27200 From: Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 5:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis.37, misleading translation. Hi Nina, I think ~Nanamoli did the right thing by interpolating the first "of primary elements" from the second "of primary elements". It would suggest he was talking about two different "sensitives" (passada), otherwise, which he isn't. But I agree, what "of" or "dependent on" or "derived from" means is unestablished. As the subsequent debate shows, the nature of the relationship between primary elements and derived matter is unknown or at least not a relationship of corresponding distinctions (eg. fire/light). You mentioned in a previous email that rupa arises in a group of eight rupas. Would you explain that a little? Larry 37. 1. Herein, the eye's characteristic is sensitivity [of primary elements] that is ready for the impact of visible data; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to see. 27201 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 7:06pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Nina, Robert and Michael --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > > Michael: > Tell me, the chair you are sitting on, or the table you have in front of > you, have you ever tried to find the "tableness" of that table? That elusive > quality that makes it be a table? And also if you separate the table into > its constituting parts, can you still find a table in those parts? Of course > not. So, the table only exists because of the supportive conditions, and due > to its parts, and of course also the fact that we gave it that name. So, can > you really tell me that the table exists? Where did it go when you took it > apart? > > Don't put words in my mouth, I never said the Abhidhamma is wrong. The > problems are in the commentaries which define the dhammas as ultimate > reality (paramatha) with an intrinsic essence (svabhava), or in other words > that they really exist. This is wrong view in accordance with the suttas. ========= Dear Michael, Very good you accept the Abhidhamma. I thought when you said it was only conventional that you meant you didn't follow it. But I see now that you feel the commentaries are wrong becuase they specify that the Abhidhamma is in fact explaining paramattha (ultimate ) dhammas. Whereas when the Buddha explained in Abhidhamma (or sutta ) dhammas such as feeling (vedana) these are are only conventional, in truth? Michael:"My contention is that the view that dhammas, as defined in the Abhidhamma & Visudhimagga, are real and ultimate, also is an eternalistic view. It attributes existence to something which is only another convention. The dhammas in the Abhidhamma are valid from a phenomenological point of view but have no real nature." And you feel the same about sutta teaching I quoted this sutta: Samyutta nikaya Khanda vagga XXII 94 (p.950 of Bodhi translation) "Rupa(matter, physical phenomena) that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say it exists. Feeling...perception..volitional formations..consciouness..that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change..I too say that it exists" endquote You said: "Now, referring to the sutta you posted, .... from the point of view of ultimate reality there is no world. The Buddha is talking in terms of conventional reality." So now could you clarify my earlier questions. I perfectly agree that there is no table in the ultimate sense as you lucidly expalin above. Does this also apply to the five khandas - feeling,( vedana) vinnana ect.? I repeat the question: So have I got it right: When the suttas etc. talk about, say, feeling or consciousness(vinnana) , in the ultimate, true sense, there is no feeling or consciousness? So in fact there is nothing at all? RobertK 27202 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 9:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:niddesas Hi Sarah, In my list of PTS Niddesa is not a Co, but part of the Khuddhaka Nikaya. There is the Mahaaniddesa and the Cuulaniddesa. I only have the first one , but in Thai. The Co to this is the Saddhammapaajotika. Interesting what you quote from your old post. Niddesa means explanation. It explains indeed questions we find in the Sutta Nipata. It has very good texts on old age etc. I enjoy it very much. Added to each part in my Thai edition is the commentary to it, thus from the Saddhammapaajotika In the Kaamasutta niddesa it gives the meanings of aayatana, citta is aayatana. Nina. op 20-11-2003 07:12 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > Before I made reference to the passage (Vism V111,39) about ‘Life, person, > pleasure, pain - just these alone Join in one conscious moment.....’ and > gave the Niddesa ref. > > James commented, rightly, that it isn’t a sutta, but a commentary. This is > correct. However, I believe the Niddesa, along with the Sutta Nipata has > always been part of the Khuddaka Nikaya and is generally attributed to > Sariputta (and sometimes MahaKaccayana as well). 27203 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 9:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: In search of .....Sinhala commentaries Dear Sarah, I have another wheel: 100, Buddhism in Ceylon, by H.R. Perera. Th old Co Buddhaghosa used were the three wellknown of Mahaa-Atthakata, Mahaa-paccari A. and Kurundi A. Also: Sankhepatthakatha, Vinayatthakata, Abidhammatthakatha and the separate co on the four Aagamas or Nikaayas. References are also found to numerous other sources like the Andhakatthakatha, the Aacariyaa or Teachers and the Poraana, or ancient masters.The old Sinhalese co. went out of vogue, the author says and were lost after the tenth century. Nina. op 20-11-2003 09:45 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > I imagine they were less and less used. It reminds me of Jim’s search for > the early Pali grammars. 27204 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 10:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Sarah, > ......... > There was a time when I > believed the Commentaries to be correct, that the Abhidhamma describes > paramatha dhammas and that they have svabhava. Now, in my humble opinion, > this is wrong view. I wish in my somewhat unskilful ways I can stirr some > doubts in the readers of this list. Hi Michael, Reading the Mahacattarika-sutta where it asks, "And what is wrong understanding," I tend to think it specifically refers to wrong understanding 'of the Buddha's teaching.' That is, wrong understanding that has arisen in the minds of worldlings who have heard the Dhamma and have jumped to certain wrong conclusions. (This could be a mistaken interpretation but bear with me for a while). The sutta continues: "To hold the view that there is no result from generosity, . ." Do you see what I mean? The Buddha taught generosity (dana), along with sila and bhavana and we worldlings know that he taught it. But we also know that he taught anicca, dukkha and anatta and so we might draw wrong conclusions: we might think that acts of dana do not ultimately exist -- that they have no essence, no real power or effectiveness. In that way, we also think there is: " . . no fruit or ripening of deeds well done or ill done, . . ." That is, we think that kusala and akusala kamma are not ultimately existent and, therefore, can't really condition vipaka. The Buddha did encourage kusala kamma and warn against akusala kamma but we could wrongly assume that he did so purely by way of metaphor and that, ultimately, these things are mere, ineffectual, figments of our imagination. " . . that this world does not really exist, that no other world really exists, that there is no benefit from mother and father, that there are no beings arising in other worlds without the instrumentality of parents, that there are not existing those who have realised by their own superknowledge both this world and a world beyond and who are living rightly following the right course." The Buddha taught that concepts (of worlds, living beings, chariots, buddhas, samsara, escape from samsara) are mere conventional designations. Worldlings mistake them for reality but the Buddha used them simply for communication. But again, it is wrong understanding to hold that, since concepts don't ultimately exist, then nothing ultimately exists. The sutta then describes 'right' understanding that 'has blemishes and so ripens to clinging.' I think this means intellectual understanding of nama and rupa. Intellectually, we know that, when the Buddha said 'living being,' he actually referred to various nama and rupa; when he said chariot, he actually referred to various rupa and so on. In this way, we know that the world and its contents really do exist -- all dhammas have their own distinctive, intrinsic characteristics. Then: "There is the perfect right understanding that goes beyond this, that has no blemishes, that has wisdom, the faculty of intellect, the component of enlightenment, that is investigation into things and is free from thoughts of self. This is perfect right understanding." This is no mere intellectual understanding of a reality; it is panna, the realisation of a reality. We all hope to have panna but it won't come until the required conditions are present. Right intellectual understanding is one such condition. We need to understand that panna directly experiences the absolutely existent, intrinsic essence, nature, characteristic, sabhava -- call it what you will -- of a paramattha dhamma. I hope this makes sense and, also, that it converts you back to your previous, commentarially-consistent, point of view. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 27205 From: Star Kid Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:48pm Subject: Buddhism Hi James, Thank you for answering my questions.You told me that there were no gods in Theravada Buddhism, so... when you're praying who are you communicating to? In what way do the Buddhists think the world started? Will recarnation ever end? By the way, how do we feel when we're being recarnated? Thanks again, for the answers. Metta, Hilary 27206 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 0:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 one object Hi Howard Sorry not being clear enough in my earlier post. Memory A has first to be an object of citta A before it conditioned as an object for citta B. That is how continuity of object like feelings is being felt and it seem to look like an "eternalistic" view. However, I like to stress that such conditions are impermanent, subject to decay and not eternalistic. Once memory A pass its information into B, it will cease to exist. This stream of passing will end once another citta is being disturb and took on another object. I hope this clarify that it is not an eternalistic view. kind rgds Ken O > ======================== > With no offence intended, this strikes me as nonsense. > Perhaps a > memory of A could be object for B, but not A itself, for at the > time of B, THERE IS > no A. One cannot observe what does not exist. The thinking that > dhammas > continue to exist in some manner throughout time is a > substantialist "heresy" of > the Sarvastivadins. > > With metta, > Howard > 27207 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 2:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Ken H. (Michael) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > wrote: We need to understand that panna > directly experiences the absolutely existent, intrinsic > essence, nature, characteristic, sabhava -- call it what > you will -- of a paramattha dhamma. > > I hope this makes sense and, also, that it converts you > back to your previous, commentarially-consistent, point > of view. :-) > > Kind regards, > Ken H You have taken a one-sided view of this sutta. Yes, the Buddha taught that it is wrong view to think that nothing exists, but he also taught that it is wrong view to think that everything exists. Existence or non-existence is beyond the scope of Buddhism and it isn't something that the Buddha taught. Knowing if things exist or don't exist doesn't lead to nibbana. In support allow me to quote the Lokayatika Sutta: Staying at Savatthi. Then a brahman cosmologist [1] went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One, "Now, then, Master Gotama, does everything [2] exist?" "'Everything exists' is the senior form of cosmology, brahman." "Then, Master Gotama, does everything not exist?" "'Everything does not exist' is the second form of cosmology, brahman." "Then is everything a Oneness?" "'Everything is a Oneness' is the third form of cosmology, brahman." "Then is everything a Manyness?" "'Everything is a Manyness' is the fourth form of cosmology, brahman. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&- form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering. "Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. From the cessation of fabrications comes the cessation of consciousness. From the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering." "Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Gotama -- through many lines of reasoning -- made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life." Metta, James 27208 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:41am Subject: Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hello Victor, I have a sneaking suspicion you are testing me, but never mind. I have this view bc I believe the Buddha did teach these views. From SN 35:90. ' One should not imagine oneself to be identical with the eye, or contained in it, or independent of it, or the owner of it. One should not imagine oneself to be identical with the ear, nose, tongue, body, mind, or with mind-object, mind-consciousness, mind-impression, with the agreeable, disagreeable, and indifferent feeling due to mind-impression; one should not imagine oneself to be contained in it, or independent of it, or the owner of it. One should not imagine oneself to be identical with the whole world, or contained in it, or independent of it, or the owner of it..... Thus, free from imagining, one clings no more to anything in the world. Clinging no more, one is no more agitated. Being no more agitated, one reaches in one's own person the cessation of all vanity [ Nibbana ], and one understands: "Rebirth has ceased, the holy life is fulfilled, the task is done, and nothing further remains after this." ' From SN 35:85. '"Empty is the world! Empty is the world!" thus it is said, Venerable ONe. But why, Venerable One, is the world called empty?' Because, Ananda, the world is empty of a self and of anything belonging to a self, therefore the world is called empty. Empty, indeed, of a self or of something belonging to a self are eye, visible form, eye-consciousness, etc. Thus, Ananda, bc all things are empty of a self and of anything belonging to a self, the world is called empty.' --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi Azita, > > Where did you get the idea that "there is no 'me' to do anything > anyway"? > > Where did you get the idea that any attempt to have more > understanding, is just 'me' wanting, lobha again? > Because if I don't know for sure, that it is right understanding, then there is a pretty fat chance that it is akusula - IMO. > I don't think the Buddha taught those ideas. > I don't agree with you, I think the Buddha did teach these ideas. > Peace, > Victor Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 27209 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:55am Subject: Re: Buddhism --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > > Hi James, > > Thank you for answering my questions.You told me that > there were no gods in Theravada Buddhism, so... when > you're praying who are you communicating to? > > In what way do the Buddhists think the world started? > Will recarnation ever end? By the way, how do we feel > when we're being recarnated? > > Thanks again, for the answers. > > > > Metta, > > > Hilary > Hi Star Kid Hilary! Well, you have some very good questions for me again. Let me get to answering them: Question: You told me that there were no gods in Theravada Buddhism, so... when you're praying who are you communicating to? Answer: I don't really `pray'. Praying does suggest that I am communicating with someone, but I don't really do that. I do chant, which is more like a personal reminder of the Buddha's teachings; and I do take vows, which is more like a personal promise to follow the Buddha's teachings. `Praying' can be defined in different ways in different religions. Question: In what way do the Buddhists think the world started? Answer: The Buddha taught that the universe goes through periods of expansion and contraction. These periods are called eons (kalpas). During a kalpa, the universe comes into being, exists, is destroyed, and then there is a period of emptiness*. Then it all starts again. Buddhist scholars have explained the length of time of a kalpa with a metaphor: rub a one-mile cube of rock once every hundred years with a piece of silk, until the rock is worn away -- and a kalpa still hasn't passed! That is a very loooooonnnnnnggggg time! ;-) Question: Will recarnation ever end? Answer: No. The only way to make rebirth end is to become enlightened. Otherwise, an individual will continue to be reborn for eon after eon. Question: By the way, how do we feel when we're being recarnated? Answer: According to Tibetan Buddhism, and practically all studies of near-death-experiences, there will be a traveling down a tunnel, without a body of any sort, and then arriving at open space. There will be bright lights (or one bright light) and soft lights. The soft lights are attractive and make you feel secure, while the bright light is frightening. There will be a focusing or merging with the soft light, a period of unconsciousness, and then rebirth. If one is able to focus on and merge with the bright light, which is supposed to be where the remnants of the ego are burning away, then there won't be a rebirth. According to Tibetan Buddhism, this is nearly impossible to do without assistance from higher beings. It is best just to practice Buddhism during one's lifetime, rather than trying to slip out the back door at the last minute. ;-) I hope this answers your questions. If you have anymore questions, don't hesitate to ask. Take care and study hard in school. Metta, James *My use of the words 'exists' and 'emptiness' are not to be taken as reality. They are only conventional descriptions. In reality, there may not be any difference between 'existence' and 'emptiness'. It isn't important anyway and not worthy of conjecture. 27210 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:56am Subject: Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi Victor and All, Thanks for responding. I will go directly to a part of your post. You said: > From what I read about Abhidhamma Pitaka, my impression is that the > content of Abhidhamma Pitaka is mainly of an elaborate taxonomy and > theory about mental phenomena. To me, it is not much different from > a taxonomy in biology in its nature, except the objects the its > classification. I thus tend to see the Abhidhamma Pitaka as a > result of scholastic pursuit, intentionlly or unintentionally. Victor, I think it is quite natural that we all `judge', the habit is quite strong I think, in most of us. I also think that we cling most strongly to our particular view of reality and that each time we make a judgement, the conclusions being a product of those views, are clung to and reinforce those views we have. I guess this is part of what makes us puthujanas as distinct from ariyans. The ariyans does not seek confirmation, he has seen it and there is no more doubt. It is good to discuss and I am happy that you remain here on DSG, even though you don't believe in the Abhidhamma. But I like to think that you do not totally reject it, and I still hope that you will one day change your mind about it. ;-) As you know, my own interest in Abhidhamma is more inclined towards understanding and not so much on `remembering' the theory. This understanding also gives me a clearer view of what `practice' is. This practicality however, does not involve a decision to practice, and I do not exclude `intellectual understanding' from being part of the practice. And this I believe is a result of understanding about anatta and conditionality. Had I not accepted on this level, that there is no `I' standing apart from `impersonal conditions' performing their functions `now', so in the past and will be in the future, it might have been hard for me to see this connection between pariyatti and patipatti. Or even to understand what pariyatti really means. But even though I do not myself stress on what you refer to as the "elaborate taxonomy and theory about mental phenomena", seeing that I can't go beyond my own reach, for the same reason as above, I feel that this very elaborate system *can* be the basis for pariyatti and consequently, patipatti for many who do have the panna developed enough. Even the most basic and simplified version of Abhidhamma would have put me completely off a few years ago, and I would have come to more or less similar conclusion as you have. But now, having seen the value of even the little Abhidhamma that I have read, I can see how certain people could really benefit from the more elaborate classifications. > To me, the "flavor" or "taste" of the content of the Abhidhamma > Pitaka is different from that of the content in the discourses and > the code of discipline, whereas "this Dhamma and Discipline has one > taste, the taste of liberation."* And there are people on this list who say that all three Pitakas have the same taste, and I believe them. ;-) > I would say my knowledge in the Abhidhamma Pitaka is superficial. > On the other hand, I have not read all the discourses and remembered > all the code of discipline. But as the question James posed: > > Does a person need to drink the whole ocean to know that it tastes > salty? > ** > > I don't think so. I will not ask you to read the whole Tipitaka before making a judgement. In and of itself, this means nothing. Reading is not the point; the understanding is the key, in which case, a sip can be fair indication of what the whole ocean tastes like. But *Moha* and *Ditthi* are our real enemy, and moha for most of us, exists now before, in the middle of and after we have read the whole of the Tipitaka. And any conclusion we make from moha and ditthi is not very reliable, is it not? So I will not ask you to read first, because at which point should I then expect sati to replace moha and panna to replace ditthi? And if you read it ritualistically, who knows, maybe you will end up like DK! :-) The Buddha's teaching as you would agree, is about what goes on in this moment. It is not for philosophizing, observing it in a vacuum. When a person fails to see Buddhadhamma from the stand point of what happens in experience, it is natural that not only doubts will arise, but speculation also thrives. We posit imaginary problems and come up with equally imaginary solutions and theories. Satipatthana is the only way out of our constant being caught in silly conjectures. Scholars may mean well, but if they do not have the panna to know what is really going on within their own minds, they deceive not only others, but their own selves too. This leads me to the importance of developing the Parami. Victor, even though this list seems to stress so much on panna, you will have noticed that Nina for example, has often stressed the importance of developing all the paramis. I too would sincerely like to hear more and more about it. So no one is being drawn in by dry theory, the development of all kinds of kusala is very much encouraged, perhaps with the exception of jhana. This I believe, is because of the understanding not of any insignificance, but rather the exaltedness of it, which through sound reasoning give rise to the conclusion of how difficult and therefore unlikely it is to *get it right*. Besides there are so many dangers from getting it wrong. However, like I said before, the idea that we can consciously develop any kind of mental state is not one that I hold. To *do*, for me, is so much dukkha! And it goes against not only `my theory', but I do get an impression, though vague, the citta is not kusala at those times. And when they do arise by conditions, the flavor is different! This is already too long, and I have to go. So will end here awaiting your response. Thanks for your Sutta reference, as always Metta, Sukin 27211 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:08am Subject: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 02 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, In the previous post ( msg 19239 ),4 sets of Cetasikas had been described.In this post,let's go into some detail about the permanent ministers ( Sabbacittasadarana Cetasikas ). There are 7 of them. 1. Phassa Cetasika It introduces Arammana ( object ) and Citta. It meets them. When an iron rod is struck against another iron rod, there will appear sparks. The first rod is Pasada Rupa or sense organ, the second is Arammana or object and the act of touching is Phassa. Sparks arise. Spark is Citta. Sparks arise at the same time of touching. So do Citta and Phassa. 2. Vedana Cetasika It feels the arammana and makes citta feels as well. Each citta arised has its own Vedana Cetasika. Cittas are named according to their accompanying Vedana cetasika in terms of Vedanasanghaha, like Somanassa Cittas, Domanassa Cittas, Dukkha Citta, Sukkha Citta and Upekkha Cittas. 3. Cetana Cetasika It drives citta. It urges to do, pushes forward Citta. It reminds Citta. Cetana also drives other cetasikas to do their business. It is Cetana who creates Kamma when they accompanied Javanacittas. It is volition. It acts voluntarily. So any action will have Kamma effect except those Cittas of Vipaka ( resultants ) and Kiriya ( Arahats' Javana Cittas ) 4. Sanna Cetasika It memorises and it recalls. It registers the object. It perceives the object. It reports the memories to Citta. This can be learn in case of people with Jatissara-nana ( reincarnated people who know the previous lives events_actually the brain in this life and ones in previous lives are never related_Science view).In these matters Sanna works and memories are carried over from Citta to Citta but subconsciously. 5. Ekagatta Cetasika It fixes citta to an Arammana.It controls Citta not to spread to other Arammanas and it calms down Citta and accompanting Cetasikas. It tranquillizes all mental bodies of Citta and Cetasikas. See in the post named '' Ekagatta, Samadhi, Jhana & Concentration''. 6. Jivitindriya Cetasika It supports Citta and other accompanying Cetasikas as caterer or supplier or supporter and it functions as life and makes all Namadhammas alive. It makes all mental bodies in their activity. So in the presence of this Jivitindriya Cetasika all Cetasikas that accompanied it and Citta are active and alive. Without it there is no possibility of Citta to arise. 7. Manasikara Cetasika It directs citta to Arammana.It steers Citta and its allied Cetasikas not to deviate to any other directions. It functions as supplying a straight way. The way we think the Arammana is directed by Manasikara. '' Yonisomanasikara '' good insight makes good things. It is something like attention. It may be assume as attending mind. All these 7 Cetasikas always accompany any citta. They all design the Citta with which they arise together. They all help the Citta while they all are arising at the same time of arising of that Citta. May you all have a clearer view on this post. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27212 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:13am Subject: Reply to James Jimbo: Thank you for your letter, and thank you for your good words and compliments. I am also quite happy at this report, but I must not forget everything else. Anyway, there are a few questions waiting for you: 1. Is there someone who is the chief monk in each Buddhist temple, such as the Grand Abbott, Grand father, Grand piano? 2.How do I deal with mean students? Beat them up? How can I get more friends? 3. Any other advice you have for me? Please reply Philip Chui 27213 From: Star Kid Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:14am Subject: Pali and monk questions Dear James, I hope you are keeping well! Well, thank you for answering my questions and here are my new ones: 1:How is the language Pali like? Do anyone in the world speak it today? 2:Where do most Buddhist monks live? ( I mean as in the type of shelter they live in) 3:Are there special rules that Buddhist monks have to obey which are different from normal people? That's all! Metta, Janice 27214 From: Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 one object Hi, Ken - Ahh, okay, thanks. So what is being discussed are propagated memories (a series of falling away and newly arisen memories). With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/21/03 3:20:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Howard > > Sorry not being clear enough in my earlier post. > > Memory A has first to be an object of citta A before it conditioned > as an object for citta B. That is how continuity of object like > feelings is being felt and it seem to look like an "eternalistic" > view. However, I like to stress that such conditions are > impermanent, subject to decay and not eternalistic. Once memory A > pass its information into B, it will cease to exist. This stream of > passing will end once another citta is being disturb and took on > another object. I hope this clarify that it is not an eternalistic > view. > > kind rgds > Ken O > > > > >======================== > > With no offence intended, this strikes me as nonsense. > >Perhaps a > >memory of A could be object for B, but not A itself, for at the > >time of B, THERE IS > >no A. One cannot observe what does not exist. The thinking that > >dhammas > >continue to exist in some manner throughout time is a > >substantialist "heresy" of > >the Sarvastivadins. > > > >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) 27215 From: Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi, Azita - In a message dated 11/21/03 6:42:50 AM Eastern Standard Time, gazita2002@y... writes: > From SN 35:90. ' One should not imagine oneself to be identical > with the eye, or contained in it, or independent of it, or the owner > of it. One should not imagine oneself to be identical with the ear, > nose, tongue, body, mind, or with mind-object, mind-consciousness, > mind-impression, with the agreeable, disagreeable, and indifferent > feeling due to mind-impression; one should not imagine oneself to be > contained in it, or independent of it, or the owner of it. > One should not imagine oneself to be identical with the whole > world, or contained in it, or independent of it, or the owner of > it..... > Thus, free from imagining, one clings no more to anything in the > world. Clinging no more, one is no more agitated. Being no more > agitated, one reaches in one's own person the cessation of all vanity > [ Nibbana ], and one understands: "Rebirth has ceased, the holy life > is fulfilled, the task is done, and nothing further remains after > this." ' > > From SN 35:85. '"Empty is the world! Empty is the world!" thus > it is said, Venerable ONe. But why, Venerable One, is the world > called empty?' > Because, Ananda, the world is empty of a self and of anything > belonging to a self, therefore the world is called empty. > Empty, indeed, of a self or of something belonging to a self > are eye, visible form, eye-consciousness, etc. Thus, Ananda, bc > all things are empty of a self and of anything belonging to a self, > the world is called empty.' > > ================================ These are wonderful quotes, Azita. I love them! I also think that Victor's position is in perfect harmony with them. BTW, "the world" is the five khandhas. All that is pointed to here can be directly discerned with right practice, and the direct knowing of all this is freeing. (The second quote, however, I must admit, comes quite *close* to explicity asserting the nonexistence of a self, but, on careful inspection, it only says that all elements of all khandhas are empty of self, that is - they are not me or mine.) An important point, I think, is that the Buddha taught not in order to inculcate positions, but to plant seeds that will sprout in liberation. The Buddha was a supreme technician, and a supreme physician, who provided just the appropriate technology and and just the right medicine to cure our illness. 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) 27216 From: Htoo Naing Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:30am Subject: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Dhamma Friends, We have been born. We were born and have lived our lives till right now. In the interim when we were born and when we are now is a dimension of time. Who was born in 1903 will have lived 100 years and in 2003 just now will have lived just hours. Since we have been born, we actually are ready to die at any time. This is not to dispute in any way as it is quite clear to see the matter to its deepest level. As we are ready, death is also ready to come. But what is not sure is when he will come. If this matter is always remembered, there is nothing to attach to life-related sensual things. Seconds are fading away tick by tick. Minutes are being eaten away making hours which again are poured into days, months, years and so on. We should always remember that death is coming. Actually he is coming now. This makes us a kind of meditation called Maranaanussati Kammatthana. This may well form the basis for higher knowledge. There is no thought apart from thought of death. Hindrances stop. Mind becomes clean. It becomes tranquilized and well calm. As mind is calm enough, thinking becomes effective and productive. Death by convention is when breathing, circulation, consciousness and all body functions stop. But if penetrative wisdom arises, it will see that Death is coming all the time. Seconds are fading away tick by tick. We are being dead tick by tick. No one can stop that tick-tack tick-tack. That tick and tack are sign of death. It is not permanent. It is Anicca. We see. Seeing stop. We think. Thinking stop. We hear. Hearing stop. We think. Thinking stop. We smell. Smelling stop. We think. Thinking stop. We taste. Tasting stop. We think. Thinking stop. We touch. Touching stop. We think. thinking stop. Death clock is running all the time tick-tack tick-tack. May you all recognize Anicca here, there, around and about With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27217 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 9:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Christine, The 3 kinds of true knowledge are the recollection of past lives, kamma and the destruction of the taints. There are many suttas that refer to this. Just to mention one - Culahatthipadopama Sutta (MN 27). Metta Michael >From: "christine_forsyth" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael >Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:35:13 -0000 > >Hello Michael,and all, > >I am interestedly reading your exchanges with other members. I may >be being particularly dense this morning (6.30 a.m. Brisbane time >now) but can you tell me about the three kinds of true knowledge and >give me a reference please? > >metta and peace, >Christine >---The trouble is that you think you have time --- > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > > I also read that, and try my best to practice it. But how about the >three > > kinds of true knowledge? Except for the destruction of the taints, >there is > > no reference in the Satipatthana Suttas about the other two kinds >of > > knowledge. And those 3 kinds of knowledge are the only true >realization of > > the Buddhist path. So, who practices Satipatthana ignores the other >2 kinds > > of knowledge. And even so this is called a complete and only path? > > > > > > Metta > > Michael 27218 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 10:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Azita, Azita: Are you saying that they [paramatta dhammas] do not exist? If I've misinterperated you, forgive me, bc I'm unclear as to what you are suggesting. Michael: It is interesting that when it comes to a person it is not so hard to accept that he/she doe not have a self. Has no intrinsic nature, no essence, is anatta and anicca – no self and impermanent. But when it comes to dhammas, the idea that they also have no intrinsic nature is so hard to accept. Our mind has a very hard time in getting rid of the idea that something has an essence, something we can grab on and say ‘Oh! At last this really exists, I can feel safe now. My self does not exist but my dhammas are real.’ Everything is utterly empty, has no abiding essence. The same logic that applies to a person also applies to dhammas. Metta Michael 27219 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 10:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Nina, Robert and Michael Hello RobertK RiobertK, I repeat the question: So have I got it right: When the suttas etc. talk about, say, feeling or consciousness(vinnana) , in the ultimate, true sense, there is no feeling or consciousness? So in fact there is nothing at all? Michael: In conventional sense all those things exist. In ultimate sense they are empty, no abiding essence, not real. So, one can say they exist and also can say they don’t exist. Both are right, provided the correct provisos are included. Conventional reality is important, thats were we live until liberation. But we have to understand where we live to curb ignorance. Metta Michael 27220 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 11:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 one object Dear Howard, How can one be aware of one object? Each citta can have only one object through one doorway at a time. You also find that reasonable. Before you spoke about citta with dislike and the unpleasant feeling like background music being present. A good simile. The feeling can be so annoying, going on and on. To make it even more complicated: there are also bodily reactions, like hardness in the chest and the experience of it, tactile consciousness. Many different realities. It seems they appear all at the same time, but only one can be noticed at a time. All these realities arise and fall away extremely fast but since we do not realize their falling away they seem to last, and they seem to appear at the same time. Your question is: 1. how can we be aware of what has fallen away, and I remember this was also an issue before. 2. And how can one dhamma be singled out as an object since they arise and fall away together? 1. Since that dhamma has only just fallen away it is still reckoned as the present moment. When you think: I experience unpleasant feeling, that feeling has fallen away, but it seems that it is still there. It has just fallen away. Its characteristic can be studied, that is, can be object of understanding. Nyanaponika, Abh Studies, in the Ch on the present explains about momentary present, a single moment of citta, and the serial present, concerning 2 or 3 processes. For all practical purposes, the dhamma that is the object of citta is still present. 2. Here we touch on conditions as stressed by Ken O. This is not a safety hatch, we are not explaining difficult questions away with the word conditions. Conditions are very complicated and there are many of them. One of the cetasikas accompanying citta may be very prominent and strong. This is one of the conditions. Years ago I asked A. Sujin how I could discern aversion, dosa, and unpleasant feeling. She usually answers:. In other words, there are different characteristics appearing and when we start to define, life becomes very complicated. We only reason and think and the truth will not be directly known. It is also useful to know that the first stage of insight is knowing by direct experience the difference between nama and rupa. Some dhammas in our life know or experience, other dhammas do not know or experience anything. Before that stage it is difficult to have a clear, thorough understanding of different namas such as dosa and unpleasant feeling, to realize that they have each their own distinct nature: sabhava again! By the way, as James said, misunderstandings of this term may be only semantical. When it is translated as essential property, I understand that Michael thinks of essentialism. Your example below: it shows that there are many different dhammas arising and falling away. Only when there is mindfulness of one of them at a time (no selection!) understanding of them can be developed. Nina. op 20-11-2003 14:38 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Typically, when remembering a pleasant event, for example, the > current feeling is pleasantness, though other conditions such as regret might > elicit sadness instead. This opposite feeling of sadness, however, is probably > not > in effect during the remembering, but afterwards. It seems likely to me that > the memory of a pleasant experience is always pleasant, but it may be followed > by regret at the thought of having found it pleasant, and that state of > regret would be unpleasant.) 27221 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 11:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi Larry, op 21-11-2003 02:21 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > You mentioned in a previous email that rupa arises in a group of eight > rupas. Would you explain that a little? N: Rupas arise in groups of eight or more rupas. There are the eight inseparable rupas: the four primaries and in addition: colour, odour, flavour and nutritive essence. This is also called the pure octad (Vis. XVIII,4, for different groups). Groups can be produced by four different factors: kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition. Those produced by kamma always have in addition to the eight: the life faculty, thus this is a nonad. Eyesense is produced by kamma: it is in a group of nine other rupas: it is a decad, the eye-decad. We have to remember that these are not theory. Remember the list of rupas Icaro gave while he was packing for bootcamp. So real all the time in daily life! Just now he was dashing in and out to Los Gerlos airbase reminding us of the difference between samutti sacca, conventional truth and paramattha sacca, ultimate truth. A wonderful early morning reminder for me. The eye of the flesh: conventional truth. The eyedecad: ultimate truth. I shall go to the photo section and look at his Jungle survival. When we look at a photo of ourselves, or in the looking glass, it is not me. Touch it: hardness, and through the eyes only colour. Many different rupas. It is the same in real life. We think of many stories on account of what is seen, just thinking. Nina. 27222 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah / Pure again Hello Thomas, Thomas: Originally the mind was a Pure Mind.. Michael: Tell me then how can something pure become impure? It is impossible, if it is pure it cannot become impure. Thomas: HOW!? The thinking has to stop! This is the simple formula to enlightenment. Michael: So, it means that non-conceptual states like fainting, sleeping, and so forth are enlightenment? Metta Michael 27223 From: Larry Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 11:26am Subject: Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Michael: "The same logic that applies to a person also applies to dhammas." Hi Michael & Azita, I haven't been following this thread so I may be going over old stuff, but I think abhidhamma would disagree with this statement. Abhidhamma would say a person is a concept while a feeling, for example, is a reality. A feeling arises and ceases as an experience but a person is a general notion that has to be defined. "Intrinsic nature" might be a debatable translation for sabhava. I think I would prefer something like "distinct arising". All dhammas are distinct in being objects of consciousness but two kinds, technically, don't arise, i.e., concepts and nibbana. Both of these arise and cease as objects because consciousness arises and ceases but for different reasons they don't arise as a dhamma. Nibbana, I guess, can be experienced, so it is classed with the "ultimate dhammas". In a certain way concepts cannot be experienced, even though they are objects of consciousness; so they are classed as conventional dhammas. What exactly a general concept is is as much a mystery as what nibbana is. To my mind, no one has been able to sort out concept very satisfactorily, including Nagarjuna and his commentators. But it's fun to try. Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Azita, > > Azita: > Are you saying that they [paramatta dhammas] do not exist? If > I've misinterpreted you, forgive me, bc I'm unclear as to what you > are suggesting. > > Michael: > It is interesting that when it comes to a person it is not so hard to accept > that he/she doe not have a self. Has no intrinsic nature, no essence, is > anatta and anicca – no self and impermanent. But when it comes to dhammas, > the idea that they also have no intrinsic nature is so hard to accept. Our > mind has a very hard time in getting rid of the idea that something has an > essence, something we can grab on and say `Oh! At last this really exists, I > can feel safe now. My self does not exist but my dhammas are real.' > Everything is utterly empty, has no abiding essence. The same logic that > applies to a person also applies to dhammas. > > Metta > Michael > 27224 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 0:28pm Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Hello Htoo Naing, and All, Thank you Htoo Naing for this reminder. I work in an acute hospital, and I see dead and dying people daily, as do most staff of most hospitals. One would think this would be a reminder to urgently reflect on and practise the Dhamma - but it is no more effective than if I worked in a bakery. Perhaps more ineffective. The Self is a marvellous 'Adjuster' - and in order to protect 'itself', it attempts to make the fact of death just a background 'noise' - like the Christmas Carols in department stores at this time. It happens to others, never to me and mine. Though one still feels compassion for the dead, the dying and their relatives the awe and shock of experiencing that first 'other one' dying diminishes with each experience, until only those deaths with special pathos, like the death of a baby or child, or the death of someone whose age and life's circumstances are almost exactily like mine, gets through the self-protective armour of the illusion of the eternal, always going to be like this, Now. I add the signature line under my name for my own daily benefit - in the hope that I can break through my own complacency, and encourage my own urgent reflection on the fragility of this rare human existence. metta and peace, Christine Forsyth ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Htoo Naing wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > We have been born. We were born and have lived our lives till right now. In the interim when we were born and when we are now is a dimension of time. Who was born in 1903 will have lived 100 years and in 2003 just now will have lived just hours. > > Since we have been born, we actually are ready to die at any time. This is not to dispute in any way as it is quite clear to see the matter to its deepest level. As we are ready, death is also ready to come. But what is not sure is when he will come. > > If this matter is always remembered, there is nothing to attach to life-related sensual things. Seconds are fading away tick by tick. Minutes are being eaten away making hours which again are poured into days, months, years and so on. > > We should always remember that death is coming. Actually he is coming now. This makes us a kind of meditation called Maranaanussati Kammatthana. This may well form the basis for higher knowledge. > > There is no thought apart from thought of death. Hindrances stop. Mind becomes clean. It becomes tranquilized and well calm. As mind is calm enough, thinking becomes effective and productive. > > Death by convention is when breathing, circulation, consciousness and all body functions stop. But if penetrative wisdom arises, it will see that Death is coming all the time. Seconds are fading away tick by tick. > > We are being dead tick by tick. No one can stop that tick-tack tick- tack. That tick and tack are sign of death. It is not permanent. It is Anicca. We see. Seeing stop. We think. Thinking stop. We hear. Hearing stop. We think. Thinking stop. We smell. Smelling stop. We think. Thinking stop. We taste. Tasting stop. We think. Thinking stop. We touch. Touching stop. We think. thinking stop. > > Death clock is running all the time tick-tack tick-tack. > > May you all recognize Anicca here, there, around and about > > With Unlimited Metta, > > Htoo Naing 27225 From: Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 one object Hi, Nina - Thank you for the detailed reply copied below. It seems to me that the gist of what you are saying with regard to the main matter being discussed is that cetasikas are discerned not when they occur, simultaneous with the discernment of some object, but afterwards as the object of subsequent cittas. This strikes me as odd. I'm not saying it's not so - I have no way of knowing at my stage of development - but just that this is odd. One wonders (at least *this* one does! ;-) why cetasikas are called concomitants, since they are supposedly never observed at the same time, and also how it is that it can be known that a cetasika, currently experienced, actually *previously* occurred! With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/21/03 2:10:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Dear Howard, > How can one be aware of one object? Each citta can have only one object > through one doorway at a time. You also find that reasonable. Before you > spoke about citta with dislike and the unpleasant feeling like background > music being present. A good simile. The feeling can be so annoying, going on > and on. To make it even more complicated: there are also bodily reactions, > like hardness in the chest and the experience of it, tactile consciousness. > Many different realities. It seems they appear all at the same time, but > only one can be noticed at a time. All these realities arise and fall away > extremely fast but since we do not realize their falling away they seem to > last, and they seem to appear at the same time. > Your question is: 1. how can we be aware of what has fallen away, and I > remember this was also an issue before. > 2. And how can one dhamma be singled out as an object since they arise and > fall away together? > 1. Since that dhamma has only just fallen away it is still reckoned as the > present moment. When you think: I experience unpleasant feeling, that > feeling has fallen away, but it seems that it is still there. It has just > fallen away. Its characteristic can be studied, that is, can be object of > understanding. > Nyanaponika, Abh Studies, in the Ch on the present explains about momentary > present, a single moment of citta, and the serial present, concerning 2 or 3 > processes. For all practical purposes, the dhamma that is the object of > citta is still present. > 2. Here we touch on conditions as stressed by Ken O. This is not a safety > hatch, we are not explaining difficult questions away with the word > conditions. Conditions are very complicated and there are many of them. One > of the cetasikas accompanying citta may be very prominent and strong. This > is one of the conditions. > Years ago I asked A. Sujin how I could discern aversion, dosa, and > unpleasant feeling. She usually answers:. In other > words, there are different characteristics appearing and when we start to > define, life becomes very complicated. We only reason and think and the > truth will not be directly known. It is also useful to know that the first > stage of insight is knowing by direct experience the difference between nama > and rupa. Some dhammas in our life know or experience, other dhammas do not > know or experience anything. Before that stage it is difficult to have a > clear, thorough understanding of different namas such as dosa and unpleasant > feeling, to realize that they have each their own distinct nature: sabhava > again! By the way, as James said, misunderstandings of this term may be only > semantical. When it is translated as essential property, I understand that > Michael thinks of essentialism. > Your example below: it shows that there are many different dhammas arising > and falling away. Only when there is mindfulness of one of them at a time > (no selection!) understanding of them can be developed. > Nina. > op 20-11-2003 14:38 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >Typically, when remembering a pleasant event, for example, the > >current feeling is pleasantness, though other conditions such as regret > might > >elicit sadness instead. This opposite feeling of sadness, however, is > probably > >not > >in effect during the remembering, but afterwards. It seems likely to me > that > >the memory of a pleasant experience is always pleasant, but it may be > followed > >by regret at the thought of having found it pleasant, and that state of > >regret would be unpleasant.) > > /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) 27226 From: Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 4:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas N: Rupas arise in groups of eight or more rupas. There are the eight inseparable rupas: the four primaries and in addition: colour, odour, flavour and nutritive essence. This is also called the pure octad (Vis. XVIII,4, for different groups). Groups can be produced by four different factors: kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition. Those produced by kamma always have in addition to the eight: the life faculty, thus this is a nonad. Eyesense is produced by kamma: it is in a group of nine other rupas: it is a decad, the eye-decad. Hi Nina, Thanks for this succinct explanation. I'm a little confused by the "eye-decade". Also, if I see a rock, are you saying the rock is not kamma result but the seeing is? Larry 27227 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 6:12pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Michael, Azita and All, I have not read the Vis., I feel quite uncomfortable with the language style, but the fault is mine. Neither have I read Kalupahana, so I have been reluctant to say anything. But I do have an opinion as you may have seen on another thread. As I have said there, I think we need to differentiate between philosophizing about the Teachings and reflecting about it in daily life. I am quite sure that there are people out there who could argue and convince other people even with reference to the direct words of the Buddha, such things as that Buddha did not deny the existence of the soul or even of God and so reinforce their own views about the existence of these. And then there are those not having any moments of satipatthana and knowing little the difference between doubt and `wise reflection', are drawn in by the former in the name of the latter. I believe that as puthujanas, there will remain always a high degree of doubt and wrong view, and both these will condition the other, I think. There will be those who see that the commentaries are consistent with the Suttas and so they will have full faith in them. And there are those who don't and so will continue seeing discrepancies. On the level of pure reasoning, it is hard to prove the other wrong, how else has this Mahayana/Theravada difference continued to exist with little of the proponent of one being convinced and drawn in by the arguments of the other. From my own experience however, and btw, I was attracted first to Mahayana before Theravada, I have seen those who believe in the latter as being far more down to earth than the former. And when it comes to particulars, the Abhidhamma group that I know is much more in touch with reality, than those who believe in meditation. And this group of Abhidhammists has full faith in the commentaries. But I may be projecting, so allow me to add some more concrete arguments. I think that at the root of all the choices we make in thought and actions, is "View". We are attracted to arguments which click with our existing `views', whether verbalized or not. However being so low in panna and high in avijja, often we do not even know that we are in conflict with ourselves, on the one hand arguing against eternalist outlook but in practice we behave otherwise. The Mahayanist are right in cautioning about eternalistic and substantialist tendencies, but then what about when they have the idea of a `self' developing kusala and *doing* meditation? The concept of `Emptiness' seems to me to be at once both annihilationist as well as eternalistic! How? Because on the one hand it leans towards the suggestion that nothing exists, yet on the other hand `Emptiness' is made into a `thing' used to deny what is happening right now in front of our noses. On the other hand, though there is a tendency in us puthujanas as you rightly suggest in this post, > "Our mind has a very hard time in getting rid of the idea that something has an > essence, something we can grab on and say `Oh! At last this really exists…" I think the study of Abhidhamma as Robert has indirectly suggested, does not stop at just this concept. `Conditionality', `Dependent Origination', the `Tilakhana' is always associated with the concept of sabhava. Besides, when we talk about manifestation, function, proximate cause and characteristic of realities, are we talking about something that never exists? Even within the Theravada Abhidhamma tradition there is an argument arising from doubt, that *in fact* we cannot experience realities ever. This is based on the argument that realities rise and fall so fast that they have already fallen away by the time there is any awareness of it, so in fact we are only experiencing `illusions' so to speak. To this, K. Sujin always has to remind the questioner that `something appears and is being experienced isn't it?' I think we can forever be drawn in by philosophical arguments and keep on denying what is really going on. This is why I suggested earlier that Buddha's teachings are for practical application, not just `thinking about'. To know this requires panna that sees the importance of satipatthana and the accumulation of the paramis, particularly in relation to the development of panna. And in this connection, I see the study of nama/rupa, conditionality, and the increasing familiarity with the characteristic of all realities as being complementary to this practice. And for this, knowing about sabhava dhammas is quite essential. Hope this is not too long and I have not bored you. ;-) Looking forward to your response. With metta, Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Azita, > > Azita: > Are you saying that they [paramatta dhammas] do not exist? If > I've misinterperated you, forgive me, bc I'm unclear as to what you > are suggesting. > > Michael: > It is interesting that when it comes to a person it is not so hard to accept > that he/she doe not have a self. Has no intrinsic nature, no essence, is > anatta and anicca – no self and impermanent. But when it comes to dhammas, > the idea that they also have no intrinsic nature is so hard to accept. Our > mind has a very hard time in getting rid of the idea that something has an > essence, something we can grab on and say `Oh! At last this really exists, I > can feel safe now. My self does not exist but my dhammas are real.' > Everything is utterly empty, has no abiding essence. The same logic that > applies to a person also applies to dhammas. > > Metta > Michael > 27228 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 6:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Traffic Lights Hi Azita (and Sarah and Nina), -------------- Az: > Me too [Sarah's suggestion from a few posts ago], but the 'me too' means here that I often can't find the right words. Want to reply but can't quite get there! My excuse this time is that I'm on night shift and am about to fall asleep right here at the comput....zzzzz --------------- :-) I'm sure we're not the only ones who have trouble sending posts off. There should be a support group for dysfunctional dsg members. -------------- Az: > I feel a tad sad that I won't be attending the upcoming w/e at Cooran; I leave those w/e feeling very uplifted. Hello to the others for me. ------------- I will 'hello the others' for you and we will all miss you. I don't like to make too much of that, though, in case you feel obligated to attend more often. From Cairns to Cooran is a very long way and we really appreciate that you make the effort. Sarah asked: " we haven't heard anything about the agenda for this one....