29000 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 10:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Extolling, disparaging , slaying wrath Dear Sarah, Thank you, but what a difference these two transl. I prefer PTS, it has something: what must we slay if we would happy live? what must we slay if we would weep no more? but I do not have the Pali to compare correctness. Nina. . op 12-01-2004 08:09 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > At the end I gave the BB translation of SN2:3 Maagha’. The verses are > identical with SN1:71 Having Slain’, except for the name of the deva > addressed. I’ll give the latter here with ‘O devataa’, replacing ‘O > Vatrabhuu’: > ****** > SN1:71 Having Slain, B.Bodhi transl: > > At Saavatthi. Standing to one side,the devataa addressed the Blessed One > in verse: > > “Having slain what does one sleep soundly? > Having slain what does one not sorrow? > What is the one thing, O Gotama, > Whose killing you approve? 29001 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:22am Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will was (Two to tango .....) Hello Herman, :-) 'The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.' (Edward Fitzgerald) The archives of dsg are a bit like kamma, don't you think? ... :):) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi Sarah and everyone, > > My wife has just picked me up of the floor, and resuscitated me. I > followed your link to useful posts, then went to free will and in post > 18891 found a straw man believing in absolute free will, with a bloody > nose. > > For the record, I regularly observe faith in the notion of absolutes on > this site, but do not subscribe to it myself. Thus anything that > represents me as believing or having believed in absolute free will is > very very incorrect. > > I would rather that you remove that post than try and correct the > perception. (Actually I would prefer to never go into useful posts at > all, either as sage or straw man. I do not subscribe to any belief that > anything can be useful of itself, absolutely, so to speak. Why are there > no photos of rotting corpses under useful posts? I can send plenty if > the selection panel wants) > > All the best > > Herman 29002 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 1:28pm Subject: RE: [dsg] HTOO: Space element Hi Robert, I am very happy for everyone to be doing whatever they are doing. But from reading and rereading suttas without any preference as to which ones, I would not consider anyone who meditates by any old means as special, mini, micro and macro all have their place; I think such folks would be quite normal. They are just following instructions. You warn against conceit and then go onto mentioning superior persons. I had to laugh, but you were probably being serious. Is it desirable to be a superior person? All the best Herman -----Original Message----- From: rjkjp1 [mailto:rjkjp1@y...] Sent: Tuesday, 13 January 2004 1:14 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: Space element --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Nina, > We need a bird-eye view. We need to explore from forest to tree. > While we are exploring individual tree, we should not forget forest. > > I do like your discussion on this topic 'space'. I assume you are > also a Vipassana practitioner not only a writer. > > May you see Dhamma directly with your own wisdom. ----------------------------------------- Dear Htoo, Sometimes we might be proud because conceit imagines WE practice vipassana or jhana, or have great understanding of Dhamma. I think one like Nina does not try to pretend or even want people to think they are anything special: what they see within is defilement and impurity, so they are concerned with developing insight into anatta, not becoming a 'vipassana practioner'. James quoted this a while back 'The Anguttara Nikaya, 70. A Superior Person: "Further: even unasked, a superior person reveals his own faults, how much more so when asked. When asked, however, and obligated to reply to questions, he speaks of his own faults without omitting anything, without holding back, fully and in detail. He should be considered a superior person. Further: even when asked, a superior person does not reveal his own praiseworthy qualities, still less so when not asked. When asked, however, and obliged to reply to questions, he speaks of his own praiseworthy qualities with omissions and hesitatingly, incompletely and not in detail. He should be considered a superior person." RobertK 29003 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 1:43pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Free Will was (Two to tango .....) Hi Christine, -----Original Message----- From: christine_forsyth [mailto:cforsyth@v...] Sent: Tuesday, 13 January 2004 6:22 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: Free Will was (Two to tango .....) Hello Herman, :-) 'The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.' (Edward Fitzgerald) ===================================================================== H> The moving hand, it tears the page, without lust and without rage, The moving foot, it shuffles forth, onto the barbie, facing North, The matchstick lights, the fire burns, what's left that any kamma earns? (Herman Hofman) Commentary: Barbie is colloquial for barbeque =================================================================== C> The archives of dsg are a bit like kamma, don't you think? ... :):) ===================================================================== Only if that's what you intend :-) All the best Herman metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 29004 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 2:32pm Subject: How many senses? Hi everyone, In Buddhism there are the classical 5 senses and the mind. Modern physiology recognizes a vast number of senses beyond the classical 5. There is the vestibular (sense of balance), proprioreception (sense of location of head, body and limbs in relation to each other) as well as the dozens of senses that react to certain levels of specific hormones and other chemical compounds. I am only guessing, but it would seem to me that Buddhism, lacking a separate sense of balance (awareness of position in relation to direction of gravitional field) would explain balance in terms of pannatti, while modern physiology would have it as paramattha. Similarly with location of right index finger in relation to nose and so on. Each of these senses has their own door and their own specific citta. Does there come a time to expand the canon, or do we place less weight on the distinction between pannatti and paramattha and the imagined consequences of taking one for the other? All the best Herman 29005 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 2:49pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Hi Michael, Michael: You are right. I won't do anything and let myself fall to the ground. James: Goodness! Please don't do that! I want you to know that it has been both an honor and a privilege to exchange views with such an admirable and learned gentleman. I hope that such discourse can continue and flourish in the future if conditions allow. Metta, James 29006 From: Andrew Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 3:28pm Subject: Message from KenH Hello everyone I have just had a phone call from KenH whose computer has crashed thanks to a defective microwave oven. He expects to be offline (and on a raw food diet) for several days. Those who have been conversing with him please note and don't think you are being ignored! He will return ... Metta Andrew PS If there are any good salad recipes out there ..... 29007 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 3:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: Space element Dear herman, the term 'superior person' is the translation used by the Pali text society in the Anguttara Nikaya - the Buddha's words. There are many sections in the Tipitaka where the Buddha spoke on the dangers of conceit also. The arahants were the supreme 'superior' ones because they were entirely without conceit. RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > You warn against conceit and then go onto mentioning superior persons. I > had to laugh, but you were probably being serious. > > Is it desirable to be a superior person? > > All the best > > Herman > > > -----Original Message----- > From: rjkjp1 [mailto:rjkjp1@y...] > > 'The Anguttara Nikaya, 70. A Superior > Person: > "Further: even unasked, a superior person reveals his own faults, > how > much more so when asked. When asked, however, and obligated to > reply > to questions, he speaks of his own faults without omitting anything, > without holding back, fully and in detail. He should be considered > a > superior person. > > Further: even when asked, a superior person does not reveal his own > praiseworthy qualities, still less so when not asked. When asked, > however, and obliged to reply to questions, he speaks of his own > praiseworthy qualities with omissions and hesitatingly, incompletely > and not in detail. He should be considered a superior person." > > RobertK 29008 From: Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] How many senses? Hi, Herman - In a message dated 1/12/04 5:36:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > > Hi everyone, > > In Buddhism there are the classical 5 senses and the mind. Modern > physiology recognizes a vast number of senses beyond the classical 5. > There is the vestibular (sense of balance), proprioreception (sense of > location of head, body and limbs in relation to each other) as well as > the dozens of senses that react to certain levels of specific hormones > and other chemical compounds. > > I am only guessing, but it would seem to me that Buddhism, lacking a > separate sense of balance (awareness of position in relation to > direction of gravitional field) would explain balance in terms of > pannatti, while modern physiology would have it as paramattha. > > Similarly with location of right index finger in relation to nose and so > on. Each of these senses has their own door and their own specific > citta. Does there come a time to expand the canon, or do we place less > weight on the distinction between pannatti and paramattha and the > imagined consequences of taking one for the other? > > All the best > > > Herman > > =========================== You could be right about the pa~n~natti interpretation. However, I think it may be too limiting to view body sense as being merely sense of touch. Certainly it also includes sense of pains, stings, tinglings, itches, motion, and I would bet it also includes sense of balance and of location within the body. Anything felt directly and actually through the body, I would suppose is included. Of those I listed, the one I have a drop of doubt about is sense of location, only because of its relation to our perception of space. But I think this is okay too. I don't think that the sense of location within the body is based on spatial experience or the concept of space, but rather the opposite - the sense of location within the body may well be one of the inputs serving as basis for our concept of space. 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) 29009 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 5:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent tendencies, Ch 1, no 3. Hi Nina >As to the term åsaya [4], bias, they explain this as dependence, abode or support on which beings depend. This term denotes the disposition to wrong view or to right view that has been accumulated. It denotes the disposition to all that is unwholesome, such as clinging to sense objects, or the disposition to all that is good, such as renunciation that has been accumulated. k: Since asaya can be kuasala or akusala, is there tendency for kusala or for kusala it is only accumulated and there is no tendency best rgds Ken O 29010 From: Eznir Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:34pm Subject: Questions of Skill Dear Friends, Questions of Skill by Thanissaro Bhikkhu http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/questions.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- The Buddha wasn't the sort of teacher who simply answered questions. He also taught which questions to ask. He understood the power of questions: that they give shape to the holes in your knowledge and force that shape -- valid or not -- onto the answers you hope will fill up those holes. Even if you use right information to answer a wrong question, it can take on the wrong shape. If you then use that answer as a tool, you're sure to apply it to the wrong situations and end up with the wrong results. That's why the Buddha was careful to map out a science of questions, showing which questions -- in what order -- lead to freedom, and which ones don't. At the same time, he gave his talks in a question- and-answer format, to make perfectly clear the shape of the questions he was answering. So if you're looking to his teaching for answers and want to get the most out of them, you should first be clear about what questions you're bringing to it, and check to see if they're in line with the questions the teachings were meant to address. That way your answers won't lead you astray. May you be Happy! eznir 29011 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 9:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: Space element Dear friends Htoo and Howard, I am having so much fun following your dialogue. And Htoo typing tik-tak-tik-tak. I did not have time but like to come in later on. Nina. op 12-01-2004 16:45 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > You said you see space. You said you hear space. You said you touch > space. > > To my knowledge, I cannot see space. I cannot hear space. I cannot > touch space. 29012 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] life-faculty, explanation Dear Nina, Larry, Howard & All, I think you had posted this before, but it needs lots of reviewing;-) --- nina van gorkom wrote: > > some explanations of footnote 25. > > note 25. 'Since the life faculty is itself entirely kamma-born it is > > established, by taking them as conascent, that the things to be > > protected by it are kamma-born too; this is why there is no inclusion > of > > the term "kamma-born". > > N: The rupas conascent with life faculty are in one group that > originates > > from kamma. Thus there is no need to say that the other rupas that are > > conascent are also originating from kamma. > > 'It maintains as if it were its own that > > kamma-born matter by being the cause of its occurrence even though > only > > lasting for a moment; that is why it has the characteristic of > > maintaining conascent kinds of matter. For kamma alone is not > competent > > to be the cause of kamma-born things' presence, as nutriment, etc., > are > > of the nutriment-born.' .... S: We see that what is written here in the commentaries is entirely consistent with the suttas, just elaborating on the details. MN 43, 22, The Greater Series of Questions and Answers, the Five Faculties, Nanamoli/Bodhi transl: “Friend, as to these five faculties - that is, the eye faculty, the ear faculty, the nose faculty, the tongue faculty, and the body faculty - what do these five faculties stand in dependence on?” “Friend, as to these five faculties - that is, the eye faculty, the ear faculty, the nose faculty, the tongue faculty, and the body faculty - these five faculties stand in dependence on vitality. [Note: MA identifies vitality (aayu) with the life faculty (jiivitindriya), which has the function of maintaining and vitalising the other material phenomena of the living body.] “Friend, what does vitality stand in dependence on?” “Vitality stands in dependence on heat.” [Note: Heat (usmaa) is the kamma-born heat intrinsic to the living body.] “Friend, what does heat stand in dependence on?” “Heat stands in dependence on vitality.” “Just now, friend, we understood the venerable Sariputta to have said: ‘vitality stands in dependence on heat’; and now we understand him to say: ‘heat stands in dependence on vitality.’ How should the meaning of these statements be regarded?” “In that case, friend, I shall give you a simile, for some wise men here understand the meaning of a statement by means of a simile. Just as when an oil-lamp is burning, its radiance is seen in dependence on its flame and its flame is seen in dependence on its radiance; so, too, vitality stands in dependence on heat and heat stands in dependence on vitality.” In the next section on Vital Formations (aayusankhaaraa), which the MA (comy) clarifies as indicating vitality, i.e aayu or jiivitindriya, it clarifies that these are not feelings and it is when the body is bereft of vitality, heat and consciousness that is is ‘then discarded and forsaken, left lying senseless like a log’. I think this section was quoted before, indicating the distinction between someone who is dead and one’ who has entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling.’ The body we cling to so much, depends on this very vitality or life-force which can cease at any moment. Reflecting wisely, it can be a condition for calm or satipatthana right now. .... > > N: Kamma is past kamma and is since long fallen away. But life-faculty > > maintains the other rupas in the group originated from kamma. <...> > > ' "Because it does accomplish each of those functions": it does so > > because it is a condition for distinguishing what is living. For it is > > the life faculty that distinguishes matter that is bound up with > > faculties from dead matter, and kamma-born matter and what is bound up > > with that from matter that is temperature originated, and so on.' > > > > N: Kamma-born matter is not only different from dead matter but also > from > > materiality produced by the three other factors of heat, nutrition, > citta. > > > > 'And the life faculty must be regarded as the reason not only for > > presence during a moment but also for non-interruption of connexion; > > otherwise death as the termination of a life span would be illogical' > > > > N: The groups of rupa with life-faculty fall away but they are > replaced > > throughout life until death occurs. > > Pm. 448). ..... Again we see that these various quotes from the Abhidhamma and commentaries are in conformity with what we read in the suttas. In the same way with the difficult topic of the rupa of space which is also mentioned in various suttas such as the Maharahulavada sutta which Nina translated. It cannot be seen or heard or sensed. It can only be known through the mind door. For us, it’s difficult to even understand intellectually how the asabhava rupa (without characteristic) can be directly known through the mind door, but like other subtle rupas it will become more and more intelligible in due course and as I understand, is known directly,(i.e. not by inference), at the 3rd stage of insight when the kalapas (groups of rupas) are known. This is as a result of the understanding of the arising and falling away of different groups of rupas, which have to be separated by the space element. Perhaps we’ll discuss it further again in Bkk too. A very difficult subject and one I usually put aside;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 29013 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Extolling, disparaging , slaying wrath Dear Nina, --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Thank you, but what a difference these two transl. I prefer PTS, it has > something: PTS: > what must we slay if we would happy live? > what must we slay if we would weep no more? .... Yes, I’m not surprised you didn’t recognise it as being the same sutta. We sent our PTS version of SN to RobK when we bought the Bodhi one (lack of space to keep texts we don’t need), so I can’t usually compare. .... Bodhi:> > “Having slain what does one sleep soundly? > > Having slain what does one not sorrow? > > What is the one thing, O Gotama, > > Whose killing you approve? .... > but I do not have the Pali to compare correctness. .... You can check the Pali at this site: http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/index.html Here it is with a quick effort by me to correct the symbols (I seem to have lost the list you gave me), so it may not be quite right: “Ki.n su jhatvaa sukha.n seti ki.n su jhatvaa na socati, Kissassa ekadhammassa vadha.n rocesi gotamaati.” There are a couple of notes given which may refer to differences in Pali texts. I’d be glad to hear your translation. Metta, Sarah ===== 29015 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 0:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Howard & All, James would call this an ‘ambush post’ and Andrew would call it a ‘poor Sarah’ one.....;-)I call it an important area for discussion, hence the salvage operation;-) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > vitakka-vicára: 'thought-conception and discursive thinking', (or > 'applied > > and sustained thought') > Ayya Khema described vitakka as the mind hitting against the > meditation object, and vicara as the mind rubbing against it, having > already made the > contact. It seems to me that these are ongoing functions. I wonder what > sort of > action can be performed during a single mind moment. .... S:I don’t think any ‘action can be performed during a single mind moment’. An action is a concept representing a long series of mind moments and co-arising mental factors, such as vitakka and vicara, and all the multiplicity of rupas being discussed, arising in kalapas (groups of rupas) and falling away all the time. When examples are given, for example in the Vism of vitkka having the characteristic of ‘directing the mind onto an object’ and so on, these are conventional descriptions to help us differentiate between various characteristics, but not to be taken literally as ‘actions’. .... >.At times I have to > wonder whether the idea of a cetasika lasting for only a single mind > moment really > makes sense - or, perhaps, it is the notion of a mind moment as > instantaneous > that is the problem. ..... S:I know what you mean. The problem, I think, is that we’re so used to thinking in terms of stories and actions with so little understanding of realities. It helps to remember, I think, that vitakka and vicara arise at every moment and with every citta apart from moments of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. With all other sense door process cittas and all mind door cittas, these cetasikas, along with the universals and others according to their particular conditions, arise and fall all the time. So whether there is or is not conventional thinking, whether there is or is not a wholesome citta arising and so on, there will be vitakka and vicara helping to direct the citta onto its object and sustainging it on the object for its bery brief duration. As the citta falls away, so do the accompanying mental factors, conditioning the next citta to follow. > ********************************************** > The more I think about this, the more I think that it is the > notion of > mind states as necessarily momentary/instantaneous that is the problem. > That > notion, propagated primarily by the Sautrantikas, has also been adopted > to > some considerable extent by Theravada and by Mahayana. But it strikes me > as being > an erroneous and unnecessary notion. While there may well be mind > states > that are instantaneous, it doesn't seem credible that they all are. Some > basic > activities require time for their execution and cannot be momentary. .... S:As you’re discussing with others, time is a concept. All that ever exists are the very brief and momentary dhammas now. Any activity consists of multitudes of namas and rupas arising and falling away. This is why, as the khandha suttas I posted yesterday indicate, there are only ever khandhas or actualities which can be directly known by insight. Time, actions, the Tathagatha, computers and elephants can only be conceptualised. .... >One > such, > from its description, is vicara. Other possible candidates for > non-instantaneous functions are wrong and right view, stinginess, > regret, doubt, and, > especially, concentration. (How is concentration on a single object > executed > momentarily, when, in fact, concentration is the *maintaining* of > awareness on a single > object over a period of time? If one answers that concentration is the > inclination within a single mind state for the subsequent state to take > the same > object, well, that is a clever move to make in the debate game, but not > good > enough I believe. The inclination towards concentration is not the same > as > concentration.) ..... S:There are many conditions as you know for each citta and cetasika to arise, to repeat, to accumulate and condition further series. Concentration may seem to last, but in truth, there are repeated cittas accompanied by concentration taking the same object. Conditions are very complicated as you’ll see in the U Narada ‘Introduction to Conditional Relations’. ..... > The bottom line, as I see it, is that there is nothing sacrosanct > > about instantaneity nor discreteness (and "sharp edges"). The > characteristic of > impermanence does not require a discrete, stop-motion, movie-frame > reality for > it to be operative. All that it requires is that nothing arising from > conditions remains indefinitely. If A is present on some occasion, there > will be some > future occasion when it is not present. That is all that is required for > > impermanence to hold. .... S:And yet we read in all the texts the references to the speed and the momentary nature of dhammas. We can also test out at this moment whether states last at all for an instant. Nothing to hold onto for even a finger-snap. ..... > The issue I am discussing here is separate from that of the issue > of > the distinction between paramattha dhammas and pa~n~natti. Paramattha > dhammas > are events and conditions that are actually and directly observable > independent of conceptual construction and projection. Whether they > occur "in the > moment" or with duration is a separate issue. .... S:On the other hand, I think it’s the same issue;-). As soon as we have an idea of events and so on, it is a concept of a dhamma, rather than the dhamma itself that is the object of consciousness. If I’m slow on any theads or not able to continue, having retrieved the balls just as they were about to fall out of my in box, it’s because we’re going away at the end of next week and I’m going to be pretty busy til then. I hope others will join in or take over too;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 29016 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 9:21pm Subject: Essential Advantage! Friends; The Basic Foundation of Freedom: Awareness is Gain !!! Negligence is Loss !!! But Awareness of What ??? Awareness of Body & World as Transient Forms Awareness of Feelings as mere Passing Responses Awareness of Mind as just Changing Moods Awareness of Phenomena as Momentary Mental States Neither is 'Mine', 'Me', 'I' or 'Self but just impersonal passing phenomena ... This - just this! - 4-old Foundation of Awareness is the Only Way for the Purification of Being!!! Such Continuous Awareness is therefore a crucial & indispensable necessity... --00O00-- Details for establishing this 4-fold Awareness: DN 22: The 4 Great Frames of Reference http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/message/4639 The Way of Mindfulness: The Satipatthana Sutta and Its Commentary http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html All yours in the Dhamma. Peace is Ease. Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/ 29017 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:01pm Subject: Reg: SammaSamadhi: Tricks of the Trade Dear Htoo Naing You asked: >Right Concentration is concentration of 1st Jhana >or 2nd Jhana or 3rd Jhana or 4th Jhana. >Is that right your venerable? Indeed! Depending on where one is along the Way! For one not having yet attained 1st Jhana. 1st Jhana = right concentration For one fully accomplished in 1st Jhana. 1st Jhana = wrong concentration (attaching to worldly mental construction) 2nd Jhana = right concentration etc. Reg: the Balancing of Abilities: If want urges for absorption, one overshoots energy & effort and cannot attain even calm (samatha) due to agitation & restlessness! 1st Jhana entrance have to cleaned for all five hindrances first... If when calmed or even entered absorption one starts to enjoy the subtle mental state too much, then one falls out as now the hindrance is desire for this particular state. Initially when one sits down, one first clears these 5 hindrances systematically & thoroughly this way: Tricks of the Trade: Sensual desire is cleared by reflection on the Disgusting Corpse. Aversion is cleared by reflection on mental release by Universal Friendliness. Lethargy is cleared by reflection on the mental Brightness or the elements of mental initiative, setting in motion & endurance of exertion. Agitation is cleared by reflection on calm of first Body then Mind. Uncertainty is cleared by reflection on whether various states is: 1: Advantageous or detrimental 2: Blamable or unblamable 3: Average or excellent 4: On bright or dark side Then, when these are all cleared, one focuses on one's particular meditation object one-pointedly! When scatter ceases, entrance emerges & there is experience & assured awareness of that. Keep on yet don't pull or push the state. If you do your cleaning well, it will emerge by itself spontaneously when mature. Metta make attain fast! samahita All yours in the Dhamma. Peace is Ease. Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/ 29018 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:40pm Subject: Re: Direct Experience! Dearest Eznir: > Direct seeing is when one perceives things as they are, (+) Direct experience is when one knows how things develop! All things in this world is dynamic & not static! Absolutely speaking: No things Are (the same). All phenomena may be thereby be regarded as processes rather than entities. Otherwise 'I' agree: Things are NEVER as they APPEAR or as we conceptualize them as you say. Knowing all phenomena to be transient mental states is a direct experience. Knowing, what is apparent material Solidity macroscopically, to be immaterial extension microscopically, is a direct experience. Knowing, what is apparent material Fluidity macroscopically, to be immaterial cohesion microscopically, is a direct experience. Knowing, what appears as an attractive construction, to be ultimately painful, to a degree even beyond death, is a direct experience. Knowing, what appears as 'Personal', 'Me' or 'Mine' to be fundamentally impersonal, selfless, coreless, ownerless, a passing cluster void of any identity, entity, ego, self or substance, is a quite direct experience. Just perceiving by focusing on the ever-changing transient impermanence right here, right now, is another in itself fleeting direct experience. Knowing what is behind this mental curtain, is a direct experience ... May we all disentangle this web of appearances. Thanks for this good question. samahita 29019 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 0:28am Subject: The Future Buddha Metteyya The Coming of the Future Buddha, Ariya Metteyya -the Friendly One- http://www.ubakhin.com/uchittin/arimet/ARIMET01.html 29020 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Extolling, disparaging & teaching Dhamma Hi Andrew, --- Andrew wrote: > Hi Sarah > Thanks for your interesting post. I had a giggle about it, > actually. ..... Well, I didn't real very-tall-men giggled, so I've learnt something new too! .... <...> > > Yes, this is what I need to remind myself about in my work and all > my > > rushed activities. > > > It is very practical advice indeed. The quote seems to suggest that > hurried speech leads to excited mind. Yet, "mind is the forerunner > of all things". Is it not that excited mind leads to hurried speech > leads to more excited mind? .... Sounds right! > > > p.s Do you also have a copy of Samyutta Nikaya, Andrew? > > Yes, I do - am reading it through slowly. .... There you go, James.....all you have to do is to encourage him to pick a sutta now;-) Anything that rings a bell in SN3 Kosalasamyutta, Andrew? As for KenH, if you speak to him, please ask him not to add us to his worry-list. But then, if the accumulations and conditions are there to do so anyway, so be it....still opportunities and fertile soil for sati;-) And wasn't one of his concerns about having over-indulged during the holiday season? If so, the salad diet may be Fair Justice. What d'ya reck'n, Chris;-)? Metta, Poor Sarah =========== 29021 From: Sarah Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 2:01am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Michael, --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > Thank you for your lengthy research but as you probably know I don’t > have > qualms with the suttas. Quite the opposite. .... Thanks for reading it. I know you really appreciate the suttas, that was why I thought I’d use them for reference this time to make the points (as I see them) that: ***** 1. A clear distinction is shown between worldly truths and realtites/actualities/the khandhas. 2. The khandhas never refer to pannatti (concepts), but refer to cittas, cetasikas and rupas. 3. Only the khandhas are conditioned, arise and fall, not concepts. 4. The development of insight/satipatthana is the direct understanding and knowledge of the khandhas and eventually of nibbana too. It is not the insight of concepts. .... > I will only comment on one thing you wrote: > “In other words, the five aggregates are the ultimate realities > (paramattha > dhammas) precisely to be known.” > > Yes, the aggregates are to be known for what they are. And they are an > object of clinging and have the three characteristics: dukkha, anatta, > anicca. When viewed as they are, clinging will cease. And that is in > brief > the objective of the path. > The aggregates are not ultimate realities, and they are not supposed to > be > seen as ultimate realities through insight. ..... OK, let’s drop ‘paramattha’ and ‘ultimate’ for a moment and say (if you agree from the suttas): 5. The khandhas are ‘real and actual’ (saccato thetato) as opposed to Beings, Self, the Buddha, computers and elephants. Unlike the latter, the khandhas have characteristics or qualities that are to be known for what they are. 6. Concepts and entities do not have the characteristics which can be penetrated and directly understood by the eightfold path factors. Therefore, it is essential to distinguish between concepts and khandhas. .... > I know we will not agree, but I don’t feel any need to convince you or > anyone else. If what I say rings a bell, thats OK, if not, thats OK > also. .... Likewise. The discussions that different people have been having with you here, Michael, have been some of the very best, imho. I’m learning a lot from your participation on DSG. Finally, whether one likes it or not: 7. The Abhidhamma uses the term ‘paramattha’ to distinguish cittas, cetasikas, rupas and nibbana from pannatti. Jon wrote: The commentary is as follows: "'from the ultimate standpoint' -- by way of ultimate exposition, setting aside conventional talk" and "'Ultimate' means in the ultimate, highest and undistorted sense; or it is the sense that comes within the sphere of knowledge that is highest and ultimate." Also, CMA quotes a passage from the Vibhanga describing 'ultimate' as 'that which belongs to the domain of ultimate or supreme knowledge'. [CMA Guide to par. 2]. ***** I’m just trying to reach some consensus here. Is there anything in any of these points you disagree with? Metta, Sarah ====== 29022 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:26am Subject: In Brief! Friends; Foremost is Elimination of Craving : Nothing is Worth Clinging to as All Constructions will Vanish! Sakka (Indra), king of gods, once asked the Buddha: Venerable Sir, How is one Ultimately Secure, as the Foremost among Gods & Humans ? The Blessed Buddha answered; Regarding this - king of gods - a Bhikkhu hears that: Nothing is Worth Clinging to. When he has heard that nothing is worth clinging to, then he directly knows all! Directly knowing all, he understands everything! Having fully understood everything, whatever feeling he feels, whether pleasant, painful or neutral, he remains regarding these feelings as transient, as fading away, as ceasing, as something that should be relinquished. Reflecting thus, he does not cling to anything in this world. When he does not cling, he is not stirred or agitated by anything. Thus imperturbable, right there & then, he personally touches Nibbana. He understands: rebirth is ended, the Noble life has been fulfilled, what should be done is done, there is no more coming back to any state of being. This - king of gods - is in brevity how a Bhikkhu is freed by the destruction of craving, is reaching the ultimate goal, the absolute security from bondage, the climax of the Noble life, the final end, as one who is foremost among gods & humans... --oo0oo-- Source: The Middle Length Sayings of the Buddha: Majjhima Nikaya MN 37 [i 251-56] The minor speech on the Destruction of Craving. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/ All yours in the Dhamma. Peace is Ease. Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. 29023 From: gazita2002 Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] life-faculty, explanation Dear Sarah, I am really enjoying reading these posts. Rupa fascinates me and I guess its the concept of rupa that I'm talking about. I'm a bit of a sci-fi buff, and while I know the reality of rupa is definitely not sci-fi, to me the concept somewhat is. Don't try to make any sense out of this, just my bias and tendency!! Hoping you are making a 'little book of questions' for Bkk. - snip - ' How should the meaning of these > statements be regarded?" > > "In that case, friend, I shall give you a simile, for some wise men here > understand the meaning of a statement by means of a simile. Just as when > an oil-lamp is burning, its radiance is seen in dependence on its flame > and its flame is seen in dependence on its radiance; so, too, vitality > stands in dependence on heat and heat stands in dependence on vitality." > > In the next section on Vital Formations (aayusankhaaraa), which the MA > (comy) clarifies as indicating vitality, i.e aayu in Thailand people ask 'aayu taorai' meaning 'how old are you?' or jiivitindriya, it > clarifies that these are not feelings and it is when the body is bereft of > vitality, heat and consciousness that is is `then discarded and forsaken, > left lying senseless like a log'. I think this section was quoted before, > indicating the distinction between someone who is dead and one' who has > entered upon the cessation of perception and feeling.' > > The body we cling to so much, depends on this very vitality or life- force > which can cease at any moment. Reflecting wisely, it can be a condition > for calm or satipatthana right now. > .... > > > N: Kamma is past kamma and is since long fallen away. But life- faculty > > > maintains the other rupas in the group originated from kamma. > <...> > > > ' "Because it does accomplish each of those functions": it does so > > > because it is a condition for distinguishing what is living. For it is > > > the life faculty that distinguishes matter that is bound up with > > > faculties from dead matter, and kamma-born matter and what is bound up > > > with that from matter that is temperature originated, and so on.' > > > > > > N: Kamma-born matter is not only different from dead matter but also > > from > > > materiality produced by the three other factors of heat, nutrition, > > citta. > > > > > > 'And the life faculty must be regarded as the reason not only for > > > presence during a moment but also for non-interruption of connexion; > > > otherwise death as the termination of a life span would be illogical' > > > > > > N: The groups of rupa with life-faculty fall away but they are > > replaced > > > throughout life until death occurs. > > > Pm. 448). > ..... > Again we see that these various quotes from the Abhidhamma and > commentaries are in conformity with what we read in the suttas. > > In the same way with the difficult topic of the rupa of space which is > also mentioned in various suttas such as the Maharahulavada sutta which > Nina translated. It cannot be seen or heard or sensed. It can only be > known through the mind door. For us, it's difficult to even understand > intellectually how the asabhava rupa (without characteristic) can be > directly known through the mind door, but like other subtle rupas it will > become more and more intelligible in due course and as I understand, is > known directly,(i.e. not by inference), at the 3rd stage of insight when > the kalapas (groups of rupas) are known. This is as a result of the > understanding of the arising and falling away of different groups of > rupas, which have to be separated by the space element. Perhaps we'll > discuss it further again in Bkk too. A very difficult subject and one I > usually put aside;-) > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== I would definitly like to hear more about this - good idea about discussing it in Bkk. Knowing, theoretically, how fast cittas arise and fall, I'm almost overwhelmed and therefore know for sure it cannot be known by just thinking about it, when I think about Nibbana and how just potent [for the want of a better description] the lokkutara citta and accompanying cetasikas must be. Sometimes I think its hardly worth discussing, esp when I read your last passage above. However, I do occasionally feel quite excited about the journey! Lots of pressure on you now Sarah, to have no blank spaces on the tapes that will be made of the upcoming discussions ;( - just kidding. Q1. do all rupas need to be known eventually? will try to get more q. to you before you go. