out and admit to ourselves where we haven't followed them and where we still don't. This takes searing honesty and courage. To be continued…. (Since I tend to bombard with new ideas before old ones have been digested, I am going to go slower with these particular posts. I will cover four steps with each post, until there are three posts covering all twelve steps.) Metta, James 17044 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:52pm Subject: Reply: Kom Dear Kom: Hi, I'm Philip. Thanks for writing to me. I have read your letter, and I agree with you that we cannot control over what will happen to us. I have a few questions I want to ask you. Even that I am a Christian, I am still interested in many other religions , such as Buddhism, Islam, Catholic, Hindu......Can you please tell me what is your religion, and tell me something about it? Thanks very much. Yours sincerely, Philip 17045 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:59pm Subject: Buddhism question( please reply) Dear guys: I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have some questions about Buddhism: 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your religion? 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? Thanks a lot for reading my letters. If you have any questions about my religion ( Christianity ), do not hestitate to tell me. Yours sincerely, Philip Chui 17046 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Robert, Nice to see you again. Sorry, but I can't discuss this with you until you have read the commentary (and maybe some of our discussions) up to as far as we have studied. We have just touched on the first "covetousness and grief" in the sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html best wishes, Larry 17047 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:24am Subject: Re: Buddhism question( please reply) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > Dear guys: > > I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself > in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have > some questions about Buddhism: > > 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the > god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have > three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). i dont think we have a God.... we dont beleive there is anyone that create anything. > 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? This/that conditionality. This name for the causal principle the Buddha discovered on the night of his Awakening stresses the point that, for the purposes of ending suffering and stress, the processes of causality can be understood entirely in terms of forces and conditions that are experienced in the realm of direct experience, with no need to refer to forces operating outside of that realm. > 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your > religion? depands on the karma > 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? mmm..... do u have any strong evidence that can prove God is real? ^^ 17048 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > What"s the difference between pada.t.thaana.m (proximate cause) and > anantarapaccaya (proximity condition). Does anantarapaccaya relate only > to 'mental states'? (see guide 13 ch. VIII CMA) ..... These are completely different terms even though the English translations make them sound similar and can cause confusion. As we have been discussing, padatthana (proximate cause/footing) can refer to a nama, a rupa, a group of namas or rupas or even some words (concepts) according to the Netthi. Anantara paccaya (proximity condition) and its twin, samanantara paccaya (contiguity condition) only apply to cittas and accompanying cetasikas. Anantara means ‘without interval’ and are the condition by which the preceding citta conditions the subsequent citta without a break. This is the way that mental states, knowlege and kamma are accumulated from moment to moment or citta to citta. I’ve just looked at the reference you’ve given which adds more detail. Nina’s book ‘Conditions’ gives more info too. http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Hope this clarifies. Sarah ====== 17049 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James --- James wrote: > ... <> Before we go too far, I suppose we should make sure we're talking about the same thing. What do you understand by the term 'discursive thought', and where do your references come from? <> (James, I'm sure there's nothing new for you in what follows, but I always try to state things as simply as I can.) The terms 'wholesome' and 'unwholesome' are the terms usually used for the Pali 'kusala' and 'akusala'. For most purposes, the moments of consciousness experienced during our waking hours can be divided into 2 kinds. The actual moments of experience through the various sense-doors are one kind. These include all the moments of seeing and hearing that go on seemingly continuously. They are moments of resultant consciousness (vipaka citta). For each moment of sense-door experience, however, there are many, many other moments of consciousness that 'process' or think about the moment of sense-door experience (otherwise nothing would 'make sense'), and there are also many, many moments of thinking not directly related to presently experienced sense-impressions. These other moments of consciousness are either kusala or akusala in nature (they cannot be 'neutral'). The nature of a moment of consciousness is determined by the mental factors that accompany that moment. Generosity, loving-kindness, patience are examples of kusala mental states. Aversion and attachment are examples of akusala mental states. So the terms do have a very specific meaning as used by the Buddha. <<(Wow. This is probably the first time I have seen this position about discursive thought and awareness. I have felt it was probably true, but thougt that to make discursive thought the subject of awareness was much like 'playing with fire.' What do you think? And how are you able to do this without the discrusive thought interrupting awareness of discursive thought? I know this is a tough question. Sorry for the efforts on your part to explain to me, but I do appreciate it.)>> To my understanding, it is not possible to 'make' anything the subject of awareness, nor is it the case that any one dhamma is a 'better' object of awareness than any other dhamma. <<(Good, because you have raised probably more questions, at least in my mind, with your answers. But we can stop at any point if you like or feel I am not ready/able to understand at this point in my practice.)>> I'm quite happy to keep going. I'm not known for my prompt responses, so I hope you don't mind either some delay or rather brief replies, or more likely, replies that are both slow and brief ;-)) Jon 17050 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Howard I think your question is, Where do the latent tendencies hide when they are not manifesting? I don't know the answer to this ;-)). I don’t even know if the question is 'admissible' (I suspect not!). I haven't seen or heard this discussed anywhere, except for mention of the fact that the 'passing on' of previous experiences is possible because of the fully contiguous nature of succeeding moments of consciousness (i.e., 'no gap in between'). Other than that I can't be of any help, I'm afraid. Are you asking because you see it as something that needs to be known, or because you find it difficult to accept? Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and all) - > > I found the following post of yours in the Useful Posts > section of the > DSG Files, under "Accumulations": > ************************************* ... ... > ******************************************** > The notion of accumulations is an intuitively understandable > one. Yet > I am unclear as to specifics. From the Abhidhammic perspective, any > > mind-moment consists solely of an act of > citta/vi~n~nana/discernment together > with associated cetasikas, all involved with the same object of > experience. > For the accumulations to be found, they must lie among the > cetasikas. Exactly > where? The most likely would be, it seems to me, cetana. However, > during a > single mind-moment, can there be multiple cetanas operative? If > not, how is > the near-infinite collection of accumulations, existing and to be > "passed > on", accounted for? (Of course, nothing is passed on - currently > occurring > conditions are merely conditions for the arising of subsequent > conditions.) > > With metta, > Howard 17051 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:10am Subject: How do you prove that Buddha is real Hi all, im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just want to tell a short story!!!! Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a little chat..... *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** d: mom, can i ask u a question? m: of cause honey! go ahead. d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. m: so??? d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! ^____^ 17052 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:45am Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Jon, By discursive thought, I mean analytical thinking, planning, deciding, etc., not sensory input processing or pure recollection. This definition I am using comes from common usage, not Buddhist scripture. I thought that that is what you meant by wholesome and unwholesome, but I was hoping for a more `nibbana based' and `non-nibbana based' type of definition. Often when you ask the simplest questions, that we all take for granted, the answers can be truly inspiring and lead in new directions. I have a hunch you have more insight to offer in this area, but you are a `tough nut to crack'. Simplicity is fantastic, but commonality is banal, at least to me. You write: To my understanding, it is not possible to 'make' anything the subject of awareness, nor is it the case that any one dhamma is a 'better' object of awareness than any other dhamma. This isn't my understanding, but I could be wrong. When the Buddha taught that we all must cultivate the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, I was assuming that this means we must be aware of reality in every moment by directing our attention to the four foundations. That does require `making' something the subject of awareness. What is it that usually gets in the way of doing that? My estimation is that discursive thought does. Discursive thought is most removed from reality and most subject to the whims of negative mind states, and positive mind states for that matter. I guess my questioning was leading to know how to use meta-cognition, thinking about thinking, as a foundation for mindfulness. But I see that I must learn more about how the Abhidhamma describes such processes. My thinking and terminology is based in my psychology, sociology, and learning theories education, and the Abhidhamma takes a different approach. We can continue this dialogue when I have established a better foundation in the vocabulary/approach commonly practiced in this forum. Metta, James 17053 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 6:40am Subject: Re: Consciousness and the heart base --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > I wonder if anyone has read "The Heart's Code: Tapping the Wisdom and > Power of Our Heart Energy: The New Findings About Cellular Memories > and Their Role in the Mind/Body/Spirit" by Paul Pearsall? > I haven't, but it seems possibly relevant to the post that TG made to > James. Christine, This post has fascinated me since you posted it. I have been reading about this particular book and its position ever since. I stayed up until 4:00 am in the morning the night you posted it! I was reading about the book, its author, and trying to get all of the information I could gather about heart transplants. I am still trying to get the book from a library and need to wait. With the holidays coming, no book buying for me right now. :-) I do want to read it and other related research, and maybe compare to the Abhidhamma's heart-base position (which I may contact you off-list for clarification if that is okay) and then post about it. It is a fascinating subject. I just wanted you to know that it wasn't a dead issue. I, for one, am very interested, but probably won't be able to respond for a while. Metta, James 17054 From: nidive Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:04am Subject: Hello ... Hi All, This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. Robert introduced me to this group. I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the Abhidhamma. To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17055 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/20/02 6:57:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > I think your question is, Where do the latent tendencies hide when > they are not manifesting? > -------------------------------------------- Howard: That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would put it because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer to what I mean is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the mechanism we *call* accumulations?" (I would imagine that some cetasikas are direct participants, while others serve as necessary auxilliary conditions for manifestation of tendencies.) It seems to me that cetanas are central to this, and that they are likely quite complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of a number of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be required to explain the great diversity of possible inclinations among people. --------------------------------------------- > > I don't know the answer to this ;-)). I don’t even know if the > question is 'admissible' (I suspect not!). I haven't seen or heard > this discussed anywhere, except for mention of the fact that the > 'passing on' of previous experiences is possible because of the fully > contiguous nature of succeeding moments of consciousness (i.e., 'no > gap in between'). Other than that I can't be of any help, I'm > afraid. > > Are you asking because you see it as something that needs to be > known, or because you find it difficult to accept? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: The former. It is easy for me to accept that our minds are conditioned and have "accumulations" (or tendencies to act and react in specific ways) which are "passed on". In fact, it is obviously so. I am merely interested in more precisely knowing the mechanism. I am a mathematician and scientist by trade, and I am interested in knowing the"how" of things. Abhidhamma is quite detailed on many matters, and this seems to be an exception. ------------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17056 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real Hi, ajahn_paul - In a message dated 11/20/02 8:11:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, ajahn_paul@y... writes: > > Hi all, > > im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just > want to tell a short story!!!! > > Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish > daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a > little chat..... > > *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > > d: mom, can i ask u a question? > m: of cause honey! go ahead. > d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. > m: so??? > d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > > And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! > ^____^ > > ======================== Excellent! A good story for grown-up kids as well as children. Nagarjuna, who said that samsara = nibbana, would like it too. We are all poor fish who just can't see what is right in front of us! As the Zen masters say, "Look! Look!" ;-) 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) 17057 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real well... its kind of funny,, and also its a little bit upset that ppl who found they were lost, or they even didnt aware that they were lost! sometimes when we felt that we were lost,,, we may walking in the right path already. on the other hand,, some ppl would think that they were walking on the right path, unfortunately they were lost! :( --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, ajahn_paul - > > In a message dated 11/20/02 8:11:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ajahn_paul@y... writes: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just > > want to tell a short story!!!! > > > > Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish > > daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a > > little chat..... > > > > *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > > > > d: mom, can i ask u a question? > > m: of cause honey! go ahead. > > d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. > > m: so??? > > d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > > > > > And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! > > ^____^ > > > > > ======================== > Excellent! A good story for grown-up kids as well as children. > Nagarjuna, who said that samsara = nibbana, would like it too. > We are all poor fish who just can't see what is right in front of us! > As the Zen masters say, "Look! Look!" ;-) > > With metta, > Howard 17058 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:56am Subject: Re: Hello ... Dear ndive,\ Really glad you made it here. I would never have guessed you were only 25 after our exchanges on Dhamma. Nina is a great help to so many of us for a long time. Best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. > > Robert introduced me to this group. > > I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. > > I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the > Abhidhamma. > > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its > the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all > about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17059 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:07am Subject: Way 26, tadanga vinaya Dear Larry, you had a question about the following: I think it was about tadanga vinaya? I looked in Nyanatiloka: five kinds of pahaana, and two kinds are mundane. The tadanga is by insight: through the stages of insight, you can find these in the Vis. Eternity is overcome by realizing the arising and falling away of nama and rupa, etc. It is said in the sub Co. that here is pointed out the preliminary practice of the mundane Path. I liked your remark about Way 25, pointing out the courage needed: < Abandoning "the discontent rooted in bodily misery, the non-delight in the culture of body contemplation, and the desire to turn away from facing the real ugliness, suffering, impermanence and insubstantiality of the body" (and feeling, citta & dhamma) might necessitate a certain amount of bravery, if not fearlessness. This would relate to our previous threads on fear. Also it is interesting that anatta is counted as an undesirable.> N: We need to be reminded often of courage, courage to continue investigating what appears now. We should not mind our lack of progress, it is condiitoned. Anatta is counted as an undesirable. We like self so much and cling to it. We are afraid to lose self when we die. Remember A. Sompong's remark about fear of death to Rob K: without personality belief no fear of death. Nina. 17060 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:23am Subject: Re: Hello ... Hello ndive, Nice to see you here, welcome. I have enjoyed your posts in the past and I look forward to any contributions you may care to make to the discussions on dsg. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. > > Robert introduced me to this group. > > I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. > > I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the > Abhidhamma. > > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its > the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all > about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17061 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:39am Subject: Re: Consciousness and the heart base Hello James, I'm glad my mention of the book was helpful - I haven't read the book yet and I would be interested in your thoughts on it at any time. I know it was written for popular consumption and so may lack a cerrtain rigour, but it states it includes the results of some recent research. So often the things in the Teachings that seem different to what 'modern' science declares as truth are not wrong - just waiting for science to catch up :), or at least use the same language. Even if the book disappoints in some way but serves as a jumping off point for further reading and reflection, and if it throws a new light on the truth of the Teachings, it is worthwhile. Newest is not always 'more true'. All we have to do is not close our minds. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Dear Group, > > > > I wonder if anyone has read "The Heart's Code: Tapping the Wisdom > and > > Power of Our Heart Energy: The New Findings About Cellular > Memories > > and Their Role in the Mind/Body/Spirit" by Paul Pearsall? > > I haven't, but it seems possibly relevant to the post that TG made > to > > James. > > > Christine, > > This post has fascinated me since you posted it. I have been > reading about this particular book and its position ever since. I > stayed up until 4:00 am in the morning the night you posted it! I > was reading about the book, its author, and trying to get all of the > information I could gather about heart transplants. I am still > trying to get the book from a library and need to wait. With the > holidays coming, no book buying for me right now. :-) I do want to > read it and other related research, and maybe compare to the > Abhidhamma's heart-base position (which I may contact you off-list > for clarification if that is okay) and then post about it. It is a > fascinating subject. I just wanted you to know that it wasn't a > dead issue. I, for one, am very interested, but probably won't be > able to respond for a while. > > Metta, James 17062 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 11:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello ... Dear Nidive, wellcome to the group. Thank you for your kind words and I am glad my book could help you. It is good to discuss more about the Abhidhamma and exchange views. Best wishes Nina op 20-11-2002 16:04 schreef nidive op nidive@y...: > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? 17063 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, Thanks for the info. Just to clarify, is every immediately preceding citta a proximity conditition (anantara paccaya) and every immediately preceding anything (dhamma or combination of dhammas) a proximate cause (padatthana)? Larry 17064 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:14pm Subject: Nama Rupa Hi all, I have been thinking for the last couple days about the meaning of "nama-rupa" and would like to write down some ideas. 1. The Sanskrit/Pali word "nama", the English word "name", the German word "Name", and the French word "Nom" all share the same root in the linguistic family of Indo-European languages. The Chinese translated "nama-rupa" as "ming-se", where "ming" means "name" in English, and "se" literally means "color". The compound word "nama- rupa" has been translated as "name-and-form" in some literature and "mentality-materiality" in other. Whether the word "nama" is translated as "name" or "mentality" in English, questions remain: what does it mean by "nama"? What does it mean by "rupa"? 2. Name is representation. Rupa is what is being represented. There are representations of representations. In other words, nama and rupa are relational. They are not two categories with some number of elements. 3. Representation of something is possible only when there is consciousness, and representations are representation through six modalities of senses (five modalities of bodily senses plus the modality of intellect.) I look forward to some discussion on the meaning of nama-rupa. Have a good day, Victor 17065 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:27pm Subject: Re: Buddhism question( please reply) Hi Star Kid! (AKA Philip) Your letter is very interesting. You have a lot of questions, and that is good. I am going to try to answer your questions after what you wrote. I also want to give you a few helpful hints about writing letters to people asking for things like information, especially adults. I am sure you won't mind. You are obviously a very clever and smart boy. Dear guys: (Philip, you can call your friends `guys', but you shouldn't do that with adults. You should address adults as "Dear Sirs or Madams; or Dear Members of DSG" I'm positive you didn't mean harm by addressing adults as `guys' and are being friendly, but showing the highest respect to adults and teachers is very important in life. It is the guidance and love of adults that will guarantee you a good future. I am sure you understand now and are clever enough to do this in the future- and teach your classmates the proper way also. I am counting on you to pass this on. :-). I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have some questions about Buddhism: 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). (Philip, since you don't capitalize `God', I am assuming that you mean any kind of god and not just the one `true creator God'. Well, let me tell you Philip, by being Christian you are missing out on having a lot of gods! Buddhism has LOTS AND LOTS of gods…and lots of demons…and lots of ghosts!! And they are all very interesting too! They glow in the dark, don't have to eat food that much, and don't have to sleep for months at a time! They live in other worlds and, if you are a Buddha, you can travel to them with the power of your mind; much like a `transporter' in Star Trek, but with no machines! And depending on the type of Buddhist, especially Tibetan Buddhist, there are also a lot of enlightened Buddhas and other higher beings living in other worlds. But none have been as supreme as LORD BUDDHA, Siddhartha. He existed for eons and eons (American spelling ;-) to bring the ultimate and final truth to the world. To most Buddhists, he is the only Lord, king, and god…as you are thinking. But, and this is very important to understand Philip, all of the gods, devas, ghosts, demons, and silent Buddhas in Buddhism are no better than human beings. Yep, hard to understand but true. They were humans before being gods, and will probably be humans again. Actually, they are jealous of humans because humans can be Buddhas more easily and they can't.) 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? (The Lord Buddha taught the belief of Buddhism in his first sermon. This belief is called "The Four Noble Truths". They are: 1: We are all suffering, 2: This suffering is caused by us all wanting things to be what they aren't, 3: There is a way to stop this suffering, 4: The Eightfold Path, which is a way to see and accept things as they really are.) 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your religion? (If you are a regular person, you are reborn into a body with the same attributes you had when you died. If you are a Buddha and see things as they really are, you are not reborn but enter a state of existence called `Parinibbana'. I am not sure what that is like because I haven't been there. I have only read a few `brief postcards' sent from Buddhas who have seen it. It is supposed to be a great place! I want to go there one day. Maybe I will see you! ;- ) 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? (We don't need to prove that the Buddha is real; after all, inside, we are all Buddhas. He said, "I am this", and we say, "Oh, I am that too!" So we know the Lord Buddha is real because we know that we are real. I know I am real anyway. Are you??? Hehehe…just kidding. I know you are real too. The Buddha is real because we are all real. Jesus was real too. And God is real also, in a certain view. The only thing that isn't real is ignorance of such things. May we all be freed of the `unreality' of ignorance.) Thanks a lot for reading my letters. If you have any questions about my religion ( Christianity ), do not hestitate to tell me. (I have one question Philip. Jesus said that a person `must be like a little child' to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Since you are a kid, I want to ask you, what do you think he meant by that?) Yours sincerely, Philip Chui Metta (Loving-Kindness), James 17066 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for the info. Just to clarify, is every immediately preceding > citta a proximity conditition (anantara paccaya) and every immediately > preceding anything (dhamma or combination of dhammas) a proximate cause > (padatthana)? > > Larry ___________________ Dera Larry, These are different terms and may be confusing if we try to compare them. Anatara paccaya is one of the 24 conditions explained in the Patthana. Padatthana is not one of the 24 . Although the English term 'proximate cause' may make us think that it arises prior to the object, in fact in many cases (eg Samadhi is the proximate cause of panna) it arises togther with it . Robert 17067 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Robert, Ah, I think I get it. Padatthana doesn't relate to time and causal sequence. As Sarah suggested it might be better to translate it as 'support' rather than 'proximate cause'. A footprint (padatthana) supports a foot, an eye supports eye consciousness, and samadhi supports panna. Btw, is there a specific proximity condition (anantara paccaya) for panna; something that is always the case, like contact (phassa) is always proximity condition for feeling (vedana)? Larry 17068 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 8:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The 12-Steps to Buddhahood- Pt. 1 Hi James, Your post is very interesting indeed (though I’m not sure about the subject heading). I’ve long been impressed by the work of AA and have had similar reflections to yours. As we know, with any addiction or illness, breaking through the denial barrier is a very important step. As you suggest -- and provide apt quotes for -- we all suffer from the diseas of desire/clinging and most of the time are in complete denial about its existence or its harm (or both) on various levels and look to others for support in our ignorance. Understanding the nature of phenomena, their existence when they arise as not-self (and not in anyone’s ‘control’) and ‘the power of the Triple Gem’ is the way. Thanks for sharing your insights on the cancers we prefer not to see;-) I think AA would be (should be) interested to receive a copy of the adapted steps for Buddhist AAs Sarah p.s 1. On the 'heart-to-heart' thread, did you look at the 'heart' posts in U.P. for more Tipitaka detail on haddaya vatthu (heart-base)? 2. Great post to Philip.....the sooner he learns the better;-) ====================================================== 17069 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 9:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi Victor, The eye can't see. Eye consciousness arises dependent on an eye, but the eye is not a seer. Eye consciousness arises and subsides so quickly it can't be considered to be a seer either. So there is no seer, just eye and eye consciousness. If we don't understand that the eye is not a seer, it will be very difficult to understand that the body is not self. Hence it is important to discriminate between mentality and materiality (nama and rupa). That's the main point, imo. Larry 17070 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 9:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Larry & Rob Ep, Larry, a very relevant quote on the use of ‘bare attention’. Not being a ‘mathmatician by trade’ I’m also always happy to hear Rob’s comments whether upside down, back-to-front or in at the deep end;-). A few brief comments: 1.I find ‘bare attention’ to be quite illogical as a translation of sati and very confusing. Why not just ‘mindfulness’ or ‘awareness’? Attention immediately suggests a ‘doing’ or ‘noting’ which I think is misleading. After all, the goal as Rob suggests, is to understand the anatta-nature of all realities (i.e 4 foundations of mindfulness). Of course, as Rob suggests, it depends on the way we read and understnd these phrases or any translation of terms for that matter. 2. Larry, sukkha-vipassana (dry-insight) has an entirely different meaning and refers to one who has attained a stage of enlightenment without jhana. 3. The problem with phrases such as the ‘bare registering of the facts observed’ is its vagueness and lack of clarity about the paramattha dhammas which are the objects of sati and panna. Registering of facts can so easily be just ‘bare’ thinking without any understanding of dhammas at all. 4. “Without reacting” to them......surely it depends on conditions whether there is ‘reacting’ or not. Do we mind or care? Is there any understanding of the lobha or dosa when there is ‘reacting’? 5.L.. ..“it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind’.Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments?” ..... My comment is just that the idea of self is very deep-rooted (as in when there is any selection of object) and so is the desire for results. And, yes, what about ‘mind’ at this moment or ‘body’ , or any other reality? 6.Rob Ep: “I don't see any difference between such precision and the idea of 'discernment', which means to see things as they are and in no other way [in other words, without delusion or ignorance].” ..... For most people, being aware of ‘the bare facts of a perception’ through one of the 6 doorways is not precise as I see it. What are the bare facts? We need to study and consider a lot about the various namas and rupas (as I’m very glad to see Victor is doing) or the 4 satipatthanas in order to know even theoretically what the ‘bare facts’ are. Think of all the discussions we’ve had on concepts and realities and on namas and rupas in the abhidhamma. We’re just scratching the surface, I believe. 7. Rob, I appreciate your comments about the rotten food, aversion and non-reacting. Rob: “but I would think there has to be some interference, at least of the intention to discern what is happening, in order for mindfulness attention and insight upon its heels to take place.” Again, I think the idea of self and the wishing for a result creeps in very craftily. Only sati can be aware of the mind-states at these times. 8. Rob: “All of these seem to be developed gradually by using all expedient means according to one's predisposition and what works for an individual.” ..... I agree about the value of seeing the benefit in all kinds of kusala and thereby they are ‘developed gradually.’ You raise many interesting and helpful points. As I was discussing with James, seeing the cancer of desire and ignorance of it at these times is the key, I think. ***** Thanks for the many helpful points in both your posts. I apologise if I’m stepping on any bare toes with these comments. Look forward to hearing more from you both or others. Sarah ===== 17071 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello ... Hi Nidive, Thanks for introducing yourself. You'll find others from Sing and Malaysia here too. Jon and I live in Hong Kong. I see you've also bumped into a few other friends as well;-) --- nidive wrote: >... I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. .... Same as I found exactly. Just a flimsy stencilled manuscript off a manual type-writer when I first read it, with lots of hand-written notes in the margins as I recall;-) Nidive, you may find it useful to access the search function for all posts (except the first ?months) at: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/ Also, you may wish to look at some of the Useful Posts when you have time or a particular topic in mind: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Look f/w to your contributions to any old or new threads. Thanks for joining (and to Rob K for the intro;-)) Sarah ===== 17072 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Sarah, Thanks for your comments. I just have a few additional points. I have no idea where the phrase "bare attention" originated. I'm assuming it was from Ven. U Narada or Mahasi Sayadaw, but it could be Nyanaponika Thera's. If it was originally Burmese we might look into translation issues. In any event, it seems to be a good fit for "just sati". The reason I brought up "sukkha vipassana" is that it is sometimes translated as "bare insight". In this case "bare" (or dry) refers to the absence of the "juice" of jhana. The "bare" in "bare attention" seems to refer to the avoidance of discursive thinking as James is discussing with Jon. However it might be clearer to think of this "bare" as the absence of akusala cetasikas which would certainly be the case whenever a citta arose with sati and especially when cultivating satipatthana. I agree with Rob that the rigorous discipline that Mahasi Sayadaw advocates is a skillful means that no doubt produces good results when conscientiously applied and understood. [I may be embellishing on Rob's thought a little here.] However, I don't think it is the only way to read the sutta and commentary. I would welcome any alternative views, particularly from K. Sujin if you get a chance to bring it up at your next meeting. An in-depth commentary from her would be nice. Also I'm going to post a few bits from Ven. Gunaratana. Larry 17073 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:41pm Subject: Sources of texts.... Hi James & All, You raised the question of sources of various texts. I would like to quote from Dhammapala (the ancient commentator who wrote most the commentaries not written by Buddhaghosa.) Here he is writing about the Netti (the Guide) which I was quoting from yesterday. This is contained in the intro and I thought you might find it of interest: ***** “If it is asked, he says,’How can it be known that the “Guide-Treatise” is what was uttered by a principal disciple and approved by the Buddha? (it can be answered that it is) because it is a text ; for there is no other criterion beyond a text, and any text not in contradiction (when examined) under the four Principal Appeals to Authority is the criterion. And the “Guide-Treatise” has, like the “Disclosure of the Pitakas” (Petakopadesa), come down (to us) by way of the unimpeachable succession of teachers.-If that is so, then why is its source not given? For a source is given in the cases of the Subha sutta, the Ananagana Sutta and Kaccayana Samyutta, etc, which were uttered by disciples. -That is not always so in the case of utterances; for no source is given in the cases of the Patisambhidamagga and the Niddesa or in the cases of the Dhammapada and the Buddhavamasa, so that is no criterion; and that is how it should be regarded here too. And then any source is itself always the utterance of the custodians of the Sutta and Vinaya, the Elders Upali and other principal disciples, and so that too is uttered by principal disciples. And anyway why this investigation about a source, since there is no one else to whom to ascribe it except the Elder. What needs investigating here is only the meaning (in order to see) that it does not conflict with the texts. Besides, as a method of detailing the meaning of the texts, this work has no more need of a separatate source than have the Patisambhidamagga or the Niddesa’....” Sarah ====== 17074 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:46pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Reply: Kom Dear Philip, > -----Original Message----- > From: Star Kid [mailto:starkidsclub@y...] > > > Dear Kom: > > Hi, I'm Philip. Thanks for writing to me. I have read > your letter, and I agree with you that we cannot > control over what will happen to us. > > I have a few questions I want to ask you. Even that I > am a Christian, I am still interested in many other > religions , such as Buddhism, Islam, Catholic, > Hindu......Can you please tell me what is your > religion, and tell me something about it? Thanks very > much. > I believe in the teachings of the Buddha, so that would make me a Buddhist. The Buddha teaches what goes on in our daily life. For example, you said you agreed that we cannot control what will happen to us. The Buddha teaches why this is so. When you see what you like, you are bound to be happy because of the seeing: this is because the habits of liking the thing that you see grows more as you keep liking the thing that you see. The happiness arises only because: 1) there is seeing, 2) there is the thing that you see, 3) because what you see had made you happy in the past. The Buddha also teaches about good things and bad things. He praises doing good things, like being kind to people, helping people who are in need, being joyful for other's good fortune, and to understand that things happen only because there are conditions for them to happen. He teaches the disadvantages of bad things, and praises not doing them. Bad things include killing, stealing, lying, saying bad words, saying things to break up people's friendship, saying non-useful things, sexual misconducts, and consuming things that cause one to be careless. The Buddha teaches that to gain the understanding of ourselves and to achieve true happiness that is not so temporary (like being happy because we see the thing that we like), we must develop wisdom to understand things in our daily life as they truly are. Through wisdom, we can become free from all the things that cause unhappiness. I hope this makes sense to you. If you don't understand anything, please ask. There are many kind people in this group that would be happy to help you if you don't understand anything I say. kom 17075 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi, Larry (and Victor) - In a message dated 11/21/02 12:06:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Victor, > > The eye can't see. Eye consciousness arises dependent on an eye, but the > eye is not a seer. Eye consciousness arises and subsides so quickly it > can't be considered to be a seer either. So there is no seer, just eye > and eye consciousness. If we don't understand that the eye is not a > seer, it will be very difficult to understand that the body is not self. > Hence it is important to discriminate between mentality and materiality > (nama and rupa). That's the main point, imo. > > Larry > ========================= I agree that there is no seer - just seeing. And the seeing is an act of vi~n~nana or discerning. However, I don't have a clue what the relative speed of the discerning has to do with anything. Several people on this list frequently point out that mind-moments arise and pass very quickly (in comparison, I suppose, with rupas which supposedly remain [or are replicated] for up to 17 mind-moments - it must be in comparison with *something*, for duration is always relative). So what? Something not lasting for a long time means only that it doesn't last for a long time - nothing more. What if an act of visual consciousness lasted twice as long (again compared, I suppose, to rupas)? Would that make it a seer? Four times as long? Seventeen times as long? I believe that it is unimportant what is the relative duration of things. What is important is that they don't remain, and that they arise only in dependence on conditions, their creation and tentative existence completely dependent on similarly empty dhammas. What is important, as I see it, is that *nothing* whatsoever has any core or own-being, being nothing more than a dependent arising that does not remain. As one Zen master said: to see a glass properly is to see it as already broken. As the Buddha said hundreds of years earlier: whatever is of the nature to arise is of the nature to cease. (The speed is irrelevant.) 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) 17076 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 6:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi again, Larry, Victor, and all - One more point: I *am* aware that the Buddha pointed out that mind changes more quickly than material form, and thus if one were to take anything to be a self, it would be more sensible to choose material form than consciousness. He said this to dissuade people from making consciousness into a self, a very common tendency then, now, and always. (We can recall the time the Buddha questioned a monk on what he meant by consciousness, getting out of him that he thought that consciousness is some sort of entity that continues from lifetime to lifetime.) But the Buddha would not consider *anything* that failed to remain, regardless of how long it lasted, to be a self. Whatever is impermanent is not-self. 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) 17077 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 11:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Larry, OK. I'm sure we'll all be raising points from discussions. Let me add a couple of quotes from K.Sujin in the meantime as translated by Nina in the Perfections (Energy ch) series recently in case they may help answer your qus: 1."The Buddha's followers in the past were the buddhist assembly at the time of the Buddha Gotama. We can see that it is not difficult for a result to materialize, but that the development of the right conditions leading to such a result is difficult. If at this moment there is not yet the cause that can bring its appropriate result, the result cannot arise, no matter how much one tries to hasten its arising. We should continue to apply energy with the development of understanding and we should be truthful with regard to it: we should find out whether we know the characteristics of realities that are appearing right now or not yet. This kind of understanding is not intellectual understanding which stems from listening, but it is of the level of satipatthåna. Satipatthåna is developed when sampajañña (paññå) arises together with sati and knows the characteristics of realities appearing at this moment as they are. Paññå develops gradually, time and again, so that one day the four noble Truths can be penetrated. When the time for enlightenment has come, this result is in accordance with the cause, and it will arise without difficulty. However, we should continue to be patient and to have energy and endeavour to develop understanding." ***** 2." 'And from what point of view , monks, should the controlling faculty of mindfulness be regarded? From that of the four applications of mindfulness.' Kusala citta cannot arise without sati cetasika, be it at the moment one performs dåna, or abstains from akusala. However, the characteristic of the controlling faculty of sati, the characteristic of its leadership, can be seen in the four applications of mindfulness*" (6. ***** footnote by Nina: "6. Sati of satipatthåna is mindful of nåma and rúpa which appear. The four Applications of Mindfulness, which are mindfulness of the Body, of Feeling, of Citta and of Dhammas, are actually all conditioned realities. They have been explained under the different aspects of the four Applications of Mindfulness. Sati of satipatthåna is sati of a level which is higher than sati of dåna or sati of síla, because when it is developed it leads to the eradication of defilements." ***** Sarah ====== 17078 From: James Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:10am Subject: Re: Sources of texts.... --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi James & All, > > You raised the question of sources of various texts. I would like to quote > from Dhammapala (the ancient commentator who wrote most the commentaries > not written by Buddhaghosa.) Here he is writing about the Netti (the > Guide) which I was quoting from yesterday. This is contained in the intro > and I thought you might find it of interest: > > ***** > "If it is asked, he says,'How can it be known that the "Guide- Treatise" is > what was uttered by a principal disciple and approved by the Buddha? (it > can be answered that it is) because it is a text of a canonical text>; for there is no other criterion beyond a text, and > any text not in contradiction (when examined) under the four Principal > Appeals to Authority is the criterion. And the "Guide-Treatise" has, like > the "Disclosure of the Pitakas" (Petakopadesa), come down (to us) by way > of the unimpeachable succession of teachers.-If that is so, then why is > its source not given? For a source is given in the cases of the Subha > sutta, the Ananagana Sutta and Kaccayana Samyutta, etc, which were uttered > by disciples. > > -That is not always so in the case of utterances; for no source is given > in the cases of the Patisambhidamagga and the Niddesa or in the cases of > the Dhammapada and the Buddhavamasa, so that is no criterion; and that is > how it should be regarded here too. And then any source is itself always > the utterance of the custodians of the Sutta and Vinaya, the Elders Upali > and other principal disciples, and so that too is uttered by principal > disciples. And anyway why this investigation about a source, since there > is no one else to whom to ascribe it except the Elder. What > needs investigating here is only the meaning (in order to see) that it > does not conflict with the texts. Besides, as a method of detailing the > meaning of the texts, this work has no more need of a separatate source > than have the Patisambhidamagga or the Niddesa'...." > > Sarah > ====== Sarah, I believe Dhammapala is using faulty reasoning and an 'armchair historian' approach to Buddhist scholarship. First he argues that the Netti has to be from the same Arahants who recorded the Vinaya and Suttas, then he argues that it doesn't matter anyway as long as it matches the teachings of the Vinaya and Suttas. Huh? This is circular reasoning and not true scholarship. As far as the origination of the Abhidhamma, which you and I are in disagreement about, allow me to present my findings: From "Theravada Buddhism; A Chronology" Edited by John Bullitt http://www.accesstoinsight.org/history.html: 1 -544/-480 Parinibbana (Skt: Parinirvana; death and final release) of the Buddha, at Kusinara (now Kusinagar, India) (age 80). {1,3} During the rains retreat following the Buddha's Parinibbana, the First Council convenes at Rajagaha, India, during which 500 arahant bhikkhus, led by Ven. Mahakassapa, gather to recite the entire body of the Buddha's teachings. The recitation of the Vinaya by Ven. Upali becomes accepted as the Vinaya Pitaka; the recitation of the Dhamma by Ven. Ananda becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka. {1,4} 100 -444/-380 100 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana the Second Council convenes in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan, Korea). {1} 294 -250 Third Council is convened by King Asoka at Pataliputra (India). Disputes on points of doctrine lead to further schisms, spawning the Sarvastivadin and Vibhajjavadin sects. The Abhidhamma Pitaka is recited at the Council, along with additional sections of the Khuddaka Nikaya. The modern Pali Tipitaka is now essentially complete, although some scholars have suggested that at least two parts of the extant Canon -- the Parivara in the Vinaya, and the Apadana in the Sutta -- may date from a later period. {1, 4} Sources {1} The Buddhist Religion: A Historical Introduction (fourth edition) by R.H. Robinson & W.L. Johnson (Belmont, California: Wadsworth, 1996) {4} Beginnings: the Pali Suttas by Samanera Bodhesako (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1984) James: If the Abhidhamma Pitaka were the direct teachings of the Buddha, or from his Chief Disciple, it would not have taken 294 years after the death of the Buddha to recite it. Most `accepted' and `unbiased' scholarship points to its being a later addition to the canon, under the encouragement and guidance of King Asoka. Now, compare true history with how some change history to fit personal agendas. This is an example of one Buddhist scholar who blatantly presents the history of the Tipitaka in a misleading way: This is from "The Buddha and His Teachings" by Ven. Nârada: http://theravada.net/general/dhamma/tipitaka_overview.html "This First Council compiled and arranged in its present form the Pali Tipitaka, which represents the entire body of the Buddha's Teaching. Two other Councils of Arahants were held 100 and 236 years later respectively, again to rehearse the Word of the Buddha because attempts were being made to pollute the pure Teaching. About 83 B.C., during the reign of the pious Siæhala King Vatta Gamani Abhaya, a Council of Arahants was held, and the Tipiöaka was, for the first time in the history of Buddhism, committed to writing at Aluvihâra in Ceylon. Thanks to the indefatigable efforts of those noble and foresighted Arahants, there is no room either now or in the future for higher critics or progressive scholars to adulterate the pure Teaching." James: But I guess Ven. Narada adulterating history is okay because this chronology is very inaccurate by acceptable scholarship. Ven. Narada knows this and later clarifies his earlier claim in regards to the Abhidhamma being recorded at the First Council: "According to some scholars Abhidhamma is not a teaching of the Buddha, but is a later elaboration of scholastic monks. Tradition, however, attributes the nucleus of the Abhidhamma to the Buddha Himself…. Whoever the great author or authors may have been, it has to be admitted that the Abhidhamma must be the product of an intellectual genius comparable only to the Buddha." James: This is faulty reasoning and a type of `Trying to Have Your Cake and Eat it Too." The Abhidhamma either is a direct teaching of the Buddha or it is not. It cannot be seen or accepted as being both. From my research, and intuition also, I conclude that the Abhidhamma is not a direct teaching of the Buddha. It is a later work of scholarship by bhikkhu scholars who had not been taught by the Lord Buddha in person. Metta, James 17079 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:12am Subject: Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Rob M, I’ve got a few of your posts in front of me this time (some of which Nina touched on). As usual, you raise important and challenging points: 1. vipaka cittas ================= In post 16905, some of the comments were a bit confused. Azita raised the right qus and I agree with your follow-up post 16969 (Azita, I also really liked your post to Chris on sleep and dreaming). Seeing (as vipaka citta) always has exactly the same characteristics and performs the same function regardless of the visible object seen at any time or whether it is kusala/akusala vipaka. As you also go on to say, there are many different conditioning factors at any time (inc. the object and eyebase), but there is only one ‘seed’ or ‘kamma’ for each vipaka.Kus kamma -> kus vipaka and vice versa. 2. With and without wrong view =============================== In post 16899 you were discussing kammic weight and we’ve discussed this. You were looking for a ref in K.Milinda. I think there are many references to the greater danger or ‘weight’ of ‘with wrong view’.I was just trying to find one quickly that I came across yest. in Sammohavinodani, but can’t see it now either;-( But again, perhaps it’s hard to generalise? Let’s post the refs when we find them. 3. Ultimate and ultimate ======================== You suggested to James that “we can say that the Buddha’s Dhamma is not “ultimate” because ther are many things left out.” This is one use of the word as we use it conventionally;-). You go on to discuss ‘ultimate realities’ and suggest these are either mentioned; 1)phenomenologically 2) analytically as in “the analysis of the five aggregates”. You say this is a small percentage of “ultimate” and the “remainder is primarily in the realm of ‘science’” Briefly: I agree that the Buddha’s Teachings are concerned with the direct experience and understanding of those ‘ultimate realities’ which can be known and lead to the goal of the eradication of all defilements and realization of nibbana. The khandhas are no more nor less than the very namas and rupas arising and falling away at this moment and therefore are the very ‘ultimate realities to be known’, as being discussed in the Satipatthana Sutta. The Buddha taught about all ‘ultimate realities’ as it will depend entirely on conditions and accumulations what will be known and experienced. I don’t think there is any use or meaning of ultimate other than that applied to ‘paramattha dhammas’. Other aspects which we conventionally might think of as ‘ultimate truths’ are concepts. These include scientific ‘facts’ such as brains, atoms, quantum physics and the like.In other words, these are all ‘sammuti sacca’ (conventional truths, however scientifically proved). Just because there isn’t any understanding or experience of say, the rupas out in the garden, doesn’t mean the ‘ultimate realities’ are any less real, even though they are unknown to ‘our’ cittas. By understanding the characteristic of a reality, say hardness or sound, when it is experienced, it can be known as an element, no self at all. Gradually by understanding its nature, it becomes apparent that other hardness or sounds must have this same nature even if they are not being experienced at this instant. This is how saddha (confidence) in the Teachings and in those ultimate realities not experienced develops. Well that’s my perspective for now. Look f/w to more of yours as always. Sarah ===== 17080 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 2:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Dear Larry, I depart on Nov 26, back Dec 13. I was so silent because I had to finish the perfection of patience. Kom helped me enormously, sometimes daily, with all the high and royal words in the Co. which does not exist in English. It was a difficult and very long chapter, I will put it on when back. I thought you were silent because of letting it sink in. Speaking of accumulations, I heard a good reminder on tape: A. Sujin said that if we accumulate patience from now on we may become more partient in speech, say, in ten years, or, the next life, or after many lives. Isn't that a good one? Courage and good cheer! I may have little time to answer questions at length now, I may save them. Bare mindfulness: see below. op 20-11-2002 01:58 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w... > > I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in > mind for "bare attention". Maybe someone familiar with Burmese could > track this down. Can you make a distinction between satiyevettha and > sukkha-vipassana? >N: the word is not satiyevettha, it is *sati*. That is all. Satiyevettha is a conglomeration of small words stuck together, a sandhi, which we have to analyse: satiyaa, which can mean: of, for, by, with reference to sati. the ev: eva, thus, indeed. etttha: here. When stuck together vocals are elided and you get one long word. I have to look at the context whether it is : sati (nominative) + eva, thus not: satiyaa. Thus, he translated sati with: bare mindfulness, which is very free, isn't it? Moreover I find it a loaded term, and I doubt whether there is a Pali equivalent. I like to be careful and check whether such a term is based on the scriptures and old commentaries. I will not go into the article you quoted for the same reason. Nina. 17081 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:44am Subject: Re: Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > 2. With and without wrong view > =============================== > In post 16899 you were discussing kammic weight and we've discussed this. > You were looking for a ref in K.Milinda. I think there are many references > to the greater danger or `weight' of `with wrong view'.I was just trying > to find one quickly that I came across yest. in Sammohavinodani, but can't > see it now either;-( But again, perhaps it's hard to generalise? Let's > post the refs when we find them. ===== A few weeks ago, we met in HK and I passed to you a copy of Abhidhamma class notes prepared by Sayadaw U Silananda. On page 23 of those class notes, there is a quote from Milinda's Questions: King Milinda: "Revered Nagasena, for whom is the greater demerit: he who does an evil deed knowingly, or he who does an evil deed unknowingly? Elder Nagasena: "His is the greater demerit, sire, who does an evil deed unknowingly." Milinda: "Well then, revered Nagasena, do we doubly punish that royal son of ours or the chief minister who does an evil deed unknowingly?" Nagasena: "What do you think about this, sire? if one (man) should unknowingly take hold of a red-hot ball of iron, aglow, aflame, ablaze and another should take hold of it knowingly, which would be the more severely burnt?" Milinda: "He who took hold of it unknowingly, revered sir, would be the more severely burnt." Nagasena: "Even so, sire, the greater demerit is his who does an evil deed unknowingly." Milinda: "You are dexterous, revered Nagasena." Sayadaw U Silananda sates that this is taken from Milinda's Questions, Vol I, pp. 116-7. I checked these pages in my PTS version of Vol I of Milinda's Questions but did not find it. Maybe you might have better luck tracking it down. ===== > > 3. Ultimate and ultimate > ======================== > Just because there isn't any understanding or experience of say, the rupas > out in the garden, doesn't mean the `ultimate realities' are any less > real, even though they are unknown to `our' cittas. > > By understanding the characteristic of a reality, say hardness or sound, > when it is experienced, it can be known as an element, no self at all. > Gradually by understanding its nature, it becomes apparent that other > hardness or sounds must have this same nature even if they are not being > experienced at this instant. This is how saddha (confidence) in the > Teachings and in those ultimate realities not experienced develops. ===== I'm not sure that I agree. Consider the classic question, "If a tree falls in the forest, but there is none to hear it, is there a sound?" We all know that the Abhidhamma depends upon very specific meanings for words, and that these specific meanings are sometimes different from "conventional" or "scientific" usage. Let us consider the Abhidhamma definition of the rupa called "sound". The rupa "sound" has the characteristic of striking the ear, the function of being the object of auditory cognition and the manifestation of being the field or object of auditory cognition. From this strict definition, I conclude that the rupa sound only exists when there is an ear to hear it. Does something come into existence when a tree falls in the forest, but there is none to hear it? Perhaps, but whatever comes into existence is not of interest to the Abhidhamma; it is not the rupa "sound" because it does not fit the characteristic / function / manifestation. If we take a "scientific" definition of sound (something like "localized incidence of rapidly changing air pressure, typically caused by a vibrating object"), then there is "sound" even if there is no ear to hear it. The Abhidhamma and science have different definitions for the word "sound" because they have different purposes. Trying to expand the Abhidhamma definition of sound and say that it can be used as a scientific definition of sound is an Aristotlean approach that I have a problem with. Ethics is outside the scope of science (scientific ethics are incredibly important, but there is nothing inherently ethical about science). We don't look to science to give us answers to ethical questions. In a similar way, we shouldn't try to apply or extend ethics (i.e. Abhdidhamma) to answer "scientific" questions. Does a falling tree make a sound when there is no ear to hear? I think that the Abhidhamma answer is "Mu!!" (the Zen answer to the koan, "Does a dog have a Buddha-nature?") It doesn't matter; it is outside the scope of definition; you must un-ask the question. Comments? Metta, Rob M :-) 17082 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Rob M, --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Sarah, > Sayadaw U Silananda sates that this is taken from Milinda's > Questions, Vol I, pp. 116-7. I checked these pages in my PTS version > of Vol I of Milinda's Questions but did not find it. Maybe you > might have better luck tracking it down. ..... I can just help here v.quickly. The page no is to the IB Horner transl in the Sacred Books series (red cover). It is in ch 3, the cutting off of Perplexity, 7th Division, vii (or 84 in the Pali). You know I was looking at it in the papers you gave us yest and I think it might have been this and not sth in the Sammohavinodani that I had in mind - no wonder I couldn't find it there;-) We can both sleep well now. Sarah ====== 17083 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:08am Subject: question if another person misunderstands us, on the misunderstanding builds more and scolds us, how should we handle the situation? what thoughts should we have towards that person? ~meththa ranil 17084 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:22am Subject: Re: question Hi Ranil, You analyze the situation, "Conditions arose and some vipaka ripened; the result of some past kamma. This is why I have heard these words. Though my past conditioning limits my choices, I still have "free will"; I can choose how to respond to this situation. If I choose to react negatively, I will have to suffer in the future. Reacting with dosa is like picking up a red-hot iron rod to hit somebody; I hurt myself first before getting a chance to hurt the other person." You examine your feelings, "I feel hurt. However, I understand that the words themselves did not hurt me. It was the emotions that I added onto the words that caused the hurt. The hurt comes from my pride, my conceit, my ego and perhaps, my arrogance. The hurt comes from me and by noting that the source of the emotions, I take away their power." You think about your acquaintance, "This comment shows that my acquaintance has dosa. They will suffer the results of this dosa according to the workings of their own kamma. I cannot allow their weakness to influence me and cause me to create bad kamma for myself. I must react to this situation with metta to benefit both myself and my acquaintance." Ranil, does this make sense? We haven't chatted before; are all these terms familiar to you? Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "ranil gunawardena" wrote: > > if another person misunderstands us, > on the misunderstanding builds more and scolds us, > how should we handle the situation? > what thoughts should we have towards that person? > > ~meththa > ranil > > 17085 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: ... ... > Hi Jon, > > I think you are making this too difficult. What to do is > anupassana. > "Anupassana" = "look at". So, look at something. Sounds simple, I agree. But I think there are one or two things further you need to explain. For example: 1. What is it that is looked at? 2. How is the looking done? Is it like normal looking, that is, deliberate and directed? 3. I assume this particular kind of looking at would have to be wholesome/kusala. How is this achieved; how do we know if the looking is the kusala kind, and not the akusala kind? Jon 17086 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real Dear Ahan Paul, I agree with you for the Dhamma. But Buddha is a human who lived with us for 45 years (total 80 years) and attained pari-nibbana. ~with meththa ranil >From: "ajahn_paul" >Subject: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real >Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 13:10:16 -0000 > >Hi all, > >im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just >want to tell a short story!!!! > >Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish >daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a >little chat..... > >*** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > >d: mom, can i ask u a question? >m: of cause honey! go ahead. >d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. >m: so??? >d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > >And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! >^____^ > 17087 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James --- James wrote: > Jon, > > By discursive thought, I mean analytical thinking, planning, > deciding, etc., not sensory input processing or pure recollection. > This definition I am using comes from common usage, not Buddhist > scripture. ... ... > This isn't my understanding, but I could be wrong. When the Buddha > taught that we all must cultivate the Four Foundations of > Mindfulness, I was assuming that this means we must be aware of > reality in every moment by directing our attention to the four > foundations. That does require `making' something the subject of > awareness. What is it that usually gets in the way of doing that? > My estimation is that discursive thought does. Discursive thought > is most removed from reality and most subject to the whims of > negative mind states, and positive mind states for that matter. I > guess my questioning was leading to know how to use meta-cognition, > thinking about thinking, as a foundation for mindfulness. But I see > that I must learn more about how the Abhidhamma describes such > processes. My thinking and terminology is based in my psychology, > sociology, and learning theories education, and the Abhidhamma takes > a different approach. We can continue this dialogue when I have > established a better foundation in the vocabulary/approach commonly > practiced in this forum. (I'm sorry if I've given the impression that discussion can only be conducted here on the basis of the vocabulary/approach of the Abhidhamma. There is no such rule or convention. People on this list are free, indeed encouraged, to discuss dhamma using whatever terminology they are comfortable with.) About discursive thought (the conventional kind you describe – analysing, planning, deciding, etc). There is nothing inherently unwholesome about it. It may be kusala or akusala, depending on the accompanying mental factors at the particular time. To my way of thinking, the fact that for us it is mostly unwholesome simply reflects our strong accumulated tendencies of unwholesomeness. The enlightened person still thinks discursively and, except in the case of the arahant, will do so with akusala mind-states at times, but no doubt with much less that for us. You mention the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. That sutta (the Satipatthana Sutta) makes no mention of discursive thought as the 'baddie', that I know of. In fact, I don't think there are any baddies mentioned at all. Its overwhelming message is to show how *any* dhamma, kusala or akusala, can be object of mindfulness and understanding, no matter where we are or what we are doing. To my understanding, the reason this is mentioned is not so much to tell us that we must strive for awareness at every moment by directing our attention to one of the 4 Foundations, as to disabuse us of the notion we all hold to so strongly that awareness can only arise, or will be much more likely to arise, by striving in a certain way, or if and when certain external circumstances are in place. Jon 17088 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... ... << That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would put it because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer to what I mean is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the mechanism we *call* accumulations?" (I would imagine that some cetasikas are direct participants, while others serve as necessary auxilliary conditions for manifestation of tendencies.) It seems to me that cetanas are central to this, and that they are likely quite complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of a number of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be required to explain the great diversity of possible inclinations among people.