(is there one at all this time??)." Yes, a number of topics have been put forward. Among them are the Anapanasati-sutta and the Satipatthana- sutta. Just a couple of quick ones to get the ball rolling. :-) I had already gone through the UP's and downloaded Nina's series on Anapanasati and now she is making them even more accessible by reposting. Thank you Nina, we will report back on our progress. ------------------- Az: > To Sarah: in answer to a post a few days ago, about my Q in myanmar re the 'positioning' of the khandhas. Yes, I can see why vedana and sanna are a khandha each, they do keep 'us' running around; ------------------- I remember your asking this Q weeks before Myanmar but I didn't know Sarah had answered it. Have I missed a post? (Heaven forbid!) I'll have to go back and find it. Reading, recently, something about nirodha-sampatti (extinction of sanna and vedana), I thought it might have been relevant to your Q but perhaps not. Kind regards, Ken H 27229 From: Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 1:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 11/21/03 9:31:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@k... writes: > The > Mahayanist are right in cautioning about eternalistic and > substantialist tendencies, but then what about when they have the > idea of a `self' developing kusala and *doing* meditation? The > concept of `Emptiness' seems to me to be at once both > annihilationist as well as eternalistic! How? Because on the one > hand it leans towards the suggestion that nothing exists, yet on the > other hand `Emptiness' is made into a `thing' used to deny what is > happening right now in front of our noses. > ========================= Though there are many problems within some schools of Mahayana as I see it (and much that is great as well), I think that your statements here are way off the mark. Mahayana does not accept a self, and Mahayanists speak of persons developing wholesome states and meditating merely as conventional speech, no differently than Theravadins, and no differently than the Buddha, himself. Also, Mahayana fastidiously avoids both extremes of nihilism and substantialis/eternalism, with Nagarjuna explicitly warning against taking emptiness to be a "thing". The emptiness of Mahayana is nothing more than the impersonality, insubstantiality, and dependent status of dhammas, and it leans neither towards annihilationism nor eternalism. I seriously think you misread Mahayana here. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 27230 From: shakti Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 6:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Htoo Naing, Thank you for the reminders of death being always present. This past week I have been doing a lot of contemplation on death and dying. My god mother, aunt died and two of my neighbors died this past week. My two neighbors were 85 and 86. Lucy died on Sat. evening and John found her Sunday morning. Her body was taken away and shortly after that, he wasn't feeling well. The ambulance was called and took him to the hospital, where he died a few hours later. They were a sweet loving couple, rarely apart. You would see both of them shoveling snow or working in the garden. Always together, even in death. I've been wondering where did they go? What died? What did they take with them? What is the difference between rebirth and reincarnation? What is reborn or reincarnated? Why are we born? Metta, Shakti Htoo Naing wrote: Dear Dhamma Friends, We have been born. We were born and have lived our lives till right now. In the interim when we were born and when we are now is a dimension of time. Who was born in 1903 will have lived 100 years and in 2003 just now will have lived just hours. Since we have been born, we actually are ready to die at any time. This is not to dispute in any way as it is quite clear to see the matter to its deepest level. As we are ready, death is also ready to come. But what is not sure is when he will come. If this matter is always remembered, there is nothing to attach to life-related sensual things. Seconds are fading away tick by tick. Minutes are being eaten away making hours which again are poured into days, months, years and so on. We should always remember that death is coming. Actually he is coming now. This makes us a kind of meditation called Maranaanussati Kammatthana. This may well form the basis for higher knowledge. There is no thought apart from thought of death. Hindrances stop. Mind becomes clean. It becomes tranquilized and well calm. As mind is calm enough, thinking becomes effective and productive. Death by convention is when breathing, circulation, consciousness and all body functions stop. But if penetrative wisdom arises, it will see that Death is coming all the time. Seconds are fading away tick by tick. We are being dead tick by tick. No one can stop that tick-tack tick-tack. That tick and tack are sign of death. It is not permanent. It is Anicca. We see. Seeing stop. We think. Thinking stop. We hear. Hearing stop. We think. Thinking stop. We smell. Smelling stop. We think. Thinking stop. We taste. Tasting stop. We think. Thinking stop. We touch. Touching stop. We think. thinking stop. Death clock is running all the time tick-tack tick-tack. May you all recognize Anicca here, there, around and about With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27231 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:13pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Howard, The point I am trying to make is this, 'believers' be they Mahayanist or Theravadins, believe in 'anatta' and/or 'emptiness'. The Mahayanist *do* believe in anatta, I am not saying that they don't. But belief in the concept is one thing, and understanding it enough to know that this moment is conditioned and anatta is another thing. Here is where I think one is contradicting oneself. On the one hand, verbally asserts that all is conditioned and not-self, and by extention one then goes on to conclude that all is 'emptiness' (to me one of the most misleading and vague concepts ever put forward), tending towards denying what goes on right now. [And what goes on is manifestations and characteristics of realities which condition all these grand ideas that we have, as far as I am concerned.] Yet there is a 'volition', behind which is the idea of 'controling conditions' and this I call 'self', which can 'in particular cause the arising of certain states'. So one can sincerely (relatively, and here I see the importance of previous accumulation of paramis), be cautioning others about the danger of substantialism, and come up with a theory about 'emptiness', *but what is one's own reaction to experiences*? Howard, I feel that the commentators of Theravada have been most compassionate in trying to explain in detail the Buddha's teachings. I see it as being our own lack of panna and comprehensive knowledge that we fail to see its true value. In our ignorance we often come up with our own theories about what realities might be and interpret the Buddha's words according to those views. I do not see it as being helpful to introduce such vague concepts as `emptiness'. I think this as being the result of philosophizing rather than actual experience. To me, without the foundation of satipatthana or at least honest reflection of ones experience, anything anyone says is not much worth considering, besides with the Tipitaka still available, why opt for anything else? I know that I am making a generalized view based on extremely little knowledge of Mahayana. But I trust that you will let me know where I am wrong, no? ;-) Thanks for trying to clarify matters for me. Metta, Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sukin - > > In a message dated 11/21/03 9:31:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, > sukinder@k... writes: > > > The > > Mahayanist are right in cautioning about eternalistic and > > substantialist tendencies, but then what about when they have the > > idea of a `self' developing kusala and *doing* meditation? The > > concept of `Emptiness' seems to me to be at once both > > annihilationist as well as eternalistic! How? Because on the one > > hand it leans towards the suggestion that nothing exists, yet on the > > other hand `Emptiness' is made into a `thing' used to deny what is > > happening right now in front of our noses. > > > ========================= > Though there are many problems within some schools of Mahayana as I > see it (and much that is great as well), I think that your statements here are > way off the mark. Mahayana does not accept a self, and Mahayanists speak of > persons developing wholesome states and meditating merely as conventional speech, > no differently than Theravadins, and no differently than the Buddha, himself. > Also, Mahayana fastidiously avoids both extremes of nihilism and > substantialis/eternalism, with Nagarjuna explicitly warning against taking emptiness to be > a "thing". The emptiness of Mahayana is nothing more than the impersonality, > insubstantiality, and dependent status of dhammas, and it leans neither > towards annihilationism nor eternalism. I seriously think you misread Mahayana here. > > With metta, > Howard 27232 From: Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 4:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 11/21/03 11:15:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@k... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > The point I am trying to make is this, 'believers' be they > Mahayanist or Theravadins, believe in 'anatta' and/or 'emptiness'. > The Mahayanist *do* believe in anatta, I am not saying that they > don't. But belief in the concept is one thing, and understanding it > enough to know that this moment is conditioned and anatta is another > thing. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly. And, as you say, this goes across "party lines". ------------------------------------------------------- Here is where I think one is contradicting oneself. On the > > one hand, verbally asserts that all is conditioned and not-self, and > by extention one then goes on to conclude that all is 'emptiness' > (to me one of the most misleading and vague concepts ever put > forward), tending towards denying what goes on right now. > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't think that intelligent Mahayanists say that "All is emptiness". What they say is that all things are empty, which is quite different. ------------------------------------------------------ [And what > goes on is manifestations and characteristics of realities which > condition all these grand ideas that we have, as far as I am > concerned.] Yet there is a 'volition', behind which is the idea > of 'controling conditions' and this I call 'self', which can 'in > particular cause the arising of certain states'. ------------------------------------------------------ Volition is just volition, a function. It does exert influence. And, for sure, it is part of what leads non-arahants to a sense of self. But it is not self. ----------------------------------------------------- > So one can sincerely (relatively, and here I see the importance of > previous accumulation of paramis), be cautioning others about the > danger of substantialism, and come up with a theory > about 'emptiness', *but what is one's own reaction to experiences*? > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: We use nominalizations all the time in language. The Buddha did so, himself. If we are fooled by such usage, then there is a problem. ---------------------------------------------------- > > Howard, I feel that the commentators of Theravada have been most > compassionate in trying to explain in detail the Buddha's teachings. > I see it as being our own lack of panna and comprehensive knowledge > that we fail to see its true value. In our ignorance we often come > up with our own theories about what realities might be and interpret > the Buddha's words according to those views. I do not see it as > being helpful to introduce such vague concepts as `emptiness'. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: The Buddha used 'su~n~na' and 'su~n~nata' in his discourses. The concept is not an invention of Mahayana. And there is nothing vague about it. Su~n~na and anatta are the same. ---------------------------------------------------- I > > think this as being the result of philosophizing rather than actual > experience. To me, without the foundation of satipatthana or at > least honest reflection of ones experience, anything anyone says is > not much worth considering, besides with the Tipitaka still > available, why opt for anything else? > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Satipatthana is part of Mahayana as well as Theravada. The use of Sanskrit instead of Pali doesn't turn milk to curds. --------------------------------------------------- > > I know that I am making a generalized view based on extremely little > knowledge of Mahayana. But I trust that you will let me know where I > am wrong, no? ;-) -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Nope, sorry. There's just no basis for seeing substantialism in Mahayana any more so than in Theravada. In fact, Mahayana began as a corrective to substantialist and annihilationist heresies in certain early schools, the Sarvastivadins and Sautrantikas in particular. In fact, the Mahayanists often accuse the Theravadins (wrongly) of being substantialists! Substantialist and annihilationist errors can be found almost everywhere one looks. And why? Because to make such errors is our human nature - our unenlightened, ignorant tendency. ----------------------------------------------- > > Thanks for trying to clarify matters for me. > > > Metta, > > Sukin. ========================= 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) 27233 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 9:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya Dear Gazita, I enjoyed very much your post with quotes. And also your reminder: if it is not right understanding there is a big, fat chance that it is akusala. Wishing for more understanding creeping in! Nina. op 21-11-2003 12:41 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > From SN 35:85. '"Empty is the world! Empty is the world!" thus > it is said, Venerable ONe. But why, Venerable One, is the world > called empty?' > Because, Ananda, the world is empty of a self and of anything > belonging to a self, therefore the world is called empty. 27234 From: Sarah Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 10:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Natural Decisive Support Condition The following message is from *Mike* who had trouble posting his message to the list ========================================================================= > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah > > 2. Based on my understanding, natural decisive support is the > > keystone for morality and development; if this is true, why is it > > not central to the Suttas (even under the name of accumulations)? > .... > Good Qu. I think it is central to the Suttas, but addressed in > different > terminology. For example, what would be the purpose of reading about > `guarding the senses' or developing other wholesome states if they > were > not `accumulated' and developed. When we read about the khandhas or > ayatanas, we're reading about anatta and the conditioned nature of > realities. Indeed the second stage of insight is understanding about > this. > I think this is the point about reading the Teachings as a > description of > conditioned realities rather than as a set of rules to follow with > an idea > of `self' that can do anything. It just depends how the suttas are > read > and interpreted. I hope others like Nina, Robert or especially > **Mike** > will add comments about this qu as I'm a bit tired now after > teaching and > beginning to ramble. Sarah, since you asked and I have a minute, it seems to me that this touches again on kamma and rebirth vs the goal (i.e. the end of rebirth). What is a 'keystone for morality' (however important otherwise) is not at all the same thing for liberation, I think, and so isn't 'central to the Suttas' (cf. 'minor matters of mere morality' in the Brahmajala Sutta). Hope I haven't misunderstood you, RobM, and certainly defer to your (and Sarah's) vastly superior knowledge of abhidhamma. Apologies in advance if I'm unable to continue this thread... mike 27235 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 10:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Nina, Robert and Michael --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > > Robert: I repeat the question: So have I got it right: When the suttas etc. > talk about, say, feeling or consciousness(vinnana) , in the ultimate, true > sense, > there is no feeling or consciousness? So in fact there is nothing at > all? =================================== > > In conventional sense all those things exist. In ultimate sense they are > empty, no abiding essence, not real. So, one can say they exist and also can > say they don't exist. Both are right, provided the correct provisos are > included. Conventional reality is important, thats were we live until > liberation. But we have to understand where we live to curb ignorance. > ============= Dear Michael, Sorry to ask so many questions; I am still trying to understand where you and professor Kalupahana feel that the ancient monks of Theravada taught wrong teaching. My own position is the same as those venerable monks. Could I give an example: "I am angry; or "She is angry". In the Theravada the 'I' or 'she', 'He', "beings" etc are considered a conventional designation, a concept: "as with the assembly of parts the word chariot is countenanced, So, when the aggregates are present, A being: is said in common usage."(samyutta I, 135) "These, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathagata makes use indeed, but he does not misapprehend them" Digha 9. But anger is a conditioned reality which arises and passes away. So anger is paramattha dhamma, whereas 'I' or 'she' are only concept. Am I right that according to your view both 'anger' and 'I'or 'she' are only conventional truth and neither exist even for an instant in actual truth. Or is there some distinction between anger (which is part of sankhara khandha) and 'I', 'she'? RobertK 27236 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Hello Shakti, and All, What a shock for you, these deaths so close together. It is good at a time like this to ask just those questions you have asked below. Shakti: "I've been wondering where did they go? What died? What did they take with them? What is the difference between rebirth and reincarnation? What is reborn or reincarnated? Why are we born?" No answers from me - you already know about citta, cetasika and rupa. You already know about kamma and vipaka. Though at times like this, it is hard to merge the theoretical, the experiential and the personal. Here are a few readings that may be food for further thought. I apologise for not having all the quotes attributed, but this has sat in my 'drafts' folder for a year or two, since a number of my daughter's young friends were killed in a road accident, in their second year post-high school, and I was asking just the same questions. My confusion also included a sort of horror at the seeming 'unfairness' of it all ... "CONTEMPLATING DEATH Nowadays, according to a world record, about 200,000 people die, on average, every day. Apparently about 70 million people die every year. We are not used to contemplate death or come to terms with it. What we usually do is to avoid it and live as if we were never going to die. As long as there is fear of death, life itself is not being lived to its fullest and at its best. So one of the very fundamental reasons for contemplating death, for making this reality fully conscious, is that of overcoming fear. The contemplation of death is not for making us depressed or morbid; it is rather for the purpose of helping to free ourselves from fear. Contemplation of death will change the way we live and our attitudes towards life. The values that we have in life will change quite drastically once we stop living as if we are going to live forever, and we will start living in a quite different way. (Buddhanet.net) Seeing with wisdom the end of life in others and comparing this life to a lamp kept in a windy place, one should meditate on death. Just as the world beings who once enjoyed great prosperity will die, even so one day will I die too. Death will indeed come to me. This death has come along with birth. Therefore, like an executioner, death always seeks an opportunity to destroy. Life, without halting for a moment, and ever keen on moving, runs like the sun that hastens to set after its rise. This life comes to an end like a streak of lightening, a bubble of water, a dew drop on a leaf, or a line drawn on water. Like an enemy intent on killing, death can never be avoided. If death could come in an instant to the Buddhas endowed with great glory, prowess, merits, supernormal powers and wisdom, what could be said of me? Dying every instant, at one point I shall die in the blink of an eye, for want of food, or through internal ailments or through external injuries. Uncertain is my life certain is my death Inevitable is death for me my life has death as its end my life is indeed unsure my death is sure Not long alas this body on the earth will lie rejected, void of consiousness useless like a rotten log All beings have died are dying will die In the same way I too will die not for me of this there doubt All formations are transient when one with wisdom sees then one is disenchanted with ill this is the path to purity All formations are suffering when one with wisdom sees then one is disenchanted with ill this is the path to purity All phenomena are non-self when one with wisdom sees then one is disenchanted with ill this is the path to purity Dhammapada: 286 "Here shall I dwell in the season of rains, and here in winter and summer"; thus thinks the fool, but he does not think of death. 287 For death carries away the man whose mind is self-satisfied with his children and his flocks, even as a torrent carries away a sleeping village. 288 Neither father, sons nor one's relations can stop the King of Death. When he comes with all his power, a man's relations cannot save him. 289 A man who is virtuous and wise understands the meaning of this, and swiftly strives with all his might to clear a path to Nirvana. Upajjhatthana Sutta AN v.57 "There are these five facts that one should reflect on often, whether one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained. Which five? "'I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.' "'I am subject to illness, have not gone beyond illness.'... "'I am subject to death, have not gone beyond death.'... "'I will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing to me.'... "'I am the owner of my actions (kamma), heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir.'... "These are the five facts that one should reflect on often, whether one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained. May this realization spur me on to put aside useless regrets, and live each day with compassion for myself and others, with kindness towards myself and others, with joy in the achievements of myself and others, and with even-mindedness in all things THE MEDITATION ON DEATH This is a contemplation on impermanence. The meditator is trying to face the stark reality that she will die. One method is to think of beings known to one who have already died and to raise the thought; "just as this one died and is no more, so I too will not escape that fate." If this method is used, the yogin should be very careful not to dwell on the death of loved ones which will lead to sorrow or regret. Instead, neutral beings should be used. Think of people you once knew who are now gone and realize this is a universal fate. Mindfulness of Death: The Eight Ways of Recollecting Death As having the appearance of a murderer. Death is like a murderer that is born along with a person and follows him all life long with a drawn sword and may at any time lop off his head. As the ruin of success. No matter what riches, beauty, power or fame a being may have, it will all come to nought with death. By comparison in seven ways: With those of great fame: Remember very well known people who have died. Consider that if even such as those can pass away, then what of obscure folk like us? With those of great merit: Remember beings with great merit who have lived in the past and are now dead such as Bodhidharma, St. Francis, Gandhi. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of sinners like us? With those of great worldly power: Remember beings with great power over the earth. The world leaders of the world war generation make a good sample of these, as their power was truly earth shaking; Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler and Stalin. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of powerless people like us? With those of great supernormal power: Remember beings with great supernormal powers who have died. Examples, Milarepa, Achaan Mun, Mogallana. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of undeveloped beings like us? With those of great understanding: Remember beings of outstanding wisdom who have died. Examples, Sariputra, Buddhaghosa, Einstein. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of ignorant people like us? With Paceka Buddhas. Even with the great development of their energy and knowledge they too have fallen prey to death. How then will it be for such as us? With fully-enlightened Buddhas. If even the Blessed Ones have died and passed away then what of people like us? As to sharing this body with many: our bodies are home to billions of parasites and symbionts of all types; viruses, bacteria, protozoa, worms and insects. Not only does this fact make apparent the falsity of the illusion that we in some sense " own" this body, but it points out that any unbalance can cause one or more of these to breed out of control and kill us. As to the frailty of life: life can be destroyed at any time by accident, disease or other misfortune. Fire, flood, cancer, plague; the number of perils to this fragile shell are too numerous to list. As to the " signlessness" of death: this means the unpredictability of death. We know not when, where or how we shall die. We could die tomorrow or in fifty years. We know not where we shall lay down the corpse, in our homeland or far overseas. Again, we cannot know whether we shall die by heart attack, cancer or choking on a chicken bone. As to the limitedness of extent: life is a finite commodity. There is a definite span to each life, even if we cannot know it ahead of time. This encourages urgency, because we cannot know how much time we have left. As to the shortness of the moment: this refers to the momentary nature of consciousness. Each mind- moment is a discrete entity unto itself. In this way we are " dying" each and every moment. This moment will not come again." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, shakti wrote: > Dear Htoo Naing, > > Thank you for the reminders of death being always present. > > This past week I have been doing a lot of contemplation on death and dying. My god mother, aunt died and two of my neighbors died this past week. 27237 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 1:38am Subject: Vism.EngPali.XIV, 37-41 37. 1. Herein, the eye's characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements that is ready for the impact of visible data; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to see.(14) Its function is to pick up [an object](15) among visible data. It is manifested as the footing of eye-consciousness. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to see. 37. tattha ruupaabhighaataarahatappasaadalakkha.na.m da.t.thukaamataanidaanakammasamu.t.thaanabhuutappasaadalakkha.na.m vaa cakkhu, ruupesu aavi~nchanarasa.m, cakkhuvi~n~naa.nassa aadhaarabhaavapaccupa.t.thaana.m, da.t.thukaamataanidaanakammajabhuutapada.t.thaana.m. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 38. 2. The ear's characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements that is ready for the impact of sounds; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to hear. Its function is to pick up [an object] among sounds. It is manifested as the footing of ear-consciousness. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to hear. 38. saddaabhighaataarahabhuutappasaadalakkha.na.m, sotukaamataanidaanakammasamu.t.thaanabhuutappasaadalakkha.na.m vaa sota.m, saddesu aavi~nchanarasa.m, sotavi~n~naa.nassa aadhaarabhaavapaccupa.t.thaana.m, sotukaamataanidaanakammajabhuutapada.t.thaana.m. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 39. 3. The nose's characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements that is ready for the impact of odours; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to smell. Its function is to pick up [an object] among odours. It is manifested as the footing of nose-consciousness. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to smell. 39. gandhaabhighaataarahabhuutappasaadalakkha.na.m, ghaayitukaamataanidaanakammasamu.t.thaanabhuutappasaadalakkha.na.m vaa ghaana.m, gandhesu aavi~nchanarasa.m, ghaanavi~n~naa.nassa aadhaarabhaavapaccupa.t.thaana.m, ghaayitukaamataanidaanakammajabhuutapada.t.thaana.m. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 40. 4. The tongue's characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements that is ready for the impact of flavours; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to taste. Its function is to pick up [an object] among flavours. It is manifested as the footing of tongue-consciousness. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to taste. 40. rasaabhighaataarahabhuutappasaadalakkha.naa, saayitukaamataanidaanakammasamu.t.thaanabhuutappasaadalakkha.naa vaa jivhaa, rasesu aavi~nchanarasaa, jivhaavi~n~naa.nassa aadhaarabhaavapaccupa.t.thaanaa, saayitukaamataanidaanakammajabhuutapada.t.thaanaa. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 41. 5. The body's characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements that is ready for the impact of tangible data; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to touch. Its function is to pick up [an object] among tangible data. It is manifested as the footing of body-consciousness. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to touch. 41. pho.t.thabbaabhighaataarahabhuutappasaadalakkha.no, phusitukaamataanidaanakammasamu.t.thaanabhuutappasaadalakkha.no vaa kaayo, pho.t.thabbesu aavi~nchanaraso, kaayavi~n~naa.nassa aadhaarabhaavapaccupa.t.thaano, phusitukaamataanidaanakammajabhuutapada.t.thaano. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Notes: 14. 'Here the first-mentioned characteristic of the eye is described according to the kamma that produces a selfhood, and is common to all of it, and this without touching on differentiation is the cause. The second is according to the specialized kamma generated thus, 'Let my eye be thus'. This is what they say. But it can be taken that the first-mentioned characteristic is stated as sensitivity's interest in lighting up its own objective fields, the five senses' state of sensitivity being taken as a generality; and that the second is stated as the seeing that is due to the particular division of its own cause, the sensitivities' cause as the state of kamma being taken as a generality or as a unity. The same method applies to the ear and so on. 'Here it may be asked, "Is the arising of the faculties of the eye, etc., due to kamma that is one or to kamma that is different?" Now the ancients say, "In both ways". Herein, firstly, in the case of the arising of an eye, etc., due to kamma that is different there is nothing to be explained since the cause is divided up. But when their arising is due to kamma that is one, how does there come to be differentiation among them? It is due to dividedness in the cause too. For it is craving, in the form of longing for this or that kind of becoming that, itself having specific forms owing to hankering after the sense-bases included in some kind of becoming or other, contrives, acting as decisive-support, the specific divisions in the kamma that generates such a kind of becoming. As soon as the kamma has acquired the differentiation induced by that [hankering] it generates that effort consisting in appropriate ability a multiple fruit with differentiated essences, as though it had itself taken on a multiple form. And the ability here need not be understood as anything other than the able state; for it is simply the effort of producing fruit that is differentiated by the differentiation due to the differentiation in its cause. And the fact of this differentiating effort on the part of kamma that is one being the cause of the multiple faculties will be dealt with below as to logic and texts (note 21). Besides, it is told how one kind of consciousness only is the cause of the generation of the ripe, the unripe, the husked, and the unhusked fruit. But what is the use of logical thinking? For the eye, etc., are the fruit of kamma; and kamma-result is exclusively the province of a Buddha's knowledge' (Pm. 444). 15. Aavi~njana--'picking-up': see "aavijjhati" in P.T.S. Dict. 27238 From: Star Kid Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:18am Subject: The Buddha Dear James, I do agree with you with what you wrote to Philip, how people have good results and they start to relax thinking that this will stay like that forever. But unexpectedly things just change. Did the Buddha have a large number of people following him? Did the Buddha teach them what is right and what is wrong? If they did something wrong, will they be punished? Metta, Sandy 27239 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:31am Subject: Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Larry" wrote: > Michael: "The same logic that > applies to a person also applies to dhammas." > > Hi Michael & Azita, > > I haven't been following this thread so I may be going over old > stuff, but I think abhidhamma would disagree with this statement. > Abhidhamma would say a person is a concept while a feeling, for > example, is a reality. A feeling arises and ceases as an experience > but a person is a general notion that has to be defined. . [ snip] > > Larry Dear Larry and Michael, I agree with what you say Larry, and want to add more, from Vipassana Dipani, the Manual of Insight, by Ledi Sayadaw Maha Thera: "Ultimate truth is the absolute truthfulness of assertion or negation in full and comlete accordance wiht what is actual, the elementary, fundamental qualities of phenomena. Here stating such truth in the affirmative form, one may say: 'the element of solidity exists,' 'the element of extension exists,' 'the element of cohesion exists,' 'the element of kinetic energy exists,' 'mind exists,' 'consciousness exists,' 'contact, feeling and perception exist,' 'material aggregates exist,' and so on. And expressing such truth in a negative form, it can be said: 'no self exists,' 'no living soul exists,' 'no person exists,' 'nor do hands, nor any part of the body exist,' 'neither does a man or a Deva exist' and so on. In saying here 'no self exists, no living soul exists' we mean that there is no such ultimate entity as a self or living soul which persists unchanged during the whole term of life, without momentarily coming to be and passing away. In the expressions 'no being exists' and so forth, what is meant is that nothing actually exists but material and mental elements. These elements are neither persons nor beings etc. Therefore there is no separate being or person apart from the elements. This ultimate truth is the diametrical opposite of the hallucination [vipallasa], and so can confute it. One who is thus able to confute or reject the hallucination can escape from the evils of Samsara." To Michael: I don't believe the same logic that applies to a person also applies to dhammas. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 27240 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:46am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Howard, > > The point I am trying to make is this, 'believers' be they > > Mahayanist or Theravadins, believe in 'anatta' and/or 'emptiness'. > > The Mahayanist *do* believe in anatta, I am not saying that they > > don't. But belief in the concept is one thing, and understanding it > > enough to know that this moment is conditioned and anatta is another > > thing. > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Certainly. And, as you say, this goes across "party lines". > ------------------------------------------------------- And ultimately there is no 'Mahayana' or 'Theravada' and hence no "party", but only 'views' and the 'insistence' that one is right and the other is wrong.;-) Howard, I think this is turning to be a Mahayana v.s. Theravada debate, so I am sure you will agree that we drop this topic of discussion. I think there will be plenty of opportunities for both of us to express ourselves though in a different context, that will somehow show both of us what the other's view is with regard to this. Do you agree? Metta, Sukin 27241 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Azita - > > These are wonderful quotes, Azita. I love them! I also think that > Victor's position is in perfect harmony with them. BTW, "the world" is the five > khandhas. All that is pointed to here can be directly discerned with right > practice, and the direct knowing of all this is freeing. (The second quote, > however, I must admit, comes quite *close* to explicity asserting the nonexistence of > a self, but, on careful inspection, it only says that all elements of all > khandhas are empty of self, that is - they are not me or mine.) Dear Howard, What do you mean by 'it only says.....'? is there anything else to say? If the elements, the Khandhas etc are ultimate truth, what else is there to be found? An important > point, I think, is that the Buddha taught not in order to inculcate positions, but > to plant seeds that will sprout in liberation. If there is no right understanding of this very present moment, that this present moment is just those phenomena arising and falling away so rapidly, then there will be no liberation. For those 'seeds' to grow, right understanding must arise to be able to be developed. Wisdom cannot develop unless it arises. Surely it is right understanding - a reality - and not me - a nonreality, that will see phenomena for what it really is -Anatta, Anicca and Dukkha. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 27242 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Sukin Sukin wrote: On the level of pure reasoning, it is hard to prove the other wrong, how else has this Mahayana/Theravada difference continued to exist with little of the proponent of one being convinced and drawn in by the arguments of the other. Michael: I am afraid the only way to find out is to taste it, I mean find out for yourself, challenge your assumption that reasoning proves nothing. Therefore I suggest you study a little bit more about the philosophical stand of Nagarjuna and his followers. But on the other hand I agree with you that the most important is the practice. Theory/philosophizing just as a base for right view and practice. Metta Michael 27243 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Azita. Azita: I don't believe the same logic that applies to a person also applies to dhammas. Michael: OK. But keep in mind that if dhammas have an essence then they are not subject to dependent origination. Dependent origination can only work if phenomena are devoid of any abiding nature/essence. Metta Michael 27244 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Howard, Howard: Substantialist and annihilationist errors can be found almost everywhere one looks. And why? Because to make such errors is our human nature - our unenlightened, ignorant tendency. Michael: Sadhu, sadhu, sadhu. Metta Michael 27245 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 4:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Shakti, Things are not always as they seem. Some happen as expected while some happen in a way that have never been expected. Could you see my inline text reply below. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, shakti wrote: > Dear Htoo Naing, > > Thank you for the reminders of death being always present. > > This past week I have been doing a lot of contemplation on death and dying. My god mother, aunt died and two of my neighbors died this past week. > > My two neighbors were 85 and 86. Lucy died on Sat. evening and John found her Sunday morning. Her body was taken away and shortly after that, he wasn't feeling well. The ambulance was called and took him to the hospital, where he died a few hours later. They were a sweet loving couple, rarely apart. You would see both of them shoveling snow or working in the garden. Always together, even in death. ------------------------------ S: I've been wondering where did they go? ------------------------------------------ H : They couldn't go anywhere as they were dead. The bodies would be under the ground. If someone thinks that one dies and he is reborn in another realm assuming he goes to that new realm, this view sounds like eternal. Like the spirit departs the old body and it inhabits the new body. This kind of view or concept is called Sassata Ditthi ( wrong view holding the concept of eternity ). Samsara is a chain of lives without any interruption. Each has his own Samsara. No one meets another one. Here arises a question how lives are connected. 1. Human to Hell ( Niriya Bhumi ) 2. Human to Tiricchana ( Animal ) 3. Human to Peta ( Ghost ) 4. Human to Asura ( Demon ) 5. Human to Human ( including man to man, man to woman, woman to woman, woman to man ) 6. Human to Deva ( any Deva in 6 Deva realms ) 7. Human to Brahma ( any Brahma in 20 Brahma realms. There are many possible shiftings between the same realm and between different realms. The shift is like transfering of flame from a near extinguishing candle light to a new candle. The candles are not the same they are different. They may have the same colour ( human to human ) or may be different colour ( human to other realms ). But they are related. the new candle has to light due to the old candle light. ( Htoo ) ----------------------------------------- S : What died? ---------------- H : Not clear what was asked. --------------------------------------- S : What did they take with them? ------------------------------------- H : They couldn't take any properties. What they brought with them is Kamma, which again is their own properties as those Kamma were made by themselves at their will. They spent their whole lives till they died. During their lives they did Kamma daily. This is not only them but also we all are in this sense. ( Htoo ) ------------------------------------------------ S : What is the difference between rebirth and reincarnation? What is reborn or reincarnated? ---------------------------------------------- H : Rebirth the term is just translation of Pali term Patisandhe. Rebirth is not the exact term. But for readily understandable it works. Patisandhi is a single moment. It is just one billionth of a blink. It last a lifespan of a Citta. It means linking. The previous life ended with Cuti Citta. Cuti Citta may assumed as death consciousness even though it is not the exact word for it. Bhavanga Cittas of next life come after Patisandhi Citta. Bhavanga Cittas are Cittas that arise as a life. When a particular Satta is in action ( moving, speaking, thinking or anything ) Vithi Cittas arise otherwise Bhavanga Cittas arise. Patisandhi Citta is a Citta between Cuti Citta of the previous life and the first Bhavanga Citta of the present life. So called linking consciousness or Patisandhe. There is no delay in these process. Reincarnation is just rebirth. Most apparent events are human to human shifting of life. But there also are human to animals and animals to human. Shifting of life except human and animals are not called reincarnation. Reincarnation is understandable if events are experienced. The difference from rebirth is reincarnated Satta has some memory of their previous life while ( simple )reborn Satta cannot remember any events of the past life ( be careful reincarnated Sattas are reborn Sattas ).( Htoo ) ------------------------------- S :Why are we born? --------------------------------- H : As long as Sattas cannot eradicate all defilements they will have to be reborn. Once they eradicate all defilements there will be no more rebirth. ( Htoo ) ---------------------------------- > Metta, Shakti 27246 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 5:50am Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Christine, Shakti and all, Thanks Christine for your kind references and Suttas. I included most of your words below in my inline text reply. I do hope these discussion will be helpful for all members and I am looking forward to adding of other members' thought on the matter of death. May all beings be mindful that they were born and ready to die. With Great Compassion, Htoo Naing ---------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Shakti, and All, > > What a shock for you, these deaths so close together. It is good at > a time like this to ask just those questions you have asked below. > > Shakti: "I've been wondering where did they go? What died? What did > they take with them? What is the difference between rebirth and > reincarnation? What is reborn or reincarnated? Why are we born?" -------------------------------------------------------------- Christine : my daughter's young friends were killed in a road accident, and I was asking just the same questions. My confusion also included a sort of horror at the seeming 'unfairness' of it all ... ---------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : I have talked about Shakti's questions in my previous post. Here I notice that you mentioned the seeming ' unfairness '. The seeming 'unfairness ' is not just in case of death but it happens in all areas. These are effects of Kamma. Saying like this does not necessarily mean, we should blindly rely on our past Kamma. Generous people who had been seen all their life with good deed and merits might end to death unexpectedly and in an unfair way. Extremely wicked people who are beyond description may live long with prosperity. There are different kind of Kamma and I mentioned at triplegem list 15 posts. Another seeming 'unfairness ' is success, achievement or anything like that in people who seem not to be worthy of them. Those who tried and struggled a lot to the extent that they should have achieved to their expected degree may not happen as they thought. This may also implicate Kamma. But past Kamma is not the sole factor of the present situation. Diligent struggle can get through anything. Sampatthi Dhamma work. (Htoo ) ------------------------------------------------------------- Christine : We are not used to contemplate death or come to terms with it. What we usually do is to avoid ( AVOID ) it and live as if we were never going to die. As long as there is fear ( FEAR ) of death, life itself is not being lived to its fullest and at its best. So one of the very fundamental reasons for contemplating death, for making this reality fully conscious, is that of overcoming fear. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Yes. Avoidance is not only in case of death but in all other unfavourable conditions. This happens because people do not want to face the real situations. If someone has got cancer and is told that he has, at least at first he would deny it as he does not want to face. But if he accept it and tries to seek treatment he would suffer less. This is because of uncertainty and unpredictability of future. Even if approximate date of death is known, fear still exists because of uncertainty of what would happen after death. Like a dying man we also should seek advice for relaying fear and uncertainty. Marana Anussati Kammatthana is not for producing fear. But it help us mentally preparing for death. If we are preparing all the time, then our way of living will totally change. At least some Mana ( conceit ) will lessen, some Lobha will lessen, and we finally can die with clear consciousness. ( Htoo ) --------------------------------------------------------- Christine : The contemplation of death is not for making us depressed ( DEPRESSED ) or morbid; it is rather for the purpose of helping to free ourselves from fear. Contemplation of death will change the way we live and our attitudes towards life. The values that we have in life will change quite drastically once we stop living as if we are going to live forever, and we will start living in a quite different way. (Buddhanet.net) --------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Exactly. The way we live will change. Thought of death is not for fear, not for depression, not for anxiety, not for anxiousness but for preparation. As I have said, we were born and since then we are ready to die. This has to be faced but in a sensible righteous way so that we can help each other and all other people. If the way people live change in connection with this thought, then the world would be in a favourable condition. ( Htoo ) ---------------------------------------------------------- Christine : This death has come along with birth. Therefore, like an executioner, death always seeks an opportunity to destroy. Life, without halting for a moment, and ever keen on moving, runs like the sun that hastens to set after its rise. ----------------------------------------------------- Htoo : So good and nice that I re-include your words, Christine. ------------------------------------------------------- Christine : This life comes to an end like a streak of lightening, a bubble of water, a dew drop on a leaf, or a line drawn on water. Like an enemy intent on killing, death can never be avoided. --------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Life as a whole is Anicca as each moment is Anicca. Your words help Anicca Sanna on life. ------------------------------------------------------ Christine : If death could come in an instant to the Buddhas endowed with great glory, prowess, merits, supernormal powers and wisdom, what could be said of me? Dying every instant, at one point I shall die in the blink of an eye, for want of food, or through internal ailments or through external injuries. ------------------------------------------------------------ Htoo : No one is exempted as Nama Dhamma, Rupa Dhamma are all Anicca. --------------------------------------------------------------- Upajjhatthana Sutta AN v.57 "There are these five facts that one should reflect on often, whether one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained. Which five? "'I am subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.' "'I am subject to illness, have not gone beyond illness.'... "'I am subject to death, have not gone beyond death.'... "'I will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing to me.'... "'I am the owner of my actions (kamma), heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator. Whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir.'... "These are the five facts that one should reflect on often, whether one is a woman or a man, lay or ordained. May this realization spur me on to put aside useless regrets, and live each day with compassion for myself and others, with kindness towards myself and others, with joy in the achievements of myself and others, and with even-mindedness in all things -------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Good Suttam and your thought units are good as well. And finally, ' THE MEDITATION ON DEATH ' is restated below. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing -------------------------------------------------- THE MEDITATION ON DEATH One method is to think of beings known to one who have already died and to raise the thought; "just as this one died and is no more, so I too will not escape that fate." If this method is used, the yogin should be very careful not to dwell on the death of loved ones which will lead to sorrow or regret. Instead, neutral beings should be used. Think of people you once knew who are now gone and realize this is a universal fate. Mindfulness of Death: The Eight Ways of Recollecting Death As having the appearance of a murderer. Death is like a murderer that is born along with a person and follows him all life long with a drawn sword and may at any time lop off his head. As the ruin of success. No matter what riches, beauty, power or fame a being may have, it will all come to nought with death. By comparison in seven ways: With those of great fame: Remember very well known people who have died. Consider that if even such as those can pass away, then what of obscure folk like us? With those of great merit: Remember beings with great merit who have lived in the past and are now dead such as Bodhidharma, St. Francis, Gandhi. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of sinners like us? With those of great worldly power: Remember beings with great power over the earth. The world leaders of the world war generation make a good sample of these, as their power was truly earth shaking; Churchill, Roosevelt, Hitler and Stalin. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of powerless people like us? With those of great supernormal power: Remember beings with great supernormal powers who have died. Examples, Milarepa, Achaan Mun, Mogallana. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of undeveloped beings like us? With those of great understanding: Remember beings of outstanding wisdom who have died. Examples, Sariputra, Buddhaghosa, Einstein. Consider that if even such as these can pass away, then what of ignorant people like us? With Paceka Buddhas. Even with the great development of their energy and knowledge they too have fallen prey to death. How then will it be for such as us? With fully-enlightened Buddhas. If even the Blessed Ones have died and passed away then what of people like us? As to sharing this body with many: our bodies are home to billions of parasites and symbionts of all types; viruses, bacteria, protozoa, worms and insects. Not only does this fact make apparent the falsity of the illusion that we in some sense " own" this body, but it points out that any unbalance can cause one or more of these to breed out of control and kill us. As to the frailty of life: life can be destroyed at any time by accident, disease or other misfortune. Fire, flood, cancer, plague; the number of perils to this fragile shell are too numerous to list. As to the " signlessness" of death: this means the unpredictability of death. We know not when, where or how we shall die. We could die tomorrow or in fifty years. We know not where we shall lay down the corpse, in our homeland or far overseas. Again, we cannot know whether we shall die by heart attack, cancer or choking on a chicken bone. As to the limitedness of extent: life is a finite commodity. There is a definite span to each life, even if we cannot know it ahead of time. This encourages urgency, because we cannot know how much time we have left. As to the shortness of the moment: this refers to the momentary nature of consciousness. Each mind- moment is a discrete entity unto itself. In this way we are " dying" each and every moment. This moment will not come again." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --------------------------------------------------------- > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, shakti > wrote: > > Dear Htoo Naing, > > > > Thank you for the reminders of death being always present. 27247 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Nina, Robert and Michael Hello RobertK Robert: But anger is a conditioned reality which arises and passes away. So anger is paramattha dhamma, whereas 'I' or 'she' are only concept. Am I right that according to your view both 'anger' and 'I'or 'she' are only conventional truth and neither exist even for an instant in actual truth. Or is there some distinction between anger (which is part of sankhara khandha) and 'I', 'she'? Michael: I have a distinct impression that we are going in circles here. Maybe we should stop this merry go round. If what I said so far nas not rung a bell, thats OK, it is either my lack of skill in explaning things or your lack of accumulations, most likely the former since I have always been a better listener than talker. In any case good talking to you about this, and be happy. Metta Michael >From: "rjkjp1" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Nina, Robert and Michael >Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 06:37:30 -0000 > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > wrote: > > > > >Robert: I repeat the question: So have I got it right: When the >suttas etc. > > talk about, say, feeling or consciousness(vinnana) , in the >ultimate, true > > sense, > > there is no feeling or consciousness? So in fact there is nothing >at > > all? >=================================== > > > > In conventional sense all those things exist. In ultimate sense >they are > > empty, no abiding essence, not real. So, one can say they exist >and also can > > say they don't exist. Both are right, provided the correct >provisos are > > included. Conventional reality is important, thats were we live >until > > liberation. But we have to understand where we live to curb >ignorance. > > >============= >Dear Michael, >Sorry to ask so many questions; I am still trying to understand >where you and professor Kalupahana feel that the ancient monks of >Theravada taught wrong teaching. My own position is the same as >those venerable monks. > >Could I give an example: >"I am angry; or "She is angry". > >In the Theravada the 'I' or 'she', 'He', "beings" etc are considered >a conventional designation, a concept: > "as with the assembly of parts the word chariot is countenanced, >So, when the aggregates are present, A being: is said in common >usage."(samyutta I, 135) >"These, Citta, are merely names, expressions, turns of speech, >designations in common use in the world. And of these a Tathagata >makes >use indeed, but he does not misapprehend them" Digha 9. > > But anger is a conditioned reality which arises and passes away. So >anger is paramattha dhamma, whereas 'I' or 'she' are only concept. > >Am I right that according to your view both 'anger' and 'I'or 'she' >are only conventional truth and neither exist even for an instant in >actual truth. Or is there some distinction between anger (which is >part of sankhara khandha) and 'I', 'she'? >RobertK 27248 From: Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Shakti - In a message dated 11/21/03 9:54:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, deannajohnsonusa@y... writes: > This past week I have been doing a lot of contemplation on death and dying. > My god mother, aunt died and two of my neighbors died this past week. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm sorry that so much death presented itself to you packed so close together. While death, especially of those who were close to us and who also were such a "presence" as to seem to be eternal, is shocking and terribly upsetting, it also lends a new perspective, a directly felt sense of urgency and a disenchantment with what previously seemed oh so important. I empathize with you in the distress this has created. I would like to encourage you to let your feelings come and go, neither hanging on to them nor pushing them away or covering them up. There is a really strong inclination to bottle up feelings of grief and fear - they hurt a lot; they are a literal heart ache - but I think it is best that we be as aware as possible of them and see them for what they actually are: impersonal, insubstantial, conditioned, and ... impermanent. 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) 27249 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 8:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Nina, Robert and Michael --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" <> > Michael: > I have a distinct impression that we are going in circles here. Maybe we > should stop this merry go round. If what I said so far nas not rung a bell, > thats OK, it is either my lack of skill in explaning things or your lack of > accumulations, most likely the former since I have always been a better > listener than talker. In any case good talking to you about this, and be > happy. > ========== Dear Michael, It is probably my poor accumulations. How about looking at another area then. I wrote this letter to a mahayana monk, Venerable Heng Shure of San Francisco. He knows Acharn Sujin very well from meetings in Thailand and America. We had a email discussion a few years ago. perhaps it would be useful if you pointed out the wrong views: Dear Venerable Heng Shure, You referred to my comment: "In another > sense there was no Buddha (and there is no us)- > there were only moments of > changing phenomena." And you said : "This sounds like it could have come right out of one > of the Mahayana > Prajna-Paramita Sutras. However, the Prajna Sutras > would also say even > cittas, cetasikas and rupas cannot be got at. > > Sincerely, in Dharma, H" Glad you could understand what I meant - it might seem a bit strange to some. Now a few words on the nature of dhammas (cittas, cetasikas and rupas- he five aggregates). The word dhamma is often translated as reality. But the word reality in English has connotations of something substantial whereas dhammas , are too evanescent to imagine. As I said recently on this list; Any words we use to describe the nature of realities –impermanent, momentary, temporary, instant by instant- cannot convey the rapidity of the arising and passing away. Take a moment of seeing: For seeing to arise there must be cakkhu pasada (seeing base). This is the extremely refined rupa that arises in the center of the eye. This special rupa is the result of kamma. But it only lasts for the briefest moment before falling away . The reason we can keep seeing is that at this moment the force of the kamma is still working to continue replacing the cakkhu pasada. The visible eye, the eyeball, and the surrounding matter, the rest of the body, are also conditioned by different conditions - not only kamma- and these rupas also only last for a moment before vanishing forever. Every conditioning factor is simarly evanescent as is every conditioned moment. The reason I added this is to highlight the Theravada understanding of dhammas. While the theravada is not quite as radical in its interpretation of reality as the Prajna- parimita sutta, it does nevertheless demolish any ideas of substantiality. I think this needs consideration as we(I mean Theravada people) are prone to talk about "moments" of mind, and so on. However what we mean by moments is rather open to interpretation. However from the Patthana - the last book of the abhidhamma - we learn that "moments" are extraordinarily complex instants in time with influences from past and present factors. The dhammas themselves are not different from the quality they posses. In fact the Atthasalini says that "there is no other thing than the quality born by it" . And no moment is identical with another-It is true that such dhammas as sanna(perception) or vedana (feeling) or vinnana (consciouness) are classified under the same heading but the actual quality is influenced by so many diverse factors that not even one moment of feeling is exactly the same. I write all this as I want to emphasize that any idea of cittas or cetasikas being like some mental atom (This is sort of how I saw things in my early days) is not correct. best wishes robert p.s.: Here is a section from the Mulapariyaya sutta (bodhi p38-39): The Exposition of the Root of all dhammas (sabbadhammamulapariyaya): The Majjhimanikaya-atthakatha (commentary) explains dhammas "they bear their own characteristics, thus they are dhammas." Now this quote from the commentary may make you wonder if the characteristics are something different from the actual dhammas but of course this is not the case. The majjhimanikaya-tika says "these dhammas are discovered as ultimately real actualities. And though there is no real distinction (between these dhammas and their characteristics), still, in order to facilitate understanding, the exposition makes a distinction as a mere metaphorical device (upacaramatta)." 27250 From: Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 11/22/03 5:46:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@k... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > >>The point I am trying to make is this, 'believers' be they > >>Mahayanist or Theravadins, believe in 'anatta' > and/or 'emptiness'. > >>The Mahayanist *do* believe in anatta, I am not saying that they > >>don't. But belief in the concept is one thing, and understanding > it > >>enough to know that this moment is conditioned and anatta is > another > >>thing. > >> > >------------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > Certainly. And, as you say, this goes across "party lines". > >------------------------------------------------------- > > And ultimately there is no 'Mahayana' or 'Theravada' and hence > no "party", but only 'views' and the 'insistence' that one is right > and the other is wrong.;-) > > Howard, I think this is turning to be a Mahayana v.s. Theravada > debate, so I am sure you will agree that we drop this topic of > discussion. I think there will be plenty of opportunities for both > of us to express ourselves though in a different context, that will > somehow show both of us what the other's view is with regard to > this. > Do you agree? > > Metta, > Sukin ============================= I *do* agree. This is a Theravadin list, and that pleases me. I see straight paths and crooked paths arising in all traditions, and my comments were for the purpose only of making what I saw to be a corrective clarification. I have no interest in an Theravada-Mahayana "debate". It would be a boring one in ny case, as I find my Buddhist home to be in the camp of the Theravadins, given that all that I see of value in Mahayana has its basis in the Tipitaka. 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) 27251 From: Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi, Azita (and Victor) - In a message dated 11/22/03 6:13:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, gazita2002@y... writes: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Azita - > > > > > These are wonderful quotes, Azita. I love them! I also think > that > >Victor's position is in perfect harmony with them. BTW, "the world" > is the five > >khandhas. All that is pointed to here can be directly discerned > with right > >practice, and the direct knowing of all this is freeing. (The > second quote, > >however, I must admit, comes quite *close* to explicity asserting > the nonexistence of > >a self, but, on careful inspection, it only says that all elements > of all > >khandhas are empty of self, that is - they are not me or mine.) > > Dear Howard, > > What do you mean by 'it only says.....'? is there anything else > to say? If the elements, the Khandhas etc are ultimate truth, what > else is there to be found? > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: My meaning is the following, Azita: Whether Victor suspects there may be a self or does not so suspect, I don't know. But what I understand Victor to be saying, at least in part, is that the Buddha pointed to various things that are useful for us to see in order to spur a radical cognitive and emotive transformation of the mind. In this respect, one may observe that the Buddha, while saying all the things from which, in my opinion, one can validly conclude "There is no self, anywhere, in anything - no core, no true self-existence, no independent status," this was never stated by the Buddha *in so many words*, never given as an axiom to be accepted, but left (in my opinion) as a transformative discovery to be made. [In the second of the two quotes you give, the Buddha says that all worldly dhammas, that is all elements of the khandhas, are not self, something he urged us to look at and see throughout his teaching. Even in this quote, he does not quite assert the axiom "There is no self." He does come close to saying that here, though, perhaps the closest anywhere.] In general, I see the Buddha as directing us to look at whatever arises and to see its emptiness (its not-self nature) and, of course, its impermanence and unsatisfactoriness. Doing so is psychologically and pragmatically different from intellectually accepting an axiom "There is no self," and even different from validly drawing the inference "There is no self". The conclusion that needs to be drawn, from repeated observations of the tilakkhana made with a mind of heightened concentration, attention, mindfulness, and energy, is to be drawn not by reason in particular (though it may be harmless, or even helpful, to do so), but by a total revolution of the mind, a radical turning over at the depths. The Buddha was a skillful spiritual physician, the consumate one, and he proceeded with his treatment in a very precise and subtle manner. ----------------------------------------------------- > > An important > >point, I think, is that the Buddha taught not in order to inculcate > positions, but > >to plant seeds that will sprout in liberation. > > If there is no right understanding of this very present moment, > that this present moment is just those phenomena arising and falling > away so rapidly, then there will be no liberation. For > those 'seeds' to grow, right understanding must arise to be able to > be developed. Wisdom cannot develop unless it arises. Surely it is > right understanding - a reality - and not me - a nonreality, that > will see phenomena for what it really is -Anatta, Anicca and Dukkha. > > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Indeed! ---------------------------------------------- > Azita > ======================== 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) 27252 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 8:53am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Michael, I realize that you may not wish to go on with this discussion about whose right and wrong. I too think that it may lead to a deadlock. However I would like to say something more about where I come from, I hope you don't mind. I remember vaguely, being impressed by the concept of `emptiness', though I am certain that my understanding then was quite superficial as compared to yours. But I do remember accepting the arguments that lead to the concept. Now, since I have come to study the Abhidhamma, I have noted a difference between two types of expressing the Buddha's teachings. Within the Theravada tradition itself, there is on the one hand teachers like Bhikkhu Bodhi, whose writings are very enjoyable to read, quite mesmerizing. On the other hand there is someone like K. Sujin and Nina, whose words do not arouse the emotions as do most other teachers. However I have noted that K. Sujin and Nina's words draw one's attention to the moment, or at least to reflection `about' the moment. This to me is the only true object of knowledge and wisdom. BB and others on the other hand, their words though they be true in terms of `theory', conditions more `thinking about' dhamma, rather than to the experience of the moment. I saw this as a problem two years ago, and later on I heard about saccayana (sp?) and I realized even more, the importance of developing wisdom that was strong enough to not stray from the present moment. But this is all just an ideal. However these past few weeks I think I have become more aware of how tenacious this habit of being drawn in by what I call the `story of dhamma' is. Even hearing K. Sujin who is forever drawing one's attention to the present moment, even this is *read* in the form of a story! We like to translate every concept in terms of a `situation'. Or we try hard to understand a dhamma within context of what has happened in the past. But this is not the way to understand the characteristic of realities! I do not expect to stop this tendency anytime soon (read millions of lifetimes ;-)), but I hope you now get an idea why I object to certain concepts such as `emptiness'. As far as I am concerned, they add to the already existing problem of the `philosopher' in me. Some people think that the discussions on DSG lean toward intellectualism. I think they look at it from the wrong perspective. I think Abhidhamma to a high extent `clarifies' the Buddha's teachings. Those who think that the Suttas in themselves are simple are wrong. They may just be interpreting it simplistically. The Abhidhamma with the help of the commentaries and the sub and sub-sub commentaries greatly help to cut through the fog often created by our own `wrong thinking'. Besides, accepting my own panna to be very weak and knowing how susceptible I am to `well sounding' words, I think it better for me to keep away from writings which will condition more and more papanca. You say that reading Nagarjuna is meant to help condition right view, and I believe that we can never hear enough reminders about annihilationist and eternalist tendencies. But do you think he has said anything *more* than what is already in the Tipitaka? I have a feeling that it might in fact be a diversion, hence risking becoming even more confused, conditioning more doubt perhaps!? Anyway, I appreciate your good intention, and maybe when I retire as you are now, I will pick up one of Nagarjuna's books and read. ;-) Metta, Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Sukin > > Sukin wrote: > On the level of pure reasoning, it is 27253 From: Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi, Michael - In a message dated 11/22/03 6:37:44 AM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Michael: > OK. But keep in mind that if dhammas have an essence then they are not > subject to dependent origination. Dependent origination can only work if > phenomena are devoid of any abiding nature/essence. > ======================= If I'm not mistaken, the sabhava of the Theravadin tradition, for the most part, is not the same as the svabhava properly criticized by Mahayana. As I understand it, the sabhava of an elementary phenomenon such as a sight or hardness or feeling is a distinguishing characteristic. Now "things," whatever their status, do have (or are) characteristics. It is an error, of course, at least in my opinion, to think of a distinguishing characteristic of a dhamma to be its "own" characteristic in the sense of inhering in the "thing" and being independent. There *is* no self-existing thing, and any group of conditions/characteristics are lacking in own-being precisely because they are completely dependently arisen. In later Theravadin usage, I do think that 'sabhava' came closer to the sense of "own being," and with that sense it was denied existence in the Path of Discrimination, a Theravadin work that was included after a while in the Khuddaka Nikaya. 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) 27254 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cooran meeting Dear Ken, Looking forward to you report after you had your meeting in Cooran. I like to know about your discussion on anapanasati after reading my Co quotes. And details about what you were eating, who did the cooking, animals, etc. And you have a fire outside? When is it? Nina. P.S. Is there no shark danger where you do your surfing? Take care, we need you on dsg. op 22-11-2003 03:21 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y...: > Yes, a number of topics have been put forward. Among them are the Anapanasati-sutta and the Satipatthana- sutta. Just a couple of quick ones to get the ball rolling. :-) 27255 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 10:38am Subject: anapanasatisutta, II c anapanasatisutta, II c Contemplating the Body in the Body: now we go to the Co to Satipatthana Sutta (Middle length Sayings, I, 10, translated by Ven. Soma): As to the words: , this Co explains that the world is the five khandhas. Covetousness stands for sense desire and grief stands for ill will, which are, as the Co states, the principal hindrances. We read: Nina: I heard in a tape that A. Sujin explained that all the different sections in the contemplation of the body are a means to remind us to be aware of rupa we take for my body. We think that we walk, sit or are breathing, but in reality there are nama and rupa. ***** Nina. 27256 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi Larry, op 22-11-2003 01:07 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Thanks for this succinct explanation. I'm a little confused by the > "eye-decade". N: Why? eye is here eyesense, the extremely tiny rupa that has the capability to be impinged on by visible object or colour. It could not arise by itself, it needs the other nine rupas in that group also produced by kamma, thus the 8 inseparable rupas and life-faculty. At the first moment of life kamma produces the rebirth-consciousness and three decads of rupas: one with the heartbase, one with bodysense (but it is not yet developed, infinitely tiny) and one with sex. The decads with eyesense, earsense etc. are produced later on. L: Also, if I see a rock, are you saying the rock is not > kamma result but the seeing is? N: You can only see what impinges on eyesense, colour or visible object. Seeing is vipaka, produced by kamma. The rock consists of different groups of rupa, but the rock as a whole is not impinging on eyesense. Only colour is. But we should not single out colour of rock, then we are not seeing, but thinking. Seeing does not define any shape, it only sees. When you touch the rock tangible object is experienced: three great primaries are tangible object, and one of them at a time only appears: solidity, appearing as hardness or softness, temperature, appearing as heat or cold, and motion, appearing as resilience or pressure. Kamma does not produce what we call a rock, only temperature produces rupas which are not of a living body. Nina. 27257 From: Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 6:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi, Nina (and Larry) - In a message dated 11/22/03 1:40:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > N: You can only see what impinges on eyesense, colour or visible object. > Seeing is vipaka, produced by kamma. The rock consists of different groups > of rupa, but the rock as a whole is not impinging on eyesense. Only colour > is. But we should not single out colour of rock, then we are not seeing, but > thinking. Seeing does not define any shape, it only sees. When you touch the > rock tangible object is experienced: three great primaries are tangible > object, and one of them at a time only appears: solidity, appearing as > hardness or softness, temperature, appearing as heat or cold, and motion, > appearing as resilience or pressure. Kamma does not produce what we call a > rock, only temperature produces rupas which are not of a living body. > ============================= Nina, there is, it is said, a group of co-arising rupas, only one of which impinges on a sense door at a time - only one of which appears at a time. At the time that one of these is experienced, where do the others reside? For example, "where" is the solidity at the time it is not felt, but sight is active instead? These others cannot reside in "the rock", for "the rock" is not an existent. Do they reside in some Buddhist equivalent to Plato's world of forms? ;-) Do you see the problem? 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) 27258 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:04pm Subject: Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Howard: > My meaning is the following, Azita: Whether Victor suspects there may > be a self or does not so suspect, I don't know. But what I understand Victor > to be saying, at least in part, is that the Buddha pointed to various things > that are useful for us to see in order to spur a radical cognitive and emotive > transformation of the mind. In this respect, one may observe that the Buddha, > while saying all the things from which, in my opinion, one can validly conclude > "There is no self, anywhere, in anything - no core, no true self- existence, > no independent status," this was never stated by the Buddha *in so many words*, > never given as an axiom to be accepted, but left (in my opinion) as a > transformative discovery to be made. [In the second of the two quotes you give, the > Buddha says that all worldly dhammas, that is all elements of the khandhas, are > not self, something he urged us to look at and see throughout his teaching. > Even in this quote, he does not quite assert the axiom "There is no self." He > does come close to saying that here, though, perhaps the closest anywhere.] In > general, I see the Buddha as directing us to look at whatever arises and to > see its emptiness (its not-self nature) and, of course, its impermanence and > unsatisfactoriness. Doing so is psychologically and pragmatically different from > intellectually accepting an axiom "There is no self," and even different from > validly drawing the inference "There is no self". The conclusion that needs to > be drawn, from repeated observations of the tilakkhana made with a mind of > heightened concentration, attention, mindfulness, and energy, is to be drawn not > by reason in particular (though it may be harmless, or even helpful, to do > so), but by a total revolution of the mind, a radical turning over at the > depths. The Buddha was a skillful spiritual physician, the consumate one, and he > proceeded with his treatment in a very precise and subtle manner. > ----------------------------------------------------- This is very well stated. Very often we see people state things like "There is no self" and then they begin to formulate ideas about what that means: in relation to themselves, other selves, and the world. However, the idea of self is still unconsciously there in these people, so these theories are distortions of reality. That is why the Buddha didn't teach, "There is no self"; he taught that everything we take for self, the five khandhas, isn't self. This is an important distinction. "There is no self" is a position, a mental fabrication, while, "Everything we take for self isn't self" is a path of inquiry. One leads to false views while the other leads to direct realization of the truth. > ======================== > With metta, > Howard Metta, James 27259 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:40pm Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Htoo Naing, Christine, Shakti and others, Do you think that we have difficulties with death bc in one sense, we haven't experienced it yet in this life. I know this statement will draw comments about death of every moment, but what I mean is that we have an idea of lobha, dosa, good feeling, bad feeling bc we experience this every day, but we don't experience our own 'conventional' death every day. One of my ways of remembering death is to drive thro a cemetary, which is close by. Its a pleasant old cemetary, with lots of curlews - birds that the indigenous people believe cry out when there are spirits around - their call is very eery. As I drive thro. I remind myself that I too will end up here one day. Its interesting, in that I am getting to know the names on the headstones and I say hello to them all!!!!! When I was about 11-12 yrs old, my girlfriend and I used to ride our bikes thro an old cemetary, and she had a fascination for the graves. She actually died quite young. Again when I was in my early 20's, a boyfriend and I used to go to the cemetary at night to see how scared we could make ourselves. Cemetaries are actually very serene places. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Christine, Shakti and all, To Htoo, I hope you won't think me rude, and I did like your comment "We are being dead tick by tick" it is unusual English and very cute, I hope you don't mind if I use it occasionally here on dsg. Thank you so much for your wonderful reminders on death. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 27260 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 4:06pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Azita. > > Azita: > I don't believe the same logic that applies to a > person also applies to dhammas. > > > Michael: > OK. But keep in mind that if dhammas have an essence then they are not > subject to dependent origination. Dependent origination can only work if > phenomena are devoid of any abiding nature/essence. > > Metta > Michael dear Michael, I'm not sure what you mean by 'essence'. Do you mean something lasting, something that arose once and has never ceased? If this is so, then I agree that D.O. does not apply. Is understanding not a dhamma? Does it not exist when it arises? Yes, it disappears again and that particular dhamma never arises again, but more understanding can arise at a later time, conditioned, possibly, by previously arisen understanding. We are being dead tick by tick, thank you Htoo Naing, Azita. 27261 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 4:42pm Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Hello Azita, Htoo Naing, Shakti,Howard and All, I don't have any fear of death myself, it is the attachment to others that makes me fear *their* deaths. A selfish wanting of things to remain as they are - I don't want to have a 'person-shaped hole' in my life. I think this is a very common feeling - often one can hear couples who love each other deeply, and who have been together a long time, say "I hope I go before Mary does - I couldn't bear to live without her". Just lobha ... You, also, will have seen in your daily work that normal run-of-the- mill death in western hospitals is not a spectacular thing to be feared. Most people are not conscious. Most are relatively pain free. Sometimes the dividing line between life and death is difficult to tell except with sensitive machines. And there is an echo of Shakti's question, even by those sitting with the dying, "Where did they go?" and even, "When did they go - I was sitting right here, I just looked away for a moment ..." I think the change in culture - once people died at home surrounded by family, to dying in a regimented, sterile hospital - has meant a growth in the fear of death, by making it unfamiliar, unknown and mysterious. I grew up going to a Christian Church which was surrounded by its own graveyard and headstones. To get to the Church door, one had to pass through a grassy lane between graves. Families in the district had 'family plots', the newly deceased were interred with the remains of already dead loved ones. Kids played around and between the graves. It was never scary, it was seen as a natural end to life. People would put fresh flowers on the graves after Church and some would have a talk and tell the dead relatives the latest happenings - I'm not sure if they really believed they were hovering around - but people add their own hopes to the basic teachings of any religion. And the Christian Religion does not teach anatta. It is kamma and its unpredictability that is a little unnerving for me - especially the type of kamma that may have been committed aeons ago and only finds its chance to have influence at the rebirth moment. Still - no control, so useless to worry I suppose. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" 27262 From: Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 5:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Nina: "Kamma does not produce what we call a rock, only temperature produces rupas which are not of a living body." Hi Nina, Does this mean the rupa that is the object of consciousness (e.g.,visible data) is different from the rupa we call a rock? Can we call this object of consciousness living rupa? Larry 27263 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 7:25pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi Howard, I believe that both of us recognize that the idea "there is no self" is not what the Buddha taught. Is it possible that this idea, itself a metaphysical extreme, can be validly inferred from what the Buddha's teaching? I don't think so. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Azita (and Victor) - [snip] Doing so is psychologically and pragmatically different from > intellectually accepting an axiom "There is no self," and even different from > validly drawing the inference "There is no self". [snip] 27264 From: Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi, Victor - In a message dated 11/22/03 10:36:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, yu_zhonghao@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I believe that both of us recognize that the idea "there is no self" > is not what the Buddha taught. > > Is it possible that this idea, itself a metaphysical extreme, can be > validly inferred from what the Buddha's teaching? > > I don't think so. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Here may be where we differ. I think that in one sense of 'self', what I call the empirical or conventional sense, it cannot be inferred, but in what I would call the philosophical sense it can. In any case, as indicated, I don't think the inferential aspects are all that important. In my opinion, liberation and enlightenment are not about intellectual positions or inference. ----------------------------------------------- > > Peace, > Victor > ======================= 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) 27265 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 1:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] the usuals Nina Found this message from you as I was clearing out my mail. Apologies for not having answered earlier. Just to let you know that your regards were passed on to Jack and Oi, and that they sent best wishes back to you and Lodewick. Sorry for not mentioning this earlier. Like you, I see the need to keep hearing about "the usuals", and I never tire of it. In fact sometimes when the discussion gets into difficult, complicated areas I find myself wishing for the 'fresh air' of some good reminders on the usuals! Jon --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Jonothan, > op 17-10-2003 14:31 schreef Jonothan Abbott op > jonoabb@y...: > we had discussion with Ajarn Sujin at the Foundation, along > > with Betty and also (surprise) Jack and Oi from California. > N: Please my warmest regards to both of them. I regret not being > there to > see them also. > J: Topics discussed included, in addition to 'the ususals' (seeing > and > > visible object of the present moment etc), kalayana mitta... > N: The usuals, a short reminder, but so helpful today. Lodewijk and > I had a > beautiful nature hike in crisp, sunny whether, enjoying the autumn > (fall) > colours. I thought of "the usuals", and the fact that we hear this > year in > year out and that we never have enough of it. Why? We are captured > by the > pleasant objects through the eyes and immediately create stories > about them. > I had to laugh, I was doing this all the time and also thinking of > your > words about "the usuals". Such a good time with your reminder, it > is > wonderful. It is so obvious that only visible object is seen, but > it is so > enticing! > With much appreciation, > Nina. 27266 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:29am Subject: Nibbana - transcendental or not? Dear Group, I am reading around the subject of nibanna. In the Ariyapariyesana Sutta MN 26.18 the section on Enlightenment "Then, bhikkhus, being myself subject to birth, having understood the danger in what is subject to birth, seeking the unborn supreme security from bondage, Nibbana, I attained the unborn supreme security from bondage, Nibbana; being myself subject to ageing, having understood the danger in what is subject to ageing, seeking the unageing supreme security from bondage, Nibbana, I attained the unageing supreme security from bondage, Nibbana; {repeats the same for sickness, death, sorrow, defilement} The knowledge and vision arose in me: "My deliverance is unshakeable; this is my last birth; now, there is no renewal of being'. I have an initial question about nibbana. I take the meaning of transcendant to mean 'going beyond the limits of ordinary experience', 'not based on experience, intuitive, innate in the mind'. In the Pali-English dictionary, it says: "Import and Range of the Term. A. Nibbana is purely and solely an ethical state, to be reached in this birth by ethical practices, contemplation and insight. It is therefore NOT TRANSCENDENTAL. The first and most important way to reach N. is by means of the eightfold Path, and all expressions which deal with the realisation of emancipation from lust, hatred and illusion apply to practical habits and not to speculative thought. N. is realised in one's heart; to measure it with a speculative measure is to apply a wrong standard." http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/index.html In the introduction to the Majjhima Nikaya, Bhikkhu Bodhi says: "The Buddha does not devote many words to a philosophical definition of Nibbaana. One reason is that Nibbaana, being unconditioned, TRANSCENDANT, and supramundane, does not easily lend itself to definition in terms of concepts that are inescapably tied to the conditioned, manifest, and mundane." Is Nibbana transcendental or not? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 27267 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Larry & Jon - ... > ============================ > What in the world could one be aware of when one is aware of > a consciousness but not of the object of that consciousness? If > that occurred, then > being aware of one consciousness would be no different from being > aware of another. I don't see it that way at all :-)). When there are moments of consciousness accompanied by awareness, whether awareness of consciousness or of one of the sense-door objects, it's not as though the 'normal' experiencing occurring at that time (e.g., reading a book, walking to work, eating lunch) is suspended or impaired and there is *only* awareness and/or its object. The consciousness with awareness arises together with (or in addition to) the 'normal' experiencing, but because there is awareness then whatever is the object of the awareness is experienced more clearly for what it truly is. Thus if there was awareness of, for example, seeing consciousness at a time when both seeing and hearing are occurring (as appears to us to be the case), the seeing consciousness would be experienced more clearly as it is truly is; there would be no doubt that the consciousness in question was seeing consciousness and not hearing consciousness. To me, the idea of awareness experiencing both seeing consciousness and its object at one and the same moment implies a unity of consciousness-and-object which the teachings are at pains to refute. May I ask whether this is a 'model' that you find mentioned in the suttas? Jon 27268 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pure again Hi Icaro, Thanks for joining in the “Pure Again” thread;-) So glad you came out of Jungle Bootcamp with flying colours. .... --- icarofranca wrote: > Yeah! Back to Air Base!!!! > My bootcamp is ending at last!!! > I will post here at DSG my bootcamp photos... muddled, hanged up > at ropes, eating jungle food with some reluctant comrades around > me... > "Scenes of a Bootcamp !!!" or " The practical uses of the Bamboo > Grove´s Sutta" > I always kept in my mind the Buddha´s Sermon at Bamboo grove, and > the paramount ideas of Sammuit-Sacca and Paramattha-Sacca! > > "Hercules Squad!!! Go Go Go !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" ..... New members might think you’ve caught a touch of jungle fever, but I’d like to assure them that this is normal for Icaro;-) I’m looking f/w to the jungle bootcamp photos* and practical applications of sammuti sacca (conventional truths) and paramatha sacca (absolute truths). I hope you will continue this discussion with Michael B, our very articulate and well-read new member (not to be confused with Michael the Buddha (no word for a long time), Mike (being a little mysterious) or a couple of other lurking Michaels). Michael B is from Brazil too!! ..... > Jungle survival is a hard road to step on! > 10% of our Hercules Squad suffered up casualities... injuries > ankles, slashed toes and many grrrls saying "Oh My goodness... I > cannot bear such efforts..." ..... Meanwhile this grrrl injured her ankle in city jungle survival. Connie meanwhile has been swimming with Conditions - a few splutters and gulps but she’s become a pro on decisive support condition. We looking forward to help with the basic strokes for other conditions. .... > Mike, you could to be there to raise up the grrrrrls´ fighting > spirit...HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!!!!!!!!!! .... Hope that encourages him to contribute more often here;-) .... > Gosh!!! The Hon. Kevin Sorbo could be there too to salute our > Hercules Squad!!! "You all boys and girls done well at Jungle > Bootcamp !!!" .... I’ll have to find a translator. Talking of which, I even followed your link and checked out the German Vism recently, looking for a reference. Can’t think of any other big news here you may have missed unless you consider James celebrating his anniversary on DSG or James and I finding an area of agreement as big news;-) Meanwhile, the StarKids keep him on his toes, especially one Chinese 13 year old whose hobby is ‘pushing limits’. Thanks for sending postcards and diary entries from Bootcamp, Icaro. Look forward to hearing more from you and so glad you appreciated the relevance of Bamboo grove suttas and paramattha sacca all the while. It shows your saddha (confidence) and appreciation of the Buddha’s teachings. To show we’ve been considering tangles, bamboo thickets and jungle knives in your absence, let me re-quote these apt reminders about the real jungle tangle and way out: Vism ch1,1 >While the Blessed One was living at Savatthi, it seems, a certain deity came to him in the night, and in order to do away with his doubts he asked this question: `The inner tangle and the outer tangle- `This generation is entangled in a tangle. `And so I ask of Gotama this question: `Who succeeds in disentangling this tangle?' (S.i, 13). 2. Here is the meaning in brief. Tangle is a term for the network of craving. For that is a tangle in the sense of lacing together, like the tangle called network of branches in bamboo thickets, etc., because it goes on arising again and again up and down among the objects [of consciousness] beginning with what is visible. But it is called the inner tangle and the outer tangle because it arises [as craving] for one's own requisites and another's, for one's own person and another's, and for the internal and external bases [for consciousness]. Since it arises in this way, this generation is entangled in a tangle. As the bamboos, etc., are entangled by the bamboo tangle, etc., so too this generation, in other words, this order of living beings, is all entangled by the tangle of craving- the meaning is that it is intertwined, interlaced by it.< ..... Vism, Ch1, 7 >Just as a man standing on the ground and taking up a well-sharpened knife might disentangle a great tangle of bamboos, so too, he-this bhikkhu who possesses the six things, namely, this virtue, and this concentration described under the heading of consciousness, and this threefold understanding, and this ardour--, standing on the ground of virtue and taking up with the hand of protective-understanding well-sharpened on the stone of concentration, might disentangle, cut away and demolish all the tangle of craving that had overgrown his own life's continuity. But it is at the moment of the Path that he is said to be disentangling that tangle : at the moment of fruition he has disentangled the tangle and is worthy of the highest offerings in the word with its deities. That is why the Blessed One said: `When a wise man, established well in Virtue, `Develops Consciousness and Understanding, `Then as a bhikkhu ardent and sagacious `He succeeds in disentangling this tangle'.