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 29024 From: teoh chee keam Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 8:29pm Subject: Angulimala Kalyanamitta, Angulimala managed to get attainment in that very life even he had killed 999 lives, but only after he had KILLED HIS BRUTALITY. Psychologically, we have to consider few important aspects in other suttas about King Pasenadi's personality and his response towards Buddha on why King Pasenadi pardoned Angulimala. Could it be King Pasenadi, as a faithfull Buddha's lay disciple, as mentioned in many suttas, i) unable to prosecute Angulimala as he had joint the order of Bhikkhu, as some Bhikkhus did to avoid the law, or ii) Angulimala as a Bhikkhu, practised "No Harm". Therefore, King Pasenadi respected him as a muni(likely,as the conversation between Buddha and King Pasenadi), or iii) King Pasenadi understand the situation at that time and avoid unnecessary punishments and suffering as he is known to be a good king. Angulimala was said to be Yakkha in his past life, made him powerfull enough to win the fight even the villagers came in big group. Regarding his injury/suffering due to things thrown accidentally to him, that is vipaka. At this point, we do not know if his suffering is due to new vipaka or past kamma. We may suffer kammic result either due to direct or indirect effect. Nothing mentioned about Angulimala then, after he had lived in seclusion, a dhutanga monk. Angulimala is a perfect example for those in doubt after repenting from their unwholesome deeds in the past, no matter how great is the kamma(except the 5 unpardonable). Vijita Teoh. 29025 From: Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: Space element Hi, Nina - In a message dated 1/13/04 12:12:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Dear friends Htoo and Howard, > I am having so much fun following your dialogue. And Htoo typing > tik-tak-tik-tak. I did not have time but like to come in later on. > Nina. > ======================= I'm glad you've been enjoying it. :-) I'm not sure how much more Htoo and I "have in us" on this topic ;-)), but I'll be pleased to read what you have to say further about it whenever you have the time. With spacious 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) 29026 From: Date: Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi, Sarah - Thank you for the following detailed and well-thought-out post. The bottom line, I think, however, is that we simply disagree on this one. The instantaneous, film-frame view of mindstates that you believe in I do not. I do not see the necessity for it, and I do see a number of problems with it. Non-duration is not what makes a phenomenon "real" or not. Abhidhamma, itself, allows for a rupa to last for the duration of 17 mindstates. So ... do rupas become "unreal" due to that. In any case, whether namas or rupas are instantaneous or not (though I don't think we*ever* observe anything that has zero duration), is really not a critical matter. What is critical is that all (conditioned) phenomena are impermanent, unsatisfying, and impersonal and insubstantial, and that we should not attempt to grasp the ungraspable, for that is the source of our suffering. With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/13/04 4:01:09 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Hi Howard &All, > > James would call this an ‘ambush post’ and Andrew would call it a ‘poor > Sarah’ one.....;-)I call it an important area for discussion, hence the > salvage operation;-) > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > >>vitakka-vicára: 'thought-conception and discursive thinking', (or > >'applied > >>and sustained thought') > > > Ayya Khema described vitakka as the mind hitting against the > >meditation object, and vicara as the mind rubbing against it, having > >already made the > >contact. It seems to me that these are ongoing functions. I wonder what > >sort of > >action can be performed during a single mind moment. > .... > S:I don’t think any ‘action can be performed during a single mind moment’. > An action is a concept representing a long series of mind moments and > co-arising mental factors, such as vitakka and vicara, and all the > multiplicity of rupas being discussed, arising in kalapas (groups of > rupas) and falling away all the time. When examples are given, for example > in the Vism of vitkka having the characteristic of ‘directing the mind > onto an object’ and so on, these are conventional descriptions to help us > differentiate between various characteristics, but not to be taken > literally as ‘actions’. > .... > >.At times I have to > >wonder whether the idea of a cetasika lasting for only a single mind > >moment really > >makes sense - or, perhaps, it is the notion of a mind moment as > >instantaneous > >that is the problem. > ..... > S:I know what you mean. The problem, I think, is that we’re so used to > thinking in terms of stories and actions with so little understanding of > realities. It helps to remember, I think, that vitakka and vicara arise > at every moment and with every citta apart from moments of seeing, > hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. With all other sense door process > cittas and all mind door cittas, these cetasikas, along with the > universals and others according to their particular conditions, arise and > fall all the time. So whether there is or is not conventional thinking, > whether there is or is not a wholesome citta arising and so on, there will > be vitakka and vicara helping to direct the citta onto its object and > sustainging it on the object for its bery brief duration. As the citta > falls away, so do the accompanying mental factors, conditioning the next > citta to follow. > > >********************************************** > > The more I think about this, the more I think that it is the > >notion of > >mind states as necessarily momentary/instantaneous that is the problem. > >That > >notion, propagated primarily by the Sautrantikas, has also been adopted > >to > >some considerable extent by Theravada and by Mahayana. But it strikes me > >as being > >an erroneous and unnecessary notion. While there may well be mind > >states > >that are instantaneous, it doesn't seem credible that they all are. Some > >basic > >activities require time for their execution and cannot be momentary. > .... > S:As you’re discussing with others, time is a concept. All that ever > exists are the very brief and momentary dhammas now. Any activity consists > of multitudes of namas and rupas arising and falling away. This is why, as > the khandha suttas I posted yesterday indicate, there are only ever > khandhas or actualities which can be directly known by insight. Time, > actions, the Tathagatha, computers and elephants can only be > conceptualised. > .... > >One > >such, > >from its description, is vicara. Other possible candidates for > >non-instantaneous functions are wrong and right view, stinginess, > >regret, doubt, and, > >especially, concentration. (How is concentration on a single object > >executed > >momentarily, when, in fact, concentration is the *maintaining* of > >awareness on a single > >object over a period of time? If one answers that concentration is the > >inclination within a single mind state for the subsequent state to take > >the same > >object, well, that is a clever move to make in the debate game, but not > >good > >enough I believe. The inclination towards concentration is not the same > >as > >concentration.) > ..... > S:There are many conditions as you know for each citta and cetasika to > arise, to repeat, to accumulate and condition further series. > Concentration may seem to last, but in truth, there are repeated cittas > accompanied by concentration taking the same object. Conditions are very > complicated as you’ll see in the U Narada ‘Introduction to Conditional > Relations’. > ..... > > The bottom line, as I see it, is that there is nothing sacrosanct > > > >about instantaneity nor discreteness (and "sharp edges"). The > >characteristic of > >impermanence does not require a discrete, stop-motion, movie-frame > >reality for > >it to be operative. All that it requires is that nothing arising from > >conditions remains indefinitely. If A is present on some occasion, there > >will be some > >future occasion when it is not present. That is all that is required for > > > >impermanence to hold. > .... > S:And yet we read in all the texts the references to the speed and the > momentary nature of dhammas. We can also test out at this moment whether > states last at all for an instant. Nothing to hold onto for even a > finger-snap. > ..... > > The issue I am discussing here is separate from that of the issue > >of > >the distinction between paramattha dhammas and pa~n~natti. Paramattha > >dhammas > >are events and conditions that are actually and directly observable > >independent of conceptual construction and projection. Whether they > >occur "in the > >moment" or with duration is a separate issue. > .... > S:On the other hand, I think it’s the same issue;-). As soon as we have an > idea of events and so on, it is a concept of a dhamma, rather than the > dhamma itself that is the object of consciousness. > > If I’m slow on any theads or not able to continue, having retrieved the > balls just as they were about to fall out of my in box, it’s because we’re > going away at the end of next week and I’m going to be pretty busy til > then. I hope others will join in or take over too;-) > > Metta, > > Sarah > /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) 29027 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 7:49am Subject: Re: How many senses? Dear Herman, Finally Buddha Sasana has to disappear because of later disciples who are foolish and stupid enough to destroy the whole Sasana. The Sasana was said to exist 5000 human years. Now it is well over 2500 years. As evrything is anicca then The Buddha Sasana is also Anicca. The wise man will follow the wise guide. To pinpoint senses there are a lot of things to be learnt. Physiology is complicated and complex and advancing and that subject is a dynamic subject. While physiology is a dynamic subject, then neurology excels physiology as neurology has to depend on physiology. There are many many sense receptors, their pathways, the place where the information in them are stored and these things are being explored and they are still endless. This happens. Because Pannatta is not real. As Pannatta is not reality, it has no dimension. So it is not amazing that following Pannatta related things will never end. The Buddha way is not just imagination. There are only 5 physical sense doors. No more than that. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi everyone, > > In Buddhism there are the classical 5 senses and the mind. Modern > physiology recognizes a vast number of senses beyond the classical 5. > There is the vestibular (sense of balance), proprioreception (sense of > location of head, body and limbs in relation to each other) as well as > the dozens of senses that react to certain levels of specific hormones > 29028 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 7:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: Space element Dear Howard, Nina, and all, I got the message. I also do not know how long we will continue on this thread. With Metta, Htoo Naing --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Nina - > > In a message dated 1/13/04 12:12:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... > writes: > > > Dear friends Htoo and Howard, > > I am having so much fun following your dialogue. And Htoo typing > > tik-tak-tik-tak. I did not have time but like to come in later on. > > Nina. > > > ======================= > I'm glad you've been enjoying it. :-) I'm not sure how much more Htoo > and I "have in us" on this topic ;-)), but I'll be pleased to read what you > have to say further about it whenever you have the time. > > With spacious metta, > Howard 29029 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vism.XIV 60 - elements, recap Dear Azita, op 12-01-2004 00:53 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > I require clarification on mind-element [manodhatu], is this the > same as heart base? N: The Abhidhamma is not for memorizing and when we understand, we shall remember. A recap is always good, also for me. The heartbase is rupa, not nama. To recap: The five sense-cognitions have each their own base, not the heartbase. Mindelement: the adverting-consciousness, the first citta of a sense-door process and the receiving-consciousness, vipakacitta (two types: kusala vipaka and akusala vipaka) succeeding a sense-cognition (seeing, etc.). Mind-consciousness element: all cittas, except the five sense-cognitions and the three kinds of cittas classified as mind-element. It includes cittas experiencing an object through six doors as well as door-freed cittas, cittas not arising in processes, namely, rebirth-consciousness, bhavanga-cittas, dying-consciousness. We can look at mind-element this way: cittas which can only arise in sense-door processes, not in mind-door processes. Question: why not the investigating-consciousness (santiira.na-citta), determining-consciousness (votthapanacitta), javana-cittas and registering-consciousness? Answer: cittas performing these functions also arise in mind-door processes, or they are process freed. Santirana can perform several functions, not only investigating, also the function of rebirth and bhavanga. Determining-consciousness: it is the mind-door adverting-consciousness that performs this function, and this citta also arises in a mind-door process. Once you understand this you will remember. A: mind object [dhamma] does this include concepts? N: Yes. A: I'm thinking > here of 'thinking', e.g. i'm thinking of how to put this question to > you - that sort of thinking ??!! N: citta thinks, and it is with kusala citta or with akusala citta, one or the other. We can reflect on concepts, also when studying or discussing dhamma, with kusala citta or akusala citta. Ven. Dhammadharo would say: do we realize this, we better find out. A: mind consciousness [mano vinnana] are these the cittas which > arise somewhere other than the 5 sense doors e.g. eye etc.? N: Other than the five sense-cognitions and mind-element. Thus also the door freed: these innocent bhavanga-cittas not involved in processes of the six doors, but still experiencing an object (the same as rebirth-consciousness). After all they are citta, and one of the word derivations of citta is: cinteti: to think. Citta "thinks" of an object, it cognizes it. A: When I wrote about my limited time, it was a condition to > remember comments from Ven. Dhammadharo regarding listening to the > Dhamma. We can have all types of excuses - too hot, too cold, too > tired, too hungry. As I sat at the computor this morning, turned > the fan on, had to rearrange that a few times to get it 'just right'; > then the mozzie began to bite and it looked like a dengue one so had > to go find the mozzie repellant, now I'm uncomfortable in this > chair........is this behaviour familiar to anyone else???? I put it > all down to Kilesa. N: I like to be reminded of Ven. Dhammadharo regarding listening to the Dhamma. It is very unpleasant to have unpleasant or painful feeling, but what would he say, and he did say this: be aware also of that. I will be missing you in Bgk! Nina. 29030 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element a concept? Dear Howard, op 12-01-2004 06:22 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: >> > ========================== > Space, if it is a rupa, is an odd sort of rupa. Hardness is > experienced through the body door - only, visual objects through the eye door > - only, > odors through the nose door - only, tastes through the tongue door only, > sounds > through the ear door - only, water element through the mind door (so it is > said) - only. But space seems to be experienced both through the body door, > the > eye door, and the ear door. Could such a thing be a rupa? I think not. I think > that space is mere (well grounded) concept designating a particular category > of relations among rupas. N: I think that you and I are speaking about different kinds of space. You look up at the sky, thinking of a concept. When thinking of the concept space one may find that very important and great. It invites to clinging. I speak about that very small, insignificant rupa that, together with the other 27 rupas is classified in the Abhidhamma as rupakkhandha and performs the function of delimiting the kalapas. It is not worth clinging to, it is impermanent and non-self. The Commentaries explain in conventional terms that the manifestation of space are cavities in the body, such as ear cavity, but we should not be led astray and we should take this in the right sense. Their intention was explaining in understandable language what space is: a reality. H: Htoo, doesn't this strike you as a bit ironic, with the space that is experienced being "unreal," but the allegedly "real" space being unobservable? Hardness that is real is actually observed! Sounds that are real are actually observed! But "real" space - that's the sort of space we *cannot* observe!! (Something's wrooong here! ;-)) N: Yes, something is wrong here. Today we go again to Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. The Buddha taught Rahula about the four Great Elements of earth, water, fire and wind, and also about space. We read in the Co: After that he taught him to apply himself to the mental development similar to earth, and similar to the other great Elements and space. We can admire the structure of the sutta here: after the explanation about the Elements the Buddha taught the application of this knowledge in daily life. The Buddha said: <³Apply yourself to the mental development that is like the earth, Rahula, For when you apply yourself to the mental development that is like the earth, Rahula, agreeable and disagreeable impressions that have arisen, impinging on the mind will not persist.²> He taught the same about mental development like water, fire, wind and space. The same about the other Great Elements and space. Would the Buddha teach Rahula merely a concept of space? He taught realities, rupakkhandha and the other khandhas. We have to understand the deep meaning of his words. We read: The goal is detachment. Nina. 29031 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: commentaries Dear Dhamma friend Eznir, I do not know how to address you, what is your real name? op 12-01-2004 06:48 schreef Eznir op eznir2003@y...: > > 28818\Nina: Understandable that you were put off with Abhidhamma. > Especially if you follow details as Larry and I study now. Details > about rupa, AND A WAY OF REASONING which must seem complicated, with > those dyads. > > How far can one go by way of reasoning? Can the Dhamma be > comprehended in this way? N: I think the two of us have no misunderstanding about pariyatti as the foundation for patipada. What I said above was meant in a special context, you see. The commentators try to explain the Dhamma and they are spot on, but we have to place ourselves into their way of reasoning and this is difficult for people today. We have to go back milleniums of years. What was their intention? Why do they bring up dyads, triads, etc. But you know already, I am sure. I like to help so that people do not take the commentaries amiss. By the way, I hope you and other people forgive me when I do not answer Emails. As much as I like to I have to limit myself in vieuw of preparations for my journey to Thailand. Looking forward to corresponding with you after my journey, Nina. 29032 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:15am Subject: tiika text to Vis. 60, and note 26, 4b. tiika text to Vis. 60, and note 4b. Note 4 b: Now follows a part of the Tiika, not mentioned in this long footnote 26. It returns to the definition of the Vis. text: Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:15am Subject: Latent tendencies, Ch 1, no 4 Latent tendencies, Ch 1, no 4 587. What are the defilements that are underlying tendencies in beings? There are seven underlying tendencies (anusaya): Underlying tendency to greed for sense-desire (kåma-råga), underlying tendency to aversion (paìigha), underlying tendency to conceit (måna), underlying tendency to wrong view (ditthi), underlying tendency to doubt (vicikicchå), underlying tendency to desire for becoming (continued existence, bhavaråga), and underlying tendency to ignorance (avijjå).² From the above quoted text we can see that behaviour, habits and defilements are accumulated and become dormant in the succession of cittas. Since the Buddha has knowledge of beings¹ biases and underlying tendencies (åsayånusaya ñåna), we know that there are underlying tendencies. In the ³Pañcappakaranatthakathå², in the Commentary to the ³Yamaka², the Sixth Book of the Abhidhamma, we read in the section on the latent tendencies (anusaya-våra) and the section on ³possessed of latent tendencies² (sånusaya-våra): ³In the section on Œbeing possessed of latent tendencies¹ the Buddha said : ¹Who is with the latent tendency of sensuous desire, he is possessed of it (yo kåmarågånusayena sånusayo)¹. This is explained by means of a simile: it is like a person who suffers from illness. He surely suffers from sickness and old age and so on. So long as he is not freed from illnesses he is called a sick person even when sickness does not arise. It is the same in the case of the latent tendencies of someone who is traversing the round of rebirths. He has defilements which have not been eradicated by the eightfold Path. Even though the latent tendencies do not arise he is called a person who is possessed of the latent tendencies, thus, he has latent tendencies. Because he is dependent on other people who have latent tendencies likewise, he receives them with the word, Œwelcome¹ [10]. The other words in this section are the same as those in the section on latent tendencies.² Thus we see that there are latent tendencies in each of the cittas that are arising and falling away in succession so long as they have not been eradicated by the noble eightfold Path. Footnote: 10. We read in the ³Path of Discrimination² in the section on beings¹ disposition (adhimutti) that beings with inferior dispositions associate with those who also have inferior dispositions, and that it is the same in the case of beings with superior dispositions. We read that this occurred also in the past and will occur in the future. Nina. 29034 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Dear Howard, op 13-01-2004 13:27 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Non-duration is not what makes a phenomenon "real" or not. Abhidhamma, itself, > allows > for a rupa to last for the duration of 17 mindstates. So ... do rupas become > "unreal" due to that. N: In this way a rupa that is sense object can be experienced by cittas arising and falling away in a process. It is actually a comparison: one rupa, 17 moments of citta, and Ven. Nyanaponika explains this very well. Both rupa and citta are impermanent, but, insight has to be developed in stages. As often stressed: the first stage of tender insight is knowing the difference between nama and rupa. Falling away is falling away, and it is just ignorance and clinging which holds on and does not even want to see that when the conditions disappear the conditioned phenomena completely disappear, at once, in a very radical way, never to come back. There is no lingering on, that is not impermanence as taught also in the Suttas. Nina. > In any case, whether namas or rupas are instantaneous or not (though I > don't think we*ever* observe anything that has zero duration), is really not > a critical matter. What is critical is that all (conditioned) phenomena are > impermanent, unsatisfying, and impersonal and insubstantial, 29035 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: Space element Dear Htoo, do not worry, there will be plenty of rupas to discuss, see Larry's thread. To begin with heartbase, and I still want to add more info from U Narada, like hearbase that can even be object of citta with insight, and heartbase getting very weak just before dying. And we should not cling, it can only be known through the mind-door, it is subtle rupa. It is not like feeling our heart. That is conventional again. Nina. op 13-01-2004 16:54 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > I got the message. I also do not know how long we will continue on > this thread. 29036 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] life-faculty, explanation Dear Sarah, I greatly appreciate your additions and sutta quote, and also the lesson at the end! The big picture and connection with daily life. Nina. op 13-01-2004 08:26 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > We see that what is written here in the commentaries is entirely > consistent with the suttas, just elaborating on the details. > > MN 43, 22, The Greater Series of Questions and Answers, the Five > Faculties, Nanamoli/Bodhi transl: > 29037 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 11:53am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hello Sarah, Sarah; 1. A clear distinction is shown between worldly truths and realtites/actualities/the khandhas. Michael: A clear distinction is shown between the way people usually perceive the world as existing/non existing and conditioned existence. The split between worldly truths and realities/actualities falls into the trap of existence/non existence. The khandhas are not realities in the sense of truly existing or in the sense of an ultimate reality, they are conditioned realities. A truly existing reality or actuality cannot be subject to conditions. S: 2. The khandhas never refer to pannatti (concepts), but refer to cittas, cetasikas and rupas. M: Khandhas are the same as cittas. cetasikas and rupa. Khandhas and paññatti are both conditioned realities none of them are ultimate realities nor non existent. S: 3. Only the khandhas are conditioned, arise and fall, not concepts. M: Therefore concepts are non existent. Again the dichotomy into existing (khandhas) and non existing (concepts). To me both are conditioned realities. S: 4. The development of insight/satipatthana is the direct understanding and knowledge of the khandhas and eventually of nibbana too. It is not the insight of concepts. M: Insight is the direct understanding and knowledge of the three characteristics. Any conditioned phenomena has the three characteristics and therefore can be an object of insight. When you see conditionality you see the Dhamma. S: 5.The khandhas are ‘real and actual’ (saccato thetato) as opposed to Beings, Self, the Buddha, computers and elephants. Unlike the latter, the khandhas have characteristics or qualities that are to be known for what they are. M: If the khandhas are ‘real and actual’ then they cannot be subject to conditionality because for something to be ‘real and actual’ it has to have something which gives it that ‘real and actual’ quality and that is the same as an essence, whether you call it like that or not, that is the assumption behind calling them ‘real and actual’. S: 6. Concepts and entities do not have the characteristics which can be penetrated and directly understood by the eightfold path factors. Therefore, it is essential to distinguish between concepts and khandhas. M: As I said before both concepts and entities are conditioned and therefore share the three characteristics and can be an object of insight. I don’t’ see room for a consensus Sarah and we better agree to disagree. Metta Michael 29038 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 0:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Michael, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > Sarah; > 1. A clear distinction is shown between worldly truths and > realtites/actualities/the khandhas. > > Michael: > A clear distinction is shown ... I have read this exchange between you and Sarah and I do agree with you. However, I am not sure if the viewpoint expressed by Sarah is the true viewpoint of the Abhidhamma and the commentaries (that is what I argued with you but you lumped me in with others here). I have also debated with Sarah extensively that cittas and rupas are merely conceptual constructs, they are not real nor do they point to something that is `real'. They are merely for the sake of convenience to discuss and categorize phenomena. My impression thus far, and I am sure many here will disagree, is that the Abhidhamma cannot be truly understood in proper context without meditation practice and is meant only for those who do meditate. Most people on this list have only an intellectual understanding of such things, not a direct realization. This leads them to establish a necessary dichotomy in their minds about some things existing and some things not. Then the clinging has switched from clinging to entities and objects to clinging to superficial understanding of namas and rupas. But, I would also like to suggest to you that your viewpoint of reality being `empty' and `void' is also absurd. All viewpoints are absurd. But without viewpoints we wouldn't have much to talk about now would we?? ;-) Metta, James 29039 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 0:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Nina, Nina: Falling away is falling away, and it is just ignorance and clinging which holds on and does not even want to see that when the conditions disappear the conditioned phenomena completely disappear, at once, in a very radical way, never to come back. James: This is so very true! This is what I have seen in my meditation practice which terrifies me! Have you known this directly? Do such thoughts/knowledge give you comfort or fear? I am just wondering. Metta, James 29040 From: Herman Hofman Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:24pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: How many senses? Hi Htoo, I am unclear about some of what you wrote. Is physiology foolishness and stupidity? Are people who use the insights of modern physiology to make their lives more bearable foolish and stupid? Are the receptors, pathways etc panatta? Are the 5 sense doors paramattha? All the best Herman -----Original Message----- From: htootintnaing [mailto:htootintnaing@y...] Sent: Wednesday, 14 January 2004 2:50 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: How many senses? Dear Herman, Finally Buddha Sasana has to disappear because of later disciples who are foolish and stupid enough to destroy the whole Sasana. The Sasana was said to exist 5000 human years. Now it is well over 2500 years. As evrything is anicca then The Buddha Sasana is also Anicca. The wise man will follow the wise guide. To pinpoint senses there are a lot of things to be learnt. Physiology is complicated and complex and advancing and that subject is a dynamic subject. While physiology is a dynamic subject, then neurology excels physiology as neurology has to depend on physiology. There are many many sense receptors, their pathways, the place where the information in them are stored and these things are being explored and they are still endless. This happens. Because Pannatta is not real. As Pannatta is not reality, it has no dimension. So it is not amazing that following Pannatta related things will never end. The Buddha way is not just imagination. There are only 5 physical sense doors. No more than that. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi everyone, > > In Buddhism there are the classical 5 senses and the mind. Modern > physiology recognizes a vast number of senses beyond the classical 5. > There is the vestibular (sense of balance), proprioreception (sense of > location of head, body and limbs in relation to each other) as well as > the dozens of senses that react to certain levels of specific hormones > 29041 From: Herman Hofman Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 1:55pm Subject: RE: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Sarah, As I wrote to TG recently, many posts on this site fluctuate between speaking conventionally and absolutely and back again, within a very short space. Quite often it is possible to make sense out of it from the context. But other times I have to assume that either I am very confused, or that the writer is. Take the following: -----Original Message----- From: Sarah [mailto:sarahdhhk@y...] Sent: Tuesday, 13 January 2004 7:31 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Howard & All, .... S:I don't think any 'action can be performed during a single mind moment'. An action is a concept representing a long series of mind moments and co-arising mental factors, such as vitakka and vicara, and all the multiplicity of rupas being discussed, arising in kalapas (groups of rupas) and falling away all the time. ======================================================================== = H> We have recently been discussing space and time. At no time did anyone suggest time was anything but a concept. So when we are discussing rupas (absolutes) how can there be a series (concept) of them? Where did time suddenly creep in? And how can rupas (absolutes) be falling away in time (concept), all the time (concept)? ======================================================================== = ..... S:I know what you mean. The problem, I think, is that we're so used to thinking in terms of stories and actions with so little understanding of realities. It helps to remember, I think, that vitakka and vicara arise at every moment and with every citta apart from moments of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching. With all other sense door process cittas and all mind door cittas, these cetasikas, along with the universals and others according to their particular conditions, arise and fall all the time. ======================================================================== === H> Is a moment an absolute or a concept? How is it that absolutes arise and fall within concepts? ======================================================================== === .... S:As you're discussing with others, time is a concept. All that ever exists are the very brief and momentary dhammas now. Any activity consists of multitudes of namas and rupas arising and falling away. This is why, as the khandha suttas I posted yesterday indicate, there are only ever khandhas or actualities which can be directly known by insight. Time, actions, the Tathagatha, computers and elephants can only be conceptualised. .... ======================================================================== ==== H> Here you say that dhammas (absolutes) are brief. Is that briefness (brevity) a characteristic of that dhamma? To me briefness is a comparative measurement and surely that is conceptual? ======================================================================== ==== .... S:And yet we read in all the texts the references to the speed and the momentary nature of dhammas. We can also test out at this moment whether states last at all for an instant. Nothing to hold onto for even a finger-snap. ..... ======================================================================== ==== H> Same again. Speed is a comparative measurement. Is high speed a characteristic of dhammas? Or is it a characteristic of observation? Or what? ======================================================================== = .... S:On the other hand, I think it's the same issue;-). As soon as we have an idea of events and so on, it is a concept of a dhamma, rather than the dhamma itself that is the object of consciousness. ======================================================================== ==== H> Now I think I can understand, but isn't the "dhamma itself" therefore an inference and not a reality? ======================================================================== ==== S>If I'm slow on any theads or not able to continue, having retrieved the balls just as they were about to fall out of my in box, it's because we're going away at the end of next week and I'm going to be pretty busy til then. I hope others will join in or take over too;-) ======================================================================== == H> Now this I really do understand. You are speaking conventionally. In the whole paragraph!!! I hope you have an absolute wow of a time in Bangkok. :-) Metta, Sarah ====== All the best Herman 29042 From: Herman Hofman Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 2:27pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Space element a concept? Hi Nina, I am starting to think that the only confusion with dhammas is the talking about them. Dhammas are dhammas are dhammas, but when discussing there is no choice but to be conceptual. Not only the Dhamma is known by the wise for themselves, but that applies to dhammas as well. Talking about dhammas is like fighting for peace. While on the subject of talking about dhammas :-) N writing to Howard: I think that you and I are speaking about different kinds of space. You look up at the sky, thinking of a concept. When thinking of the concept space one may find that very important and great. It invites to clinging. I speak about that very small, insignificant rupa that, together with the other 27 rupas is classified in the Abhidhamma as rupakkhandha and performs the function of delimiting the kalapas. It is not worth clinging to, it is impermanent and non-self. ======================================================================== ==== H> You talk above about a very small, insignificant rupa, space. Do rupas have size? Does the rupa space have size? I always thought that the notion of size comes from extension and being delimited by something other. Is space delimited by space? ======================================================================== ==== All the best to you and Lodewijk and your father Herman PS When I imagine myself as over a hundred years old, I become unhappy. Not because of decline of health or fear of my own death, although that might change when I get closer, but because if I am over a hundred, my children will be between 70 and 80. The chance increases that my children will die while I remain alive. Not a nice thought. 29043 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 2:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) James, I fully agree with all that you are saying except when you argue that "But, I would also like to suggest to you that your viewpoint of reality being `empty' and `void' is also absurd. All viewpoints are absurd." Emptiness in my view is just another name for conditionality. It is a way of conveing the idea that there is nothing underlying that phenomena except for the conditions based on which it arose. I don't think the view of conditionality is absurd. Metta Michael >From: "buddhatrue" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi >KenO;-)) >Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:36:51 -0000 > >Hi Michael, > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" > wrote: > > Hello Sarah, > > > > Sarah; > > 1. A clear distinction is shown between worldly truths and > > realtites/actualities/the khandhas. > > > > Michael: > > A clear distinction is shown ... > >I have read this exchange between you and Sarah and I do agree with >you. However, I am not sure if the viewpoint expressed by Sarah is >the true viewpoint of the Abhidhamma and the commentaries (that is >what I argued with you but you lumped me in with others here). I >have also debated with Sarah extensively that cittas and rupas are >merely conceptual constructs, they are not real nor do they point to >something that is `real'. They are merely for the sake of >convenience to discuss and categorize phenomena. My impression thus >far, and I am sure many here will disagree, is that the Abhidhamma >cannot be truly understood in proper context without meditation >practice and is meant only for those who do meditate. Most people on >this list have only an intellectual understanding of such things, not >a direct realization. This leads them to establish a necessary >dichotomy in their minds about some things existing and some things >not. Then the clinging has switched from clinging to entities and >objects to clinging to superficial understanding of namas and rupas. >But, I would also like to suggest to you that your viewpoint of >reality being `empty' and `void' is also absurd. All viewpoints are >absurd. > >But without viewpoints we wouldn't have much to talk about now would >we?? ;-) > >Metta, James 29044 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 2:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Michael, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Beisert" wrote: > James, > > I fully agree with all that you are saying except when you argue that > > "But, I would also like to suggest to you that your viewpoint of reality > being `empty' and `void' is also absurd. All viewpoints are absurd." > > Emptiness in my view is just another name for conditionality. It is a way of > conveing the idea that there is nothing underlying that phenomena except for > the conditions based on which it arose. I don't think the view of > conditionality is absurd. > > Metta > Michael Hi Michael, Maybe I am not making myself clear enought. I am saying that all viewpoints are absurd, even the viewpoint of conditionality is absurd (even this viewpoint of mine about viewpoints is absurd!...chew on that one for a bit! ;-)). The only thing that isn't absurd is direct realization. Metta, James ps. Now you are seeing what I described before as my 'Zen influences'...;-) 29045 From: Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 10:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element a concept? Hi, Nina - Thank you very much for the following, Nina. (Sarah & Jon - I apologize for retaining Nina's post in its entirety below, but I thought it best to keep it all, so that it can be looked at in light of what I say in the following.) Nina, you mention the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta below, and you include quotes from the commentary on it. I decided to look at the sutta directly in my copy of The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, and I just don't see in the sutta what the commentary sees. It seems to me that the commentary is "Abhidhamma-bound" to an uncalled for degree. As I read this sutta, everything that I see presented is quite conventional, and that applies as much to space as it does to earth element, fire element, air element, and water element. All these items are mentioned, but all are dealt with quite conventionally with not even a hint of "Abhidhammic fragrance." I see this sutta as a straightforward one teaching non-clinging to all aspects of materiality in the conventional sense (bodily solids, liquids, air, winds, humours, cavities and apertures etc) as well as non-clinging to a variety of namas, plus considerable teaching about meditation to Rahula. One thing that I hoped you might address in the discussion of the issue of space as a rupa is the two questions I raised in my post to Htoo. The first of these pertains to space seemingly being experienced through more than one sense door. The answer which I understand Htoo to have given and you to concur with is that "that space" is mere concept, but the "real space," the paramattha dhamma, is a rupa - an unobserved rupa. But that then led to my *second* question: "Htoo, doesn't this strike you as a bit ironic, with the space that is experienced being "unreal," but the allegedly "real" space being unobservable? Hardness that is real is actually observed! Sounds that are real are actually observed! But "real" space - that's the sort of space we *cannot* observe!! (Something's wrooong here! ;-))" There is a well known saying: "Seeing is believing". But at times, it seems to me that in Abhidhamma, the statement should be "Not seeing is believing"! (Of course, as a digression, another good saying, as pertains to concepts, is "Believing is seeing"! ;-)) Now, you certainly did respond below to my questions, Nina, but I don't follow how what you say in your response actually addresses the issue raised in my second question. I apologize for persisting with this, but I just don't see how that has been actually addressed. This is probably just me missing your point!! I hope that this can be further clarified for me to help me see the plausibility of space being a rupa, or, of course, the opposite - to have my scepticism on this issue left intact. With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/13/04 2:17:34 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Dear Howard, > op 12-01-2004 06:22 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > >> > >========================== > >Space, if it is a rupa, is an odd sort of rupa. Hardness is > >experienced through the body door - only, visual objects through the eye > door > >- only, > >odors through the nose door - only, tastes through the tongue door only, > >sounds > >through the ear door - only, water element through the mind door (so it is > >said) - only. But space seems to be experienced both through the body door, > >the > >eye door, and the ear door. Could such a thing be a rupa? I think not. I > think > >that space is mere (well grounded) concept designating a particular > category > >of relations among rupas. > N: I think that you and I are speaking about different kinds of space. You > look up at the sky, thinking of a concept. When thinking of the concept > space one may find that very important and great. It invites to clinging. I > speak about that very small, insignificant rupa that, together with the > other 27 rupas is classified in the Abhidhamma as rupakkhandha and performs > the function of delimiting the kalapas. It is not worth clinging to, it is > impermanent and non-self. > The Commentaries explain in conventional terms that the manifestation of > space are cavities in the body, such as ear cavity, but we should not be led > astray and we should take this in the right sense. Their intention was > explaining in understandable language what space is: a reality. > H: Htoo, doesn't this strike you as a bit ironic, with the space that is > experienced being "unreal," but the allegedly "real" space being > unobservable? > Hardness that is real is actually observed! Sounds that are real are > actually > observed! But "real" space - that's the sort of space we *cannot* observe!! > (Something's wrooong here! ;-)) > N: Yes, something is wrong here. > Today we go again to Mahaaraahulovaadasutta. > The Buddha taught Rahula about the four Great Elements of earth, water, fire > and wind, and also about space. > We read in the Co: > Blessed One speak about the meditation subject of materiality? > He spoke so that he (Rahula) would abandon his attachment to materiality. > It must have occurred to him thus: ³Since attachment has arisen in Rahula on > account of his body, and the meditation subject on materiality was explained > to him before in brief, I shall now also make him dissect the body in > fortytwo ways and thus cause him to get rid of attachment that is dependent > on it and to attain the truth of Dhamma.