>> You are suggesting I think that some cetasikas have the function of, or some particular role to play in, 'accumulating' whatever it is that gets accumulated. I've not come across this notion before. It was my understanding that, for example, panna cetasika accumulates as panna cetasika and that it does so because this is the nature of things. Sorry, but I'm not able to add anything further. Maybe others can. Jon 17089 From: ranil gunawardena Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 6:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhism question( please reply) Dear Philip Chui, I'd like to add to what Paul said. > > I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself > > in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have > > some questions about Buddhism: > > 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? There is no "belief" in Buddhism. Buddhism only says. We are to understand or try to understand. What Buddhism says, - Every thing is changing - Therefore there is nothing which we could cling on to for help or say is mine. (here help is permanent help) - And due to above we always will have unsatisfaction at the end How to try to understand, Unlike in "god" based religions "praying" in Buddhism will take you nowhere. In Buddhism you have get on with your "practice". what to practice, first practice virtue (good words and good actions) then concentration (good concentration) then wisdom (dont go showing magic to everyone once you get some wisdom) Once you practice wisdom you will understand the sayings of Buddhism. This is called "sandiththico" - a quality of buddism - you will see results. And unlike "god" based religions, in Buddhism you dont have wait until you die to get the highest goal. You can achieve it in "this" life itself - that is end all suffering. > > 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your > > religion? like paul said depends on the karma. but to add to it, depends on the last thought. so a man in the next life can be a mosquito. same applies to any being - even heavenly bodies - if you die with thoughts with greed, hatred or foolishness you will not get a better next life. (but always the suitable life for your last thought). > > 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? Several ways answer this question. 1. how do you prove that your mother and father are actually your real mother and father. as for nowadays you may have been a child who have been adopted... or some others eggs placed in your mothers womb. 2. learn a little about history 3. learn the Buddha dhamma do you will really see Buddha. Now that you are having access to Buddha dhamma have an open and fearless mind (I say this as Christians fear of the commandment telling not to worship other gods) not having anger but friendliness, being happy of the happiness of others... ~may all understand reality and end all unsatisfaction - permanently! in friendliness, ranil 17090 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 7:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi Howard / Jon, In my recent Abhidhamma course, the professor mentioned that cetana plays a dual role in kusala / akusala cittas: - Creating kamma - Creating accumulations It makes sense to me that accumulations can only be created by kammicly active cittas. On page 44 of Nina's book, "Cetasikas", it says in the Chapter on Cetana, "The cetana which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta has, in addition to coordinating, another task to perform: `willing' or `activity of kamma'.[1]" The footnote on this page says, "[1] Ayuhana which means `striving' or pursuing, is translated in the English text of the Atthasåliní as conation, and in the english text of the Visuddhimagga as acumulation." On page 49 of this book (still the Cetana chapter), Nina says, "We have accumulated different degrees of kusala kamma and akusala kamma and they are capable of producing their appropriate results when there is opportunity for it. We may be inclined to think that the term "accumulation" only pertains to kamma, but not only kamma is accumulated, also tendencies to kusala and akusala are accumulated. When one steals, akusala kamma is accumulated which is capable of producing vipaka later on. However vipaka is not the only effect of this unwholesome deed. Also the tendency to stealing is accumulated and thus there are conditions that one steals again." In brief, my professor and Nina seem to agree that cetana creates tendencies (accumulations) as well as creating kamma. I don't know the textual source, but I suspect that it is out there somewhere :-) Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > ... ... > << That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would > put it because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer > to what I mean is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the > mechanism we *call* accumulations?" (I would imagine that some > cetasikas are direct participants, while others serve as necessary > auxilliary conditions for manifestation of tendencies.) It seems to > me that cetanas are central to this, and that they are likely quite > complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of a number > of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of > possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be > required to explain the great diversity of possible inclinations > among people.>> > > You are suggesting I think that some cetasikas have the function of, > or some particular role to play in, 'accumulating' whatever it is > that gets accumulated. I've not come across this notion before. It > was my understanding that, for example, panna cetasika accumulates as > panna cetasika and that it does so because this is the nature of > things. > > Sorry, but I'm not able to add anything further. Maybe others can. > > Jon 17091 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:03am Subject: It crumbles away, Way 25 Dear Larry, Way 25: <"In this world." In just this body. Here the body [kaya] is the world [loka], in the sense of a thing crumbling. As covetousness and grief are abandoned in feeling, consciousness, and mental objects, too, the Vibhanga says: "Even the five aggregates of clinging are the world."> N:It crumbles away: lujjanapalujjana,t.thena, in the sense of crumbling away. Remember Kindred Sayings on Sense, Ch 3, §82: The world. It crumbles away. What crumbles away: the eye... objects... eye-consciousness... Very meaningful: when the whole is taken apart by pa~n~naa, dissolved into elements, realities can be seen as they are. Lujjati and loko are associated in meaning. We can begin now: whatever appears can be object of awareness. That is satipatthana. As to satiyeva, the y is just inserted between sati and eva:< sati is indeed here called satipatthana> is the tr.. I am still studying this passage. Nina. 17092 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:29pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hi Larry, Thank you for responding. I am interested to see how people understand what it means by the word "nama-rupa". Have a good day, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Victor, > > The eye can't see. Eye consciousness arises dependent on an eye, but the > eye is not a seer. Eye consciousness arises and subsides so quickly it > can't be considered to be a seer either. So there is no seer, just eye > and eye consciousness. If we don't understand that the eye is not a > seer, it will be very difficult to understand that the body is not self. > Hence it is important to discriminate between mentality and materiality > (nama and rupa). That's the main point, imo. > > Larry 17093 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 0:58pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hello Victor, Good to 'read' you again. :-) My understanding of the meaning of the words 'nama' and 'rupa' are that 'nama' is mental phenomena and 'rupa' is physical phenomena. 'Nama' experiences something. 'Rupa' does not experience anything. So therefore, 'rupa' is not just what seems solid matter, but is also things like 'sound'. 'Nama-rupa' are the mental phenomena plus the physical phenomena in a interdependent combination that need each other in order to exist as the alleged being conventionally known as Christine. (sorry about the word 'being' Victor :-) not meaning to stir up old discussions :-)) For more precise (though not particularly comprehensible to me) meanings, put 'nama' or 'rupa' in the search engine at: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/index.html Or go to Nyanatiloka's dictionary (which I can understand) at: http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm Victor, what is your everyday conversational understanding of the terms, as used within Buddhism? metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Larry, > > Thank you for responding. I am interested to see how people > understand what it means by the word "nama-rupa". > > Have a good day, > Victor > 17094 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 1:40pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa 4. Being conscious of something is being conscious of it's representation. 5. When consciousness ceases, represenation/nama and represented/rupa cease to be. 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions ignorance. Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi all, > > I have been thinking for the last couple days about the meaning > of "nama-rupa" and would like to write down some ideas. > > 1. The Sanskrit/Pali word "nama", the English word "name", the German > word "Name", and the French word "Nom" all share the same root in the > linguistic family of Indo-European languages. The Chinese > translated "nama-rupa" as "ming-se", where "ming" means "name" in > English, and "se" literally means "color". The compound word "nama- > rupa" has been translated as "name-and-form" in some literature > and "mentality-materiality" in other. Whether the word "nama" is > translated as "name" or "mentality" in English, questions remain: > what does it mean by "nama"? What does it mean by "rupa"? > > 2. Name is representation. Rupa is what is being represented. There > are representations of representations. In other words, nama and > rupa are relational. They are not two categories with some number of > elements. > > 3. Representation of something is possible only when there is > consciousness, and representations are representation through six > modalities of senses (five modalities of bodily senses plus the > modality of intellect.) > > I look forward to some discussion on the meaning of nama-rupa. > > Have a good day, > Victor 17095 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 2:16pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions ignorance. > Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? > You have asked a very complex question. The brief answer is as follows: - Taints (asavas) condition ignorance (avijja) - Ignorance (avijja) conditions kammic formations (sankhara) - Kammic formations (sankhara) condition consciousness (vinnana) Ignorance is moha concommitant with 12 akusala cittas. Sankhara is cetana in the 8 kamavacara kusala cittas & 5 rupavacara kusala cittas (merit), cetana in the 12 akusala cittas (demerit) and cetana in the 4 arupavacara kusala cittas (imperturbable). In the case of formations of merit, avijja can condition sankhara through object condition or natural decisive support condition. In the case of formations of demerit, avijja can condition sankhara through the following conditions: root, object, object predominance / decisive support, proximity / contiguity, co- nascence, mutuality, support, natural decisive support, repetition, association, presence / non-disappearance and absence / disappearance. In the case of the formations of the imperturbable, avijja conditions sankhara only through natural decisive support condition. Consciousness are the 32 lokiya vipaka cittas. Sankhara conditions consciousness through asynchronous kamma condition and through natural decisive support condition. This has been extracted from Visuddhimagga XVII 102, 103, 104, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181. If you want definitions of the various conditions listed above, see my most recently updated class notes (pages 171-178). This is available on-line in the "Files" section of DSG. I suspect that this is more than you really wanted to know, but I would be pleased to explore the details with you. Metta, Rob M :-) 17096 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 2:18pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa Hello Christine, Thank you. It's been a while since I posted in DSG. However, I have been following the messages, and I have always enjoy reading yours. I understand the meaning of the word "nama" as the meaning of the word "name". I understand the word "name" as designation of something or someone. I see designation, in its broader sense, as representation. I see rupa as something being represented. This is how I am understanding the words "nama" and "rupa" in the context of the Buddhist literature. Have a good day, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Victor, > > Good to 'read' you again. :-) > My understanding of the meaning of the words 'nama' and 'rupa' are > that 'nama' is mental phenomena and 'rupa' is physical > phenomena. 'Nama' experiences something. 'Rupa' does not experience > anything. So therefore, 'rupa' is not just what seems solid matter, > but is also things like 'sound'. 'Nama-rupa' are the mental phenomena > plus the physical phenomena in a interdependent combination that need > each other in order to exist as the alleged being conventionally > known as Christine. (sorry about the word 'being' Victor :-) not > meaning to stir up old discussions :-)) > > For more precise (though not particularly comprehensible to me) > meanings, put 'nama' or 'rupa' in the search engine at: > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/index.html > Or go to Nyanatiloka's dictionary (which I can understand) at: > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm > > Victor, what is your everyday conversational understanding of the > terms, as used within Buddhism? > > metta, > Christine > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > Hi Larry, > > > > Thank you for responding. I am interested to see how people > > understand what it means by the word "nama-rupa". > > > > Have a good day, > > Victor > > 17097 From: nidive Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:53pm Subject: What is Space? Hi All, Can anybody explain what is space in the context of the Abhidhamma? I read this link below: http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ch4_1.ht ml It says: ------------------------------------------- The first group is that of the five elements of rupa. Rupa is usually translated as 'matter', but in its most general sense it is also useful to translate it as 'the world' - the principle that our experience is 'of' or 'in' a world. The existence of the world is the functioning of four basic principles, the so-called primary elements, whose symbolic names are earth, water, fire and air (or breath). The world, as it exists, is extension (earth), cohesion (water), heat (fire) and motion (air). These four elements exist in a primary sense; the fifth, space, does not. It is the field of action of the four elements, dependent for its existence on them but not existing in the same way as them. In terms of a diagram, the five elements can be drawn as a pyramid. The basis is formed by the four primary elements, which define and limit. Space can be the point either above or below, depending on how it is viewed. In other words, it underpins the other four, or goes beyond them. --------------------------------------------- So does space exist? Or is it only my own imagination? Or ... please comment. 17098 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi Howard, What I was referring to, rather crypticly, was that the body seems to last a long time. So even though it doesn't last forever, many people think of it as a temporary self that usually lasts for 70 or 80 years. However, since the body isn't conscious it can't be a self. Consciousness, on the other hand, flies by so quickly there really isn't anything to identify with if you observe it carefully. This is a different consideration than the relative speeds of nama and rupa in citta process. Larry 17099 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Sarah, Thanks for the quotations, much appreciated. It occurred to me that K Sujin might say "bare mindfulness" means sati does not have a concept for an object. We have discussed this so much maybe we don't need to go into it again beyond acknowledging that this is her position and not too different from Nyanaponika Thera. Larry 17100 From: James Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:18pm Subject: Wholesome vs. Unwholesome vs. Nosome Hey All, I have again begun study of the Abhidhamma and I am hung up on something. Nina Van Gorkom writes in "Buddhism in Daily Life" http://www.abhidhamma.org/buddhism_in_daily_life.htm: "Nina: The situation is not hopeless. Wisdom, the understanding of reality, can condition one to have more wholesome mental states and to do good deeds. There is no "self" who can suppress one's bad inclinations; there is no "self" who can force one to do good deeds. Everybody can verify this in daily life. For example, if we tell ourselves: "today I will be very kind to everybody", can we prevent ourselves from suddenly saying an unkind word? Most of the time it has happened before we realize it. If we are able to suppress our anger for a while we are inclined to think that there is a "self" who can suppress anger. In reality there are at that moment cittas which are not conditioned by anger, but which arise from other conditions. Afterwards there will be anger again because anger is not really eradicated by suppression. Only wisdom, seeing things as they are, can very gradually eradicate everything which is unwholesome in us." This position appears to be in contradiction to most of the Buddha's teachings in regards to Sila. The Buddha said that we CAN do good deeds, cultivate proper mental states, and that such behavior will then naturally lead to the `natural awareness' independent of such `outside guidelines'. In other words, following the mundane Eightfold path will lead to the natural following of the transcendent Eightfold path. The above position seems to be putting `The cart before the horse.' It seems to be encouraging one to have the mind of a Buddha without the proper groundwork first. For example, in the Anusota Sutta (With the Flow), http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/anguttara/an04-005.html it is stated that there are four kinds of people in the world: Those who go with the flow, those who go against the flow, those who stand fast in the flow, and those who have transcended the flow. Those who go with the flow fall prey to evil deeds; those who go against the flow do good deeds even if it "though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure"; those who stand fast in the flow is one who has removed the first set of five fetters; and those who have gone past the flow have done so by ending mental fermentations and discernments, and are therefore enlightened. The sutta says that one who makes the choice will be the first type of person, and then the second, and then the third, and finally the fourth. According to this, one can change behavior and `accumulations' by surrendering to the teachings of the Buddha. And it suggests that one moves through stages. The above quote by Nina suggests that one is either enlightened or not, there is nothing in-between which can be determined by the practice of sila. Is this a contradiction in the approach of the Abhidhamma and the teachings of the Buddha, or am I missing something? Just trying to understand the position of the Abhidhamma. Metta, James 17101 From: robmoult Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: What is Space? Hi, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > Can anybody explain what is space in the context of the Abhidhamma? > Rupas always arise in groups (kalapas) which consist of at least eight rupas (the eight inseparable rupas). Our body consists of different groups of rupa and these groups are delimited by the rupa space. Space is the rupa that separates or limits; the infinitesimal space between the groups of rupa. It is "untouched by the four great Elements." Space-element has the characteristic of delimiting material objects, the function of showing their boundaries, the manifestation of showing their limits, state of being untouched by the four great elements and of being their holes and openings as manifestation, the separated objects as proximate cause. It is that of which in the separated groups we say "this is above, this is below, this is across." Space delimits the groups of rupa which are produced by kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition so that they are separate from each other. If there were no space in between the different groups of rupa, these groups would all be connected, not distinct from each other. Space comes into being whenever the groups of rupa are produced by the four factors and therefore it is regarded as originating from these four factors. Metta, Rob M :-) 17102 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 4:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Nina, I think I will try to cultivate a little patience and wait until Dec. to discuss Way 24. As for "bare mindfulness", I re-read the passage in light of calling the words "just mindfulness" and I don't think this term refers to what Nyanaponika Thera is calling "bare attention". Rather, I think "just mindfulness" means "pointing out the things that make up the condition connected with [just] satipatthana [not jhana or other factors necessary for the abandoning of defilements or attainment of nibbana]..." In other words satipatthana needs energy, clear comprehension, and mindfulness and because the commentary was talking about just mindfulness, no mention was made of factors of jhana such as initial application, sustained application, interest, joy and one-pointedness. Here's the passage in question: Way 25: After the pointing out of the things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness through body-contemplation, there is the pointing out of the things that make up the condition which should be abandoned in this practice with the words, "having overcome, in this world, covetousness and grief" = Vineyya loke abhijjhadomanassam. [Tika] "Arousing of Mindfulness". Here bare mindfulness is meant. Therefore, the commentator speaks of "the things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness." These things are energy and so forth, associated necessarily with mindfulness. Condition [anga] = reason [karana]. [T] "Mindfulness" denotes concentration, too, here on account of the inclusion of mindfulness in the aggregate of concentration [samadhikkhandha]. [T] Or since the exposition is on mindfulness, and as neither the abandoning of defilements nor the attainment of Nibbana is wrought by mindfulness alone, and as mindfulness does not also occur separately, the pointing out "the things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness" is like the pointing out of the condition connected with absorption [jhana]. Condition [anga] is a synonym for constituent [avayava]. Initial application, sustained application, interest, joy and one-pointedness of mind are together with absorption, as energy and the other qualities are with mindfulness. Larry 17103 From: Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 5:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Hi Jon, Let's see how long it takes to transform a simple proposition into a thousand knots. Here are your questions and my best guesses: Larry: Hi Jon, I think you are making this too difficult. What to do is anupassana. "Anupassana" = "look at". So, look at something. Jon: Sounds simple, I agree. But I think there are one or two things further you need to explain. For example: 1. What is it that is looked at? L: Already a problem. I see 2 choices: 1) Since you are obviously a keen witted theoretical type you should practice dhammanupassana and look at dhammas. 2) or you could look at any of the 4 'foundations' objects. 2. How is the looking done? Is it like normal looking, that is, deliberate and directed? L: Look with energy, clear comprehension, and mindfulness. (I'm still working out what this means.) 3. I assume this particular kind of looking at would have to be wholesome/kusala. How is this achieved; how do we know if the looking is the kusala kind, and not the akusala kind? L: This is a really good question. How do we recognize sati sampajanna? I don't have a ready answer but I am conducting research as we speak. How would you answer these questions? Larry 17104 From: rjchacko Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 10:49pm Subject: dependent origination question I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping someone here can help me to answer it. I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to Buddhism. Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will tend to want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will want to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists also have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views and therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct application of dependent origination? Thanks. 17105 From: Sarah Date: Thu Nov 21, 2002 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Scrambled & Ultimate Hi Rob M (& James), --- robmoult wrote: > I'm not sure that I agree. Consider the classic question, "If a tree > falls in the forest, but there is none to hear it, is there a sound?" > > We all know that the Abhidhamma depends upon very specific meanings > for words, and that these specific meanings are sometimes different > from "conventional" or "scientific" usage. Let us consider the > Abhidhamma definition of the rupa called "sound". The rupa "sound" > has the characteristic of striking the ear, the function of being > the object of auditory cognition and the manifestation of being the > field or object of auditory cognition. From this strict definition, > I conclude that the rupa sound only exists when there is an ear to > hear it. ..... Would you say the same about all rupas -- i.e if there is no experience of them they don’t exist? What about the elements that make up the ‘tree’? Do they only arise and fall away if they are seen or touched? (As we both agree, in terms of objects of awareness, if they are not experienced they can’t be known). Not just in the Abhidhamma, but also in the suttas, we read about the various internal and external elements.In the Simile of the Greater Elephant’s footprint (MN28), we read about the great earth and the waters in the great oceans, all in terms of elements. We read about the fire element which burns up towns and countries and the air element sweeps away the same. We also read suttas which describe how, regardless of whether we hear the Buddha’s Teachings, all the possessions and what we hold dear, still just consist of these 28 rupas. ..... > Does something come into existence when a tree falls in the forest, > but there is none to hear it? Perhaps, but whatever comes into > existence is not of interest to the Abhidhamma; it is not the > rupa "sound" because it does not fit the characteristic / function / > manifestation. >if there is no ear to hear it. ..... Just to clarify what I know you know: Kalapas (inseparable groups) of rupas are produced by citta, utu (temperature), kamma and oja (nutritive essence). In the case of sound, it can originate from citta (when we speak, for example) or from temperature as in the case of the rock falling or waterfall. ..... > The Abhidhamma and science have different definitions for the > word "sound" because they have different purposes. ..... Ok, let’s stick to the Abhidhamma definition of sound. I don’t think anyone is suggesting any dhammas should or can be used for scientific definitions (at least I’m not;-)) Earlier I quoted from the Dhammasangani, the first book of the Abhidhamma (my caps for the word MAY): ***** “Here is one extract from the Dhammasangani, first book of the Abhidhamma (p170) on sound: ..... “What is that (material) form which is the sphere of sound? That sound which is derived from the four Great Phenomena, is invisible and reacting, such as the sound of drums, of tabors, of chank-shells, of tom-toms, of singing of music; clashing sounds, manual sounds, the noise of people, the sound of the concussion of substances, of wind, of water, sounds human and other than human, or whatever other sound there is, derived from the Great phenomena, invisible and reacting - such a sound, invisible and reacting, as, by the ear, invisible and reacting, one has heard, hears, will, or MAY hear... ....in consequence of which sound and depending on the ear, there has arisen, arises, will, or MAY arise auditory contact...and...born of that auditory contact, a feeling....(or)a perception...(or)volition,,,(or)auditory cognition.....”” ***** Note: on account of the sound, depending on ear-sense(i.e whether there is any hearing consciousness), there does, will or MAY be contact. As you know from your study of conditions, visible object or sound are conditions (by object condition) for consciousness to arise, but not the other way round. ..... e> Ethics is outside the scope of science (scientific ethics are > incredibly important, but there is nothing inherently ethical about > science). We don't look to science to give us answers to ethical > questions. In a similar way, we shouldn't try to apply or extend > ethics (i.e. Abhdidhamma) to answer "scientific" questions. > > Does a falling tree make a sound when there is no ear to hear? I > think that the Abhidhamma answer is "Mu!!" ..... I’d like to add one more quote from the Dhammasangani(653). Here we read about rupas which are the objects of grasping on account of the result of kamma to experience them. These are followed by rupas not grasped at, due to no vipaka cittas to experience them (as I read this passage): “What is that (material) form which is grasped at (upaadi.n.na.m)? The spheres of sight, hearing, smell, taste, body-sensibility, femininity, masculinity, life, or whatever form there exists through karma having been wrought, whether it be in the spheres of visible forms, odours, tastes, or the tangible;....- this is that (material) form, or odily nutriment - that is that form which is grasped at. What is that (material) form which is not grasped at? the sphere of sound, bodily and vocal intimation , lightness, plasticity and wieldiness of (material) form, its decay and impermanence, of whatever other (material) form exists which is not due to karma having been wrought, whether it be in the sphere of visible forms, smells, tastes, or the tangible;....- this is that form which is not grasped at.” ***** As I said at the outstart: “I agree that the Buddha’s Teachings are concerned with the direct experience and understanding of those ‘ultimate realities’ which can be known and lead to the goal of the eradication of all defilements and realization of nibbana.” James questioned the ‘omniscience’ of the Buddha’s knowledge, which I see fully reflected in the Abhidhamma, so I’d like to just sign off with a couple of short quotes from Anguttara Nikaya, (B.Bodhi transl): 1. (Bk of One’s,8) “Monks, there is one person arising in the world who is unique, without a peer, without counterpart, incomparable, unequalled, matchless, unrivalled, the best of humans. Who is that one person? It is the Tathagata...... Monks, the manifestation of one person is the manifestation of great vision, of great light, of great radiance; it is the manifestation of the six things unsurpassed; the realization of the four analytical knowledges; the penetration of various elements, of the diversity of elements........” 2. (Bk of four’s, 54) “Monks, the world is fully understood by the Tathagata; the Tathagata is released from the world. The origin of the world is fully understood by the Tathagata; the origin of the world is abandoned by the Tathagata. The cessation of the world is..... the path to the cessation of the world is.... Monks, in the world with its devas, Mara and Brahma, in this generation with its ascetics and brahmins, devas and humans, whatever is sen, heard, sensed and cognized, attained, searched into, pondered over by the mind - all that is fully understood by the Tathagata. That is why he is called the Tathagata.” ************** Sarah ======= 17106 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:13am Subject: Re: Citta and Vinnana Hi, > " Bhikkhus as to that which is called Citta and Mano and Vinnana- > the uninstructed worldling is unable to experiance revulsion > (nibbinditum) towards it.For what reason? Because for a long time > this has been held to > by him,appropriated and grasped thus:'This is mine,This I am ,This > is > my Atta' It would be better,Bhikkhus for the uninstructed worldling > to take as atta this body composed of the 4 great elements rather > than the citta. For what reason? Because this body composed of the 4 > great elements is seen > standing for one year,for two years,for three,four ,five or ten > years,for 20,30 40 or 50 years,for 100 years, or even longer. But > that which is called > Citta and Mano and Vinnana arises as one thing and ceases as another > by day and night. > Samyutta 12:61:Translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi Actually Shakya Aryanatta have commented on this passage: 1. This passage does not call the citta vinnana. 2. Of course the defiled mind (Citta) changed every second. However, "citta is originally pure" MN 1.36 3. Dirty water changes every second in quality.However the dirt in the water is separable from the water. MN 1.36 Suppose, followers, that a piece of cloth was defiled and filthily stained; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it in some stain or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would appear unclean and of an impure appearance. How is that so? Because, followers being impure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is ones consciousness when defiled and filthily stained that one expects destinations hither of great woe. Suppose, followers, that a piece of cloth was purified and bright; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it in some stain or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would still appear clean and of a pure appearance. How is that so? Because, followers being pure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is ones citta when purified and bright one expects destinations hither of heavenly-bliss. 4. AN 1.282 "amata'ya dha'tuya' cittam upasam.harati'"ti" .."He gathers the consciousness (Citta)inside the immortal realm" 5. "all Jhanic samadhi (i.e. The 8fold path) is for the purposes of Adhicitta" DN 1.37?..Adhicitta (transmundane [purification of] Citta) 6. And what about vinnana? SN 3.61 "The Aryan Eightfold Path is making cessation of Vinnana (and other khandas)"that being sammaditthi." This person really make me confuse. I hope someone could clear my confusion. Rahula 17107 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:17am Subject: Nibbana Hi, Is Nibbana inside or outside "the all"? Sabba Sutta "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." --------- Rahula 17108 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:57am Subject: letter from Kimmy Hi James, Thanks for your reply as well as the story. It is very meaningful and teaches me somemore things about Buddhism. At this moment, i now that the things i need to do is obey my parents, study hard with my acedemic and also treat everyone as good as i can, because we have to treasure all the things we have got. By the way, I know that in Chistianality, committing suicide is a silly way to end our life and God won't forgive for this. However, I would like to know how Buddha thinks of committing suicide? Can you tell me? Kimmy 17109 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:05am Subject: Joannes letter to Kiana Hi Kiana (Miss Silly!) =D, I am Joanne Lam, I think you should remember me fromyour Saturday class a few weeks ago. Well I sure do remember you. I hope Jan feels alot better about Mr. Walsh Till now after a while. I think its just common sense why people try to kill themself. (not exactly but...) Because maybe theirparents are being mean or scolding them alot or maybethey are too stressed about work! You never know, I think they are just crazy. Dont ever try it, if youhave any problems with homework or you stressed about something. Always talk to your parents. They can always help you out! Or talk to the manager or somebody that can help you. =P Of course, everybody wants peace in Life, that is why everybody tries to save people. Unless maybe the gangster people that wants to kill people, they wont save others. I wonder why life is alwayz unfair?? By the way, i guess i better stop now, i hope you understand what i wrote~* Joanne Lam P.S. James: I really enjoy your poem again and again...