< ***** Metta, Sarah *If one day you suddenly find they (the jungle pix) have disappeared, don’t get alarmed - we’re having to regularly cull pix other than the ones in the member folder as we keep reaching the album limit. ================================================== 27269 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... > I don't think so. They are definitely distinguishable, and > they are > distinguishable on the basis of their characteristics. I don't deny > this at all. I > simple say that they never occur on their own, and that is what I > mean by their being inseparable. > > With metta, > Howard It is of course true that dhammas do not occur 'on their own', but what do you see as being the significance of that, especially in terms of the direct experience of dhammas by awareness? According to the teachings, dhammas are to be experienced by awareness and/or panna individually; that I think is the whole point of identifying the individual dhammas that are the 'soil' of understanding. I don't want to get into a discussion on semantics, but I would not have said that 'never occurring on their own' and 'inseparable' were the same thing at all. More to the point perhaps, is this something you find mentioned in the suttas, i.e., the aspect of inseparability as opposed to the characteristics/aspects of impermanence, no-self and conditioned nature? (I know you're not strong on references, Howard, but if you come across any I'd be interested to see them). Jon 27270 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah / Pure again Hi Thomas, Michael, Howard and Victor too have already replied to your comments as I recall, so I’ll just add a little only. --- nordwest wrote: > Dear Sarah, I really find the word pure perfectly right. It ia an easy > english word to use. What is this wholesome or unwholesome? ..... These terms are translations of the Pali terms ‘kusala’ and ‘akusala’. Some mental states such as kindness, generosity and wisdom are kusala (wholesome) and some, such as anger, attachment and ignorance are akusala (unwholesome). We can say the kusala ones are ‘pure’, but as we have different understandings of what this word means, it may be confusing. .... >What is > this cittas and critters? - I am joking, as you may imagine. .... It’s a good question and it doesn’t matter if we call them critters either;-) (They’ve been called far worse, I’m sure. They're pronounced more like cheetahs;-)) According to the Buddha’s teachings as we find in the Pali canon, what we take for ‘mind’ or ‘consciousness’ are really a continuous flow of cittas or momentary elements of consciousness, each one conditioning the next like an electrical current. While each citta is conditioned by the last one, when it arises, the previous one has completely fallen away, never to return. So there is no underlying pure mind. Each citta is accompanied by many mental factors or cetasikas such as those we discussed above under kusala and akusala. Simply put, a kusala citta is accompanied by kusala cetasikas and vice versa. You may find it helpful to look at RobM’s slides for some basic details. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Htoo is also giving details in his posts about these cetasikas. Please ask any other questions. .... >Please let > me exaplin why "pure" is such a useful word, it arises from this > understanding: > > Imagine the mind as a mirror in which reality is reflected. Like this > you can understand how mind works. It is not seeing things directly, but > contemplating things, or refecting upon things. > Originally the mind was a Pure Mind, this means it refelcted without any > thought this what is, and all that is, without limitations in space and > time. .... When was this? I’ll wait for you before I add anything more. Metta, Sarah ==== 27271 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Larry --- Larry wrote: ... > I have had a change of mind. I don't think consciousness by itself > can be an object of consciousness. I would say consciousness ALWAYS > arises with cetasikas. Are you saying that if consciousness alone can be the object of awareness, this would mean or imply that consciousness arises or can arise without cetasikas? I'm not with you on this. Perhaps you could elaborate. > ... The 121 consciousnesses are actually 121 > combinations of the 52 cetasikas. Consciousness as object would be > one of the 121 combinations. Not quite. Remember, there are said to be 4 paramattha dhammas: citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbana. The 121 consciousnesses are actually 121 cittas; arising with various combinations of the 52 cetasikas. Some of the different kinds of cittas have the same combinations of cetasikas (for example, each of the 5 sense-door consciousnesses is accompanied by exactly the same cetasikas, the difference lies in the doorway through which they experience their object). Consciousness as object means that it is the citta rather than one of the cetasikas that is object of consciousness/awareness. Does this make sense? Jon 27272 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inherent characteristics of rupa Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - Howard: Perhaps 'accumulations' is the wrong word. What I meant is that whether a pleasant or unpleasant rupa arises is at least partly a kammic consequence. ... Well, old kamma still has its effect, and the pleasantness/unpleasantness of what arises still is conditioned by prior kamma. Jon: As I understand it, past kamma conditions whether a pleasant or unpleasant rupa *is experienced* (not, 'arises'). The arising of rupas is conditioned by an altogether different set of conditions, and, except in the case of certain rupas of the body, has nothing to do with an individual's past kamma. I think we have to distinguish between 2 different sets of factors: (a) the factors governing the *arising* of rupas and, (b) the factors governing the experiencing of rupas by sense-door consciousness. Howard: Yes, vedana is a mental feature/function. The question is of its dependency. I am merely saying that the rupa itself is a condition for the particular vedana that arises. Jon: I'm not sure that that is so (but in any event is quite different to saying that the rupa carries its own vedanic flavour!). However, the extent to which a rupa as object could be a condition for the feeling that accompanies the subsequent consciousness must be limited. For example, if the consciousness that follows the moment of experiencing the rupa is kusala consciousness, then the feeling could not be unpleasant feeling, no mater how 'unpleasant' the rupa. I would not see the relationship as being anywhere near as direct as is suggested by the analogy you give below. Jon Howard: [Analogy: A surface that reflects only red light is seen as red. The seeing of redness is not something in the surface, nor is the seen redness, itself, something in the surface. But a "black" surface will not be seen as red - so the seen redness is dependent on the surface, and we might say, in that sense, that it is inherent in the surface. Likewise, the pleasantness of a rupa depndes in part on the rupa, and, in that sense, may be described as inherent in it. Of course, all talk of inherency is and should be suspect! It is a dangerous manner of speech.] 27273 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 4:20am Subject: Re: Reply to James --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Star Kid wrote: > Jimbo: > > Thank you for your letter, and thank you for your > good words and compliments. I am also quite happy at > this report, but I must not forget everything else. > > Anyway, there are a few questions waiting for you: > > > 1. Is there someone who is the chief monk in each > Buddhist temple, such as the Grand Abbott, Grand > father, Grand piano? > > 2.How do I deal with mean students? Beat them up? How > can I get more friends? > > 3. Any other advice you have for me? > > Please reply > > Philip Chui Hi Star Kid Philip! Jimbo?? Please refer to me only as James, Mr. James, or Mr. Mitchell. Because I am your elder, referring to me with any other name isn't showing me proper respect; and I'm sure you don't want to do that, do you? ;-) I am glad that my other letter pleased you and gave you some food for thought. Okay, let me get to your questions in this letter: Question: Is there someone who is the chief monk in each Buddhist temple, such as the Grand Abbott, Grand father, Grand piano? Answer: None of the above. The chief monk of a temple is just referred to as the `Abbott'. Question: How do I deal with mean students? Beat them up? How can I get more friends? Answer: Physical or verbal violence is never an answer to anything. If a student is mean, you should be especially nice to him or her until they start to act nice. If that doesn't work after a while, stay away from that student. The way to get more friends is to have the virtue of friendliness. You have to be someone who others want to be friends with. But if you want a lot of friends just so that you can feel good about yourself, feel powerful, or to boast to other people, you will end up with no friends. Friends are there to support and help each other, not use each other. Question: Any other advice you have for me? Answer: Yes, you need to start being nicer to your sister. You may not see it, but she looks up to you as a role model and an example. You need to be patient with her and show her the difference between right and wrong, by doing only right things yourself. She is counting on you. I hope that answers your questions. If you have anymore questions, don't hesitate to ask. Metta, James 27274 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 5:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Victor --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I am not quite sure what you are trying to argue or why. OK, to save any further to-ing and fro-ing, here is the last post of mine on the issue we were discussing (copied from msg No. 26541). << << << You start by asking the question, 'Why did the Buddha teach right concentration/samma samadhi?' I think the short answer is that the Buddha taught everything that needs to be known about the path leading to enlightenment. One of the most important of these is the 8 factors of which the Noble Eightfold Path is comprised. Samma samadhi is 1 of these. To my understanding, these path factors are the factors that accompany a moment of path consciousness. They are not factors to be developed separately and individually and that somehow coalesce when they have reached a certain degree. >> >> >> And for convenience I have also copied just below your original post to Larry and me. Hope all is clear now ;-)). Happy to continue the discussion if you would like to. Jon Victor wrote: << << << Hi Larry, Jon, and all, Perhaps the way to have a clear idea why the Buddha recommended right concentration/samma samadhi or what is the exact relationship between tranquility and concentration in samma samadhi is to develop right concentration/samma samadhi itself. Why did the Buddha teach right concentration/samma samadhi? As a factor of the Noble Eightfold Path, it leads to the cessation of dukkha. Specifically, Let me quote from MN14 Culadukkahkkhandha Sutta* the following passage: How does one attain to the rapture and pleasure that are apart from sensual pleasures, apart from unwholesome states, or to something more peaceful than that? With right concentration/samma samadhi. Without right concentration/samma samadhi, one would still be attracted to sensual pleasures. >> >> >> 27275 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 5:34am Subject: Vism.EngPali.XIV, 42-45 42. Some,(16) however, say that the eye is sensitivity of primary elements that have fire in excess, and that the ear, nose, and tongue are sensitivity of primary elements that have [respectively] air, earth, and water in excess, and that the body is that of all [four equally]. Others say that the eye is sensitivity of those that have fire in excess, and that the ear, nose, tongue, and body are [sensitivity] of those that have [respectively] aperture, air, water, and earth in excess. They should be asked to quote a sutta. They will certainly not find one. 42. keci pana ``tejaadhikaana.m bhuutaana.m pasaado cakkhu, vaayupathaviiaapaadhikaana.m bhuutaana.m pasaadaa sotaghaanajivhaa, kaayo sabbesampii''ti vadanti. apare ``tejaadhikaana.m pasaado cakkhu, vivaravaayuaapapathavaadhikaana.m sotaghaanajivhaakaayaa''ti vadanti. te vattabbaa ``sutta.m aaharathaa''ti. addhaa suttameva na dakkhissanti. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 43. But some give as their reason that it is because these [several sensitivities] are [respectively] aided by visible data, etc., as qualities of fire, and so on.(17) They should be asked, 'But who has said that visible data, etc., are qualities of fire and so on? [445] For it is not possible to say of primary elements, which remain always inseparable,(18) that "This is a quality of this one, that is a quality of that one" '. 43. keci panettha ``tejaadiina.m gu.nehi ruupaadiihi anugayhabhaavato''ti kaara.na.m dassenti. te vattabbaa ``ko panevamaaharuupaadayo tejaadiina.m gu.naa'ti. avinibbhogavuttiisu hi bhuutesu aya.m imassa gu.no aya.m imassa gu.noti na labbhaa vattu''nti. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 44. Then they may say: 'Just as you assume, from excess of some primary element in such and such material things, the [respective] functions of upholding (sandhaara.na), etc., for earth, etc., so from finding visibility, etc., [respectively] in a state of excess(19) in material things that have fire in excess, one may assume that visible data, etc., are [respectively] qualities of these'. They should be told: 'We might assume it if there were more odour in cotton, which has earth in excess, than in fermented liquor, which has water in excess, and if the colour of cold water were weaker than the colour of hot water, which has heat in excess. 44. athaapi vadeyyu.m ``yathaa tesu tesu sambhaaresu tassa tassa bhuutassa adhikataaya pathaviiaadiina.m sandhaara.naadiini kiccaani icchatha, eva.m tejaadiadhikesu sambhaaresu ruupaadiina.m adhikabhaavadassanato icchitabbameta.m ruupaadayo tesa.m gu.naa''ti. te vattabbaa ``iccheyyaama, yadi aapaadhikassa aasavassa gandhato pathaviiadhike kappaase gandho adhikataro siyaa, tejaadhikassa ca u.nhodakassa va.n.nato siitudakassa va.n.no parihaayetha''. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 45a. 'But since neither of these is a fact, you should therefore give up conjecturing the difference to be in the supporting primary elements. Just as the natures of visible objects, etc., are dissimilar from each other though there is no difference in the primaries that form a single group, so too are eye-sensitivity, etc., though no other cause of their difference exists'.(20) This is how it should be taken. 45a. yasmaa paneta.m ubhayampi natthi, tasmaa pahaayeta.m etesa.m nissayabhuutaana.m visesakappana.m, ``yathaa avisesepi ekakalaape bhuutaana.m ruuparasaadayo a~n~nama~n~na.m visadisaa honti, eva.m cakkhupasaadaadayo avijjamaanepi a~n~nasmi.m visesakaara.ne''ti gahetabbameta.m. 45b. But what is it that is not common to them all?(21) It is the kamma itself that is the reason for their difference. Therefore their difference is due to difference of kamma, not to difference of primary elements; for if there were difference of primary elements, sensitivity itself would not arise, since the Ancients have said: 'Sensitivity is of those that are equal, not of those that are unequal'. 45b. ki.m pana ta.m ya.m a~n~nama~n~nassa asaadhaara.na.m? kammameva nesa.m visesakaara.na.m. tasmaa kammavisesato etesa.m viseso, na bhuutavisesato. bhuutavisese hi sati pasaadova na uppajjati. samaanaana~nhi pasaado, na visamaanaananti poraa.naa. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Notes: (16) ' "Some" are certain Mahasanghikas; for among these Vasudhamma says this: "In the eye fire is in excess; in the ear, air; in the nose, earth; in the tongue, water; in the body all are equal" ' (Pm.444). (17) ' "As qualities of fire, and so on": [aided] by visible data as the illuminating [quality] of heat, which is called lighting up; by sound [as a quality] of air, by odour [as a quality] of earth, by flavour [as a quality] of water called spittle--so according to the first theory [that of "others"] because they need to be assisted by such and such qualities of primaries: what is meant is that they have to be helped in apprehending visible data and so on. This theory holds that the quality is the ability of the eye, etc., to light up [respectively] visible data, etc., only when associated with the reasons that are their accessories consisting of light, etc., and aperture's state of decisive support for ear consciousness. Aperture is taken in due order, as are fire, etc., since it is absence of primaries. Or alternatively, when others intend that aperture is a quality of primaries, as visible data, etc., are, then the qualities of primaries are construable in their order thus: [aided] by visible data and light [as a quality] of fire, by sound [as a quality] of aperture called space, by odour [as a quality] of air, by flavour [as a quality] of water, by tangible data [as a quality] of earth' (Pm.445). (18) The four primaries are held to be inseparable and not to exist separate from each other; cf. quotation from the 'Ancients' in par.45. Pm. says: 'Excess is in capability, not in quantity, otherwise their inseparability would be illogical' (Pm.451). (19) ' "From finding visibility, etc., [respectively] in a state of excess": from finding them associated with these differences, namely, the bright visible datum in fire, sound audible through its individual essence in air, the odour beginning with surabhi perfume in earth, and the sweet taste of water; thus "visible data, etc., are the [respective] qualities of these". This is according to the first theory, and he has stated the conclusion (uttara) that follows, beginning with "we might assume" in terms of that. The second is confuted in the same way. Or alternatively, "Then they may say", etc., can be taken as said emphasizing, in order to confute it, the theory of Kanada, which asserts that the eye, etc., are respectively made of fire, space, earth, water, and air, that have visible data, etc., as their respective qualities' (Pm.445). (20) In the P.T.S. text and the Sinhalese Hewavitarne text the word "ekakalaape", 'that form a single group', occurs in this sentence but is not in the Harvard text. (21) 'If there is no differentiation according to primaries, what then is the reason for the differentiation of the eye, and so on? Though the kamma that is produced by the longing for a selfhood (individual personality) with five sense-bases is one only, still it should be taken as called "not common to them all" and "difference of kamma" because it is the cause of the differentiation of the eye, and so on. For it is not a condition for the ear through the same particular difference through which it is a condition for the eye, since, if it were, it would then follow that there was no distinction between the faculties. Because of the words, "At the moment of rebirth-linking, exalted volition is a condition, as kamma condition, for the kinds of materiality due to kamma performed"(P.tn.) it must be recognized that a single volition is kamma condition for all kinds of materiality due to kamma performed that come into existence at the moment of rebirth-linking. For if the volition were different, then, when there came to be the arising of the faculties, it would follow that the materiality due to kamma performed was generated by limited and exalted kamma. And rebirth-linking that is one is not generated by a plurality of kinds of kamma. Thus it is established that the arising of the plurality of the faculties is due to a single kamma' (Pm.446). 27276 From: Egberdina Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 5:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Hi, Jon and everyone, How are you? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard > More to the point perhaps, is this something > you find mentioned in the suttas, i.e., the aspect of inseparability > as opposed to the characteristics/aspects of impermanence, no-self > and conditioned nature? (I know you're not strong on references, > Howard, but if you come across any I'd be interested to see them). > > Jon > Have you ever experienced anything that is in the suttas? Have you ever experienced anything that is not in the suttas? Have you ever experienced a sutta? Which comparisons are without conceit? What is happening right now? (Hint: It is not in a book.) A foetus in the process of being aborted is more aware of what is happening at the present moment than a person attempting to link an experience to something they have read. Awareness has no prerequisites. Awareness does not need to be identified and / or categorised in order for it to be awareness. The identification and categorisation of awareness is the basis for proliferation of unawareness. The suttas are not more to the point. The suttas require a whole lot of existing and pre - existing culture (yes, yoghurt) to make any sense at all. The suttas are less to the point. Awareness ceases the moment thinking cuts in. What do you think? All the best Herman 27277 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:00am Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Azita, Shakti, Christine and Dhamma Friends, Death is a shocking matter to all. Let alone own death, death of near relatives causes shocking. There are many people who had escaped from near death. Each time they think about the event they still feel shocking. This will go on as long as the view is not changed. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing -------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > Dear Htoo Naing, Christine, Shakti and others, ------------------------------------------------------------- Azita : Do you think that we have difficulties with death bc in one sense, we haven't experienced it yet in this life.( Azita ) ----------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Everybody knows that death occurs once in a life. But there are people who had experienced near death even though it was not the death itself. They will change their attitute after the event. (Htoo ) -------------------------------------------------------------- A : I know this statement will draw comments about death of every moment, but what I mean is that we have an idea of lobha, dosa, good feeling, bad feeling bc we experience this every day, but we don't experience our own 'conventional' death every day. -------------------------------------------------------------- H : Exactly. ------------------------------------------------------------- A : One of my ways of remembering death is to drive thro a cemetary, which is close by. Its a pleasant old cemetary, with lots of curlews - birds that the indigenous people believe cry out when there are spirits around - their call is very eery. As I drive thro. I remind myself that I too will end up here one day. Its interesting, in that I am getting to know the names on the headstones and I say hello to them all!!!!! --------------------------------------------------------- H : In a Myanmar saying, '' Attending a funeral equates visiting monastry ten times.'' That means_ Visiting monastry and meeting with Dhamma teachers and being taught by them for ten times equates with attending a funeral, at which realization of impermance and Dhamma thinking arise quickly than the former. ------------------------------------------------------------ A : When I was about 11-12 yrs old, my girlfriend and I used to ride our bikes thro an old cemetary, and she had a fascination for the graves. She actually died quite young. ------------------------------------------------------------- H : Just remember my wrong usage when I was in university. But you may be right in your usage. When I was in university, I had friends both boys and girls or men and women. One day I used the word 'girlfriend ' because she was a girl and my friend. I was done. My bookish friend told me and reminded me not to use the word loosely. It is someone like a wife without marriage. I got the point. Your friend was fond of visiting graves and died young. But what I remind is not that way. Just tp prepare sensibly. Because there is difference between death in desparity and death in clarity. ( Htoo ) ---------------------------------------------------------- Azita : Again when I was in my early 20's, a boyfriend and I used to go to the cemetary at night to see how scared we could make ourselves. ---------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : The same principle applies as above. I got the point. Once we as teenagers tested those sorts of thing like sitting in the hut in a cemetry. Nothing happened to us apart from bad smelling of burnt bodies. ( Society to society difference exists ) ---------------------------------------------------------- Cemetaries are actually very serene places. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > Dear Christine, Shakti and all, ------------------------------------------------ Azita :To Htoo, I hope you won't think me rude, and I did like your comment "We are being dead tick by tick" it is unusual English and very cute, I hope you don't mind if I use it occasionally here on dsg. ---------------------------------------- Htoo : Not at all. And of course you can ------------------------------------------------- Azita :Thank you so much for your wonderful reminders on death. ------------------------------------------ Htoo: ( As people in general say ) You're welcome. ------------------------------------------------ Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. ------------------------------------------------ Same to you With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27278 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:18am Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Christine and Dhamma Friends, Death is not so simple. There are many definitions of death, many meanings of death. Social, cultural, judicial, medical, political and so on will have influence on definition of death. Even sensitive machines cannot say exactly the accurate point of death. The machines have to take the data that the person concerned is dead and then they have to process them and then they have to shoe up in the display. Cittakkhana is so brief that it exists just a moment. As I have posted death of the present life and the first consciousness of the next life is stick together without interruption. The first consciousness in a life is Patisandhi Citta. But that Satta may not be born if he or she is not Oppapatika Sattas like Deva, Brahma, Peta, Niriyans and has to be in an egg shell or in a womb of the mother or in wet surface. Regarding the dividing line between Cuticitta of dying Satta and Patisandhicitta of next Satta, only The Buddha will know that. Great Arahats with special power knows where the Satta gone but not the dividing line. May you all have constant reminder Sati that all are ready to die. ( So no reason to arise Mana ) With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Azita, Htoo Naing, Shakti,Howard and All, > > I don't have any fear of death myself, it is the attachment to others > that makes me fear *their* deaths. A selfish wanting of things to > remain as they are - I don't want to have a 'person-shaped hole' in > my life. I think this is a very common feeling - often one can hear > couples who love each other deeply, and who have been together a long > time, say "I hope I go before Mary does - I couldn't bear to live > without her". Just lobha ... > You, also, will have seen in your daily work that normal run-of- the- > mill death in western hospitals is not a spectacular thing to be > feared. Most people are not conscious. Most are relatively pain > free. Sometimes the dividing line between life and death is > difficult to tell except with sensitive machines. And there is an > echo of Shakti's question, even by those sitting with the > dying, "Where did they go?" and even, "When did they go - I was > sitting right here, I just looked away for a moment ..." > I think the change in culture - once people died at home surrounded > by family, to dying in a regimented, sterile hospital - has meant a > growth in the fear of death, by making it unfamiliar, unknown and > mysterious. > I grew up going to a Christian Church which was surrounded by its own > graveyard and headstones. To get to the Church door, one had to pass > through a grassy lane between graves. Families in the district > had 'family plots', the newly deceased were interred with the remains > of already dead loved ones. Kids played around and between the > graves. It was never scary, it was seen as a natural end to life. > People would put fresh flowers on the graves after Church and some > would have a talk and tell the dead relatives the latest happenings - > I'm not sure if they really believed they were hovering around - but > people add their own hopes to the basic teachings of any religion. > And the Christian Religion does not teach anatta. > It is kamma and its unpredictability that is a little unnerving for > me - especially the type of kamma that may have been committed aeons > ago and only finds its chance to have influence at the rebirth > moment. Still - no control, so useless to worry I suppose. > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" 27279 From: phamdluan2000 Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:27am Subject: Re: Nibbana - transcendental or not? Dear Christine, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: Dear Group, < snip > I have an initial question about nibbana. I take the meaning of transcendant to mean 'going beyond the limits of ordinary experience', 'not based on experience, intuitive, innate in the mind'. < snip > Is Nibbana transcendental or not? KKT: In Udana 8, we read a definition of Nibbana: There is an unborn, unmade, unbecoming, unconditioned, ... Within the scope of human experiences (ie. 5 khandhas) we can only experience what is born, made, becoming, conditioned. Thus Nibbana should be transcendental if we accept your definition of << transcendant to mean 'going beyond the limits of ordinary experience' >> Metta, KKT 27280 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Herman It's been a while. Welcome back. I'm doing fine, thanks. Are you suggesting I should talk more about my personal experience and less about what is in the suttas (yes, I do know the difference ;-))? I can assure you that would be a retrograde step, not to mention deadly boring for everyone else. The suttas contain the teachings of the Buddha (that was true at the time he lived, and it's true now). Some of us think that he knew a thing or two worth learning, but that this can only be done by repeated study of the texts *as well as* the application of what has been learnt from that study so far. He who thinks awareness can be developed without reference to the texts has only his own ignorance and wrong view for a guide. Well, you asked me, and that's what I think ;-)) Good talking to you. Jon wrote: > Hi, Jon and everyone, > > How are you? ... > Have you ever experienced anything that is in the suttas? > Have you ever experienced anything that is not in the suttas? > Have you ever experienced a sutta? > > Which comparisons are without conceit? > > What is happening right now? (Hint: It is not in a book.) A foetus > in the process of being aborted is more aware of what is happening > at the present moment than a person attempting to link an > experience > to something they have read. Awareness has no prerequisites. > Awareness does not need to be identified and / or categorised in > order for it to be awareness. The identification and categorisation > of awareness is the basis for proliferation of unawareness. > > The suttas are not more to the point. The suttas require a whole > lot > of existing and pre - existing culture (yes, yoghurt) to make any > sense at all. The suttas are less to the point. Awareness ceases > the moment thinking cuts in. > > What do you think? 27281 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Hello Christine, Christine wrote: It is kamma and its unpredictability that is a little unnerving for me - especially the type of kamma that may have been committed aeons ago and only finds its chance to have influence at the rebirth moment. Still - no control, so useless to worry I suppose. Michael: I prefer not to think that way Christine, and that way of thinking has the risk of leading to inertia. There is a simile in relation to rebirth consciousness which I don’t recall where it comes from, but which has a lot of relevance to me, and that I always try to keep remembering. The simile is in relation to cattle held in a pen. When the gate is opened, which is the first one to come out? There are a number of options: the strongest, the one that usually gets out first, or the one which is closest to the gate. In terms of rebirth consciousness, the state of mind which will prevail could be the strongest, the one that usually surfaces, or the one that is closest at that moment. All this leads to the point that if you constantly cultivate the same/similar state of mind this will become strongest, will become the likelier to surface first, and the closest. Which points towards practicing the dhamma in every single moment. And in that case it really doesn’t matter the kamma committed aeons ago – in fact you are (indeed) in control. Metta Michael 27282 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: object of awareness, 1. Hi Howard, This issue you bring up is important. op 21-11-2003 22:31 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > It seems to me that the > gist of what you are saying with regard to the main matter being discussed is > that cetasikas are discerned not when they occur, simultaneous with the > discernment of some object, but afterwards as the object of subsequent cittas. N: When I speak about citta, the accompanying cetasikas are always included. They arise at the same physical base as the citta, experience the same object through the same doorway and fall away together with the citta. Thus, citta with the cetasikas experience an object, for example, colour. They can only experience that one object, they cannot experience themselves. Seeing does not know, "I am seeing". Citta and the concomittant cetasikas fall away. After that another citta (and cetasikas) may arise which are directly away of : visible object, or seeing, or feeling which is indifferent feeling in this case. Citta rooted in aversion arises that dislikes visible object that was experienced by seeing. Citta with aversion and unpleasant feeling falls away. After that kusala citta with wisdom may arise and directly experience: the citta rooted in aversion, or the unpleasant feeling that was its concomittant, or any other nama or rupa. H: This > strikes me as odd. I'm not saying it's not so - I have no way of knowing at > my stage of development - but just that this is odd. N: If this were not possible, one could not be aware of akusala. Awareness arises with kusala citta, and it cannot arises at the same time as akusala citta, but it can be directly aware of the characteristic of akusala dhamma which has just fallen away and is still *the present moment*. We read in the "Kindred Sayings"(IV, XXXV,§70) Upavana that the Buddha said to Upavana: . Could just inferential thinking be of such result and be onward-leading? Evverybody can just think: I have desire, we do not need the dhamma for that. If there is no direct awareness and understanding of akusala, its true nature cannot be realized. It cannot be known that it is only a type of nama that is conditioned, not self. Its arising and falling cannot be realized. (to be continued) Nina. 27283 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Dear Sukin, You explained the essence (again essence!) of the Dhamma very well. I like this one: < K. Sujin always has to remind the questioner that `something appears and is being experienced isn't it?'> Yes, practical application, not just thinking about. Appreciating, Nina. op 22-11-2003 03:12 schreef Sukinderpal Singh Narula op sukinder@k...: > Even within the Theravada Abhidhamma tradition there is an argument > arising from doubt, that *in fact* we cannot experience realities > ever. This is based on the argument that realities rise and fall so > fast that they have already fallen away by the time there is any > awareness of it, so in fact we are only experiencing `illusions' so > to speak. To this, K. Sujin always has to remind the questioner > that `something appears and is being experienced isn't it?' > I think we can forever be drawn in by philosophical arguments and > keep on denying what is really going on. This is why I suggested > earlier that Buddha's teachings are for practical application, not > just `thinking about'. To know this requires panna that sees the > importance of satipatthana and the accumulation of the paramis, > particularly in relation to the development of panna. And in this > connection, I see the study of nama/rupa, conditionality, and the > increasing familiarity with the characteristic of all realities as > being complementary to this practice. And for this, knowing about > sabhava dhammas is quite essential. 27284 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Marana, Death Clock, Dear Christine and Htoo, Thank you for your helpful words, good to remember. Nina. op 22-11-2003 14:50 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > Thanks Christine for your kind references and Suttas. I included most > of your words below in my inline text reply. I do hope these > discussion will be helpful for all members 27285 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inherent characteristics of rupa Hello Jon, Howard, I will jump into your conversation… Jon: As I understand it, past kamma conditions whether a pleasant or unpleasant rupa *is experienced* (not, 'arises'). The arising of rupas is conditioned by an altogether different set of conditions, and, except in the case of certain rupas of the body, has nothing to do with an individual's past kamma. I think we have to distinguish between 2 different sets of factors: (a) the factors governing the *arising* of rupas and, (b) the factors governing the experiencing of rupas by sense-door consciousness. Michael: I think I understand it the same way you do but never find any confirmation of this in any scripture. Have you? I don't know if you are familiar with Geshe Michael Roach? Out of curiosity, in order to gain a better grasp of the Mahayana thinking, I was listening to his teachings some time ago, and he expressed a quite different view which apparently is the prevalent view in his tradition (Gelug-pa). What he said is that no matter what, past kamma conditions the arising of rupas. Jon: I'm not sure that that is so (but in any event is quite different to saying that the rupa carries its own vedanic flavour!). However, the extent to which a rupa as object could be a condition for the feeling that accompanies the subsequent consciousness must be limited. For example, if the consciousness that follows the moment of experiencing the rupa is kusala consciousness, then the feeling could not be unpleasant feeling, no mater how 'unpleasant' the rupa. Michael: I have two comments on this. First I recall reading in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (please don’t ask me to quote precise details), that the vedana flavor of a certain rupa is influenced by convention. So, although there is no intrinsic flavor to a certain rupa, the majority of the people will react the same way to that experience. And this will mislead them into thinking that the vedana is intrinsic to the rupa (real nature vs conventional nature again). Second, in relation to kusala/akusala and pleasant/unpleasant, the Abhidhammattha also mentions that the combinations are not always straight forward. Take for example the situation of a masochist which will experience pleasure through an akusala rupa/action. Metta Michael 27286 From: Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Hi, Jon - I'm not understanding you in parts of the following. In a message dated 11/23/03 5:57:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > What in the world could one be aware of when one is aware of > >a consciousness but not of the object of that consciousness? If > >that occurred, then > >being aware of one consciousness would be no different from being > >aware of another. > > I don't see it that way at all :-)). > > When there are moments of consciousness accompanied by awareness, > whether awareness of consciousness or of one of the sense-door > objects, it's not as though the 'normal' experiencing occurring at > that time (e.g., reading a book, walking to work, eating lunch) is > suspended or impaired and there is *only* awareness and/or its > object. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: There's always awareness only of its object. By "awareness" here, do you just mean vi~n~nana, or are you talking about sati or pa~n~na? I assume you mean vi~n~nana. ---------------------------------------------------- The consciousness with awareness arises together with (or in> > addition to) the 'normal' experiencing, but because there is > awareness then whatever is the object of the awareness is experienced > more clearly for what it truly is. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sorry, Jon, I just can't make head or tail of this sentence. (I'm not saying that's your fault, but, in any case, I just can't get what you are saying.) ---------------------------------------------------- > > Thus if there was awareness of, for example, seeing consciousness at > a time when both seeing and hearing are occurring (as appears to us > to be the case), the seeing consciousness would be experienced more > clearly as it is truly is; there would be no doubt that the > consciousness in question was seeing consciousness and not hearing > consciousness. -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I still am not quite getting you. When we are aware of a moment of consciousness as an object, it must be as a memory, and that typically is a memory of the cognitive event which involved both the knowing and the known, and that recalls it more or less faithfully. My point was the following: The only means of distinguishing one act of consciousness from another is by means of the object and the concomitant features and functions - the consciousness per se is merely the knowing aspect of the event. When we are aware of seeing something - rather, of just *having* seen something, the awareness is actually (of) a partial memory that includes at least the visual nature of the event in addition to the knowing aspect. If there is awareness *only* of vi~n~nana per se, culled out by the mind from the full event, then the awareness is the knowing only that there just was knowing (of something). ---------------------------------------------------- > > To me, the idea of awareness experiencing both seeing consciousness > and its object at one and the same moment implies a unity of > consciousness-and-object which the teachings are at pains to refute. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: The consciousness and its object (and the sense door activation) *do* constitute a single event called *contact or impression or phassa or "act of consciousness" (by me). When we are aware of consciousness as an object, we are actually aware of a mind-constructed memory consisting of a replication of all or part of a past act of consciousness. ---------------------------------------------------- > May I ask whether this is a 'model' that you find mentioned in the > suttas? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: This "model" is based on three things: 1) The suttic definition of contact, 2) the portion of paticcasamupada relating vi~n~nana, namarupa, and salayatana, 3) the definition of vi~n~nana, 4) personal introspection, and 5) the fact that one cannot experience what no longer exists. ------------------------------------------------ > Jon > ======================== With metta, Howard * With regard to contact, there is a point of information I've been meaning to ask about, and this seems like a good time. I recently found in Kalupahana's book The Principles of Buddhist Philosophy, some of which I like a lot, and some of which I disagree with, a reference to a sutta of the Digha Nikaya, D 2.62. I have the Walshe version of the DN, and I cannot figure out which sutta this is. The reason for my interest is that what Kalupahana writes suggests some support for my view of the primacy of contact. Kalupahana, in explicating the Buddha's teaching phenomenologically, writes the following: "... when the question regarding the nature of mind (nama) and matter (rupa) was raised, he responded by saying that the so-called matter is 'contact with resistence' (patigha-samphassa) and what is called mind is 'contact with concepts' (adhivacana-samphassa). In doing so, he was reducing both mind and matter to contact (samphassa) and, therefore, processes of experience rather than any kind of material-stuff or mind-stuff." What I would like to know is three things: 1) which sutta this is in the Walshe book, 2) whether the Pali is correct, and 3) whether the English translation of the Pali is acceptable. /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) 27287 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 8:47am Subject: [dsg] Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Michael, Christine and all, Near dying, there come thoughts racing. These thoughts may be related to the very present or the past. He ( I will use he for any sex here ) may see the present visual object or one of other four sense objects at the present. One of these five sense objects come repeatedly near death. Finally just before the last consciousness ( Cuticitta ) there runs a series of Javanacittas which take the object at one of five senses at the present. The object may be robes, monastry, food for offering, medicine for offering or the object may be the receiver of donation like monks. These objects arise if he is going to good realm. Or the object may be knives, axes, guns, bow and arrows or the object may be killed animals or killed men and so on if he is going to bad realm. Or the thoughts that are racing at near death may reveal hin as if he is doing good deed at the present or as if he is doing bad things at the present. Or he may take the present objects like beautiful lakes, sweet songs and music etc if he is going to a good realm or he may take the object like great fire, hugh dogs, ugly noice shouting in fear or he may take the object of womb wall etc. These thoughts are racing at near death. But there are different Kamma. Regarding rebirth there are 4 different Kamma in terms of seniority. If the most senior Kamma called Garuka Kamma is present no other Kamma can give rise to Patisandhi Citta or linking consciousness. Garuka Kamma are like Rupa Jhana, Arupa Jhana, Anantariya Kamma. In its absence, the second most senior is Asanna Kamma. This Kamma is the Kamma that have done near dying. Asanna means repeatedly arising. In the absence of Garuka Kamma and Asanna Kamma, Acinna Kamma will give rise to rebirth. Acinna means long practising. If there is no special Kamma like Garuka and Asanna Kamma, then the Kamma which he had been practising in his life will give rise to rebirth. In the presence of all these three Kamma, the fourth Kamma called Katatta Kamma will give rise to rebirth. This is something like Christine said. It may be Kamma done since aeon. At dying state, the Satta is so weak and sometime cannot think clearly. So he has to accept whatever Citta arise. If a good practice have been done in this life it may come as Acinna Kamma. Asanna Kamma is much more powerful. So most Myanmar do good deed for patients when there is possibility of death so as to arise Asanna Kamma in good nature. Garuka Kamma overwhelms other Kamma. If Anantariya Kamma exists any other Kamma will be useless in terms of rebirth at that particular moment. Patricide, matricide, killing of Arahats, raping of femal Arahats, causing bruise to The Live Buddha, separation of The Sangha are Anantariya Kamma. In the absence of this very bad Kamma, if Jhana cannot be obtained, Asanna Kamma will help a lot. May all beings be free from misfortune With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing -------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Christine, > > Christine wrote: > It is kamma and its unpredictability that is a little unnerving for > me - especially the type of kamma that may have been committed aeons > ago and only finds its chance to have influence at the rebirth > moment. Still - no control, so useless to worry I suppose. > > Michael: > I prefer not to think that way Christine, and that way of thinking has the > risk of leading to inertia. There is a simile in relation to rebirth > consciousness which I don't recall where it comes from, but which has a lot > of relevance to me, and that I always try to keep remembering. The simile is > in relation to cattle held in a pen. When the gate is opened, which is the > first one to come out? There are a number of options: the strongest, the one > that usually gets out first, or the one which is closest to the gate. In > terms of rebirth consciousness, the state of mind which will prevail could > be the strongest, the one that usually surfaces, or the one that is closest > at that moment. All this leads to the point that if you constantly cultivate > the same/similar state of mind this will become strongest, will become the > likelier to surface first, and the closest. Which points towards practicing > the dhamma in every single moment. And in that case it really doesn't matter > the kamma committed aeons ago – in fact you are (indeed) in control. > > Metta > Michael 27288 From: shakti Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:58am Subject: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Htoo Naing, Christine, Azita, Howard and other friends, Thank you for your postings on death and dying. They have been helpful reminders and more food for thought. Christine, I haven't had a chance to read all the sites you posted but will try to do that this weekend. Since the death of my aunt and neighbors last week, I have been surprised at how much my mind is thinking about death. There seem to be a lot of feelings of emptiness arising, moments of sadness and attachment. I thought someone a few weeks ago asked, what is the purpose of life? I have been wondering about that too. This is a question as old as mankind. When I contemplate death, life seems so meaningless so empty. Is the purpose of life, if there is one, to experience just the eternal now? Sometimes it feels like a puzzle to be solved. Is it to understand the nature of reality, dukkha, anatta, anicca? Why? Metta, Shakti gazita2002 wrote: Dear Htoo Naing, Christine, Shakti and others, Do you think that we have difficulties with death bc in one sense, we haven't experienced it yet in this life. I know this statement will draw comments about death of every moment, but what I mean is that we have an idea of lobha, dosa, good feeling, bad feeling bc we experience this every day, but we don't experience our own 'conventional' death every day. ----snip --- Azita 27289 From: Michael Beisert Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 10:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Hello Htoo, Htoo: In the absence of this very bad Kamma, if Jhana cannot be obtained, Asanna Kamma will help a lot. Michael: Thank you for the very technical explanation. Also one should keep in mind that at the moment of rebirth consciousness which is very near death, the consciousness is vey weak, only 4 or 5 javanas ( I am not sure) instead of the 7 in a normal process. Metta Michael 27290 From: shakti Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 10:23am Subject: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana gazita2002 wrote: Dear Htoo Naing, Christine, Shakti and others, Do you think that we have difficulties with death bc in one sense, we haven't experienced it yet in this life. I know this statement will draw comments about death of every moment, but what I mean is that we have an idea of lobha, dosa, good feeling, bad feeling bc we experience this every day, but we don't experience our own 'conventional' death every day. -----snip -----Azita Shakti: Dear Azita, I think that I have trouble with death because, of my attachments to things, 'self' and to others. The thought of leaving my children behind and what will happen to them, brings up a lot of fear for me. I feel attachment to the earth and the beautiful sights and sounds of it. I wonder about my own final moments and hope that I will not be full of fear but, rather that wisdom will arise. I hope that I can die as I have lived with the understanding of dhamma growing. With metta, Shakti 27291 From: Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Hi, Shakti - In a message dated 11/23/03 1:00:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, deannajohnsonusa@y... writes: > I thought someone a few weeks ago asked, what is the purpose of life? I > have been wondering about that too. This is a question as old as mankind. > When I contemplate death, life seems so meaningless so empty. Is the purpose of > life, if there is one, to experience just the eternal now? Sometimes it > feels like a puzzle to be solved. Is it to understand the nature of reality, > dukkha, anatta, anicca? Why? > ========================= It seems to me that the notion of 'purpose of life' presupposes a design. I believe that the world, including all realms of existence and experience, is a vast mosaic of designs, with the kamma of multitudes of interacting mindstreams constituting the "designer". This is how I see the matter. But one then could ask why are things as they are. It seems to me that an appropriate answer might be "How could things be other than as they are?". 