² > Why did he then explain in detail the element of space? > In order to point out the derived material phenomena. > Before he had spoken about the four great Elements, not about the derived > physical phenomena. > Therefore, in order to point these out in that way, he explained in detail > the element of space. > He also made known the matter that is delimitated by the internal space {N: > space performing its function of delimitating]. > ³He proceeds to clarify matter that is delimitated by space. > The Guide explained this so that it was clear to him in that way.² > > After that he taught him to apply himself to the mental development similar > to earth, and similar to the other great Elements and space. We can admire > the structure of the sutta here: after the explanation about the Elements > the Buddha taught the application of this knowledge in daily life. The > Buddha said: > <³Apply yourself to the mental development that is like the earth, Rahula, > For when you apply yourself to the mental development that is like the > earth, Rahula, agreeable and disagreeable impressions that have arisen, > impinging on > the mind will not persist.²> > He taught the same about mental development like water, fire, wind and > space. > earth, Rahula, > agreeable and disagreeable impressions that have arisen, will not take a > lasting hold on the mind.>The same about the other Great Elements and space. > Would the Buddha teach Rahula merely a concept of space? He taught > realities, rupakkhandha and the other khandhas. We have to understand the > deep meaning of his words. We read: anywhere, > likewise, Rahula, you should cultivate the mental development that is > like space.> > The goal is detachment. > Nina. > > /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) 29046 From: Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 2:17am Subject: Applied and Sustained Concentration Lead to Ecstatic Absorption How Applied and Sustained Concentration (Vitakka And Vicara) Lead to Ecstatic Absorption (jhana) Hello Htoo Naing, Hasituppada and Khema, it is once again a pleasure to exchange messages with you. On your questions regarding Vitakka And Vicara (applied and sustained concentration), and how concentration is different from thought, as well as how I use concentration for the other reflections that are spoken of in the Sati (meditation) suttas, such as the awareness of the body (inside and out), the senses, and the mental states and mental objects. For me to explain concentration and how I use it is no small conversation, because it requires explaining a number of things, therefore I am afraid I will not be able to cover the whole subject in a single message. First let me explain how I use the term 'concentration.' It is simply a turning of the awareness to an object, say in this case the observation of the breath. Coincident to this process is an effort to still the cognitive processes of thinking, reasoning, memory and perception. In the process of engaging in concentration, the awareness can wander to other objects, so there is an effort to bring the awareness back to the object. Therefore this process is consistent with an applied and sustained effort that the Pali terms 'Vitakka And Vicara' imply. But, this is not a thought process for me. Thinking engages the cognitive process listed above, whereas what I have described suspends them, and seeks just awareness directed toward a single object. Since I am intent on ecstatic absorption (jhana), then I use the objects of awareness of the breath, body (inside and out), the senses, and the mental states and mental objects as a "home base" as Khema called it, but once charismatic manifestations (jhana-nimitta) arise, then they become the new "objects" of concentration. But, by the time the charisms (jhana-nimitta) have arisen, then the cognitive processes have fully subsided and calm abiding is thus fully established. Therefore there is no reason to keep directing and redirecting the awareness to the "object." It is as though the awareness has fused with the object, which is now, as I have said, the various charismatic manifestations or charisms (jhana-nimitta). It is at this time that the first absorption (jhana/dhyana) then naturally and inexorably leads to the second absorption, but only if one is both sensitive to charisms (jhana-nimitta), and is willing to let go of the object of concentration. In the case of the various meditations on the breath, body (inside and out), the senses, and the cognitive processes, they are just objects of meditation. I only remain with them until charisms (jhana-nimitta) have arisen. Once charisms have arisen, then the breath, body, senses and mind are no longer my object of concentration. I am as the Buddha instructed, "sensitive to pleasure," a pleasure that is "not of the senses," which are these charisms. When that pleasure arises, I ignore the sense objects that do not lead to the pleasure of ecstatic absorption (jhana/dhyana), therefore I become "secluded" from the objects of the senses. Throughout the day I practice concentration as awareness of the breath, the body (inside and out), the senses, and the mental states and mind objects. I am always aware of relinquishing any grasping and aversion as they arise. I endeavor to still the cognitive processes of thinking, reasoning, memory and perception, thus maintaining calm abiding throughout the day. And, I am always "sensitive to pleasure," a pleasure that is "not of the senses" (charisms). I begin each day with a few hours of meditation. Every day I lead at least one 1 hour public meditation, and I end each day with a couple more hours of meditation. Every time I sit charisms (jhana-nimitta) arise and fill me throughout the sit. And in this way charisms have not only become a regular feature of my daily sitting practice regimen, but they have also become a regular feature of my moment-to-moment mindfulness practice as well. Therefore my mind is calm and tranquil throughout my sits, as well as throughout the day. And, I have become saturated and suffused with charisms (jhana-nimitta) throughout my sits as well as throughout the day. This is how 30 years of daily meditation practice has led to ecstatic absorption (jhana), and a saturation in charismatic manifestations (jhana-nimitta), which have so flooded my awareness domain that the pains of aging, such as arthritis, and tooth decay, are no longer with me. And, when I have illnesses, such as the passing of kidney stones a few years ago, there is no pain, just charisms (jhana-nimitta) have replaced all of the sensations. Thus I have become saturated and suffused with a pleasure that is "not of the senses," charisms (jhana-nimitta). This is how I have become established in the fourth absorption (jhana/dhyana) as my base of awareness. Please note: I use jhana-nimitta (a Pali term) to means the various charismatic manifestations of ecstasy, or what the Buddha called "a pleasure that is not of the senses." The Buddha's discourses on meditation and awareness training (Sati) are described in these suttas (sutras): Anapanasati Sutta (MN 118) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn118.html Maha-satipatthana Sutta (DN. 22) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn22.html Satipatthana Sutta (MN 10) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn010.html I have made modifications to the translation of the above suttas to accommodate a more ecstatic absorption (jhana) appropriate rendering. If anyone is interested in this version of the translation then they are on the JSG at this URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Jhanas/files/ Thank-you for your kind interest, Jeff Brooks 29047 From: Michael Beisert Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 3:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hello James, James: Maybe I am not making myself clear enought. I am saying that all viewpoints are absurd, even the viewpoint of conditionality is absurd (even this viewpoint of mine about viewpoints is absurd!...chew on that one for a bit! ;-)). The only thing that isn't absurd is direct realization. Michael: I know what you are saying. It is a possible interpretation for conditionality/emptiness. I personally don't go that far. I think it is possible to undersand, or have a view, about conditionality, which of course will not be as deep and transforming as a direct realization but which will point someone towards the right direction. But you are in good company, TRV Murti wrote a whole book about the absurdity of any points of view - The Central Phylosophy of Buddhism. Metta Michael 29048 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 4:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Michael, Michael: But you are in good company, TRV Murti wrote a whole book about the absurdity of any points of view – The Central Phylosophy of Buddhism. James: Thanks for the tip; I haven't read it. Maybe I will search for it next time I am in the states. Nothing better than reading something that reaffirms your own absurd viewpoints!! ;-)) Metta, James 29049 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 6:33pm Subject: Re: Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Sarah and all, I hope you don't mind me jumping in to this thread to share some thoughts regarding the five aggregates (pancakkhandha), or for that matter, the five aggregates of sustenance/clinging (pancupadanakkhandha). The message is rather long though. Anyway, one way to understand what the term "five aggregates of sustenance/clinging (pancupadanakkhandha)" means is to see it as a more general and abstract term denoting all that which are dukkha. To quote the passages of Ven. Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translations in which the Buddha taught the noble truth of dukkha: Now this, bhikkhus, is the noble truth of suffering: birth is suffering, aging is suffering, illness is suffering, death suffering; union with what is displeasing is suffering; separation from what is pleasing is suffering; not to get what one wants is suffering; in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering. [1] Now this, monks, is the noble truth of stress: Birth is stressful, aging is stressful, death is stressful; sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair are stressful; association with the unbeloved is stressful, separation from the loved is stressful, not getting what is wanted is stressful. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful. [2] When the Buddha taught the noble truth of dukkha, he started with specific instances of what is dukkha and ended with the statement "in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering." /"In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful." The phrase "in brief"/"in short", in the last statement is of significance. It indicates a change from listing the specific to stating the general. If all the specific and concrete instances that are dukkha were to be stated, then there would be an infinite list and that would not be suitable for teaching the noble truth of dukkha. The Buddha stated a few specific instances of what is dukkha. After that, he stated: "in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering." /"In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful." and did not list all the specific instances that are dukkha. Doing so would take an infinite amount of time. The term "five aggregates of sustenance/clinging" can thus be understood as a general and abstract term to denote all that are dukkha in which the specific and concrete instances that the Buddha taught in the noble truth of dukkha are included. The very word "aggregate"/"khandha" reminds me of the basic notion of "set" in mathematics. Intuitively, a set is a collection of elements or objects. For example, if I need to represent all the integers in a statement, instead of writing the integer numbers out one by one, like 0, 1, -1, 2, -2, 3, -3, . . . (which would take an infinite amount of time), I could simply use the bold letter "Z" to represent the set of all integers. The idea of aggregate/khandha can be understood with that connotation of set. The five aggregates of sustenance/clinging are like five sets/collections of elements that are of sustenance/clinging. Five aggregates of sustenance/clinging are dukkha can be understood as everything in these five sets is dukkha. In that sense, birth, aging, death, not getting what one wants, sorrow, lamentation, for instances, belong to one of the five aggregates of sustenance/clinging. The union of these five aggregates of sustenance/clinging would thus be the aggregate of dukkha (dukkhakkhandha). Everything that is dukkha can be understood as belonging to either one of the five aggregates of sustenance/clinging and thus belonging to the aggregate of dukkha. Now the question is: what is it that is dukkha? The Buddha taught that what is inconstant (anicca) is dukkha. One may ask the questions regarding specific things such as computers: "are computers included in the five aggregates of sustenance/clinging?" or "are computers dukkha?" or "are computers inconstant?" I will try to summarize the views, as I understand it, on such questions as following: 1. Computers are not included in the five aggregates of sustenance/clinging because computers are pannatti, not paramattha, and five aggregates of sustenance/clinging are paramattha, not pannatti. What is pannatti is not considered inconstant and dukkha because it does not exist. Only paramattha exists. 2. Computers are included in the five aggregates of sustenance/clinging, because computers are dukkha. Computers are dukkha because they are inconstant. As I see it, the discussion on those questions would often involve the question on whether computers (or some other things such as vases, etc) exist or not. It would be useful to see what the Buddha said regarding what does not exist and what exists. Let me quote the following: At Savatthi. "Bhikkhus, I do not dispute with the world; rather, it is the world that disputes with me. A proponent of the Dhamma does not dispute with anyone in the world. Of that which the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, I too say that it does not exist. And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I too say that it exists. "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, of which I too say that it does not exist? Form that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, and I too say that it does not exist. Feeling … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, and I too say that it does not exist. "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, of which I too say that it does not exist. "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness that is impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists. [3] So regarding the question whether computers exist or not, what the Buddha said about what does not exist and what does can be of reference. May all be well and happy. Peace, Victor [1] The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. Translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi, p.1844 [2] Handful of Leaves,* Volume Two: An Anthology from the Samyutta Nikaya. Translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, p.300 [3] The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the Samyutta Nikaya. Translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi, p.949-950 * For more information on Handful of Leaves, please check http://www.sati.org/handful_of_leaves.htm#gohere2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Michael & All, > > I hope you don't mind me picking up on a few of your main contentions, > quoting brief comments from some recent posts of yours to different > people. [snip] 29050 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 7:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi James and all, James, just a quote I find might be relevant to what you were saying: Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.54 6.54 My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.) He must surmount these propositions; then he sees the world rightly. http://www.kfs.org/~jonathan/witt/t654en.html Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Michael, [snip] > > Maybe I am not making myself clear enought. I am saying that all > viewpoints are absurd, even the viewpoint of conditionality is absurd > (even this viewpoint of mine about viewpoints is absurd!...chew on > that one for a bit! ;-)). The only thing that isn't absurd is direct > realization. > > Metta, James > ps. Now you are seeing what I described before as my 'Zen > influences'...;-) 29051 From: Eznir Date: Tue Jan 13, 2004 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Dear Friends! The Lord Buddha in Majjhima Nikaya 22 'And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, "How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?" In doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. Even so monks, I have taught you the Dhamma like a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Knowing the Dhamma to be like a raft, you should let go even of [skillful] qualities, to say nothing of those that are not.' MN 22 Be Happy! eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > Hi James and all, > > James, just a quote I find might be relevant to what you were saying: > > Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 6.54 > > > 6.54 > My propositions are elucidatory in this way: he who understands me > finally recognizes them as senseless, when he has climbed out > through them, on them, over them. (He must so to speak throw away > the ladder, after he has climbed up on it.) > > He must surmount these propositions; then he sees the world rightly. > > http://www.kfs.org/~jonathan/witt/t654en.html > > Peace, > Victor > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > > Hi Michael, > [snip] > > > > Maybe I am not making myself clear enought. I am saying that all > > viewpoints are absurd, even the viewpoint of conditionality is > absurd > > (even this viewpoint of mine about viewpoints is absurd!...chew on > > that one for a bit! ;-)). The only thing that isn't absurd is > direct > > realization. > > > > Metta, James > > ps. Now you are seeing what I described before as my 'Zen > > influences'...;-) 29052 From: Eznir Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 0:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: commentaries Dear Nina & Friends! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Dhamma friend Eznir, > I do not know how to address you, what is your real name? eznir: just address me as eznir! What's in a name anyway! It's conventional! (pun intended! :-)) > > 28818\Nina: Understandable that you were put off with Abhidhamma. > > Especially if you follow details as Larry and I study now. Details > > about rupa, AND A WAY OF REASONING which must seem complicated, with those dyads. > > eznir: > > How far can one go by way of reasoning? Can the Dhamma be > > comprehended in this way? > N: .....What I said above was meant in a special context, you see. The commentators try to explain the Dhamma and they are spot on, but we have to place ourselves into their way of reasoning and this is difficult for people today. We have to go back milleniums of years. What was their intention? Why do they bring up dyads, triads, etc. eznir: I understand what you mean, Nina. But the discussion... whatever.... is being waylaid at times.... I think. The subject matter being commented upon is sometimes shelved and the focus is on what the commentry said, which afterall, is not what matters, isn't it? It is the main topic that is of concern. Note that the shifting of the focus of attention would be very subtle, from the main topic being commented upon and the commentry itself, though apparently one may be appearing to discuss the main topic! And if the commentators are not as "spot on" then I'm sure you could imagine where the discussion would lead to! Moreover, if one frequently depends on the commentry and not in the suttas when one examines the Teachings, then one loses the opportunity to develop ones "investigating-the-Dhamma" factor, which is one of the 37 Bhojjanga factors. As much emaphasis must be given to practise as to the theory/reasoning/discussion, for the verification lies therein! May you have a pleasant journey! Be Happy! eznir 29053 From: Eznir Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 1:01am Subject: Re: Direct Experience! Dear Ven. Bhante! I am trying to clarify a subtle point here Bhante. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > Dearest Eznir: > > Direct seeing is when one perceives things as they are, > (+) > > Direct experience is when one knows how things develop! > > All things in this world is dynamic & not static! > Absolutely speaking: No things Are (the same). > All phenomena may be thereby be regarded as > processes rather than entities. > > Otherwise 'I' agree: Things are NEVER as they APPEAR > or as we conceptualize them as you say. > > Knowing all phenomena to be transient mental states > is a direct experience. > > Knowing, what is apparent material Solidity macroscopically, > to be immaterial extension microscopically, > is a direct experience. > > Knowing, what is apparent material Fluidity macroscopically, > to be immaterial cohesion microscopically, > is a direct experience. > > Knowing, what appears as an attractive construction, > to be ultimately painful, to a degree even beyond death, > is a direct experience. > > Knowing, what appears as 'Personal', 'Me' or 'Mine' > to be fundamentally impersonal, selfless, coreless, > ownerless, a passing cluster void of any identity, > entity, ego, self or substance, > is a quite direct experience. > > Just perceiving by focusing on the ever-changing > transient impermanence right here, right now, > is another in itself fleeting direct experience. > > Knowing what is behind this mental curtain, > is a direct experience ... > > May we all disentangle this web of appearances. > > Thanks for this good question. > > samahita eznir: What one perceives that one comes to know. Perception arises first and Knowledge follows. Perception is structurally simpler than Knowledge. There is a subtle difference between Perception and Knowledge, isn't there Bhante? Like in 'Direct Seeing' and 'Direct Experience'. One experiences or cognizes 'Namarupa'. But 'Direct Seeing' is something beyond namarupa. It IS. Fullstop! May your practise be pleasant and progress quick! Be Happy! eznir 29054 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 2:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Angulimala Hi Vijita & All, I’m glad to see another post from you and I’ve enjoyed reading all the other posts on this thread as well, with so many interesting angles considered;-) --- teoh chee keam wrote: <..> V:> Psychologically, we have to consider few important aspects in other > suttas about King Pasenadi's personality and his response towards Buddha > on why King Pasenadi pardoned Angulimala. Could it be King Pasenadi, as > a faithfull Buddha's lay disciple, as mentioned in many suttas, > i) unable to prosecute Angulimala as he had joint the order of > Bhikkhu, as some Bhikkhus did to avoid the law, or > ii) Angulimala as a Bhikkhu, practised "No Harm". Therefore, King > Pasenadi respected him as a muni(likely,as the conversation between > Buddha and King Pasenadi), or > iii) King Pasenadi understand the situation at that time and avoid > unnecessary punishments and suffering as he is known to be a good king. .... S: ...or iv) King Pasenadi shows his great respect for the Triple Gem: “It is wonderful, venerable sir, it is marvellous how the Blessed One tames the untamed, brings peace to the unpeaceful, and leads to Nibbana those who have not attained Nibbana....” M. 86 In Nina’s series/translations on ‘Latent Tendencies’ recently posted, we read about the Buddha’s omniscient knowledge of people’s latent tendencies and biases (anusaya), his knowledge of behaviour (carita) and dispositions (adhimutti). He thoroughly understood all the wrong views in the latent tendencies and all the past wholesome and unwholesome kamma relating to present behaviour. We read that with developed understanding of conditionality, comes patience and forbearance. Also, with developed wisdom which knows the real cause of suffering, comes compassion for all who act in ignorance. The Buddha has unlimited compassion for all. Indeed, we read about how foolish anger is: ‘When a fool hates a man that has no hate, Is purified and free from every blemish, Such evil he will fine comes back on him, As does fine dust thrown up against the wind’ (Dh 125). Many good examples are given in Vism. IX, 14f, Getting Rid of Resentment. As others like Herman pointed out, ‘holding of a grievance, or the attribution of guilt does not hurt anyone but the person doing it.’ Or as Connie said so eloquently, ‘any time I hate someone, they probably couldn’t care less even if they did know, but that I was hurting myself....all those things an enemy would wish upon an enemy that anger does.’ (Thx for your personal example, Connie;-)) ... V:> Angulimala was said to be Yakkha in his past life, made him powerfull > enough to win the fight even the villagers came in big group. .... S: Also, a few more ‘deckchair’ details from the comy to the Theraagathaa, CCLV (PTS) which may be relevant to other discussions: 1.“Now because he was born vexing the king’s mind he was named Hi.nsaka. but afterwards when what was seen no more, he became known as Ahi.nsaka.” (Not necessarily any conflict when it suggests elsewhere he was named Ahi.nsaka?) 2. “He went to the Jalini forest, in Kosala, and from a cliff near the high road watched the passers-by, and rushing down smote off their fingers and hung them on a tree, till the vultures and crows had stripped the bones of flesh. Then making a garland of the fingerbones, he hung it round his shoulders as if decked for sacrifice.” (Not necessarily smelly or impossible to hang the bones only around his shoulders?) 3.”And Angulimala’s mother, of the Mantani brahmins, said to her husband: ‘Our son is a thief and committing this and that. Send for him, bid him to stop doing these things.’ but he replied: ‘I have nought to do with sons of that sort; let the king do as he will.’ Then she in love, took provisions and set out, saying: ‘I will bring my son and stop him.’ “ (The way it reads in the comy is that there is no suggestion his mother knew and failed to take action earlier??) .... V: > Regarding his injury/suffering due to things thrown accidentally to him, > that is vipaka. At this point, we do not know if his suffering is due to > new vipaka or past kamma. We may suffer kammic result either due to > direct or indirect effect. ..... The bodily suffering now must be as a result of past kamma. No new kamma, bringing new vipaka for arahants. I agree with what you say about direct and indirect effects. Well said;-) .... V: > Nothing mentioned about Angulimala then, after he had lived in > seclusion, a dhutanga monk. ..... S: In the commentary to the Dhammapada account (Bk13, story6), and referred to, I think, in Qus of King Milinda, Angulimala passed into parinibbana soon after joining the order and whilst living in seclusion, having given the well-known utterances we read in all accounts. The bhikkhus were surprised to be told by the Buddha that he had passed into parinibbana which led the Buddha to say: “He whose misdeeds are covered by good deeds, Illumines this world as does the moon freed from a cloud.” (Dhp 173). .... V: > Angulimala is a perfect example for those in doubt after repenting from > their unwholesome deeds in the past, no matter how great is the > kamma(except the 5 unpardonable). .... S: I think you and all the other posters on this thread have mentioned many useful points. Looking rather quickly at the various accounts in the texts, while different details are given, I don’t see any obvious discrepancies. As Eddie summarised, ‘unfortunately, we live in a world well dominated with idea of punishment and we are more or less influenced’. Many thanks to everyone for all the helpful reminders and especially to Christine for raising the thread and encouraging the discussion;-) Vijita, I look forward to more of your contributions. Also Eddie and everyone else too. Metta, Sarah ======= 29055 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:49am Subject: Re: Applied and Sustained Concentration Lead to Ecstatic Absorption Dear Jeff, You have distributed wide your message which is like a reply to specific people who are not of each group. Anyway Vitakka is not concentration. Vicara is not concentration. If you resist saying like that that will automatically mean that you do not understand Vitakka and Vicara. While these two Jhanic factors are not understood, it is hardly possible that a person who do not understand Jhanic factor achieve Jhana. Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, macdocaz1@a... wrote: > How Applied and Sustained Concentration (Vitakka And Vicara) Lead to Ecstatic > Absorption (jhana) > > Hello Htoo Naing, Hasituppada and Khema, it is once again a pleasure to > exchange messages with you. 29056 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: Space element Dear Nina, Thanks for your encouragement. Heartbase is a controversial subject I think. Is it Hadaya Vatthu of 28 Paramattha Rupa? Where does it exist? Is it in the heart? I am looking forward to hearing from you. I will search and read up Larry's thread later. Thanks Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > do not worry, there will be plenty of rupas to discuss, see Larry's thread. > To begin with heartbase, > heart. That is conventional again. > Nina. 29057 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 7:06am Subject: Heart base DearHtoo, I wrote some short letters on heart base a couple of years ago on the forum. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5395 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5410 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5470 Rob In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Nina, > > Thanks for your encouragement. Heartbase is a controversial subject I > think. Is it Hadaya Vatthu of 28 Paramattha Rupa? Where does it > exist? Is it in the heart? I am looking forward to hearing from you. > I will search and read up Larry's thread later. > > Thanks > > Htoo Naing > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Htoo, > > do not worry, there will be plenty of rupas to discuss, see > Larry's thread. > > To begin with heartbase, > > heart. That is conventional again. > > Nina. 29058 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 6:17am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Micheal and (Victor) I think Victor has quoted a very impt sutta and if you read carefully., dhamma EXIST and what does not exist are permanent self and I hope this will convince you what commentators wrote that things truly exist but conditioned. Khandhas exists. This solve one problem now to the next are khandhas = paramathas and are paramathas indeed irreducible or it is possible for it to be further reduce - that we will have to discuss again and again from different angles. I am patient so I hope you dont mind me bothering you about this. Victor - could you kindly quote me the relevant sutta name for this sutta - thanks in advance At Savatthi. "Bhikkhus, I do not dispute with the world; rather, it is the world that disputes with me. A proponent of the Dhamma does not dispute with anyone in the world. Of that which the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, I too say that it does not exist. And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I too say that it exists. "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, of which I too say that it does not exist? Form that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, and I too say that it does not exist. Feeling … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, and I too say that it does not exist. "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, of which I too say that it does not exist. "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness that is impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say that it exists. [3] best wishes Ken O 29059 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Dear Ken, I think Michael is aware of this. Take this post from november: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m22933.html '''.>>>Dear Michael, Could you tell us more about your view. How does it relate to 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>>>>> RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Micheal and (Victor) > > I think Victor has quoted a very impt sutta and if you read > carefully., dhamma EXIST and what does not exist are permanent self > and I hope this will convince you what commentators wrote that things > truly exist but conditioned. Khandhas exists. This solve one > problem now to the next are khandhas = paramathas and are paramathas > indeed irreducible or it is possible for it to be further reduce - > that we will have to discuss again and again from different angles. > I am patient so I hope you dont mind me bothering you about this. > > Victor - could you kindly quote me the relevant sutta name for this > sutta - thanks in advance > > > > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is > impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the > world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling > … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness that is > impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the > world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. > "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists. > [3] > > > best wishes > Ken O 29060 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 8:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Ken, > I think Michael is aware of this. Take this post from november: > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m22933.html > '''.>>>Dear Michael, Hi Ken O and Robert K (and Victor), Victor has provided a very important sutta, I am glad that you appreciate it. However, Victor being the clever minx that he is ;-) failed to provide his viewpoint of this sutta. I believe that you both have misinterpreted this sutta; please allow me to explain and provide another sutta that more clearly demonstrates the Buddha's position. The important part of this sutta is the beginning: "Bhikkhus, I do not dispute with the world; rather, it is the world that disputes with me. A proponent of the Dhamma does not dispute with anyone in the world. Of that which the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, I too say that it does not exist. And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I too say that it exists." SN, 22, 93 "Flowers" In other words, the Buddha is going to use conventional language of `existing' and `not existing', just as other people do, so as to not dispute with them (obviously there are no Buddhas who post on this list! ;-)). However, he did not truly believe in 'existence' or 'non-existence' of anything, khandas included, and saw beyond such dualistic concepts. Let me quote another important sutta which provides a counter-point: SN, 12, 15(5) "Dwelling at Savatthi... Then Ven. Kaccayana Gotta approached the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, 'Right view, right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?" "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases. But one such as this does not get involved with or cling to these attachments, clingings, fixations of awareness, biases, or obsessions; nor is he resolved on 'my self.' He has no uncertainty or doubt that, when there is arising, only stress is arising; and that when there is passing away, only stress is passing away. In this, one's knowledge is independent of others. It is to this extent, Kaccayana, that there is right view. …" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-015.html Metta, James 29061 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 9:02am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hello KenO, KenO: I think Victor has quoted a very impt sutta and if you read carefully., dhamma EXIST and what does not exist are permanent self and I hope this will convince you what commentators wrote that things truly exist but conditioned. Khandhas exists. This solve one problem now to the next are khandhas = paramathas and are paramathas indeed irreducible or it is possible for it to be further reduce - that we will have to discuss again and again from different angles. I am patient so I hope you dont mind me bothering you about this. Michael: The sutta in summary states that: Khandhas that are permanent – do not exist Khandhas that are impermanent – exist I never said that dhammas do not exist. What I say is that they exist subject to conditionality and not as an ultimate reality. Something which is impermanent, continuously changing can only exist in a conventional sense, i.e. can be experienced, performs functions, but do not exist in an ultimate sense, it is impossible for something impermanent to be an ultimate reality. Because an ultimate reality has something in it that makes it qualify as an ultimate reality. And that something is an essence. Remember the Kaccayanagotta Sutta. The Buddha said people believe things can exist or not exist, and he taught conditionality. He rejected the first two. So when the Buddha says exists it is always, always, within the context of dependent origination. Who sees dependent origination sees the Dhamma. Metta Michael 29062 From: Michael Beisert Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 9:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hello RobertK, I have already sent a message to Ken on this issue. But just to clarify again, the Buddha taught dependent origination and any affirmation by him about existence has to be taken in the context of dependent origination. In causality things do exist, they can be experienced, but they do not exist in an ultimate sense. That is the difference. Metta Michael >From: "rjkjp1" >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> >Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 15:18:43 -0000 > >Dear Ken, >I think Michael is aware of this. Take this post from november: >http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m22933.html >'''.>>>Dear Michael, >Could you tell us more about your view. How does it relate to 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>>>>> >RobertK > 29063 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:02am Subject: heartbase, note 4 c heartbase, note 4 c Follows after the footnote 26. U. Narada gives examples trying to explain why the material base is located within the heart. He gives his personal views. When there is grief, He also explains about the brain: N: He tries to explain the heart as centre, versus the brain theory, but mixing medical terms with realities may be confusing. We have to remember that the heartbase is a subtle rupa to be known only through the mind-door. When we believe that we notice the heartbase through the bodysense, it is only thinking about the heart. We may cling to our heart instead of understanding the reality of the rupa that is heartbase. It is helpful that the Patthana only uses the term: that rupa. This is the lesson we can learn. U. Narada cites places of the Patthana where the heartbase occurs as dependence condition, at birth and throughout life. At the moment of birth the heart-base arises simultaneously with the rebirth-consciousness, and during life, the arising of citta is dependent on the heartbase that arose together with the citta immediately preceding it. We have to remember that rupa is weak at its arising moment and that it can only condition nama after it has arisen, during its moments op presence. Kamma keeps on producing the heartbase throughout life during the three moments of citta: its arising moment, the moment of its presence and the moment of its falling away. At the time of dying, the last cittas depend on one heartbase. U Narada: < It is like many persons sitting astride an old man who is very weak. For the heart-base at the time of dying is very weak and many consciousnesses have to depend on it, and it ceases with the ceasing of death-consciousness. The simultaneous ceasing of this materiality with consciousness is known as birth. (Note that the simultaneous arising of this materiality with consciousness is known as birth in the five aggregates planes.) > Heart-base can condition citta by: base-object- prenascence-dependence condition. It is prenascent, it is base, it can also be the object. In the Patthana it is explained that it can be the object of insight or of lobha: ³ (One) practises insight into impermanency, suffering, impersonality... enjoys and delights in the internal (heart-base). Taking it as object, arises lust, arises wrong views, arises doubt, arises restlessness, arises grief.