=D 17110 From: robmoult Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:17am Subject: Re: dependent origination question Hi, Let me take a stab. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjchacko" wrote: > I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping someone > here can help me to answer it. > > I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to > Buddhism. > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will tend to > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will want > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists also > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. > > It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent > origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause > for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views and > therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture > rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct > application of dependent origination? > > Thanks. Interesting concept, trying to link evolutionary psychology to Buddhism. Here are two points to consider: - The elements of dependent origination are often shown in a circle to emphasize the fact that there is no "first cause" - Ignorance is conditioned by the taints (asavas); which are delusion, greed (including lust) and wrong view Here is a deeper question: Why should there be a link between evolutionary psychology and dependent origination? Dependent origination shows us how to escape endless rounds of rebirth. It has an ethical focus; it is not intended to be a "scientific model". I would be interested in your comments. Metta, Rob M :-) 17111 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:39am Subject: Joannes letter to James Hi James, My name is Joanne Lam. This is my first time writing to you. I'm sure you have heard of me before in otheremails. Well, I am born in Hong Kong but I speakEnglish quite well I guess..=S (EcK) I also speakCantonese, a little bit Japanese but not too good. I'm not trying to be mean but I think Philip is quitea show off... I am also studying in Hong KongInternational School, 7th grade. What does that mean?It means I know Philip! I dont know him really well,but I know him at least...hehe. I find your lettersvery funny and intersting. Will you ever wonder why life is always so unfair?Good things happen to bad people and Bad things alwayzhappens to kind-hearted people! SIGH~* I guess thatslife, we cant control anything, how sad. =( mmm..Can you tell me a little bit about the life of abuddha? Thankz... I guess I better stop now.. Write back soon! Joanne Lam P.S. Your poems are indeed very interesting!!! =D 17112 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 5:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Larry & All, I'm getting increasingly busy with life (as Rob Ep would say), so may have to sign off after this post until I get back from our trip and try not to be tempted to reply to others for now;-(. You wrote "It occurred to me that K .Sujin might say 'bare mindfulness' means sati does not have a concept for an object." This sounds a lot more like what Larry would say than K.Sujin;-) She'd be much more likely to ask what you mean by 'bare mindfulness' or what sati is aware of, followed by several more probing questions to any responses. (e.g. What is nama? What is seeing? Is there awareness of seeing now? and so on….) Btw, I liked your little summary on nama and rupa to Victor……and also Rob M's explanations on space and other topics…..keep it up;-) By way of a parting gift to you and Rob M, I'd like to give you one more quote from the Netti (167)p.49 on proximate cause (which I missed before) and gives 'tranquillity is the footing for pleasure (sukha)'. I haven't got your other qu to Rob K in front of me, but I should think this will cover that too. I rather think it hits the jackpot;-) (I'm skipping the first few 'footings' which would need some checking of terms). Enjoy! "……The state of having previously performed merit is the footing for living in befitting places. Living in befitting places is the footing for waiting on true men. Waiting on true men is the footing for right disposition in self-guidance (see A.ii 32). Right disposition in self-guidance is the footing for the kinds of virtue. The kinds of virtue are the footing for gladness. Gladness is the footing for tranquillity. Tranquillity is the footing for pleasure. Pleasure is the footing for concentration. Concentration is the footing for knowing and seeing how (things) are. Knowing and seeing how (things) are is the footing for dispassion. Dispassion is the footing for fading of lust. Fading of lust is the footing for deliverance. Deliverance is the footing for knowing and seeing of deliverance. In this way all kinds of general-support, all kinds of conditions, are a footing." ***** I'll look f/w to reading all posts, even if I don't have time to write much if anything for about 10days. Sarah p.s James- thx for your post and interest in the Abhidhamma history - I hope others respond and you read your homework carefully which I gave you 'til I can get back to you;-) ============================ 17113 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:00am Subject: Re: Citta and Vinnana Dear Rahula The Visuddhimagga XIV (82) : "The words vinnana, citta and mano are one in meaning" This is also clear form the sutta I gave. Citta is pure in this sense because it is quite different from cetasikas. That is why the Buddha gave so many details: he taught us the five khandhas where sankhara khanda includes those defilements that taint citta. As we see from the quotes you give: some people wil search high and low for the slightest phrase they can grasp onto as somwhere permanent their 'self' can reside. It is natural because everyone has accumulated selfview to some degree. However, our job is to attentuate self-view: it can only happen during a Buddhasasana. Robert --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: > Hi, > > > " Bhikkhus as to that which is called Citta and Mano and Vinnana- > > the uninstructed worldling is unable to experiance revulsion > > (nibbinditum) towards it.For what reason? Because for a long time > > this has been held to > > by him,appropriated and grasped thus:'This is mine,This I am ,This > > is > > my Atta' It would be better,Bhikkhus for the uninstructed worldling > > to take as atta this body composed of the 4 great elements rather > > than the citta. For what reason? Because this body composed of the > 4 > > great elements is seen > > standing for one year,for two years,for three,four ,five or ten > > years,for 20,30 40 or 50 years,for 100 years, or even longer. But > > that which is called > > Citta and Mano and Vinnana arises as one thing and ceases as > another > > by day and night. > > Samyutta 12:61:Translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi > > Actually Shakya Aryanatta have commented on this passage: > > 1. This passage does not call the citta vinnana. > > 2. Of course the defiled mind (Citta) changed every second. > However, "citta is originally pure" MN 1.36 > > 3. Dirty water changes every second in quality.However the dirt in > the water is separable from the water. > > > MN 1.36 Suppose, followers, that a piece of cloth was defiled and > filthily stained; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it in some stain > or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would appear unclean and > of an impure appearance. How is that so? Because, followers being > impure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is ones > consciousness when defiled and filthily stained that one expects > destinations hither of great woe. Suppose, followers, that a piece of > cloth was purified and bright; and then a clothes-dyer went to dip it > in some stain or other-be it blue, yellow, red or pink, it would still > appear clean and of a pure appearance. How is that so? Because, > followers being pure, so too that cloth. Just so also, followers is > ones citta when purified and bright one expects destinations hither of > heavenly-bliss. > > > 4. AN 1.282 "amata'ya dha'tuya' cittam upasam.harati'"ti" .."He > gathers the consciousness (Citta)inside the immortal realm" > > 5. "all Jhanic samadhi (i.e. The 8fold path) is for the purposes of > Adhicitta" DN 1.37?..Adhicitta (transmundane [purification of] > Citta) > > 6. And what about vinnana? > > SN 3.61 "The Aryan Eightfold Path is making cessation of Vinnana (and > other khandas)"that being sammaditthi." > > > > This person really make me confuse. I hope someone could clear my > confusion. > > Rahula 17114 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:04am Subject: Re: Nibbana --- Dear Rahula, This sutta is explained in reasonable detail in the commentary, Bhikku Bodhi gives some terse notes in his translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. Do you have it.? robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rahula_80" wrote: > Hi, > > Is Nibbana inside or outside "the all"? > > Sabba Sutta > > "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I > will speak." > "As you say, lord," the monks responded. > > The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & > sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, > intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who > would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if > questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, > would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. > Why? Because it lies beyond range." > > --------- > > Rahula 17115 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Rob M (and Howard) Thanks for coming in with these interesting comments about the function of cetana (intention). If we're talking about accumulated tendencies to do good and bad deeds, then I agree that cetana plays a large part. However, as I said in my original post (the one Howard refers to), it's not only these kinds of tendencies that are accumulated and passed on from one moment of consciousness to the next. As I understand it, all the mental factors that make up each moment of consciousness are passed on and so, in a sense, 'accumulate'. Take sanna (memory/perception), for example. This also accumulates. Any explanation of the 'passing on' phenomenon should also take account of 'non-kammic' mental factors such as this. While I agree with the general thrust of your comments regarding cetana, I don't think they explain the 'how' of it, which is Howard's particular area of interest. Jon --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Howard / Jon, In my recent Abhidhamma course, the professor mentioned that cetana plays a dual role in kusala / akusala cittas: - Creating kamma - Creating accumulations It makes sense to me that accumulations can only be created by kammicly active cittas. On page 44 of Nina's book, "Cetasikas", it says in the Chapter on Cetana, "The cetana which accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta has, in addition to coordinating, another task to perform: `willing' or `activity of kamma'.[1]" The footnote on this page says, "[1] Ayuhana which means `striving' or pursuing, is translated in the English text of the Atthasåliní as conation, and in the english text of the Visuddhimagga as acumulation." On page 49 of this book (still the Cetana chapter), Nina says, "We have accumulated different degrees of kusala kamma and akusala kamma and they are capable of producing their appropriate results when there is opportunity for it. We may be inclined to think that the term "accumulation" only pertains to kamma, but not only kamma is accumulated, also tendencies to kusala and akusala are accumulated. When one steals, akusala kamma is accumulated which is capable of producing vipaka later on. However vipaka is not the only effect of this unwholesome deed. Also the tendency to stealing is accumulated and thus there are conditions that one steals again." In brief, my professor and Nina seem to agree that cetana creates tendencies (accumulations) as well as creating kamma. I don't know the textual source, but I suspect that it is out there somewhere :-) Metta, Rob M :-) 17116 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:21am Subject: Re: letter from Kimmy --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James, > > Thanks for your reply as well as the story. It is very > meaningful and teaches me somemore things about > Buddhism. > > At this moment, i now that the things i need to do is > obey my parents, study hard with my acedemic and also > treat everyone as good as i can, because we have to > treasure all the things we have got. > > By the way, I know that in Chistianality, committing > suicide is a silly way to end our life and God won't > forgive for this. However, I would like to know how > Buddha thinks of committing suicide? Can you tell me? > > Kimmy Dear Star Kid Kimmy, Wow, you ask a tough question! I will try my best to answer it. First of all, I way to make a few comments about your suggestion that God won't forgive someone who commits suicide. Humans cannot know the mind of God and shouldn't try. Humans should see those who want to commit suicide and encourage them with kind words, not with threats of getting in trouble with God. Threatening them will only make them feel worse. Don't you feel worse when someone says you're going to get in trouble with your teacher or parents? Are they usually right? Do they usually know what they are talking about? Hmmmm...not usually ;-) Look at it this way: Life is kinda like a test, and God has (or is) the answer sheet. He isn't going to give the answers and it is no use trying to guess the answers. Humans just have to look at each problem and work it out, and find the answer through individual effort. God isn't going to give anyone the answers. Some people want to quit the test and walk away from life; we should encourage them to continue. And when we get done with the test, when we die, it isn't important how many answers we got right and how many we got wrong, the important thing is how hard we tried. Doing our absolute best will get us all a GOLD STAR! Okay, now you want to know how the Buddha looked at suicide. The plain answer, which I will further explain, is that the Buddha saw suicide as a craving in relation to self-existence; this craving comes in the form of aversion but is no different than craving for self-existence to continue. Confused? Don't worry, most adults are confused about this subject too because it is very deep and complicated. Let me use an example to help you understand. Let's say you have two girls: Patty and Dominique. Patty is a very popular girl and she just thinks she's just `The Bomb'! She wears all the best clothes, goes to all the best parties, has the most handsome boyfriend, hangs out with only popular people, and is really stuck on herself. Everyday Patty looks at herself in the mirror and thinks, "Patty, you are better than everyone else! No one is as good as you! I am so glad that I am Patty!" Hmmm…pretty sad isn't it? Well, Dominique is very similar, but in the opposite way. Dominique doesn't like to have too many friends and really hates herself and her life. She wears all black, hangs out with a few people getting high or drinking and talking bad about everyone, doesn't do her work in school and disrespects authorities, she has a boyfriend but she insults him and calls him `Pizza Face', and she thinks about committing suicide on a daily basis. Everyday Dominique looks in the mirror and thinks, "Dominique, you really suck! I really hate your stinking guts! You are so worthless, ugly and stupid. I wish you would just die already!" Hmmm…that's pretty sad too, isn't it? So Kimmy, can you see that there is little difference between Patty and Dominique because they both look at themselves in the wrong way? They see themselves as objects, as possessions, as things that they should either love or hate. But that is the wrong way for people to see themselves. We are not objects for love or hate, we are just people living. Who are you? Who am I? Well, that is one of the big questions on the test of life. I am still working on that problem and I am sure you are too. However, the very important thing is to know a wrong answer when you see one. Patty and Dominique found the wrong answer and stopped there. Make sure you don't do that in your life. Take care Kimmy and thanks for writing. I am glad that you are obeying your parents, teachers and studying hard. You get a GOLD STAR from me, Star Kid! Love, James 17117 From: nidive Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:43am Subject: Re: What is Space? Thank you robmoult, for your excellent reply. 17118 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 8:28am Subject: Re: Joannes letter to James --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James, > > My name is Joanne Lam. This is my first time writing > to you. I'm sure you have heard of me before in > otheremails. Well, I am born in Hong Kong but I > speakEnglish quite well I guess..=S (EcK) I also > speakCantonese, a little bit Japanese but not too > good. > > I'm not trying to be mean but I think Philip is quitea > show off... I am also studying in Hong > KongInternational School, 7th grade. What does that > mean?It means I know Philip! I dont know him really > well,but I know him at least...hehe. I find your > lettersvery funny and intersting. > > Will you ever wonder why life is always so unfair?Good > things happen to bad people and Bad things > alwayzhappens to kind-hearted people! SIGH~* I guess > thatslife, we cant control anything, how sad. =( > > mmm..Can you tell me a little bit about the life of > abuddha? Thankz... > > I guess I better stop now.. Write back soon! > > Joanne Lam > > P.S. Your poems are indeed very interesting!!! =D Hi Star Kid Joanne: Thank you for your letter. Others may have written about you but I don't remember. It is nice to get a letter in person though. It's good that you are learning so many languages. Keep up those studies and you will go far in life! Joanne, about Philip, I know that you are not trying to be mean, but you should try to be more positive in the words you say. Judging people isn't good, but trying to understand them is. I think you want to understand Philip. Well, Joanne, you have written to the right person because it is going to shock you to hear this, but I think I am very much like Philip! When I was in school, practically everyone thought I was a show off too. And now that I am an adult, practically everyone still thinks I am a show off! :-) Does Philip get into a lot of trouble? Me too! Does Philip ask a lot of questions? Me too! Does Philip challenge authority? Me too! Does Philip talk about things no one else even thinks of? Me too! Is Philip hard to understand most of the time? Me too! And honestly, is Philip someone you really like, but also really don't like, and are not sure why you feel either way? Most people feel that way about me too. Why are Philip and I that way? Answer: Because we `walk to the beat of a different drummer'. When everyone else goes right, we go left, but we still get to where everyone else gets… and sometimes before they do. Some people just don't think or act like the crowd, but that doesn't mean they don't want to be accepted by the crowd. Philip probably feels bad that many people reject him, like you have shown in this letter, so he acts out even more, gets angry and lashes out at people, or goes to extremes to get people's attention and acceptance. I know this because I have done all of these things, and still do to a great extent. Old habits die hard. Try to understand that Philip is different and accept him…he will be the most loyal, fascinating, and funny friend you could have. Joanne, about the rest of your letter, I don't have much to say. I don't know what the life of a Buddha is like because I am not a Buddha, yet. I would think it would be very much like being different from everyone else, but not caring about that and handling the situation more wisely. At least I hope so. Take care Joanne and keep studying. Give Philip this letter and try to get along. We all need friends. Love, James _______________________________________________________________ 17119 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Hi rjchacko and Rob M, rjchacko said > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will > tend to > > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will > want > > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists > also > > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. Perhaps we can think deeper, what is "innate impulses" and what is "strategies for reproduction"? What so called "impulses" and subconscious "strategies" may simply be manifestation of "accumulation", that eventually can be traced back to "self view", which leads to "protection of self", which leads to "protection of my family", which leads to "protection of my tribe"? There were many posts about Buddhism vs. science. The whole basis for science is a very rigid methodology for explaining phenomenons involving formulating hypothesis, collection of data, and testing based on "concrete" and "measurable" data. Because the data has to be "measurable", it's bound to lag behind "truth" spoken through philosophy and religion. However, I believe science and all would "eventually" converge, after all, they are all describing the same reality. Ethical focus of Buddhism came natually after the realization of the "ultimate reality". Same thing, people can derive natural ethical consequences even just from learning from science, though not as profound because science lags so much behind (given its rigid methodology as explained above). with metta, Wendy ----- Original Message ----- From: "robmoult" Sent: Friday, November 22, 2002 1:17 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question > Hi, > > Let me take a stab. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjchacko" wrote: > > I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping > someone > > here can help me to answer it. > > > > I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to > > Buddhism. > > > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will > tend to > > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will > want > > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists > also > > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. > > > > It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent > > origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause > > for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views > and > > therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture > > rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct > > application of dependent origination? > > > > Thanks. > > Interesting concept, trying to link evolutionary psychology to > Buddhism. > > Here are two points to consider: > - The elements of dependent origination are often shown in a circle > to emphasize the fact that there is no "first cause" > - Ignorance is conditioned by the taints (asavas); which are > delusion, greed (including lust) and wrong view > > Here is a deeper question: Why should there be a link between > evolutionary psychology and dependent origination? Dependent > origination shows us how to escape endless rounds of rebirth. It has > an ethical focus; it is not intended to be a "scientific model". > > I would be interested in your comments. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17120 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 10:00am Subject: Hi Rob Ep and Victor Dear friends, It is too strange: I was thinking of Rob Ep, missing his dialogues and then he emerged. I was, the next day, thinking of Victor, not heard from him for a long time, and then he appeared. Victor, I really appreciate your interest in nama and rupa, such an essential subject, yes, *the* subject. I cannot go into it for long because Tuesday I depart for Thailand, where nama and rupa will be our daily subject of discussion. In short: I believe we can give many definitions, but we shall still not know nama and rupa as they really are. Best of all is verifying the different characteristics of nama and rupa at this moment. Sound appears now: does sound know anything? It does not, it is rupa. When sound appears there must also be hearing. Does hearing experiences something? It does, it experiences sound, therefore, hearing is nama, it experiences something. There may be pleasant feeling or unpleasant feeling. Feeling experiences, it is nama. There are many moments of thinking in a day. Thinking is nama, it experiences. Now we can appreciate the many suttas dealing with all the objects appearing through the six doors, they can remind us directly of nama and rupa appearing now. I am sorry to miss your dialogues about all this next week, Nina. 17121 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 10:26am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hello Robert and all, Thank you, Robert, for responding. Instead of asking why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? My question should be: Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? To me the idea of "sankhara" is perhaps one of the most difficult to comprehend. It's been translated as "mental formation". However, I am not yet able to see the connection between sankhara and consciousness. Have a good day, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions > ignorance. > > Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? > > > > You have asked a very complex question. The brief answer is as > follows: > - Taints (asavas) condition ignorance (avijja) > - Ignorance (avijja) conditions kammic formations (sankhara) > - Kammic formations (sankhara) condition consciousness (vinnana) > > Ignorance is moha concommitant with 12 akusala cittas. > > Sankhara is cetana in the 8 kamavacara kusala cittas & 5 rupavacara > kusala cittas (merit), cetana in the 12 akusala cittas (demerit) and > cetana in the 4 arupavacara kusala cittas (imperturbable). > > In the case of formations of merit, avijja can condition sankhara > through object condition or natural decisive support condition. > > In the case of formations of demerit, avijja can condition sankhara > through the following conditions: root, object, object > predominance / decisive support, proximity / contiguity, co- > nascence, mutuality, support, natural decisive support, repetition, > association, presence / non-disappearance and absence / > disappearance. > > In the case of the formations of the imperturbable, avijja > conditions sankhara only through natural decisive support condition. > > Consciousness are the 32 lokiya vipaka cittas. > > Sankhara conditions consciousness through asynchronous kamma > condition and through natural decisive support condition. > > This has been extracted from Visuddhimagga XVII 102, 103, 104, 177, > 178, 179, 180, 181. > > If you want definitions of the various conditions listed above, see > my most recently updated class notes (pages 171-178). This is > available on-line in the "Files" section of DSG. > > I suspect that this is more than you really wanted to know, but I > would be pleased to explore the details with you. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17122 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 0:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama Rupa Hi Howard, Needless to say, what we Buddhists are trying to understand is that the all important being we call ourselves is, in reality, nothing more than the five khandhas of the present moment. So in the seen, there is only the seen; in the heard, there is only the heard and so on. What our thinking minds tell us it that the object we see is the same object we hear, touch or taste and smell. Our thinking minds also tell us that the being who sees is the same being who hears, touches, tastes, smells and thinks. But our thinking minds take time to come up with this wrong view the world. By the time thinking has taken place, the realities that see and are seen, have been and gone. So, our objective is to realise that reality is fleeting and that conceptualising is comparatively slow. This could be why, as Larry says, it is the speed of citta that prevents it from being identified with the illusory being who sees, hears, smells, tastes and thinks. May I suggest that when we liken the present reality to a bubble, a mirage or a coreless plantain, the objective is to see that it is devoid of the concepts we think about. The actual dhammas are the `all' (of the Loka Sutta), so they are not devoid of their own substance. What the `plantain trunk' is devoid of is the illusory conceptual core that thinking ascribes to it (over the course of time). So I think you may be placing too much stress on the impermanence and emptiness of dhammas in your explanation of anatta. (You may be emptying out the baby with the bath water.) I think it would be quite in order to say, for example, that citta `sees' or `is the observer of' it's object. We could even say that the five khandhas are the self, provided we recognise that the self lives and dies in the space of one moment. In other words, the anatta characteristic does not mean that dhammas are empty of absolute reality, it means they are empty of conceptual reality. Kind regards Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > ========================= > I agree that there is no seer - just seeing. And the seeing is an act > of vi~n~nana or discerning. However, I don't have a clue what the relative > speed of the discerning has to do with anything. > Several people on this list frequently point out that mind- moments > arise and pass very quickly (in comparison, I suppose, with rupas which > supposedly remain [or are replicated] for up to 17 mind-moments - it must be > in comparison with *something*, for duration is always relative). So what? > Something not lasting for a long time means only that it doesn't last for a > long time - nothing more. What if an act of visual consciousness lasted twice > as long (again compared, I suppose, to rupas)? Would that make it a seer? > Four times as long? Seventeen times as long? > I believe that it is unimportant what is the relative duration of > things. What is important is that they don't remain, and that they arise only > in dependence on conditions, their creation and tentative existence > completely dependent on similarly empty dhammas. What is important, as I see > it, is that *nothing* whatsoever has any core or own-being, being nothing > more than a dependent arising that does not remain. > As one Zen master said: to see a glass properly is to see it as > already broken. As the Buddha said hundreds of years earlier: whatever is of > the nature to arise is of the nature to cease. (The speed is irrelevant.) > > With metta, > Howard 17123 From: rjchacko Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:14am Subject: Re: dependent origination question --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi, > > Let me take a stab. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjchacko" wrote: > > I have a question about dependent origination, and I'm hoping > someone > > here can help me to answer it. > > > > I'm trying to compare some ideas in evolutionary psychology to > > Buddhism. > > > > Evolutionary psychologists claim that men and women have different > > strategies for reproduction and so they have different sexual > > impulses. So they conclude men have strong sex drives and will > tend to > > want to mate with as many partners as possible, while women will > want > > to be selective about their partners. Evolutionary psychologists > also > > have other theories about behavior where humans are assumed to have > > certain innate impulses that can't be attributed to culture. > > > > It seems though that this would contradict the idea of dependent > > origination. The first limb of the chain is ignorance, so the cause > > for a sex drive (or any other acquisitive impulse) is wrong views > and > > therefore any difference in male-female behavior is due to culture > > rather than some innate biological nature. Is this a correct > > application of dependent origination? > > > > Thanks. > > Interesting concept, trying to link evolutionary psychology to > Buddhism. > > Here are two points to consider: > - The elements of dependent origination are often shown in a circle > to emphasize the fact that there is no "first cause" > - Ignorance is conditioned by the taints (asavas); which are > delusion, greed (including lust) and wrong view > > Here is a deeper question: Why should there be a link between > evolutionary psychology and dependent origination? Dependent > origination shows us how to escape endless rounds of rebirth. It has > an ethical focus; it is not intended to be a "scientific model". > > I would be interested in your comments. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) I'm comparing the two because I see both as forms of psychology. They have different approaches to the same subject, but there ought to be points of correspondence. As I understand it dependent origination can also be considered the relationship between a stream of moments in a single person and is not necessarily limited to being an explanation about previous and future lives. Dependent origination also explains the arising of the concept of self, which is something that happens in this life. I originally started thinking about this in terms of the five hindrances. According to Buddhist tradition as one progresses towards nibbana, one eliminates the five hindrances. (Here's a point I'm unclear about: In the four foundations of mindfulness the hindrances are one of the dhammas that can be contemplated. But unwholesome consciousnesses are also part of the third foundation right? So is contemplating the hindrances basically about characterizing certain consciousnesses as hindrances?) Anyway according to evolutionary psychologists human brains are "designed" to seek out sex in certain ways according to whether you are male or female. So it seems to me that would correspond to some process which causes lustful consciousnesses to arise under conditions that are conducive to your genders' reproductive strategy. But then it sounds like according to the evolutionary psychologist the hindrance of sensual desire can't be removed because it's "hard wired" into the brain. In other words they are asserting lustful consciousnesses are conditioned only by perception of the external situation. On the other hand in Buddhism lustful consciousness is not determined only by perception. In general I think the idea behind evolutionary psychology makes sense, but I think that many of the applications of it are only just so stories meant to explain away some cultural conventions. The whole mating strategy thing is contradicted when you go and actually observe mating habits outside of familiar cultures. For example in Tibet, before the Chinese invaded polyandry was common, and even though it's illegal now it still happens. But the whole idea of one woman seeking multiple partners is completely backwards if you buy the evolutionary psychologists explanation of human nature. In other applications of evolutionary psychology or psychobiology differences in human behavior are reduced to some "gene". Some people have more "IQ" because of a gene, some people are more prone to violence because of a gene, etc. Differences are reduced to essences. It seems to me that when one starts to invoke the existence of essences to explain one's own behavior(e.g. "I don't want to settle down with one girl because I'm a guy.") that there is a lack of understanding of dependent origination. But in trying to apply the idea of dependent origination in this case I find that I don't really understand it so I thought I'd look for some help in trying to elaborate on that idea. 17124 From: Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 3:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Sarah, Thanks for the good quotation on the footings. My question to Robert was what is the proximate condition (anantara paccaya) for panna (wisdom). Samadhi is the footing for wisdom, is it also the proximate condition? I'm going to drop my inquiry into "bare mindfulness'. I think it is as Nina said, a non-technical term that is best understood in the context we have (Way 25) as "just mindfulness" without the special significance I was attributing to it. However, I would like to look more into "bare attention" as described by Nyanaponika Thera. If there are any Mahasi yogis in this group maybe they have some insight into what this term is in reference to in the Satipatthana Sutta. My first thought is it may relate to the phrase "contemplate the body in the body". I'm a little surprised that you think "satipatthana cannot have a concept for an object" is not a view advocated by K. Sujin. I believe both you and Kom have argued for this and I assumed you got it from her. I did yoke this idea with "bare mindfulness". Maybe that was what you were objecting to. Looking forward to clarification. Larry 17125 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:24pm Subject: Re: dependent origination question Dependent Origination explains the cause of human existence-birth- suffering; Evolutionary Psychology explains the details of that human existence over a certain time period. They cannot be compared on an equal footing because they are not similar. To use an analogy, doing so is like trying to compare an apple tree to the apple it produces. They are linked in a certain way, but still very dissimilar. I believe, what you are driving at, is that you would like to know how one can `transcend' clinging (or which sexual desire is one form) in the mental sphere so as to cease existence-birth- suffering. Most people mistakenly look at the traditional chain of events, beginning with ignorance, and believe that all one needs to do is eliminate ignorance and the process will be ended and one will become enlightened. WRONG! The Abhidhamma also takes this approach by supporting the idea that if one `knows' the arising and falling of Nama/Rupa, that will naturally lead to a direct knowledge of Nibbana. Wrong again. The Buddha spelled out the transcendent path in a little recognized, but highly important sutta, the Upanisa Sutta. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel277.html Allow me to summarize the traditional Dependent Origination steps: Ignorance (avijja)= Kamma formations (sankhara)= Consciousness (viññana)= Mentality-materiality (namarupa)= Sixfold sense base (salayatana)= Contact (phassa)= Feeling (vedana)= Craving (tanha)= Clinging (upadana)= Existence (bhava)= Birth (jati)= Suffering (dukkha) So, one would assume that since the cause is ignorance, that removal of that cause will make the whole chain fall, like a line of dominoes. But, it doesn't work that way. Surprisingly, what one needs to cultivate first isn't knowledge of nama/rupa, but FAITH. These are the Transcendent Dependent Origination steps that the LORD BUDDHA taught: Faith (saddha)= Joy (pamojja)= Rapture (piti)= Tranquillity (passaddhi)= Happiness (sukha)= Concentration (samadhi)= Knowledge and vision of things as they are (yathabhutañanadassana)= Disenchantment (nibbida)= Dispassion (viraga)= Emancipation (vimutti)= Knowledge of destruction of the cankers (asavakkhaye ñana) So, there you have it. Metta, James 17126 From: Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" In a message dated 11/20/2002 7:19:42 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > Howard: > That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would put it > because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer to what I mean > is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the mechanism we *call* > accumulations?" (I would imagine that some cetasikas are direct > participants, > while others serve as necessary auxilliary conditions for manifestation of > tendencies.) It seems to me that cetanas are central to this, and that they > are likely quite complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of > a > number of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of > possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be required > to > explain the great diversity of possible inclinations among people. > Hi Howard I believe the "accumulations" act as roots somewhat like the roots of plants. The accumulations perhaps are "hidden" beneath the surface (of experiences) like roots are "hidden" underground (out of view). Abhidhamma states (and I agree on this point) that we are not capable of experiencing the "pure" water element (coalescence element). The coalescence element is an "inward movement." I believe karma roots us to "continued becoming" primarily through a coalescing force...hence we can't experience it with our normal perceptive abilities. I quite suspect (as you) the cetasika combinations are extremely complex and dynamic; so I try to look at it from a "principle" standpoint...I suspect craving is primarily a "coalescing type activity" and that the accumulation processes revolve around that. This is a slightly different approach than I think you're taking but thought you might find it interesting. I believe the Buddha said that only he could fully understand karma and that anyone else would go mad trying to figure it out. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha......... TG 17127 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:27pm Subject: Jan's letter Dear Ms Christine Forsyth, I really enjoyed reading your letter! Your dog Rusty seems like a really nice dog. I was just wondering what type of dog is he? eg: retriver, terrier, bull dog. Well, im alos going to get a dog which is an Iggy(italian greyhound) I have a dog in Thailand called Spike which is an Yorkie/ Shizu. Last last week, I read a book called Chicken soup for the pet lovers soul. Its a very good book so i just wanted to mention it. I was also wondering if do you have any intersting facts about Buddhism that you can tell me? Thanks for your letter! Jan 17128 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:52pm Subject: Show Off Hi Philip I am your sister Janet! I have read your first letter and I think it's very bad, you can do it better because your such a show off! Anyway, I am going to tell Mum about your letter! (Ha! Ha!) Work well soon! Janet Chui: 8 years old. My hobbies are: playing table tennis and reading. What is Buddhism? What help us? Please write to me. Janet. 17129 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:58pm Subject: My letter to ...... Dear James, It's me again, Janice! Thank you for the poem! Somehow I always enjoy your poems as they are extremely happy. I shall definitely send your condolences to Mrs.. Walsh-Till when I come across her again. Of course, I shall keep smiling and study hard everyday. And Thank you for answering my question about the buddha. In fact, the poem you sent me about Sarah Cynthia Sylvia Stout by Shel Silverstein, I have heard and recited this poem to my class last year. However, I think this poem is very hilarious and it teaches us that we have to finish something right away. In Philip's letter, I agree the with the way that he writes something to an adult or teacher and to a friend. James, do you know how many Gods, Demons, and Ghosts are there in the Buddha religion ? (Approximately) By the way, what does 'Metta'mean ? I hope you could send me more funny poems! Please write back soon! Thank you ! Janice Chung 17130 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 6:58pm Subject: Re: Nama Rupa - 7 --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > 4. Being conscious of something is being conscious of it's > representation. > > 5. When consciousness ceases, represenation/nama and represented/rupa > cease to be. > > 6. Ignorance conditions taints, which in turn conditions ignorance. > Why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? > 7. Every mental phenomenon is a representation of something. 17131 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:47pm Subject: Re: Jan's letter Hi Jan, Thank you for your letter and for asking about Rusty. Rusty is a Great Dane/Alsatian. So he is very large like a Great Dane, and has their gentle nature, but is not as heavy. He is really intelligent like an Alsatian. He is nine years old. I am a little sad about Rusty at the moment. He twisted his back right knee very badly, and had to have an operation at the Veterinary hospital. He is staying in boarding kennels right now because he has to be kept still in a small space. He has to stay there until after Christmas. I really miss him. One of the things I like about Buddhism is that the Buddha often talked about animals and insects, and said that every living and breathing creature wants to be happy and safe. He taught us to be gentle and kind to all beings, not just humans. As you own Spike and are getting an Iggy, you will notice that animals have different personalities, just like people - and can feel happy or frightened, just like people. That book sounds interesting - I'll keep a look-out for it at the Bookshop. Thanks for mentioning it. metta (loving-kindness) from Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear Ms Christine Forsyth, > > I really enjoyed reading your letter! > > Your dog Rusty seems like a really nice dog. I was > just wondering what type of dog is he? eg: retriver, > terrier, bull dog. > > Well, im alos going to get a dog which is an > Iggy(italian greyhound) > > I have a dog in Thailand called Spike which is an > Yorkie/ Shizu. > > Last last week, I read a book called Chicken soup for > the pet lovers soul. Its a very good book so i just > wanted to mention it. > > I was also wondering if do you have any intersting > facts about Buddhism that you can tell me? > > Thanks for your letter! > > Jan 17132 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:52pm Subject: Re: Nibbana Hi, > This sutta is explained in reasonable detail in the commentary, Bhikku > Bodhi gives some terse notes in his translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. > Do you have it.? No. 17133 From: rahula_80 Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 7:56pm Subject: Re: Citta and Vinnana Hi, > The Visuddhimagga XIV (82) : "The words vinnana, citta and mano > are one in meaning" Shakya Aryanatta said Visudhimagga are latter commentarial literature. And he does accept it as an authority on Buddhism. He only accepts the Pali Canon (without the Abhidhama) and the Commentarries. 17134 From: James Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:24pm Subject: Re: My letter to ...... --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > > Dear James, > > It's me again, Janice! Thank you for the > poem! Somehow I always enjoy your poems as they are > extremely happy. I shall definitely send your > condolences to Mrs.. Walsh-Till when I come across her > again. Of course, I shall keep smiling and study hard > everyday. And Thank you for answering my question > about the buddha. > > In fact, the poem you sent me about Sarah > Cynthia Sylvia Stout by Shel Silverstein, I have heard > and recited this poem to my class last year. However, > I think this poem is very hilarious and it teaches us > that we have to finish something right away. > > In Philip's letter, I agree the with the way > that he writes something to an adult or teacher and to > a friend. James, do you know how many Gods, Demons, > and Ghosts are there in the Buddha religion ? > (Approximately) By the way, what does 'Metta'mean ? > > I hope you could send me more funny poems! > Please write back soon! > Thank you ! > Janice Chung Hi Star Kid Janice, I am glad that you liked the poems. Since you asked, I have put some more for you at the end of this letter. I hope you like them. Now, to answer your questions. You ask two very interesting questions. I am going to answer your last question first, because it will take less time. You ask what is `Metta'? Metta is a Pali word which is usually translated as "Loving-Kindness". What does that mean? Well, you know that we can all feel different kinds of love, right? We have one type for parents, one for siblings, one for friends, one for pets, one for teachers, etc., etc., etc. Well, imagine that you put all of those different types of love together in a great big pile, and you squeezed all of them together really, really tight! The juice that would come out would be: METTA! :-) You also ask how many god, demons, and ghosts there are in other dimensions/realms, according to Buddhism. Well, that is a very tricky question and you will get different answers depending on the type of Buddhist you ask. Since I am a Theravada Buddhist, I will answer according to that type. I don't know how many entities exist exactly in all of the other realms; gosh, I don't even know how many people are on the planet Earth right now! :-) All I can tell you is that there are 31 Planes of Existence in Theravada Buddhism. Does that mean that there are 31 different planets? No, that means there are 31 different ENTIRE UNIVERSES! All in the same space as our universe but made of different materials so we don't see each other. It is only with a very sharp, wise mind that one is able to see them. Like some people can see ghosts and some people can't… that kind of thing. Now, I know you are going to want to know what these different universes are like, so I will just tell you now. They are broken up into three different categories: No Material, Fine Material, and Large Material. They are called in the No Material Universes: Neither-perception-nor- non-perception, Nothingness, Infinite Consciousness, Infinite Space (These gods/entities have no bodies, only minds). In the Fine Material Universes they are called: Peerless devas, Clear-sighted devas, Beautiful devas, Untroubled devas, Devas not Falling Away, Unconscious beings, Very Fruitful devas, Devas of Refulgent Glory, Devas of Unbounded Glory, Devas of Limited Glory, Devas of Streaming Radiance, Devas of Unbounded Radiance, Devas of Limited Radiance, Great Brahmas, Ministers of Brahma, and Retinue of Brahma. In the Large Material Universes they are called: Devas Wielding Power over the Creation of Others, Devas Delighting in Creation, Contented devas, Yama devas, The Thirty-three Gods, Devas of the Four Great Kings, Human beings, Asuras, Hungry Shades/Ghosts, Animals, Hell So Jan, I really couldn't know how many gods, demons, and ghosts existed in all of these different places. But I hope this helps some! Keep smiling! Metta, James My Sister's Always on the Phone by Bruce Lansky My sister's always on the phone. I never see her study. She doesn't do her homework, which is why her grades are cruddy. My sister's always on the phone, but I don't think that's cool. My sister is so popular she's flunking out of school. ******* My Dog Chewed Up My Homework by Bruce Lansky I'm glad to say my homework's done. I finished it last night. I've got it right here in this box. It's not a pretty sight. My dog chewed up my homework. He slobbered on it, too. So now my homework's ripped to shreds and full of slimy goo. It isn't much to look at, but I brought it anyway. I'm going to dump it on your desk if I don't get an A. ******* No More Flies in the School Kitchen by Bruce Lansky There were lots of flies in the kitchen. The cook didn't know what to do. The principal made an inspection. He swatted some flies with his shoe. Now there are no flies in the kitchen. The cook's in a very good mood. The flies are not quite so delighted. They died after eating the food. ******* Mary Had Some Bubble Gum by Anonymous Mary had some bubble gum, she chewed it long and slow, and everywhere that Mary went her gum was sure to go. She chewed the gum in school one day, which was against the rule. The teacher took her pack away and chewed it after school. 17135 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Nov 22, 2002 11:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Hi, rj. --- rjchacko wrote: Welcome to the list from me. I've been following this thread. I'm reminded of a recent discussion here about science and Buddhism. The conclusion that people seemed to come to was that each was talking about 'realities' from a different perspective and that there was little or no overlap between the two. So I'm wondering if we are likely to find the situation any different when making a comparison between Buddhism and psychology (this of course does not mean that making the comparison is not a useful exercise). <> I think the apparent similarities are likely to be only at fairly superficial level. For example, both deal a lot with the mind, but the understanding of what ‘the mind’ is surely quite different. In any event, the Dhamma is not limited to a study of the mind and behaviour (which is how I would 'define' psychology -- purely a layman's view, of course!) but to an understanding on a far broader scope. <> I think this is right, but it's a lot easier to see in the context of different lifetimes than successive mind-moments! <> Yes, unwholesome consciousness falls under both the third and fourth foundations. But as I understand it, all dhammas falling under the first three foundations also fall under the fourth. For example, the basic phenomena that comprise the body fall under the first of the five aggregates (khandhas) in the fourth foundation (as well as under the first foundation) and feelings fall under the second of the five aggregates in the fourth foundation (as well as under the second foundation). So I would regard the division of the basic phenomena into the four foundations as a classification made to help us grasp the teaching better. This being so, it is not a matter of 'practising' one foundation or another, but of realising that all basic phenomena are potentially an object of awareness. … … <> There are many useful textual sources But expect to spend some time on it! Dependent origination is one of those things that we're told can be comprehended only by those of highly developed understanding. So we shouldn't be surprised if we don't manage to crack at right away. In any event, since dependent origination is essentially a description of the relationship between different dhammas that arise in our daily lives, the best way to have a deeper understanding of it is to develop understanding of those basic phenomena arising at the present moment. Without the development of satipatthana we will never 'get it' at any real depth. My views, anyway. Jon 17136 From: rjchacko Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Jon, Thanks for the welcome. <> When I compare satipatthana and psychology I see a lot of overlap. A student of satipatthana meditates to observe the relationship between mentality and materiality. A student of psychology also studies the relationship between mentality and materiality. The difference lies in the approach. A yogi takes advantage of his sentience to note the dynamics of his mind. A psychologist applies tests, surveys, PET scans, etc. to his experimental subjects. One approaches the mind from the inside, and the other approaches it from the outside. When a psychologist throws out a hypothesis it should be possible to recast it in a way that we can think about it from an internal point of view and see if that makes sense. So, for example, with the mating strategy hypothesis recasting the idea in terms of internal experience, we would say that the hypothesis is that lustful consciousnesses are determined only by perception of potential mating partners. We can now examine our experience to see if this makes sense. Does it? Does it makes sense in terms of dependent origination? What does psychology have to offer? I think that it could explain things like the mechanism behind what makes certain feelings pleasant or unpleasant. What makes certain sensations pleasant or unpleasant is not explained, but it's not relevant to understanding suffering. The external approach could also help to refine teaching methods in Buddhism. Also Buddhism doesn't seem to have anything to offer to people who have organic defects like schizophrenia. On the other hand Buddhism has a complete theory of the dynamics of the mind. An external approach could someday show the neural correlates of those dynamics, but while interesting that proabably wouldn't offer much practical advantage (perhaps as a diagnostic tool?). <> Well, I'm actually skeptical about different lifetimes myself, but even if I were to grant that, it I think it would still be more important to understand dependent arising in terms of succesive mind moments, because this is how one would comprehend anatta. Dependent origination is the middle way of rejecting both an inherently existing self, and nihilism. I think also that it is important to apply the idea of dependent origination to many ideas that are part of the "conventional wisdom." A lot of the pop science we hear on tv and read in the paper are just rationalizations of certain cultural conventions using scientific jargon. Since the scientific approach has, for good reason, earned a lot of trust using scientific jargon can lend an air of truth to questionable theories. More often though many conventions are just tacitly accepted in public discourse, e.g. after 9/11 questions like "why do 'they' hate 'us'?" I think this can present a lot of difficulties for the lay practitioner who is constantly exposed to popular culture and uses its terms to communicate and think about the world. <> I agree that it is important to actually see dependent origination "on the fly", but I think it's also useful to have a philosophical grasp on the idea. It easier to recognize something, if you know what it looks like. <> Thanks. The fourth foundation always confused me because of the apparent redundance. It makes more sense to me now to see that the dhammas are insights about the other three foundations. -Ranjit 17137 From: robmoult Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:43am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? The definition of "sankhara" in Nyanatiloka's "Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines" starts, "This term has, according to its context, different shades of meaning, which should be carefully distinguished...." It then proceeds to give multiple definitions. You are probably familiar with the term "sankhara" as applied as one of the five aggregates. In this case, it means all of the cetasikas minus feeling and perception. The definition of "sankhara" when used as part of dependent origination is quite different. In dependent origination, "sankhara" is the 29 rebirth-producing cetana which fall into three classes: - Formations of merit (punnabhisankhara): cetana in the 8 maha kusala cittas and cetana in the 5 rupavacara cittas - Formations of demerit (apunnabhisankhara): cetana in the 12 akusala cittas - Formations of the imperturbable (anenjabhisankhara): cetana in the 4 arupavacara cittas In short, sankhara represents the 29 types of kamma (kamma = cetana) associated with the 17 lokiya kusala cittas and the 12 akusala cittas. Just as sankhara has a unique definition when used as part of dependent origination, so too does consciousness (vinnana) have a unique definition when used as part of dependent origination. As part of dependent orgination, consciousness means the 32 lokiya vipaka cittas. You have probably seen the diagram of dependent origination which shows sankhara as the last of the "past period (kala)" and vinnana as the first of the "present period". Most of the focus when describing the link between sankhara and vinnana is on how at the time of rebirth (patisandhi-kala), the 11 akusala cetanas (excluding uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanas (excluding the two abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of the 19 rebirth consciousnesses. However, dependent origination does not have to extend over three lives and during a lifetime (pavatti-kala) the 12 akusala cetanas (including uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanas (excluding the two abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of vipaka cittas which arise in the thought process as follows: - Formations of merit: 8 mahakusala cetanas and 5 rupavacara cetanas condition the arising of 8 kusala vipaka cittas (5 sense consciousness, receiving, 2 investigating), 8 mahakusala vipaka cittas (here the mahakusala vipaka cittas play a role of registration cittas, not patisandhi cittas) and 5 rupavacara vipaka cittas - Formations of demerit: 12 akusala cetanas condition the arising of 7 akusala vipaka cittas (5 sense consciousness, receiving, investigating) - Formations of the imperturbable: 4 arupavacara cetanas condition the arising of 4 arupavacara vipaka cittas All of the conditioning between sankhara and vinnana is according to asychronous kamma condition and natural decisive support condition In simple words, the second link in dependent origination tells us that kamma conditions vipaka; it is kamma that conditions our rebirth citta (which is vipaka) and it is kamma that conditions our sense door consciousness, receiving, investigating and registration cittas. Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free will?") and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. Victor, does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17138 From: nidive Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:07am Subject: Fear of Rupas I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence of rupas. It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the physical world as 'real' has been violated. Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your experience. 17139 From: James Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 1:36pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. Hello Fellow Traveler, Yes, I also share your fear and hesitation when contemplating Rupa, and I posted distinctly in message 16795 of this group. Here are some of the highlights of what I wrote, which I still stand by: "Actually, I wish that I could forget what I have garnered from my reading about the Abhidhamma thus far. Maybe time will help me to forget? This is going to sound radical, but I think it is a dangerous work…" Obviously, I share your fear of the concept of Rupa as presented in the Abhidhamma. I believe that you and I probably do what many don't do: we contemplate with our whole being, not just our brains. When you contemplate Rupa with your whole being, a fear distinctly hair-raising naturally arises. Is this a hindrance? No, we know a hindrance when we experience one. A hindrance is like a pesky fly- this kind of fear is profound and deep and not shakable. When I experienced it, it reminded me of Star Wars and being drawn to the `Dark Side' of the Force. That is strong reason for fear and why I was hesitant to proceed with studies of Rupa. But I did and,now finished, I have still come to the same conclusion: The contemplation of Rupa, outside of that experienced within the body (which is still Nama), is dangerous and should be avoided. Frankly, I am convinced that the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma and, having an extensive knowledge of his teachings, I am sure he would not approve of it for the majority of practitioners (I believe it attracts and could be suited to those who have been re-born from the non-material realms where they were all mind and no body. `Matter' is a novelty to this type of individual and therefore `enlightening'. To the rest of us, it is dangerous and can result in rebirth in an animal or hell realm…the lowest of the sensual realms). Allow me to quote further of what I wrote: "Mostly I am going on intuition and deduction for this evaluation, since I didn't finish my studies of it and never intend to…But its biggest fault, in my estimation, is the assertion of 'Rupa', or matter, and how knowledge of such will lead to insight. This goes contrary to what the Buddha taught. The Buddha taught that it is from the mind that we create our world and it is through control and taming of the mind that we will find liberation. Knowing the various 'dhammas' of matter has little to do with that. Basically, as the Buddha said, it is all Nama. Anything other than that is purely speculative and doesn't lead to liberation…" Trust your instincts and they won't fail you. I feel your fear also. I believe it is a good fear and neither of us should ignore it. Metta, James Ps. obviously, in this group that is very Abhidhamma oriented, I will respond to the postings of the children but not much more. My other posts are being ignored anyway- but those intoxicated with `Rupa'. 17140 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 2:08pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas Hello nidive, l hope many of those who really understand the Abhidhamma and the meanings of the terms used will discuss the matter with you. I admire the fact that you are asking questions and seeking to understand. This will always guard you against falling into the trap of drawing ill-informed conclusions from premature, partial, and misunderstood information. I am just a beginner myself, having studied Abhidhamma for only a year or so. Please, take a great deal of time, there is no need to hurry. Understanding grows very slowly, ignorance is hard to disperse, especially when we don't see it as it is, or even that we have it. Don't be fearful, all will be well as you slowly develop understanding. Those I learn Abhidhamma from are some of the most intelligent, peaceful, joyful, equanimous, and ethical people I know. To borrow from another religion, "By their fruits you will know them". Many of us will be in Bangkok over the next week or so, but I look forward to your contributions to many discussions over the coming months. It is really good to have someone who can articulate questions and we all learn from the discussions that follow. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin > to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the > four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a > short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does > occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence > of rupas. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. 17141 From: azita gill Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fear of Rupas --- nidive wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few > days. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that > the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to > be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' > that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please > share your > experience. > > dear nidive, rupas aren't dangerous, they are just rupas and they are very real - it is our thinking that makes them fearful, dangerous. Once the understanding grows and knows these namas and rupas for what they really are: impermanent, not self and therefore unsatisfactory', that fear may fall away also. > However, to be honest, 'my'comfort zone feels pretty unsafe most of the time too. I think when we start learnning about the Dhamma, all the ideas that we have about our life get tossed around and chewed up and you kinda feel like a refugee. Here's something that I find useful: < 'I am the owner of my actions[kamma], heir of my actions. I am born of my actions. I am related to my actions and I have my actions as refuge. Whatever I do, good or evil, of that I will be the heir". < from the Anguttara-Nikaya. < the above reflections are not meant to creat morbidity but are meant to arouse in us a sense of urgency and wisdom to live more meaningfully and to strive for the true liberation of Nibbana. > Hope this helps. < Azita > 17142 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 7:40pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas --- Dear ndive, Fear comes about because of the clinging to self. If there is sati there cannot be fear at the same time. And sati can take fear as an object. Because for so long there has been the accumulation of clinging to self then it can happen that when contemplating in a way that seems to challenge this deeply rooted grasping fear can arise. This fear is simply the kilesa -defilements. At these times we can see how dangerous and pitiful is the idea of self. It is a barrier that has to be crossed so that understanding can become firm to see that there is no self- either in rupa or nama. Then the contemplation of impermanence will evoke calm. But it all happens gradually, not by forcing. The world of concepts(such as 'physical world', self, ) that we have clung to for a long time is not real, while namas and rupas are real but fleeting and unsubstantial, unworthy of clinging to. Seeing this correctly takes a long time. I think it cannot be hurried. Robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin > to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the > four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a > short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does > occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence > of rupas. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. 