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) 27292 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 11:48am Subject: Re: [dsg]awareness and thinking Dear Herman, Welcome back. I was on the point to write to you but I did not want to intrude, so I did not write. I talked to Lodewijk about you yesterday! And now you are right here! How is your family and the music? We still have to play twice a week for my father and rehearse for this. We give a house concert end Dec when he becomes hundredthree. The last sentence is a point which I shall react to. Awareness is not thinking. When there is thinking about seeing, the characteristic of seeing does not appear. But thinking should not worry us, it is conditioned, it is real and can be object of awareness. Gradually we can learn the difference between awareness and thinking and thus, when we know the characteristic of awareness it can be developed. When we are thinking about realities we can be reminded that this is not awareness. Nina. op 23-11-2003 14:40 schreef Egberdina op hhofman@t...: > Awareness ceases the > moment thinking cuts in. 27293 From: Larry Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 1:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Jon: "Are you saying that if consciousness alone can be the object of awareness, this would mean or imply that consciousness arises or can arise without cetasikas? I'm not with you on this. Perhaps you could elaborate." Hi Jon, Yes. This stems from a conversation I had with Rob and, I think, Nina, concerning the purity of consciousness. My resultant understanding is that consciousness simply cognizes and the 121 consciousnesses are the same consciousness with 121 combinations of the 52 cetasikas and the rupas. Consciousness of consciousness _itself_ would be consciousness of mere cognizance without the quality of a cetasika or rupa. I don't see that being explored in Theravada. So I would conclude that, as in the Satipatthana Sutta, consciousness of consciousness is actually consciousness of a mind state composed of cetasikas. I had thought, like you I think, that the 121 consciousnesses were actually 121 different consciousnesses, but apparently this is not the case. Is this right??? Larry 27294 From: Larry Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 1:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Herman: "Awareness ceases the moment thinking cuts in. What do you think?" Larry: Good. The more cessation the better. 27295 From: Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana - transcendental or not? Hi Christine Based on the way the Suttas present Nibbana, I cannot conclude that they are indicating some other state transcendental or otherwise. The major thrust seems to be "the end of this state." -- Like a fire that has gone out; it does not "go somewhere else." TG In a message dated 11/23/2003 2:30:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, cforsyth@v... writes: > Dear Group, > > I am reading around the subject of nibanna. > > In the Ariyapariyesana Sutta MN 26.18 the section on Enlightenment > "Then, bhikkhus, being myself subject to birth, having understood the > danger in what is subject to birth, seeking the unborn supreme > security from bondage, Nibbana, I attained the unborn supreme > security from bondage, Nibbana; being myself subject to ageing, > having understood the danger in what is subject to ageing, seeking > the unageing supreme security from bondage, Nibbana, I attained the > unageing supreme security from bondage, Nibbana; {repeats the same > for sickness, death, sorrow, defilement} > The knowledge and vision arose in me: "My deliverance is unshakeable; > this is my last birth; now, there is no renewal of being'. > > I have an initial question about nibbana. I take the meaning of > transcendant to mean 'going beyond the limits of ordinary > experience', 'not based on experience, intuitive, innate in the mind'. > > In the Pali-English dictionary, it says: "Import and Range of the > Term. A. Nibbana is purely and solely an ethical state, to be reached > in this birth by ethical practices, contemplation and insight. It is > therefore NOT TRANSCENDENTAL. The first and most important way to > reach N. is by means of the eightfold Path, and all expressions which > deal with the realisation of emancipation from lust, hatred and > illusion apply to practical habits and not to speculative thought. N. > is realised in one's heart; to measure it with a speculative measure > is to apply a wrong standard." > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/index.html > > In the introduction to the Majjhima Nikaya, Bhikkhu Bodhi says: "The > Buddha does not devote many words to a philosophical definition of > Nibbaana. One reason is that Nibbaana, being unconditioned, > TRANSCENDANT, and supramundane, does not easily lend itself to > definition in terms of concepts that are inescapably tied to the > conditioned, manifest, and mundane." > > Is Nibbana transcendental or not? > > metta and peace, > Christine > 27296 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:12pm Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Hello Shakti, Htoo Naing, Michael,(Azita, Howard, RobM)and All, Htoo Naing: Thanks for your explanation of the types of kamma that can influence rebirth. I am slowly learning a lot from you on a number of Lists. I like your numbered series elsewhere - easy to find in the archives when needed. Michael: I'm not so sure that there is any control at all. Maybe the 'illusion' of choices. How much control do we have of our actions really, and how much is just the result of conditions where we think we have chosen? I can't choose not to hear or see or smell something by an act of will. I can't make myself not have a particular thought. I can't make myself feel heat, cold, or hardness unless they arise, and if they arise, I can't make myself not feel them. I can see that habitual behaviour may have a strong effect, but if a fleeting remembrance can also pop up and influence rebirth - I can just see myself repeating "Only think of good deeds, only think loving thoughts ... Only think of good deeds, only think loving thoughts... don't think of that time when you backed into someone's car and didn't leave your name and address ... ooops!" Shakti, you ask: "Is the purpose of life, if there is one, to experience just the eternal now? Sometimes it feels like a puzzle to be solved. Is it to understand the nature of reality, dukkha, anatta, anicca? Why?" These are good questions, on whether there is any purpose to life ... This is the launching pad for most searching, and why many of us, who thought we had been deeply committed to a spiritual journey for most of our lives, really only get a move along each time suffering or death smacks us in the face. Then we get caught in the story as a 'whole' and see it as *my * pain and grief, instead of namas and rupas that rise and fall away so quickly. If I understood much in this area, I could give you any suttas where the Buddha might touch on this. But as I don't understand it myself, I would just be a Dhamma Parrot mimicing others. It is not something I feel settled about myself. One can feel that the world and life has, or ought to have, a purpose - because purpose gives a point and a meaning to life. Often, even when bad or evil things happen, we cope by trying to find that good eventually comes from bad - as if there was a hidden agenda. A purpose also implies a 'designer'. Nice to have 'someOne' who allegedly knows what they're doing - that this whole mess has a structure and an intelligent goal. I used to think there was a Great Designer, except the Great Designer behaved in ways that I wouldn't have. e.g. seemed to allow hopeless suffering and judged whether a person deserved eternal heaven or hell depending on behaviour in a single unequally resourced and unfair life-time. Eventually I came to realise that there was no-One at the wheel. Just many causes and effects. Alternatively, one can feel that the world and life has no purpose whatsoever, and then everything can seem meaningless, no good, no evil, no aims or objectives - everything without value. Personally, I think Samsara, the wandering on, Just Is - the purpose is to get out, to have the interminable, repetitive dukkha stop, to cease coming back and having to ignorantly live the soapie stories again, and again, and again. Hence my continuing interest in trying to understand anatta and nibbana - *what* gets out, and *to where* does it get? I found this site interesting, once given to me by RobM, thanks Rob:). Dying2Live "The Role of Kamma in Dying and Rebirth" - Aggacitta Bhikkhu http://www.geocities.com/ekchew.geo/dying2live.htm Noticeably written for a different culture, but solid dhamma. I found the flavour of the dying individual's mind moments and the attempts to alter them for the benefit of the dying person, particularly fascinating, I'm not sure what to think about it. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, shakti 27297 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi Howard, op 21-11-2003 22:31 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: odd. One wonders (at least > *this* one does! ;-) why cetasikas are called concomitants, since they are > supposedly never observed at the same time, and also how it is that it can be > known > that a cetasika, currently experienced, actually *previously* occurred! N: It is not odd. If we find this odd we may believe that it is impossible to know all realities, akusala included, as they are. We read in the "Satipatthanasutta" under: mindfulness of citta: that consciousness with lust is an object of mindfulness. The subco states: Under mindfulness of dhammas (mental objects) : the five hindrances are objects of mindfulness. The subco states about right reflection: This kind of reflection is not just inferential thinking, we all can think of impermanence, but this does not change our life. We read in the "Kindred Sayings"(IV, 138, transl of Wheel 251-253): <"Is there a way, o monks, by which a monk without recourse to faith, to cherished opinions, to traditions, to specious reasoning, or preference for his preconceived views, may declare the Final Knowledge (of Sainthood), thus: 'Rebirth has ceased, the Holy Life has been lived, completed is the task, and nothing remains after this'?"... 'There is such as way, o Monks. And what is it? Herein, monks, a monk has seen a form with the eyes, and if greed, hatred and delusion are in him, he knows 'There is in me greed, hatred and delusion'; and if greed, hatred and delusion are absent in him, he knows 'There is no greed, hatred and delusion in me'. (the same is said with regard to the other doorways.)... This monks, is a way by which a monk without recourse to faith, to cherished opinions, to traditions, .... may declare the Final Knowledge (of Sainthood), thus: 'Rebirth has ceased, the Holy Life has been lived, completed is the task, and nothing remains after this".> When he only reasons and thinks, 'There is in me greed, hatred and delusion' he could surely not become an arahat. "The all" has to be thoroughly known and realized. We read in the Suttas about the development of jhana and insight. The person who develops jhana must know the jhanafactors, cetasikas, by direct experience. Otherwise he would not know how to abandon the more coarse factors so that he can attain higher stages of jhana. He then develops insight and has to be aware of the jhanacitta so that he can realize the three characteristics of it. Jhanacitta has as object only the meditation subject of jhana. When it has just fallen away the jhanacitta or one of the accompanying cetasikas can be object of mindfulness and direct understanding. We may wonder how it is possible to be directly aware of what has just fallen away. Understanding can, but not without cultivating the right conditions. The groundwork: right understanding of what can be the object of mindfulness: any dhamma, citta, cetasika or rupa that presents itself one at a time. Not rejecting akusala dhammas as object of awareness. Questioning and discussing knotty points, reflection, the development of all perfections, none excluded. Nina. 27298 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 11:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Hi Howard (& Jon), --- upasaka@a... wrote: H: >I recently found in Kalupahana's book, The Principles of Buddhist Philosophy, some of which I like a lot, and some of which I disagree with, a reference to a sutta of the Digha > Nikaya, D 2.62. I have the Walshe version of the DN, and I cannot figure out which sutta this is. ..... This time, no problem locating the reference (which is to the Pali text): Walshe transl: p.225, Mahaanidaana sutta, starting at 19. (if you look at the top left corner of the page, you'll see ii,62) For those who have BB's excel.transl with commentaries, p.50, starting at 19. Lots of detail here;-) Where Walshe gives the footnote 337 to 'body-factor' (ruupa-kaaya), PTS transl gives a footnote to ruupakaaye adhivacanasamphasso. BB transl of comy (small taste;-)): "..... Designation-contact (adhivacanasamphassa) is synonymous with mind-contact (manosamphassa), which arises in the mind-door taking as its basis the four mental aggregates [S: i.e feeling, perception, consciousness, volition-sankhara as support condition]. Would that be discerned in the material body? Would it arise taking as its basis one or another of the five kinds of sensitive matter? “The Venerable Ananda replies: 'Certainly not, Venerable sir,' rejecting the arising of (mind-contact) from the material body (alone), just as one would the arising of a mango fruit from a rose-apple tree when mango trees are absent." The second kind of contact referred to in the following lines is patighasamphasso. According to BB, sappatigha refers to the five kinds of sensitive matter. BB: "Thus impingement-contact is contact occurring through the five physical sense-faculties, eye-contact, ear-contact, etc." This is exactly as I read it in the Abhidhamma texts too. In other words, two kinds of contact are distinguished as I read it: adhivacanasamphassa arising in the mind-door processes and patighasamphassa arising in the sense-door processes. Ananda again rejects "the arising of (impingement-contact) from the mental body (alone), just as one would the arising of a rose-apple fruit from a mango tree when rose-apple trees are absent.” Eventually, we read (Walshe transl): "Then, Ananda, just this, namely mind-and-body [i.e nama-rupa], is the root, the cause, the origin, the condition for all contact." Comy (BB transl): "The meaning is: 'The mentality-materiality occurring in the six doors, this is the cause, this is the condition, [for the two kinds of contact}.' for in the eye-door, the eye and visible form objects are materiality and the aggregates associated [with contact] are mentality; the same holds, with appropriate changes, in regard to the other physical sense doors. Thus this fivefold contact [by way of eye-contact, etc] is still 'contact with mentality-materiality as condition.' In the mind-door, too, the heart-basis and any material object are materiality, the phenomena asociated [with contact] and any immaterial object are mentality. Thus mind-contact, too, is 'contact with mentality-materiality as condition'. Mentality-materiality is a condition for this [contact] in many ways. The sub-commentary (Tiika) continues to give the breakdown of exactly what these many conditions are. For example, the resultant mentality (i.e vipaka citta such as seeing consciousness) is a condition for the numerous kinds of resultant mind-contact (i.e phassa accompanying it) in seven ways - as conascence, mutuality, support, kamma-result, association, presence and non-disappearance conditions. We also read about the ways in which the rupas (materiality)such as the eye-base sensitive matter and visible object condition the phassa (contact). Hence we begin to see how namas and rupas condition phassa in many ways. Lots more detail if anyone would like it. Let me look at your comments now briefly: ***** Howard: >Kalupahana, in explicating the Buddha's teaching phenomenologically, writes the following: "... when the question regarding the nature of mind (nama) and matter (rupa) was raised, he responded by saying that the so-called matter is 'contact with resistence' (patigha-samphassa) ..... patigha-samphassa is not matter but a kind of phassa (contact), a cetasika (mental factor) which arises with cittas experiencing objects through the sense doors. sappatigha-samphassa -lit. impact-impression. Contact on account of sense impressions on sensitive matter of the eye etc. Sammohavinodani: "...And 'mind-impression born' is figuratively a name for this too. For eye-consciousness is called mind (mano). the impression conascent with that is called mind-impression." .... H:>and what is called mind is 'contact with concepts' (adhivacana-samphassa). .... Phassa (contact) is one of 52 cetasikas included in nama along with cittas (and nibbana). Adhivacana-samphassa refers to phassa accompanying cittas in the mind door process. .... H:>In doing so, he was reducing both mind and matter to contact(samphassa) and, therefore, processes of experience rather than any kind of material-stuff or mind-stuff." .... This is clearly incorrect. Phassa is included in sankhara khandha. .... H:> What I would like to know is three things: 1) which sutta this is in the Walshe book, 2) whether the Pali is correct, and 3) whether the English translation of the Pali is acceptable. ..... Hope I’ve helped. I intended to just quickly give you the reference, but as you’ll have seen, I got interested;-). This closely relates to recent Visuddhimagga extracts too. I’ll be glad to hear comments or corrections or to clarify anything further. Metta, Sarah p.s Howard, appreciating other posts of yours on Death to Shakti and on sabhava to Michael. ====== 27299 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 0:39am Subject: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Victor, Sorry for the delay. I appreciated your comments. --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Could you provide some references regarding clinging to wholesome > states? Did the Buddha ever address the problem of clinging to > wholesome states, if there is such problem at all? ..... Isn’t there clinging to wholesome states, to having more of them all the time? What about wishing for wisdom just before death or at this moment, for example? When we read about the upadanakkhandha (5 aggregates of clinging), do you read these as excluding wholesome states? Usually only nibbana and the lokuttara cittas are considered to be always be anasava and anupadaniya (untainted and not subject to clinging. Being supramundance, they ‘transcend’ mundane consciousness and cannot be the object of clinging. Aggregates Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-048.html "And what are the five clinging-aggregates? "Whatever form -- past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that is called form as a clinging-aggregate. "Whatever feeling -- past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that is called feeling as a clinging-aggregate. "Whatever perception -- past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that is called perception as a clinging-aggregate. "Whatever (mental) fabrications -- past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- are clingable, offer sustenance, and are accompanied with mental fermentation: those are called fabrications as a clinging-aggregate. "Whatever consciousness -- past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near -- is clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that is called consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. "These are called the five clinging-aggregates." ***** Wholesome states are included in sankhara khandha translated here as mental fabrications. ‘Upaadaaniya’ refers to that can be clung to - that which becomes a condition for clinging by being the object. B.Bodhi writes in his introduction to the Khandhavagga: “Examination of the five aggregates plays a critical role in the Buddha’s teaching for at least four reasons. First, because the five aggregates are the ultimate referent of the first noble truth, the noble truth of suffering, and since all four truths revolve around suffering, understanding the aggregates is essential for understanding the Four Noble Truths as a whole. Second,because the five aggregates are the objective domain of clinging and as such contribute to the causal origination of future suffering. Third, because the removal of clinging is necessary for the attainment of release, and clinging must be removed from the objects around which its tentacles are wrapped, namely, the five aggregates. And fourth, because the removal of clinging is achieved by wisdom, and the kind of wisdom needed is precisely clear insight into the real nature of the aggregates.” Later he also writes: “Whatever in the world one might cling to, it is only form, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness that one clings to. For this reason the aggregates that make up our mundane experience are commonl called the five aggregates subject to clinging (pa~ncupaadaanakkhandha).” ..... V: > As I understand it, the Buddha explained clinging/sustenance as the > following: > > > "And what is clinging/sustenance? These four are clingings: > sensuality clinging, view clinging, precept & practice clinging, and > doctrine of self clinging. This is called clinging. > .... I notice that you didn’t give any references for your quotes this time, Victor. In D22 (Mahasatipatthana Sutta) we read about the origin of suffering (Walshe transl, p.346): “It is that craving which gives rise to rebirth, bound up with pleasure and lust, finding fresh delight now here, now there: that is to say sensual craving, craving for existence, and craving for non-existence. ‘And where does this craving arise and establish itself? Wherever in the world there is anything agreeable and pleasurable, there this craving arises and establishes itself. ‘And what is there in the world that is agreeable and pleasurable? The eye....the ear......the mind.....agreeable and pleasurable, and there is this craving arises and establishes itself. Sights, sounds.......mind-objects.......craving arises and establishes itself. ‘ Eye-consciousness...............mind-consciousness.... ‘ Eye-contact...... ‘Feeling....... ‘Perception of sights........ ‘Volition in regard to sights..... ‘Thinking (vitakka) of sights..........mind-objects ‘ Pondering (vicara)..........etc’ .... No exceptions are given for wholesome states. We have to know and become detached from all kinds of craving as all kinds lead to the ‘piling-up’ of samsara and continuation of the cycle (see Gotami sutta, AN, Bk of 8s, iii,53. Mahapajati, the Gotamid is said to have become an arahant on hearing this). Piling-up (aacayaaya) - any kind of craving or attachment accumulates. I found B.Bodhi’s words a helpful reminder as I wrote. We think the attachment and grief is to the other person, such as the one who has just passed away, or that there’s no either no clinging to wholesome states or that it isn’t a problem, but really whenever there is clinging, it is to the aggregates - to having pleasant feelings, particular sense objects, to wholesome mental states and so on. In other words, it all concerns the clinging to oneself, however gross or subtle. With metta, Sarah ====== 27300 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati, II a, training. Dear Nina & All, I was thinking of the references and comments relating to jhana states and particularly the clinging to these as I wrote to Victor. He only likes sutta quotes, so I'll write to you instead;-) More and more I appreciate that the listeners at the time of the Buddha were being encouraged to understand whatever realities (paramattha dhammas) were arising in their lives at any given time and to develop detachment from even the highest jhana states which would impede progress. As you wrote in the Visuddhimagga- Buddhaghosa thread: .... N: >Vipassana. In order to realize nibbana insight has to be developed, no matter someone develops jhana or not. As I see it, all these passages are referring to vipassana, satipatthana, the eightfold Path. At the end of the Ch on virtue, as I wrote before, all degrees of virtue are included: jhanacittas, and all stages of insight and of enlightenment. There is a verse at the end: At the end it is said: N: The teaching of insight , satipatthana, the eightfold Path, leading to the eradication of the wrong view of self is exclusively the teaching of Buddhas. Thus, whenever we read about virtue or jhana in the Suttas we have to remember this. Then understanding of the suttas will become deeper. The threepartite division we find in the Visuddhimagga and also in the suttanta is not a matter of: develop first virtue and concentration and then insight. It is a matter of arranging the material to be taught under these three headings.< ..... S: One Eightfold Path, one Way whichever texts we are reading. .... In the anapanasati thread, we learn about those bhikkhus for whom breath was the object of higher and higher jhanas. Yet, even for these bhikkhus with highly developed samatha, the goal remains that of understanding realities for what they are with detachment from any idea of self. The practice is still that of satipatthana, the four foundations of mindfulness. Sati and panna still have to know the characteristics of namas and rupas for what they are, just as Rahula was reminded with regard to the elements which make up the body and breath. Without the development of satipatthana, there will always be the idea of ‘man’, ‘woman’ or ‘whole body’. .... N: >Another long footnote to Vis. VIII, 168. Thus, development: making much of, increase. Not only concentration, but realizing the three charactristics is the goal. Mindfulness of the realities appearing while breathing in order to know their true characteristics.... N:> So many aspects I have not considered myself enough. This subject is very useful. ..... I agree. Very complicated too. Thank you for re-posting these. I’m also looking forward to Ken H’s feedback after the weekend. (KenH, if they get through anapanasati or the Satipatthana sutta too quickly or they get bored, you could always throw in a little sabhava or luminous Pure Mind and that should spice it up;-)) Metta, Sarah ======= 27301 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Michael, I’ve been enjoying your posts to everyone. I’m glad to see you’re happy to join in the controversial topics;-) --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Michael: > Agree with you up to ‘same medicine’. That is not what you read in the > suttas. There were countless situations with varying medicines. One can > argue that the ‘best’ medicine is the Noble Eightfold Path but that was > not > the cure for all that the Buddha prescribed in every situation. .... Hmmm...I know what you’re saying. I think I’d rather say, it just depended how much the listeners could hear or appreciate. Often we think the advice given is merely conventional encouragment to ‘do good’ for example, but I think this reflects our limited understanding more than anything else. Certainly those who were enlightened would have understood every word as referring to dhammas with the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta. Like the examples of the different fields for planting seeds (AN), it depends on the understanding, how much can be appreciated. We discussed a sutta on ‘right livelihoods’ on our last visit to Bangkok. It can be read and appreciated at different levels I think. I’d be glad to discuss any specific examples further. ..... And each > > medicine can be called a path of practice. Take the perspective of the > person who got the advice from the Buddha, whatever that might be, for > her/him that is her/his path of practice. ...... I’m not sure it would necessarily be ‘the path of practice’ of satipatthana, however. Other paths of practice are bound to be with the wrong idea of a self developing. ..... > Michael: > I prefer to say insight into the three characteristics and not into > paramatha dhamma. In my opinion, as you are probably sick of hearing by > now, > paramatha dhamma is a dupe. ..... You would also consider the stages of insight a dupe too;-) The first stage of insight is the clear distinction between namas and rupas (both paramattha dhammas) by developing insight into their characteristics - ie seeing vs visible object etc. I agree that understanding the 3 characteristics begins to develop, but the knowledge of the impermanence and thereby unsatisfactoriness of these paramattha dhammas is clear at a later stage. Only a sotapanna has no more wrong view about self. The point I’m trying to make is that the 3 characteristics cannot be known as anything other than characteristics of paramattha dhammas. First, we have to clearly understand how these are distinct from concepts as I see it. .... > Michael: > I also read that, and try my best to practice it. But how about the > three > kinds of true knowledge? Except for the destruction of the taints, there > is > no reference in the Satipatthana Suttas about the other two kinds of > knowledge. And those 3 kinds of knowledge are the only true realization > of > the Buddhist path. So, who practices Satipatthana ignores the other 2 > kinds > of knowledge. And even so this is called a complete and only path? .... Thanks for clarifying and for Christine’s Qu on this;-): “The 3 kinds of true knowledge are the recollection of past lives, kamma and the destruction of the taints. There are many suttas that refer to this. Just to mention one - Culahatthipadopama Sutta (MN 27).” .... Firstly, no ‘we’ to practice and I believe practice has to start at the very beginning with the understanding of the objects of satipatthana so that sati and panna can develop. Full destruction of the taints is only at arahatship. There is no reference to recollection of past lives in some suttas because this refers to particular high jhanic attainments. At the highest level, no one but a Buddha could know anything which came to mind in the past, future or present. This isn’t an essential ingredient of the Eightfold Path! We read about these abilities because there were such large numbers of bhikkhus at that time who had already attained all jhanas and were also had ariyan level wisdom. As Nina’s quotes (my last post) showed, even attachment to these abilities has to be relinquished. Thanks for helping me to consider further, Michael. Do you have a reference for the ‘many medicines’ we can look at further? Metta, Sarah ====== 27302 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Michael, --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Michael: > I have read some of the posts (confess not all of them) and gather that > the > kernel of the discussion was around the sutta commentary. I haven’t seen > in > the posts the following remarks by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, if it has already > > been mentioned sorry for the redundancy: .... I think it may be new to DSG;-) Thx for reading some of the other posts in UP on 'luminous';-) A little more: .... TB:> “This statement (Luminous, monks, is the mind) has engendered a great > deal > of controversy over the centuries. The commentary maintains that "mind" > here > refers to the bhavanga-citta, the momentary mental state between periods > > when the mental stream adverts to objects, but this statement raises > more > questions than it answers. .... Agreed so far;-) .... T: >There is no reference to the bhavanga-citta > or > the mental stream in any of the suttas (they appear first in an > Abhidhamma > treatise, the Patthana); .... You might like to read this post of Nina’s. Though the names may not all be given, the ‘nucleus’ can be found in the Patisambhidamagga, for example. http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m13819.html ..... T:>and because the commentaries compare the > bhavanga-citta to deep sleep, why is it called luminous? .... No kilesa. Vipaka cittas which are not experienced through the sense doors. No kilesa on account of the object. ..... T: >And why would > the > perception of its luminosity be a prerequisite for developing the mind? ..... It’s just to illustrate the transitory and fast-changing nature of cittas (see previous sutta about nothing being so fast changing as the mind (cittas)). Bhavanga cittas, seeing, attachment or aversion on account of what is seen, bhavanga cittas, mind door process with kilesa, bhavanga cittas etc. Wholesome and unwholesome states just arising momentarily with particular cittas. No fixed Pure Mind or self or storehouse. ..... T: > And > further, if "mind" in this discourse means bhavanga-citta, what would it > > mean to develop the bhavanga-citta?” .... It wouldn’t;-) As the commentary clarifies, the wholesome and unwholesome states arise in the subsequent javana process and it is with the javana cittas when any development or panna arises too. Hence we also see that even for an arahant, there isn’t non-stop wisdom. It arises momentarily with specific cittas. We can begin to see that it really is true - mental states and cittas don't last at all. For those with highly developed wisdom, bhavanga cittas can be known I'm told. You may also like to read more about bhavanga cittas in UP;-) .... M: > BTW, the inclusion of bhavanga in the commentaries is another critique > that > DK makes of the commentaries for the same reasons outlined above. .... In the end, I think much depends on whether we have more confidence in our own and other modern interpretations or those of the ancient Theravada commentators which have been so carefully preserved and passed down to us. What we read in the commentaries is perfectly in accordance with the Abhidhamma and I understand both the Abhidhamma and the commentaries have been recited to a large extent from the very earliest days and the 1st Council. I know this isn’t a very popular view;-) Thanks for the quote and I look forward to any further comments you have. Metta, Sarah ==== 27303 From: ashkenn2k Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:18am Subject: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi Nina and Howard > We may wonder how it is possible to be directly aware of what has just fallen away. Understanding can, but not without cultivating the right conditions. The groundwork: right understanding of what can be the object of mindfulness: any dhamma, citta, cetasika or rupa that presents itself one at a time. Not rejecting akusala dhammas as object of awareness. Questioning and discussing knotty points, reflection, the development of all perfections, none excluded. > Nina. k: I think Howard has a point how does one experience a citta that has been ceased to exist. He also point out that we cannot be always using panna as the excuse for all. To me, I would prefer my previous explanation, the "passing" of information as one citta conditioned another to arise. I also have to be cleared that this passing of information is also impermanent as passing information also changes, also without an owner. Because of our habitual habits, we also have the notion that when we are mindful of feelings one citta and not two cittas. To me, Abdhidhamma is based on singularity, and one object is cognize at a time. There is no simultaneously cognization of two objects. kind regards Ken O 27304 From: Egberdina Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Hi Jon and everyone, The suttas begin to become accessible to anyone who has acquired the "compounded to the nth degree" conceptual framework from which they sprang. Conceptual frameworks do not illuminate experience. The experience conceptually described as "red" gains nothing from optometry, opthalmology, physics, optics , you name it. "Red" is red, but ceases to be that when it becomes the object of thought. The remotest absorbtion in any conceptual frame of reference will prevent the experience "red". Instead of watching the sun rise, you could watch movies on TV of people talking about a man who once watched the sun rise. Or read the texts. An unborn foetus needs not be taught what "pain" is. Neither does it not experience "red" because it has not studied Gaugain, Monet, Picasso. The opposite is true. Those living in an identified and categorised reality are living in an illusory world, never arisen, never ceased, and without real consequence. (not to say there are no imagined consequences) Awareness does not need developing. Concepts need de-developing to get remotely near to awareness. Deconstruction by insight occurs, unplanned, and allows some to return to what there was before there were "the texts". To suggest that the texts need to be acquired in order to discard them is pretty funny. I see no evidence in any scriptures that awareness is developed, but plenty that awareness is uncovered. Like Larry says, the path of the Buddha is cessation, not development. The empty mind is joyful, and not because it says so in a book. All the best Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > > It's been a while. Welcome back. I'm doing fine, thanks. > > Are you suggesting I should talk more about my personal experience > and less about what is in the suttas (yes, I do know the difference > ;-))? I can assure you that would be a retrograde step, not to > mention deadly boring for everyone else. > > The suttas contain the teachings of the Buddha (that was true at the > time he lived, and it's true now). Some of us think that he knew a > thing or two worth learning, but that this can only be done by > repeated study of the texts *as well as* the application of what has > been learnt from that study so far. > > He who thinks awareness can be developed without reference to the > texts has only his own ignorance and wrong view for a guide. > > Well, you asked me, and that's what I think ;-)) > > Good talking to you. > > Jon > > wrote: > Hi, Jon and everyone, > > > > How are you? > ... > > Have you ever experienced anything that is in the suttas? > > Have you ever experienced anything that is not in the suttas? > > Have you ever experienced a sutta? > > > > Which comparisons are without conceit? > > > > What is happening right now? (Hint: It is not in a book.) A foetus > > in the process of being aborted is more aware of what is happening > > at the present moment than a person attempting to link an > > experience > > to something they have read. Awareness has no prerequisites. > > Awareness does not need to be identified and / or categorised in > > order for it to be awareness. The identification and categorisation > > of awareness is the basis for proliferation of unawareness. > > > > The suttas are not more to the point. The suttas require a whole > > lot > > of existing and pre - existing culture (yes, yoghurt) to make any > > sense at all. The suttas are less to the point. Awareness ceases > > the moment thinking cuts in. > > > > What do you think? 27305 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Hi Herman, --- Egberdina wrote: > What do you think? .... Good to see you around again;-) Hoping you and your family are all well. .... > All the best .... Likewise. Look forward to hearing more from you. Metta, Sarah ===== 27306 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Nina, Robert and Michael Hi RobertK, --- rjkjp1 wrote: > I wrote this letter to a mahayana monk, Venerable Heng Shure of San > Francisco. He knows Acharn Sujin very well from meetings in Thailand > and America. We had a email discussion a few years ago. ..... A few years ago already!! Seems like a few months ago to me. I remember the discussions and appreciate reading your post again with all its helpful detail. (Two quotes below from it) Metta, Sarah ======= > Take a moment of seeing: For seeing to arise there > must be cakkhu > pasada (seeing base). This is the extremely refined > rupa that arises in the center of the eye. This > special rupa is the result of kamma. But > it only lasts for the briefest moment before falling > away . The reason we can keep seeing is that at this > moment the force of the kamma is still working to > continue replacing the cakkhu pasada. The visible eye, > the eyeball, and the surrounding matter, the rest of > the body, are also conditioned by different conditions > - not only kamma- and these rupas also only last for a > moment before vanishing forever. Every conditioning > factor is simarly evanescent as is every conditioned > moment. >The dhammas themselves are not > different from the quality they posses. In fact the > Atthasalini says that "there is > no other thing than the quality born by it" . 27307 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 0:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/24/03 12:33:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > > Hi Howard, > op 21-11-2003 22:31 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > odd. One wonders (at least > >*this* one does! ;-) why cetasikas are called concomitants, since they are > >supposedly never observed at the same time, and also how it is that it can > be > >known > >that a cetasika, currently experienced, actually *previously* occurred! > N: It is not odd. > The groundwork: right understanding of what can be the object of > mindfulness: any dhamma, citta, cetasika or rupa that presents itself one at > a time. Not rejecting akusala dhammas as object of awareness. Questioning > and discussing knotty points, reflection, the development of all > perfections, none excluded. > Nina. > ============================= I've been thinking over this matter, Nina, and I think I've come to the nub of my position. It seems to me that experiencing something *as an object* is only one way of experiencing a thing. In particular, the difference is most easily seen with regard to feelings and emotions. There is a difference between being angry and experiencing anger as an object, there is a difference between being happy and experincing happiness as an object, and there is a difference between experiencing a taste or touch etc as pleasant and experincing that pleasantness as an object. This difference is the difference between a "participatory" or non-dual (oh, oh! ;-) mode of experiencing and the subject-object mode. [BTW, on one occasion, at a meditation retreat, I spent a couple hours entirely in the "participatory mode," and not just as regards the affective aspect of experience, but it is not my intention here and now to be using that as demonstration of anything. For all I know, that may well have been simply some odd, disassociative state - though I doubt it, for the fallout from it was most beneficial.] 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) 27308 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Herman We have a number of members who reject the Abhidhamma and commentaries, but I think you're taking the discussion to a new level in suggesting the suttas be rejected too! Tell me, if you had a chance to hear the Buddha himself would you choose not to do so because of the conceptual framework involved? I presume not, otherwise you wouldn't be here. In which case you perhaps you see an essential difference in this regard between hearing the Buddha live and reading his words some (considerable) time centuries later What is that crucial factor? And even so, isn't reading the suttas the next best thing to hearing the man himself live? You mention awareness. Do you consider that the awareness you are talking about is the same awareness as the Buddha talked about? If yes, how are you able to know this? I don’t disagree at all with the notion that destruction by insight occurs unplanned. But do you say that insight itself occurs sufficiently without the development of the conditions for its arising? Jon --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon and everyone, > > The suttas begin to become accessible to anyone who has acquired > the "compounded to the nth degree" conceptual framework from which > they sprang. Conceptual frameworks do not illuminate experience. ... > Awareness does not need developing. Concepts need de-developing to > get remotely near to awareness. Deconstruction by insight occurs, > unplanned, and allows some to return to what there was before there > were "the texts". To suggest that the texts need to be acquired in > order to discard them is pretty funny. > > I see no evidence in any scriptures that awareness is developed, > but > plenty that awareness is uncovered. Like Larry says, the path of > the Buddha is cessation, not development. > > The empty mind is joyful, and not because it says so in a book. 27309 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 6:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Larry) - Howard: The fundamental question that arises for me is: "Exactly *where* does the alleged group of dhammas (only one of which is experienced) arise?". For example, when one is experiencing the coldness of a "metal rod", exactly *where* is the hardness? For that matter, other than as an object of consciousness *where* is the coldness? Jon: I'm not sure I see the significance of this piece of information. Are you suggesting it's something we really need to know the answer to, or that the co arising of several rupas only 1 of which is experienced is an impossibility? Howard: Another closely related question is: "By what means is one aware that there is an entire group of rupas arising (somewhere), when only one rupa is experienced?" Jon: Well obviously one wouldn't know it at the moment of just experiencing 1 rupa. But one could know it myriad mind-moments later by thinking about what has just been seen and/or heard etc at that moment/those moments and all the moments preceding and following, and by recollection of previous experiences, etc. In other words, one knows it 'inferentially' as you would say. Does this sound feasible? Jon 27310 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 6:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 (Jon) Shakti Hi, and sorry for the delay in replying, but I had noticed that Nina gave a quick but complete answer (thanks Nina). Sorry about the confusion caused by whatever it was I said. Enjoying your posts lately (and sorry to hear about the deaths of people close to you). Jon --- shakti wrote: > Jon, I'm confused about something that you said. I thought that I > heard once, that citta could never take concepts as an object. ??? > With metta, shakti > > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > ---snip --- > > I don't see that as a necessary assumption. To my understanding, > consciousness takes only 1 object (dhamma, or a concept) at a time. 27311 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 7:42am Subject: [dsg] Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Michael, Thanks for your reply. Near death, the body or Rupa that Citta depends is very very week. In the matter of Javana, the usual way is to arise as 7 successive Citta which are all the same in nature. But the effect are different. The first, middle 5 and the last have different effects. There are other occassions that less than 7 Cittas arise in the matter of Javana. Embryos, fetuses, very young babies are weak in away and there is possibility of less number of Javana Cittas. In dying person, there also are less number of Cittas in their Javana. The last series of Javana Cittas is only 5 in number. It is called Maranaasannajavana Cittas. In case of Bhagava, when He has to show up Yamaka Payatiha, Javana Cittas have to arise in just 3 or 4 in number as many Cittas have to arise in succession. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Htoo, > > Htoo: > In the absence of this very bad Kamma, if Jhana cannot be obtained, > Asanna Kamma will help a lot. > > > Michael: > Thank you for the very technical explanation. Also one should keep in mind > that at the moment of rebirth consciousness which is very near death, the > consciousness is vey weak, only 4 or 5 javanas ( I am not sure) instead of > the 7 in a normal process. > > Metta > Michael 27312 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 7:48am Subject: Re: Marana, Death Clock, Anicca And Kammatthana Dear Howard, Yes. You are right. I also agree what you mentioned in your post. Yes.Things could not be other than as they are. I means things in their ultimate senses. Happy you With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing ------------------------ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Shakti - > > In a message dated 11/23/03 1:00:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, > deannajohnsonusa@y... writes: > > > I thought someone a few weeks ago asked, what is the purpose of life? I > > have been wondering about that too. This is a question as old as mankind. > > When I contemplate death, life seems so meaningless so empty. Is the purpose of > > life, if there is one, to experience just the eternal now? Sometimes it > > feels like a puzzle to be solved. Is it to understand the nature of reality, > > dukkha, anatta, anicca? Why? > > > ========================= > It seems to me that the notion of 'purpose of life' presupposes a > design. I believe that the world, including all realms of existence and > experience, is a vast mosaic of designs, with the kamma of multitudes of interacting > mindstreams constituting the "designer". This is how I see the matter. But one > then could ask why are things as they are. It seems to me that an appropriate > answer might be "How could things be other than as they are?". > > With metta, > Howard > 27313 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 9:47am Subject: Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Sarah, You are right, I did not provide references to the quotes in my last message to you. Here they are: "And what is clinging/sustenance? These four are clingings: sensuality clinging, view clinging, precept & practice clinging, and doctrine of self clinging. This is called clinging. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-002.html "And what, monks, is right effort? (i) There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (ii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. (iii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (iv) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn45-008.html "Now, there is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful & fully aware, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn066.html You found a reference to the teaching on the five aggregates. But that does not address the problem of clinging to wholesome states, if there is such a problem at all. Now, is clinging to wholesome states sensuality clinging, view clinging, precept & practice clinging, or doctrine of self clinging? Is generating desire, endeavoring, activating persistence, upholding & exerting one's intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen and for the maintenance, non- confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen clinging to wholesome states? Is cultivating, developing, pursuing renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure clinging to wholesome states? Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, [snip] 27314 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:14am Subject: anapanasati, II . anapanasati, II a. Insertion of Jon's remarks on the subject. Jon: (to Rob Ep): -As in the case of any sutta, one needs to ask the question, 'What exactly is the message being conveyed here, and to/for whom?'. Nina has already given us a lot of material from the commentarial texts, which to me give a clear answer to those questions. However, as I know you have reservations about the authenticity of the commentaries, I would like to make one or two observations based on the text of the sutta alone, taking the first part of the passage quoted by you below as an example. 1/. A closer look at the wording of the text. The structure of the passage is rather complex, so I think it helps to break it down a little. Here’s my breakdown-- (a) Now, on whatever occasion a monk breathing in [or out] long [or short] discerns that he is breathing in [or out] long [or short]; (b) trains himself to breathe in or out sensitive to the entire body, or calming bodily fabrication: (c) On that occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. (d) I tell you, monks, that this -- the in-&-out breath -- is classed as a body among bodies, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. … (e) This is how mindfulness of in-&-out breathing is developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination. To me, the words 'on whatever occasion' in par. (a) indicate that what immediately follows is not meant to be instructional’, but to describe a situation that may occur. I see that expression as equivalent to present-day in the case where’. The key to the whole passage seems to be par. (c), because it is here that the first reference to mindfulness is found. Note, however, that par. (c) does not tell us *how* mindfulness is to be developed, but seems to refer to *mindfulness arising and taking a specific object, namely the body (i.e., rupas)*. So my reading of the whole passage would be something like this: *If* there is mindfulness of rupa as rupa ['the body in and of itself', in par. (c)] while focussing on the breath [as described in par. (a) and (b)] then this is mindfulness of breathing for the purposes of satipatthana [par. (d)]. 