² This shows that a rupa that can be experienced only through the mind-door is not only experienced by insight, but it can also be experienced by akusala citta. U Narada, p. 33: during the process of dying: ******* (Conclusion of notes) Nina. 29064 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Dear James, op 13-01-2004 21:42 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > > Nina: Falling away is falling away, and it is just ignorance and > clinging which holds on and does not even want to see that when the > conditions disappear the conditioned phenomena completely disappear, > at once, in a very radical way, never to come back. > > James: This is so very true! This is what I have seen in my > meditation practice which terrifies me! Have you known this > directly? N: No, I do not even realize the first stage of tender insight, knowing the difference between nama and rupa, and thus, how could the falling away of one nama or rupa at a time, not mixed, be realized. J: Do such thoughts/knowledge give you comfort or fear? N: I can only *think* about it: it is as it is. I asked Lodewijk: he finds it fearful. It is hard to imagine how it is, he said, but the consequences are frightening. And, he added: you need the perfection of truthfulness: the truth and nothing but the truth. When citta falls away there are conditions for the arising of a succeeding one. When rupa falls away, it is replaced so long as there are conditions. Thus it is difficult to realize that a new reality is not the same anymore, it may be very similar. I was thinking of Michael who takes to heart the avoidance of eternalism and annihilation view. The seeing of conditions causes the balance, the Middle Way, as he also mentioned. Visuddhimagga, XVII, 310: explains about seeing the linking of cause and fruit: As to fear: it depends on the context. It may be wholesome, like seeing the disadvantage and danger of akusala. But then, it is not accompanied by unhappy feeling. Feeling is predominant and this is a means to recognize whether there is wholesome fear or unwholesome fear. As to the latter, this is aversion which has many shades: anger, being upset, sadness, being afraid. This is not to be pursued, but when it arises it can be known that it is conditioned. We have the latent tendency of aversion and this conditions it time and again. Thus, when there is understanding there cannot be at the same time the negative kind of fear, there is no unhappy feeling, and this can be verified even now, even when it has not yet reached the stages of insight. For example, when we reflect on suttas. We read, Vis. XX, 102: Here is the key to the dilemma, I think. More about fear, and this is helpful after the frightening figurative languge about monsters, etc. Vis. XXI, 32: Thus, simply the mere judgement. The Buddha taught the Dhamma for the happiness of beings, not in order to make them fearful. Nina. 29065 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vism.XIV 60 (3 of 4), note 3 c heartbase Dear James, I tried to add more about this subject in the note 4c. I shall now be rather brief, maybe more after Bgk. op 12-01-2004 00:23 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > What you have > quoted here from the Vism doesn't specify the conditioning dhamma(s) > for heart-base, N: Kamma. J: how it is strengthened or weakened by pre- > conditioning and post-conditioning dhammas N: It is weak at the end of life. J: or how it relates to > insight/dependent origination/samsara/nibbana. N: it can be object of insight. Not seeing it for self. This already includes:dependent origination. When insight is fully developed it leads to the experience of nibbana and finally to the end of samsara. J: (I want to know more > of the `Big Picture' in this regard ;-). N: that is always good and helpful. Larry can help as well. Nina. 29066 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:02am Subject: sutta, space, etc. Hi Howard, You brought up very good points about sutta reading, the heart of the matter. To pay due attention I need time, not sure whether this is after Bgk perhaps. Actually this point was discussed last time in bgk, see my But, it never is enough, always more to it. As to subtle rupa as object through the mind-door: see heartbase. My answer to you was insufficient: even with lobha, thus, not with insight, it can be known. Don't ask me how and when. Help! help! Sarah, another point for Bgk to discuss. And also about the approach to sutta reading, with an Abhidhammic flavour, I add: and thus, with a satipatthanic flavour. Note the words: and thus. Here is the whole dilemma in a nutshell. I love the subject. About unproduced rupa, space: I understood from Vis. it can still be seen as originated from the four causes.In Vis. XIV, 79: All the rest: includes space. Now I read in U. Narada, p. 13: about non- concrete matter: it is Thus, I would stress: not directly, keeping in mind that it is not concrete matter. Nina. 29067 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:02am Subject: Latent tendencies, ch 1, no 5 Latent tendencies, ch 1, no 5 2. The latent tendencies have ³arisen² in the sense of ³having obtained a soil² [11] (bhumiladdhuppanna). This refers to the defilements that cannot yet be eradicated and are present in their own soil. First of all we should study the text that explains the meaning of the term ³arisen², uppanna, in the Commentary to the ³Dhammasangani² the ³Expositor² (Book I, Part II, Ch I, 67): ³Herein its word-definition: Œpresent or existing¹ is called uppanna, because it has arrived at the portal, so to speak, of genesis, etc. , after the end of the previous state [12] . This word uppanna has many meanings: Œpast,¹ Œgetting,¹ Œuprisen,¹ Œnot discarded,¹ Œnot completely cut off,¹ Œthe totality of the three instants.¹ In such passages as, ŒBhikkhus, at that time Kakusandha, the Blessed One, the Saint has arisen in the world¹- uppanna is used in the sense of Œpast¹. ŒTo the elder Ånanda has arisen a superfluous robe¹- here uppanna means Œgetting¹. ŒEven, bhikkhus, as a strong wind at intervals disperses a great mass of clouds that have arisen¹- here upanna means Œuprisen¹. ŒThe wandering of the mind which has arisen is difficult to remove; (mindfulness on respiration) then and there causes evil, i.e., immoral states, to disappear every time they have arisen,- here upanna means Œnot discarded¹. ŒOne who cultivates, practises many times the Ariyan Eightfold Path causes at intervals evil, i.e., immoral, states to disappear then and there every time they have arisen¹ - here uppanna means Œnot cut off¹. In the catechism, ŒIs a thing arisen in the course of generation ? Yes¹--uppanna has the meaning of Œreached the totality of the three instants,¹ Œis existing¹, or Œis present¹. ...² From these text quotations we can see that the word Œuppanna¹, arisen, has many meanings. But here in the sense of ³arisen² in the sense of ³having obtained a soil² (bhumiladdhuppanna), it means: not cut off. ³Arisen in the sense of having obtained a soil² refers to the defilements which have not been eradicated and which have obtained a soil. It does not mean that defilements who have their own soil arise with the akusala citta. In the Commentary to the ³Book of Analysis², the ³Dispeller of Delusion², Ch 8, Classification of the Right Efforts, Suttanta Division, 1448, it is said: ³But the five aggregates are called the plane of insight. These are divided into past, future and present. But the defilements inhering in these are not to be said to be past, future or present; inhering in the past aggregates, they are unabandoned. Inhering in the future aggregates and in the present aggregates, they are also unabandoned. This is called Œarisen having obtained a plane¹. Hence the ancients said: ŒThe defilements which are unabolished in this or that plane are counted as arisen having obtained a soil¹.² Footnotes: 11. A fertile soil. They are potential defilements in the sense of possessing a fertile soil for their arising. 12. There are three moments of citta: the moment of its arising, of its presence and of its falling away. ***** Nina. 29068 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:01am Subject: Re: Heart base Dear Robert, Thanks for your old messages and your links. It is clear and intelligible. But the last link is not in post form. It is in a reply form like >>..>>.. Thanks again for your kindness to save my time. With Metta, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > DearHtoo, > I wrote some short letters on heart base a couple of years ago on > the forum. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5395 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5410 > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/5470 > Rob > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > > Dear Nina, > > > > Thanks for your encouragement. Heartbase is a controversial > subject I > > think. 29069 From: Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 6:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi, Nina (and James) - In a message dated 1/14/04 1:42:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > Dear James, > op 13-01-2004 21:42 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > > > >Nina: Falling away is falling away, and it is just ignorance and > >clinging which holds on and does not even want to see that when the > >conditions disappear the conditioned phenomena completely disappear, > >at once, in a very radical way, never to come back. > > > >James: This is so very true! This is what I have seen in my > >meditation practice which terrifies me! Have you known this > >directly? > N: No, I do not even realize the first stage of tender insight, knowing the > difference between nama and rupa, and thus, how could the falling away of > one nama or rupa at a time, not mixed, be realized. > > J: Do such thoughts/knowledge give you comfort or fear? > N: I can only *think* about it: it is as it is. I asked Lodewijk: > he finds it fearful. It is hard to imagine how it is, he said, but the > consequences are frightening. And, he added: you need the perfection of > truthfulness: the truth and nothing but the truth. > When citta falls away there are conditions for the arising of a succeeding > one. When rupa falls away, it is replaced so long as there are conditions. > Thus it is difficult to realize that a new reality is not the same anymore, > it may be very similar. > I was thinking of Michael who takes to heart the avoidance of eternalism and > annihilation view. > The seeing of conditions causes the balance, the Middle Way, as he also > mentioned. > Visuddhimagga, XVII, 310: explains about seeing the linking of cause and > fruit: understanding the unbrokenness of the continuity that occurs through the > linking of cause and fruit. And one who sees it wrongly clings to the > eternity view by apprehending identity in the non-interruption of the > continuity that occurs through the linking of cause and fruit. > > As to fear: it depends on the context. It may be wholesome, like seeing the > disadvantage and danger of akusala. But then, it is not accompanied by > unhappy feeling. Feeling is predominant and this is a means to recognize > whether there is wholesome fear or unwholesome fear. As to the latter, this > is aversion which has many shades: anger, being upset, sadness, being > afraid. This is not to be pursued, but when it arises it can be known that > it is conditioned. We have the latent tendency of aversion and this > conditions it time and again. > Thus, when there is understanding there cannot be at the same time the > negative kind of fear, there is no unhappy feeling, and this can be verified > even now, even when it has not yet reached the stages of insight. For > example, when we reflect on suttas. > We read, Vis. XX, 102: him through seeing rise and fall according to condition owing to his > discovery of the inability of states to have mastery exercised over them. > Then he more thoroughly abandons the self view.> > Here is the key to the dilemma, I think. > More about fear, and this is helpful after the frightening figurative > languge about monsters, etc. > Vis. XXI, 32: or does it not fear? It does not fear. For it is simply the mere judgement > that past formations have ceased, present ones are ceasing, and future ones > will cease.> Thus, simply the mere judgement. The Buddha taught the Dhamma > for the happiness of beings, not in order to make them fearful. > Nina. > ============================== I have experienced anicca at a fairly fine level, though not, I believe, at the finest level possible (whatever that level may be), and I didn't happen to find that terrifying, but that may well be so because I experienced it *only* in bodily sensation. Were I to experience radical impermanence in allthings at such a fine level, it might well be another matter - it might well be truly terrifying. I *have* briefly experienced anatta - in the partial form of no sense of personal self and of the complete impersonality of all experience, and that was entirely terrifying, though most worthwhile. I suspect that if one were well practiced in the jhanas, if one had mastery of the jhanas, then one would have acquired a basis of calm and equanimity, so that even the deepest experiences of anicca and anatta would be without fear. And that would be an immense benefit, for without fear, such insight events would not be run away from and short-circuited, but would be permitted to continue and develop further, leading to great things. 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) 29070 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:07am Subject: Re: heartbase, note 4 c Dear Nina, Thanks for your notes on heart basis. RobertK has linked me with 3 messages at DSG that appeared a couple of years ago. Your notes are excellent and I like it and it makes sense at least for me. With Metta, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > heartbase, note 4 c > > Follows after the footnote 26. > (Conclusion of notes) > Nina. 29071 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 1:13pm Subject: Re: On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Nina and Howard, Thank you both for attempting to answer my questions. I am really just trying to figure out why I have this fear reaction and what I might do to stop it; how I might view it to make it go away. It has become a significant roadblock to my practice. I feel like I am in a limbo of some sort. Perhaps this is not the best forum (actually, I know it isn't) but my isolation here in Cairo makes me somewhat needy for input. What you both seem to be saying is that I shouldn't be having this fear reaction. That could very well be true. I know that something is wrong or I wouldn't be asking. I don't have it when I notice just the arising and falling of bodily sensations, I have it when I notice the arising and falling of mind or consciousness. It happened quite by accident really. I was concentrating on body sensations, just as they occur throughout the body when I started to think that I wasn't focusing on them well enough. I seemed like my mind was out of focus or something. I worked for several days on this during a meditation retreat when I suddenly noticed that the reason I couldn't focus to the extent that I wanted is because my mind, the part that was doing the concentrating, was changing also. I could see that my `view' of a particular sensation would change quickly from one aspect of that sensation to another (around, inside, close, far away, etc.). I tried to stop this but I couldn't. I then let it just happen and started to observe the consequences. I noticed that my mind focused on the sensation that arose, changed while observing that sensation, and then seemed to `disappear' shortly after the sensation stopped. It would then again focus on another sensation when it arose after that, but the realization that my mind `disappeared' for that moment shook me to my very core and filled my mind with fear! Obviously, I couldn't concentrate very well after that happened and usually had to stop the meditation session. In subsequent tries, when I went that deep into my concentration, the fear would arise again. Pretty soon I started to avoid going into that deep level of concentration and then pretty soon after that I started to avoid meditating at all. I have started again and I am having somewhat positive consequences of being able to stay with the arising and falling of the mind for a longer duration, but it is difficult. I still don't think I am meditating like I should (I don't meditate everyday…I write these posts instead! ;-) Now my meditation is like an overwhelming frenzy of arising and falling sensations and jumping mind moments…like when you boil water and bubbles continuously break the surface, it is a lot like that. I can only maintain concentration during this mass pandemonium for a while before feeling mentally overwhelmed and perplexed (like after going on a fast amusement park ride ;-). There is also some lingering fear. Sometimes I wonder why I have let myself get this far. Howard, you are probably right, if I had practiced Jhana I probably wouldn't be having these experiences, it would be wonderful and blissful and mind expanding until the end, but I chose to practice Vipassana instead. So now I have to go through the gutter! ;-)) Vippasana is what I was first introduced to, what I clicked with, and what I have stuck with. It is my karma. Plus, Jhana requires much more strenuous dedication to meditation than I am willing to give. Oh well, I will see how it goes. Thanks again both of you for the input. I hope I haven't rambled on too much (Gosh, I feel like this is `Buddhist True Confessions' or something! ;-)) Metta, James 29072 From: Herman Hofman Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 1:19pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Ken, From Nyanatiloka's dictionary - section on khandas. "The fact ought to be emphasized here that these 5 groups, correctly speaking, merely form an abstract classification by the Buddha, but that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real existence, since only single representatives of these groups, mostly variable, can arise with any state of consciousness. For example, with one and the same unit of consciousness only one single kind of feeling, say joy or sorrow, can be associated and never more than one. Similarly, two different perceptions cannot arise at the same moment. Also, of the various kinds of sense-cognition or consciousness, only one can be present at a time, for example, seeing, hearing or inner consciousness, etc. Of the 50 mental formations, however, a smaller or larger number are always associated with every state of consciousness, as we shall see later on. Some writers on Buddhism who have not understood that the five khandha are just classificatory groupings, have conceived them as compact entities ('heaps', 'bundles'), while actually, as stated above, the groups never exist as such, i.e. they never occur in a simultaneous totality of all their constituents. Also those single constituents of a group which are present in any given body- and -mind process, are of an evanescent nature, and so also their varying combinations. Feeling, perception and mental formations are only different aspects and functions of a single unit of consciousness. They are to consciousness what redness, softness, sweetness, etc. are to an apple and have as little separate existence as those qualities." All the best Herman -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn2k@y...] Sent: Thursday, 15 January 2004 1:17 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Micheal and (Victor) I think Victor has quoted a very impt sutta and if you read carefully., dhamma EXIST and what does not exist are permanent self and I hope this will convince you what commentators wrote that things truly exist but conditioned. Khandhas exists. This solve one problem now to the next are khandhas = paramathas and are paramathas indeed irreducible or it is possible for it to be further reduce - that we will have to discuss again and again from different angles. I am patient so I hope you dont mind me bothering you about this. Victor - could you kindly quote me the relevant sutta name for this sutta - thanks in advance best wishes Ken O 29073 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 1:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Ken O and all, Ken, the name of the sutta which the quote is from is Flowers, in Samyutta Nikaya, Khandhavagga, Khandhasamyutta (22.94). Peace, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Micheal and (Victor) [snip] > Victor - could you kindly quote me the relevant sutta name for this > sutta - thanks in advance > > > > At Savatthi. "Bhikkhus, I do not dispute with the world; rather, it > is the world that disputes with me. A proponent of the Dhamma does > not dispute with anyone in the world. Of that which the wise in the > world agree upon as not existing, I too say that it does not exist. > And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I > too say that it exists. > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > not existing, of which I too say that it does not exist? Form that > is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this the wise > in the world agree upon as not existing, and I too say that it does > not exist. Feeling … Perception … Volitional formations … > Consciousness that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to > change: this the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, and I > too say that it does not exist. > "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as not > existing, of which I too say that it does not exist. > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is > impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the > world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling > … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness that is > impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the > world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. > "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists. > [3] > > > best wishes > Ken O 29074 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 7:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi RobK Thanks - Then I am confounded by his stance that nothing truly exist. - then that IMHO his preception of existence will lean toward nihistic views. I have earlier posed a qn to him when we experience the mental fabrication, does that experience exist or dont exist. Dhamma that exist out of conditions , is still existence - to me we cannot say it does not exist bc it will not be congruent with what Buddha taught. best wishes Ken O --- rjkjp1 wrote: > Dear Ken, > I think Michael is aware of this. Take this post from november: > http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m22933.html > '''.>>>Dear Michael, > Could you tell us more about your view. How does it relate to 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>>>>> > RobertK > > 29075 From: Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi, Ken (and Robert and Michael) - In a message dated 1/14/04 6:09:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, ashkenn2k@y... writes: > Hi RobK > > Thanks - Then I am confounded by his stance that nothing truly > exist. - then that IMHO his preception of existence will lean toward > nihistic views. I have earlier posed a qn to him when we experience > the mental fabrication, does that experience exist or dont exist. > Dhamma that exist out of conditions , is still existence - to me we > cannot say it does not exist bc it will not be congruent with what > Buddha taught. > > > best wishes > Ken O > ======================= I hope I'm not putting words into Michael's mouth, but it seems to me that he is using the terms 'existence' and 'nonexistence' as they were used by the Buddha in the Kaccayangotta Sutta, and as picked up by Nagarjuna centuries later, to wit: 'Existence' of something means self-existence, unconditional and absolute existence "from its own side", and 'nonexistence' means the diametrical opposite, namely no existence at all, being nothing at all, being at best imagined. In that sutta, but not in all suttas, that is how these words are used. Now, don't we all agree that IN THESE SENSES (!), paramattha dhammas such as hardness, visual objects, feelings, volition, and awareness are neither existent nor nonexistent? Don't we also agree, however, that each of these phenomena does truly arise dependent on conditions, thus having a conditional, dependent existence for a period, later to cease? Don't we agree that the existence really is a of kind of existence (else how could we experience it) but is neither inherent nor absolute, for if it were, if it were an independent existence, then the subsequent cessation could not occur? If all that is so, if we agree on all that, then it seems to me that with regard to so called paramattha dhammas we are all in agreement with regard to matters of existence except for terminology. It seems to me that while we think we are differing on substance, what we actually differ on is merely form - we are mistaking terminological differences for substantive differences. 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) 29076 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 4:53pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Michael k: So far we have agreed on a few things, exist out of conditions, dhammas are distinct and the characteristics of dhamma is inseparable from the dhamma itself. What you disagree that dhamma is not instrinsic to the the arisen dhamma k: I have said many times ultimate reality is that it cannot be reduce further - that it what it meant and nothing else. If your prefer I would use the world emphrical or the most basic. I think your notion and attachment to the viewpoint that ultimate reality is something that arise on its own is something that you had and not that of the commentary stand. I have already in a two times quote you two different quotes from the commentary to prove it is conditioned and empty, yet I have not seen you quote those commentary that support your case. I personally feel that you are very unfair to the commentary bc in the first place did you really read the commentary. Or are you basing your commentary on others pples viewpoint. k: Secondly you also cannot logically disprove that feeling is irreducible and if you can find in the sutta that feelings can be further break down into parts, I will give three bows to you. The assumption that it can be further reduce is not supported anywhere in the suttas and again this assumption is based on your personal viewpoint which is unfair to the commentary. k: Thirdly you also cannot logically prove that characteristics that arise out of the dhammas are independent of the dhamma. The usage of this word intrinsic has been many times emphasis by me not meaning of an independent essence and I have also provide dictionary definition of it. Yet your stand is still basing on your viewpoint that it is independent which again not fair bc you prefer your own definition. kind regards Ken O 29077 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 9:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element a concept? Hi Herman, We usually see each other just from afar. Thanks for writing. I am not in a mood to debate much, though you make good points. op 13-01-2004 23:27 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofman@t...: > You talk above about a very small, insignificant rupa, space. Do > rupas have size? Does the rupa space have size? I always thought that > the notion of size comes from extension and being delimited by something > other. Is space delimited by space? N: Space itself delimits. Talking about size: you are very scientifical, I am not :-) But, O,O, I am comparing here, and thus banner conceit creeps in before we realize it. H: When I imagine myself as over a hundred years old, I become unhappy. Not > because of decline of health or fear of my own death, although that > might change when I get closer, but because if I am over a hundred, my > children will be between 70 and 80. The chance increases that my > children will die while I remain alive. Not a nice thought. N: Yes, we consider that too, he may survive all of us. Thanks for your good wishes, but his mind is up and down. The music helps to bring him back. He survives many dogs, and his Husky Sibi is very special: one brown and one blue eye. When the Music is Bach and older, she lies flat, eyes open, listening. Once Lodewijk played Schubert, and then Sibi ran out slamming the door. Nice talking to you, and best regards from Lodewijk, Nina. 29078 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 9:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] HTOO: heart base. Dear Htoo, I added notes to Larry's thread, but since you have so many Emails it may be difficult to trace. It is hadaya vatthu, and in the Patthana called: that rupa, without specification. Among the 28 rupas. In earlier days there were flaming articles about heart, even Rhys Davids time. People were making a big issue out of it. (See Compendium, at end). Perhaps difficult for people who have strong believes in brain. Nina. op 14-01-2004 14:53 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: Heartbase is a controversial subject I > think. Is it Hadaya Vatthu of 28 Paramattha Rupa? Where does it > exist? Is it in the heart? I am looking forward to hearing from you. > I will search and read up Larry's thread later. 29079 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 9:53pm Subject: Heart base Dear Htoo, I edited this old post to make it easier to read for you. In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Robert Kirkpatrick <> > > > The visuddhimagga (viii, 111)says about hadaya-vatthu (heart > > basis): > > they describe the heart and then note that inside the heart > > "there is hollow the size of a punnaga seeds bed where half a > > pastata measure of blood is kept, with which as their support > > the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur." > > Note that it is not the heart itself that is the hadaya-vatthu > > NOR is it the blood inside the heart but rather as the > > Paramatthamanjusa (see vis.xiii note 5 ) says "the heart basis > > occurs with this blood as its support". > > ************************************************************ > > Ranjith: > > I have read this part of the Visuddimagga written in Sinhala. > > Sinhala > > version used the word "patha" in place of "pastata". In > > Sinhala, > > the 'patha' > > is a measure for liquid which accounts for about 100 mili > > liters. Therefore, > > half a 'patha' could be about 50 ml. My belief is the human > > heart contains > > much more quantity of blood in it at any given time. If we > > want > > to take it > > as it is probably, we can assume that the 'Vinnana' can > > resides > > in the > > hadaya-vatthu' as long as there is half a patha of blood in > > there. > > > > ************************************************************ Robert: You see the actual hadaya-vatthu is incredibly sublime - in scientific measure it wouldn't even amount to a tiny fraction of a gram. It might even be so refined as to be unmeasuarable by > > scientific instruments. > > ************************************************************ > > Ranjith: > > In this statement what do you refer to by the word of > > hadaya-vatthu? > > > > > > > > ************************************************************ Dear Ranjith, What is essential to realise is that hadaya-vatthu (heart base) is not the heart nor is it the blood in the heart that we can see. It is a special type of rupa that is conditioned only by kamma and it arises in association with some of the blood in the heart. In the space of a flash of lightning more than a billion moments of hadaya-vatthu have arisen and fallen away. If we think of heart in conventional terms (and mistake this for hadaya-vatthu) we are lost in the world of concept- and will not understand the deep meaning in the Visuddhimagga. _____________________________________________________________ > > Ranjith: However, I still can not understand what answers I have for > > following > > questions. > > > > If the seat of the Vinnana is the hadaya-vatthu; > > > > 1. What would happen to the Vinnana during the time of an open > > heart surgery > > where the heart is inactive for the function of pumping blood? > > > > 2. Does the Vinnana get changed from one heart tissue to > > another > > in case of > > the heart transplant? > > > > 3. Where does Vinnana reside during the period of tissue > > transition (several > > hours)? > > > > 4. In case of using an artificial heart, we can assume that > > engineers do not > > make any provision for the tiny heart hole' as they are not > > aware of the > > requirement. But we know the person who carry the 'heart pump' > > live > > normally. In this case what happens to the Vinnana? > > _______________________________________________ Robert:None of this can be surprising if we understand hadaya-vatthu. That special kammic matter will arise wherever there is the suitable conditions, including blood (or even a blood substitute). Although now, for us, it arises inside the body inside the heart, it can certainly arise in a pump, or anywhere suitable. Vinnana lasts even a shorter time than the heartbase so there is no question of it going anywhere . Vinnana has no time to go anywhere- it can't change from tissue to anywhere. It arises, performs its function (depending on the type of vinnana) and immediatley falls away. But it conditions the next vinnana to arise. It is this continuity that deceives us into believing that things can last. Even if we think something lasts only for a split second we are still caught up in vipallasa of permanence. It is all much more ephemeral than that and so only vipassana that insights (not us) can understand the difference between nama and rupa and so overcome doubt on these matters. This applies also to the other sense organs (pasada rupa). The Atthasalini remarks that the very purpose of using the term pasada is to dismiss the popular misconception of what we think an eye or an ear is. (see karunadasa p45)The actual sensitive matter in the eye and ear is very refined. If someone dies then the ear-sense and eye sense (sotapasada and cakkhu-pasada ) are immediately no longer produced (they are produced by kamma only) yet one would not notice much outward change looking at the eye and ear(at least for the first few minutes before decomposition sets in). The same applies to the heart - the blood in the heart would have the same volume after death and yet the hadaya-vatthu is no longer present. > > ************************************************************ > > Ranjith:Yes, the 'pasada-rupa' is not the organ itself. But I > > think it is the name > > given to the ability of the 'rupa' (organ) to receive an > > 'arammana' in a > > specific form and translate that into another form of 'rupa' > > to > > send the > > message to 'Vinnana'(consciousness) which is constantly > > monitoring the 'six > > sens doors' for inputs. I have shown this process clearly in > > the > > diagram I > > have posted sometimes ago. > > ________________ Robert: The pasada rupa doesn't translate into anything. It arises and performs its function which is to be the base and meeting point for cakkhu-vinnana to arise and contact the rupa which is visible object. It is so anatta- so uncontrollable. the pasada is conditioned, the cakkhu vinnana is conditioned by different conditions, the rupa which is visible object (vanayatana or rupayatana) is conditioned by different conditions again. All of them so ephemeral and yet they all arise and meet. That is all life is- through different doors. Because of deep ignorance we imagine that we can control this process. Seeing into this process is understanding paticcasamupada. It is so deep and yet sadly these days we have people who can think about anatta or have unusual experiences while meditating and believe this means they have had insight. Very hard to help. ________________ > > Ranjith:When a person die, all pasada rupas 'appear' to die > > immediately. But they > > don't. What dies is the Mind so that it can no longer monitor > > the sense > > doors and receive arammanas. This happens immediately after > > the > > death. That > > is the reason for me to use the words "permanent separation of > > the Mind from > > the Matter" to describe the death. However, the ability of > > some > > of those > > sense organs to function normally remain intact for sometime. > > That is how > > the surgeons use the Eye tissue of a dead person to transplant > > into another > > person, giving the vision to the second one. Removal of the > > eye > > tissue can > > take place even an hour after the death. I am aware of a > > situations where a > > medical team has recovered eyes of a dead man few hours after > > his death as > > the man died at home and relatives did not call the nearest > > Eye > > Bank for > > hours. > > > > _________________ Robert: This is mixing conventional thinking with Dhamma and so confusions occur. You write "When a person die, all pasada rupas 'appear' to die immediately. But they don't. What dies is the Mind so that it can no longer monitor the sense doors and receive arammanas. This happens immediately after the death." No. Immediately after cuticitta (death consciousness) arises (not even a split second delay)there are no more of any of the sense bases. They are all produced by kamma and already patisandicitta has arisen in a new existence - maybe in another world and another plane far from here. But the eyes, ears and so forth - these organs where the pasada arises still exist, are still visible, because they are not conditioned solely by kamma. And certainly they can act as a support for new pasada rupa -conditioned by anothers kamma. That is why transplants can work. If this is still not clear please ask more as these subtle points where conventional ideas and the sublime Dhamma intersect can show us much about the clinging that there is to concept and story. >robert 29080 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 9:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Howard I agree with you but does Michael agree to it. I think he does not think so, he think ultimate reality is some kind of bogus, an independent entity ;-). best wishes Ken O . It seems to me that > while we > think we are differing on substance, what we actually differ on is > merely form > - we are mistaking terminological differences for substantive > differences. > > With metta, > Howard 29081 From: Herman Hofman Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:15pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Space element a concept? Hi Nina, Thanks for your post. I can live without debating, too :-) I have not touched an ebony or ivory (or plastic) key for months. Shame, shame, shame, but I still listen very keenly, very often. It is amazing how each time I hear the same piece, I hear things that seem totally new. Next week we will know whether my son gets into University to do his Music degree. Secretly I cry when I hear him play. How is such invention possible, I wonder to myself. Sibi has very definite taste in music by the sound of it. Very funny story about Schubert. Poor young Franz. All the best Herman -----Original Message----- From: nina van gorkom [mailto:nilo@e...] Sent: Thursday, 15 January 2004 4:16 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element a concept? Hi Herman, We usually see each other just from afar. Thanks for writing. I am not in a mood to debate much, though you make good points. op 13-01-2004 23:27 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofman@t...: > You talk above about a very small, insignificant rupa, space. Do > rupas have size? Does the rupa space have size? I always thought that > the notion of size comes from extension and being delimited by something > other. Is space delimited by space? N: Space itself delimits. Talking about size: you are very scientifical, I am not :-) But, O,O, I am comparing here, and thus banner conceit creeps in before we realize it. H: When I imagine myself as over a hundred years old, I become unhappy. Not > because of decline of health or fear of my own death, although that > might change when I get closer, but because if I am over a hundred, my > children will be between 70 and 80. The chance increases that my > children will die while I remain alive. Not a nice thought. N: Yes, we consider that too, he may survive all of us. Thanks for your good wishes, but his mind is up and down. The music helps to bring him back. He survives many dogs, and his Husky Sibi is very special: one brown and one blue eye. When the Music is Bach and older, she lies flat, eyes open, listening. Once Lodewijk played Schubert, and then Sibi ran out slamming the door. Nice talking to you, and best regards from Lodewijk, Nina. 29082 From: Herman Hofman Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 10:30pm Subject: Kamma and action Hi everybody, Are action and intention synonymous in the Canon? Nyanatiloka has kamma as wholesome and unwholesome action, but then includes cetana "Volition (cetaná), o monks, is what I call action (cetanáham bhikkhave kammam vadámi), for through volition one performs the action by body, speech or mind. . There is karma (action), o monks, that ripens in hell.... Karma that ripens in the animal world.. Karma that ripens in the world of men.... Karma that ripens in the heavenly world.... Threefold, however, is the fruit of karma: ripening during the life-time (dittha-dhamma-vedaníya-kamma), ripening in the next birth (upapajja-vedaníya-kamma), ripening in later births (aparápariya-vedaníya kamma) ...." (A.VI.63). According to the Canon, does the possibility exist to intend bodily without acting bodily or opposite to the intention? All the best Herman 29083 From: Sarah Date: Wed Jan 14, 2004 11:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Dear Eznir, You are making a lot of helpful contributions, but I question a couple about the commentaries you’ve made more than once I think: --- Eznir wrote: > eznir: > First, The Commentaries! They are, as the word Commentaries mean, > comments on what Lord Buddha and his Noble Disciples said so that > those of lesser intelligence would understand what was said, under > what circumstances and in what context. .... Yes, and with detailed explanation of what had been said. .... Eznir: >The commentaries are made by > ordinary people if not intellectuals in the Dhamma and not by Arahats > of those times! Therefore these commentaries should be taken with a > pinch of salt! .... We’ve had a lot of discussion on the commentaries and I’d be glad if you’d take your time to read the posts under ‘commentaries’ at this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts I don’t believe the ancient Pali commentaries have been taken ‘with a pinch of salt’ at the great Councils. Quite the reverse. Indeed, the Buddha encouraged and foresaw the need for later clarifications and detail. For example, 3)From Atthasalini transl (‘Expositor’, PTS p.6) “Now when he laid down the table of contents he foresaw that, two hudnred and eighteen years after his death, Tissa, Moggali’s son, seated in the midst of one thousand bhikkhus, would elaborate the Kathavatthu....So Tissa, Moggali’s son, expounded the book not by his own knowledge but according to the table of contents laid down, as well as by the method given, by the Teacher. Hence the entire book became the WORD OF THE BUDDHA.” These early texts and commentaries which were handed down ‘by way of the unimpeachable succession of teachers’ (intro to DA), all constitute the Buddhavacana (word of the Buddha). .... Eznir: > These type of clarifications were made even during Lord Buddha's > times by Venerables Sariputta, Ananda, etc. Fortunately Lord Buddha > himself was there to give his stamp of assurance to its credibility! > They are therefore included in the main body of the tripitaka. .... It’s true that as it says in the introductory discourse in the Atthasalini, that after the buddha gave his approval ‘the whole suttanta became the word of the Buddha’, even though some suttas were given after his parinibbana or at least elaborated on. I don’t think there is any evidence at all that any of the Pali commentaries were given by ‘ordinary people’ and certainly those like the great arahant Mahinda who played such an important role in preserving the ancient commentaries, were very far from ordinary and so was their respect for these texts. Eznir: > Finally, just as a man whose fallen into a well can only come out > from inside the well, no matter how much we theorize and reason > things out and seem to understand things, true knowledge will arise > only through constant observation of your own world (the limited > vision one has when one is in the well), i.e., your 5 aggregates > (Rupa, Vedana, Sanna, Sanskara and vinnana)! ... Well explained. Indeed the aggregates are the only ‘All’ or ‘World’ that can be known at this very moment. Most the time we live in a fantasy world and don’t see the real worlds as they really are. Look forward to more of your contributions. I'll be glad to discuss more about the commentaries, but it'll have to be after I get back from our trip I think and after you've read those other posts, perhaps;-) Metta, Sarah p.s. James, thx for the compliment, but I assure you I've only read a very small fragment of the commentaries, and then only in translation, so I don't think I qualify for the crown;-);-) ===== 29084 From: Carl Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 0:27am Subject: chat? hanging out on chat for about 1 hour. starting 12:30am usa westcoast time. hope to chat with you 29085 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:04am Subject: Re: chat? Hello Carl, Had a try (about 7.00 p.m. Brisbane time - which I think is 1.00 a.m. L.A. time?) - but I am not technologically adept, and haven't used a chat room. Hope others got there. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Carl" wrote: > hanging out on chat for about 1 hour. starting 12:30am usa > westcoast time. hope to chat with you 29086 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] life-faculty, explanation Hi Azita & Howard (& James), --- gazita2002 wrote: > Dear Sarah, > > I am really enjoying reading these posts. Rupa fascinates me and > I guess its the concept of rupa that I'm talking about. > I'm a bit of a sci-fi buff, and while I know the reality of rupa > is definitely not sci-fi, to me the concept somewhat is. Don't try to > make any sense out of this, just my bias and tendency!! ...... Well, we can see the Dhamma is for all biases and tendencies, in the sense that it’s the Truth to be known, regardless of inclinations and interests. For example, I’ve never had the slightest interest in sci-fi and am bored to having to walk out of sci-fi movies, much to Jon’s dismay;-) I don’t have any particular fascination with rupas either, but again and again what we read can be tested and proved to be right and then there is growing confidence and consideration of the non-tested, non-proved rupas too. For example, Howard, I appreciate everything you say about space element. Before we might have said the same about visible object or sound which are obvious and acceptable now, at least in theory as we speak. If you say to other ‘ordinary’ folk that they only see visible object, not ‘people’ or ‘computers’, it will sound as crazed to them as what you read about space element now seems to you. When we read the detalils about rupas that were apparent to the Buddha and great disciples, we shouldn’t assume that these are concepts because that is how they seem to us. It’ll just depend on accumulations what is and will be known directly, I think. Even conceptual/intellectual considerations can be very helpful. Like about bhavanga cittas in deep sleep and between processes and space around the kalapas as a way of demarkation. I have an idea that this is of far greater importance than I am able to appreciate at any level now. .... A: > Hoping you are making a 'little book of questions' for Bkk. ... At the moment I’m just putting aside various scraps of paper which I’ll spend some time on before Bkk. I’ll miss you and your book, Azita. Still, Nina is helping me this time and I will start a book and jot down hers, mine and everyone else’s topics each day as we did last time. Have them ready, those coming to Bkk!! Too precious an opportunity, imho, to sit in silence. .... A: > I would definitly like to hear more about this - good idea about > discussing it in Bkk. ... Your comment is about space. The comments in my last post were from a discussion I had in Burma with K.Sujin. I’ve been asking a little each time for some time now, but like Howard, I find it very difficult and his qus remind me of my own. We need to listen many times and from many angles. It's the same when we read the suttas and other texts, we need to consider over and over again. .... A: > Knowing, theoretically, how fast cittas arise and fall, I'm almost > overwhelmed and therefore know for sure it cannot be known by just > thinking about it, when I think about Nibbana and how just potent > [for the want of a better description] the lokkutara citta and > accompanying cetasikas must be. > Sometimes I think its hardly worth discussing, esp when I read > your last passage above. However, I do occasionally feel quite > excited about the journey! .... Yes. when we think about the speed or feel overwhelmed etc, it is only thinking and quite different from direct awareness. One reason it’s well worth discussing is to clarify how little awareness there really is and how what may have seemed like insights or great experiences of concentration or calm in the past were quite other than they seemed and more indicative of attachment than anything else. In this sense, I think that James’s recent comments about fearful experiences and changing mind-states may be quite useful. Sometimes it can be shocking or frightening to begin to see that there really isn’t any control over the mind and that any attachment or attempts to guide it or focus on it are likely to bring more suffering. I still recall how stunned I was after following an intensive (‘vipassana’) meditation practice to begin to study and consider the Abhidhamma and to begin to comprehend just a little, for the first time, that there really was no self to control or guide or do anything. As James reminds us, we glibly talk about anatta, but still cling to an idea of self all the time. Vipassana refers to the developed insight into the nature of namas and rupas as not-self, not a focussing on sensations, mind-states or anything else with a subtle sense of ‘I’ directing the show. I doubt my comments will be any consolation, James, but from all your recent posts, sutta comments and reflections, it seems to me that you’re doing very fine as you are, so no need to be unduly concerned or change your pattern or to think you 'shouldn't' have such experiences of fear. You always had a lot of confidence in the teachings of the Buddha, and that seems to have grown even more. I’m sorry that I don’t have the right words to give this encouragement without it sounding like a pat on the back, but you’ll understand again;-) .... A: > Lots of pressure on you now Sarah, to have no blank spaces on the > tapes that will be made of the upcoming discussions ;( - just > kidding. .... Oh, I enjoy that kind of pressure, especially with Nina and other friends helping. Just like here;-) .... A: > Q1. do all rupas need to be known eventually? > > will try to get more q. to you before you go. .... Good, good. Could you elaborate with more detail on Q1. KS will ask, what do you mean by ‘eventually’? Yes, just fire out any others with any detail and take it that I have them jotted. Metta, Sarah Azita, we may have a couple of other old friends from the 70s days joining too - (Vince Tassiello, Nancy and Nina V ;-) We'll try to encourage them to participate here afterwards. Howard, I have a friend from NY visiting this week. She always asks when I'm going to get to NY...one day, esp. now we have direct flights!! ===== 29087 From: connie Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:33am Subject: Re: heartbase, note 4 c Rob M, where are you? Nina quoted: U Narada, p. 33: during the process of dying: Does this mean that heart-base is the object of the current bhavangas? thank you to anyone who might answer, connie 29088 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Sarah - > > Thank you for the following detailed and well-thought-out post. > The > bottom line, I think, however, is that we simply disagree on this one. > The > instantaneous, film-frame view of mindstates that you believe in I do > not. I do not > see the necessity for it, and I do see a number of problems with it. ..... No problem. I think that reading and considering the details can help us to more clearly distinguish between the thinking about impermanence and direct realization of this characteristic of all namas and rupas. There is a debate in the Kathavatthu on the duration of consciousness. The Andhakas are said to believe in the ‘appaent continuity both of consciousness in Jhana and of sub-consciousness, a single state of consciousness lasted for a length of time’. It quotes AN i.10 : “I consider, bhikkhus, that there is no phenomenon that comes and goes so quickly as mind. It is not easy to find a simile to show how quickly mind comes and goes.” Also SN ii.95 “Just as a monkey faring through the dense forest catches one bough, and, letting it go, catches another, and then another, even so bhikkhus, with what is called thought, or mind , or consciousness, by day as by night, one arises when another perishes.” In the Visuddhimagga, XX94, we read under ‘Knowledge or Rise and Fall’: “..Here in the text: ‘How is it that understanding of contemplating present states’ change is knowledge of contemplation of rise and fall? Present materiality is born [materiality]; the characteristic of its generation is rise, the characteristic of its change is fall, the contemplation is knowledge. Present feeling ... perception .... formations......consciousness....eye....(etc)....Present becoming is born [becoming]; the characteristic of its generation is rise, the characteristic of its change is fall, the contemplation is knowledge.(Psi54)” This comes under the fourth vipassana ~naa.na (knowledge) which clearly understands the arising and falling away of the rapid succession of namas and rupas. There are a lot more details in the Vism. There can only be this degree of insight or vipassana when sufficient detachment to all conditioned phenomena has been developed and after the tender insights have been realized, clearly distinguishing namas and rupas, understanding their conditioned nature, and comprehension by groups as a result of knowing directly rather than theoretically, the fast succession of cittas, cetasikas and rupas. I think the theoretical appreciation of realities changing so rapidly helps again to condition detachment from an idea of self and to help us appreciate how thinking about, say the breakdown of a computer or the changing nature of sounds right now is not the same as the deep insight into the impermanence of presently arising and falling namas and rupas. I know that we have no problem disagreeing anytime, Howard;-) ' "Life, person, pleasure, pain - just these alone join in one conscious moment that flicks by. Ceased aggregates of those dead or alive Are all alike, gone never to return...'"Vism, V111 39 We've quote these lines a lot and yet each time I read them, they're a reminder to me of the very shortness of life and all we hold dear, just the present aggregates flicking by already. Nothing else exists but these very temporary, very conditioned, very impermanent khandhas now, without self, core, store or sub-conscious. Metta, Sarah H: > Non-duration is not what makes a phenomenon "real" or not. Abhidhamma, > itself, allows > for a rupa to last for the duration of 17 mindstates. So ... do rupas > become > "unreal" due to that. > In any case, whether namas or rupas are instantaneous or not > (though I > don't think we*ever* observe anything that has zero duration), is really > not > a critical matter. What is critical is that all (conditioned) phenomena > are > impermanent, unsatisfying, and impersonal and insubstantial, and that we > should > not attempt to grasp the ungraspable, for that is the source of our > suffering. =============== 29089 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 2:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Hi Sarah, Sarah: James, thx for the compliment, but I assure you I've only read a very small fragment of the commentaries, and then only in translation, so I don't think I qualify for the crown;-);-) James: You're welcome. Hey, in this day and age it takes very little to qualify as royalty! ;-)) Sarah: I'll be glad to discuss more about the commentaries, but it'll have to be after I get back from our trip I think and after you've read those other posts, perhaps;-) James: I am curious about the `Useful Posts' section you often refer members, especially newcomers, to. Are they `useful' because they are well-argued and present various points-of-view or are they `useful' because they happen to support your point-of-view?? No offense intended but I don't think that a biased compilation of posts should be considered useful to anyone (even to those who compiled it). For example, the section "Abhidhamma- its origins" has 14 posts: four are written by Robert K; four are written by Nina; and five are written by you, Sarah. They all present the one viewpoint that the first book of the Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha to Ven. Sariputta and subsequently presented at the First Council. Now, I have written some posts that challenge this idea and present contrary evidence that no part of the Abhidhamma was presented until the Third Council and therefore it couldn't have been taught by the Buddha to the extent suggested. Why are none of my posts, or other posts stating the same thing, about this matter in the `Useful Posts' section? Why are you presenting just one side of this issue? Granted, some of the posts contain contrary arguments by others, for example some excellent arguments by Howard in post 4639, but they are not presented alone and as also possibly valid. It is presented like "It is useful for everyone to know how wrong Howard is about this issue." Okay. That isn't very fair. Why don't you provide some links to posts that you don't necessarily agree with but are presented convincingly? Why don't you create contrasting sections under each of the topics so that different viewpoints can be presented? Frankly, I find the `Useful Posts' section very self- serving; you might as well rename it "Useful Posts For Sarah". However, this doesn't reflect my opinion about this group and your superb leadership. It is the best and most intelligent group I have encountered on the Internet. Metta, James 29090 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 2:45am Subject: Re: life-faculty, explanation Hi Sarah, Sarah: I doubt my comments will be any consolation, James, but from all your recent posts, sutta comments and reflections, it seems to me that you're doing very fine as you are, so no need to be unduly concerned or change your pattern or to think you 'shouldn't' have such experiences of fear. James: Thank you Sarah for the nice comments. And you don't have to doubt if they are a consolation, they are a consolation. Very sweet of you, thanks again. Metta, James 29091 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 4:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: You're welcome. Hey, in this day and age it takes very little > to qualify as royalty! ;-)) ... You mean commentary royalty??;-) ..... > James: I am curious about the `Useful Posts' section you often refer > members, especially newcomers, to. Are they `useful' because they > are well-argued and present various points-of-view or are > they `useful' because they happen to support your point-of-view?? .... Just that;-) That’s why we’ve added a note at the top about it being a selection by the moderators or sth similar. If it were a selection of well-argued and presenting various points-of-view, there'd probably be a lot of candidates every day which would be too hard for us and mean a lot more scrolling...hence the archives. .... > No > offense intended but I don't think that a biased compilation of posts > should be considered useful to anyone (even to those who compiled > it). .... Well, some people tell us repeatedly that they find it helpful. Others like Herman swear they’ll never look again. That’s OK. Just call it a perk of the job of having been here from the start and setting the undemocratic rules;-) ..... > Why don't you create contrasting sections > under each of the topics so that different viewpoints can be > presented? .... More work and frankly it’s hard enough and time-consuming already without further criteria. There are also size and space issues. Perhaps when Kom has added the alphabet at the top, saving the need for long scrolling, we could consider sth further. Or you or anyone else would be welcome to set up your own alternative UP according to the criteria you suggest. (If so, contact us off-list first about size of files etc as space is a big issue in files). ..... >Frankly, I find the `Useful Posts' section very self- > serving; you might as well rename it "Useful Posts For Sarah". .... ;-) That's about how it started - It was really just sharing my saved folder after asking a few others if they'd do it with no takers. That's why it's such a simple, modest effort. We could at least add a ‘biased’ in the description under UP or maybe it should stand out more like a kind of warning...we'll look at it. ..... > However, this doesn't reflect my opinion about this group and your > superb leadership. It is the best and most intelligent group I have > encountered on the Internet. .... James, I know you’ve been using the internet for quite some time and checked other groups (or they’ve checked you;-)), so thank you. It sounds like a cliche, but really the value is only as good as the members and their views expressed...and all the differing opinions, even if they don’t make the biased ‘hall of fame’;-)We greatly appreciate your regular support. Metta, Sarah p.s You have posts in the UP, but I believe you when you say they aren’t under ‘Abhidhamma - its Origins’;-) =========================================== 29092 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:05am Subject: Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Hi Sarah, Sarah: That's about how it started - It was really just sharing my saved folder after asking a few others if they'd do it with no takers. That's why it's such a simple, modest effort. We could at least add a `biased' in the description under UP or maybe it should stand out more like a kind of warning...we'll look at it. James: Okay, that's cool. I just think that the title "Useful Posts" is somewhat misleading. "Biased" has a negative connotation though, may I humbly suggest "Favorite". But since it is already established, I guess nothing really has to be changed; as long as it is understandable that they are not committee selected or anything like that (I think that is what most people are thinking...but I could be wrong). Sarah: You have posts in the UP, but I believe you when you say they aren't under `Abhidhamma - its Origins';-). James: Yes, I know, and I am probably like Herman in the regard that I would rather them not be in there (even the ones to the Star Kids). I have a feeling that years from now I will read back on them and consider them naïve, useless garbage! ;-)) Better if there was no evidence. ;-) Metta, James 29093 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 6:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: Okay, that's cool. I just think that the title "Useful Posts" > is somewhat misleading. "Biased" has a negative connotation though, > may I humbly suggest "Favorite". .... Or maybe “Favourite” ;-) We’ll look at it. it’s a valid point. At least we could make it clearer perhaps. ... >But since it is already > established, I guess nothing really has to be changed; as long as it > is understandable that they are not committee selected or anything > like that (I think that is what most people are thinking...but I > could be wrong). .... In the beginning I did ask a small group for selections and used to get some, but we were all just too busy for committees and off-list discussions, so it just evolved as it has with me doing most the work, Kom helping on the techie side and Jon sometimes giving his views. .... > James: Yes, I know, and I am probably like Herman in the regard that > I would rather them not be in there (even the ones to the Star > Kids). I have a feeling that years from now I will read back on them > and consider them naïve, useless garbage! ;-)) Better if there was > no evidence. ;-) .... Ah, but the archives are saved anyway, so no escape;-) Anyway, you have us vetting, so don’t worry there won’t be any ‘useless garbage’ there ;-) Your bathtub post was a dilemma and a bit of an exception to what I said in my last post. We didn’t really agree with the message but it was very funny and exceptionally well written, imho of course, so it got included in ‘children - letters to’, I think it’s called. Often posts are left out very reluctantly I assure you and everyone else, like other posts of yours to the kids. By the way, are you still working on your book for children? I’ll be seeing the kids again tomorrow and Saturday if you want a prompt. Herman sent a post in his early days that I found hysterical, even though it was quite off topic and so we started a ‘Light Relief’ section at the very bottom of UP if anyone hasn’t seen it. So we do break our own rules occasionally too;-) One thing we’ve often said would be useful would be a section with people’s introductions for newcomers to look at. I remember yours was wild;-)It wasn't started and it would be hard to find them all now, however. Metta, Sarah p.s I think I’ll take anything further on UP off-list now, if you don’t mind. If anyone has further suggestions for us or wishes to work on an alternative compilation, also pls let us know off-list or just do it! ======================= 29094 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 7:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hello Howard, Howard: Now, don't we all agree that IN THESE SENSES (!), paramattha dhammas such as hardness, visual objects, feelings, volition, and awareness are neither existent nor nonexistent? Don't we also agree, however, that each of these phenomena does truly arise dependent on conditions, thus having a conditional, dependent existence for a period, later to cease? Don't we agree that the existence really is a of kind of existence (else how could we experience it) but is neither inherent nor absolute, for if it were, if it were an independent existence, then the subsequent cessation could not occur? It seems to me that while we think we are differing on substance, what we actually differ on is merely form - we are mistaking terminological differences for substantive differences. Michael: I don’t think it is just a question of terminology. But if it where only terminology I still think one should be precise and not characterize things that only exist based upon conditions as ultimate reality. But I say it is not terminology because there is another factor in conditioned phenomena which is that they are compounded, i.e. made up of parts, I don’t think this idea is accpetable by the defenders of dhammas being ultimate realities. I still view the definition of dhammas as paramatha/sabhava as a confused thinking because it considers that dhammas can be at the same time ultimate realities with true existence and impermanent/conditioned. Those characteristics are incompatible and impossible. Metta Michael 29095 From: Michael Beisert Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 7:56am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hello Ken, Comments below >From: Kenneth Ong >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> >Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 00:53:40 +0000 (GMT) > >Hi Michael > > >k: So far we have agreed on a few things, exist out of conditions, >dhammas are distinct and the characteristics of dhamma is inseparable >from the dhamma itself. What you disagree that dhamma is not >instrinsic to the the arisen dhamma I don't say that the characteristics are inseparable from the dhammas. I say that dhammas and characteristics arise interdependently. > >k: I have said many times ultimate reality is that it cannot be >reduce further - that it what it meant and nothing else. If your >prefer I would use the world emphrical or the most basic. I think >your notion and attachment to the viewpoint that ultimate reality is >something that arise on its own is something that you had and not >that of the commentary stand. I have already in a two times quote >you two different quotes from the commentary to prove it is >conditioned and empty, yet I have not seen you quote those commentary >that support your case. I personally feel that you are very unfair >to the commentary bc in the first place did you really read the >commentary. Or are you basing your commentary on others pples >viewpoint. > The word ultimate reality means what it means. You may not like it but that's what it is. Now if you don't intent to convey the idea of an ultimate reality then don't use those words. The Buddha never used them. I don't think the commentators were that dumm. They knew what they were writing about and they have chosen to define dhammas as ultimate realities. >k: Secondly you also cannot logically disprove that feeling is >irreducible and if you can find in the sutta that feelings can be >further break down into parts, I will give three bows to you. The >assumption that it can be further reduce is not supported anywhere in >the suttas and again this assumption is based on your personal >viewpoint which is unfair to the commentary. I say dhammas can be reduced further because that is what is observable in other conditioned phenomena and if dhammas are a conditioned phenomena then they must be subject to further reduction. But you are right, there is no sutta to confirm that. It is my own reasoning. I don't think it is unfair to the commentaries. Remember Canki Sutta - MN 95 - How to preserve the truth and how to find out the truth. > > >k: Thirdly you also cannot logically prove that characteristics that >arise out of the dhammas are independent of the dhamma. The usage of >this word intrinsic has been many times emphasis by me not meaning of >an independent essence and I have also provide dictionary definition >of it. Yet your stand is still basing on your viewpoint that it is >independent which again not fair bc you prefer your own definition. > > I am not saying that characteristics exist on their own, and I am not saying that the dhammas own the characteristic because that would be the same as an essence, something intrinsic. Therefore the logic is that characteristics and dhammas arise interdependently. > >kind regards >Ken O > Metta Michael 29096 From: Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 3:19am Subject: Some Thoughts on Naturality Hi, all - My future daughter-in-law gave me one of those "Zen calendars" for my desk - you know, the kind that has another "saying" for each day of the month. Today's saying is "No snowflake ever falls in the wrong place." In thinking about what this means, it seemed to me that it means that a snowflake doesn't think or will, but just "does". That then got me to thinking about human beings. Now, we both think and we will. Also, there seem to be two kinds of willing: Willing that "just happens" and which we might call "natural," and willing which involves an imposition of "self" and of thought. (Perhaps this is three kinds - there can be thinking without an interposing of "self.") Then I got to thinking about the implication that the "natural" willing is good, but the other is bad. Well, I'm not entirely certain about that. I think that very much depends on the characteristics of the person willing and acting. An advanced ariyan, and certainly an arahant, will, when willing and acting "naturally," act usefully, beneficially, out of a wholesome state of mind. But what of a worldling who is filled with selfish, self-serving desires and inclinations? When s/he acts "naturally," automatically, and without interpo sing "self" or thought, s/he quite typically acts in service to desires and emotions, and may well cause great harm! I recall a sutta, probably more than one, in which the Buddha advised *stopping* and *considering* before acting! It is not just that he said to act with sharp awareness, sharp mindfulness and clear comprehension, but to actually cease for a moment and to think carefully about what one is about to say or do. Now that is not "natural," but for most of us, it *is* good - very good. What do you folks think? 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) 29097 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:02am Subject: Re: Heart base Dear Robert K, Thank you very much for your effort and I am happy with heart base. But here a question arises. Do Pasada Rupa solely caused by Kamma or are also caused by others? With much respect, Htoo Naing -------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Htoo, > But the eyes, ears and so forth - these organs where the > pasada > arises still exist, are still visible, because they are not > conditioned solely by kamma. And certainly they can act as a > support for new pasada rupa -conditioned by anothers kamma. > That > is why transplants can work. If this is still not clear please > ask more as these subtle points where conventional ideas and > the > sublime Dhamma intersect can show us much about the clinging > that there is to concept and story. > > >robert 29098 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:05am Subject: Re: heartbase, note 4 c Dear Connie, If in Pancavokara Bhumi that is if in sensual sphere and material sphere then the answer is yes. If in immaterial sphere then the answer is no. Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Rob M, where are you? > > Nina quoted: > > U Narada, p. 33: during the process of dying: object and base] it is this heart-base that is taken as object by all > the > dying impulsions even if there is delight, grief, doubt or restlessness > at > the time.> > > Does this mean that heart-base is the object of the current bhavangas? > > thank you to anyone who might answer, > connie 29099 From: Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 4:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] life-faculty, explanation Sounds great, Sarah! With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/15/04 4:20:12 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahdhhk@y... writes: > Howard, I have a friend from NY visiting this week. She always asks when > I'm going to get to NY...one day, esp. now we have direct flights!! > /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) 29100 From: Htoo Naing Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:54am Subject: Contemplation On Own Body ( 04 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The Dhamma practitioner is striving to get through the Samsara. He has been practising formal sitting meditation for an hour mainly concentrating on his own breath. After an hour, he changes his meditation to another type, walking meditation. Walking meditation is good for maturation of wisdom as it is already supported by a good effort that is Viriya. He recognizes everything whenever they arise at their respective sense door. At some time he tries to sit again and practise sitting meditation. Actually meditation is not that easy as you read through the post (01) to (11) of 'How To Get Through The Samsara '. So the meditator starts to contemplate on his own body. First he has been contemplating on each part of body as disgusting things. This contemplation helps the meditator in striking down sensual thoughts. Another method of contemplation on own body is grouping of elements. Actually there is no body, no one. When he contemplates on his own body, he does not find anyone or any life or anything like that. Hair, hairs, nail, skin... these are earth element. Flesh, sinew, heart, kidneys etc etc are earth element. Tear, urine, blood, pus, bile etc etc are water element. Inside of lungs, inside of intestine, inside of stomach etc etc are wind element. There also is fire element in the body and it passes and spread all over in tissues and the whole body. There is nothing to be attached and the whole body is just combination of earth element, water element, wind element, and fire element. When he is contemplating on elements, there is no time to step on sensual thoughts. And the contemplator cannot go on hatred or other bad thoughts. May you all be free from bad thoughts. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 29101 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 10:07am Subject: Re: Icaro's packing list, to Connie Dear Connie, I answer you on line. op 15-01-2004 01:36 schreef connie op nichicon@h...: > In case Nina's busy doing her Icaro prepares for bootcamp packing > routine: N: This was his packing list: solidity (or extension) cohesion temperature motion eyesense earsense nose (smellingsense) tongue (tastingsense) bodysense visible object sound odour flavour femininity masculinity heart-base life faculty nutrition space bodily intimation speech intimation lightness plasticity wieldiness birth or integration continuity decay impermanence A picture of the whole! Yes, I often think of his natural way of learning about the 28 rupas, just realities in daily life. They are right at hand. His presence was so refreshing, Abhidhamma straight. It happens that today I am with my packing list for Bgk. I am so inspired by Icaro!! Visible object is just to be seen, hardness is to be touched, sound is to be heard. There are the eight inseparables, avinibhogas, as real as anything. All around. Rupas, no concepts!! Packing without stress, it is fun. I was looking for some red slippers in the cupboard, and yes, only one was there, why never in pairs? Then quietly looking in some boxes, Icaros' list in hand. There was the second one, and colour was seen. After that defining: a slipper. Colour is the only, only rupa of this list that can be seen. I will not let all of you look further into my untidy cupboard. I hope he has more time for us in Febr. Did you hear from him? I received the Yamaka from PTS and Jim was so kind to give me the Commentary. I would like to share my enthusiasm with Icaro, a pity he is not here. Thank you for your kindness giving the Pali signs on line. Some signs of this Tipitaka org are the same, but Sarah thought that maybe their code changed. I had no time yet, but will check after Bgk. A problem is also difference in computers, but Sarah and I have the same. Appreciating, Nina 29102 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 10:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On the Momentariness of Mind States Dear James, op 14-01-2004 22:13 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > I hope I haven't rambled on too much (Gosh, I feel like this > is `Buddhist True Confessions' or something! ;-)) N: No, you did not ramble and since the subject is mental development, yes, it seems like a confession, but we are just talking about the many changing states of mind. I appreciate your sincere post. First of all, I really sympathize with your fear. I have little knowledge and no experience with the meditation you describe. But now I try to think of saying something in general which may be helpful, or not, I do not know. I asked Lodewijk, and he said: I could add something. It is wise that you are doing this already, with the Suttas. We have to check ourselves all the time, are we overreaching, wanting more than we are up to? Then lobha is around the corner. I overreach in other fields, like my study, trying too hard to answer all Emails, wanting to do things too perfectly. As to the negative kind of fear, that is, accompanied by unhappy feeling, fear that disturbs, it is a sign. It is dangerous, because one will easily accumulate more of that. It is a warning sign I would say. It could become worse and worse. We have to find out what conditions it. As Lodewijk said, we always have to check our mind. Clinging is a condition for fear. It has to do with overreaching. Then we are not on the right track. At times, I realize that I am clinging to awareness, but I also know that this is not the right Path. I find that every little bit of understanding is a gain, it helps me in my daily life. I am very grateful to the Buddha for that. Also this contact in dsg helps me to consider the Dhamma more, to reflect more, to develop understanding. This is also thanks to the excellent way Sarah and Jon are leading this forum, it is good to say this sometimes. Lodewijk also sends you his best regards, Nina. 29103 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Heart base Dear Rob K, I enjoyed your posts, glad you reposted it, I have no time for going to webs or following links, appreciating, Nina. op 15-01-2004 06:53 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > Robert:None of this can be surprising if we understand hadaya-vatthu. > That special kammic matter will arise wherever there is the > suitable conditions, including blood (or even a blood > substitute). 29104 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: heartbase, note 4 c Dear Connie, op 15-01-2004 10:33 schreef connie op nichicon@h...: > Nina quoted: > > U Narada, p. 33: during the process of dying: object and base] it is this heart-base that is taken as object by all > the > dying impulsions even if there is delight, grief, doubt or restlessness > at > the time.> > > Does this mean that heart-base is the object of the current bhavangas? N: it could never be the object of the bhavangas of that life, these only have one object: the same as the rebirth-consciousness which is the same as the last javanas of the previous life. Rebirth-consciousness, bhavangacitta and dying-consciousness of one life always have the same object, they are door-freed and process-freed. As to the last javanacittas in a life: these can take the heartbase as object, thus, these are not bhavangacittas. They are followed by the dying-consciousness of that life (that has, as said, its own object) and then the rebirth-consciousness of next life has the same object as the last javanas of the previous life, in this case the heartbase. Is there anything not yet clear? Nina. 29105 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:04pm Subject: latent tendencies, Ch 1, no 6 latent tendencies, Ch 1, no 6 The ³Visuddhimagga², in the explanation about ³Purity by Knowledge and Vision² (Ch XXII, 81-86), gives an additional explication about ³arisen in the sense of having obtained a soil². It states: ³While unprofitable [kamma] is still unabolished in any given soil [plane] [13], it is called arisen by having soil [to grow in].² This refers to the latent tendencies that lie dormant in the citta. We read further on (82): ³And here the difference between Œsoil¹ and Œhaving obtained a soil¹ should be understood. For Œsoil¹ (plane) means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming, which are the objects of insight 14] . ŒWhat has obtained a soil¹ is an expression for defilements, capable of arising with respect to those aggregates. Those defilements have that soil (plane). That is why Œby having soil [to grow in]¹ is said. And that is not meant in the sense of just making them the object 15]. For defilements occupied with an object arise with respect to any aggregates including past or future ones as well [as present], and also with respect to the [subjectively] fully-understood aggregates in someone [else] whose cankers are destroyed, like those that arise in the rich man Soreyya with respect to the aggregates in Mahå-Kaccåna (Dh A. I, 325) and in the brahman student Nanda with respect to Uppalavaùùa (Dh A. II, 49), and so on. And if that were what is called Œarisen by having soil [to grow in]¹, no one could abandon the root of becoming because it would be unabandonable. But Œarisen by having soil [to grow in]¹ should be understood [subjectively] with respect to the bases [for them in oneself]. For the defilements that are the root of the round are inherent in [one¹s own]aggregates not fully-understood by insight from the instant those aggregates arise. And that is what should be understood as Œarisen by having soil [to grow in]¹, in the sense of its being unabandoned. Now when defilements are inherent, in the sense of being unabandoned, in someone¹s aggregates, it is only those aggregates of his that are basis for those defilements, not aggregates belonging to another. And only past aggregates, not others, are basis for defilements that inhere unabandoned in past aggregates. Likewise in the case of future aggregates, and so on. Similarly too only sense-sphere aggregates, not others, are the basis for defilements that inhere unabandoned in sense-sphere aggregates. Likewise in the case of the fine material and immaterial. But in the case of the Stream Enterer, etc., when a given defilement, which is a root of the round, has been abandoned by means of a given path in a given Noble Person¹s aggregates, then, his aggregates are no longer called Œsoil¹ for such defilement since they are no longer a basis for it...² Therefore, the defilements that are dormant in the citta, the latent tendencies, are realities which each have their own characteristic. These can be eradicated by the development of insight, and this means, by knowing the true nature of the aggregates or the realities which appear. Footnotes: 13. Bhúmi is translated as plane or soil, depending on the context. The Tíka to the Visuddhimagga explains as to plane in this context: ³the aggregates as objects of clinging, reckoned as a human or a divine person.² 14. The not fully-understood state of the aggregates. 