17143 From: Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 5:26pm Subject: Re: dependent origination question This may be useful; just happened upon this after catching up on some posts. The site is Mahayana but it contains interesting arguments/positions on many issues connecting the Dhamma and science. On the issue at hand: "Evolutionary Psychology Getting into the state of being satisfied sets the instinctive alarm bells ringing. If you think you can drop out of the evolutionary race, then all the habituation of hundreds of millions of years of evolution will tell you not to. Our genes drive us along paths of action which appear to minimise suffering, but in many cases increase it. Greed and acquisitiveness are natural reactions designed to increase the survival of our genes, and decrease the chances of our competitors. But after a certain point, the more you've got, the more you've got to lose, (even if it is just losing face) and so the more you've got to worry about. These instinctive strivings and attachments for things which are ultimately only going to cause us worry and unhappiness are known in Buddhist philosophy as innate delusions (as distinct from intellectually formed delusions such as memes). The innate delusions are considerably more difficult to overcome than intellectually formed delusions, however it is one of the fundamental tenets of Buddhism that they can eventually be brought into the light of day and removed. To quote Richard Dawkins 'We are built as gene machines and cultured as meme machines, but we have the power to turn against our creators. We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators.' [Dawkins 1989] The Buddhist technique of rebellion against the selfish replicators, at any rate in the form of innate delusions, is to reduce the power of the forces which drive us by recognising them for what they are. This is traditionally performed by a mixture of analytical thought and meditation, and involves the recognition of four truths of biological existence: (1) The first step is to recognise the inevitability of dukkha - the sense of unsatisfactoriness and the certainty of death and the ultimate loss of everything, which haunts all sentient beings even in the absence of manifest suffering. (2) The second is to recognise that the origins of these futile strivings result from our biologically conditioned evolutionary history. If we want to stop being the puppets of our genes and memes we need to clearly understand why we're attached to these particular strings. (3) The third step is to realise that it needn't be like this. This is perhaps the most difficult one for a materialist. It involves realising that the root mind is non-physical and that it can escape from the eternal evolutionary treadmill. (4) The fourth step is adopting a liberating technology that stabilises the root mind and protects it against uncontrolled attachment to further striving, suffering, biological rebirths." Brain and mind - Mahayana Buddhism and argument… metta, stephen 17144 From: James Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 11:18pm Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > I have been contemplating about rupas these few days. When I begin > to contemplate on space as coming into existence depending on the > four great elements, a strange kind of fear arises within (me) for a > short moment. This happened very strongly once, but it still does > occur (less strongly) if I concentrate the mind on the impermanence > of rupas. > > It's hard to describe, but the fear seems to be that the rupas > are 'dangerous', that the rupas are 'unreal', not to be taken as > they really are. It seems that the 'comfort zone' that I see the > physical world as 'real' has been violated. > > Does anybody have this kind of fear as well? Please share your > experience. Hey Traveler, I have read the other responses to this e-mail and I want to make a few comments. Where in this e-mail do you say that your fear is a result of seeing the non-self (anatta) of rupa? I don't see that at all in this letter. You say that the contemplation of rupa, outside of the body, brings a feeling of fear. It makes you feel that the world you once knew has become something this is 'unreal' and uncomfortable. I don't see where you talk about rupa within yourself at all. Why do members assume they know your feelings more than you do? Why is it that members what to tell you what you are feeling? Did you ask for them to tell you what they think you are feeling? I don't see that question here. You ask, very plainly, 'Has anyone else had this type of fear before?". The answers should be either yes or no, with some details. But notice how people respond by telling you what and how you should be feeling. You don't have to, but I would view any input such as that as being suspect. Additionally, the path of the Buddha is never supposed to be fearful to the extent that it makes everyday reality uncomfortable. That is not what the Buddha said about the dharma. The dharma is beautiful in the beginning, beautiful in the middle, and beautiful in the end. The Buddha said that the wise person upon hearing the dharma will immediately put it into practice and experience great results. It is not supposed to be painful or upsetting. I am reading responses to your letter that are describing the dharma as if it is like a bathtub full of scolding hot water which we all just need to 'ease into'. What? That is odd thinking. The dharma is beautiful, peaceful, and serene...never painful or fearful. Granted, it may be difficult to see and practice, but that is because it is sublime...not because it is torture. As the Buddha said, if it feels like you need to ease into something which is painful, it is not the dharma...it is something which should be avoided. Again, I believe you should listen to your insticts; other people cannot tell you what you feel. Only you know what you feel and what is the right thing to do. Metta, James 17145 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination question Ranjit --- rjchacko wrote: > Jon, ... ... <> Thank you for these interesting comments on the similarities between psychology and the teachings. You have obviously given a lot of thought to this area, and I can see you have a high regard for psychology. I'm sure that regard is well placed (I daren't say otherwise, being married to a psychology major!). I look forward to your further sharing with us. However I would just like to give a word of caution about trying to rationalize the teachings with another discipline or body of knowledge. I'm sure that someone interested in, say, medicine, law, physics or business, could likewise draw parallels with the teachings, and restate the hypotheses postulated in those disciplines in terms of the teachings. But I think it's undeniable that enlightenment can be attained without a knowledge of any other discipline (since the teachings are complete within themselves). So while different individuals may find knowledge gained from other sources useful in their study of teachings, it could never be said that that knowledge was a prerequisite for enlightenment. <> It is tempting to regard dependent origination as a hypothesis that can be tested against or applied to different scenarios. However, I think this misses the point somewhat. It is true, as you suggest, that a firm intellectual understanding of dependent origination is helpful to one's development of insight. But there may be a danger in taking dependent origination and applying it elsewhere, in that if our grasp of it is merely at the intellectual level (and even then, shaky ;-)), we will be applying a concept that is tainted with our ignorance and misconceptions about the true nature of things. This cannot bring any useful outcome, and may only serve to reinforce that ignorance and misconceptions. To my reading of the teachings, the 'work' to be done is to better understand as it truly is the presently arising reality, from which will gradually emerge a clearer understanding of these deeper aspects of the teachings. (I see a similar danger as regards the characteristics of impermanence, unsatisfactoriness or non self. Rather than trying to see them in things/in our life, they should be regarded as attributes that will emerge as an outcome of the development of insight into basic phenomena (dhammas), as described in the Satipatthana Sutta.) <> Well, I'm not saying this is wrong, but it's not what I thought I was saying! I simply meant to say that the dhammas of the first 3 foundations are all mentioned twice, because the fourth catches everything. I am not aware of anything in the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta that indicates any difference is intended between, say, feeling as an object of satipatthana under the second foundation and feeling as an object under the fourth foundation (although I remember seeing someting in the Visuddhimagga that seems to suggest otherwise). Thanks again for your extensive comments. Jon 17146 From: Kom Tukovinit Date: Sat Nov 23, 2002 11:58pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Dear Robert M, This post is excellent. You definitely motivated me to get out all the digits for counting. BTW, do you have some kind of class notes related to Dependent Origination with the explanation of the Abhidhamma? If you have one, it would be great. Khun O. (a lurking DSG person) is always interested in hearing about this topics... kom > -----Original Message----- > From: robmoult [mailto:rob.moult@j...] > Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2002 7:44 AM > Subject: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) > > > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" > wrote: > > Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? > > The definition of "sankhara" in Nyanatiloka's > "Manual of Buddhist > Terms and Doctrines" starts, "This term has, > according to its > context, different shades of meaning, which > should be carefully > distinguished...." It then proceeds to give > multiple definitions. 17147 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas James --- James wrote: > ... ... > "…But its > biggest fault, in my estimation, is the assertion of 'Rupa', or > matter, and how knowledge of such will lead to insight. This goes > contrary to what the Buddha taught. The Buddha taught that it is > from the mind that we create our world and it is through control and > taming of the mind that we will find liberation. Knowing the > various 'dhammas' of matter has little to do with that. Basically, > as the Buddha said, it is all Nama. Anything other than that is > purely speculative and doesn't lead to liberation…" ... > Metta, James > > Ps. obviously, in this group that is very Abhidhamma oriented, I > will respond to the postings of the children but not much more. My > other posts are being ignored anyway- but those intoxicated > with `Rupa'. An interesting hypothesis! Just to clarify, are you suggesting that the Buddha didn't teach rupas as forming part of 'the world' as we know it, or that he didn't teach insight of rupas as necessary for enlightenment? Jon (intoxicated, but prepared to listen) 17148 From: nidive Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:25am Subject: Re: Fear of Rupas Hi James, You are right. I didn't comtemplate about rupas inside of the body. It's the contemplation of rupas outside of the body that brings that feeling of fear. This fear doesn't arise so 'naturally' that it makes everyday living uncomfortable. It's only when the mind starts contemplating about impermanence of rupas, then that fear arises. When that fear arises, a sense that rupas are 'dangerous', 'trickery', 'unreal without substance' arises. If I don't contemplate, that 'comfort zone' is still there. Nevertheless, the knowledge of rupas as 'dangerous', as 'trickery', as 'unreal without substance', is still etched in the mind. 17149 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 3:09am Subject: Hi Everyone Dear Everybody, Hi! My name is Sandy Lee and I'm 10 years old. I come from Hong Kong, but my mum is malaysian and my dad's from Hong Kong. My first language is Chinese then English. I disagree with the terrorist's attack especially and hope it can come to peace. I'm also sad about Jan's teacher, Mr Wash-till too, and hope Jan can see him again in his future. Life and death-What happens after death? Is there life after death? Does the spirit live on? Will the spirit reincarnate to another form of life? Would we be able to recognise the people who reincarnated to another form? What do Buddhists believe? Do Buddists pray all the tme? I hope to hear from you soon. Sandy 17150 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 3:12am Subject: A Letter For Charles Dear Charles, Hi I'm Janet, I have read your letter. I think your letter is good but a bit long. I go to Marymount Primary School. I'm 8 years old. I was born in Hong Kong. You speak French, don't you? My brother is called Philip. He goes to Hong Kong International School. It's really sad for Jan about the dead. I think it is good for not cutting the trees because we need alot of fresh air to breathe. Do you know about Buddhist? Please write to me. Good Luck, Janet Chui 17152 From: Star Kid Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 3:16am Subject: About Me And My Thoughts Dear Robert, I hope your children learn English fast because it has a lot of grammer and learn it well because my sister took the test for a good school in England and she only just past. How old are your two children? What Boarding School do yo want them to go to? What do your children think about Buddhism and do they like it? From Charles C.B (C.B. is my signature) 17153 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 4:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James --- James wrote: > Jon, ... > I thought that that is what you meant by wholesome and unwholesome, > but I was hoping for a more `nibbana based' and `non-nibbana based' > type of definition. I think I know what you mean, but I believe it would not be correct to define kusala/akusala in terms of leading to/not leading to nibbana. Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the Buddha's teachings. Jon 17154 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 5:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Larry You ask: <> Well, first, I would need to go back to the starting point, which was: <> My version would be: "Anupassana" = "seeing (directly)". So, the questions become: Q1. What is to be seen? A1. Any presently arising reality (i.e., any of the dhammas covered in the 4 foundations/arousings). Q2. How does this seeing occur? A2. Like any other form of kusala, it can only occur if the right conditions for its arising having been developed. Q3. How does one know if awareness is being developed? A3. By knowing as much as possible about it, its objects, its function and so on, so that it can be recognized; and by seeing over time that there is a better understanding of the realities at A1 and their characteristics. Jon (trying to keep it simple) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Let's see how long it takes to transform a simple proposition into > a > thousand knots. Here are your questions and my best guesses: > > Larry: Hi Jon, I think you are making this too difficult. What to > do is > anupassana. > "Anupassana" = "look at". So, look at something. > > Jon: Sounds simple, I agree. But I think there are one or two > things > further you need to explain. For example: > > 1. What is it that is looked at? > > L: Already a problem. I see 2 choices: 1) Since you are obviously a > keen > witted theoretical type you should practice dhammanupassana and > look at > dhammas. 2) or you could look at any of the 4 'foundations' > objects. > > 2. How is the looking done? Is it like normal looking, that is, > deliberate and directed? > > L: Look with energy, clear comprehension, and mindfulness. (I'm > still > working out what this means.) > > 3. I assume this particular kind of looking at would have to be > wholesome/kusala. How is this achieved; how do we know if the > looking is > the kusala kind, and not the akusala kind? > > L: This is a really good question. How do we recognize sati > sampajanna? > I don't have a ready answer but I am conducting research as we > speak. > > How would you answer these questions? > > Larry 17155 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 6:57am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hello Robert and all, Thank you, Robert, for responding. I am going to write some thoughts down. 1. Dependent origination represents a pattern. 2. The following sequence of numbers also represents a pattern. 4 2 8 5 7 1 4 2 8 5 7 1 4 2 8 5 7 1 4 2 8 5 7 1 .... What is the number that comes after 1? My question "why and how does sankhara condition consciousness?" is like asking "why and how the number 4 comes after the number 1?" when told that 4 comes after 1 without seeing the pattern directly in the number sequence myself. Seeing the pattern is through observation and inductive reasoning. Seeing the pattern of Dependent Origination is required a mind that is well concentrated. Have a good day, Victor PS. For those who are interested to know how I got the sequence of numbers above, try divide 3 by 7 with a calculator or by hand. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > > Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness? > > The definition of "sankhara" in Nyanatiloka's "Manual of Buddhist > Terms and Doctrines" starts, "This term has, according to its > context, different shades of meaning, which should be carefully > distinguished...." It then proceeds to give multiple definitions. > > You are probably familiar with the term "sankhara" as applied as one > of the five aggregates. In this case, it means all of the cetasikas > minus feeling and perception. > > The definition of "sankhara" when used as part of dependent > origination is quite different. In dependent origination, "sankhara" > is the 29 rebirth-producing cetana which fall into three classes: > - Formations of merit (punnabhisankhara): cetana in the 8 maha > kusala cittas and cetana in the 5 rupavacara cittas > - Formations of demerit (apunnabhisankhara): cetana in the 12 > akusala cittas > - Formations of the imperturbable (anenjabhisankhara): cetana in the > 4 arupavacara cittas > > In short, sankhara represents the 29 types of kamma (kamma = cetana) > associated with the 17 lokiya kusala cittas and the 12 akusala > cittas. > > Just as sankhara has a unique definition when used as part of > dependent origination, so too does consciousness (vinnana) have a > unique definition when used as part of dependent origination. As > part of dependent orgination, consciousness means the 32 lokiya > vipaka cittas. > > You have probably seen the diagram of dependent origination which > shows sankhara as the last of the "past period (kala)" and vinnana > as the first of the "present period". Most of the focus when > describing the link between sankhara and vinnana is on how at the > time of rebirth (patisandhi-kala), the 11 akusala cetanas (excluding > uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanas (excluding the two > abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of the 19 rebirth > consciousnesses. However, dependent origination does not have to > extend over three lives and during a lifetime (pavatti-kala) the 12 > akusala cetanas (including uddhacca-cetana) and the 17 lokiya kusala > cetanas (excluding the two abhinna-cetanas) condition the arising of > vipaka cittas which arise in the thought process as follows: > - Formations of merit: 8 mahakusala cetanas and 5 rupavacara cetanas > condition the arising of 8 kusala vipaka cittas (5 sense > consciousness, receiving, 2 investigating), 8 mahakusala vipaka > cittas (here the mahakusala vipaka cittas play a role of > registration cittas, not patisandhi cittas) and 5 rupavacara vipaka > cittas > - Formations of demerit: 12 akusala cetanas condition the arising of > 7 akusala vipaka cittas (5 sense consciousness, receiving, > investigating) > - Formations of the imperturbable: 4 arupavacara cetanas condition > the arising of 4 arupavacara vipaka cittas > > All of the conditioning between sankhara and vinnana is according to > asychronous kamma condition and natural decisive support condition > > In simple words, the second link in dependent origination tells us > that kamma conditions vipaka; it is kamma that conditions our > rebirth citta (which is vipaka) and it is kamma that conditions our > sense door consciousness, receiving, investigating and registration > cittas. Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our > current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our > current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free will?") > and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. > > Victor, does this help? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 17156 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:05am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) > Seeing the pattern of Dependent Origination is required a mind that > is well concentrated. Seeing the pattern of Dependent Origination requirs a mind that is well concentrated. 17157 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > James > An interesting hypothesis! Just to clarify, are you suggesting that > the Buddha didn't teach rupas as forming part of 'the world' as we > know it, or that he didn't teach insight of rupas as necessary for > enlightenment? > > Jon > (intoxicated, but prepared to listen) Jon, First, I apologize for the `intoxicated with rupa' comment. I didn't mean it as insulting…just an interesting phrase. Now, allow me to clarify my position. By all acceptable historical scholarship, it should be accepted that the Lord Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma Pitaka. It wasn't recited at the First Council, or the Second Council, it was recited until the Third Council-almost 300 years after the Buddha died. Considering that human life spans run 70 to 80 years, the Abhidhamma was composed by `Third Generation' bhikkhus. My hypothesis is that it was probably composed in reaction to the schisms within the Sangha that originated at the Second Council. Those opposed to the rigidity of the Suttas and Vinaya broke away and started to create their own teachings, which had been supposedly `hidden until the time was right' (Later becoming Mahayana Buddhism); so why couldn't those who supported the suttas and Vinaya do the same? Why couldn't they create their own teachings which had been `taught from a Heaven Realm' that further supported the rigidity of the suttas and Vinaya? Get it? Fight fire with fire. This is speculative on my part, but it would logically explain the origination and purpose of the Abhidhamma. One thing is certain to me, however, the Lord Buddha didn't teach it. It's position of Rupa/Nama and the various `dhammas classifications' are not found in the Sutta Pitaka. The Buddha taught that it is worthwhile to observe the Four Great Elements in the material world so that the bhikkhu could more readily see them in the body. In the Sutta Pitaka the Buddha doesn't use any phrases like `Color Rupa, Eye Consciousness, Sound Rupa, Ear Consciousness, etc.' He teaches about the four elements which one can experience in the body with ONE Consciousness that discerns differences, and is itself changing. He didn't expound on rupa outside of the body because, I would think, knowledge of such doesn't lead to insight. He taught dukkha and anatta in terms of human perception/existence, not in terms of inanimate objects. He wasn't trying to be a scientist per se; he only spoke of those things leading to enlightenment. Frankly, I don't think that most of those who practice meditation and mindfulness are really doing what the Abhidhamma suggests, even if they want to. They are not viewing the world as broken up into a lot of various dhammas. They may think they are, but it is unlikely that they really are. When you really do contemplate the transient nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally arises. I have felt this again and again. Why? Because what that person is doing is forcing the mind to run contrary to its natural functioning. The purpose of the mind's consciousness is to put sensory input together into a coherent whole, forcing the mind to separate its 'wholistic view of the world' will, in essence, `break down' the purpose of the mind. That is a bad thing and why fear arises. The Buddha taught that the processes of the mind shouldn't be `reversed' or `halted'; they should be `transcended'. And seeing their `unsatisfactory' nature will allow one to transcend them. Tampering with the natural functioning of the mind is not a good idea, and it very dangerous in my opinion. I hope this post answers your questions. These are my opinions and no one has to agree. Everyone should decide for themselves after careful and unbiased consideration...just as I believe I have done. Metta, James 17158 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 9:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas Hi James and all, I don't think the Buddha taught Abhidhamma as well. I see much of Abhidhamma Pitaka as metaphyscial work of later composition. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > James > > An interesting hypothesis! Just to clarify, are you suggesting > that > > the Buddha didn't teach rupas as forming part of 'the world' as we > > know it, or that he didn't teach insight of rupas as necessary for > > enlightenment? > > > > Jon > > (intoxicated, but prepared to listen) > > Jon, > > First, I apologize for the `intoxicated with rupa' comment. I > didn't mean it as insulting…just an interesting phrase. > Now, allow me to clarify my position. > > By all acceptable historical scholarship, it should be accepted that > the Lord Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma Pitaka. It wasn't > recited at the First Council, or the Second Council, it was recited > until the Third Council-almost 300 years after the Buddha died. > Considering that human life spans run 70 to 80 years, the Abhidhamma > was composed by `Third Generation' bhikkhus. My hypothesis is that > it was probably composed in reaction to the schisms within the > Sangha that originated at the Second Council. Those opposed to the > rigidity of the Suttas and Vinaya broke away and started to create > their own teachings, which had been supposedly `hidden until the > time was right' (Later becoming Mahayana Buddhism); so why couldn't > those who supported the suttas and Vinaya do the same? Why couldn't > they create their own teachings which had been `taught from a Heaven > Realm' that further supported the rigidity of the suttas and > Vinaya? Get it? Fight fire with fire. This is speculative on my > part, but it would logically explain the origination and purpose of > the Abhidhamma. One thing is certain to me, however, the Lord > Buddha didn't teach it. > > It's position of Rupa/Nama and the various `dhammas classifications' > are not found in the Sutta Pitaka. The Buddha taught that it is > worthwhile to observe the Four Great Elements in the material world > so that the bhikkhu could more readily see them in the body. In the > Sutta Pitaka the Buddha doesn't use any phrases like `Color Rupa, > Eye Consciousness, Sound Rupa, Ear Consciousness, etc.' He teaches > about the four elements which one can experience in the body with > ONE Consciousness that discerns differences, and is itself > changing. He didn't expound on rupa outside of the body because, I > would think, knowledge of such doesn't lead to insight. He taught > dukkha and anatta in terms of human perception/existence, not in > terms of inanimate objects. He wasn't trying to be a scientist per > se; he only spoke of those things leading to enlightenment. > > Frankly, I don't think that most of those who practice meditation > and mindfulness are really doing what the Abhidhamma suggests, even > if they want to. They are not viewing the world as broken up into a > lot of various dhammas. They may think they are, but it is unlikely > that they really are. When you really do contemplate the transient > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally > arises. I have felt this again and again. Why? Because what that > person is doing is forcing the mind to run contrary to its natural > functioning. The purpose of the mind's consciousness is to put > sensory input together into a coherent whole, forcing the mind to > separate its 'wholistic view of the world' will, in essence, `break > down' the purpose of the mind. That is a bad thing and why fear > arises. The Buddha taught that the processes of the mind shouldn't > be `reversed' or `halted'; they should be `transcended'. And seeing > their `unsatisfactory' nature will allow one to transcend them. > Tampering with the natural functioning of the mind is not a good > idea, and it very dangerous in my opinion. > > I hope this post answers your questions. These are my opinions and > no one has to agree. Everyone should decide for themselves after > careful and unbiased consideration...just as I believe I have done. > > Metta, James 17159 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:10am Subject: pali question Hi all, Does anyone have access to either "Sumangala-Vilasini" or "Samoha-Vinodani"? I'm looking for a description of the fourfold sampajanna. Ven. Nyanaponika Thera gives it in "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation" and I'm guessing he got it from one of these sources. Here's the entry from the PTS online dict.: Sampajanna (p. 690) (nt.) [fr. sampajana, i. e. *sampajanya] attention, consideration, discrimination, comprehension, circumspection A I.13 sq.; II.93; III.307; IV.320; V.98 sq.; S III.169; D III.213 (sati+samp. opp. to muttha--sacca+ asampajanna), 273. Description of it in detail at DA I.183 sq.=VbhA 347 sq., where given as fourfold, viz. satthaka°, sappaya°, gocara°, asammoha°, with examples. Often combined with sati, with which almost synonymous, e. g. at D I.63; A I.43; II.44 sq.; V.115, 118. L: DA = Sumangala-Vilasini, VibhA = Samoha-Vinodani. Would these be parts of the commentaries to Diggha Nikaya and Vibhanga? thanks, Larry 17160 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Jon, I agree. Now what?????? Larry 17161 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:29pm Subject: Re: [dsg] pali question Hi again, I found the explanation I was looking for in the commentary we have. It's in the section on the 4 kinds of clear comprehension under contemplation of the body. Larry 17162 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 1:57pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. > > That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and > the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the > Buddha's teachings. > > Jon Jon, What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? What are you saying? The absence of Dana (generosity), Sila (moral conduct), and Samantha (calmness) IS SAMSARA! That is where we all naturally reside, because of the first Noble Truth…absent of these qualities. And like water that naturally runs downhill, we all naturally run toward the lowest state possible…such as that found in a sewer. And you are saying that a life in the sewer is the Buddhist life? Huh? I didn't respond to this post right away today because I wanted to ponder it. I can tell that you are very insightful and intelligent and I was confused. I did some errands, came back and read it… cleaned my bathroom, came back and read it…and worked on some computer graphics, came back and read it, and each time I read it, I was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I think it is time for me to being my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of Buddhism. That is only part of the picture…it is the cause but not the solution. This is going to sound radical but I believe the Abhidhamma is a step backwards from the teachings of the Buddha. The Abhidhamma is very Vedic in philosophy and outlook. Before the Buddha, Brahmins believed that wisdom could be 'figured out' by viewing the world and the body with intellect. The Buddha transcended that pitfall… but many today still don't seem to want to. Why? Because Buddhism, as taught by Lord Buddha, requires a 'Leap of Faith.' Intellectuals don't want to do that. They believe that dharma isn't like other religions, it must be logical and understandable with the powers of the mind alone. But it isn't. However, I digress. Allow me to explain in an intellectual way. The path to Nibbana is the Eightfold Path. They are: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html Now, think to yourself, do these things seem boring, uninspired, and old fashioned? Do they seem confining and unintellectual? If so, I can smell the strong influence of the Abhidhamma. These things are it, the end, the whole enchilada…there is nothing higher. So, what is it that allows one to practice Right this and Right that, etc., as opposed to Wrong this and Wrong that, etc.? Answer: DANA, SILA, and SAMANTHA!! If you deny these things, you deny Buddhism. Plain and simple. Metta, James 17163 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 0:37pm Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Hello James, (A strange day when I'm posting on dsg to defend abhidhamma ;-) There's a misunderstanding here. "Bhikkhus, know kamma, know the cause of kamma, know the variations of kamma, know the results of kamma, know the cessation of kamma and know the way leading to the cessation of kamma ... Bhikkhus, intention, I say, is kamma. A person intends before acting through body, speech or mind. What is the cause of kamma? Sense contact is the cause of kamma. What are the variations of kamma? They are, the kamma which results in birth in hell, the kamma which results in birth in the animal world, the kamma which results in birth in the realm of hungry ghosts, the kamma which results in birth in the human realm, and the kamma which results in birth in the heaven realms. These are known as the variations of kamma. What are the results of kamma? I teach three kinds of kamma-result. They are, results in the present time, results in the next life, or results in a future life. These I call the results of kamma. What is the cessation of kamma? With the cessation of contact, kamma ceases. This very Noble Eightfold Path is the way leading to the cessation of kamma. That is, Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right concentration." A.III.415 (A.22/334/464) "Most people are interested only in black kamma and white kamma, bad kamma and good kamma. They take no interest in this third kind of kamma which is neither black nor white, neither bad nor good, which consists in complete freedom from selfhood and leads to the attainment of Nibbana. It wipes out every kind of bad and good kamma. People don't understand the method for wiping out kamma completely. They don't know that the way to put an end to all kamma is through this special kind of kamma, which consists in applying the Buddha's method. That method is none other than the Noble Eightfold Path. " TWO KINDS OF LANGUAGE : Everyday Language & Dhamma Language Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu metta, stephen >> Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only >> insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The >> develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and >> of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. >> >> That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and >> the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the >> Buddha's teachings. >> >> Jon >Jon, >What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? >What are you saying? BTW, Jon, the desire to escape from existence is samsara. Nibbana is awareness, here and now. Well, I think we disagree ;-) 17164 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 6:08pm Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Stephen, What are you driving at? Where is the misunderstanding? You lost me. :-( Metta, James 17165 From: Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 1:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello James, Jon noted that kusala actions (dana, sila, samatha, in his example) contribute to continuation in samsara. They do, being 'white' kamma; they lead (traditionally) to rebirth in deva realms, and such. They lead to the higher reaches of samsara, but samsara nonetheless. I believe you were disputing this. Thus the two quotes. Perhaps I misunderstood your position. metta, stephen BTW, the old question remains open: abhidhamma recognizes both black and white kamma, and mixed, but what about the kamma that ends kamma? What is its classification? 17166 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 7:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., oreznoone@a... wrote: > BTW, the old question remains open: abhidhamma recognizes both black and > white kamma, and mixed, but what about the kamma that ends kamma? What is its > classification? ___________ Dear Stephen, Have you asked this question before, I don't recall? 1. "Black and white kamma": The expositor PTS (translator :pe maung tin). P58. Triplets in the Matika "'leading to accumulation' are those states which go about severally arranging births and deaths in a round of of destiny like a bricklayer who arranges bricks, layer by layer in a wall." "..leading to accumulation are those causes which by being accomplished go to, or lead a man, in whom they arise, to that round of rebirth" It then defines these causes as "moral or immoral states". i.e akusala AND kusala. 