2/. The preliminary/underlying assumptions In the sutta, the whole passage on mindfulness of breathing, including the part quoted in your post, is preceded by the following: "Now how is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination? "There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out..." This sets the context for what follows, including the passage discussed at 1/. above. I would like to focus on some particular aspects of this introductory section. Again, a breakdown may be helpful: (a) *There is the case where* a monk, (b) *having gone to the wilderness*, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, (c) and *sets mindfulness to the fore*. (d) *Always mindful*, he breathes in" Again, this is a "case where" situation, not a "do this" passage [par. (a)]. To my reading, it refers to a particular class of monk, namely one who is not only leading the homeless life but is doing so in the manner recommended by the Buddha for those who wish to develop samatha to a high degree [par. (b)], and in whom both samatha with breath as object and mindfulness/satipatthana are well developed [par. (c) and (d)]. Who else could 'set mindfulness to the fore' and be 'always mindful' when breathing? It is to such a person that the rest of the sutta is pitched. Howard, I hope these comments give you some idea as to why I do not read the sutta as a general exhortation to practise mindfulness of breathing as a means of developing satipatthana, but rather as being directed to those with already-developed samatha where breath is the object. (I am of course not saying the sutta has no relevance or application to the rest of us, but simply that it has to be understood in its proper context.) Jon 27315 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas, doing their work Hi Howard, op 22-11-2003 20:22 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > there is, it is said, a group of co-arising rupas, only one of > which impinges on a sense door at a time - only one of which appears at a > time. > At the time that one of these is experienced, where do the others reside? N: They are there in that group, arising and falling away together with colour which is experienced. In countless suttas we read that the Buddha taught about different contacts through the six doors. When there is eye-contact there cannot be ear-contact or body-contact at the same time. Let us take colour: it impinges on the eyesense. There is solidity with colour, but this does not impinge on the eyesense. As we read with Larry: vis. XIV,37: the eye. It function is . It could not pick up solidity. Solidity arises together with colour and its function is to be a foundation of it, supporting it, and also the other three primaries are together, as well as three other rupas. They all fit into the group, they are unknown, silent, but they do their work all the same! Their presence, though extremely short, is indispensable. H: For example, "where" is the solidity at the time it is not felt, but sight is > active instead? These others cannot reside in "the rock", for "the rock" is > not > an existent. N: They reside in an infinitesimally small unit or group of rupas, arising and falling away. Rock is only an example we can use to illustrate that what we call rock is actually many units of rupa arising and falling away, just like chariot. H: Do they reside in some Buddhist equivalent to Plato's world of > forms? ;-) Do you see the problem? N:No problem. There are the six worlds in the ariyan discipline: the world appearing through the eyes, the ears. etc. Only one world at a time, and these do not last! Perhaps there is a problem for a phenomenologist?;-) Nina. 27316 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas op 23-11-2003 02:49 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Nina: "Kamma does not produce what we call a rock, only temperature > produces rupas which are not of a living body." L: Does this mean the rupa that is the object of consciousness > (e.g.,visible data) is different from the rupa we call a rock? Can we > call this object of consciousness living rupa? N: In conventional language we say: I see a rock. But seeing experiences only what appears through the eyes. The rock has a colour, but what actually happens when your eyes are open? There are many different moments of seeing we all join together (in our thoughts) as one experience. But actually, also what is next to the rock, such as the background, the colour of a tree or sky is seen. Just all that appears through eyes, no need to name it rock or tree. When you name or define, or pay attention to shape and form it is not seeing. We have to learn the characteristic of seeing. Difficult, because we are so used to think about seeing. Rupa is not alive, but rupas of the body have life-faculty, another rupa which does not know or feel anything. It just has a function of "maintaining" conascent rupas (Vis. XIV, 59). 27317 From: Michael Beisert Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 11:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hello Sarah, Just a few additional comments on the luminous mind: Thanissaro: and because the commentaries compare the bhavanga-citta to deep sleep, why is it called luminous? Sarah: No kilesa. Vipaka cittas which are not experienced through the sense doors. No kilesa on account of the object. Michael: Well, in keeping with the doctrine of kamma and rebirth, this present life of ours is the direct result of what we have intentionally committed in the past. Therefore the relinking consciousness which gives rise to the present stream of consciousness is the resultant consciousness of the previous kamma. If the last thought moment of the previous life was totally free from taints then this resultant life continuum would not have come into being. It follows that the mind that causes rebirth is a mind with defilements. Therefore the life continuum cannot be completely immune to corruption. T: And further, if "mind" in this discourse means bhavanga-citta, what would it mean to develop the bhavanga-citta?” S: It wouldn’t;-) M: Yeah, but the sutta says ‘Luminous is the mind, and it is freed from incoming defilements’ and that assumes development of the mind or development of bhavanga-citta. So the question still stands, what does it mean to develop bhavanga-citta. Sarah; In the end, I think much depends on whether we have more confidence in our own and other modern interpretations or those of the ancient Theravada commentators which have been so carefully preserved and passed down to us. What we read in the commentaries is perfectly in accordance with the Abhidhamma and I understand both the Abhidhamma and the commentaries have been recited to a large extent from the very earliest days and the 1st Council. Michael: I am sorry to say that Bhikkhu Bodhi would not agree with you, in the Introduction to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha he quotes ‘Even in the Abhidhamma itself the dhamma teory is not yet expressed as an explicit philosophical tenet, this comes only later in the commentaries.’ This also addresses your second remark, since the Abhidhamma was recited only during the Third Council, Bhikkhu Bodhi is saying that the commentaries are later than that. Metta Michael 27318 From: Michael Beisert Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 11:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Sarah, Sarah: You would also consider the stages of insight a dupe too;-). Michael: No, just paramatha dhamma and their sabhava. This is what I consider a dupe. In that respect the commentators went too far and have assumed a position of essentialism. For those who love that concept I urge to carefully study the arguments of Nagarjuna in order to dispel that attachment. Even without sabhava the Abhidhamma is great. I like it a lot. Metta Michael 27319 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 0:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration and samatha Hi, Sarah (and Jon) - In a message dated 11/24/2003 2:13:03 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > > Hi Howard (& Jon), > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > H: >I recently found in Kalupahana's book, The Principles of Buddhist > Philosophy, some of which I like a lot, and some of > which I disagree with, a reference to a sutta of the Digha > > Nikaya, D 2.62. I have the Walshe version of the DN, and I cannot figure > out which sutta this is. > ..... > This time, no problem locating the reference (which is to the Pali text): > > Walshe transl: p.225, Mahaanidaana sutta, starting at 19. > (if you look at the top left corner of the page, you'll see ii,62) > > For those who have BB's excel.transl with commentaries, p.50, starting at > 19. > > Lots of detail here;-) > > Where Walshe gives the footnote 337 to 'body-factor' (ruupa-kaaya), PTS > transl gives a footnote to ruupakaaye adhivacanasamphasso. > > BB transl of comy (small taste;-)): > > "..... Designation-contact (adhivacanasamphassa) is synonymous with> Hope I’ve helped. I intended to just quickly give you the reference, but > as you’ll have seen, I got interested;-). This closely relates to recent > Visuddhimagga extracts too. > > I’ll be glad to hear comments or corrections or to clarify anything > further. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Howard, appreciating other posts of yours on Death to > Shakti and on > sabhava to Michael. ---------------------------- Howard: Thanks. ============================ Sarah, thank you very much for this post. Now that you have informed me as to which sutta this is, I will study it (I own the Walshe book), and then reply to this post of yours. I sort of suspected that Kalupahana might be translating the sutta and/or giving a "spin" to it in a way that supported his point of view, which in this area is similar to mine. But I prefer not to be deluded! ;-) So, I will study this sutta and get back to you. With metta, Howard 27320 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 0:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Hi, Herman - This is a brief one of those "sadhu posts"! ;-) Without giving specifics, and though there are a few monor bones I could pick, I just want to tell you that there is very much that I like a lot here! With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/24/2003 7:33:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > > Hi Jon and everyone, > > The suttas begin to become accessible to anyone who has acquired > the "compounded to the nth degree" conceptual framework from which > they sprang. Conceptual frameworks do not illuminate experience. The > experience conceptually described as "red" gains nothing from > optometry, opthalmology, physics, optics , you name it. "Red" is > red, but ceases to be that when it becomes the object of thought. > The remotest absorbtion in any conceptual frame of reference will > prevent the experience "red". Instead of watching the sun rise, you > could watch movies on TV of people talking about a man who once > watched the sun rise. Or read the texts. > > An unborn foetus needs not be taught what "pain" is. Neither does it > not experience "red" because it has not studied Gaugain, Monet, > Picasso. The opposite is true. Those living in an identified and > categorised reality are living in an illusory world, never arisen, > never ceased, and without real consequence. (not to say there are no > imagined consequences) > > Awareness does not need developing. Concepts need de-developing to > get remotely near to awareness. Deconstruction by insight occurs, > unplanned, and allows some to return to what there was before there > were "the texts". To suggest that the texts need to be acquired in > order to discard them is pretty funny. > > I see no evidence in any scriptures that awareness is developed, but > plenty that awareness is uncovered. Like Larry says, the path of the > Buddha is cessation, not development. > > The empty mind is joyful, and not because it says so in a > book. > > > All the best > > > > Herman 27321 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 0:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/24/2003 9:00:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Larry) - > Howard: > The fundamental question that arises for me is: "Exactly > *where* does the alleged group of dhammas (only one of which is > experienced) arise?". For example, when one is experiencing the > coldness of a "metal rod", exactly *where* is the hardness? For that > matter, other than as an object of consciousness *where* is the > coldness? > > Jon: > I'm not sure I see the significance of this piece of information. > Are you suggesting it's something we really need to know the answer > to, or that the co arising of several rupas only 1 of which is > experienced is an impossibility? ------------------------------ Howard: Ahh! now, jon, you may be getting an inkling of how I feel about much that is in the Abhidhamma! ;-) The significance is in seeing the plausibility of a suggested scheme, as opposed to taking it on faith. (As I pointed out in another post, there is no conventional object in which these rupas can inhere, for that is concept-only.) ------------------------------ > > Howard: > Another closely related question is: "By what means is one > aware that there is an entire group of rupas arising (somewhere), > when only one rupa is experienced?" > > Jon: > Well obviously one wouldn't know it at the moment of just > experiencing 1 rupa. But one could know it myriad mind-moments later > by thinking about what has just been seen and/or heard etc at that > moment/those moments and all the moments preceding and following, and > by recollection of previous experiences, etc. In other > words, one > knows it 'inferentially' as you would say. > > Does this sound feasible? ------------------------- Howard: Yes. ------------------------ > > Jon ======================== With metta, Howard 27322 From: gazita2002 Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 1:58pm Subject: [dsg] Re:object of awareness, 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Howard, [snip] > We may wonder how it is possible to be directly aware of what has just > fallen away. Understanding can, but not without cultivating the right > conditions. > The groundwork: right understanding of what can be the object of > mindfulness: any dhamma, citta, cetasika or rupa that presents itself one at > a time. Not rejecting akusala dhammas as object of awareness. Questioning > and discussing knotty points, reflection, the development of all > perfections, none excluded. > Nina. Dear Nina, Thank you for these wonderful reminders. There is so much good reading on dsg., but these reminders of yours I like the best, so to the point. So often, I dislike the dhammas that arise and quickly want to be rid of them eg Mana - but as you say - not rejecting akusala dhammas that can be object of awareness. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 27323 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, michael (and Sarah) - In a message dated 11/24/2003 2:22:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Michael: Well, in keeping with the doctrine of kamma and rebirth, this > present life of ours is the direct result of what we have intentionally > committed in the past. Therefore the relinking consciousness which gives > rise to the present stream of consciousness is the resultant consciousness > of the previous kamma. If the last thought moment of the previous life was > totally free from taints then this resultant life continuum would not have > come into being. It follows that the mind that causes rebirth is a mind with > defilements. Therefore the life continuum cannot be > completely immune to > corruption. ============================= I think your reasoning here is impeccable, Michael. With metta, Howard 27324 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi Nina, Would it be correct to say rupas that are produced by temperature are not objects of consciousness because all the rupas that are objects of consciousness are produced by kamma? Larry 27325 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:53pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Cooran meeting Dear Nina, Thank you for your interest in our humble Cooran group. ------------- N: > Looking forward to your report after you had your meeting in Cooran. I like to know about your discussion on anapanasati after reading my Co quotes. <..> When is it? -------------- We meet this coming weekend. Andrew has been on the phone insisting that I have your Co quotes summarised, printed and ready for distribution. He seems to think I will leave it till the last minute. (Plenty of time, Andrew.) -------------- N: > And details about what you were eating, who did the cooking, animals, etc. And you have a fire outside? --------------- I hope there will be a campfire, it depends on whether Reg is prepared to build it. My role is more of an advisory one. Another thing I am looking forward to is meeting my old friend Klaas de Jong. He is a countryman of yours who founded the group. He is quite old now and rarely leaves Brisbane; some of us haven't seen him in years. --------------- N: > P.S. Is there no shark danger where you do your surfing? Take care, we need you on dsg. --------------- You are too kind. Sharks are rarely seen around Noosa except by fishermen who say they are quite common. They keep to themselves and are frightened by people and surfboards. We are more likely to get killed in our cars driving to and from the beach. Kind regards, Ken H 27326 From: Carl Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 4:51pm Subject: New Member I am another new member and have been lurking and reading the posts for a week or so now. And also reading the books of Nina. Learning and studying the Abhidhamma is kinda like playing tag with a steam- roller :) Just the moment you think you have some understanding it runs right over the top of you! I am so happy to be here among the authors writing on the Abhidhamma and the very astute contributors of this group. I appreciate the close adherance, scrutiny and devotion to Lord Buddha's Dhamma. The Abhidhamma seems as a magnifying glass on the teachings of Buddha and for me seems to bring the teachings into clarity. I wonder this: Cittas are only existant within bodies (the 5 aggregates) they (cittas) are present nowhere else. With the crumbling of the aggregates, cittas are gone. Cittas are a reality. The body is not a reality. The body is not a Citta. So I ponder a reality (citta) that exists within and is dependent upon a non reality (the 5 aggregates). Anyway, I find it appealing that "reality" may depend upon and be born by "non- reality". I am sure I must have my wires crossed somewhere :) It is an honor to be here. Carl 27327 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi, Larry - In a message dated 11/24/03 8:40:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Nina, > > Would it be correct to say rupas that are produced by temperature are > not objects of consciousness because all the rupas that are objects of > consciousness are produced by kamma? > > ========================== Does any dhamma arise from a single condition? Why must arising from temperature and arising from kamma be mutually exclusive? 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) 27328 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Howard: "Does any dhamma arise from a single condition? Why must arising from temperature and arising from kamma be mutually exclusive?" Hi Howard, Generally, you are correct. Most rupa is produced by a combination of 4 causes: kamma, consciousness, temperature, and nutriment. Plus countless conditional relations figure into the mix. I think? "climatic and geological transformations" are produced only by temperature *plus conditions*. I am wondering if any rupa that doesn't have kamma as one of its producers can be an object of consciousess? I thought all rupa that is an object of consciousness is a result of kamma. I just looked in CMA and I see that sound is not produced by kamma (intentional sound, e.g. speech, is produced by kamma). Maybe there is a difference between "produced by kamma" and "result of kamma". Larry 27329 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:32pm Subject: Re: New Member Nice to have you here Carl, The five aggregates (khandhas) are ultimate realities(paramattha dhamma), and citta (vinnana) is one of the five. What is only conventionally real is person or being. Person or being are the shadow of what is really there. RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > I> I wonder this: Cittas are only existant within bodies (the 5 > aggregates) they (cittas) are present nowhere else. With the > crumbling of the aggregates, cittas are gone. > Cittas are a reality. The body is not a reality. The body is not a > Citta. So I ponder a reality (citta) that exists within and is > dependent upon a non reality (the 5 aggregates). Anyway, I find it > appealing that "reality" may depend upon and be born by "non- > reality". I am sure I must have my wires crossed somewhere :) > It is an honor to be here. Carl 27330 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi, Larry - In the following you ask "I am wondering if any rupa that doesn't have kamma as one of its producers can be an object of consciousess?" In all seriousness I have to ask in return "If not, how would anyone know?" With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/24/03 11:27:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Generally, you are correct. Most rupa is produced by a combination of 4 > causes: kamma, consciousness, temperature, and nutriment. Plus countless > conditional relations figure into the mix. I think? "climatic and > geological transformations" are produced only by temperature *plus > conditions*. I am wondering if any rupa that doesn't have kamma as one > of its producers can be an object of consciousess? I thought all rupa > that is an object of consciousness is a result of kamma. I just looked > in CMA and I see that sound is not produced by kamma (intentional sound, > e.g. speech, is produced by kamma). Maybe there is a difference between > "produced by kamma" and "result of kamma". > > /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) 27331 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New Member Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/24/03 11:37:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Nice to have you here Carl, > The five aggregates (khandhas) are ultimate realities(paramattha > dhamma), and citta (vinnana) is one of the five. What is only > conventionally real is person or being. Person or being are the > shadow of what is really there. > RobertK ========================= Don't you mean that the dhammas subsumed by the five aggregates are paramattha dhammas? The aggregates themselves, being collections of dhammas, are concept-only, are they not? While instances of hardness are experienced, and sights are experienced, and smells, and tastes, etc, the aggregate of these things is never experienced; there is just the thought/idea of that collection. 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) 27332 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi Jon and Howard > > Jon: > > I'm not sure I see the significance of this piece of information. > > > Are you suggesting it's something we really need to know the > answer > to, or that the co arising of several rupas only 1 of which is > experienced is an impossibility? > ------------------------------ > Howard: > Ahh! now, jon, you may be getting an inkling of how I feel > about much that is in the Abhidhamma! ;-) > The significance is in seeing the plausibility of a suggested > scheme, as opposed to taking it on faith. (As I pointed out in > another post, there is no conventional object in which these rupas > can inhere, for that is concept-only.) > ------------------------------ k: Even with these several rupas that co-arising, the citta as we know only cognize one object. How does we know that only one rupa is being the object much depends on conditional relations, depending which rupa is a "stronger" condition for one particular citta to arise. > > > > Howard: > > Another closely related question is: "By what means is one > > aware that there is an entire group of rupas arising (somewhere), > > when only one rupa is experienced?" k: Such an experience can only be able to experience and explain by the wisdom of Buddha. I think without him, not many Arahat will know about also, only certain Great Arahats. In my opinion, this is a natural law for rupas to co-arise together. Only one is choose, they rest will fall away and cease to exist (also a natural law). This is also similar to the universal cetasikas where seven arise together with each citta but only one is arise and depend on condition relations, which cetasikas will be cognize. kind regards Ken O 27333 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Sarah and Micheal (Suan) I remember talking about this also why can't bhavanga citta be developed and I remember Suan said that bhavanga citta can also be changed in this lifetime. I hope Suan is around to verify it. I also tend to believe that bhavanga citta can be changed in this life time, since every citta has latent tendecies and such tendecies can be changed or not what is the point of learning Buddhism. If latent tendecies cannot be change in bhavanga citta then we are all in big trouble bc it is bhavanga citta that substains our continuity when there is no sense object. I thought Suan has wrote the commentaries and sub-commentaries on this issue which I think describe it clearly why it is luminoius. Kind regards Ken O 27334 From: blue lan Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member Hi, Carol: Somehow, after read your idea, i think we need to go back to see what an example the Buddha had said to us--- lotus. The Buddha makes such a good example---between people who could understand the five aggregates and cittas (or they are connected each other). I am a Taiwanness, i read some of sutras in which also be written by Chinese chatacters. By the way, i an also a new member here, and reading the posts for a couple of weeks. This letter is my first to post my opinion. Blue Carl wrote: I am another new member and have been lurking and reading the posts for a week or so now. And also reading the books of Nina. Learning and studying the Abhidhamma is kinda like playing tag with a steam- roller :) Just the moment you think you have some understanding it runs right over the top of you! I am so happy to be here among the authors writing on the Abhidhamma and the very astute contributors of this group. I appreciate the close adherance, scrutiny and devotion to Lord Buddha's Dhamma. The Abhidhamma seems as a magnifying glass on the teachings of Buddha and for me seems to bring the teachings into clarity. I wonder this: Cittas are only existant within bodies (the 5 aggregates) they (cittas) are present nowhere else. With the crumbling of the aggregates, cittas are gone. Cittas are a reality. The body is not a reality. The body is not a Citta. So I ponder a reality (citta) that exists within and is dependent upon a non reality (the 5 aggregates). Anyway, I find it appealing that "reality" may depend upon and be born by "non- reality". I am sure I must have my wires crossed somewhere :) It is an honor to be here. Carl 27335 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 11:44pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Michael, > Michael: No, just paramatha dhamma and their sabhava. This is what I > consider a dupe. In that respect the commentators went too far and have > assumed a position of essentialism. For those who love that concept I urge > to carefully study the arguments of Nagarjuna in order to dispel that > attachment. Even without sabhava the Abhidhamma is great. I like it a lot. Now you have aroused my curiosity ;-). Can you please direct me to any such material on the internet? I lack patience in reading, so please if possible choose one with the most simple writing style and minimum amount of reading. Thanks in advance. Metta, Sukin. 27336 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 0:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Michael. --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Sarah, > Michael: Well, in keeping with the doctrine of kamma and rebirth, this > present life of ours is the direct result of what we have intentionally > committed in the past. Therefore the relinking consciousness which gives > rise to the present stream of consciousness is the resultant > consciousness > of the previous kamma. If the last thought moment of the previous life > was > totally free from taints then this resultant life continuum would not > have > come into being. ..... S: Agreed so far. Good Abhidhamma knowledge;-) ..... M: >It follows that the mind that causes rebirth is a mind > with > defilements. Therefore the life continuum cannot be completely immune to > corruption. .... S: We need to distinguish between anusaya (latent tendencies) and ‘corruption’ which arises with akusala cittas in the javana process. From the commentary, translated here by Nina: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8386 >dampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti pabhassara.m. ta~nca khoti ta.m bhava"ngacitta.m. N: It is also pure, because it is unsoiled (by defilements); thus luminous. That indeed, meaning, that life-continuum. aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkha.ne uppajjanakehi. N: ‘by oncoming’(defilements). by those that are not conascent with it, but arise later at the moment of impulsion (javana). upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi upakkili.t.thattaa upakkili.t.tha.m naamaati vuccati. N: ‘by defilements’. By being soiled by desire etc. it is indeed called defiled.< ***** S: I know you’ve read many of the posts in UP and are familiar with the Abhidhamma, but as this is a difficult area, let me re-quote Nina’s comments here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/8408 N: >Remarks:The upakilesas, defilements arising with the citta (different from the anusayas,latent tendencies who do not arise with the akusala citta but can condition akusala), are like visitors from outside. It seems disturbing, but we have to note: the ariyan knows the citta as it really is: yathaabutta. One has to know also akusala citta as it is, otherwise one cannot become an ariyan, this is stressed in this short sutta. Yathaabhuuta: bhuuta: that which has grown, is, exists, the truth. yathaabhuuta: in its real essence, according to the truth. vippamutta: pamu~ncati: to release. The Atthasalini speaks about the bhavangacitta as being pure, using the word pa.n.dara (I, Book I, Part IV, Ch II, 140) : "Mind also is said to be clear in the sense of exceedingly pure with reference to the Bhavanga-citta." Now I like to quote from Acharn's Survey of Paramattha dhammas where she explains about the bhavanga-citta which is different from the cittas experiencing objects impinging on the six doors. She explains that when one is fast asleep one does not know who one is or where one is, one does not experience the world. When one wakes up the world appears, one experiences all the objects impinging on the six doors and then these objects give rise to defilements. The bhavanga-citta, life-continuum, that has the function of keeping continuity in the life of an individual, arises when fast asleep and also in between the processes of cittas. Thus our life, consisting of an uninterrupted series of cittas, goes on. The bhavanga-citta experiences the same object as the rebirth-consciousness, and this object is like an echo of the object experienced shortly before the dying-consciousness of the previous life. This citta is pure, but it does not mean that there are no latent tendencies of defilements, anusayas, which lie dormant in the citta. It is called pure or luminous, because at that moment no defilements arise. I quote: < The citta is pure only at the moment it does not experience an object through the doors of eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or mind. Everybody who is fast asleep looks innocent, pure, he does not experience like or dislike, he is not jealous, stingy, conceited, he has no lovingkindness nor compassion; thus, unwholesome or wholesome qualities do not arise because he does not see, hear, experience tangible object or think. However, it should be known that whenever the citta which arises experiences an object through one of the six doors, citta is not pure. The reason is that many different defilements have been accumulated in the citta and these condition the arising of pleasure and attachment when one sees something pleasant, and the arising of displeasure and annoyance when one sees something unpleasant.>* The person who is enlightened, the ariyasaavako, has eradicated anusayas by the development of pa~n~naa of the eightfold Path. It is pa~n~naa which knows realities as they are, yathaabhuuta, no other way. Anusayas are eradicated at the different stages of enlightenment, and only the arahat is freed from all defilements, he has no more latent tendencies of defilements, no conditions for their arising. Nina. ****** > T: And further, if "mind" in this discourse means bhavanga-citta, what > would it mean to develop the bhavanga-citta?” > > S: It wouldn’t;-) > > M: Yeah, but the sutta says ‘Luminous is the mind, and it is freed from > incoming defilements’ and that assumes development of the mind or > development of bhavanga-citta. So the question still stands, what does > it > mean to develop bhavanga-citta. .... S: It doesn’t mean development of bhavanga-citta. See commentary above. Bhavanga citta is never developed and continues to experience the same object throughout life as you explained. ..... > Michael: > I am sorry to say that Bhikkhu Bodhi would not agree with you, in the > Introduction to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha he quotes ‘Even in the > Abhidhamma > itself the dhamma theory is not yet expressed as an explicit > philosophical > tenet, this comes only later in the commentaries.’ This also addresses > your > second remark, since the Abhidhamma was recited only during the Third > Council, Bhikkhu Bodhi is saying that the commentaries are later than > that. .... S: Oh Michael. you’re sneaking in a few more controversial topics into this already super-controversial thread;-) I’ll leave aside BB’s comment (??) for now. The commentaries were started during the Buddha’s time and added to as appropriate. The Abhidhamma for the most part was recited at the First Council. See UP under ‘Abhidhamma - its origins’ and ‘Commentaries’. I’m glad to see you read the Abhidammattha Sangaha;-) Metta, Sarah * From 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas' by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, transl by Nina. It can be found on one of RobertK's websites full of good material: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ http://www.vipassana.info/ ===== 27337 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 0:54am Subject: Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi Michael, --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Sarah, > Michael: No, just paramatha dhamma and their sabhava. This is what I > consider a dupe. In that respect the commentators went too far and have > assumed a position of essentialism. For those who love that concept I > urge > to carefully study the arguments of Nagarjuna in order to dispel that > attachment. Even without sabhava the Abhidhamma is great. I like it a > lot. .... Ok, that’s a big help;-) Let’s look at the beginning of the first book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka, the Dhammasangani, Icaro’s favourite (icaro, I need your help!). Para 2 is on Howard’s cetasika of the month - phasso (contact) which he and I are discussing. I’m using the PTS transl by Mrs R-D “What on that occasion (sobhana cittas) is contact (phasso)? The contact which on that occasion is touching, the being brought into contact, the state of having been brought into touch with - this is the contact that there then is.” Regardless of the terms or words used, what we read in the Abhidhamma Pitaka is a description of dhammas, of paramattha dhammas. Phasso is one example. Here we read a brief description of the sabhava, the particular nature of phasso which differentiates it from vedana (feeling) which follows or other mental factors. Furthermore, as Howard often stresses, at each moment, these characteristics or mental factors change as they arise and pass away in different combinations, experiencing different objects. “This is the contact that there then is”. If there were no contact arising, there would be no experiencing of any data at all. Understanding characteristics or particulars is the way to understanding dhammas as anatta. It doesn’t matter if we or commentaries use the term ‘sabhava’ or not. As Howard wrote, how sabhava is used by the Theravada commentaries is quite different from how the term is used in Mahayana. Better not to confuse them and appreciate these Theravada texts and the usage for what it is. For more on the meaning of ‘paramattha’ see: http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/n_r/paramattha.htm I appreciate your comments which help us all consider these points further, Michael. Trust me, there will be large numbers of other lurkers who will be silently supporting you from the lines;-) Metta, Sarah p.s Oh, I think it’s time you added a pic to our photo album..... Any other newbies (or oldies), pls consider this little act of dana too;-) ====== 27338 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Victor, --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > You are right, I did not provide references to the quotes in my last > message to you. Here they are: .... Thanks, Victor. It’s a great help when I see your blue links;-) I’m not sure that I have anything to add to the comments I wrote yesterday. ... > > "And what is clinging/sustenance? These four are clingings: > sensuality clinging, view clinging, precept & practice clinging, and > doctrine of self clinging. This is called clinging. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-002.html .... These include all kinds of clinging - all kinds of clinging with and without wrong view with regard to the khandhas as I discussed. ..... > > "And what, monks, is right effort? (i) There is the case where a > monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & <...> > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn45-008.html > > > "Now, there is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities -- enters & > remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, <...> > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn066.html .... These are ‘red herring’ links;-) The desire and so on mentioned, refer to wholesome chanda and so on. In this thread, we’re discussing clinging as in lobha or tanha or other unwholesome clinging as you appreciate in the first link above;-) We’ve had a long thread before on this which I can link you back to if you like;-) .... > You found a reference to the teaching on the five aggregates. But > that does not address the problem of clinging to wholesome states, > if there is such a problem at all. .... Actually, dozens and dozens or hundreds of references to the aggregates. Do you accept that: a) wholesome states are included in the khandhas, b) All kinds of clinging are the cause of Dukkha, c)No special exceptions are given anywhere for particular objects of clinging .... > Now, is clinging to wholesome states sensuality clinging, view > clinging, precept & practice clinging, or doctrine of self clinging? .... It can be any of these. It can be plain clinging, clinging with a view of self that clings, clinging to a ritual, clinging with conceit and so on. .... > Is generating desire, endeavoring, activating persistence, upholding > & exerting one's intent for the sake of the arising of skillful > qualities that have not yet arisen and for the maintenance, non- > confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of > skillful qualities that have arisen clinging to wholesome states? .... As to be understood in the references you gave, No. In daily life, at this moment, when there is desire, wishing, endeavouring and so on, you tell me whether there is clinging/attachment or not. For most of us, I know what the answer will be. I notice you’re moving the goal posts again here, Victor. Before you were arguing that clinging to wholesome states isn’t a problem. Now you’re suggesting that these references are not referring to such clinging which of course we agree on;-) .... > Is cultivating, developing, pursuing renunciation-pleasure, > seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure clinging > to wholesome states? ... Again, look forward to your answers. Btw, I particularly liked another sutta you gave a link to some time back on the thread of Guarding the Senses. You wrote: V: >I see the desires that you mentioned as craving/tanha, particularly in terms of "May I be like this", "May I be otherwise", "I will be like this", "I will be otherwise", or other craving-verbalizations as enumerated by the Buddha in Anguttara Nikaya IV.199 Tanha Sutta Craving http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-199.html Metta, Sarah ====== 27339 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi Azita & Howard, --- gazita2002 wrote: > What do you mean by 'it only says.....'? is there anything else > to say? If the elements, the Khandhas etc are ultimate truth, what > else is there to be found? .... Like Howard, I thought you gave wonderful quotes, Azita and I'm amazed at how savvy you're becoming on the computer these days;-) ;-) Sometimes I have to check it's really you (no offence intended)! I'm with you 100% on this one. I understand the points Howard is making, but I put them in a similar category to the 'sabava' and 'paramattha' ones. Now it might well be that when people say 'there is no self' that there isn't any understanding at all of anatta as James said (and I agree with him;-);-)). This depends on the understanding of what is meant, rather than the words, I think. We can only get an idea of the meaning of words by asking for repeated clarifications. It can often, in my case, be used as a kind of shorthand. One word, anatta, is even shorter as KKT and I discussed;-) It's the understanding, not the word that counts as I see it. I appreciate 'there is no self' and the 'the khandhas are empty of self' may carry distinctions in some cases. Btw, Howard, you refer to 'a total revolution of the mind, a radical turning over at the depths'. This reminds me of comments I've read by B.Bodhi and in this case I'm not sure I agree. Perhaps you'd elaborate. How does this fit with the wearing away of the adze handle and the gradual development of the Path? .... Azita:> If there is no right understanding of this very present moment, > that this present moment is just those phenomena arising and falling > away so rapidly, then there will be no liberation. For > those 'seeds' to grow, right understanding must arise to be able to > be developed. Wisdom cannot develop unless it arises. Surely it is > right understanding - a reality - and not me - a nonreality, that > will see phenomena for what it really is -Anatta, Anicca and Dukkha. > > Patience, courage and good cheer, .... Keep up the good sutta quotes (the Ledi Sayadaw one was good too)and reminders;-) Metta, Sarah p.s You'll be glad to hear I'm walking almost normally again now;-) ====== 27340 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:niddesas Hi Nina, I meant to thank you for your added comments below. I'd be very interested to read it as I've mentioned before, hopefully it'll be translated into English in my life-time;-) Metta, Sarah ===== --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Sarah, > In my list of PTS Niddesa is not a Co, but part of the Khuddhaka Nikaya. > There is the Mahaaniddesa and the Cuulaniddesa. I only have the first > one , > but in Thai. The Co to this is the Saddhammapaajotika. Interesting what > you > quote from your old post. Niddesa means explanation. It explains indeed > questions we find in the Sutta Nipata. It has very good texts on old age > etc. I enjoy it very much. Added to each part in my Thai edition is the > commentary to it, thus from the Saddhammapaajotika In the Kaamasutta > niddesa > it gives the meanings of aayatana, citta is aayatana. > Nina. 27341 From: Htoo Naing Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:44am Subject: How To Get Through The Samsara ( 01 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, This age is the age of information. And information technology is growing fast. Everything seems to be obtained easily through a proper approach. The chance never comes twice. What that chance is being born as a human being. This human realm is the most capable realm in 31 planes of existence. No other realm excels human realm as man is always courageous and excels other Sattas in terms of courage and Sati. Man has the best Sati. Most Deva and Brahma drift away on their own achievement and they forget to search Dhamma. Anicca and Dukkha are much more readily perceivable in Manussa realm as man has better Sati than any other Deva or Brahma. In lower realms like Peta, Asura, animals and Niriya or hell, there is a little or little or even no chance to do good deed. Therefore, the best realm is Manussa or human realm, where Bodhisatta develops into Sammasambuddha. As we all are human beings, the most capable and with richest courage and Sati, now let's focus on Sati. With Sati, we look back. Alas! ....there have been many many lives we have lived infinitely. We have lived. That is not a problem. What is problem is how many lives we have to live in our Samsara. The problem will never come to an end without developing special wisdom that have penetrative and analytical and directly realizable in nature. These kinds of wisdom are Magga Nana and Phala Nana. As soon as we pass the first gate of Magga, Samsara will have been limited and shortened. When we attain Arahatta Magga, we are ready to get through the Samsara. May all beings get through the Samsara With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27342 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi James, I meant to add a note - apologies for the late ambush post;-) --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: I read the post. Actually, I agree with you on this point…I > know, that's probably a shocker! ;-)))(And I'm not sure if Michael's > point isn't simply a semantic one). I do not believe that a person > can develop any single part of the Eightfold Path to fruition, to > nibbana, alone. All of them must be developed in tandem. Granted, > they may not all be developed to the same degree, but there cannot be > any deficiencies. Therefore, I agree with you, there is only one > path. ..... It was a bit of a shocker - albeit a pleasant shocker;-) Actually, you’ve been writing some good posts recently. No dispute here. ..... >But remember, I wasn't explaining my position; I was > explaining Buddhaghosa's. He is the one who wrote that each of those > values, developed ALONE, will lead to nibbana. I don't agree with > him. I think he has misinterpreted those suttas he quotes. Just > because those suttas are emphasizing a single value, that doesn't > mean that the others are excluded; they are still there, just > unstated. If you have any disputes, it is with Buddhaghosa, not with > me ;-). .... On the contrary, I don’t believe our disputes are with Buddhaghosa and haven’t read anything in the Visuddhimagga, inc. the extracts given, to suggest that any factor alone leads to nibbana. Just as you suggest in the suttas, looking at an emphasized ‘value’ in a line or section of the Visuddhimagga, doesn’t mean that satipatthana or the eightfold path factors are ever unnecessary. This is stressed so often in Buddhaghosa’s commentaries. I accept that you and other writers may read passages in a different light. I’ll leave the other argument as it was DK’s and not yours. Metta, Sarah ====== 27343 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:42am Subject: New file uploaded to dhammastudygroup Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dhammastudygroup group. File : /letterdatabase.zip Uploaded by : nsdragonman Description : Ann S Winn's address solution You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/letterdatabase.zip To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, nsdragonman 27344 From: Tom Westheimer Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:45am Subject: Early morning brain cramp I thought I was uploading a file to the voice recognition yahoo group but sent it here instead. Sorry for the strange message! 27345 From: Egberdina Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:47am Subject: Re: Act of consciousness Hi Jon, There is no need to reject the suttas. They are stories, and understanding that they are stories is enough. There is no hierarchy amongst stories. There are no "good" stories and "bad" stories, or "true" stories and "false" stories. They do not have a life of their own. There is no need to pass judgment on stories. A story , any story, becomes unravelled with awareness. Awareness does not need expounding. It does not need clarification. It does not need thinking about. Commentaries to awareness do one thing, and that is to kill it. I need not learn to speak English, Bantu, or Pali, in order to be silent. The stories of the Buddha that I have read tell me that he preferred silence to speech, inertness to activity. Silence requires no conceptual framework. Neither does knowing. Knowing arises when it does, and ceases when it does. And so it goes. Peace, love and joy Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Herman > > We have a number of members who reject the Abhidhamma and > commentaries, but I think you're taking the discussion to a new level > in suggesting the suttas be rejected too! > > Tell me, if you had a chance to hear the Buddha himself would you > choose not to do so because of the conceptual framework involved? I > presume not, otherwise you wouldn't be here. In which case you > perhaps you see an essential difference in this regard between > hearing the Buddha live and reading his words some (considerable) > time centuries later What is that crucial factor? And even so, > isn't reading the suttas the next best thing to hearing the man > himself live? > > You mention awareness. Do you consider that the awareness you are > talking about is the same awareness as the Buddha talked about? If > yes, how are you able to know this? > > I don't disagree at all with the notion that destruction by insight > occurs unplanned. But do you say that insight itself occurs > sufficiently without the development of the conditions for its > arising? > > Jon > > --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon and everyone, > > > > The suttas begin to become accessible to anyone who has acquired > > the "compounded to the nth degree" conceptual framework from which > > they sprang. Conceptual frameworks do not illuminate experience. > ... > > Awareness does not need developing. Concepts need de-developing to > > get remotely near to awareness. Deconstruction by insight occurs, > > unplanned, and allows some to return to what there was before there > > were "the texts". To suggest that the texts need to be acquired in > > order to discard them is pretty funny. > > > > I see no evidence in any scriptures that awareness is developed, > > but > > plenty that awareness is uncovered. Like Larry says, the path of > > the Buddha is cessation, not development. > > > > The empty mind is joyful, and not because it says so in a book. > 27346 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member Hi Carl, --- Carl wrote: > I am another new member and have been lurking and reading the posts > for a week or so now. And also reading the books of Nina. Learning > and studying the Abhidhamma is kinda like playing tag with a steam- > roller :) Just the moment you think you have some understanding it > runs right over the top of you! .... Good to welcome you here and trust me, I’m sure we are all familiar with the steam-roller :) .... > I am so happy to be here among the authors writing on the Abhidhamma > and the very astute contributors of this group. I appreciate the > close adherance, scrutiny and devotion to Lord Buddha's Dhamma. > The Abhidhamma seems as a magnifying glass on the teachings of > Buddha and for me seems to bring the teachings into clarity. .... I know Nina and others will be most encouraged by your comments. Your description of the Abhidhamma exactly illustrates how I see it too. .... <..> > It is an honor to be here. Carl ..... it’s an honor to have you join us, Carl. I’ve left your comments as RobertK has already replied and I look forward to reading your continued discussion with him and anyone else. Thankyou again for your introductory comments and qus. If you’d like to add any details about where you live and how you found your way here or became interested in the Abhidhamma, that would be interesting too. I look forward to further discussions. Metta, Sarah ===== 27347 From: Egberdina Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Hi Howard, I appreciate your feedback very much. I have been thinking of you and your wife with your recent loss, and want you to know that I have been encouraged by the depth and strength of your understanding. Wishing you and yours well Herman --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Herman - > > This is a brief one of those "sadhu posts"! ;-) Without giving specifics, and though there are a few monor bones I could pick, I just want to tell you that there is very much that I like a lot here! > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 11/24/2003 7:33:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > > > > > Hi Jon and everyone, > > > > The suttas begin to become accessible to anyone who has acquired > > the "compounded to the nth degree" conceptual framework from which > > they sprang. Conceptual frameworks do not illuminate experience. 