15. Making them the object: as will be explained further on, the defilements that are the root of the round are inherent in [one¹s own]aggregates not fully-understood by insight. And that is what should be understood as Œarisen by having soil [to grow in]¹, in the sense of its being unabandoned. Someone may have another person¹s aggregates as object, even the aggregates of an arahat, but he could not be released from the cycle of birth and death by having someone else¹s aggregates as object. So long as his own aggregates are not fully understood by insight there are still latent tendencies that have a fertile soil to grow in. The example of Soreyya is given here (see Pali Proper Names II, p. 1311). Soreyya saw the body of the arahat Mahå Kaccåyana and had clinging to it. The aggregates of someone else was the object of his defilements. His desire caused him to become a woman and he married the Treaserer of Takkasilå. Later on he asked Mahå Kaccåyana forgiveness and eventually he himself became an arahat. **** Nina. 29106 From: Eznir Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 10:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Dear Sarah & Friends! When I was new to this mode of discussion my first contribution to a certain group regarding a particular thread was to address the issue itself which was how the thread began and named after, (ie the original post that started it). The person who originated that thread, after having welcomed me to the group, was highly amused to read my post, since it realigned the thread to the original point under discussion, which shows how much it had drifted from the main issue! Similarly, if one doesn't have the Dhamma, being discussed, in focus, one would find the views of the commentaries of the Dhamma under discussion, being discussed! This was the main point I was trying to drive in my post regarding commentries. I do not intend any disrespect to the commentators themselves! This happens even during ones meditation practice, one's main object of concentration is waylaid, rather discreetly, by a series of thoughts, connecting one to another, not pertaining to the object of concentration. Some of the threads under discussion, is an explicit example of meditation in general, before the 'Nivaranas' are overcome! This tread "Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 )" is a case in point! Perhaps, I am being rather idealistic, to expect discussions in this mode, to simulate a good meditation session! :-)) Nevertheless, wouldn't it be wonderful, if one could gather just those cluster of "thinking and pondering" necessary, focussed to address the issue of the thread under discussion! One is then being mindful of one's "vacisankhara", are we not? May you be Happy! eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear Eznir, > > You are making a lot of helpful contributions, but I question a couple > about the commentaries you've made more than once I think: > > --- Eznir wrote: etc ..etc... > > Metta, > > Sarah > > p.s. James, thx for the compliment, but I assure you I've only read a very > small fragment of the commentaries, and then only in translation, so I > don't think I qualify for the crown;-);-) > ===== 29107 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 10:35pm Subject: RE: [dsg] On the Momentariness of Mind States Hi Herman, You raise good qus about the mixing of conceptual terms with ‘absolutes’. It’s inevitable that we often use conceptual terms for shorthand and we read this throughout the texts as well, even in the Abhidhamma. --- Herman Hofman wrote: ======================================================================== > = > > H> We have recently been discussing space and time. At no time did > anyone suggest time was anything but a concept. So when we are > discussing rupas (absolutes) how can there be a series (concept) of > them? Where did time suddenly creep in? And how can rupas (absolutes) be > falling away in time (concept), all the time (concept)? > ======================================================================== > = S: The series referred to “a series (vithi) of mind moments”, which refers to the sense door and mind door cittas which condition the next one and so on (absolutely). Series is a short-hand concept to refer to these cittas (absolutes). Production, continuity, decay and impermanence are characteristics (absolutes) of all rupas (absolutes) whenever they occur (absolutely) and can be directly known by developed wisdom (absolute). Rupas are conditioned in various ways (absolutely) by cittas, kamma, temperature and nutrition (absolutes). ======================================================================== > === > > H> Is a moment an absolute or a concept? How is it that absolutes arise > and fall within concepts? > > ======================================================================== > === S: Moment (concept) is shorthand here for saying that cittas arise and fall away (absolutely) extremely rapidly, conditioning the next without interval. The cittas (absolutes) don’t arise and fall within concepts. The concepts, such as the ones I gave yesterday from the suttas to indicate the great speed, are just to give an indication of the nature of these absolutes only. In the Abhidhamma, the term ‘kha.nikapaccuppanna’ is used to refer to the momentary present when absolutes occur. If you have Bodhi’s CMA, see ch 111,Comp.of the Misc.,17. ======================================================================== > ==== > H> Here you say that dhammas (absolutes) are brief. Is that briefness > (brevity) a characteristic of that dhamma? To me briefness is a > comparative measurement and surely that is conceptual? > > ======================================================================== > ==== S: A conceptual term referring to the absolute characteristics of dhammas which fall away as soon as they’ve arisen and can be experienced as such. ======================================================================== > ==== > H> Same again. Speed is a comparative measurement. Is high speed a > characteristic of dhammas? Or is it a characteristic of observation? Or > what? > ======================================================================== > = S: In CMA, iV, Guide to 6, Bodhi gives more detail on all these points. He adds: “ ‘There are three conditioned characteristics of the conditioned: arising, passing away, and the alteration of that which stands’ (A.3:47/i,152). Here the presence moment is identified with ‘the alteration of that which stands’ (.thitassa a~nnathatta). “ When there is insight, there is no thought of time, but the nature of rapidly changing succession of namas and rupas can be known directly at the third stage onwards and so there is no doubt about the speed at which they occur. I understand your good and challenging questions, but I think these only arise in the thinking rather than the direct experiencing of these absolutes. More on ‘time’ in Nyanaponika’s ‘Abhidhamma Studies’ and under ‘Time’ in UP (oops!)Again as Htoo wrote, the more understanding there is of paramattha dhammas, the less confusion there will be about what concepts are too. ======================================================================== > ==== > H> Now I think I can understand, but isn't the "dhamma itself" therefore > an inference and not a reality? > ======================================================================== > ==== S: It depends whether there is any understanding and awareness now. There can be thinking about ‘hardness’ (concept) as we type or there can be direct awareness of the characteristic (absolute) as it’s experienced. Only panna (understanding) can differentiate and know which. ======================================================================== > == > H> Now this I really do understand. You are speaking conventionally. In > the whole paragraph!!! I hope you have an absolute wow of a time in > Bangkok. :-) .... S: You got it! Thanks, Herman and hope you can join us some time, somewhere (lots more concepts). Let me know if you don’t agree absolutely or conceptually with anything here. You’re raising important issues in this and in other posts and I liked your verse in reply to Christine’s;-) Metta (absolute) Sarah (concept) ============ 29108 From: Sarah Date: Thu Jan 15, 2004 10:56pm Subject: All directions (was Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 )) Hi Eznir, I understand your point about how threads go off in all directions, just as we’re doing here;-) I apologise for barking up the wrong tree with regard to your comments on the commentaries and I’m glad to read of your respect in that regard;-) --- Eznir wrote: > Dear Sarah & Friends! > Perhaps, I am being rather idealistic, to expect discussions in this > mode, to simulate a good meditation session! :-)) Nevertheless, > wouldn't it be wonderful, if one could gather just those cluster > of "thinking and pondering" necessary, focussed to address the issue > of the thread under discussion! One is then being mindful of > one's "vacisankhara", are we not? .... That’s another branch of discussion we could follow too;-) I think some others would prefer the list and discussions to be more structured and focussed (Larry??), while others of us enjoy taking threads in various directions and often see great value in say, looking at what the commentaries or other writers have to say about particular aspects. I don’t think we can say one is better or more wholesome than the other - we can learn about our own cittas when we speak or write, I think. Perhaps this relates to our various views on 'focussed meditation' too. Thanks for clarifying your concerns, Eznir and feel free to come back to the original post in a thread or to follow any branch you prefer. Let me know if you have other ideas on this branch. Metta, Sarah ====== 29109 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 0:18am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Michael, --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > Sarah; > 1. A clear distinction is shown between worldly truths and > realtites/actualities/the khandhas. > > Michael: > A clear distinction is shown between the way people usually perceive the > > world as existing/non existing and conditioned existence. .... S2: i.e the khandhas - conditioned ‘existence’ ... M: >The split > between > worldly truaths and realities/actualities falls into the trap of > existence/non existence. .... S2: Obviously when the Buddha differentiated and described worldly truths and khandhas, existing impermanently (as we found in the suttas), there was no trap. The trap is only a manifestation of any wrong view we may have in appreciating the significance. .... M: >The khandhas are not realities in the sense of > truly existing or in the sense of an ultimate reality, they are > conditioned > realities. A truly existing reality or actuality cannot be subject to > conditions. .... S2: We agree that khandhas are conditioned realities. You use ‘ultimate reality’ or ‘existing reality’ in a different sense to the way the commentarie and we use these terms, so be it. Rupas, vedana, sanna, sankhara and vinnana exist momentarily by conditions and then fall away. Whether they are referred to as paramattha or ‘existing’ or ‘actual’, they are like the foam, the water bubble, the mirage, the plaintain or the magician’s trick, without self, lasting essence or core and knowable by insight. .... > S: > 2. The khandhas never refer to pannatti (concepts), but refer to cittas, > cetasikas and rupas. > > M: > Khandhas are the same as cittas. cetasikas and rupa. Khandhas and > paññatti > are both conditioned realities none of them are ultimate realities nor > non > existent. .... S2: I notice that even though I avoided all mention of ultimate realities, you introduce it into each point;-) Nowhere in the Tipitaka is there any suggestion that pannatti are conditioned realities. this is why I quoted from the khandavagga to show that only the khandhas - *Not pannatti*- are conditioned and to be understood by insight. .... > S: > 3. Only the khandhas are conditioned, arise and fall, not concepts. > > M: > Therefore concepts are non existent. Again the dichotomy into existing > (khandhas) and non existing (concepts). To me both are conditioned > realities. ... S2: Exactly, concepts are non existent except as imaginary constructs. This is the point in the suttas quoted and Abhidhamma text about Self and Tathagata. They don’t exist, they are only *thought* to exist. While we cling to the idea of self existing, we also cling to the idea of people and things in the same way. The sotapanna has no more wrong idea about self and concepts existing. .... > S: > 4. The development of insight/satipatthana is the direct understanding > and > knowledge of the khandhas and eventually of nibbana too. It is not the > insight of concepts. > > M: > Insight is the direct understanding and knowledge of the three > characteristics. Any conditioned phenomena has the three characteristics > and > therefore can be an object of insight. When you see conditionality you > see > the Dhamma. ... S2: The three characteristics of namas and rupas. If there is no understanding of namas and rupas and distinction from selves, computers and so on, there cannot be higher insights which understand the tri-lakkhana of these realities. Any conditioned phenomena means any conditioned nama or rupa. When you see namas and rupas as they are, the knowledge of their conditioned nature becomes more and more apparent. .... > S: > 5.The khandhas are ‘real and actual’ (saccato thetato) as opposed to > Beings, Self, the Buddha, computers and elephants. Unlike the latter, > the > khandhas have characteristics or qualities that are to be known for what > they are. > > M: > If the khandhas are ‘real and actual’ then they cannot be subject to > conditionality because for something to be ‘real and actual’ it has to > have > something which gives it that ‘real and actual’ quality and that is the > same > as an essence, whether you call it like that or not, that is the > assumption > behind calling them ‘real and actual’. .... S2: I think that when the Buddha used these words he was pointing out the exact opposite to what you are saying. He was pointing out that by knowing the ‘real and actual’ as opposed to concepts, slowly the idea of self will be eradicated. When there is touching of hardness, there can be awareness of the characteristic. We don’t have to give it a name, but it is real or actual or experienced in a way that concepts never can be. .... > S: > 6. Concepts and entities do not have the characteristics which can be > penetrated and directly understood by the eightfold path factors. > Therefore, it is essential to distinguish between concepts and khandhas. > > M: > As I said before both concepts and entities are conditioned and > therefore > share the three characteristics and can be an object of insight. .... S2: Could you give me some Tipitaka references which suggest that concepts and entities are conditioned, share the 3 characteristics and can be object of insight. .... M:> I don’t’ see room for a consensus Sarah and we better agree to disagree. ... S2:I think we might reach consensus that we’re talking about more than terminology differences as Howard suggested;-) We might also agree that we’re still a long way apart, but as I keep saying, I value these discussions. Metta, Sarah p.s sorry if this sounds rushed - kids at the door. I'll post anyway as I won't have time later or tomorrow. ====== 29110 From: icarofranca Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 0:34am Subject: Re: Icaro's packing list, to Connie Dear Nina et all N: This was his packing list: > > solidity (or extension) > cohesion > temperature > motion > eyesense > earsense > nose (smellingsense) > tongue (tastingsense) > bodysense > visible object > sound > odour > flavour > femininity > masculinity > heart-base > life faculty > nutrition > space > bodily intimation > speech intimation > lightness > plasticity > wieldiness > birth or integration > continuity > decay > impermanence -------------------------------------------------------------------- Such Paramattha Dhammas list has got some interesting remarks, as a goo= d rendition to the term "eyesense", "earsense" as CakkuDhatu and so on. My o= wn list could show a different Niyama on these terms! --------------------------------------------------------------- > Packing without stress, it is fun. -------------------------------------------------------------- With a little help of Niyama and friends, everything becomes more easy! -------------------------------------------------------------- > Thank you for your kindness giving the Pali signs on line. Some signs of > this Tipitaka org are the same, but Sarah thought that maybe their code > changed. I had no time yet, but will check after Bgk. A problem is also > difference in computers, but Sarah and I have the same. > Appreciating, --------------------------------------------------------------- Pali codification of Tipitaka.org - since you configure your browser, of= course - hasn´t so much difficulty to read on. Missing you all too much... I hope get more free time to be with you mo= re frequently! Mettaya, Ícaro > Nina 29111 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 1:19am Subject: Abhidhamma-fatigue Dear Group, I understand the purpose of studying the Abhidhamma in all its microscopic particulars is as an aid to realise the complete impermanence and anattaness of all dhammas. But, there is a problem - for me, at least. I find I've turned off and tuned out - actually several weeks ago - no longer read any of the technical posts and can't relate to the enthusiasm others seem to feel for discussing nama and rupa in infinite detail. Perhaps it's just a phase. Can't see anything about Abhidhamma-fatigue in the Useful Posts though ... I guess it's a little late for a prophylaxis, but is there any antidote? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- 29112 From: Eznir Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:31am Subject: Re: Kamma and action Dear Herman Herman: Are action and intention synonymous in the Canon? eznir: Yes. Herman: According to the Canon, does the possibility exist to intend bodily... eznir: No. Intending is something of the mind, Nama, defined as vedana, sanna, cetana(intention), passa and manasikara. Whereas 'bodily' is something of matter, ie., Rupa. Therefore to intend bodily....... Herman: ....without acting bodily....... eznir: .... without acting bodily is impossible isn't it? Unless ofcourse, you mean 'intend mentally' and not bodily. But then you would have said so! And even 'mentally' is a form of action. Action is of three types, body, speech and mind. 'Intend bodily without acting bodily' is not coherent speech, is it? Notice how language has evolved in line with our thoughts! When we speak non-sense it doesn't sound sensible either! Herman: ........or opposite to the intention? eznir: Perhaps you mean the type of action that doesn't result in Kamma. Yes. These type of actions can be done only by Arahats, the Noble Ones! As they have got rid of craving, conceit and views and their Consciousness is said to be 'anidassana' or non-pointing. It doesn't indicate or signify a self. Intention is Action. They are synonymous. This is not outwardly seen. That is why in meditiation one is supposed to be mindful of every action, while walking, lying, sitting, bathing, changing clothes, etc etc as in Satipatthana Sutta so that this synonymity is exposed. One finds that every action is preceeded by an intention. May you be Happy! eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi everybody, > > Are action and intention synonymous in the Canon? Nyanatiloka has kamma > as wholesome and unwholesome action, but then includes cetana > > "Volition (cetaná), o monks, is what I call action (cetanáham bhikkhave > kammam vadámi), for through volition one performs the action by body, > speech or mind. . There is karma (action), o monks, that ripens in > hell.... Karma that ripens in the animal world.. Karma that ripens in > the world of men.... Karma that ripens in the heavenly world.... > Threefold, however, is the fruit of karma: ripening during the life- time > (dittha-dhamma-vedaníya-kamma), ripening in the next birth > (upapajja-vedaníya-kamma), ripening in later births > (aparápariya-vedaníya kamma) ...." (A.VI.63). > > According to the Canon, does the possibility exist to intend bodily > without acting bodily or opposite to the intention? > > All the best > > > Herman 29113 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 3:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: heartbase, note 4 c Dear Nina and Connie and all, Nama have to depend on Rupa when in Pancavokara Bhumi that is the realms where there are Rupa as beings. Bhavangacittas also have to depend on Rupa. In this Rupa is Hadaya Vatthu or heartbase. I did not mean Hadaya Vatthu or heartbase as an object for Bhavangacittas. When in Catuvokara Bhumi that is four Arupa Brahma Bhumi, Bhavangacittas do not have to depend on any Rupa as there is no Rupa in Arupa Bhumi. Patisandhicitta ( linking consciousness or rebirth consciousness ), Bhavangacitta ( life continuum consciousness ), and Cuticitta ( dying consciousness ) are all the same. The only difference is temporal placing. The first in a life is Patisandhicitta ( rebirth consciousness ) and the last in a life is Cuticitta or dying consciousness ( not death consciousness as the dead cannot be consciousness ). These three Citta are doorfree Citta. This means they do not need to appear at any door ( eye, ear, nose, tongue, body ) and mind-door. The last Bhavangacitta just before Vithicitta ( conscious mind ) is said to be mind-sense door but Bhavangacittas never appear at 6 doors. With Metta, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Connie, > Nina quoted: > > U Narada, p. 33: during the process of dying: > the dying impulsions even if there is delight, grief, doubt or restlessness at the time. > > Does this mean that heart-base is the object of the current bhavangas? > N: it could never be the object of the bhavangas of that life, these only > have one object: the same as the rebirth-consciousness which is the same as > the last javanas of the previous life. > Rebirth-consciousness, bhavangacitta and dying-consciousness of one life > always have the same object, they are door-freed and process-freed. > As to the last javanacittas in a life: these can take the heartbase as > object, thus, these are not bhavangacittas. They are followed by the > dying-consciousness of that life (that has, as said, its own object) and > then the rebirth-consciousness of next life has the same object as the last > javanas of the previous life, in this case the heartbase. > Is there anything not yet clear? > Nina. 29114 From: Sarah Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 5:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma-fatigue Hi Christine, --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Group, > > I understand the purpose of studying the Abhidhamma in all its > microscopic particulars is as an aid to realise the complete > impermanence and anattaness of all dhammas. But, there is a > problem - for me, at least. I find I've turned off and tuned out - > actually several weeks ago - no longer read any of the technical > posts and can't relate to the enthusiasm others seem to feel for > discussing nama and rupa in infinite detail. ..... I’m not sure why this is a problem -- after all, it is the understanding of realities whether reading miscroscopic particulars or having fun/not having fun in any other way that counts. .... >Perhaps it's just a > phase. Can't see anything about Abhidhamma-fatigue in the Useful > Posts though ... .... Ah, maybe that’ll change too;-) .... > I guess it's a little late for a prophylaxis, but is there any > antidote? .... If we’re looking for an antidote to the ‘turn off’, doesn’t it suggest the problem is not the particulars, but the idea that this is what we should be enthusiastic about at this moment? In other words, yet another chance to know the present realities regardless of the objects of thinking and ‘turn off’. No rules or one size fits all in this regard. A few years ago when I was working extremely long hours, I hardly opened a dhamma book and would often fall asleep as soon as I did so. The namas and rupas were just as real as these days when I’m reading more. It may be different again tomorrow for us both. Have a good weekend and let us hear more about your non-microscopic particular reflections. I know that in your case, you’ll still be reading plenty of Dhamma material;-) How are we going with Kosalasamyutta? Perhaps Eznir will join in and help keep us a little focussed;-) Metta, Sarah ======= 29115 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 6:41am Subject: Antidote For Abhidhamma-Fatigue Dear Dhammafriends, First of all, fatigue has to be defined. If well defined, then antidote will possibly be there at some corner. I do not think that Christine wants to say about sloth and torpor. But these may well be related. Hearing words of unfamilarity may possibly fatigue some. Anyway, I try here an antidote for Christine and possibly for others. If not working fedback is favourable. People want to avoid experiencing bad things even though they are doing bad things in a daily basis and to be exact at each moment. This thought is just comparison to doing good things. In this paragraph, people I mean people in general. Experiencing bad things? In which way? How do they happen? When they feel bad at their body, they become unhappy. When they feel bad in their mind they become unhappy. Otherwise they will go unchecked and unnoticed. When feel bad, it actually is not bad. But it becomes bad when they think that it is bad. Why are they thinking those bad experiences bad. Because they want something different that they think is good. Why are they thinking something is good? Because they like that something. Here liking is the chief source that create everything. If liking is dropped where it is picked up, there will no more problem. And this include fatigue. Fatigue of all kinds not only Abhidhamma-Fatigue. I hear this. I hear this word. I hear these words. I hear this sentence. I hear these sentences. I hear this sound. I hear these sounds. I hear noice. I hear a noice. I hear those noices. I see a letter. I see a word. I see words. I see a sentence. I see sentences. I see a paragraph. I see paragraphs. I see a passage. I see passages. I see a coulour. I see colours. I see a form. I see forms. I see shape. I see a shape.I see shapes. I experience smell. I smell a smell. I smell smells. I taste taste. I taste a taste. I taste tastes. I feel it hard. I feel it soft. I feel it smooth. I feel it rough. I feel it hot. I feel it warm. I feel it cold. I feel it springing. I feel it pressing. I feel it tense. I feel it move. I feel it support. I feel it push. If all these are dropped at their respective door, there will no more be fatigue. Fatigue is actually noticed later on after we all have picked it up and we store it deeply in our mind. The best antidote for fatigue is prevention of it arising by watching the picker. As soon as you drop it, you are liberated from its binding up. May all beings free from fatigue. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 29116 From: Htoo Naing Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 8:48am Subject: Contemplation On Own Body ( 05 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There is a way how to get through the Samsara or wheel of life. To get through the Samsara, one who wants such an achievement needs to practise special contemplation on own body, contemplation of any feeling whenever arise, contemplation on own mind and contemplation on Dhamma. As described in the related posts, the Dhamma practitioner has been striving to achieve a state. Dhamma is so good that even though the final goal has not been achieved, there always is a good output from practising Dhamma at every stage at every step and achievement is there all the time since practising Dhamma. First, the practitioner contemplates on his own breath. He knows everything connected with his own breath. This means he knows when the breath is long as long and short as when short and he calms down all the process of breathing with special contemplation along with great mindfulness. Human is made up of parts of body and they do need balance and nutrition. As the practitioner knows this, he frequently changes his body position say about an hour. He knows whenever he changes the position. He knows his body position. He knows his changing of body positions. Moreover, he knows all the process of changing at his bodily environments. This means that he knows going forward as going forward and back as back. He knows looking straight ahead as he looks straight ahead and if else where as looking else where. He also knows all the body process of changing like changes in the process of dressing, carrying something, eating, drinking, chewing, savouring, urinating, defecating, walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking, speaking, and even when he is silent, he contemplates that he is silent. He has full understanding on what is happening at his own body. If this happens to individual, there is no problem and what he needs to do is just continue his practice steadfastly and this finally say about 7 years will lead him to enlightenment. Let alone 7 years, 6,5,4,3,2, or 1 year may suffice. Let alone 1 year, 7 months may suffice to be enlightenment. Let alone 7 months, 6,5,4,3,2,1, or even 14 days may suffice to be enlightened provided he is in real practice and not just thinking and reasoning. This is so hard even though easy to read them up. First try to sit for a complete hour. There will arise a lot of problems. Mind does not stay still. It is moving all the time. Mind is mixed with Moha, Lobha, Dosa and so on. Even 2 minutes may make the sitting meditator shattered and put him into a disaster. But with practice this can be overcome. Mind is moving all the time. Sometimes, it does not obey intended direction and frequently fall on sensual thinking and sensual thoughts become prevailed. This may go unnoticed and unchecked and realized only after a long period. To crack down this, another contemplation on own body has to practised. It is focusing on 32 body parts. After some time, sensual thughts are a bit settled down under the command of Patikulamanasikara or contemplation on 32 body parts or Kayagatasati Anussati Kammatthana. At another time, the practitioner contemplates on his own body focusing on 4 elements as there is nothing but 4 elements. When we die, our body is just a corpse. If we died today, it would become a corpse today. All people know that one day we will definitely die. The Dhamma practitioner knows this as well. He is going to contemplate on his potential corpse soon. May you all be able to contemplate on your own body. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing JourneyToNibbana 29117 From: Eddie Lou Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Angulimala Hi, Sarah, I am glad to be of some contribution and very respectful of your wisdom. Metta, Eddie Lou --- Sarah wrote: > Hi Vijita & All, > > I’m glad to see another post from you and I’ve >...(snip)... > discrepancies. As Eddie summarised, ‘unfortunately, > we live in a world > well dominated with idea of punishment and we are > more or less > influenced’. > > Many thanks to everyone for all the helpful > reminders and especially to > Christine for raising the thread and encouraging the > discussion;-) Vijita, > I look forward to more of your contributions. Also > Eddie and everyone else > too. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= > === message truncated === 29118 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Elements, no 1. Dear Howard, op 14-01-2004 00:03 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: ...you mention the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta below, and you include quotes from the commentary on it. I decided to look at the sutta directly in my copy of The Middle Length Discourses of the Buddha, and I just don't see in the sutta what the commentary sees. It seems to me that the commentary is "Abhidhamma-bound" to an uncalled for degree. As I read this sutta, everything that I see presented is quite conventional, and that applies as much to space as it does to earth element, fire element, air element, and water element. All these items are mentioned, but all are dealt with quite conventionally with ven a hint of "Abhidhammic fragrance." I see this sutta as a straightforward > one teaching non-clinging to all aspects of materiality in the conventional > sense > (bodily solids, liquids, air, winds, humours, cavities and apertures etc) as > well as non-clinging to a variety of namas, plus considerable teaching about > meditation to Rahula.... (snip) N: I am so glad you notice the Abhidhammic fragrance. Now a next step will be the Satipatthanic fragrance :-). Now in all earnest: it is difficult and time consuming, but the Dhamma student should read all or many, many suttas, and then he can evaluate what the Buddha¹s message is. Today, I took up other Rahula suttas in K II. Ch XIV, On Element. § 11: seven elements, and certainly, space-infinity-element included here is a subject for jhana. Rahula had accumulated skill for jhana. But, jhana is not enough. The three characteristics of paramattha dhammas, of the khandhas, have to be realized. Only thus could he attain arahatship. We read, Ch XVIII, § 1, the eye: that the Buddha asked Rahula: ³Is the eye abiding or fleeting?² Remark: the Pali has: nicca, permanent, or anicca, impermanent. Rahula answered that it is impermanent. The same is asked concerning dukkha and anatta. Then the same is asked about the other sense-organs and the mind. The next paras: the same about the sense objects, cognitions through the six doorways, contact, feeling, perception, volition, craving elements, aggregates. As to elements, this is referred to as the four great elements. Points of consideration for the Dhamma student: is the teaching contained in this sutta Abhidhamma as well as satipatthana or not. Does the Buddha teach here the ultimate realities or not. And is the purpose to develop direct understanding of realities so that they eventually can be realized as impermanent, dukkha and non-self, or not. We also read in Vis. XI, 27, etc. that the elements are a subject of samatha. But what is the meaning? Jhana is not enough, their true nature should be realized by vipassana. We read, XI, 43: The Dhamma student may attain jhana with this subject, but only with insight he can realize the three characteristics of what are mere elements. I have more to say, later on, on the satipatthanic fragrance. I do not know how much time I have, have to play it by ear. There is my packing list, full of Abhidhammic and satipatthanic fragrance! Nina. P.S. The points of consideration given above should just be seen as a long term project of discoveries by the Dhamma students. I am also in for a long, long term study project. 29119 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 11:01am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hello Sarah, S2: I think that when the Buddha used these words (khandhas) he was pointing out the exact opposite to what you are saying. He was pointing out that by knowing the ‘real and actual’ as opposed to concepts, slowly the idea of self will be eradicated. Michael: I don’t see the Buddha pointing out the ‘real and actual’. I see him rejecting the notion that there is a ‘real and actual’ as well as its opposite ‘not real and not actual.’ I see the Buddha pointing towards dependent origination all the time. And dependent origination is not ‘real and actual’ nor ‘not real and not actual.’ S2: Could you give me some Tipitaka references which suggest that concepts and entities are conditioned, share the 3 characteristics and can be object of insight. S2: Exactly, concepts are non existent except as imaginary constructs. Michael: Concepts = Paññatti, for example a human being. Entities = Khandhas. Can you give me a sutta which states that paññatti, or a human being, is non existent. Metta Michael 29120 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 11:14am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hello Sarah, S2: You use ‘ultimate reality’ or ‘existing reality’ in a different sense to the way the commentarie and we use these terms, so be it. Rupas, vedana, sanna, sankhara and vinnana exist momentarily by conditions and then fall away. Whether they are referred to as paramattha or ‘existing’ or ‘actual’, they are like the foam, the water bubble, the mirage, the plaintain or the magician’s trick, without self, lasting essence or core and knowable by insight.. Michael: Again the same story of using words that have a very clear meaning but pretending they mean something else. But another point here is how can you say that something ‘exists momentarily’? Either the thing exists or it does not exist. Because for a thing to exist it has to have something in it that justifies its existence. And non existence is the absence of that. So how is it possible that a thing exists and then loses that something and suddenly does not exist anymore. Show me a sutta where the Buddha said that things exist momentarily. Not commentaries, suttas. Metta Michael 29121 From: Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 7:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi, Michael (and Sarah) - In a message dated 1/16/04 2:24:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, mbeisert@h... writes: > Hello Sarah, > > S2: You use ‘ultimate reality’ or ‘existing reality’ in a different sense > to > the way the > commentarie and we use these terms, so be it. Rupas, vedana, sanna, > sankhara and vinnana exist momentarily by conditions and then fall away. > Whether they are referred to as paramattha or ‘existing’ or ‘actual’, they > are like the foam, the water bubble, the mirage, the plaintain or the > magician’s trick, without self, lasting essence or core and knowable by > insight.. > > Michael: > Again the same story of using words that have a very clear meaning but > pretending they mean something else. But another point here is how can you > say that something ‘exists momentarily’? Either the thing exists or it does > > not exist. Because for a thing to exist it has to have something in it that > justifies its existence. And non existence is the absence of that. So how is > > it possible that a thing exists and then loses that something and suddenly > does not exist anymore. Show me a sutta where the Buddha said that things > exist momentarily. Not commentaries, suttas. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Michael, I tend to agree with you about momentariness, but not about what it means to exist. The key point, as I see it, is your claim that "for a thing to exist it has to have something in it that justifies its existence." I just don't get that insisting on such a restricted sense of 'exist'. For a condition to hold/exist there must have been prior and co-occurring conditions for it to appear. I see nothing more or less needed. To assume that there must be some core or essence is to allow the substantialists to steal with the term 'exist'. The Buddha accepted neither substantial self-existence of conditions nor nihilistic nonexistence, but the middle-way phenomenon of conditioned existence. ------------------------------------------------------- > > 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) 29122 From: Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 7:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi again, Michael - I wrote my last post to you quickly, with some typos. Permit to repair it: > Howard: > Michael, I tend to agree with you about momentariness, but not about > what it means to exist. The key point, as I see it, is your claim that "for > a > thing to exist it has to have something in it that justifies its existence." > I > just don't get that - insisting on such a restricted sense of 'exist'. For a > > condition to hold/exist there must have been prior and co-occurring > conditions > for it to appear. I see nothing more or less needed. To assume that there > must > be some core or essence is to allow the substantialists to steal the term > 'exist'. The Buddha accepted neither substantial self-existence of > conditions > nor nihilistic nonexistence of conditions, but, rather, the middle-way > phenomenon of conditioned existence. > ========================== 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) 29123 From: connie Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 1:51pm Subject: red slippers Dear Nina, I see Icaro has posted again! You reminded me of a an old tale about a girl who was so overjoyed to put on a beautiful pair of red slippers only to find that she couldn't stop dancing or take them off... all our infatuations with our packings and carrying on. Whatever the font problem was with my computer, the VRI font now shows up the way it should, but I believe the Tipitaka site is still using that one. The secret decoder ring insert follows for those who might be interested in seeing Apples through my Windows. peace, connie VRI code: ¼ 1/4 = .l ½ 1/2 = .m ¾ 3/4 = Aa ± combined +_ = aa µ u w/long tail in front = .t ñ = ~n superscripts: º 0 = .n ¹ 1 = .d ² 2 = ii ³ 3 = uu ª a = "n (n with a dot on top) Þ longhorn = .D Ý y fwdhat = .T ì i bkwdhat = " (dbl quote) î i duncehat = "n (n w/dot on top) 29124 From: Michael Beisert Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hello Howard, I agree with what you say. Maybe I am being a little bit picky, but I prefer to be careful and whenever possible refrain from saying that things exist because of the loaded connotation of ‘existence.’ If existence is used it should always be clear that it is conditioned existence. Metta Michael >From: upasaka@a... >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi >KenO;-)) >Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 15:36:56 EST > >Hi again, Michael - > > I wrote my last post to you quickly, with some typos. Permit to >repair >it: > > > Howard: > > Michael, I tend to agree with you about momentariness, but not about > > what it means to exist. The key point, as I see it, is your claim that >"for > > a > > thing to exist it has to have something in it that justifies its >existence." > > I > > just don't get that - insisting on such a restricted sense of 'exist'. >For a > > > > condition to hold/exist there must have been prior and co-occurring > > conditions > > for it to appear. I see nothing more or less needed. To assume that >there > > must > > be some core or essence is to allow the substantialists to steal the >term > > 'exist'. The Buddha accepted neither substantial self-existence of > > conditions > > nor nihilistic nonexistence of conditions, but, rather, the middle-way > > phenomenon of conditioned existence. > > >========================== >With metta, >Howard 29125 From: icarofranca Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 2:58pm Subject: Re: red slippers Dear Connie: Connie:" I see Icaro has posted again!" ------------------------------------------------------------------- Right!!! Time and again, having free time I surely do post here! Everything changes, everything flows...sometimes our lives´ stuff are gr= ounded only on Sammuit-sacca: shallow concepts, and such concepts easily com= e, easily go! Abhidhamma at everyday life begins with Kusala, Akusala and Kusalaskusal= a dhammas.At the other end, seeing Nama, Rupa and Nibbana as beyond general= ities about concepts is a great step for mind! ----------------------------------------------------------------- > You reminded me of a an old tale about a girl who was so overjoyed to > put on a beautiful pair of red slippers only to find that she couldn't > stop dancing or take them off... ------------------------------------------------------------------- I hope not stop dancing at this floor... Buddhaghosa still fools me wit= h all that Baroque Pali of Tikas!!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------- all our infatuations with our packings > and carrying on. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Relax, Connie! -------------------------------------------------------------- > Whatever the font problem was with my computer, the VRI font now shows > up the way it should, but I believe the Tipitaka site is still using > that one. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Fortunately the Pali texts are O.K.!!!! Mettaya, Ícaro 29126 From: Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:31am Subject: An Abhidhamma-Related Mathematical Model of Consciousness WARNING: Reading the following message may be dangerous to one's health, causing a reaction of nausea in any who are allergic either to Abhidhamma or to Mathematics! Hi, all - The following interval-model of consciousness has occurred to me and is presented here for your inspection: ___________________________ 1) An object (via any sense door) is an object of awareness during a time interval that corresponds to an OPEN interval on the real line, (start-time, end-time), within which the awareness of that object occurs. Call such an interval an "object interval." It corresponds roughly to the time during which a process (in the Abhidhammic sense) occurs. Note that neither the object and nor the awareness of the object exist at the interval endpoints. 2) A mental concomitant occurs also during a time interval that corresponds to an OPEN interval on the real line. Call such an interval a "concomitant interval." 3) No two objects have identical or even overlapping intervals. For every object interval, A, there is an immediately preceding object interval, A1, and an immediately subsequent object interval, A2, and, moreover, whenever B and C are two object intervals with C the immediate successor of B, the end-time of B is identical with the start-time of C. Adjacent object intervals are associated with different objects. [Recall that an object interval corresponds to a process, not a citta.] This guarantees that there is exactly one object of consciousness at any time. It also makes the start-time and end-time interval-boundary points times at which there is no object of consciousness present, but note that these are mere zero-duration points in time, and they amount to no more than blips/spikes in consciousness. 4) Concomitant intervals only occur contained within object intervals (making awareness of objects primary), and each object interval is covered (in the mathematical sense) by a finite number of concomitant intervals. This covering requirement guarantees that there is no consciousness of an object without at least one concomitant in effect as well. (Obviously, Abhidhamma would impose a further breakdown into types of objects and concomitants, and would impose additional co-occurence restrictions.) 5) Of two concomitant intervals, they may overlap, be disjoint, or one may contain another. No restrictions are imposed except, of course, for type restrictions - love and hate, for example, will not co-occur. 6) Define a "citta" or "mindstate" as occurring within a single arammanic interval, A, and starting at a boundary-point within A, and ending at the very next boundary-point within A. Thus, a citta or mindstate begins and ends with the arising or ceasing of the awareness of an object or of a mental concomitant to that awareness; and an object interval, corresponding to a process, consists of a sequence of consecutive mindstates. ---------------------------------------------------------- I would be very interested in hearing from those of you who have both knowledge of Abhidhamma and of Mathematics, what you think of this model, what you think its implications about consciousness are, and what are its strengths and weaknesses as a model. Certainly, I will also be pleased to hear from those of you without knowledge/interest in Abhidhamma or Mathematics, or both! ;-) With model 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) 29127 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 7:57pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Hi Eznir, Thank you for your reply. Some comments interspersed below. -----Original Message----- From: Eznir [mailto:eznir2003@y...] Sent: Friday, 16 January 2004 9:32 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Dear Herman Herman: Are action and intention synonymous in the Canon? eznir: Yes. Herman: According to the Canon, does the possibility exist to intend bodily... eznir: No. Intending is something of the mind, Nama, defined as vedana, sanna, cetana(intention), passa and manasikara. Whereas 'bodily' is something of matter, ie., Rupa. Therefore to intend bodily....... Herman: ....without acting bodily....... eznir: .... without acting bodily is impossible isn't it? Unless ofcourse, you mean 'intend mentally' and not bodily. But then you would have said so! And even 'mentally' is a form of action. Action is of three types, body, speech and mind. 