2: "the kamma that ends kamma": The start of the next chapter is where it discusses the eight-fold path. The Discourse on lokuttara (transcendental). "He cultivates the Jhana means that he evolves, produces the ecstatic jhana of one momentary flash of consciousness. because it goes forth from the world, from the round of rebirths, this is jhana called going out...This is not like that which is known as 'leading to accumulation' which heaps up and increases rebirths by the moral(kusala) consciousness of the three planes. This can be compared with the following sutta in the Anguttara nikaya: [AN IV.232] The Kamma These four types of kamma have been understood, realized, & made known by me. Which four? There is kamma that is black with black result; kamma that is white with white result; kamma that is black & white with black & white result; and kamma that is neither black nor white with neither black nor white result, leading to the ending of kamma. And what is kamma that is black with black result? There is the case where a certain person fabricates an injurious bodily fabrication... an injurious verbal fabrication... an injurious mental fabrication... He rearises in an injurious world where he is touched by injurious contacts... He experiences feelings that are exclusively painful, like those of the beings in hell. This is called kamma that is black with black result. And what is kamma that is white with white result? There is the case where a certain person fabricates an uninjurious bodily fabrication... an uninjurious verbal fabrication... an uninjurious mental fabrication... He rearises in an uninjurious world where he is touched by uninjurious contacts... He experiences feelings that are exclusively pleasant, like those of the Ever-radiant Devas. This is called kamma that is white with white result. And what is kamma that is black & white with black & white result? There is the case where a certain person fabricates a bodily fabrication that is injurious & uninjurious... a verbal fabrication that is injurious & uninjurious... a mental fabrication that is injurious & uninjurious... He rearises in an injurious & uninjurious world where he is touched by injurious & uninjurious contacts... He experiences injurious & uninjurious feelings, pleasure mingled with pain, like those of human beings, some devas, and some beings in the lower realms. This is called kamma that is black & white with black & white result. And what is kamma that is neither black nor white with neither black nor white result, leading to the ending of kamma? The intention right there to abandon this kamma that is black with black result, the intention right there to abandon this kamma that is white with white result, the intention right there to abandon this kamma that is black & white with black & white result. This is called kamma that is neither black nor white with neither black nor white result, leading to the ending of kamma. 17167 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > The purpose of the mind's consciousness is to put > sensory input together into a coherent whole, forcing the mind to > separate its 'wholistic view of the world' will, in essence, `break > down' the purpose of the mind. That is a bad thing and why fear > arises. The Buddha taught that the processes of the mind shouldn't > be `reversed' or `halted'; they should be `transcended'. And seeing > their `unsatisfactory' nature will allow one to transcend them. > Tampering with the natural functioning of the mind is not a good > idea, and it very dangerous in my opinion. ______________ Dear James, Where have you read in the Abhidhamma or on this list that it is advised to 'tamper with the natural functioning of the mind', or to 'force the mind' to do anything. As I read the Abhidhamma it is about understanding mind and matter as they arise naturally here and now; and any forcing is immediately the wrong path. --- _________ James: When you really do contemplate the transient > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally > arises. I have felt this again and again. Why? Because what that > person is doing is forcing the mind to run contrary to its natural > functioning. __________ I think you are using 'contemplation' to mean thinking - in words- about rupas outside the body. Thinking can think about any subject and some subjects may condition fear sometimes. For example marananusati - contemplation of death- is recommended at all times and places by the Buddha - yet sometimes, if contemplated wrongly, may produce fear. But all fear is rooted in self clinging. Selfview is the most dangerous because it supports other defilements and wrongviews. Hence to be genuinely successful and calming and productive of energy death contemplation should go together with the understanding of anatta. And the understanding of anatta relies on direct insight into nama and rupa (mind and matter). Thinking about rupas inside or outside the body is only that: thinking, conceptualising. It is not the same as direct insight. However, insight can understand the thinking process while it is happening. I would suggest that it is useful and possible to gradually discern the difference between concept and reality. Then one won't be disturbed much by thinking because the unreality of concepts will be known. It is like finding out the majicians tricks. Prior to finding out, as young boys, we might have been entranced and mystifed by the show. After uncovering them we may still enjoy the show but in a different way- no longer so excited or deluded by it. In the same way the mind continues its complex process exactly as before but the degree of delusion about it continues to be lessened. I think no forcing on this path- it is about understanding not doing. Robert 17168 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 8:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > This is speculative on my > part, but it would logically explain the origination and purpose of > the Abhidhamma. One thing is certain to me, however, the Lord > Buddha didn't teach it. > It's position of Rupa/Nama and the various `dhammas classifications' are not found in the Sutta Pitaka. The Buddha taught that it is > worthwhile to observe the Four Great Elements in the material world > so that the bhikkhu could more readily see them in the body. In the Sutta Pitaka the Buddha doesn't use any phrases like `Color Rupa, > Eye Consciousness, Sound Rupa, Ear Consciousness, etc.' _____________ Dear James, I quote just one sutta. Try not to be confused by the different terms the translators use for the same pali words. The original pali in the Abhidhamma and suttas are usually the same. .Majjhima Nikaya below: http://www.vipassana.info/037-culatanhasankhaya-sutta-e1.htm "Bhikkhus, founded on whatever, consciousness arises, it is reckoned on that. On account of eye and forms arises consciousness, it's reckoned eye consciousness. On account of ear and sounds arises consciousness, it's reckoned ear consciousness. On account of nose and smells arises consciousness, it's reckoned nose consciousness. On account of tongue and tastes arises consciousness, it's reckoned tongue consciousness.On account of body and touches arises consciousness, it's reckoned body consciousness. " ________ From another post: James;"I was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I think it is time for me to begin my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' worldwide campaign." It's always nice to have a project to work on - I guess worldwide campaigns must really bring up energy. I hope the list can help out with occasional corrections so that your campaign is properly informed. Robert 17169 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 9:56pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., oreznoone@a... wrote: > Hello James, > Jon noted that kusala actions (dana, sila, samatha, in his example) > contribute to continuation in samsara. They do, being 'white' kamma; they > lead (traditionally) to rebirth in deva realms, and such. They lead to the > higher reaches of samsara, but samsara nonetheless. I believe you were > disputing this. Thus the two quotes. Perhaps I misunderstood your position. > metta, stephen > BTW, the old question remains open: abhidhamma recognizes both black and > white kamma, and mixed, but what about the kamma that ends kamma? What is its > classification? Stephen, Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I agree with you that dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate goal, will lead to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe you are jumping to a false conclusion if you say that they should not be practiced at all. Practice of dana, sila, and Samantha will lead to the state where such practice is abandoned. When one has experienced the Four Jhanas and destroyed the cankers, then the mundane practices of dana, sila, and Samantha are natural and transcendent. The difference here is between the mundane Eightfold Path and the transcendent Eightfold Path. One must start with the mundane and then lead to the transcendent. The white and black and mixed kamma sutta is confusing to me (Which is understandable since the Canon states that kamma, like the mind of a Buddha, is unfathomable. And yet the Buddha explains different types of kamma as white/black/mixed/and neither. Or did he? Hmmm… rather odd.). I prefer the Cula-dhammasamadana Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn045.html where the Buddha described what you are referring to in terms of different practices: "Monks, there are these four ways of taking on practices. Which four? There is the taking on of a practice that is pleasant in the present but yields pain in the future. There is the taking on of a practice that is painful in the present and yields pain in the future. There is the taking on of a practice that is painful in the present but yields pleasure in the future. There is the taking on of a practice that is pleasant in the present and yields pleasure in the future." The first is the practice of disregarding things like dana, sila, and Samantha, which is a lot of fun but will lead to rebirth in animal or hell realms. The second is the practice of extreme austerities which are painful which will also lead to rebirth in animal or hell realms. The fourth is the practice of dana, sila, etc. for its own sake, which is painful, and will lead to rebirth in the heaven realms. And the final is the practice of transcendent dana, sila, etc., which leads to the four jhanas, which is pleasurable, and leads to nibanna and parinibbana. The differences are subtle, but important. One must take baby steps before running a marathon. Metta, James 17170 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 9:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > > Although all kusala is support for the development of insight, only > > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The > > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and > > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence. > > > > That's why the emphasis on this list tends to be on satipatthana and > > the other aspects of the teachings that are the essence of the > > Buddha's teachings. > > > > Jon > > Jon, > > What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? > What are you saying? The absence of Dana (generosity), Sila (moral > conduct), and Samantha (calmness) IS SAMSARA! That is where we all > naturally reside, because of the first Noble Truth…absent of these > qualities. And like water that naturally runs downhill, we all > naturally run toward the lowest state possible…such as that found in > a sewer. And you are saying that a life in the sewer is the Buddhist > life? Huh? > > I didn't respond to this post right away today because I wanted to > ponder it. I can tell that you are very insightful and intelligent > and I was confused. I did some errands, came back and read it… > cleaned my bathroom, came back and read it…and worked on some > computer graphics, came back and read it, and each time I read it, I > was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I > think it is time for me to being my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' > worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance > of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. > > First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of > Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who > strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They > think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, > that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of > Buddhism. That is only part of the picture…it is the cause but not > the solution. This is going to sound radical but I believe the > Abhidhamma is a step backwards from the teachings of the Buddha. The > Abhidhamma is very Vedic in philosophy and outlook. Before the > Buddha, Brahmins believed that wisdom could be 'figured out' by > viewing the world and the body with intellect. The Buddha > transcended that pitfall… but many today still don't seem to want > to. Why? Because Buddhism, as taught by Lord Buddha, requires > a 'Leap of Faith.' Intellectuals don't want to do that. They > believe that dharma isn't like other religions, it must be logical > and understandable with the powers of the mind alone. But it isn't. > > However, I digress. Allow me to explain in an intellectual way. The > path to Nibbana is the Eightfold Path. They are: Right View, Right > Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right > Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html Now, think > to yourself, do these things seem boring, uninspired, and old > fashioned? Do they seem confining and unintellectual? If so, I can > smell the strong influence of the Abhidhamma. These things are it, > the end, the whole enchilada…there is nothing higher. So, what is it > that allows one to practice Right this and Right that, etc., as > opposed to Wrong this and Wrong that, etc.? Answer: DANA, SILA, and > SAMANTHA!! If you deny these things, you deny Buddhism. Plain and > simple. > > Metta, James Jon, I must apologize for the tone of this post. Re-reading it, is see that it is far too didactic and preachy. I tend to get overly passionate about dharma at times. I stick by the content of the post, but the delivery is 'over the top'. Sorry. Metta, James 17171 From: James Date: Sun Nov 24, 2002 10:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Stephen, > > Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I agree with you that > dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate goal, will lead > to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe you are jumping to a > false conclusion if you say that they should not be practiced at > all. Practice of dana, sila, and Samantha I'm not sure who this 'Samantha' girl is, but I just can't get her off my mind! :-) I meant 'samatha'. The Pali feature of my 'Spell Check' is broken I think. :-) 17172 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:02am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > > Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I agree with you that > dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate goal, will lead > to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe you are jumping to a > false conclusion if you say that they should not be practiced at > all. ________ Dear James, I looked over the posts Stephen and Jon gave. I didn't see any indication that they had 'jumped to the conclusion that dana, sila and samatha' should not be practiced'? Jon said "athough all kusala is support for the development of insight, only > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from existence. The > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila and samatha), in and > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the round of existence."" . In fact Jon said they support insight: how do you then figure that he (or stephen) is concluding that dana, sila and samatha should not be practised? Robert 17173 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] temperaments Larry --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Jon, > > I agree. Now what?????? > > Larry This is an entirely novel situation for which there is no established precedent. What do you suggest? Jon 17174 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 4:07am Subject: The Abhidhamma forgets the 4 noble truths?: "what is awareness. In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: , I > was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I > think it is time for me to begin my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' > worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance > of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. > > First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of > Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who > strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They > think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, > that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of > Buddhism. _______________________- Dear James, Just a couple of points that I hope help ensure your campaign doesn't misrepresent the Abhidhamma. If you take up the study of the Abhidhamma oneday you will see that it was recorded in seven sections. The second of these is called the Vibhanga and the Pali text society has a very good translation by a Burmese monk. In the Vibhanga one section is called Classification of the [four] Noble Truths. Another section is called "Classification of Dependent Origination". As I understand it both these aspects are considered very important in Abhidhamma. In the Majjhima Nikaya http://www.vipassana.info/011-culasihanada-sutta-e1.htm "Bhikkhus, these four holdings[the grasping to sila and ritual practices, the grasping to wrong view, the garsping to self, the garsping to sense objects], from what do they originate, from what do they rise, from what do they come to birth, and with what do they develop. They originate from craving, rise from craving, come to birth from craving, and develop with craving. Bhikkhus, this craving, from what does it originate, from what does it rise, from what does it come to birth, and with what does it develop. ........p. Contact originates from the six spheres, rises from the six spheres, comes to birth from the six spheres and develops with the six spheres. Bhikkhus, these six spheres from what do they originate, from what do they rise, from what do they come to birth, and with what do they develop. ............... Bhikkhus, these determinations, from what do they originate, from what do they rise, from what do they come to birth and with what do they develop. Determinations originate from ignorance, rise from ignorance, come to birth from ignorance and develop with ignorance. Bhikkhus, when ignorance dispelled and turned out science arises, he does not hold to sensuality, does not hold to views, does not hold to virtues, and does not hold to the self view. Not holding is not worried, not worried, he by himself is extinguished: birth is destroyed, the holy life is lived, what should be done is done, there is nothing more to wish. "endquote Robert 17175 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James I may not have made myself clear. I was not denying the importance of developing wholesomeness of all kinds. I was pointing out that only insight, the form of wholesomeness that is unique to the Buddha's teachings, leads one out of the round of existence. Other forms of wholesomeness lead to other results such as rebirth in the higher higher realms. In other words, they lead to continued existence. I have not lost sight of the Four Noble Truths, particularly the Noble Eightfold Path. You might be interested in the sutta quoted below, which I give also to indicate that this issue is not just an Abhiddhamma point. In addition to Right View, the sutta gives a similar twofold description of Right Intention, Speech, Action and Livelihood. Jon Majjhima Nikaya, Mahacattarisaka Sutta 'The Great Forty' (M. 117) (Trans MLDB, Bhhikkhu Bodhi) 6. "And what, bhikkhus, is right view? Right view, I say, is twofold: there is right view that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening on the side of attachment; and there is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a factor of the path. --- James wrote: ... ... What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? What are you saying? The absence of Dana (generosity), Sila (moral conduct), and Samantha (calmness) IS SAMSARA! That is where we all naturally reside, because of the first Noble Truth…absent of these qualities. And like water that naturally runs downhill, we all naturally run toward the lowest state possible…such as that found in a sewer. And you are saying that a life in the sewer is the Buddhist life? Huh? I didn't respond to this post right away today because I wanted to ponder it. I can tell that you are very insightful and intelligent and I was confused. I did some errands, came back and read it… cleaned my bathroom, came back and read it…and worked on some computer graphics, came back and read it, and each time I read it, I was reminded again and again of how dangerous the Abhidhamma is. I think it is time for me to being my `Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' worldwide campaign. What you are proposing is a stance of 'convenience' not of 'dhamma'. First and foremost, this stance is contrary to the heart of Buddhism: The Four Noble Truths. I have noticed that those who strongly adhere to the Abhidhamma seem to have forgotten this. They think that the heart of Buddhism is `This/That Conditionality`. No, that is the Heart of Dependent Origination, that is not the Heart of Buddhism. That is only part of the picture…it is the cause but not the solution. This is going to sound radical but I believe the Abhidhamma is a step backwards from the teachings of the Buddha. The Abhidhamma is very Vedic in philosophy and outlook. Before the Buddha, Brahmins believed that wisdom could be 'figured out' by viewing the world and the body with intellect. The Buddha transcended that pitfall… but many today still don't seem to want to. Why? Because Buddhism, as taught by Lord Buddha, requires a 'Leap of Faith.' Intellectuals don't want to do that. They believe that dharma isn't like other religions, it must be logical and understandable with the powers of the mind alone. But it isn't. However, I digress. Allow me to explain in an intellectual way. The path to Nibbana is the Eightfold Path. They are: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html Now, think to yourself, do these things seem boring, uninspired, and old fashioned? Do they seem confining and unintellectual? If so, I can smell the strong influence of the Abhidhamma. These things are it, the end, the whole enchilada…there is nothing higher. So, what is it that allows one to practice Right this and Right that, etc., as opposed to Wrong this and Wrong that, etc.? Answer: DANA, SILA, and SAMANTHA!! If you deny these things, you deny Buddhism. Plain and simple. Metta, James 17176 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 6:26am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" > wrote: > > > > > > Okay, now I understand what you are saying. I > agree with you that > > dana, sila, and Samantha, practiced as the ultimate > goal, will lead > > to rebirth in heaven realms. However, I believe > you are jumping to a > > false conclusion if you say that they should not > be practiced at > > all. > ________ > Dear James, > I looked over the posts Stephen and Jon gave. I > didn't see any indication that they had 'jumped to > the conclusion that dana, sila and samatha' should > not be practiced'? Jon said "athough all kusala is > support for the development of insight, only > > insight itself leads to nibbana and escape from > existence. The > > develoment of other forms of kusala (dana, sila > and samatha), in and > > of themselves, do not; in fact, they add to the > round of existence."" . > In fact Jon said they support insight: how do you > then figure that he (or stephen) is concluding that > dana, sila and samatha should not be practised? > Robert Robert, Yea, I missed that 'in and of themselves', it was rather understated as an appositive in the sentence and probably should have been given more attention...since it makes a world of difference. Jon, I am learning, uses as few words as possible...which can lead one to wrong conclusions. I guess I am the one who jumped to the wrong conclusion! :-) Don't take my 'Just Say No to the Abhidhamma' campaign seriously. It is just a joke. If I publish a book, I will probably include my Internet writings about it, but that is hardly a national campaign. Metta, James 17177 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi, Victor - I returned last night from the ordination (I will give a brief report soon), and I'm plowing through a backlog of posts. In a message dated 11/22/02 1:26:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hello Robert and all, > > Thank you, Robert, for responding. Instead of asking why and how > does ignorance condition consciousness? My question should be: Why > and how does sankhara condition consciousness? > > To me the idea of "sankhara" is perhaps one of the most difficult to > comprehend. It's been translated as "mental formation". However, I > am not yet able to see the connection between sankhara and > consciousness. > > Have a good day, > Victor > ========================= I don't know whether or not I'm "Abhidammically correct" in this, but I think that a key way in which sankhara might be required for the arising of vi~n~nana is via *interest*. It seems to me that, in part, interest would direct the discernment of an object. 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) 17178 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 3:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, TG - In a message dated 11/22/02 9:27:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > I believe the Buddha said that only he could fully understand karma and that > > anyone else would go mad trying to figure it out. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha > ha > ha......... > > ======================== ;-))) 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) 17179 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:42am Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our > current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our > current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free will?") > and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. > > ++++++++++++++++++++ Dear RobM, Could you explain this more? I cannot see anywhere in the Paticcasamupada where there is a suggestion of freewill. Robert 17180 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kusala leading to samsara. Hi all, op 24-11-2002 22:57 schreef James op buddhatrue@y...: > > What!!?? The practice of Dana, Sila, and Samatha leads to Samsara? Nina: The Buddha encouraged us to perform all kinds of kusala, dana, sila, samatha, vipassana. The study of the Abhidhamma greatly helps us to perform kusala, and it helps us not to delude ourselves into taking for kusala what is akusala. Even the theory is so useful: what is lobha exactly, when can it occur? I quote from the chapter on The Perfection of Truthfulness’ in the series on the Perfections written by me: : When there is an opportunity for any kind of kusala, it is good not to let it go by. We are not going to think beforehand: does it lead to samsara or not? But we know that the development of understanding is most valuable, that it is understanding which conditions kusala to be pure kusala. Eventually satipatthana will lead to lokuttara panna, to breaking down those bricks of the wall of existence. But we are not so far yet. Just live with the moment: do any kind of kusala for which there is an opportunity, and sometimes there may be conditions for awareness of nama and rupa. Who could direct the cittas? They are gone immediately, before we can think of directing. Tomorrow Kom will turn off my mail, since I depart. Your discussion is interesting, Nina. 17181 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:13am Subject: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 1 Hi, all - I left Thursday from New York LaGuardia Airport for Greensboro, North Carolina to attend the ordination of Ven. Piyadhammo (a.k.a. David) and Ven. Dhammarato (a.k.a. Dhammarato ;-) The two monks-to-be picked me up at the Greensboro airport, and 30 minutes later we pulled into Wat Greensboro, a beautiful Wat located on 10 acres of lovely flora, trees, a large pond, many small animals, a main house, a meditation center, and several smaller buildings including a lovely pagoda which can be used as a kuti and which also serves as a repository for the bones of past supporters of the Wat. Before I say more, I would like to tell you about Phra David and Ven. Dhammarato. Phra David is a lovely, soft-spoken, self-effacing young man in his early forties, very serious about the monk's life, very hardworking, and very dedicated. Ven. Dhammarato, just as "outrageous" in person as on the internet, is - and he will kill me for this! ;-)) - a playful, sweetheart of a guy, filled with joy and exhuberance, the love of the Triple Gem and, particularly filled with great devotion to the Sangha. I would also like to comment on Ven. Yanatharo, who made the great expenditure of time, effort, and money to make the trip from Australia. Bhante Yanatharo is absolutely delightful! He is a devoted but devilishly ;-)) iconoclastic monk who is easy to talk with, great fun to be around, and filled with good humor. I want everyone to know what a limited vehicle the internet is in providing a clear picture of what people are like. These are all absolutely delightful, loving, and "fun" individuals, and it was a privilege for me to get to meet them face to face. The monks at Wat Greensboro are wonderful, joyful, generous and devoted people. They made me feel wonderfully and easily at home there. They are people of real substance who, it would seem, have "gone far". Truly impressive. I will give a follow-up post providing some details of my few days at the Wat and of the marvelous ordination, itself, that took place on the 23rd. 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) 17182 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: >> > James: When you really do contemplate the transient > > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension naturally > > arises. I have felt this again and again. >_______________________________________- Dear James, I add some more about this topic. What you said reminded me that in the early years of nuclear discoveries (before world war II) scientists had uncovered that matter (rupa) is almost all space, and changing so incredibly fast to boot. What had once seemed a solid wrold now seemed astonishly, inherently unstable. These discoveries were initially resisted by some: John Zeleny, Yale universities Chief Physicist, said " I feel that there is real world corresponding to our senses, I believe that Minneapolis is a real city and not simply a city of my dreams" referring to what quantum physics was telling them.(Daniel kelves 1987, The Physicists: the history of a scientific community in modern america cambridge ; harvard. uni. press,p168) This was in about 1930. Thus even such a great scientist as this couldn't accept what the evidence was showing. Of course after science incarnated their insights at Hiroshima such doubts stopped. These days scientists and even school children know very well that the earth, the universe, their bodies, are of such a nature but it doesn't reduce kilesa in any of them. Why? Because it still conceptual knowledge and only genuine panna, wisdom, can remove kilesa. Another example: I once taught an introductory course on Astronomy and some students( and me too) were a little boggled (not surprisingly) when we came to the descriptions of the size of the universe compared to the pinprick that is earth. Not to mention that it is flying through this vast open space at some fantastic speed. In the same way we can read the texts of the Abhidhamma and think about them and conceive and proliferate - and it can be done with akusala, either with dosa(aversion with unpleasant feeling) or with lobha (craving with pleasant or neutral feeling). So we have to learn how to approach the Abhidhamma wisely and patiently so that proper use is made of the wisdom therin. Robert 17183 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 0:58pm Subject: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi Howard and Victor, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > I don't know whether or not I'm "Abhidammically correct" in this, but > I think that a key way in which sankhara might be required for the arising of > vi~n~nana is via *interest*. It seems to me that, in part, interest would > direct the discernment of an object. I'm not sure about your interpretation, Howard. If I rephrase the terms "sankhara" and "vinnana" using the specific definitions from paticcasamuppada, Victor's question becomes: "How and why does kamma condition rebirth and vipaka cittas?" Personally, I draw an analogy to the law of conservation of energy. A citta that creates kamma (kusala or akusala) is active; it has energy (not to be confused with the cetasika viriya). When the citta falls away, what happens to that energy? It gets stored as potential energy (kammic potential). When other conditions are conducive, this potential energy has the ability to cause the arising of another citta. The citta that arises is a vipaka citta; maybe even a rebirth linking citta (a special type of vipaka citta). So what happens to all that accumulated kammic energy when the rupas that are my body "die"? The potential energy is still there. It doesn't disappear. Depending on conditions, this potential energy finds a new outlet (new existence). If I become an Arahant, my thought processes no longer create energy; kiriya cittas, which are not active, play the role of javana cittas in the Arahant thought process. Because an Arahant doesn't create kamma, he can escape samsara once he has used up past energy accumulated before he became an Arahant. Even the Buddha had to suffer sickness and pain which was the result of kammic actions performed before His enlightenment. Looking at it from another angle, my current situation is vipaka. Why and how has my current situation arisen? In fact, I am now sitting in a Singapore hotel room at 4:30am typing in a response to a question about kamma. What led to this condition: - I chose to come to Singapore to attend a meeting yesterday - I requested an early wake-up call this morning - I decided to check the most recent DSG postings - I selected your message to read - I have an interest in learning the Dhamma These are five of the uncountable number of active states that resulted in my current situation. Each of these active states arose at an earlier time. The origins of some of the above active states are quite mundane; I requested an early wake-up call this morning because I have an early flight to Hong Kong. The origin of some of the above active states starts one thinking; why am I drawn to the Dhamma (and Abhidhamma in particular)? I cannot find a suitable answer to why certain active states arose (i.e. why am I interested in the Dhamma, why are my kids gifted at music, etc.) if I limit my perspective to my current life. It seems perfectly natural to me that some of the conditioning (active states) occured before I was born. I studied the Dhamma in a previous life (active state) thereby conditioning a result in this life (i.e. an interest in the Dhamma). My kids applied themselves to music in a previous life (active states) thereby conditioning results in this life (musical "talent"). We have millions of thought processes each microsecond and each thought process has seven active (javana) cittas which create kamma. So many past active states. I can't even trace the mundane ones, let alone the deeper ones from previous lives. Therefore, I agree with the texts that say that only a Buddha can fully grasp the workings of kamma (I can't remember the reference). Does this help? Metta, Rob M :-) 17184 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 1:18pm Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) Hi Robert K, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > Everything that happens to us is a result of our kamma. Our > > current situation is a result of our kamma. What we do in our > > current situation is not determined by our past kamma ("free > will?") > > and what we do in our current situation creates new kamma for us. > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++ > Dear RobM, > Could you explain this more? I cannot see anywhere in the > Paticcasamupada where there is a suggestion of freewill. > Robert Busted!! :-( It was wrong of me to type in a long message on paticcasamuppada (directly supported by Vis. XVII 177-181) and then end off with an "editorial comment" about "free will". In "A Manual of Abhidhamma" by Narada, the term "free-will" is used in the context mentioned above (so I am not alone), but the term "free-will" is not found the the Suttas or the commentaries (that I know of). Whenever I use the term "free will" in my class notes or during a lecture, I always put the term in quotation marks and mention that the concept must be understood without having a self behind it. How to explain "free will" without a "self" is something that I am still struggling with. In fact, I had booked a stopover in Bangkok this Friday and hoped to meet up with Khun Sujin, Nina, yourself and the other DSGrs. Unfortunately, Jon told me that you were going on a "field trip" from Friday to Sunday, and would not be in Bangkok, so I have cancelled my stopover. One of the topics that I wanted to raise with the group was how to understand "free will" without a "self". Rob K, can I ask you to please raise the topic in a group discussion and let me know the conclusion? Metta, Rob M :-) 17185 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:14pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > >> > > James: When you really do contemplate the transient > > > nature of rupa outside of the body, fear and apprehension > naturally > > > arises. I have felt this again and again. > >_______________________________________- > > Dear James, > I add some more about this topic. What you said reminded me that in > the early years of nuclear discoveries (before world war II) > scientists had uncovered that matter (rupa) is almost all space, and > changing so incredibly fast to boot. Robert, Okay, I guess I am going to just keep talking about this. Of course perhaps most of my views are discarded because I don't thrown Pali vocabulary into my writing in some anachronistic fashion? But that is okay if so. Robert, I found your post very well-written, intelligent and interesting. But it stops rather abruptly. You write as a final sentence, "So we have to learn how to approach the Abhidhamma wisely and patiently so that proper use is made of the wisdom therin." Please tell me, in simple terms without using Pali, how this is supposed to happen? What is the wisdom contained therein? Where is the Abhidhamma, with its concept of ultimate nama/rupa, supposed to take you? I have read all kinds of things about the Abhidhamma and I don't see anything I can view as a `practice', I see things I can view as `metaphysics'. Why is such knowledge, even if it was true, supposed to lead to insight? This is something everyone is dancing around. Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for insight purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. I could quote sutta after sutta where the Buddha explains this, but I want to look at two only. In the Cula-sihanada Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn011.html "Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of clinging. What four? Clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self…These four kinds of clinging have craving as their source, craving as their origin, they are born and produced from craving.[10] Craving has what as its source...? Craving has feeling as its source... Feeling has what as its source...? Feeling has contact as its source... Contact has what as its source...? Contact has the sixfold base as its source... The sixfold base has what as its source...? The sixfold base has mentality-materiality as its source... Mentality-materiality has what as its source...? Mentality-materiality has consciousness as its source... Consciousness has what as its source...? Consciousness has formations as its source... Formations have what as their source...? Formations have ignorance as their source, ignorance as their origin; they are born and produced from ignorance." Summary: Clinging comes from Craving Craving comes from Feeling Feeling comes from the Six Senses Six Senses comes from Mentality-Materiality (one thing, not two like nama/rupa) Mentality-Materiality comes from Consciousness (one consciousness, not many) Consciousness comes from Formations Formations come from Ignorance The important thing to look at here is that mentality-materiality comes from consciousness. It comes from the mind. In other words, there isn't a rupa one needs to consider, it is all nama (mind). Now, to look at the important sutta, the Satipatthana Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn010b.html Let's look at the one area where this sutta appears to be supporting the concept of nama/rupa, but I don't believe it really is when taken as a whole: "3. The Six Internal and External Sense Bases How, monks, does a monk live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the six internal and the six external sense-bases? Herein, monks, a monk knows the eye and visual forms and the fetter that arises dependent on both (the eye and forms);[24] he knows how the arising of the non-arisen fetter comes to be; he knows how the abandoning of the arisen fetter comes to be; and he knows how the non- arising in the future of the abandoned fetter comes to be. Commentary: The important phrase here is "the fetter that arises dependent on both". In other words, rupa not directly experienced cannot be seen to have the qualities of anatta, dukkha, or impermanence. It must be directly experienced by one of the six sense bases or it has nothing. They are dependent on each other for a fetter to arise. This is contrary to what the Abhidhamma states. Additionally, examine closely what the remainder of this section states: "Thus he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects internally, or he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects externally, or he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects internally and externally. He lives contemplating origination factors in mental objects, or he lives contemplating dissolution factors in mental objects, or he lives contemplating origination-and-dissolution factors in mental objects.[25] Or his mindfulness is established with the thought, "Mental objects exist," to the extent necessary just for knowledge and mindfulness, and he lives detached, and clings to nothing in the world. Thus, monks, a monk lives contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the six internal and the six external sense-bases." Commentary: Now, if this doesn't prove that the only thing important to consider is Nama (mind) and the mental objects, I don`t know what could convince you. The Lord Buddha spells it out in black and white in this sutta. The Buddha explains that "he lives contemplating mental objects in mental objects internally and externally." Basically, it is from our mind that we create the world and mental objects exist both internally and externally. He mentions nothing about contemplation of rupa. To the Buddha, rupa didn't really exist separate from the mind. This has been another installment 'James' Notes to Self/Non-Self". Perhaps no one else is really listening. Metta, James 17186 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:39pm Subject: Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 1 Howard, Thanks for the update. Very interesting. You paint a nice picture in the mind. I am sorry/jealous that I didn't get to meet Ven. Yanatharo. There's more to him than meets the eye, or the Internet... Metta, James 17187 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:24pm Subject: Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "robmoult" wrote: > > It was wrong of me to type in a long message on paticcasamuppada > (directly supported by Vis. XVII 177-181) and then end off with > an "editorial comment" about "free will". > > In "A Manual of Abhidhamma" by Narada, the term "free-will" is used > in the context mentioned above (so I am not alone), but the > term "free-will" is not found the the Suttas or the commentaries > (that I know of). Whenever I use the term "free will" in my class > notes or during a lecture, I always put the term in quotation marks > and mention that the concept must be understood without having a > self behind it. How to explain "free will" without a "self" is > something that I am still struggling with. > In fact, I had booked a stopover in Bangkok this Friday and hoped to meet up with Khun Sujin, Nina, yourself and the other DSGrs. > Unfortunately, Jon told me that you were going on a "field trip" > from Friday to Sunday, and would not be in Bangkok, so I have > cancelled my stopover. One of the topics that I wanted to raise with > the group was how to understand "free will" without a "self". Rob K, > can I ask you to please raise the topic in a group discussion and > let me know the conclusion? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) _______________ Dear Rob. A real pity we'll miss you this weekend. I'll try and bring up the freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. Seeing this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. I like this old post from Christine: This is a summary of the freewill/ no-control discussion on the weekend - as I 'heard' it. Others may have different points - this is as I 'heard' it through the filters of my own memory, understanding, needs, emotional reactions, views and accumulations. There wasn't a structured hour on Freewill - it just kept surfacing and was interwoven in all discussions ..... Whenever the topic of freewill/no-control arose, Impermanence and Conditions featured heavily - and, as with many of the other exchanges, Anatta (not self) pervaded everything. So many times in the conversations we would slip back into the everyday assumptions, heavily influenced by our culture and habitual language usage, that there was 'someone' who could 'plan', 'achieve', 'do', and 'make things happen' or 'come to be' - i.e. states of consciousness, actions etc. KenH was ever vigilant (some thought 'merciless' :) in reminding us when we strayed off in that direction. We had copies of 'The Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines' on the table to refer to. As Nyanatiloka says, "Anatta is the central doctrine of Buddhism, and without understanding of it, 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. 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 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 Nibbana, his personality that walks on the Eightfold Path." Isn't that a spine-chilling description? - "there exists only this continually self-consuming process of arising and passing bodily and mental phenomena" ..... The perception of 'loneliness' and 'coldness' for some of us in this explanation was discussed, and the desire for it to be other than this ... finally, the acknowledgment that this is just 'the way it is'. This weekend, though Anatta loomed over all, it was in considering freewill versus no-control that the doctrine of Impermanence made the biggest impact on me. That body and mind are temporary combinations of different realities which arise because of conditioning factors and then fall away immediately. They are succeeded by new realities which fall away again, and so the flux of life goes on. That these bodily and mental phenomena are all 'conditioned things' dependent on something else, and without which they could not be. A concurrence of conditions, not just one condition one effect. Multiple conditions for the effect. So 'choices' and 'decisions' have multiple conditions - and each of these conditions has multiple conditions, all the way back as far as you go I had accepted a sort of 'slower' Impermanence that I see daily - in aging and decaying of people, animals, buildings, objects and trees. But Impermanence - realities rising, staying briefly, falling away in every fraction of a millisecond because of conditions - is difficult to consider ... That's when I began to find it easier to grasp that there is no 'self' who can exert control over realities. How could there be control when everything falls away immediately, including what I think of as 'me'? So regarding Freewill - the more I learn about the conditional nature of every single thing, the multiplicity of conditions, the more I understand that whatever I experience (good or bad) is impermanent, 'not-self' and is beyond *my* control. I have read this again and realise it may not make sense to anyone but me - like trying to explain the taste of a banana ... as was also mentioned on the weekend. :) metta, Christine 17188 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 2:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sankhara (Re: Nama Rupa)n Hi, Rob - In a message dated 11/25/02 4:00:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > > Hi Howard and Victor, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > > I don't know whether or not I'm "Abhidammically correct" in > this, but > >I think that a key way in which sankhara might be required for the > arising of > >vi~n~nana is via *interest*. It seems to me that, in part, > interest would > >direct the discernment of an object. > > I'm not sure about your interpretation, Howard. If I rephrase the > terms "sankhara" and "vinnana" using the specific definitions from > paticcasamuppada, Victor's question becomes: > > "How and why does kamma condition rebirth and vipaka cittas?" > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Huh? Victor had written the following: "Instead of asking why and how does ignorance condition consciousness? My question should be: Why and how does sankhara condition consciousness?To me the idea of "sankhara" is perhaps one of the most difficult to comprehend. It's been translated as "mental formation". However, I am not yet able to see the connection between sankhara and consciousness." I understood this to be asking about the link in patticca samupada of sankhara -> vi~n~nana, and my supposition was that interest, which would fall under the category of sankhara is a necessary condition for the arising of discernment. --------------------------------------------------- > > Personally, I draw an analogy to the law of conservation of energy. > A citta that creates kamma (kusala or akusala) is active; it has > energy (not to be confused with the cetasika viriya). When the citta > falls away, what happens to that energy? It gets stored as potential > energy (kammic potential). When other conditions are conducive, this > potential energy has the ability to cause the arising of another > citta. The citta that arises is a vipaka citta; maybe even a rebirth > linking citta (a special type of vipaka citta). > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Mmm. But lots of things "have energy". The fact of sankhara being a condition for consciousness is a specific form of conditionality. ------------------------------------------------- > > So what happens to all that accumulated kammic energy when the rupas > that are my body "die"? The potential energy is still there. It > doesn't disappear. Depending on conditions, this potential energy > finds a new outlet (new existence). If I become an Arahant, my > thought processes no longer create energy; kiriya cittas, which are > not active, play the role of javana cittas in the Arahant thought > process. Because an Arahant doesn't create kamma, he can escape > samsara once he has used up past energy accumulated before he became > an Arahant. Even the Buddha had to suffer sickness and pain which > was the result of kammic actions performed before His enlightenment. > > Looking at it from another angle, my current situation is vipaka. > Why and how has my current situation arisen? In fact, I am now > sitting in a Singapore hotel room at 4:30am typing in a response to > a question about kamma. What led to this condition: > - I chose to come to Singapore to attend a meeting yesterday > - I requested an early wake-up call this morning > - I decided to check the most recent DSG postings > - I selected your message to read > - I have an interest in learning the Dhamma > > These are five of the uncountable number of active states that > resulted in my current situation. Each of these active states arose > at an earlier time. > > The origins of some of the above active states are quite mundane; I > requested an early wake-up call this morning because I have an early > flight to Hong Kong. > > The origin of some of the above active states starts one thinking; > why am I drawn to the Dhamma (and Abhidhamma in particular)? > > I cannot find a suitable answer to why certain active states arose > (i.e. why am I interested in the Dhamma, why are my kids gifted at > music, etc.) if I limit my perspective to my current life. It seems > perfectly natural to me that some of the conditioning (active > states) occured before I was born. I studied the Dhamma in a > previous life (active state) thereby conditioning a result in this > life (i.e. an interest in the Dhamma). My kids applied themselves to > music in a previous life (active states) thereby conditioning > results in this life (musical "talent"). > > We have millions of thought processes each microsecond and each > thought process has seven active (javana) cittas which create kamma. > So many past active states. I can't even trace the mundane ones, let > alone the deeper ones from previous lives. Therefore, I agree with > the texts that say that only a Buddha can fully grasp the workings > of kamma (I can't remember the reference). > > Does this help? > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > ============================ 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) 17189 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 7:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > Robert, I found your post very well-written, intelligent > and interesting. But it stops rather abruptly. You write as a final > sentence, "So we have to learn how to approach the Abhidhamma wisely > and patiently so that proper use is made of the wisdom therin." > Please tell me, in simple terms without using Pali, how this is > supposed to happen? What is the wisdom contained therein? Where is > the Abhidhamma, with its concept of ultimate nama/rupa, supposed to > take you? I have read all kinds of things about the Abhidhamma and I > don't see anything I can view as a `practice', I see things I can > view as `metaphysics'. Why is such knowledge, even if it was true, > supposed to lead to insight? This is something everyone is dancing > around. _______________________ Dear James, These are the sort of questions that can help. I'll try. Most of us naturally want a practice, something we can do, some obvious method by which we can put in effort and so make discernible progress. But I believe the path out of samsara is so profound. So that if we happen to bring in, with our practice and striving, subtle or not so subtle ideas of self who is making things happen, who is making progress etc. then there is in fact a wrong path that can't give what is hoped for. You ask about why the discernment of nama (mentality)and rupa(matter) is given preponderance in the Abhidhamma? There are many reasons, I try to keep it simple:The Buddha taught about the five khandhas(the aggregates) , the elements, the ayatanas(sense bases). These are all stressed in the suttas as well as the Abhidhamma. And all of them are different classifications of nama and rupa., He taught them so that we could begin to see what really exists. And what exists is evanescent, conditioned phenomenena, no person. Of course, as you indicate, thinking about them can't break up the idea of self ; it is only by direct insight that takes any of these dhammas as an object that the (mis)perception of a whole, a person is slowly erased. It seems like 'we' can control and do as we wish, but this is an illusion that is at the heart of the self view; as the different elements are resolved the 'whole' is found to be concept and instead there is a complex concantenation of conditioned dhammas with no controller or overlord, anywhere. Resolution into the component parts is an antidote to the wrong idea of a self that exists and is somehow directing this conglomerate of namas and rupas. It is like a butcher; when he takes the whole cow he thinks 'this is a cow'. But by the time he has skinned, chopped , cut, boned, diced, sliced and minced the carcase that idea of "cow" is gone. Look forward to continuing the discussion. Robert , 17190 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:31pm Subject: Re: Brief Report on Wat Greensboro Ordination - Part 1 - Dear Howard, Thanks for the outline of your trip and how nice to hear of the new monks and ven. Yanantharo. May they rejoice in their lives as monks. Robert -- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I left Thursday from New York LaGuardia Airport for Greensboro, North > Carolina to attend the ordination of Ven. Piyadhammo (a.k.a. David) Bhante Yanatharo is absolutely > delightful! He is a devoted but devilishly ;-)) iconoclastic monk who is easy > to talk with, great fun to be around, and filled with good humor. I want > everyone to knowthis message have been removed] 17191 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:54pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 2Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for insight > purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. > > I could quote sutta after sutta where the Buddha explains this, but I > want to look at two only. In the Cula-sihanada Sutta > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/majjhima/mn011.html > > " Craving has feeling as its source... Feeling has what as > its source...? Feeling has contact as its source... Contact has what > as its source...? Contact has the sixfold base as its source... The > sixfold base has what as its source...? The sixfold base has > mentality-materiality as its source... Mentality-materiality has what > as its source...? Mentality-materiality has consciousness as its > source... > > Summary: > Clinging comes from Craving > Craving comes from Feeling > Feeling comes from the Six Senses > Six Senses comes from Mentality-Materiality (one thing, not two like > nama/rupa) > > The important thing to look at here is that mentality-materiality > comes from consciousness. It comes from the mind. In other words, > there isn't a rupa one needs to consider, it is all nama (mind). > >________________________________ Dear James, Nice you quoted a sutta on Dependent Origination - In any event the sixfold base in the sutta above includes both mental and material factors. The commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, the Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (no English translation completed yet) gives this answer to the question of why the Buddha taught so many detals about nama and rupa: "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 ayatanas. The five senses and the five sense objects are ten kinds of rupa which are ayatanas(the sense fields). As to dhammayatana this comprises both nama and rupa. Thus in this classification rupa has been explained more extensively. Those who are slow in understanding as to both nama and rupa can understand realities as explained by way of elements, dhatus, because in this classification both nama and rupa have been explained in detail." Robert 17192 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 9:58pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 3Fear of Rupas > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > > Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for > insight > > purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. __________________________ Dear James, I think, practically, no one can avoid contemplating (correctly or incorrectly) rupa. Seeing must have rupa as an object. Taste tastes rupa. Smelling smells rupa. Touch contacts rupa........ Robert > > > 17193 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 10:44pm Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Hi all, Stephen quoted from TWO KINDS OF LANGUAGE : Everyday Language & Dhamma Language Ven. Buddhadasa Bhikkhu: > "Most people are interested only in black kamma and white kamma, bad kamma and good kamma. They take no interest in this third kind of kamma which is neither black nor white, > -------------- The special kind of kamma which undoes other kamma arises with moments of Path Consciousness (Magga-citta) (see Suan's translations of the Vitthaara Sutta; message #13546). --------------- > neither bad nor good, > ---------------- Is this correct? I would have thought it was the highest good. ---------------- > which consists in complete freedom from selfhood and leads to the attainment of Nibbana. > ---------------- I think it *is* the attainment of Nibbana; perhaps what is meant here is that it conditions higher levels of attainment(?). ---------------- > It wipes out every kind of bad and good kamma. > ---------------- By the stage of Arahatship, it has wiped out all the defilements; kamma would be completely wiped at Parinibbana.(?) ---------------------- > People don't understand the method for wiping out kamma completely. They don't know that the way to put an end to all kamma is through this special kind of kamma, which consists in applying the Buddha's method. That method is none other than the Noble Eightfold Path. " > ------------------- Since this `method' is, as the author rightly says, the Noble Eightfold Path, it is practised exclusively by the Noble Ones. I wonder if the author agrees that the method that worldling disciples can follow is the five-fold way of mundane satipatthana. Kind regards Ken H 17194 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hello Ken >Since this `method' is, as the author rightly says, the >Noble Eightfold Path, it is practised exclusively by the >Noble Ones. I'd say we all practice it, the Noble Ones have realized it. >I wonder if the author agrees that the >method that worldling disciples can follow is the >five-fold way of mundane satipatthana. That's Samma Sati. Add 7 other steps. (Don't forget effort, which requires doing things/free choice, and samadhi, defined as the four jhanas ;-) metta, stephen 17195 From: Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 5:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness.- kamma Hello Robert, >Have you asked this question before, I don't recall? [On the 4 kinds of kamma, especially the kamma that ends kamma, being treated in the abhidhamma.] No, but it was asked (and unanswered) on another list. I'm glad it's mentioned but the treatment seems somewhat abrupt. Also in Buddhadasa;-) It does seem, to me, to be largely ignored in the abhidhamma; but then, as you know, I'm no expert. For instance, in "the Psychology and Philosophy of Buddhism," by Jayasuriya, there's the usual classifications of kamma by genesis, weight, time of appearance, and in respect of place of rebirth. (Too oddly: each with 4 subcategories.) Nothing on the only kind of kamma that really matters, the kamma that ends kamma. Just, again to me, metaphysical speculations and categorizations. But your reply makes it clear that that's not all there is on the subject within the abhidhamma. Thank you, metta, stephen 17196 From: James Date: Mon Nov 25, 2002 11:47pm Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > > > > Frankly, as I keep saying, for all practical purposes, for > > insight > > > purposes: THERE IS NO REASON TO CONTEMPLATE RUPA-IT IS ALL NAMA. > __________________________ > > Dear James, > I think, practically, no one can avoid contemplating (correctly or > incorrectly) rupa. Seeing must have rupa as an object. Taste tastes > rupa. Smelling smells rupa. Touch contacts rupa........ > > Robert Robert, I completely disagree with this position. Okay, let me try to explain in a different way why, for the purposes of Buddhist practice, I believe everything we experience is nama (mind). You claim that seeing sees rupa, and hearing hears rupa, tasting tastes rupa, etc. I don`t agree. Seeing is consciousness perceiving a mind object. Hearing is consciousness perceiving a mind object. Tasting is consciousness perceiving a mind object, etc, etc, etc. You seem to be suggesting that mind can be escaped or doesn`t exist in everyday perception; that the eyes see on their own, that the ears hear on their own, that the nose smells on its own, etc. I posit that the six sense bases are like the fingers to a hand, which is the mind…they appear to be separate, but they are really the same thing. Eyes, nose, ears, mouth, body are really just extensions of the mind/heart. They don't 'think' or have `consciousness' on their own. Rupa cannot be known as rupa because it must always be filtered through nama, which makes experience pure nama. The field of quantum physics bears this reality out. Experimenters were discovering that the observation of matter, and its qualities, would change depending on who was doing the viewing/experimenting. So the results of experiments at such a minute level would be unrepeatable. Why is that? Because the experimenters had different minds, the matter was actually 'different' each time. The mind 'made' the matter what it was. Consider, we can't even be sure if matter exists outside of the mind/body. It all comes through the mind so it is all mind. Know the mind and you know it all. Metta, James Ps. I will reply to your other posts later. I did this one first because it is shortest. :-) 17197 From: nidive Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 8:21am Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas Hi James, I couldn't agree with you. How can I not be sure that matter exists outside of the mind? If rupas don't exist, then what is it that the eye (which is the mind according to you) sees? If there is no input into the eye (which is the mind according to you), then is the monitor screen that I am seeing now does not exist [as a compounded object]? That this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? That whatever you had written and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? That whatever I had typed on my keyboard in response to your message and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? It can't be. Because of the Mathematical Law of Contradiction... If whatever you see on your monitor screen is your own imagination and whatever I see on my monitor screen is my own imagination, then why are we here on this Yahoo! group discussing about Abhidhamma? Why am I able to response intelligently to you about what you had said in your message? And why are you able to response intelligently to Robert about what he had said in his messages? Indeed, why are we able to communicate on this Yahoo! group in the first place? Why do I 'imagine' your name to be 'James' and not 'ajmse'? Why am I discussing about Abhidhamma here instead of say Christianity? Why do I not see your message as saying that Jesus died for me on the Cross? If rupas do not exist, then most of us humans (99.99% ?) would not be able to communicate effectively with one another at all. Unless I mastered the supernormal powers of mind-reading & thought transfer... If rupas don't exist, then you would had never heard of the Buddha. Simply because no one transfered the very idea of Buddha to you via thought transference. If rupas don't exist, Yahoo! groups would have never existed in the first place. Because it's impossible to communicate via rupas since rupas don't exist. How do you and I store our messages then? By the time you are reading this message of mine, I would probably be sleeping soundly on my bed. And I wouldn't be able to transfer my thoughts to you while I am sleeping. Does that mean you can't read this message of mine? NEO Swee Boon 17198 From: James Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 11:46am Subject: Re: 3Fear of Rupas --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi James, > > I couldn't agree with you. How can I not be sure that matter exists > outside of the mind? > > If rupas don't exist, then what is it that the eye (which is the > mind according to you) sees? If there is no input into the eye > (which is the mind according to you), then is the monitor screen > that I am seeing now does not exist [as a compounded object]? That > this monitor screen is just my wild imagination? That whatever you > had written and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild > imagination? That whatever I had typed on my keyboard in response to > your message and appeared on this monitor screen is just my wild > imagination? NEO Swee Boon, I didn't say that rupa doesn't exist, I said that for all practical purposes we should consider that it doesn't exist to us. We should deal only with our mind and not believe that we can get insight from the contemplation of sound rupa, color rupa, taste rupa, or any other rupa. Okay, you are very convinced that you know reality, right? You sound pretty sure you know all of the manifestations of rupa in `reality'. Okay, answer a few questions for me: Tell me, how many past lives have I had? What is my future life likely going to be? What were you in your past lives? How many did you have? Hmmmm… you don't know? Well, the Buddha, if he was alive, could look at me and look at you and tell us this (if he felt to do so would help us). He could `see' all of our past lives. Maybe those questions are too tough. Here are some more: Tell me, what do divas look like? Where do they live and what do they wear? How about hungry ghosts and demons are there? What does Mara look like and how does he dress? Don't know those answers either? Well, the Buddha did, and his arahants did. Why don't you? Why don't I? The reason is because our `reality', our `rupa', is limited and superficial. We are asleep and the Buddha was awake. We don't see, hear, smell, taste, or feel the whole picture. Why would the contemplation of something that we don't know fully- in its true sense- bring us any kind of wisdom? I don't think it would. What we must concentrate on is the mind, observe the superficial and harmful way the mind works, and then rise above it. Before we do this, we are asleep and blind. The Abhidhamma wants us to take our sleeping dreams for ultimate reality. I refuse to do that. I know better. Metta, James 17199 From: robmoult Date: Tue Nov 26, 2002 2:52pm Subject: Free Will (again) Hi Rob K, --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "rjkjp1" wrote: > I'll try and bring up the > freewill issue. For now I can say that I believe that in direct > proportion to the degree of acceptance/understanding of anatta > ancilliary ideas such as 'freewill' also drop away. There are just > conditioned dhammas arising and ceasing with no one anywhere. Seeing > this gradually leads away from the clinging to self and samsara. Last night, I met up with Jon, Sarah, Christine and Ajarn Paul. I knew that it was going to be an interesting discussion when the first question that Jon asked as I sat down was, "What do you mean by free will?". We explored the topic and I think that there was some progress, but "the light did not come on". I then raised the question of the role of meditation. After some discussion, Jon asked me what my current mental states were. I replied, "Confusion and restlessness". I then continued on thinking aloud, "But confusion and restlessness are not vipaka. These are javana. I did not choose to be confused. I did not choose to be restless. These states arose naturally because of conditions, not because of free will and choice." I feel that I am now at the edge of a cliff. It seems clear to me now that there is no "choice" in the thought process. However, if I say that all is pre-determined because there is no choice, then I take away any sense of ethical responsibility and all that I have to do is to "stay on the roller-coaster ride until the end". Rob K (or others), can you help pull me back from the edge of the abyss? Metta, Rob M :-)