27348 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member Hi Blue, Welcome to DSG too;-) --- blue lan wrote: > Hi, Carol: .... (Note: his name is CARL!) ..... > Somehow, after read your idea, i think we need to go back to see what an > example the Buddha had said to us--- lotus. The Buddha makes such a > good example---between people who could understand the five aggregates > and cittas (or they are connected each other). ..... Cittas being the same as vinnana khandha or aggregate of consciousness which consists of all cittas. .... > I am a Taiwanness, i read some of sutras in which also be written by > Chinese chatacters. By the way, i an also a new member here, and reading > the posts for a couple of weeks. This letter is my first to post my > opinion. .... Thank you very much for introducing yourself, Blue. Jon and I are fairly close to you as we live in Hong Kong. There have been other Taiwanese members, but none active at the moment that I can think of. ( I think there was another Michael in Taiwan before). It’s good to read your opinions and I’m very happy to hear you’re reading the posts. Let us know if there’s anything you’d like clarified. I saw a copy of the Abhidammattha Sangaha written in Chinese characters and printed in Malaysia if you'd like the address. Obviously, if you've been reading messages here for the last two weeks you also read English pretty easily;-) Look forward to further discussion with you. Metta, Sarah p.s Btw, we ask all members on DSG to kindly trim previous posts in the thread =================================================================== 27349 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Early morning brain cramp Hi Tom, --- Tom Westheimer wrote: > I thought I was uploading a file to the voice recognition yahoo group > but sent it here instead. Sorry for the strange message! ..... As I’m sure you’ll have noticed over the years, we get all kinds of introductory messages and sooner or later even die-hard lurkers like yourself make an unusual appearance;-) ;-) I was sorry not to see you and Beverly in India with K.Sujin and others and hope we meet in Thailand or somewhere. How about a proper intro now you’ve broken the ice? That would be interesting;-) I know Nina and everyone else would be glad to hear from you and any Dhamma musings. Metta, Sarah p.s Thanks for behind-the-scenes comments and suggestions about file storage ============================================================== 27350 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Micheal I have been reading the exchanges, however one thing creep into my mind that you keep insisting that " commentators went too far and have assumed a position of essentialism." Would you like to define how does one assume an essentialism? What are your parameters of such an essentialism? Or could I have the privilege to define as something with an intrinsic value. Or do your prefer "an individuality", a kind of form". Anyway whatever definiton, it is always good that you provide such a definition for easy discussion. Buddha in the suttas always refer "self" as a construct of the five aggregates" Abdhidhamma as you also know also refer "self" as a construct of cittas, cetasikas and rupa. Abdhidhamma never invent a new way of saying that the construct of "self" is different from what Buddha said in the sutta. It is only different in the way it categorise them and in rupa explain a bit more in detail. Buddha says impermanence and anatta. Abdhidhamma never invent a new way of saying that this impermanence and anatta is different from sutta. However two of the most controversial prinicple of Abdhidhamma where essentialism could be construe are the accumulations of kamma and latent tendecies. To me a correct perspective must be maintain in order to understand this two concepts. Latent tendecies - To me I prefer the word "habitual effect" rather than this word latent tendecies where it rings a kind of essentialism principle. All cittas have this habitual effect, logically the cause of such an effect is ignorance. But does this habitual effect "permanent and a self", or a thing that presume a self or an underlying consciouness. If it is a thing, a self, then the whole Abdhidhamma theory will thoroughly fail bc this is an impt pillar of Abdhidhamma. If it is a thing, a self, then the so called conditions and conditions relations in Abdhidhamma is not valid. Habitual effect can be change and it is anatta. If it does not change, then why bother to learn Buddhism in the first place. If it has a self, how come we cannot tell our habitual effect to stop all these nonsense. Accumalation of Kamma - I dont have a better a word. Accumulations also ring a bell of essentialism - it is always misconstrue as "a storehouse of consciousness", or an underlying consciouness. If there is a another underlying consciouness or a storehouse of consciouness, does these mean that at each moment of our consciouness there is a subset of consciouness. Isn't this very confusing. If each consciouness has a self in it, so that means there is another entity at work. This is like the argument of a soul. Accumalation in Abdhidhamma is also impermanent and anatta. In fact the whole thing how Kamma work is really in the realm of Buddha. In Abdhidhamma the accumulative effect is a just function of a cetasikas. Just like vedana function for a citta to feel. Or would you prefer to give us your parameters on why Abdhidhamma is essentailism. With warmest regards Ken O 27351 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 6:58am Subject: Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi James, > > I meant to add a note - apologies Hi Sarah, Sarah: I meant to add a note - apologies for the late ambush post;-) James: That's okay. Honestly, I was hoping for a breather and that you had dropped the issue after my last post, but I should have known better! ;-). Sarah, you are going to exhaust me! ;-))) Sarah: It was a bit of a shocker - albeit a pleasant shocker;-) Actually, you've been writing some good posts recently. No dispute here. James: Yea, the best posts are those that agree! ;-) Seriously, my posts have been better because I have been using references out the yin yang…even Pali! Yuck. It is too much; I am not pleased with myself. I need to lurk more and write less; meditate/practice mindfulness more and search references less. Don't want to lose good accumulations through poor choices.;-) Sarah: On the contrary, I don't believe our disputes are with Buddhaghosa and haven't read anything in the Visuddhimagga, inc. the extracts given, to suggest that any factor alone leads to nibbana. James: Buddhaghosa wrote, "In some instances this path of purification is taught by insight alone…" Notice the word `alone'. You are stating the exact opposite of what Buddhaghosa wrote. Buddhaghosa later writes in the introduction, "This is how the Blessed One shows the path ofpurification under the headings of virtue, concentration and understanding there." It seems to me that Buddhaghosa is describing different paths, based on the suttas, here. Of course that may not have been his intention, but that is how he stated it. I was simply defending DK's interpretation because I think it is accurate. Buddhaghosa begins the Visudhimagga by describing different paths to purification but finally decides on the broader "virtue, concentration, and understanding" path. Sarah: Just as you suggest in the suttas, looking at an emphasized `value' in a line or section of the Visuddhimagga, doesn't mean that satipatthana or the eightfold path factors are ever unnecessary. This is stressed so often in Buddhaghosa's commentaries. James: I was just going on what Buddhaghosa wrote. He wrote `alone'; alone means alone to me. I don't believe that I am taking anything out of context. He may have stressed something different in his commentaries- I will take your word for it since you are well read in them- but that isn't what he wrote in this introduction. We were only discussing the introduction to the Visudhimagga, not his entire body of work. Sarah: I accept that you and other writers may read passages in a different light. James: That is good because I don't think we are ever going to agree on this. If you can explain to me how Buddhaghosa didn't really mean `alone' when he wrote `alone', by only using what is in context (not additional sources), maybe we can agree. Metta, James 27352 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi, Ken (and Jon) - In a message dated 11/25/03 1:28:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > >>Howard: > >> Another closely related question is: "By what means is one > >>aware that there is an entire group of rupas arising (somewhere), > >>when only one rupa is experienced?" > > k: Such an experience can only be able to experience and explain by > the wisdom of Buddha. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I believe I've heard that one before, but then it sounded more like "God's ways are mysterious, His wonders to perform." ------------------------------------------------- I think without him, not many Arahat will know> > about also, only certain Great Arahats. In my opinion, this is a > natural law for rupas to co-arise together. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: And this is known ... how? ---------------------------------------------- Only one is choose, they> > rest will fall away and cease to exist (also a natural law). This is > also similar to the universal cetasikas where seven arise together > with each citta but only one is arise and depend on condition > relations, which cetasikas will be cognize. > > ========================== All this alleged fact is known by what means? Whatever happened to ehipassiko? Also, where in the suttas, the discourses taught for 45 years and guiding many to full enlightenment, did this appear even in raw form? Jon, you asked me why I need to know *where* hardness is when it is not experienced (there being no actual rock in which to inhere) and yet supposedly has arisen along with an experienced sight (say) and other unexperienced rupas. My answer was that we need to know this to gain some reason to give credence to the claim of such a state of affairs, the arising of a rupa group that is unobservable except supposedly only by a Buddha (according to you, Ken) and that must be taken on faith. Even if this rupa-group claim were correct, the Buddha said to see for ourselves, and *not* accept due to authority, and, perhaps more importantly, why is *this* leaf in the forest among the few in the Buddha's hand?? Does one also need to know that water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen to make progress towards freedom? 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) 27353 From: ashkenn2k Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 8:07am Subject: Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi James > James: Buddhaghosa wrote, "In some instances this path of > purification is taught by insight alone…" Notice the word `alone'. k: I think the line of controvery here is how do we read the author intention. Why did he beat about the bushes with so different paths (if there are many paths) and then come back to one path. Was it a different path in the first instance when he say that statement or was it refering to certain disciples who need just the method of insight alone or others who need more? When Buddha teach about dependent origination, sense investigation, etc was he trying to overwhelm us using different paths? Or was he just providing different methods using the same path? To me, in Buddhism there is only one path, that is the 8 Noble Foot Path? Be it you are practising Thervada, Mahayana or Tibetan, all methods still come back this path. There is no other path. That is how I interpret Buddhaghosa when he illustrates the diverse methods but in the end only one path. kind regards Ken O 27354 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 8:36am Subject: [dsg] Re: Clinging to Wholesome States (was: Buddhaghosa....) Hi Sarah and all, My question was Could you provide some references regarding clinging to wholesome states? Did the Buddha ever address the problem of clinging to wholesome states, if there is such problem at all? You provided the reference Aggregates Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-048.html and said that wholesome states are included in sankhara khandha translated here as mental fabrications. I would not disagree with you on that. But on the other hand, that is not what I was inquiring. I also asked the following three questions Now, is clinging to wholesome states sensuality clinging, view clinging, precept & practice clinging, or doctrine of self clinging? Is generating desire, endeavoring, activating persistence, upholding & exerting one's intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen and for the maintenance, non- confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen clinging to wholesome states? Is cultivating, developing, pursuing renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure clinging to wholesome states? It seems to me that clinging to wholesome states is a specific problem, and we agree that 1. Generating desire, endeavoring, activating persistence, upholding & exerting one's intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen and for the maintenance, non- confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen and 2. Cultivating, developing, pursuing renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure do not refer to clinging to wholesome states. However, I am not sure what you mean by clinging to wholesome states. Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, [snip] 27355 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:02am Subject: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 03 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Among the four sets of Cetasikas, permanent ministers have been described. In this post, the flexible ministers will be delineated. They are given ' the sense ' of ' flexible ' because when they work with Akusala Cetasikas,they will become Akusala Cetasikas and when they work with Kusala Cetasikas they will become Kusala Cetasikas. They are known as '' Pakinnaka Cetasikas ''. There are six of them who work as flexible ministers. 1. Vitakka It delibrately puts the Citta and other cetasikas on a particular Arammana or object. It makes sure that Citta is taking that Arammana or object. It works as a starter and all other Cetasikas and Citta start working even though Citta is a leader.He accepts the advice of Vitakka and starts working on that particular sense ( object or Arammana ) and so on. It is also known as initial application. 2. Vicara It makes reviews on the Arammana and goes all the way round on that particular Arammana. It functions as a reviewer. It advises the leader ( Citta ) to review and review on the senses. It is also known as sustained application.It persists on a particular Arammana or object. When Vitakka puts the Citta on a particular object, Vicara helps sustained and stays persistently on that Arammana or object. 3. Piti It makes itself, Citta and all other Cetasikas cheerful. Citta likes the Arammana as advised by Piti. In its presence, Citta and all Cetasikas do their business cheerfully and happily. Piti energizes all mental faculties exist. In the presence of Piti, all mental jobs become tirelessness and unexhausted. Piti makes joyous, happy, merry, rejoiced and it increases likeness to the particular object or Arammana. 4. Viriya It makes exertion, effort, movement of citta. It functions as an effort-maker and sustains the activity. Viriya advises the king Citta to produce effort steadfastly. Viriya will never withdraw what it is doing at every moment. In the presence of Viriya, Citta becomes a steadfast effort producer. It gives the strength to Citta in performing actions not to stop or not to withdraw from performing ongoing actions. 5. Chandha It advises Citta its wish and Citta implements the wish. It sets a target or a goal. Citta and other Cetasikas go hand in hand toward that goal. Chandha is just a wish without any attachment unlike Lobha. Chandha is mere desire without magnetic attraction to a particular object. No one can search Nibbana with Lobha. But Nibbana can be attained with Chandha. Chandha is just wishing, just desire, just willingness without any specific attachment. 6. Adhimokkha It determines the exact job. It advises a decision for Citta. Citta, the king (leader ) then decides according to Adhimokkha's advice. Adhimokkha makes a clear cut decision. It gives strong determination. It marks the exact job for Citta to do. In the presence of Adhimokkha Citta can work undubiously. Citta can work with Adhimokkha under suspicion free environment. Adhimokkha is a decision maker. He is the chief adviser minister of the king Citta, who leads all other mental bodies Cetasikas. These six Cetasikas work as flexible ministers to the king Citta. When the king does good things, they functions as good advisers. When the king does bad things, they flexibly agree and advise accordingly. Trying to see or realize these Dhamma will have a good chance to probe internal ( mental ) phenomena. May you have an interest in the job of Cetasikas and realize them With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27356 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Sukin, Sukin: Now you have aroused my curiosity ;-). Can you please direct me to any such material on the internet? I lack patience in reading, so please if possible choose one with the most simple writing style and minimum amount of reading. Michael: Sorry, cannot recomend anything from the web on Nagarjuna. I would recommend as a starter to read 'The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way' - Translation and Commentary by Jay L. Garfield. The Central Philosoohy of Buddhism by TRV Murti, Dependent Arising and Emptiness by Elizabeth Napper, The Essence of the Heart Sutta by the Dalai Lama and A History of Buddhist Philosphy by Kalupahana, are also good reading. It's a long list and a very complex subject but wothwhile the effort. Metta Michael 27357 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma-vinaya Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/25/03 5:12:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Btw, Howard, you refer to 'a total revolution of the mind, a radical > turning over at the depths'. This reminds me of comments I've read by > B.Bodhi and in this case I'm not sure I agree. Perhaps you'd elaborate. > How does this fit with the wearing away of the adze handle and the gradual > development of the Path? > ========================= Not much to say, Sarah. The gradual development, the cultivation, comes first. And then, after stages of awakening, yet more development, and then yet further awakening, etc, but each touching of the unborn is earth-shattering - just look at the expressions of joy at enlightenment in the Songs of the Monks and Nuns or in the Zen records. And even when the joy is missing due to being ill prepared with respect to cultivation of calm, the experience is a radical one. 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) 27358 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Act of consciousness Thank you, Herman. Much appreciated. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/25/03 8:14:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I appreciate your feedback very much. > > I have been thinking of you and your wife with your recent loss, and > want you to know that I have been encouraged by the depth and > strength of your understanding. > > Wishing you and yours well > > > Herman > /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) 27359 From: ashkenn2k Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi Howard All this alleged fact is known by what means? Whatever happened to > ehipassiko? Also, where in the suttas, the discourses taught for 45 years and > guiding many to full enlightenment, did this appear even in raw form? > Jon, you asked me why I need to know *where* hardness is when it is > not experienced (there being no actual rock in which to inhere) and yet supposedly has arisen along with an experienced sight (say) and other unexperienced rupas. My answer was that we need to know this to gain some reason to give > credence to the claim of such a state of affairs, the arising of a rupa group that is unobservable except supposedly only by a Buddha (according to you, Ken) and that must be taken on faith. Even if this rupa-group claim were correct, the > Buddha said to see for ourselves, and *not* accept due to authority, and, perhaps more importantly, why is *this* leaf in the forest among the few in the Buddha's hand?? Does one also need to know that water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen to make progress towards freedom? > k: You are aboslutely right that we do not need to know water is H2O. In fact, what Buddha taught in Sutta is adequate for learning, for exploring, for liberation. And what is taught in Sutta is verifiable, have put us more in faith, here and now. The most difficult position of Abdhidhamma has a whole, is its difficulty in providing evidence from the sutta. Even those evidence from the sutta is always infer and not direct proof bc the recorded suttas do not provide such material proof. k: To me, it is extremely difficult to have faith and confidence in Abhidhamma. There are these nagging issues like how do we know that these rupas arise together etc. How to verify Abdhidhamma is to investigate the validity of the guiding principle (forget about such details about rupas rising together) with what Buddha taught in the suttas. Presently I only can provide two examples k: Abdhidhamma always talk about singularity. Does sutta talk about it. In fact it is always in it, for eg. one can only experience one feeling at a time. Bc of this singularity, cittas have to been very fast arise and fall (just like frames of a film) or not we will have problem seeing etc. Just like the eye retina has many neurotransmitters that capture the picture and send to the brain for us to see. If it is slow, we will have a problem seeing. k: Abdhidhamma talks in great length on conditions and the relationship between these conditions. One eg in sutta is dependent origintion. Why great length, bc there is a need to see things as conditions so as to prevent seeing one as a "self" construct. In fact this method will eventually eradicate the way we think that a self is involved esp when we taught we always have the right to choose or in short free will. k: In the end, I have to admit that there is no way to verify those nagging issues in the suttas. However, I like to state that Abdhidhamma is an extension of sutta and not the other round bc the path of liberation can only be found described in the sutta. Whether the sutta is for certain level of disciple, it is not the issue, to me it is for everyone and each one of us will interpret to our own level. However, with the help of Abdhidhamma, the meaning of sutta has become clearer, more meaningful. I believe it will bring benefit not loss, bring clarity to suttas and to faith and then to liberation. And the only way you can verify it, is that you put down all views and try it. kind regards Ken O 27360 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Kenneth, Kenneth: I have been reading the exchanges, however one thing creep into my mind that you keep insisting that " commentators went too far and have assumed a position of essentialism." Would you like to define how does one assume an essentialism? What are your parameters of such an essentialism? Michael: I suggest you look back at the post containing the reproduction of part of the chapter on Buddhaghosa by D. Kalupahana. The arguments are there. Metta Michael 27361 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cooran meeting Dear Ken, Always a pleasure to read your posts. I am not yet quite happy about the sharks. I really appreciate it that Klaas founded the group, and please convey my anumodana and warmest regards to him. Could he not partake of dsg? Nina. op 25-11-2003 01:53 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowardau@y...: > Another thing I am looking forward to is meeting my old > friend Klaas de Jong. 27362 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] New Member, to Carl Dear Carl, welcome to the group. I always appreciate it very much when people have confidence in the Abhidhamma. See below. op 25-11-2003 01:51 schreef Carl op c7carl@y...: Learning > and studying the Abhidhamma is kinda like playing tag with a steam- > roller :) Just the moment you think you have some understanding it > runs right over the top of you! N: we all need patience. It is a process of learning little by little, and this is for all of us. C: The Abhidhamma seems as a magnifying glass on the teachings of > Buddha and for me seems to bring the teachings into clarity. N: I like this simile you use. And it helps us to be down to earth. C: Cittas are a reality. The body is not a reality. N: Rob K already explained about the five khandhas. The body consists of rupas which are real. But it takes time to absorb this. We are used to think of "our body" all the time. The question is, how do we exprience it at this moment? We experience heat, hardness, pressure. Different elements. The Abhidhamma is not theory, it has to be verified right now. This is the way to learn that what we take for person are only fleeting elements. Looking forward to your input, Nina. 27363 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi Larry, op 25-11-2003 05:25 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: Would it be correct to say rupas that are produced by temperature are not objects of consciousness because all the rupas that are objects of consciousness are produced by kamma? N: This is not correct. Howard: "Does any dhamma arise from a single condition? Why must arising > from temperature and arising from kamma be mutually exclusive?" L: Most rupa is produced by a combination of 4 > causes: kamma, consciousness, temperature, and nutriment. N: Some groups of rupa of the body are produced by kamma, some by consciousness, some by temperature, and some by nutriment. The rupas that are not of the body are produced only by temperature. When a group is produced by kamma, it is not produced at the same time by temperature, etc. Different kinds of rupa, no matter produced by which factor can be experienced and known. But we do not have to pinpoint by which factor they are produced. Because of fright, heat of the body may appear: conditioned by citta. Nutrition conditions the body in different ways and its effect can be heat that appears. When the temperature outside is cold, it can cause stiffness of the body. There are many intricate conditions. L:I just looked > in CMA and I see that sound is not produced by kamma (intentional sound, > e.g. speech, is produced by kamma). N: No, not by kamma. Sound can be produced by temperature and by citta, think of the sound of wind, and of speech sound. L:Maybe there is a difference between > "produced by kamma" and "result of kamma". N: There is a difference between originating from and caused by, see CMA at the end, but this is very intricate. Expositor II, p. 443: originating in and caused by. Here I want to be careful. Nina. 27364 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:14am Subject: Vis.Tiika37 Relevant text Vis. 37: 37. 1. Herein, the eye's characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements that is ready for the impact of visible data; or its characteristic is sensitivity of primary elements originated by kamma sourcing from desire to see. Its function is to pick up [an object] among visible data. It is manifested as the footing of eye-consciousness. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to see. ------------------ 37. tattha ruupaabhighaataarahatappasaadalakkha.na.m da.t.thukaamataanidaanakammasamu.t.thaanabhuutappasaadalakkha.na.m vaa cakkhu, ruupesu aavi~nchanarasa.m, cakkhuvi~n~naa.nassa aadhaarabhaavapaccupa.t.thaana.m, da.t.thukaamataanidaanakammajabhuutapada.t.thaana.m. Tiika: Note: 37. tattha ruupaabhighaataarahatappasaadalakkha.na.m da.t.thukaamataanidaanakammasamu.t.thaanabhuutappasaadalakkha.na.m vaa cakkhu, N: impact of visible object, ruupaabhighaata, readiness or fitness, arahataa, the eyesense (sensitivity), pasaada. Then at end: characteristic, lakkha.na.m. Sentient organ that is ready for the impact of visible data is the characteristic (of the eye). Pasada, literally brightness or clearness, (it is a revealer) is a derived rupa with its own specific nature or characteristic, (sa-bhava, own nature) also called pasaada-ruupa. It is eyesense, earsense, etc. Now the second part, and for this I needed to consult the Atthasalini, 307 (Expositor II, p. 404). Vis reads: I analyse: sourcing from desire to see, da.t.thukaamataa nidaana, originated by kamma, kammasamu.t.thaana, sentient organ depending on the primaries, bhuutappasaada. At the end: characteristic, lakkha.na.m. In a compound stems are used and except at the end, no cases are used. Here bhuuta stands for the genetive case, but in the compound the ending is eliminated. This will be clear from what follows. In the Tiika it is said: catunna.m bhuutaana.m pasaado : the sensitivity of the four primaries. The Atthasalini: Thus we read the genetive: of the four primaries, but the meaning is: depending on. Tiika text 37: 37. Idaani yathaa-uddi.t.thaani upaadaaruupaani lakkha.naadito niddisitu.m ³tattha ruupaabhighaataarahabhuutappasaadalakkha.nan²ti-aadi aaraddha.m. Now he said first in order to explain the characteristics etc. of the derived material phenomena that were pointed out: ² Herein, sentient organ that is ready for the impact of visible data is the characteristic and so on². Tattha tatthaati tesu upaadaaruupesu. As to the expression herein, this means, with regard to the derived materiality. Ruupe, ruupassa vaa abhighaato ruupaabhighaato, ta.m arahatiiti ruupaabhighaataaraho, On account of visible object, or the impact of visible object is visible object-impact, it is fit for this, thus, ready for impact of visible object, ruupaabhighaato hotu vaa maa vaa eva.msabhaavo catunna.m bhuutaana.m pasaado ruupaabhighaataarahabhuutappasaado, the sentient organ that is dependent on the four primaries is of such nature, no matter whether it is impinged on by visible object or not, thus, (there is the compound) ³the sentient organ dependent on the primaries that is ready for the impact of visible data; eva.mlakkha.na.m cakkhuuti attho. thus is its characteristic, meaning the eye. ........(section omitted) Tenaaha ³ya.m cakkhu anidassana.m sappa.tigha.m ruupamhi sanidassanamhi sappa.tighamhi pa.tiha~n~ni vaa²ti, Therefore he said: ³...which eye that is invisible and reacting has impinged on visible object that is visible and reacting...² ³yamhi cakkhumhi anidassanamhi sappa.tighamhi ruupa.m sanidassana.m sappa.tigha.m pa.tiha~n~ni vaa pa.tiha~n~nati vaa²ti ca aadi. ³on which eye(sense) that is invisible and reacting visible object that is visible and reacting has impinged or impinges...² and so on (Dhsg §598, 599). ......(section omitted) Da.t.thukaamataati hi da.t.thumicchaa, ruupata.nhaati attho. As to the expression desire to see, this refers to seeing in the wrong way, the meaning is craving for visible object. (.....) Ruupesu puggalassa, vi~n~naa.nassa vaa aavi~nchanarasa.m. The picking up (an object) among visible data, by a person or consciousness, is its function *. Aadhaarabhaavapaccupa.t.thaana.m nissayapaccayabhaavato. It is manifested as the footing of eye-consciousness, by its nature of dependence-condition **. Da.t.thukaamataanidaanakammajabhuutapada.t.thaana.m Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to see, yesa.m bhuutaana.m pasaado, tevassa aasannakaara.nanti katvaa. and the sense-organ is depending on (of) these primaries, which have been made the near cause of it. ***** English: Now he said first in order to explain the characteristics etc. of the derived material phenomena that were pointed out: ² Herein, sentient organ that is ready for the impact of visible data is the characteristic and so on². As to the expression herein, this means, with regard to the derived materiality. On account of visible object, or the impact of visible object is visible object-impact, it is fit for this, thus, ready for impact of visible object, the sentient organ that is dependent on the four primaries is of such nature, no matter whether it is impinged on by visible object or not, thus, (there is the compound) ³the sentient organ dependent on the primaries that is ready for the impact of visible data²; thus is its characteristic, meaning the eye. ........(section omitted) ...Therefore he said: which eye that is invisible and reacting has impinged on visible object that is visible and reacting... on which eye(sense) that is invisible and reacting visible object that is visible and reacting has impinged or impinges...² and so on (Dhsg §598, 599). ......(section omitted) As to the expression desire to see, this refers to seeing in the wrong way, the meaning is craving for visible object. (.....) The picking up (an object) among visible data, by a person or consciousness, is its function *. It is manifested as the footing of eye-consciousness, by its nature of dependence-condition **. Its proximate cause is primary elements born of kamma sourcing from desire to see, and the sense-organ is depending on (of) these primaries, which have been made the near cause of it. __________ * The eyesense does not strictly speaking select or pick up an object. Because of conditions, citta does, or, in conventional sense a person does. ** The sense-bases and the heart-base are dependance-condition for the relevant cittas that arise at those bases. ******* Nina. 27365 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hello Sarah, Sarah: Regardless of the terms or words used, what we read in the Abhidhamma Pitaka is a description of dhammas, of paramattha dhammas. Phasso is one example. Michael: Explain to me please, all cittas, cetasikas and rupas described in the Abhidhamma of the Pali Tipitaka are exaustive? I mean do they explain all that should be comprehended as paramattha dhamma (ultimate realities). Could there be anything missing? Could there be too much, i.e things that are not paramatha but have been included? Second, are there other Abhidhammas from other Buddhist schools? In case yes, do they have exactly the same paramattha dhamma? In case no, do you know if there is a reason for only existing the Pali Abhidhamma? Sarah: As Howard wrote, how sabhava is used by the Theravada commentaries is quite different from how the term is used in Mahayana. Better not to confuse them and appreciate these Theravada texts and the usage for what it is. Michael: Oh! Now I see, Nagarjuna did not know what he was talking about. He probably knew the meaning of sabhava/svabhava but did not know the particular way the commentators of the Canon used it. I guess Bhikkhu Bodhi should also be told about this because he affirms: ‘Dhammas alone possess ultimate reality: determinate existence “from their own side” (sarupato).’ Which is exactly what Nagarjuna critizes. Metta Michael PS: I will see what I can do about the pictures. Is there only one photo album? Can you pls. provide the link:) 27366 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Hi, Ken - While I don't agree with *all* that you say in the following, I do agree with very much of it, and more importantly, I very much admire your candor, your non-doctrinnaire attitude, and the moderate approach you adopt. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/25/03 1:36:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > > Hi Howard > > All this alleged fact is known by what means? Whatever happened to > >ehipassiko? Also, where in the suttas, the discourses taught for > 45 years and >guiding many to full enlightenment, did this appear > even in raw form? > Jon, you asked me why I need to know > *where* hardness is when it is >not experienced (there being no > actual rock in which to inhere) and yet supposedly has arisen along > with an experienced sight (say) and other unexperienced rupas. My > answer was that we need to know this to gain some reason to give > > credence to the claim of such a state of affairs, the arising of a > rupa group that is unobservable except supposedly only by a Buddha > (according to you, Ken) and that must be taken on faith. Even if > this rupa-group claim were correct, the > >Buddha said to see for ourselves, and *not* accept due to > authority, and, perhaps more importantly, why is *this* leaf in the > forest among the few in the Buddha's hand?? Does one also need to > know that water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen to make > progress towards freedom? > > > > k: You are aboslutely right that we do not need to know water is > H2O. In fact, what Buddha taught in Sutta is adequate for learning, > for exploring, for liberation. And what is taught in Sutta is > verifiable, have put us more in faith, here and now. The most > difficult position of Abdhidhamma has a whole, is its difficulty in > providing evidence from the sutta. Even those evidence from the > sutta is always infer and not direct proof bc the recorded suttas do > not provide such material proof. > > k: To me, it is extremely difficult to have faith and confidence in > Abhidhamma. There are these nagging issues like how do we know that > these rupas arise together etc. How to verify Abdhidhamma is to > investigate the validity of the guiding principle (forget about such > details about rupas rising together) with what Buddha taught in the > suttas. Presently I only can provide two examples > > k: Abdhidhamma always talk about singularity. Does sutta talk > about it. In fact it is always in it, for eg. one can only > experience one feeling at a time. Bc of this singularity, cittas > have to been very fast arise and fall (just like frames of a film) > or not we will have problem seeing etc. Just like the eye retina > has many neurotransmitters that capture the picture and send to the > brain for us to see. If it is slow, we will have a problem seeing. > > k: Abdhidhamma talks in great length on conditions and the > relationship between these conditions. One eg in sutta is dependent > origintion. Why great length, bc there is a need to see things as > conditions so as to prevent seeing one as a "self" construct. In > fact this method will eventually eradicate the way we think that a > self is involved esp when we taught we always have the right to > choose or in short free will. > > k: In the end, I have to admit that there is no way to verify those > nagging issues in the suttas. However, I like to state that > Abdhidhamma is an extension of sutta and not the other round bc the > path of liberation can only be found described in the sutta. > Whether the sutta is for certain level of disciple, it is not the > issue, to me it is for everyone and each one of us will interpret to > our own level. However, with the help of Abdhidhamma, the meaning > of sutta has become clearer, more meaningful. I believe it will > bring benefit not loss, bring clarity to suttas and to faith and > then to liberation. And the only way you can verify it, is that you > put down all views and try it. > > > kind regards > Ken O > /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) 27367 From: christine_forsyth Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:32am Subject: PHOTOS PHOTOS PHOTOS All members,(new and not so new), DhammaStudyGroup has four photo albums. The albums are: 1. Members - there are currenty 63 photos of members in this album. 2. Significant Others and Family - there are currently 11 photos in this album. 3. DSG Meetings - there are currently 14 Group photos in this album. 4. Myanmar (members trip October 2003) - there are currently 41 photos in this album. The albums can be accessed by clicking on one of them at this link: http://photos.groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/lst Then click on any photo to enlarge it for easier viewing. All new and old members, whether lurking or actively posting, are encouraged to place a photo, or several photos, in the Members or Significant Others Albums. It does make a pleasant difference to be able to visualise the person to whom you are writing. As you will see, we come in all shapes and sizes, are of many nationalities, and of varied ages and genders. I hope many who are not yet in the Album, but who have thought they "may put a photo in one day", will seriously consider doing it now. We'd be delighted to have you join us. If you are unsure of how to do it, please email Kom, Sukin, or myself off-list and we will be glad to be of assistance. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 27368 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hello Sarah, Sarah: It doesn’t mean development of bhavanga-citta. Bhavanga citta is never developed and continues to experience the same object throughout life as you explained. Michael: OK. But lets look again at what the sutta says. In parts: ‘Luminous is the mind,’ So, based on the commentaries this refers to bhavanga citta in a state of deep sleep, and bhavanga is pure and luminous. (bhavanga is experiencing the rebirth object which was defiled and therefore how can bhavanga be pure if it is experiencing a defiled object?) ‘and it is freed from incoming defilements’ So, the sutta refers to ‘it’ which has to be the same mind as before, or bhavanga citta. And ‘freed from incoming defilements’ means development – bhavana. Therefore the question is: how is the development of bhavanga citta. Further, how can bhavanga citta be affected by incoming defilements? Bhavanga is detached from the sense doors so how is this possible? Sarah: The commentaries were started during the Buddha’s time and added to as appropriate. The Abhidhamma for the most part was recited at the First Council. Michael: Yeah, I know that MahaKaccana is considered the father of exegesis in Theravada but Bhikkhu Bodhi was referring to commentaries on the Abhidhamma, not commentaries in general. It is the first time I hear that Abhidhamma was recited in the first council. Were does that come from? Metta Michael 27369 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 7:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi, Michael - In a message dated 11/25/03 3:03:40 PM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Michael: > Oh! Now I see, Nagarjuna did not know what he was talking about. He probably > > knew the meaning of sabhava/svabhava but did not know the particular way the > > commentators of the Canon used it. I guess Bhikkhu Bodhi should also be told > > about this because he affirms: ‘Dhammas alone possess ultimate reality: > determinate existence “from their own sideâ€? (sarupato).’ Which is exactly > what Nagarjuna critizes. ========================= I may be mistaken, but I don't believe Nagarjuna addressed Theravada. I believe that his works were largely in response to the Sarvastavadin and Sautrantika schools. If I recall correctly, you've read a bit by David Kalupahana. Didn't he also say that Nagarjuna addressed positions of those schools rather than Theravada? Also, I think that although Theravada is a single school, there are a variety of streams within it, some of which, in my opinion wander off course on some issues, but others of which do not. Kalupahana, BTW, considers himself to be a Theravadin. For the record, the statement you attribute to Bhikkhu Bodhi is one that I take considerable exception to. 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) 27370 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hello Howard, Howard: I may be mistaken, but I don't believe Nagarjuna addressed Theravada. I believe that his works were largely in response to the Sarvastavadin and Sautrantika schools. Michael: Nagarjuna addressed the Abhidhamma. I don’t know if the schools you mentioned had Abhidhamma. Did they? His writings were a critique of the concepts of paramatha dhamma and sabhava/svabhava that had crept up in the writings about the Abhidhamma. Howard: For the record, the statement you attribute to Bhikkhu Bodhi is one that I take considerable exception to. Michael: Sorry but I don’t know what you mean, what exactly do you object? Metta Michael 27371 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Howard: "Hi, Larry - In the following you ask "I am wondering if any rupa that doesn't have kamma as one of its producers can be an object of consciouness?" In all seriousness I have to ask in return "If not, how would anyone know?" " Hi Howard, Same way we know most things. Reason. Larry 27372 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Sukin, Here is a link for several Nagarjunian views. Read the first two sections at least: http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/madhyamaka.html Larry btw this philosophy is highly controversial amongst its proponents. No two can agree on what it says. L. 27373 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 5:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi Michael, Here is Bhikku ~Nanamoli's note on "sabhava". The main thing is that it is not permanent. Larry Vism. VIII, Note 68. 'In such passages as "Dhammas that are concepts" (Dhs., p. 1;1308) even a non-entity (abhava) is thus called a "dhamma" since it is borne (dhariyati) and affirmed (avadhariyati) by knowledge. That kind of dhamma is excluded by his saying "Dhammas [means] individual essences". The act of becoming (bhavana), which constitutes existingness (vijjamanata) in the ultimate sense, is essence (bhava); it is with essence (saha bhavena), thus it is an individual essence (sabhava); the meaning is that it is possible (labbhamanarupa) in the true sense, in the ultimate sense. For these are called "dhammas (bearers)" because they bear (dharana) their own individual essences (sabhava), and they are called "individual essences" in the sense already explained' (Pm. 282; cf Ch. VII, n. 1). In the Pitakas the word "sabhava" seems to appear only once (Ps.ii,178). It next appears in the Netti (p.79), the Milindapanha (pp.90,164,22,360). It is extensively used for exegetical purposes in the Visuddhimagga and main commentaries and likewise in the sub-commentaries. As has just been shown, it is narrower than dhamma (see also Ch. XXIII,n.18). It often roughly corresponds to "dhatu" (element--see e.g.DhsA.263) and to "lakkhana" (characteristic--see below), but less nearly to the vaguer and (in Pali) untechnical pakati (nature), or to "rasa" (function--see Ch.I,21). The Attasalini observes: 'It is the individual essence, or the generality, of such and such dhammas that is called their characteristic' (DhsA.63); on which the Mula Tika comments: 'The "individual essence" consisting in, say, hardness as that of earth, or touching as that of contact, is not common to all dhammas. The "generality" is the individual essence common to all consisting in impermanence, etc.; also in this context (i.e.Dhs.1) the characteristic of being profitable may be regarded as general because it is the individual essence common to all that is profitable; or alternatively it is their individual essence because it is not common to the unprofitable and indeterminate [kinds of consciousness]' (DhsAA.63). The individual essence of any formed dhamma is manifested in the three instants of its existence (atthita, vijjamanata), namely, ariing, presence (=ageing) and dissolution. It comes from nowhere and goes nowhere (Ch.XV,15) and is borne by the mind. Dhammas without individual essence (asabhava-dhamma) include the Attainment of Cessation (see Ch. XXIII,n.18) and some concepts. Space and time belong to the last mentioned. Of space (akasa) the Tika in the Majjima Nikaya says: 'Though time is determined by the kind of consciosness [e.g. as specified in the first paragraph of the Dhammasangani] and is non-existent (avijjamana) as to indivdual essence, yet as the non-entity (abhava) before and after the moment in which those [conascent and co-present] dhammas occur, it is called the "container 'adhikarana'"; it is perceived (symbolized) only as the state of a receptacle (adhara-bhava)' (DhsAA.62). Of nibbana (for which see Ch. XVI,64ff.), which has its own individual essence, the Mula Tika says: Nibbana is not like other dhammas; because of its extreme profundity it cannot be made an object of consciousness (alambitum) by one who has not realized it. That is why it has to be realized by Change-of lineage. It has profundity surpassing any individual essence belonging to the three periods of time' (Vbh.AA.38). 'Sabhava' has not the extreme vagueness of its parent 'bhava', which can mean anything between 'essence' (see e.g.DhsA.61) and '-ness' (e.g. 'natthi-bhava' = non-existingness -- Ch.X,35). This may be remembered when 'sabhava' is defined as above thus 'It is with essence (saha bhavena) thus it is individual essence (sabhava)' (Pm.282), and when it is again defined thus 'A dhamma's own essence or its existing essence (sako va bhavo samano va bhavo) is its individual essence (sabhava)' (Pm.433). "Sabhava' can also be the basis of a wrong view, if regarded as the sole efficient cause or condition of any formed thing (Ch.XVI,n.23). The Sanskrit equivalent, 'svabhava', had a great vogue and chequered history in philosohical discussions on the Indian mainland. This (unlike the word 'dhamma', which has many 'referents') is an instance in which it is of first importance to stick to one rendering. The word is purely an exegetical one; consequently vagueness is undesirable. 'Individual essence' has been chosen principally on etymological grounds, and the word 'essence' (an admittedly slippery customer) must be understood from the contexts in which it is used and not prejudged. Strictly it refers here to the triple moment of arising etc., of formed dhammas that can have such 'existence' in their own right and be experienced as such; and it refers to the realizability of nibbana. We are here in the somewhat magical territory of Ontology, a subject which is at present undergoing one of its periodical upheavals in Europe, this time in the hands of the Existentialists. Consequently it is important to approach the subject with an open mind. 27374 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi, Michael - In a message dated 11/25/03 8:19:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Hello Howard, > > Howard: > I may be mistaken, but I don't believe Nagarjuna addressed Theravada. > I believe that his works were largely in response to the Sarvastavadin and > Sautrantika schools. > > Michael: > Nagarjuna addressed the Abhidhamma. I don’t know if the schools you > mentioned had Abhidhamma. Did they? His writings were a critique of the > concepts of paramatha dhamma and sabhava/svabhava that had crept up in the > writings about the Abhidhamma. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I understand that many if not all the early schools developed their own Abhidhamma. The Sarvastivadins in particular developed an Abhidhamma that was incorporated into the Tibetan canon. The Abhidhammas of the various early schools had similarities (not surprising) but were far from the same. What I consider to be mainstream Theravada, different from other early schools, does not treat paramattha dhammas as self-existent entities with core and own-being, but merely as directly and actually experienced fleeting phenomena that are empty and dependent, as opposed to people, trees, houses, cars, and all the infinitely many other conventional entities with which we populate our mind-created world but have no actual existence at all other than conventional. ---------------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > For the record, the statement you attribute to Bhikkhu Bodhi is one that I > take considerable exception to. > > Michael: > Sorry but I don’t know what you mean, what exactly do you object? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I *think* you may be misunderstanding me, Michael. Let me clarify that I am not taking exception to what *you* wrote, but to the characterization by B. Bodhi of dhammas as possessing ultimate reality and existence "from their own side". As I have mentioned before, I am leery about "reality" terminology, prefering "actual" to "real", and where what is actual is merely what is actually and directly experienced. Moreover, as I understand the teachings of the Sutta Pitaka, all dhammas are insubstantial, without core, lacking own-being, and being dependently arisen from the coming together of equally empty conditions. To speak of dhammas as existing "from their own side" is to use terminology that suggests independence and own-being, terminology that I consider to be contrary to the Dhamma. I could also add more along the lines of dhammas being dependent on their being known (being objects of consciousness), but that comes from my own personal phenomenalist (yogacara-like) position, and that best be left out of this, I think. ---------------------------------------------------------- > > Metta > Michael > ============================= 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) 27375 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 7:18pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New Member --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > In a message dated 11/24/03 11:37:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, > rjkjp1@y... writes: > > > Nice to have you here Carl, > > The five aggregates (khandhas) are ultimate realities(paramattha > > dhamma), and citta (vinnana) is one of the five. What is only > > conventionally real is person or being. Person or being are the > > shadow of what is really there. > > RobertK > ========================= > Don't you mean that the dhammas subsumed by the five aggregates are > paramattha dhammas? The aggregates themselves, being collections of dhammas, are > concept-only, are they not? While instances of hardness are experienced, and > sights are experienced, and smells, and tastes, etc, the aggregate of these > things is never experienced; there is just the thought/idea of that collection. >___ Dear Howard, Good question. This might have something to do with the English word "aggregates" (translation of khandha) which perhaps has a nuance of stuck together. In fact the pali term khandha applies to all instances. For example if painful feeling is arising now this is vedana khandha. So when in a sutta it talks about the khandha of vedana this covers all vedana that could arise, in the present moment, or that arose in the past or that might arise in the future. It is still poiniting us to seing it directly. So indeed the khandha is experienced! These nuances that English translations gives to words show the usefulness of learning the pali - and more than that of course to see that vedana, or sanna, or sankhara or vinnana or rupa can be known without words. RobertK 27376 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vis., groups of rupas Hi, Larry - In a message dated 11/25/03 10:03:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Howard: "Hi, Larry - > In the following you ask "I am > wondering if any rupa that doesn't have kamma as one of its producers > can be an object of consciouness?" In all seriousness I have to ask in > return "If not, how would anyone know?" " > > Hi Howard, > > Same way we know most things. Reason. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Very suspect, Larry! Highly undependable - subject to deduction errors and false and hidden premisses. ;-) ----------------------------------------------- > > Larry > ======================== With reasonable 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) 27377 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 3:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New Member Hi, Robert - Ahh, what an interesting language usage! There must be instances of that in English as well, though none occurs to me at this moment. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/25/03 10:20:05 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Don't you mean that the dhammas subsumed by the five > aggregates are > >paramattha dhammas? The aggregates themselves, being collections of > dhammas, are > >concept-only, are they not? While instances of hardness are > experienced, and > >sights are experienced, and smells, and tastes, etc, the aggregate > of these > >things is never experienced; there is just the thought/idea of that > collection. > >___ > Dear Howard, > Good question. This might have something to do with the English > word "aggregates" (translation of khandha) which perhaps has a nuance > of stuck together. > > In fact the pali term khandha applies to all instances. For example > if painful feeling is arising now this is vedana khandha. So when in > a sutta it talks about the khandha of vedana this covers all vedana > that could arise, in the present moment, or that arose in the past or > that might arise in the future. It is still poiniting us to seing it > directly. > So indeed the khandha is experienced! These nuances that English > translations gives to words show the usefulness of learning the pali - > and more than that of course to see that vedana, or sanna, or > sankhara or vinnana or rupa can be known without words. > RobertK > /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) 27378 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: five khandhas Hi Howard, op 25-11-2003 07:19 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Don't you mean that the dhammas subsumed by the five aggregates are > paramattha dhammas? The aggregates themselves, being collections of dhammas, > are > concept-only, are they not? While instances of hardness are experienced, and > sights are experienced, and smells, and tastes, etc, the aggregate of these > things is never experienced; there is just the thought/idea of that > collection. N: I see it differently. The five aggregates are just a classification of conditioned paramattha dhammas: citta, cetasika and rupa. Rupa-khandha comprises all the different rupas which are realities, actualities if you like that word better. The same for the other khandhas. We have to investigate now, in our life these actualities when they appear. Not all of them appear, but let us investigate only those that appear, that is enough. Nina. 27379 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 9:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the lotus Dear Blue, welcome to this group. Are you alluding to the lotus which grows in the water, and does not come out of it, and the lotus which grows out of it and is not wetted by it? It is a beautiful sutta. People have different capabilites for understanding. Nina. op 25-11-2003 07:09 schreef blue lan op shihrenn@y...: > i think we need to go back to see what an example the Buddha had said to us--- > lotus. The Buddha makes such a good example---between people who could > understand the five aggregates and cittas (or they are connected each other). 27380 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42n Hi Howard, Ken O & All, --- upasaka@a... wrote earlier: H> My specific point is that if rupas arise (somewhere, somehow, in some sense) as a group, but with only one being an object of consciousness, this is discoverable (on evidence, perhaps retrievable from mental traces)only by inference. ..... S>Good points and I agree it seems this way. We’d have said the same about directly knowing namas and rupas when we first heard about them. However, we shouldn’t underestimate what developed panna (wisdom) can know. This knowledge of groups is known directly at the third stage of insight. .... H> I get your point, and I won't say it's wrong, because I can't know that. However, it strikes me that this is making pa~n~na into a catch-all for everything we have a problem explaining, making it a sort of dumping bin for explanations. Now, of course, it is quite possible that in an arahant inference based on sa~n~na is replaced by pa~n~na, but, as I say, if we just assume this is so without evidence and without clear teachings to that effect in the suttas, then there is a real danger of turning pa~n~na into an escape hatch for all difficulties of explanation. .... S: I’ve hesitated to reply again because I’m not sure it will help or that the details (mostly in the commentaries) will satisfy. When people first hear us talking about directly understanding namas and rupas it sounds theoretical and not related to practice. As panna begins to understand these realities directly, there is less doubt about their characteristics or about anatta or the meaning of practice. The first stage of insight clearly distinguishes namas and rupas and certainly no more confusion between them or between realities and concepts. The second stage of insight understands the conditioned nature of realities. Again it seems inferential when we just think about conditions now. The third stage of insight directly understands the succession of namas and rupas as they rise and fall and the comprehension of groups including the arising of rupas in kalapas. Even at this stage, insight is called ‘tender’ and yet we can see how developed it has to be. It’s direct knowledge, but still only one characteristic appearing at a time. However, there are many rapidly succeeding processes accompanied by sati and panna which make this direct knowledge possible. It can only be understood by insight at the time - not by thinking about it - and that’s the problem. It’s similar to your valid qu about how awareness can be aware of a characteristic which has just fallen away. It sounds illogical, but as Ken O said, because of the nature of succeeding cittas (by anantara paccaya-proximity condition) it’s possible and when sati and panna arise and know the characteristic, there’s no doubt at all. We had some discussions about the 3rd stage of insight and kalaapa sammasana (comprehension of the groups) not so long ago and many posts were written. I completely appreciate the difficulties;-) You asked about references and we’ll come to more detail in the Visuddhimagga. You may like to also look at these messages again: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m14039.html http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m14101.html Whilst the details are not explicity given in the suttas, without the commentary details I don’t think they will be fully appreciated. For example, in the Mulapariyaya Sutta, we read that the ignorant worldling ways of viewing the world and are told this is because earth (pathavi) and all the other elements (dhatu)have not been fully understood. From the commentary to the Mulapariya Sutta: “...He who fully understands the earth understands it by the three types of full understanding: the full understanding of the known(~naata.pari~n~naa), the full understanding of scrutinization(tiira.napari~n~naa), and the full understanding of abandoning (pahaanapari~n~naa).” “Therein, what is the full understanding of the known? He fully understands the earth element thus: “This is the internal earth element, this the external. This is its characteristic, this its function, manifestation, and proximate cause.” This is full understanding of the known. What is the full understanding by scrutinization? Having known it in this way, he scrutinizes the earth element in forty-two modes as impermanent, suffering, a sickness, etc. this is full undestanding by scrutinization. What is the full understanding by abandoning/ Having scrutinized it in this way, he abandons desire and lust for the earth element through the supreme path (aggamagga). This is full understanding by abandoning. Or , alternatively, the defining of mentality-materiality(naamaruupavavatthaana) is the full understanding of the known; from insight-comprehension of the groups (kalaapasammasana) as far as conformity knowledge (anuloma) is the full understanding by scrutinization; and the knowledge of the ariyan path is the full understanding by abandoning.” ***** In short, the knowledge is ‘ehipassiko’, but ‘ehipassiko’ for the developed wisdom that is able to understand these details. As the knowledge develops and tests and proves what has been taught by the Buddha and his key disciples, there will be less and less room for doubt and misgivings as I see it. Again, the test comes back to this moment and the presently arising dhammas. Is there any knowledge about dhammas now? Ken O, you’ve been writing some *amazing* posts and it’s a real joy to have you around again. I agree with all Howard’s comments in this regard and always appreciate your reflections and especially your emphasis on Abhidhamma as practice with or without a sun-tan;-). As Nina would say, don’t go and get attacked by any shark, we need you here;-) ;-) Metta, Sarah ===== 27381 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 0:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Ken O (& Suan & Michael), --- Kenneth Ong wrote: K:> I remember talking about this also why can't bhavanga citta be > developed and I remember Suan said that bhavanga citta can also be > changed in this lifetime. I hope Suan is around to verify it. .... There was a long discussion and possibly a difference of opinion;-) I’ll leave this to Suan. .... K:>I > also tend to believe that bhavanga citta can be changed in this life > time, since every citta has latent tendecies and such tendecies can > be changed or not what is the point of learning Buddhism. .... The latent tendencies are worn away and eventually eradicated through the understanding of the kilesa (defilements) and all other realities appearing as objects in the javana processes as I understand. The object of the bhavanga cittas doesn’t change (as Michael explained) and the function of these cittas is merely to provide continuity of the life-span. Each citta is different, arising and falling away, but the object remains the same and it is never developed. As you’ve explained so well elsewhere, by continuity or anantara paccaya, the next citta must follow and the ‘habitual effect’ or anusaya (latent tendencies) is ‘carried over’. Nina is translating/writing a series on this subject she mentioned. Yes, the point of learning Buddhism is to develop wisdom which sees things as they are and eradicate ignorance and other kilesa. No conflict here;-) .... K:>If latent > tendecies cannot be change in bhavanga citta then we are all in big > trouble bc it is bhavanga citta that substains our continuity when > there is no sense object. .... Latent tendencies can be changed, but the necessary wisdom for this doesn’t arise whilst we are deeply asleep, for example. .... K:> I thought Suan has wrote the commentaries and sub-commentaries on > this issue which I think describe it clearly why it is luminoius. .... You may like to check this message of Suan’s and follow the links. I believe his translation of the sub-commentary is also in UP under ‘Luminous’. http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m7401.html Perhaps Suan can help with the parts of the post addressed to him directly. Ken O, in your other helpful post to Michael you also wrote: K:> If it is a thing, a self, then the so called conditions > and conditions relations in Abdhidhamma is not valid. Habitual > effect can be change and it is anatta. If it does not change, then > why bother to learn Buddhism in the first place. If it has a self, > how come we cannot tell our habitual effect to stop all these > nonsense. .... Again, good points and the change or gradual wearing away occurs at the time of the javana series of cittas only. Once defilements are eradicated, they cannot arise as latent tendencies with bhavanga cittas or any other cittas. .... K:> Accumalation of Kamma - I dont have a better a word. Accumulations > also ring a bell of essentialism - it is always misconstrue as "a > storehouse of consciousness", or an underlying consciouness. If > there is a another underlying consciouness or a storehouse of > consciouness, does these mean that at each moment of our consciouness > there is a subset of consciouness. Isn't this very confusing. If > each consciouness has a self in it, so that means there is another > entity at work. This is like the argument of a soul. Accumalation > in Abdhidhamma is also impermanent and anatta. In fact the whole > thing how Kamma work is really in the realm of Buddha. In > Abdhidhamma the accumulative effect is a just function of a > cetasikas. Just like vedana function for a citta to feel. .... Excellent and well said, like so many of your comments these days;-) Anumodana with regard to all the careful study and reflection behind the scenes. Metta, Sarah p.s Hope your family are well. Any chance of joining many of us inc. Nina at end Jan in Bkk? ====== 27382 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 1:12am Subject: Photos Hello Thomas, :-) Thanks for adding your contribution to the Members album, welcome! - it's great to see your happy, friendly face, and I hope it may spur others (new members, long-time members, and returning members) to similar action. Maybe some long-time members might like to update their original photos, perhaps they've finally found that elusive print that shows their 'best' side? - and surely the Dalthorp and Kirkpatrick kids have grown a bit by now?! Another thought - Andrew, has Smokey Joe lost any weight yet? I'm bringing the tape measure this weekend ... :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 27383 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 1:37am Subject: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs......deep breath Hi Ken H (& Cooranites), This is the support group for dysfunctional DSG ers - we all have our dysfunctional hang-ups;-) You were worried you might have missed a post concerning Azita’s qu on the ‘positioning’ of the khandhas. She may be ...zzzzz..ing off again on zombie shifts, but I think she was referring to this post I wrote recently: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m22944.html We learn about our great attachment to rupas, vedana (feelings), sanna (perception). There would be no kilesa (defilements) without rupas, vedana and sanna marking the objects for example. On anapanasati - that post of Jon’s which Nina re-sent is a pretty neat summary (imho) if you’re still on your surf-board up until departure and Andrew is still giving you trouble;-) This is also such a clear description of the ‘Body in the Body’ from a recent post of Nina’s with reminders again of the plaintain trunk - no hidden ‘thingy’ or lasting essence inside: Nina: >Contemplating the Body in the Body: now we go to the Co to Satipatthana Sutta (Middle length Sayings, I, 10, translated by Ven. Soma): As to the words: , this Co explains that the world is the five khandhas. ***** Whilst you take care of those longboarders and sharks, we’ve moved on to crocodiles (we ‘did’ sharks a couple of years ago). Our main tourist attraction these days is the search for one very smart croc which managed to escape the dinner table or having its gall bladder and penis extracted for Chinese medicine. Instead it found its way into a truly yucky inner-city surbaban creek. After a team of local very average Government officials were found to be quite incompetent in catching it, a real-life Crocodile Dundee from your part of the world (Queensland) was contacted and happily offered to come up for a couple of days for free to show how they are caught with bare hands and no fuss at all. A few weeks later, the croc is definitely winning and I’m even considering going out to visit the creek;-) (Either way, Chris, the celebrity croc will live in style). What did that have to do with khandhas? Well everything that was just experienced while you read the tale consisted of the khandhas to be known;-) Actually, I was just ‘bonding’ with all of you in Qld. Have fun and report back. Metta, Sarah p.s MN117-Mahacattarika. Very helpful comments you made. I think the ‘right understanding’ ‘that has blemishes and so ripens to clinging’ refers to direct understanding, not just intellectual. Mundane panna, followed by kilesa including attachment as opposed to supramundance panna. Any other comments or commentary notes here? =================================== 27384 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:45am Subject: Re: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs......deep breath Hi Sarah, and all, Personally, I don't think putting chicken heads in the trap is a good idea, as we hear is happening - the rats and pork are O.K.(small mammals and feral pigs are usual prey) But I would bow to Azita's opinion on this, if she is reading ... I think she mentioned in October that there is a croc in her local creek - (don't let the dogs go swimming, Azita. :-)) The general opinion here is that the croc should have been caught by now - with the use of a spotlight at night to dazzle him/her - but in Hong Kong there is so much light pollution from the high rise buildings that this method is proving ineffective. Off-topic link to some crocs near where Azita lives. But, hey..what can the mods say, when one of them started this? . http://www.proserpineecotours.com.au/crocs.htm Maybe we can talk about red fire-ants next ..jumped off an American ship in Brisbane and are spreading faster than cane-toads around S.E. Queensland. I'll throw in relentless rebirth, the rarity of rebirth in human form, kamma and vipaka, and there you go! On-topic again. :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Ken H (& Cooranites), > ***** > Whilst you take care of those longboarders and sharks, we've moved on to > crocodiles (we `did' sharks a couple of years ago). Our main tourist > attraction these days is the search for one very smart croc which managed > to escape the dinner table or having its gall bladder and penis extracted > for Chinese medicine. Instead it found its way into a truly yucky > inner-city surbaban creek. After a team of local very average Government > officials were found to be quite incompetent in catching it, a real- life > Crocodile Dundee from your part of the world (Queensland) was contacted > and happily offered to come up for a couple of days for free to show how > they are caught with bare hands and no fuss at all. A few weeks later, the > croc is definitely winning and I'm even considering going out to visit the > creek;-) (Either way, Chris, the celebrity croc will live in style). > > What did that have to do with khandhas? Well everything that was just > experienced while you read the tale consisted of the khandhas to be > known;-) Actually, I was just `bonding' with all of you in Qld. > > Have fun and report back. > > Metta, > Sarah 27385 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:52am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi Michael and Larry, Larry, thanks for the link, I will read it as soon as I find the time. I was relieved when I read your post since I was feeling nervous about having to read a whole book. But Michael, incidently yesterday, before receiving this post I went up to where my 'unread' books are stored, and guess what, the book that caught my attention was 'The Central Philosoohy of Buddhism by TRV Murti'!! And today after reading your post I went up again, vaguely remembering the title, 'The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way'. I had to go down on all fours, since the books were scattered every where, (but believe me, 99.5% of them have never been read :-/), and just as I gave up looking and was trying to get up and leave, it was there right under my nose! If Larry's essay arouses my attention enough, I may start to read one of these two books. ;-) Metta, Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Sukin, > > Sukin: > Now you have aroused my curiosity ;-). Can you please direct me to > any such material on the internet? I lack patience in reading, so > please if possible choose one with the most simple writing style and > minimum amount of reading. > > Michael: > Sorry, cannot recomend anything from the web on Nagarjuna. I would recommend > as a starter to read 'The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way' - > Translation and Commentary by Jay L. Garfield. > > The Central Philosoohy of Buddhism by TRV Murti, Dependent Arising and > Emptiness by Elizabeth Napper, The Essence of the Heart Sutta by the Dalai > Lama and A History of Buddhist Philosphy by Kalupahana, are also good > reading. > 27386 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 3:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hang-ups, khandhas and crocs......deep breath Hi Christine & All, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hi Sarah, and all, > > Personally, I don't think putting chicken heads in the trap is a good > idea, as we hear is happening - the rats and pork are O.K.(small > mammals and feral pigs are usual prey) <.....> ..... I thought you might know better, Chris.....All the Star Kids are convinced they’d have done better too;-) Anyway this Star Croc has turned up his jaws at all delicacies and prefers his own ‘non-trap’ finds of dead duck and fish in this yucky creek. (We all laughed when the 'expert' said he’d be wading out in it before his arrival here;-)). Oh - nutritive essence, one of the four ways by which rupas are produced. We could bring in the other ways of cittas, kamma and temperature in this case too;-) .... > The general opinion here is that the croc should have been caught by > now - with the use of a spotlight at night to dazzle him/her - but in > Hong Kong there is so much light pollution from the high rise > buildings that this method is proving ineffective. .... Not to mention the TV crews and teams of journalists and spectators in pursuit. ..... <..> >I'll throw in relentless rebirth, the rarity of rebirth > in human form, kamma and vipaka, and there you go! On-topic again. :-) .... Well done, Chris;-) Now you have another topic for your weekend get together if you need a break from 'breath' discussions. Metta, Sarah ===== 27387 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:07am Subject: Cetasikas As Designers Or Helpers ( 04 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, After Permanent Ministers and Flexible Ministers ( Cetasikas ) have been described, here Destructive Ministers will be delineated. They destroy the place they home. They put the king Citta into an ugly portrait. 1. Moha He is the leader for all Akusala Cetasikas.It is also called '' Avijja '' that is the opposite of '' Vijja ''( Panna ). All the destructive minds are led by him. It veils the real things and the truth. So, Satta with it will never see real Dhamma. Instead it leads to all the destructive actions. It veils Citta not to see the truth. Then Moha-mounted Citta can do any bad thing with backing of Moha. 2. Ahirika ( shamelessness ) It makes Citta shameless. So, Citta will do everything regardless of glory. All the bad things can be done by shamelessness. There is no inhibition to do things bad in the absence of shame. Shamelessness or Ahirika ignores all decent things. In its presence any Akusala thinkable and imaginable can be committed however wicked the acts are. Ahirika will not consider others' feeling or thought. When this destructive Minister advises the king Citta, then the king Citta becomes no more shamed and he will commit any wicked action at all cost. 3. Anottappa ( fearlessness ) It makes the king Citta dare do everthing. There will be no inhibition to do bad things in the absence of fear. This minister is also as powerful as Ahirika. He also behaves like Ahirika but in a slightly different way that as he has not got any control that means he has no fear, then he can do anything imaginable and thinkable. He advises the king Citta to do everything the king wants and promises that he will never be frightened and fearful and also advises the king not to reluctent to do bad things. 4. Uddacca ( deconcentration ) It makes the knig Citta wandering round from a sense to another successively and causes poor concentration. The king will taste different objects one after another due to the advice given by the Destuctive Minister Uddacca. As Citta is wandering on one object after another in a quick succession, concentration goes into disaster and the mind becomes deconcentrated. Wandering mind easily slips into Akusala actions. In the presence of this Destructive Minister Uddacca all Akusala can easily be committed. 5. Lobha ( Tanha ) It is strong desire or craving for things. Lobha has many different names like Lobha, Tanha, Raga, Adana, Upadana and so on.It makes the king Citta very greedy. According to this Destructive Minister Lobha, the king Citta becomes attached to objects and he will never content to grasp objects. Lobha advises the king Citta to look for object in the sense that Citta always looks for his desired objects. This is something like a thirsty man looking for water everywhere. Lobha Cetasika makes Citta look for desired object thirstily. It expands Sansara and Satta concerned will never end the Samsara in the presence of Lobha Cetasika. 6. Ditthi ( wrong view ) This is not just simply a wrong view. There are a lot of things implicated with this Cetasika. It makes the king Citta misinterprets the things. Under the influence of wrong view, every bad things may be done readily. This Destructive Minister works hand in hand with Lobha Cetasika. When a Satta is greedy, Ditthi also arise in him. Ditthi is something like illusion. There is a real sense but the sense is wrongly interpreted. When a rope is seen, misinterpretation of the rope as a snake may happen under poor light condition. Ditthi also works with Moha. As Moha makes darkness, Ditthi easily misinterpretes. The view Atta has to arise due to the advice of Destructive Minister Ditthi to the knig Citta. As long as Ditthi is present, the stream can never be entered. Ditthi makes Satta to view on realities as self, man, woman, animal and so on, which actually are all Nama and Rupa in their ultimate sense. 7. Mana ( conceit ) It makes the knig Citta proud and Citta will behave himself as self and self-referenced and self-orientated. Citta with Mana will think that he is the topmost person of all people all Sattas. If things are different, destructive mind will appear. Mana also works with Lobha and Moha. As Moha is prevailing, and in the presence of Lobha Cetasika, Mana works happily on Dhamma. Mana assumes himself as the most important person in the universe. And he also advises the king Citta to be conceited. Then Citta with Mana becomes proud and thinks that he is the most powerful, beautiful, educated, prosperous, and all the most of the most. In the presence of Mana, Lobha will not release the object. Mana also expand the Samsara endlessly. 8. Dosa ( anger ) It makes the king Citta angry, furious and the king Citta changes suddenly to an aggressive one. Citta accompanied by Dosa is quite apparent and makes Samyutta-Rupas ugly. Dosa comes in different degrees. And it has different names. Different Dosa have different power of destructiveness. Patiga, Vyapada, Ahinsa, Soka, Domanassa, Upayasa and many other names apply to Dosa. Dosa is the most powerful Destructive Minister in all Akusala Cetasikas in terms of destruction. In every age and in any era, wars have to arise based on Dosa. Atomic bombing that destroyed lots of lives derived from Dosa origionally. 9. Issa ( jealousy ) It makes the king Citta jealous and leads to destructive actions. This destructive Minister works hand in hand with Dosa Cetasika along with Moha and other Moha-Mulaka Cetasikas Ahirika, Anottappa, and Uddacca. Whenever Issa arises Moha, Ahiraka, Anottappa, Uddacca, and Dosa also arise. They all work together and destroy the origionally beautiful status of Citta. As Issa arise Citta has been painted or designed as an ugly being. Issa does not give any achievement but disaster and destruction of internal peace of mind. Issa also encourage Dosa and in the presence of Issa, Dosa can do any wicked thing instantaneously. 10. Macchariya ( stinginess ) It makes the king Citta not to share its own properties with others. Micchariya arise along with Dosa. He does not want others see or listen or smell or taste or touch what he think is his own. Other associated Cetasikas that work with Macchariya Cetasika are Moha, Ahirika, Anottappa, Uddacca, and Dosa. In the presence of Macchariya, Citta becomes so stingy that he will not expose anything to other. Macchariya may raise Dosa to a level that Dosa destroy everything. 11. Kukkucca ( repantance ) This is an ineffective mental factor as it makes the king Citta thinks back what have not been done for Kusala-Kamma and what have been done for Akusala Kamma. This destructive Minister advises the king Citta to think repeatedly what have already done in past. The thoughts associated with Kukkucca are not useful for any sense. They are all useless and even they help Akusala Dhamma proliferate and increase to the level that Kusala Dhamma has no place to home in. Kukkucca should never be borne in mind. 12. Thina ( Sloth ) It makes the king Citta less active. The king becomes tired as this Destructive Minister is continuously advising to hate to take the object. The king Citta then gradually less and less active and then no more interested in taking the objects whether they are good or bad. In the presence of this Destructive Minister Thina, the king Citta become inactive, tired, sluggish and ineffective in performing action in taking objects. 13. Middha ( Topor ) This Destructive Minister is the twin-brother of Thina. Whenever Thina arise, Middha also arise. Middha makes arising Cetasikas less active. Middha makes all Cetasikas tired and unable to do their jobs properly. All Cetasikas becomes sluggish in the presence of Middha. When Middha acts together with Thina, the king Citta is no more able to do its job properly. Everything becomes sluggish. Thina and Middha are not good Cetasikas as they do not contribute to any beautiful mind conditions. 14. Vicikicca ( disbelief/suspicion ) This Destructive Minister advises the king Citta not to believe in Dhamma, Paticcasamuppada, The Buddha, The Sangha and any good things. He raises suspicion in matter. He makes Citta suspicious to rely on The Dhamma. As disbelif is prevailing, all other Akusala Dhamma can be committed in the presence of this Destructive Minister Vicikiccha Cetasika. He will not believe Magga, Phala, Nibbana, The Buddha, The Dhamma, Paticcasamuppada, The Sangha and then in its presence all disasters can arise. These 14 Cetasikas are happening daily in all areas. As they arise, they lead to destructive actions. If one can control these Cetasikas well, he will be in peace. Arahats are those who achieve the state that these 14 Akusala Cetasikas can never arise again as when they were in the lower states of achievement. May you all be in peace by eradicating/derooting these Akusala- Cetasikas with Arahatta Magga With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 27388 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inherent characteristics of rupa Michael Thanks for coming in on this thread, and my apologies for taking so long to get back to you (standard for me, I'm afraid). --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Jon, Howard, ... Michael: I think I understand it the same way you do but never find any confirmation of this in any scripture. Have you? I don't know if you are familiar with Geshe Michael Roach? Out of curiosity, in order to gain a better grasp of the Mahayana thinking, I was listening to his teachings some time ago, and he expressed a quite different view which apparently is the prevalent view in his tradition (Gelug-pa). What he said is that no matter what, past kamma conditions the arising of rupas. Jon: The view that all rupas are conditioned by past kamma would not be in accordance with the orthodox Theravadin position according to which, as I understand it, there are 4 conditioning factors for rupas, namely, kamma, consciousness, temperature and nutriment (see for example CMA VI, 9). Kamma is not a conditioning factor for non-animate rupas. Michael: First I recall reading in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (please don’t ask me to quote precise details), that the vedana flavor of a certain rupa is influenced by convention. So, although there is no intrinsic flavor to a certain rupa, the majority of the people will react the same way to that experience. And this will mislead them into thinking that the vedana is intrinsic to the rupa (real nature vs conventional nature again). Second, in relation to kusala/akusala and pleasant/unpleasant, the Abhidhammattha also mentions that the combinations are not always straight forward. Take for example the situation of a masochist which will experience pleasure through an akusala rupa/action. Jon: I think the passage you have in mind is the one I have copied below (not from the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha itself, in fact, but the translator's summary of the commentaries on the main text). Note that there is no suggestion of rupas having a 'vedana flavour' of any kind. The passage goes on to say that the javana cittas following the moment of sense-door experience, which are either kusala cittas or akusala cittas, are not governed by the nature of the object but vary in accordance with the proclivities of the experiencer. Thanks again for your comments, and for your posts on other threads. I am enjoying reading them. Jon CMA Guide to par. 17, ch. IV: << << << Sense objects are distinguished into three classes: the undesirable, the moderately desirable, and the extremely desirable... According to the Abhidhamma philosophy, this distinction in the quality of objects pertains to the intrinsic nature of the object itself; it is not a variable determined by the individual temperament and preferences of the experiencer. .. The Sammohavinodani states that the distinction between the intrinsically desirable and undesirable obtains by way of the average being (majjhima-satta) ... Whether on a given occasion one experiences an undesirable, a moderately desirable, or an extremely desirable object is governed by one's past kamma. Thus the object experienced provides the opportunity for kamma to ripen in the form of resultant states of consciousness (vipakacitta). The resultant cittas accord with the nature of the object spontaneously, without deliberation, just as a facial reflection in a mirror accords with the features of the face. >> >> >> See the quoted passage in full at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14142 [With thanks to Larry for taking the trouble to key in this passage] 27389 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:12am Subject: [dsg] Re: New Member Dear Howard, Yes, I tried to think of something similar as an analogy but couldn't. Once we know what they mean it seems so obvious but trying to see into these expressions that are very foreign to western culture is filled with obstacles at first. The early PTS translators chose the word aggregates and I can see why in the sense that it means a grouping but on the other hand there might have been some word better....:) Or occasionally we hear of someone objecting to paramattha dhammas as a term and yet paramattha dhammas is only another synonym for the khandhas plus nibbana. RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Robert - > > Ahh, what an interesting language usage! There must be instances of > that in English as well, though none occurs to me at this moment. > >> > Dear Howard, > > Good question. This might have something to do with the English > > word "aggregates" (translation of khandha) which perhaps has a nuance > > of stuck together. > > > > In fact the pali term khandha applies to all instances. For example > > if painful feeling is arising now this is vedana khandha. So when in > > a sutta it talks about the khandha of vedana this covers all vedana > > that could arise, in the present moment, or that arose in the past or > > that might arise in the future. It is still poiniting us to seing it > > directly. > > So indeed the khandha is experienced! 27390 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Larry) - ... Howard: How is what is unobserved and unobservable anything other than concept-only, merely inferable? ... My specific point is that if rupas arise (somewhere, somehow, in some sense) as a group, but with only one being an object of consciousness, this is discoverable (on evidence, perhaps retrievable from mental traces) only by inference. My more general point is that some of what is true in "the world", perhaps much, is knowable only inferentially. Jon: It's true that as far as you and I are concerned many of the descriptions of the way things are as contained in the Abhidhamma cannot be directly known, at least not at our present stage of understanding and, for some of them, maybe never. I believe we need to distinguish between (a) things that are part of the way things are and are directly knowable (or potentially so) by us and (b) things that are part of the way things are but are not directly knowable by us and never likely to be, i.e., that are directly knowable only by the likes of a Buddha or his great disciples. Things that belong to category (b) are no less part of the way things are for being not directly knowable by us. It may still be useful to know *about* them. Insight knowledge is directly knowledge of the way things are; but only so much insight knowledge is needed to attain enlightenment (enough to penetrate the characteristics of dhammas and the Four Noble Truths). There is a lot more besides that will never be known. Even as regards the suttas, not everything mentioned is knowable, or needs to be known, by every person in order to attain enlightenment. Clearly, the Buddha had to teach for all potential followers, so there is much more there than is sufficient for any one individual. Jon 27391 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV 42 Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Larry) - ... Howard: How is what is unobserved and unobservable anything other than concept-only, merely inferable? ... My specific point is that if rupas arise (somewhere, somehow, in some sense) as a group, but with only one being an object of consciousness, this is discoverable (on evidence, perhaps retrievable from mental traces) only by inference. My more general point is that some of what is true in "the world", perhaps much, is knowable only inferentially. Jon: It's true that as far as you and I are concerned many of the descriptions of the way things are as contained in the Abhidhamma cannot be directly known, at least not at our present stage of understanding and, for some of them, maybe never. I believe we need to distinguish between (a) things that are part of the way things are and are directly knowable (or potentially so) by us and (b) things that are part of the way things are but are not directly knowable by us and never likely to be, i.e., that are directly knowable only by the likes of a Buddha or his great disciples. Things that belong to category (b) are no less part of the way things are for being not directly knowable by us. It may still be useful to know *about* them. Insight knowledge is directly knowledge of the way things are; but only so much insight knowledge is needed to attain enlightenment (enough to penetrate the characteristics of dhammas and the Four Noble Truths). There is a lot more besides that will never be known. Even as regards the suttas, not everything mentioned is knowable, or needs to be known, by every person in order to attain enlightenment. Clearly, the Buddha had to teach for all potential followers, so there is much more there than is sufficient for any one individual. Jon 27392 From: Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hi, Larry (and Michael) - In a message dated 11/26/03 12:25:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Michael, > > Here is Bhikku ~Nanamoli's note on "sabhava". The main thing is that it > is not permanent. > > Larry > =========================== At least part of the problem is translating 'sabhava' as "essence", because in western philosophy, 'essence' indicates self/core/entitiness/being, and not merely distinguishing characteristic. Also, the form of the Pali word itself suggests that meaning - 'sabhava' literally meaning "own being" or "own nature". The main problem I see with "own nature" is not so much the "nature" part, but the "own" part. For, ultimately, nothing is owned, but merely imparted. The notions of 'self' and 'ownership' go together. It is fortunate, I think, that 'sabhava' rarely occurs in the suttas, and that it's most substantialist sense is rejected in Path of Discrimination of the Khuddaka Nikaya. I think that a fair appraisal will admit that there *is* a tendency in parts of Theravada Abhidhamma and the Theravadin commentarial tradition, towards a pluralist realism/substantialism, borrowed most likely from other early schools. But, I've seen some of this in modern Mahayanist writings as well, writings that adopt a movie-frame view of experience that has more of a discrete quality than the Theravadin picture. The Theravadin picture is that of a gapless stream of consciousness, whereas I have read some modern Mahayanists adopting more of a sequence view, with experience proceeding as a *sequence* of frames separated by empty gaps! 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) 27393 From: Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 11/26/03 5:56:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@k... writes: > > Hi Michael and Larry, > > Larry, thanks for the link, I will read it as soon as I find the > time. I was relieved when I read your post since I was feeling > nervous about having to read a whole book. But Michael, incidently > yesterday, before receiving this post I went up to where my 'unread' > books are stored, and guess what, the book that caught my attention > was 'The Central Philosoohy of Buddhism by TRV Murti'!! And today > after reading your post I went up again, vaguely remembering the > title, 'The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way'. I had to go down > on all fours, since the books were scattered every where, (but > believe me, 99.5% of them have never been read :-/), and just as I > gave up looking and was trying to get up and leave, it was there > right under my nose! > > If Larry's essay arouses my attention enough, I may start to read > one of these two books. ;-) > > Metta, > > Sukin. > =========================== I'd like to warn you to use considerable caution in reading 'The Central Philosoohy of Buddhism by TRV Murti'. I consider it to be a Vedantist misreading of Nagarjuna that is way off the mark. I think that the best source for understanding Nagarjuna is Garfield's translation and commentary on Nagarjuna's main work: ***************************************** 1. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika by Nagarjuna, Jay L. Garfield (Translator) (Paperback - November 1995) Avg. Customer Rating: Usually ships in 24 hours List Price: $17.95 Buy new: $17.95 Used & new from $13.22 2. The Fundamental Wisdom of the Middle Way: Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika by Nagarjuna, Jay L. Garfield (Translator) (Hardcover - June 1995) Avg. Customer Rating: Usually ships in 24 hours List Price: $65.00 Buy new: $65.00 Used & new from $41.95 ***************************************** You can find this on amazon at: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books& field-titleid=493871&ve-field=none/qid=/102-2293934-2744161 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) 27394 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi Micheal and Sarah > T: And further, if "mind" in this discourse means bhavanga-citta, > what would it mean to develop the bhavanga-citta?” > > S: It wouldn’t;-) > > M: Yeah, but the sutta says ‘Luminous is the mind, and it is freed > from incoming defilements’ and that assumes development of the mind or development of bhavanga-citta. So the question still stands, what does it mean to develop bhavanga-citta. k: Lets look at the translation again: "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of the mind." {I,vi,1} "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is development of the mind." {I,vi,2} k: If you look carefully that "The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern that as it actually is present" which applies that if there is no mindfullness, no awareness, there will definitely be no development of the mind. My interpretation is that there is a need to be mindful of bhavanga citta but if you look carefully, the sutta does not indicate development of bhavanga citta. It is telling us that in order to develop the mind, there is a need to be mindful of bhavanga citta. kind regards Ken O 27395 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi KenO, KenO: My interpretation is that there is a need to be mindful of bhavanga citta but if you look carefully, the sutta does not indicate development of bhavanga citta. It is telling us that in order to develop the mind, there is a need to be mindful of bhavanga citta. Michael: First of all there is no reference in the Satipathana Suttas about bhavanga. Second even if it were as you say, it sounds impossible to me. How can you be mindful of bhavanga? How can you be mindful of deep sleep? In order to be mindful you need the senses and bhavanga is disconnected from the senses. I don’t get it. Metta Michael 27396 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hello Larry, Larry: Here is Bhikku ~Nanamoli's note on "sabhava". The main thing is that it is not permanent Michael: I fully agree with the comments made by Howard about this. One should also keep in mind that in additon to sabhava, the use of paramatha dhammas to characterize the agregates only reinforces the realism/substantialism critiscism towards the Abhidhamma. The point is that it is part of human nature to seek one of the extremes: existence and non-existence, and this was clearly pointed by the Buddha. it is a trap that we fall into very easily. BTW for those who intend on reading Nagarjuna, don't be surprised by his intense negative tone, he was writing to dismiss sunstantialist ideas and used extremely strong language. One has to keep in mind to whom he was writing. Ignoring that, it will be very easy to dismiss him, putting his writings in the other extreme of non-existence. Metta Michael 27397 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava, Paramattha, Abhidhamma (was: Buddhaghosa..) Hello Howard, Howard: I *think* you may be misunderstanding me, Michael. Let me clarify that I am not taking exception to what *you* wrote, but to the characterization by B. Bodhi of dhammas as possessing ultimate reality and existence "from their own side". As I have mentioned before, I am leery about "reality" terminology, prefering "actual" to "real", and where what is actual is merely what is actually and directly experienced. Moreover, as I understand the teachings of the Sutta Pitaka, all dhammas are insubstantial, without core, lacking own-being, and being dependently arisen from the coming together of equally empty conditions. To speak of dhammas as existing "from their own side" is to use terminology that suggests independence and own-being, terminology that I consider to be contrary to the Dhamma. Michael: I fully agree with you. I am a great admirer of Bhikkhu Bodhi’s writings. I have translated to Portuguese many of his BPS newsletter short essays, but I also think that in relation to dhammas he is off the mark. I prefer the position taken by Nyanaponika Thera in his book Abhidhamma Studies which is very similar to what you are saying. Metta Michael 27398 From: Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 4:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pure Mind/Buddha Nature Hi, Ken (and Michael, and Sarah) - In a message dated 11/26/03 11:43:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi Micheal and Sarah > > > >T: And further, if "mind" in this discourse means bhavanga-citta, > >what would it mean to develop the bhavanga-citta?â€? > > > >S: It wouldn’t;-) > > > >M: Yeah, but the sutta says ‘Luminous is the mind, and it is freed > >from incoming defilements’ and that assumes development of the > mind or development of bhavanga-citta. So the question still stands, > what does it mean to develop bhavanga-citta. > > > k: Lets look at the translation again: > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming > defilements. The uninstructed run-of-the-mill person doesn't discern > that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for > the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person -- there is no development of > the mind." {I,vi,1} > > "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming > defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns > that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that -- for > the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones -- there is > development of the mind." {I,vi,2} > > k: If you look carefully that "The uninstructed run-of-the-mill > person doesn't discern that as it actually is present" which applies > that if there is no mindfullness, no awareness, there will > definitely be no development of the mind. My interpretation is that > there is a need to be mindful of bhavanga citta but if you look > carefully, the sutta does not indicate development of bhavanga citta. > It is telling us that in order to develop the mind, there is a need > to be mindful of bhavanga citta. > > > kind regards > Ken O > > =========================== I see this matter differently. On the one hand there is "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements," and on the other hand there is "Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements." Whether covered by adventitious defilements (as a blackboard is covered by chalk dust or a mirror by dust), or whether it is not so covered, luminous is the mind. The point here, as I see it, is that the defilements do not inhere in the mind as essential characteristics. The mind is luminous one way or the other, and "development" is actually a process of removal, of sweeping away the dust of defilements, leaving the already pure mirror-mind to properly reflect reality. When there is gold ore, the base metals are the base metals, and the gold is the gold, and the process of obtaining gold from the ore is a process of removing the adventitious metals, leaving the gold to be seen as it actually is and was. I also see no reason whatsoever to interpret "Luminous, monks, is the mind" as referring to a particular type of mindstate, especially one that was never taught by the Buddha in any discourse. There is nothing in the sutta to even hint at such a meaning. 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) 27399 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 9:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhaghosa(Suan): To Robert and Michael Hello Larry, Larry: Here is a link for several Nagarjunian views. Read the first two sections at least: Michael: Thanks for the excelent link. Reading only the first two sections you will miss the best. Go through the end. The author's argument of 'Emptiness as an Epistemological Doctrine' brought to my mind the Madhupindika Sutta - MN18. Metta Michael