'Intend bodily without acting bodily' is not coherent speech, is it? Notice how language has evolved in line with our thoughts! When we speak non-sense it doesn't sound sensible either! ==================================================================== Eznir, you are a funny girl. I asked about the relation between intention/action in the context of the Buddhist canon, because I didn't know, and now you tell me about my incoherent, non-sense speech because I didn't use the Buddhist usage. Yeah, right! :-) Modern physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary neural systems. The involuntary nervous system makes the body work and act without any reference to the mind at all. In fact, the body can be kept alive for decades without a head or heart or any other base you may care to name. There are billions of impulses traversing the body each second that not even a Buddha could be aware of. You have not convinced me that bodily intention to act bodily is as incoherent or non-sensical as you make out. =================================================================== Eznir: Intention is Action. They are synonymous. May you be Happy! ======================================================================== == Thank you for answering my question. All the best Herman eznir 29128 From: Eznir Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 10:25pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Dear Herman, When I said, "When we speak non-sense it doesn't sound sensible either!", I didn't mean to be-little you! I was trying to make the point to show how language exposes the flaws in our thinking pattern. Which is why I preceeded that statement with, "Notice how language has evolved in line with our thoughts!" That is to say that the clause in your statement "...to intend bodily without acting bodily..." doesn't sound ok! Which should point to the fact that something is wrong either in the thinking pattern or in the way it is presented. Re-reading your full statememt in question, I find that you have qualified it with "According to the Canon...." which implies that your thinking pattern is of a different 'environment', which I NOW realize, AFTER having read your reply, to be in line with "Modern physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary neural systems." Had you stated this para first.... "Modern physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary neural systems. The involuntary nervous system makes the body work and act without any reference to the mind at all. In fact, the body can be kept alive for decades without a head or heart or any other base you may care to name. There are billions of impulses traversing the body each second that not even a Buddha could be aware of." ..... and then posed your question it would have made sense! I repeat, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. May you be happy! eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi Eznir, > > Thank you for your reply. Some comments interspersed below. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eznir [mailto:eznir2003@y...] > Sent: Friday, 16 January 2004 9:32 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action > > Dear Herman > > Herman: > Are action and intention synonymous in the Canon? > > eznir: > Yes. > > Herman: > According to the Canon, does the possibility exist to intend bodily... > > eznir: > No. Intending is something of the mind, Nama, defined as vedana, > sanna, cetana(intention), passa and manasikara. Whereas 'bodily' is > something of matter, ie., Rupa. Therefore to intend bodily....... > > Herman: > ....without acting bodily....... > > eznir: > .... without acting bodily is impossible isn't it? Unless ofcourse, > you mean 'intend mentally' and not bodily. But then you would have > said so! And even 'mentally' is a form of action. Action is of three > types, body, speech and mind. > > 'Intend bodily without acting bodily' is not coherent speech, is it? > Notice how language has evolved in line with our thoughts! When we > speak non-sense it doesn't sound sensible either! > ==================================================================== > Eznir, you are a funny girl. I asked about the relation between > intention/action in the context of the Buddhist canon, because I didn't > know, and now you tell me about my incoherent, non-sense speech because > I didn't use the Buddhist usage. Yeah, right! :-) > > Modern physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary neural > systems. The involuntary nervous system makes the body work and act > without any reference to the mind at all. In fact, the body can be kept > alive for decades without a head or heart or any other base you may care > to name. There are billions of impulses traversing the body each second > that not even a Buddha could be aware of. > > You have not convinced me that bodily intention to act bodily is as > incoherent or non-sensical as you make out. > =================================================================== > Eznir: > Intention is Action. They are synonymous. > > > May you be Happy! > > ====================================================================== == > == > > Thank you for answering my question. > > All the best > > Herman > > > eznir 29129 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Jan 16, 2004 11:05pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Hi Eznir, There is no problem at all. I am happy to have received your answer. The content of your answer ie that action and intention, in the Buddhist canon, are identical, raises many questions for me. These questions are probably due to me not having a "Buddhist paradigm" at a gut level. I will leave the questions, for the time being. Thanks again for your reply. Herman -----Original Message----- From: Eznir [mailto:eznir2003@y...] Sent: Saturday, 17 January 2004 5:26 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Dear Herman, When I said, "When we speak non-sense it doesn't sound sensible either!", I didn't mean to be-little you! I was trying to make the point to show how language exposes the flaws in our thinking pattern. Which is why I preceeded that statement with, "Notice how language has evolved in line with our thoughts!" That is to say that the clause in your statement "...to intend bodily without acting bodily..." doesn't sound ok! Which should point to the fact that something is wrong either in the thinking pattern or in the way it is presented. Re-reading your full statememt in question, I find that you have qualified it with "According to the Canon...." which implies that your thinking pattern is of a different 'environment', which I NOW realize, AFTER having read your reply, to be in line with "Modern physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary neural systems." Had you stated this para first.... "Modern physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary neural systems. The involuntary nervous system makes the body work and act without any reference to the mind at all. In fact, the body can be kept alive for decades without a head or heart or any other base you may care to name. There are billions of impulses traversing the body each second that not even a Buddha could be aware of." ..... and then posed your question it would have made sense! I repeat, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. May you be happy! eznir 29130 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 0:01am Subject: RE: [dsg] Some Thoughts on Naturality Hi Howard, -----Original Message----- From: upasaka@a... [mailto:upasaka@a...] Sent: Friday, 16 January 2004 3:19 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Some Thoughts on Naturality Hi, all - My future daughter-in-law gave me one of those "Zen calendars" for my desk - you know, the kind that has another "saying" for each day of the month. ================================================================== HH]It is one of my ambitions to have a future daughter-in-law like yours :-) ================================================================== Today's saying is "No snowflake ever falls in the wrong place." In thinking about what this means, it seemed to me that it means that a snowflake doesn't think or will, but just "does". That then got me to thinking about human beings. Now, we both think and we will. Also, there seem to be two kinds of willing: Willing that "just happens" and which we might call "natural," and willing which involves an imposition of "self" and of thought. (Perhaps this is three kinds - there can be thinking without an interposing of "self.") ================================================================= HH] Howard, have you ever come across the following schema to explain human behaviour re a certain activity or goal? (1) unconscious incompetence (2) conscious incompetence (3) conscious competence (4) unconscious competence It sounds like your "natural" willing could be either 1 or 4. 1 is not aware that they will and that it doesn't achieve it's goal. 4 is not aware that they will and that it reaches it's goal I think folks in the category 2 or 3 show plenty of neurotic behaviour while learning the task at hand. 2 is full of "shoulds" and "musts". 3 may well be less than a pleasant companion, what with all that "look at me" stuff :-) ================================================================== Then I got to thinking about the implication that the "natural" willing is good, but the other is bad. Well, I'm not entirely certain about that. I think that very much depends on the characteristics of the person willing and acting. An advanced ariyan, and certainly an arahant, will, when willing and acting "naturally," act usefully, beneficially, out of a wholesome state of mind. But what of a worldling who is filled with selfish, self-serving desires and inclinations? When s/he acts "naturally," automatically, and without interpo sing "self" or thought, s/he quite typically acts in service to desires and emotions, and may well cause great harm! I recall a sutta, probably more than one, in which the Buddha advised *stopping* and *considering* before acting! It is not just that he said to act with sharp awareness, sharp mindfulness and clear comprehension, but to actually cease for a moment and to think carefully about what one is about to say or do. Now that is not "natural," but for most of us, it *is* good - very good. What do you folks think? ======================================================================= Being aware of what one doesn't know i.e. being aware that what one is attempting to achieve ain't working, is a vital step in learning. And being aware that what one is trying to achieve is working is also a vital step in learning. Once the task is learned, awareness of it's execution is not necessary. All good and well for learning a piece on the piano, or riding a bike, but what are we actually willing to achieve? All the best Herman ================================================================= 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) 29131 From: connie Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 0:34am Subject: Re: heartbase/rebirth Dear Htoo Naing, Nina, op 15-01-2004 10:33 schreef connie op nichicon@h...: > Nina quoted: U Narada, p. 33: during the process of dying: > > Does this mean that heart-base is the object of the current bhavangas? N: it could never be the object of the bhavangas of that life, these only have one object: the same as the rebirth-consciousness which is the same as the last javanas of the previous life. Rebirth-consciousness, bhavangacitta and dying-consciousness of one life always have the same object, they are door-freed and process-freed. As to the last javanacittas in a life: these can take the heartbase as object, thus, these are not bhavangacittas. They are followed by the dying-consciousness of that life (that has, as said, its own object) and then the rebirth-consciousness of next life has the same object as the last javanas of the previous life, in this case the heartbase. Is there anything not yet clear? Nina. C: The dying javanas of pastConnie, say Bonnie, take Bonnie heartbase as object and pass that object onto the patisandhi of Connie, so all bhavangas of Connie have Bonnie's heartbase as their object is still how I read it. And when Connie dies, the future Donnie's bhavangas would come up with Connie's heartbase as their object. But no, because the Bonnie cuti follows the last 5 Bonnie javanas and cuti has it's own object and that cuti object has to be what is passed to the Connie patisandhi, not the javana's object. And I guess that Bonnie's heartbase rupa would be at it's 17th moment as the Connie patisandhi was arising. Also, the heartbase would not necessarily be the object of the last javanas, would it? And is it always the javanas that preceed the cuti? connie 29132 From: sinweiy Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 1:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma-fatigue As there is a saying that goes - Learn Buddhadharma for a year, Buddha is next to you; Learn Buddhadharma for 2 years, Buddha is up in the sky. Learn Buddhadharma for 3 years, Buddha is cover up by the clouds. Perhaps it's because of the over to the dharma or to the technique of "swimming" and is not really living it up with daily life or jumping into the real water? In reality, the Buddha never wished to spend time on speculative (or metaphysical) issues of the Universe as they have little value for spiritual development towards True Happiness. When reached the other shore, what for do i need the boat? It's time to do some true renouncing, which is the renouncing of the inside, five skandhas. From the Heart Sutra:- "…O Shariputra, a son or daughter of noble family who wishes to practice the profound prajnaparamita should see in this way: seeing the five skandhas to be empty of nature. ... In the same way, feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness are emptiness. Thus, Shariputra, all dharmas are emptiness. …" Might start from our worldly processions. OM GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHI SVAHA amtb, sinweiy ps: On living it with the microscopic particulars & infinite detail, want to try Avatamsaka (or Hua Yen or Flower Ornament) Sutra http://www.superprajna.com/Buddhism/Avatamsaka.html (With commentary) ... a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Christine, > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Dear Group, > > > > I understand the purpose of studying the Abhidhamma in all its > > microscopic particulars is as an aid to realise the complete > > impermanence and anattaness of all dhammas. But, there is a > > problem - for me, at least. I find I've turned off and tuned out - > > actually several weeks ago - no longer read any of the technical > > posts and can't relate to the enthusiasm others seem to feel for > > discussing nama and rupa in infinite detail. > ..... > I'm not sure why this is a problem -- after all, it is the understanding > of realities whether reading miscroscopic particulars or having fun/not > having fun in any other way that counts. > .... > >Perhaps it's just a > > phase. Can't see anything about Abhidhamma-fatigue in the Useful > > Posts though ... > .... 29133 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 2:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: Contemplation On Own Body ( 01 ) Hi Sarah, Sarah: I think I'll take anything further on UP off-list now, if you don't mind. If anyone has further suggestions for us or wishes to work on an alternative compilation, also pls let us know off-list or just do it! James: Yes, you are completely right. It was stupid of me to even mention it on-list. It is unrelated to the dhamma and it isn't a big deal; it is rather petty really. People in this group have the ability to think for themselves. I was just thinking outloud about the issue. Sometimes I forget that you and I are not having a private discussion in this forum because most people stay out of our discussions. Sorry again and I will try to be more mindful of this in the future. Please don't respond to this post…I want everyone to just forget this ugly business. (See…I don't want lingering evidence of my mistakes! ;-)) Sarah: By the way, are you still working on your book for children? I'll be seeing the kids again tomorrow and Saturday if you want a prompt. James: No, I feel that I still have a lot more to learn about the dhamma before I feel qualified to teach it to anyone…even children. I am waiting on that one. Metta, James 29134 From: icarofranca Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 2:34am Subject: Re: heartbase/rebirth Dear Connie Respectfully butting in... > C: The dying javanas of pastConnie, say Bonnie, take Bonnie heartbase as > object and pass that object onto the patisandhi of Connie, so all > bhavangas of Connie have Bonnie's heartbase as their object is still how > I read it. And when Connie dies, the future Donnie's bhavangas would > come up with Connie's heartbase as their object. > > But no, because the Bonnie cuti follows the last 5 Bonnie javanas and > cuti has it's own object and that cuti object has to be what is passed > to the Connie patisandhi, not the javana's object. And I guess that > Bonnie's heartbase rupa would be at it's 17th moment as the Connie > patisandhi was arising. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Well exposed and done, Connie! At my viewpoint, this Trio Patisandhi-Bhavanga-Cuti is better understood as Jhanas with Resultants at Form-sphere ( Since jhanas are built on heartbase, there is a strong connection between these issues!) So You got the Joy and Happiness of Bonnie resulting up, by the grace of the Jhana and its heartbase, at the Joy, happiness AND One- pointness with sustained application of Connie. Such Joy, Happiness and One-pointness sustained application of Connie are going to result - via heartbase always! - at the equanimity, Joy, happiness, atc, of Donnie, Tonnie, Gonnie... What a lucky girl you are! What is passing on by and by is Patisansdhi and not the Javana´s object, due its analogy with the Jhanas - even at the form sphere! > Also, the heartbase would not necessarily be the object of the last > javanas, would it? Why not? Equanimity, happiness, joy...are all grounded on heartbase and are find even at more ethereal Jhanas!!! > > And is it always the javanas that preceed the cuti? When you got the Functional Jhana Resultants, you have got Javanas AFTER Cuti Mettaya, Ícaro 29135 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 2:51am Subject: Re: heartbase/rebirth Dear Connie, I hope these comments will help. With Unlimited Metta, htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Dear Htoo Naing, Nina, ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Connie: The dying javanas of pastConnie, say Bonnie, take Bonnie heartbase as object and pass that object onto the patisandhi of Connie, so all bhavangas of Connie have Bonnie's heartbase as their object is still how I read it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : No. Connie. The dying Javanas of Bonnie had to depend on Bonnie's heartbase as their home. But their object ( Arammana ) as a sense was different that is not heartbase. Bonnie's heartbase died out when he died. So,Bonnie could not give her heartbase to Connie. But Bonnie was sensing something consciously in his last moments. That sense is now unconsciously being sensed by Connie. The connection is there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Connie : And when Connie dies, the future Donnie's bhavangas would come up with Connie's heartbase as their object. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : No. This has been explained above. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Connie :But no, because the Bonnie cuti follows the last 5 Bonnie javanas and cuti has it's own object and that cuti object has to be what is passed to the Connie patisandhi, not the javana's object. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Connie. You seem to be confused. Bonnie's Cuti seated Bonnie's heartbase and it was sensing Gonnie's( past Bonnie ) Javana object. Bonnie Cuti object and Connie are not related and not connected. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Connie : And I guess that Bonnie's heartbase rupa would be at it's 17th moment as the Connie patisandhi was arising. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : No. When Bonnie's heartbase was at its 17th moment, there was no Patisandhi of Connie. When Bonnie's heartbase died out, Connie's Patisandhi arised. This is without interval and known as Anantara ( An- Antara ,no interval/space). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Connie : Also, the heartbase would not necessarily be the object of the last javanas, would it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : Heartbase is never the object ( Arammana ) of Javana. Object of Javana are Kamma, Kamma Nimitta, Gati Nimitta. Not a heartbase. But last Javanas do depend on heart base as mind seat. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Connie :And is it always the javanas that preceed the cuti? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo : No. Not always. Sometimes Bhavanga Citta preceeds the Cuti. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > connie 29136 From: Sarah Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Hi Chris (& Icaro), I haven't followed the logic of it yet, but perhaps even a quick glance at an Icaro post (with Connie's help) is surely enough to get anyone through 'Abhidhamma fatigue';-) --- icarofranca wrote: > Dear Connie > So You got the Joy and Happiness of Bonnie resulting up, by the > grace of the Jhana and its heartbase, at the Joy, happiness AND One- > pointness with sustained application of Connie. Such Joy, Happiness > and One-pointness sustained application of Connie are going to > result - via heartbase always! - at the equanimity, Joy, happiness, > atc, of Donnie, Tonnie, Gonnie... > > What a lucky girl you are! .... Great to see you back, Icaro with your own practical solutions to lost red slippers, Abhidhamma napping and heart to hearts;-) Metta, Sarah p.s. space has been made in the photo album section for your (temp.) folder of boot-camp..... New members, lots of room for member pix now!! ====== 29137 From: icarofranca Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:34am Subject: Re: heartbase/rebirth Dera Htoo > > I hope these comments will help. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Respectfully butting in II... ------------------------------------------------------------------ > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > Htoo : No. Connie. The dying Javanas of Bonnie had to depend on > Bonnie's heartbase as their home. But their object ( Arammana ) as a > sense was different that is not heartbase. Bonnie's heartbase died > out when he died. > > So,Bonnie could not give her heartbase to Connie. But Bonnie was > sensing something consciously in his last moments. That sense is now > unconsciously being sensed by Connie. The connection is there. > -------------------------------------------------------------------- There are six kinds of bases: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and heart, all these found in the sense-sphere...but the mind element, namely, the five-door averting consciousness and the two receiving consciousness, that rest in dependence of the heart base, the same with the remaining-mind-conscious-element ( that in my opinion is linked with rebirth),the same with Kusala, akusala, Functional, resultant etc. The only one independent of the heart-base is the formless-sphere resultant. (Vatthu sangaho) "Vatthusangahe vatthuni nama cakkhu sota ghana jivha kaya hadayavatthu c´ati chabbidhani bhavanti", etc,"Tani kamaloke sabbani ´pi labbhanti. Rupaloke pana ghanadittiyam natthi. Arupaloke pana sabbani ´pi na samvijjanti," and so on... Following up your reasoning, Htoo, the one form of consciousness Bonnie could transmit to Connie and so on is the Formless- sphere- resultants, since by your hipothesis the heart-base dies with each individual. Seems to me that the Abhidhamma Puggala states something different...but I may be wrong!!! Mettaya, Ícaro 29138 From: icarofranca Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Dear Sarah: Hi Chris (& Icaro), > > I haven't followed the logic of it yet, but perhaps even a quick glance at > an Icaro post (with Connie's help) is surely enough to get anyone through > 'Abhidhamma fatigue';-) ------------------------------------------------------------------- Geeeezzzz.... it´s good to be back!!!! Mettaya, Ícaro 29139 From: Htoo Naing Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:57am Subject: Contemplation On Own Body ( 06 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The Dhamma practitioner has been striving his Mahasatipatthana( meditation ) practice diligently. He has practised breathing meditation in detail. He has meditated on his body positions. He also has meditated on all his bodily movements. He has contemplated on each of 32 parts of his body. He has contemplated on basic four elements of his own body. He is still striving to attain a special wisdom. Now he realises that he is made up of body and mind. He is made up of Nama and Rupa. Nama or mind has to depend on Rupa ( body ). When the body does not admit this, when his Kamma does not admit him to stay any longer, when both body and Kamma do not allow him to stay in his very present life or even before the end of his present bodily life and Kamma life when he is no more allowed to stay in his very present life, Nama or mind does not have a chance to stay any more moment on the present body. If so, the left body will be just a corpse. This will happen surely at some time in his life. This is universal and all beings have to face one day. This kind of contemplation is a form of repeatitive contemplation called Anussati Kammatthana ( contemplating meditation ). As it is related to death, it is called Marana Anussati or death contemplation. The practitioner is contemplating on death. It is quite possible that one day he will definitely die. All his ancestors have died and they all left their respective bodies. When mind can no more stay on its co-existing body then the body is just a corpse. It will be like a log thrown on roadside, in forest, in jungle, and etc. When the corpse is a day or two or three days old, the body parts become swollen, become blueish, bloated, and festering as there are many reactions inside of that corpse and this is called Utuja Rupa. That corpse is not to be attached and no one will occupy that swollen corpse. After 3 days onward, the corpse will be bitten and nicked by crows, hawks, vultures, herons, dogs, tigers, leopards, jackals, worms etc etc. They will eat away the parts they like and the corpse will be thrown into a disfigured corpse with unidentifiable identity. As all the flesh of corpse has been eaten away, there left little flesh. The whole corpse is like just a skeleton. But that skeleton has some flesh and there is blood stick to some bones and some flesh. After that the corpse will not have any flesh and the whole corpse will be just a collection of bones fitted into a recognizable as human skeleton. But in that skeleton there is some blood smeared here and there as a remanant. After that stage the corpse will be seen as just a human skeleton and that skeleton is as dry as stone and there is no trace of blood and the whole skeleton is completely dry. In due course, the corpse becomes just loose bones and the bones are scattered here and there and there is just some recognition as human bones or may not be recognized as human bones. After that, the corpse is just scattered bones and the bones become white and dry. This happens on the corpse and after a year the bones become just bones and they start to decay. They become rotten, disintegrate and become just dust and finally there is nothing but dust and just Rupa that is four basis elements. In this way, the meditator contemplate on death and contemplate on his own body as potential corpse. There is nothing to be attached to own body as own or self identity or anything like that but just body and just Rupa. May you all be able to contemplate on your own body as a corpse. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 29140 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 6:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Hi Icaro and (Htoo) To me, heartbase must die when the cuti citta cease to exist, a new heartbase will be arise with rebirth-linking citta conditioned by kamma (only in the case where there is nama and rupa). Htoo - That sense is now unconsciously being sensed by Connie. The connection is there. Could you clarify bc I am abit confused by what you are saying, the connection should be kamma and not others. best wishes Ken O 29141 From: ashkenn2k Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 7:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Michael M: > I don't say that the characteristics are inseparable from the dhammas. I say that dhammas and characteristics arise interdependently. k: I dont think they are interdependently, bc dhamma dont depend on its characteristics to arise, it is the characteristic that needed the dhamma to arise in order to manifest itself. M: The word ultimate reality means what it means. You may not like it but that's what it is. Now if you don't intent to convey the idea of an ultimate reality then don't use those words. The Buddha never used them. I don't think the commentators were that dumm. They knew what they were writing about and they have chosen to define dhammas as ultimate realities. k: I check the meaning of ultimate - highest and undistorted sense; or it is the sense that comes within the sphere of knowledge that is highest and ultimate - is there anything imply here that is substanlism. So an ultimate reality is just describing khandhas (khandhas are paramathas dhamma) comes within the highest sphere of knowlegde - I think dont think this is not congruent with what Buddha describe the way to liberation throught the usage of khandhas as an expedient. k: Canki Sutta I encourage to look at the commentary yourself and not from any of us in DSG to tell you what the commentary writes. Read the commentary with a critical mind, investigate yourself and observe for yourself and not from other, this is what the Canki sutta is all about. Then it will be more fruitful and I sincerely hope you see for yourself. Best wishes Ken O 29142 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 10:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma and Math Hi Howard, thanks :-) See below. op 17-01-2004 00:31 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > WARNING: Reading the following message may be dangerous to one's health, > causing a reaction of nausea in any who are allergic either to Abhidhamma or > to > Mathematics! N: It depends on people's accumulated biasses and inclinations how they react to this. As to old timers here, it is quite predictable how they react. Some Dhamma students with scientific background may take to your presentation, they are bound to like it. Others who suffer from Abhidhamma fatigue, when they read your article, may find that the Abhidhamma in this way is indeed like a valley of dry bones, as Rhys Davis said. Others again may find that there is something missing here, that there is no connection with daily life. What that something is that is missing I cannot and will not explain in one sentence or one Email, but only step by step. I am sure you guess what it is! Thank you all the same, this Mail makes it even clearer to me which dilemmas can arise for the Dhamma student, Nina. 29143 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 10:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: brave soldiers, to Icaro Dear Icaro op 16-01-2004 23:58 schreef icarofranca op icarofranca@y...: > Abhidhamma at everyday life begins with Kusala, Akusala and Kusalaakusala > dhammas.At the other end, seeing Nama, Rupa and Nibbana as beyond generalities > about concepts is a great step for mind! N: Here we come to the essence. When we think only of concepts we never come to the heart of the matter, we always miss it. I: You reminded me of a an old tale about a girl who was so overjoyed to >> put on a beautiful pair of red slippers only to find that she couldn't >> stop dancing or take them off... > I hope not stop dancing at this floor.. N: When I received my Yamaka Pali and Co. I thought of you dancing when having downloaded all from Tipitaka org. I felt also like dancing, although I cannot dance. When we read the Yamaka there are questions and answers, and it is not easy reading. But with the Co these become so much more meaningful. The text comes to life. I: . Buddhaghosa still fools me with all that Baroque Pali of Tikas!!!!! N: Visuddhimagga is from Buddhaghosa, and the Tiika is from Dhammapaala, a later Commentator, but firmly rooted in the ancient commentarial tradition. Worth while to try him out, and then we see that he is so helpful. Now as to the Pali of the Tiika: at first I thought that I could not read it, but, like a good soldier we should never give up. Just going on, and then, here we go. Even though I know that I make mistakes. And also: never retreat, never give up satipatthana just now, the packing list is right at hand. Like brave Dhamma soldiers. In this sense I like the military spirit! All the best and success! Nina. 29144 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 10:03am Subject: beginners Dear Sarah, Another point. Alan wrote to me saying that he is interested in a tape for beginners. He will put this on his computer. But, this is the question: who is a beginner and who is not? About what do we talk to those who have never studied the Dhamma before? We can ask Kh Sujin, this can be very interesting. It is easy to get a selection for Alan and no problem to send them from here to England. Nina. 29145 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 10:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] red slippers Dear Connie, op 16-01-2004 22:51 schreef connie op nichicon@h...: I believe the Tipitaka site is still using > that one. The secret decoder ring insert follows for those who might be > interested in seeing Apples through my Windows. > VRI code: N: Yes, the same, thank you. Only we usually keep it simple, not using capitals. Thus those longhorns we do not need, and difficult to use in command: search and replace. And the quote signs, but I am used to these. Nina. > > Þ longhorn = .D > Ý y fwdhat = .T > > ì i bkwdhat = " (dbl quote) > î i duncehat = "n (n w/dot on top) > 29146 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 2:01pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Hi Ken and everyone, Wouldn't it be better to just wait till you die, and make a mental note of what is actually happening? All the best Herman -----Original Message----- From: Kenneth Ong [mailto:ashkenn2k@y...] Sent: Sunday, 18 January 2004 1:10 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Hi Icaro and (Htoo) To me, heartbase must die when the cuti citta cease to exist, a new heartbase will be arise with rebirth-linking citta conditioned by kamma (only in the case where there is nama and rupa). Htoo - That sense is now unconsciously being sensed by Connie. The connection is there. Could you clarify bc I am abit confused by what you are saying, the connection should be kamma and not others. best wishes Ken O 29147 From: Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 9:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some Thoughts on Naturality Hi, Herman - In a message dated 1/17/04 3:02:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, hhofman@t... writes: > HH] Howard, have you ever come across the following schema to explain > human behaviour re a certain activity or goal? > > (1) unconscious incompetence > (2) conscious incompetence > (3) conscious competence > (4) unconscious competence > > It sounds like your "natural" willing could be either 1 or 4. > > 1 is not aware that they will and that it doesn't achieve it's goal. > 4 is not aware that they will and that it reaches it's goal > > I think folks in the category 2 or 3 show plenty of neurotic behaviour > while learning the task at hand. 2 is full of "shoulds" and "musts". 3 > may well be less than a pleasant companion, what with all that "look at > me" stuff :-) > ========================= I haven't heard of this, but it is interesting. Yes, I guess natural willing could indeed be 1 or 4. I picture 4, in its ultimate perfection, as the mode of action of an arahant. I picture 1 as the mode of action of one who sleepwalks through life. And I think that 2 and 3, in varying combinations and strengths constitute the mode of actions of most of us. 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) 29148 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:09pm Subject: Re: An Abhidhamma-Related Mathematical Model of Consciousness Hi Howard, Howard: Certainly, I will also be pleased to hear from those of you without knowledge/interest in Abhidhamma or Mathematics, or both! ;-) James: Well, I guess I qualify in both areas! Okay, I have gotten over my math phobia and taken a look at your model! ;-) First, bottom line, I don't agree with your model even though it is nicely planned out. Here is why: You are describing consciousness as a self-regulating, repeating, phenomena of `open intervals' during which objects may or may not be cognized singly. This is in order to justify a `continuous stream' model of consciousness which you favor over a `namarupic' dependent stream. These intervals are supposed to have `zero duration points' at which they change, but there is never a break in consciousness. Any type of break in consciousness would be because the rupa fell away during an open interval before another arose and therefore would seem to be a break in consciousness but wouldn't be an actual break. Running in tandem with these open intervals would be `concomitant intervals' which also have zero points and may or may not overlap. These concomitant intervals would account for such things as emotions and moods. Am I following you so far? This model reminds me of Adobe Premiere which has video editing, special effects editing, and sound editing running concurrently on different timelines. It is also a bit like Flash which uses various timelines to create animations. The problem is that consciousness is dependent on rupa to arise and when the rupa ceases, the consciousness ceases. Consciousness isn't a self-regulating process of `open intervals' waiting for an object, it depends on the rupa to arise and when the rupa ceases, it will also disappear. Only the consciousness of the enlightened isn't dependent on rupa to arise and therefore doesn't cease. One citta must completely disappear before the next arises and one rupa will equal seventeen moments of citta until that citta has no more object and so that series of cittas will cease until there is another rupa that arises to attach to. The rupa is like a magnet that draws the cittas into being but the cittas oscillate, they aren't constant. They arise/fall, arise/fall, arise/fall, arise/fall, arise/fall…etc. When the rupa finally falls away, the citta process is quick to follow after that. I believe in this model because I have seen it for myself in very deep meditation. I have seen that the consciousness of a particular object (rupa) will attach to that object several times in succession and the consciousness isn't always the same and the object of attention isn't the same, like I wrote before: inside, outside, close, far, above, below, etc. When that object finally falls away, the consciousness that was attached to it falls away also. I have seen that the object (rupa) falls away first. Then consciousness doesn't begin again until there is another rupa to serve as a `magnet' for it. I know it sounds weird, and it is the darndest thing to experience, because it is completely out of your control (all you can do is watch it). Now, if this lack of control at the microscopic level means lack of control at the macroscopic level is debatable, but I am keeping an open mind about that. Metta, James Ps. I am just going to reply to your post on this list if you don't mind. It could get confusing otherwise. 29149 From: connie Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 4:41pm Subject: the return of Angulimala Dear Well-Rested and Fatigued, Let me confess that I awoke in the middle of the night under a big white flag with the motto "how stupid" for dancing about trying to find the object of bhavangas and wonder if I might hide myself at James' while I relax with a Pali dictionary, Icaro's influence on me. But maybe I can distract you with a tale about a certain necklace as given in the Mongolian Jatakas. I apologize for the length, but it's the best I could do without losing the nice flavour. peace, connie Angulimala's father was a wise, intelligent, exceedingly wealthy minister to King Prasejanit and from the highest caste. His gentle natured wife had become even more so as soon as the child had entered her womb, rejoicing on hearing of others' virtues and goodness and unhappy hearing of faults or evils, with great compassion on destitute beggars so the soothsayer called to name the child said his "name must be that of one who performs virute. His name will be Angulimala". This boy could run faster than horses, was stronger than an elephant and jumped as high as birds can fly. This was because he had once been a monk during the time of Kasyapa who had been unable to wade through the water to find anything to protect a crop he had been weeding when a terrible storm came up and he had vowed to have these strengths. He also prayed to meet the future Buddha Shakyamuni and be liberated from the Round. When he went to his teacher, he learned in a single day what took the others a year and the brahmin's wife fell in love with the lad. Once, when a master of gifts invited the school to help him for 3 months, Angulimala was left behind to help the wife and when he refused to satisfy the woman's passion, she decided upon revenge. Her husband found her on the floor with a torn dress and scratched cheek, sobbing over what she claimed was too shameful to tell. Naturally, the husband devised the ruse of the great secret teaching requiring 7 days of fasting and the necklace that would ensure rebirth as Brahma to punish this powerful son of a nobleman. Being no fool, Angulimala had some doubt, but the teacher plunged a sword into the earth after enchanting it with a magic formula so that a great rage arose in the boy and he was able to collect the first 999 fingers in 7 days, but couldn't find a single person after that until his mother, knowing he hadn't eaten, came to bring him food and ask about his terrible deeds. When he explained, saying she was next, she just said "You are not going to kill me or take my fingers". Then the Buddha steps into view and Angie's strength was drained away so that he found himself unable to run and Buddha explained that He was always sitting because of having the power of the samadhis through having calmed his senses, but that Angie had learned the wrong teachings from an evil teacher and relied on evil acts. Then He dropped the monk disguise and showed his true shining and adorned body, whereupon our boy felt remorse, confessed and heard the teachings, attaining the eye of the Dharma and firm faith and wished to become a monk. Buddha said "Welcome" and Angie's beard and hair fell out and he was a monk. Still, the countryside was in such fear that even a cow elephant was unable to give birth until our born again Buddhist said, "Unborn from the very beginning, I have killed no man". The king and army searching for him were sidetracked when their animals stopped to enjoy the beautiful sounds of an exceedingly ugly arahant monk reciting scriptures. For 500 lives he had been reborn short and ugly as a result of his anger and laziness when he helped build a tremendous jeweled stupa during the time of Kasyapa, but had a beautiful voice because he had regretted his fault when it was done and hung a golden bell atop it with the vow that he would always have a voice others would rejoice to hear and that he would meet Shakyamuni. Then the discussion turned to Angulimala and Buddha explained that he was now a monk and the search was over, he would take the king to meet him. The king was so uncertain that even hearing Angulimala's cough as they were outside the door caused him to faint when he remembered the murdered people... just as in an earlier time Angie had been a poisonous deadly insect eating bird whose very shadow could wither trees and the king, then an elephant king, had fainted when he heard him. Buddha then tells the king the story of Stripefoot, a king who had been conceived in fear of a lioness when his father had been departed from his entourage while chasing an antelope. Once, when he had promised to sport with whichever of his two wives should catch him first, the brahmin wife who had stopped to worship at a shine had lost the race and in her anger when the diety hadn't helped her, destroyed the shrine and the deity, in anger and confusion, decided the king would pay. Thus, one day when a rishi didn't make his customary alms visit to the castle, the diety took his place and refused his usual servant's fare, stating that henceforth he would only eat meat and fish. Insulted by this offering the next day, the real rishi cursed the king, saying "may you eat nothing but human flesh for 12 years". As it happens, one day there was no meat, but the king's cook finally found a dead child along the road and served this to the king, who, even after the cook confessed, said that he would have only this excellent fare in the future. When the cook was finally captured kidnapping another child, he was brought before the king and when the ministers were enraged upon king's confession, agreed that the monstrous king should be done away with. With the soldiers, they caught him in his bathing pool and placed him under arrest, whereupon he promised to refrain from evil in the future and the ministers agreed to spare him if it rained black rain and a black serpent coiled itself around his head. Instead, the king prayed to become a dragon by the power of his past virutes and thereby made his escape into the firmament where he said "In the future may it be you who are killed and may I eat your beloved wives and children" and flew away to another country. Here, the people came to live in fear and the other dragons became his followers. In honor of this, 999 princes were captured for a feast, but there was one missing. The terrified princes convinced King Sripefoot to capture the clever Suasomaputra, knowing he would think of a way to set them free. He was captured while listening to the Dharma and cried like a baby at not being able to hear the rest, but as he'd never told a lie and promised to return in 7 days, Stripefoot let him go. The brahmin spoke verses about the kalpa's end and the never exhausted round where evil arises from desire as all effect arises from a cause and "the true and certain become false"; where all appear thru ignorance as in the magic show and the mind without reality, arising from non-knowing, dwells with the four serpents and grasps at pleasurable things. He asks how the eternal can be in either form or thought and how, as body and mind are separate, he could be departed from the kingdom and our good prince, thinking on the meaning, rejoiced. His ministers tried to talk him into building an iron castle to live in, but since it is better to die than lie, our man kept his word and returned to offer himself up to the dragon. As he was so happy upon his return, Stripefoot wanted to hear what had happened and decided to give up killing and release all the princes. As he was now tamed and knew the Dharma, and the 12 year curse had ended, Stripefoot returned to his former kingdom and ruled justly. Our fainting king's men were those who throughout all their births had wanted to kill Angie Stripefoot whom Buddha, tamer of men and he who had removed all obstacles, had always 'turned back from evil and brought to supreme happiness'. Now, the fainthearted king wondered why all this killing had come about in the first place and was told the tale of a younger prince who had become a hermit until after his father and then his elder brother had died and the ministers of the country had sought him out and beseeched him to have compassion and agree to be the protector of his people. Alas, he hadn't yet cut off attachment and his passion for women came to master him so that it was proclaimed that all the maidens must first come to him before they married, and this was done. Then one day at a gathering of many people, a certain woman made water in front of everyone and when the people burst out laughing she asked what was wrong with a woman doing so in front of only other women as there were no other men in the country besides the king for if the others were real men, they "would do the thing" themselves. In shame, the people agreed that the king's behaviour had departed from the good and he should be destroyed. Once again, the soldiers sprang upon him in his bath and this time said they'd spare him if black snow fell and a poison serpent wrapped itself about his neck. Angered, the king reminded them of his hermitage and reluctance to return and vowed that if they killed him, he would meet and kill them in future lives... and so he had done as retribution for evil is inevitable. In fact, Buddha told the king "Even now as Angulimala sits in his dwelling, the fires of hell blaze forth from the hairs of his body" and sent a monk to open Angie's door and peek in, but when he tried, the key melted in the lock. The final paragraph reads: Then Ananda, the monks, the king, and the great assembly, having heard the Buddha's exposition of the law of retribution, exerted themselves and thought on the Four Truths. Some became streamwinners, some became once-returners, some become never-returners, and some became arhats. Some brought forth a mind of Supreme Enlightenment. Some entered the realm of no-return. Some directed their body, speech, and mind toward virtue and having faith in the Buddha's word, rejoiced greatly. 29150 From: Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 5:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Hi Connie and Htoo, Would it be correct to say the heartbase could be an object of javana only if the javana consciousness were a very high degree of amoha (panna/wisdom)? At that level, presumably, there wouldn't be a future life. Even so, there is reason to doubt that this could happen. I see that the Vism. commentary says the heartbase is to be known "from scriptures and from reasoning", in other words, conceptually. Also, I was wondering what, if any, difference one's bhavanga citta makes. If my last conscious moment manifests as a hatred for apples, that javana series will have kammic consequences but will the hatred for apples that manifests countless times as bhavanga in my next life have any kammic consequences, become a latent tendency, or in any way characterize my behaviour? Larry 29151 From: Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 1:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Abhidhamma-Related Mathematical Model of Consciousness Hi, James - In a message dated 1/17/04 6:11:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Howard: Certainly, I will also be pleased to hear from those of you > without knowledge/interest in Abhidhamma or Mathematics, or both! > ;-) > > James: Well, I guess I qualify in both areas! Okay, I have gotten > over my math phobia and taken a look at your model! ;-) First, > bottom line, I don't agree with your model even though it is nicely > planned out. Here is why: You are describing consciousness as a > self-regulating, repeating, phenomena of `open intervals' during > which objects may or may not be cognized singly. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't understand. What do you mean by self-regulating? And why do you say objects may or may not be cognized singly? In this scheme there is consciousness when and only when there is an object of consciousness, and that is all the time except at the instants of object change, when there is neither consciousness nor object of consciousness. ---------------------------------------------------- This is in order to > > justify a `continuous stream' model of consciousness which you favor > over a `namarupic' dependent stream. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: The objects are nama and rupas, and every object co-occurs with the cognizing of it , and there is no cognizing without an object. ---------------------------------------------------- These intervals are supposed to > > have `zero duration points' at which they change, but there is never > a break in consciousness. Any type of break in consciousness would > be because the rupa fell away during an open interval before another > arose and therefore would seem to be a break in consciousness but > wouldn't be an actual break. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: It would be a break, but not a gap. By a gap, I mean a break of positive duration. ------------------------------------------------------ Running in tandem with these open > > intervals would be `concomitant intervals' which also have zero > points and may or may not overlap. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, because of universal cetasikas, a number, at least seven I guess, if Abhidhamma is to be accepted, of concomitant intervals would all completely coincide with their entire object interval. ----------------------------------------------------- These concomitant intervals would > > account for such things as emotions and moods. Am I following you so > far? ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Each concomitant mental factor would occur in an associated concomitant interval. ------------------------------------------------------ This model reminds me of Adobe Premiere which has video > > editing, special effects editing, and sound editing running > concurrently on different timelines. It is also a bit like Flash > which uses various timelines to create animations. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know these. ------------------------------------------------------- > > The problem is that consciousness is dependent on rupa to arise and > when the rupa ceases, the consciousness ceases. > ---------------------------------------------------------- Why is that a problem? (Of course the object needn't be a rupa, but that's another issue.) That is exactly what this model says. That is built directly into the model. --------------------------------------------------------- Consciousness isn't > > a self-regulating process of `open intervals' waiting for an object, > it depends on the rupa to arise and when the rupa ceases, it will > also disappear. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The object intervals are exactly periods in which there is the consciousness of an object. When the object ceases so does the consciousness, and when the consciousness ceases, so does the object. There is no consciousness waiting in an interval for an object! That isn't being said at all. Whwn one arises, so does the other; when one ceases, so does the other. ----------------------------------------------------------- Only the consciousness of the enlightened isn't > > dependent on rupa to arise and therefore doesn't cease. One citta > must completely disappear before the next arises and one rupa will > equal seventeen moments of citta until that citta has no more object > and so that series of cittas will cease until there is another rupa > that arises to attach to. ------------------------------------------------------------ Howard: If you look at the definition of citta given in the model, you will see that no two cittas exist at the same time for even an instant. And the number of cittas occurring during an object interval simply isn't specified in this model. If one wanted to refine the model by building in the Abhidhammic restriction that there be 17 cittas in each object interval for an object that is a rupa, one could certainly do so. There are lots of details assumed in Abhidhamma that haven't been imposed on this model but could be. ---------------------------------------------------------- > The rupa is like a magnet that draws the > cittas into being but the cittas oscillate, they aren't constant. > They arise/fall, arise/fall, arise/fall, arise/fall, arise/fall…etc. > When the rupa finally falls away, the citta process is quick to > follow after that. ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't follow what you are saying here. --------------------------------------------------------- I believe in this model because I have seen it > > for myself in very deep meditation. > I have seen that the > > consciousness of a particular object (rupa) will attach to that > object several times in succession and the consciousness isn't always > the same and the object of attention isn't the same, like I wrote > before: inside, outside, close, far, above, below, etc. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: In what Abhidhamma calls a process, there is but one object, lasting throughout the entire sequence of cittas. I'm trying to model the Abhidhammic view. When there is change of object, it is a new process. ---------------------------------------------------- When that > > object finally falls away, the consciousness that was attached to it > falls away also. I have seen that the object (rupa) falls away > first. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: The consciousness that experienced that object has also fallen away; it is no longer the same consciousness. ----------------------------------------------------------- Then consciousness doesn't begin again until there is another > > rupa to serve as a `magnet' for it. I know it sounds weird, and it > is the darndest thing to experience, because it is completely out of > your control (all you can do is watch it). > ---------------------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree there is no control of this. Whatever arises (consciousness together with object) is conditioned by prior conditions, and that is that. But any*experienced* object (rupa or not) cannot precede the consciousness observing it, else it is not observed. There can be the fresh memory of it having just passed, but the experienced object and the experincing of it are co-occurring. ----------------------------------------------------------- Now, if this lack of > > control at the microscopic level means lack of control at the > macroscopic level is debatable, but I am keeping an open mind about > that. > > Metta, James > Ps. I am just going to reply to your post on this list if you don't > mind. It could get confusing otherwise. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Good. this list is really the proper venue for it, I think. ============================ 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) 29152 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 6:14pm Subject: Re: the return of Angulimala Holy Mackerel, Connie! Thanks for the Mother-of-All Incomprehensible Tales. Without T.V., I imagine this style of story would have stood in the place of the entertainment offered nowadays by T.V. movies and serials around the fire, by lamplight, on a dark winters' night in outer Mongolia. Same Old, same old though ... same old stereotypes, and same old mentality... In Cowells' translation of The Jataka Tales, (No. 537) Mahaa- Sutasoma-Jaataka tells how Angulmaala, cruel and bloodstained robber and man eater [so he was worse, then 'improves' in our sutta!], was also tamed by the Buddha when he (the Buddha) was "living in a previous stage of existence and in a condition of only limited knowledge." However - the Tale is 42 pages long, so I'll spare you. :-) Well! maybe the sutta version and explanations were not so bad! Everything is relative ... Certainly more entertaining than a summary offered at: http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/ay/angulimaala.htm metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" maybe I can > distract you with a tale about a certain necklace as given in the > Mongolian Jatakas. I apologize for the length, but it's the best I > could do without losing the nice flavour. > peace, > connie 29153 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 7:39pm Subject: Samyutta Nikaya 3 Kosalasamyutta 22 (2) Grandmother Dear Group, King Pasenadi's Nana dies, and miserable and hurting he goes to the Blessed One. He seems to have loved her very dearly, and like all of us, would have bargained with death, if only he could... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- Samyutta Nikaya 3 Kosalasamyutta 22 (2) Grandmother "At Saavatthi. Then, in the middle of the day, King Pasenadi of Kosala approached the Blessed One... The Blessed One said to him as he was sitting to one side: "Where are you coming from, great king, in the middle of the day?" "Venerable sir, my grandmother has died. She was old, aged, burdened with years, advanced in life, come to the last stage, 120 years from birth. Venerable sir, my grandmother was dear and beloved to me. If, venerable sir, by means of th elephant-gem I could have redeemed her from death, I would have given away even the elephant-gem so that she would not have died. [n.251] If by means of the horse-gem I could have redeemed her from death ... If by a prize village I could have redeemed her from death ... If by means of the country I could have redeemed her from death, I would have given away even the country so that she would not have died." "All beings, great king, are subject to death, terminate in death, and cannot escape death." "It is wonderful, venerable sir! It is amazing, venerable sir! How well this has been stated by the Blessed One: 'All beings, great king, are subject to death, terminate in death, and cannot escape death.'" "So it is, great king! So it is, great king! All beings, great king, are subject to death, terminate in death, and cannot escape death. Just as all the potter's vessels, whether unbaked or baked, are subject to a breakup, terminate in their breakup, and cannot escape their breakup, so all beings are subject to death, terminate in death, and cannot escape death. "All beings will die, "For life ends in death, They will fare according to their deeds, Reaping the fruits of their merit and evil: The doers of evil go to hell, The doers of merit to a happy realm. "Therefore one should do what is good As a collection for the future life. Merits are the support for living beings ]When they arise] in the other world." in note 251 - Spk: When his mother died his grandmother filled her place in bringing him up; hence he had such a strong affection for her. The elephant-gem was an elephant worth 100,000 kahaapana, decked with ornaments worth the same amount. The same explanation applies to the horse-gem and the prize village. 29154 From: Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:05pm Subject: A Missing Feature (Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma and Math) Hi, Nina - I think that there is a feature missing from the model I gave that is important to mention, though it may wellnot be what you had in mind. Now, this may or may not be consistent with Abhidhamma, but I believe that nothing remains *exactly* the same even for a moment. At the very least, for any cetasika and for any experienced of an object, that cetasika or object changes in intensity during its interval of existence, first increasing, then peaking, then decreasing. As an example, there might be, at some point in time within a namarupic flow, no anger whatsoever, but then anger arises, grows gradually, peaks, then decreases, and finally ceases. (It could, of course, then arise once again, in a subsequrent citta.) So, I see a constant flux occurring at all times, with nothing at all remaining exactly the same. Without mentioning that, it might be taken that the model I gave explicity rules that out, but that was not my intention. With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/17/04 1:09:46 PM Eastern Standard Time, nilo@e... writes: > > Hi Howard, > thanks :-) > See below. > op 17-01-2004 00:31 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >WARNING: Reading the following message may be dangerous to one's health, > >causing a reaction of nausea in any who are allergic either to Abhidhamma > or > >to > >Mathematics! > N: It depends on people's accumulated biasses and inclinations how they > react to this. As to old timers here, it is quite predictable how they > react. > Some Dhamma students with scientific background may take to your > presentation, they are bound to like it. Others who suffer from Abhidhamma > fatigue, when they read your article, may find that the Abhidhamma in this > way is indeed like a valley of dry bones, as Rhys Davis said. Others again > may find that there is something missing here, that there is no connection > with daily life. > What that something is that is missing I cannot and will not explain in one > sentence or one Email, but only step by step. I am sure you guess what it > is! > Thank you all the same, this Mail makes it even clearer to me which dilemmas > can arise for the Dhamma student, > Nina. > /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) 29155 From: Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 3:10pm Subject: Re: A Missing Feature (Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma and Math) Hi again, Nina - The following is a typo. > At the very least, > for any cetasika and for any experienced of an object, ... > It *should* read as follows: "At the very least, for any cetasika and for any experienced object, ..." Sorry. 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) 29156 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 9:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Dear Connie, Donnie, Bonnie, op 17-01-2004 09:34 schreef connie op nichicon@h...: > Also, the heartbase would not necessarily be the object of the last > javanas, would it? N: Not at all, it can be any object through one of the six doors, and this depends on the kamma that will produce the following rebirth. However, as I quoted from U Narada, the last javanas can have heartbase as their object. He gave the example:U Narada, p. 33: during the process of dying: C: And is it always the javanas that preceed the cuti? N: These javanas conditioned by kamma are decisive for one's next life. But these javanas are usually only five and also they are weak. Still, it is kamma that conditions them. > C: The dying javanas of pastConnie, say Bonnie, take Bonnie heartbase as > object and pass that object onto the patisandhi of Connie, so all > bhavangas of Connie have Bonnie's heartbase as their object is still how > I read it. N: correct. C:And when Connie dies, the future Donnie's bhavangas would > come up with Connie's heartbase as their object. N: The object of rebirth, bhavangas and cuti of the Donnie life can change entirely. C: But no, because the Bonnie cuti follows the last 5 Bonnie javanas and > cuti has it's own object and that cuti object has to be what is passed > to the Connie patisandhi, not the javana's object. N: No. The cuticitta has nothing to pass, except accumulated tendencies. No object is passed from Bonnie cuti to the next Connie patisandhi. you have to look back at the last javanas of a life, that is what counts. We have to be careful with the expression: passing an object. C:And I guess that > Bonnie's heartbase rupa would be at it's 17th moment as the Connie > patisandhi was arising. N: Bonnie's heartbase rupa falls away completely after seventeen moments, and it is not passed on at all. When we say: the object of Connie patisandhi is the heartbase that was experienced during the last javanas of Bonnie, this means: the patisandhi has as it were an echo of that object. Not the rupa heartbase itself, that is already gone. I hope everything is clear, Bonnie, Connie, Donnie? Nina. 29157 From: Eznir Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 10:13pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Dear Herman, Quoting from the platform of Abhidamma: Material phenomena arises in four ways, (1) Kamma, (2) Mind, (3) Seasonal conditions (heat-element) and (4) Food. Herman: "The involuntary nervous system makes the body work and act without any reference to the mind at all." eznir: The causes of the behaviour of the involuntary nervous system, if not Kamma and Mind, would be due to the nutritive value in the food that we eat and the digestive system involving heat and of course the respiratory system apart from the actual intention of (though it appears autonomous) in-and-out-breathing. But note that even for (3) and (4) to be operative (1) and (2) must be already 'in place'. Perhaps this would be of some help. Be Happy! eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi Eznir, > > There is no problem at all. > > I am happy to have received your answer. The content of your answer ie> that action and intention, in the Buddhist canon, are identical, raises many questions for me. > > These questions are probably due to me not having a "Buddhist paradigm" at a gut level. > > I will leave the questions, for the time being. > > Thanks again for your reply. > > Herman > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Eznir [mailto:eznir2003@y...] > Sent: Saturday, 17 January 2004 5:26 PM > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action > > Dear Herman, > > When I said, "When we speak non-sense it doesn't sound sensible > either!", I didn't mean to be-little you! I was trying to make the > point to show how language exposes the flaws in our thinking pattern. > Which is why I preceeded that statement with, "Notice how language > has evolved in line with our thoughts!" That is to say that the > clause in your statement "...to intend bodily without acting > bodily..." doesn't sound ok! Which should point to the fact that > something is wrong either in the thinking pattern or in the way it is presented. > > Re-reading your full statememt in question, I find that you have > qualified it with "According to the Canon...." which implies that > your thinking pattern is of a different 'environment', which I NOW > realize, AFTER having read your reply, to be in line with "Modern > physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary neural > systems." > > Had you stated this para first.... > > "Modern physiology distinguishes between voluntary and involuntary > neural systems. The involuntary nervous system makes the body work > and act without any reference to the mind at all. In fact, the body > can be kept alive for decades without a head or heart or any other > base you may care to name. There are billions of impulses traversing the body each second that not even a Buddha could be aware of." > > ..... and then posed your question it would have made sense! > > I repeat, I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. > > May you be happy! > > eznir 29158 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 11:35pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Abhidhamma-Related Mathematical Model of Consciousness Hi Howard, Howard: I don't understand. What do you mean by self-regulating? And why do you say objects may or may not be cognized singly? In this scheme there is consciousness when and only when there is an object of consciousness, and that is all the time except at the instants of object change, when there is neither consciousness nor object of consciousness. James: Oh, then I didn't understand your model. Sorry, I tried ;-)) Metta, James 29159 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 11:38pm Subject: Re: the return of Angulimala Hi Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Dear Well-Rested and Fatigued, > Let me confess that I awoke in the middle of the night under a big white > flag with the motto "how stupid" for dancing about trying to find the > object of bhavangas and wonder if I might hide myself at James' while I > relax with a Pali dictionary, Icaro's influence on me. Hmmm...are you trying to tell me something? Metta, James 29160 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 11:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What the Buddha taught Herman Hi. Thanks for your further comments, and my apologies for the delay in getting back to you. --- Egberdina wrote: > Hi Jon, ... > There seem to be a number of suttas relating to how the Buddha got > to where he got. From what I have gathered it came down to a > determination to not budge until he had found the answers he was > looking for. Seven days, whether an exact figure or indicative of > some fullness of time, of seated meditation, followed by three > night watches (again as above) of piercing analysis. What you refer to here was the final step of an incredibly long journey, so it should not be seen as the key factor in the final outcome, any more than was, say, what he had for breakfast that morning. Remember that Gotama was destined to become enlightened in that lifetime -- he could not have not made it (the power of conditions!). > I am not sure of what he did, but I'm pretty sure that he explained > it only to folks who were doing what he was doing. He explained the teaching to anyone who was ready to hear it, regardless of their current MO. It was part of the Buddha's daily routine to survey the world to see who was ready to hear about the truths, and to then seek out those persons. Actually, this is an important fact to keep in mind. It explains in part at least why the underlying meaning of the suttas is so difficult to discern. The suttas record an exchange between two persons on a complex subject in which both were highly skilled (one much more so that the other, of course), using everyday language and images but with certain specialised meanings. Given this, it's no wonder we need the help of the commentaries and the Abhidhamma to understand the suttas. > As I wrote to Dan earlier on today, if the path was a way of > acquiring something, what you say above makes sense. But we are > travelling in an opposite direction. Advice on how to become > unencumbered will never get one unencumbered. Willingness to ditch > some or all of our luggage will forever remain OUR choice. (nb The > willingness only) But wrong view is not something that can be 'ditched'. It gets replaced only to the extent that understanding/right view is developed. And anyway, we first need to know what wrong view is: wrong view *of what*, for example? > As far as I understand, any discussion of what happened to the > Buddha or how he did it was addressed to bhikkhus, not a fully- > fledged world limpet like myself. For this reason, I much > appreciated Victor's recent advice to Ben to seek out bhikkhus-in- > the-know to get his very profound questions answered. Bhikkhus do > what the Buddha did, and say what the Buddha said. As for me, I do > computer network maintenance, love my family, enjoy our exchanges > on the Internet, and resist all further conviction that flows from > reading the texts, and doing what they suggest. If the suttas and commentaries as they stand are not relevant to ordinary lay-folk like you and me how will your hypothetical bhikkhu-in-the-know be able to help (and how does one find such a person in the first place)? Another thing that needs to be considered is how (i.e., by reference to what criteria) should the listener evaluate the answers he is given? At some stage it all has to be figured out for oneself. The other person can only help keep one on the right path. Jon (fellow world-limpet ;-)) PS > The observation also does not hold true in the case of parents > versus children :-) ... > I'd be quite interested, purely out of interest, to see some of the > examples you have in mind. I was suggesting that in the case of a Buddha it would not be true to say that actions were a better indicator of beliefs that speech, and I was asking whether, in suggesting the opposite, you had any specific instances in mind. 29161 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 17, 2004 11:56pm Subject: Paramattha, samutti etc (was, characteristics) Michael (Sorry for the slow turnaround time ;-)) --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Jon M: To begin with, the Buddha never felt the need to make this distinction between paramatha and pannatti. J: There may be some terminological differences between us here. I see the distinctions made in the texts as being between paramattha and samutti, between dhamma and pannatti, and between sabhava and asabhava/abhava. And by the way, these are not distinctions of good vs. bad or right vs. wrong -- simply distinctions that need to be known and appreciated. The terms 'paramattha' and 'samutti' are often coupled with truths (sacca), or terms (vacana) or exposition (desana). A truth is said to be paramattha (from 'parama' = ultimate, highest, final, and 'attha' = reality, thing) if it is a truth about dhammas that holds good for all beings, during all ages, in all worlds. For example, "All dhammas are anatta". This is a truth 'in the highest sense' of the term. Surely there is no hidden substantialism here, despite the use of 'paramattha'? We could equally call these truths 'eternal truths', without necessarily implying any 'eternalistic' view. It is all a question of use of language. Likewise when applied to 'dhammas', 'paramattha' means 'in the highest/ultimate sense', so the expression 'paramattha dhammas' means 'realities in the highest sense' of the word. This indicates that there is nothing *more 'real'* than dhammas. Why should this be seen as implying substantiality? Both the Abhidhamma pitaka and the Sutta pitaka deal with paramattha sacca and paramattha dhammas, but they do so by using different approaches. The Sutta pitaka is characterised by 'conventional' expression (samutti vacana/desana), and the Abhidhamma by 'absolute/ultimate' expression (paramattha vacana/desana). However, as Nyanatiloka notes in his 'Buddhist Dictionary': <> I know you do not question the Abhidhamma -- I mention this to show that there is nothing necessarily sinister about the term 'paramattha', but rather that it serves a very useful purpose. M: Why? Because the khandhas do not represent the ‘truth,’ meaning a truth in an ultimate sense. There is no ultimate truth in the conditioned world. There is only conventional truth. Everything in the conditioned world is conventional truth. J: I'm not sure what you mean by, 'There is no ultimate truth in the conditioned world ... only conventional truth'. The truths discovered and taught by the Buddha are truths that can be known only by developed insight into the true nature of dhammas/the khandhas. The Buddha referred to these truths as 'noble' (ariyan) truths. They are certainly not regarded in the teachings as conventional in any sense, even when known at the mundane level. I see the distinction between conventional-sense truths and ultimate-sense truths as being a very important one and furthermore one that, had it not been explained, would not have been apparent to us from a bare reading of the suttas or Abhidhamma (i.e., without the assistance of the commentaries). By the way, an interesting example of a paramattha sacca that is expressed in both conventional and absolute terms is the first Noble Truth. The reference to birth, aging, death, separation etc expresses the truth in conventional terms, while the reference to the five khandhas expresses the same truth in absolute terms. Jon 29162 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 0:10am Subject: Aggregates and detachment (was, characteristics) Hi again, Michael --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Jon M: The reason the Buddha used the five aggregates is because they are the basis for clinging and his teaching was focused on elimination of suffering. ... But in my view, viewing the aggregates as completely empty, devoid of any characteristic of paramattha is more conducive to detachment. J: Yes, let's talk about detachment and the development of the path. The Dhamma is about the present moment. Detachment is the kusala that is the absence of attachment. Attachment is gradually eradicated as insight into the true nature of dhammas/the aggregates is developed. I think there is no disagreement here. What is the significance or relevance of how we view the aggregates in terms of paramattha, sabhava, emptiness etc? It is important I believe to realise that any idea we have about the aggregates as a result of reading or studying, whether the suttas, the Abhidhamma or the commentaries, is just a kind of *thinking about* the aggregates (or, more correctly, about *our concept of* the aggregates). There is no point in *trying to see* dhammas in that particular way (to my understanding, that would probably be wrong view leading the way to more accumulated wrong view). What is important is a correct intellectual grasp of what is or is not meant by the aggregates/khandhas (the dhammas that can be the object of insight), since without this the development of insight cannot begin. So mere *ideas about* dhammas as 'paramattha' or 'sabhava' are not part of the development of the path at the present moment. However, a strongly-held and innate *view* on that issue, if not a correct one, could constitute an obstacle to the development of the path (for reasons you have mentioned in the past). The Dhamma is all about the dhammas of this very moment and the truths relating to them. Seeing and visible-object, hearing and sound, etc. Thinking, feeling, attachment. The five khandhas, the elements, the sense-bases. Jon 29163 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 0:14am Subject: Re: [dsg]process cittas Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - ... > Yes ... well, I'm not surprised that material foreshadowing > process-of-cittas concepts would appear in the Pts.M. While there > is plenty of material > in this work that I find of value, particularly the material on > anapanasati > and the comments on sabhava, I certainly doubt the (direct) source > of origin of this work being the Buddha. > --------------------------------------------------- I'll add process-of-cittas concepts and the Pts.M. to the list. ;-)) Jon 29164 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 0:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] author's rights, etc. Hi, Nina --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon, > Yes, it is finished, but the Pali accents are not correct I think. > And sending it to Zolag first is another problem. As mentioned, the > quotes from Ven. Nanamoli, allowed percentage? > Nina. I agree we need to consider the copyright aspect. We can discuss it further in Bangkok (not long to go now!). If necessary, I can seek permission from the copyright holder (if that means BPS then it should be fairly straightforward). Jon 29165 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 0:38am Subject: Sabhava, etc (was, characteristics) Michael Hi, again. --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Jon ... M: I have been hearing this argument a lot. The dictionary has an unmistakable definition of sabhava and paramatha. J: Not sure what dictionary you refer to here, sorry. M: I have also said before, that the Mulamadhyamakakarika is directed as a response to the believers in true existence, which is unmistakably the followers of the abhidhamma philosophy. J: Yes I'm aware of that, but I don't see any particular significance in that fact when, having heard what the author has to say, we can come to out own conslusions on the matter, since we still have the Abhidhamma and the commentaries on which the work is based. Now the argument you have been putting forward seems to be that the commentators were closet substantialists but either didn't realise it or didn't want to admit it (which is it supposed to be?), but that their cover was unwittingly blown by their choice of the term 'sabhava' to connote the 'distinctive quality' aspect of dhammas. The problem for that case, however, is that you cannot point us to a single utterance (as opposed the mere choice-of-terminology aspect) in the commentators' writings that betrays their supposed substantialist views. To my reading of the texts, the key point here is that each dhamma has a distinctive quality, different from the distinctive quality of any other dhamma, by which that particular dhamma can be known to panna. Do you agree with this analysis of the teachings? M: To me it is similar to look at a green object, and everybody agrees that it is green, but then someone comes along saying that the maker of that object has used the green color but that his intention was to view it as red. Doesn’t make any sense. J: It is not the same situation at all. There is room for considerable differences as to the likely or necessary connotations of the terms essence and inherent characteristic. But because these differences are not provable objectively either way, this discussion can probably only be resolved by finding specific references in the commentaries themselves. M: But anyway, I have an open mind, and was given the Kathavathu as a reference to find those ‘detailed explanations,’ as you say, of sabhava and paramatha. I was not given though clear directions where to look. I will be at the BCBS early in February and plan to check their library. If worthwhile I will buy the book. Apart from the Kathavathu I was not given any other pointers, just vague remarks, I would be happy to have clearer indications where I can find relevant material in the commentaries on those ‘detailed explanations.’ J: I'll have to start looking. Ken O has given some references already that I believe are relevant. I will check the Visuddhi-Magga since this is one of the 'offending' texts you have mentioned. Can't promise anything in a hurry, though ;-)) Jon 29166 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 1:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element a concept? Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Nina - ... H: One thing that I hoped you might address in the discussion of the issue of space as a rupa is the two questions I raised in my post to Htoo. The first of these pertains to space seemingly being experienced through more than one sense door. J: If you're anything like me, the "space seemingly being experienced through more than one sense door" is rather like the hardness that is seemingly perceived through more than one sense door too. In either case, whatever else there is, there is a lot of conceptualising about space or hardness. H: The answer which I understand Htoo to have given and you to concur with is that "that space" is mere concept, but the "real space," the paramattha dhamma, is a rupa - an unobserved rupa. J: There is no need to think of 'real space' as being a rupa, since we are unlikely to conceptulaise this correctly in any event, and it may only create internal conflict. Can we not just think of there being, according to the teachings, a rupa that has a certain function, characteristic and proximate cause and to which the name 'space' has been given, this rupa being one of several that are not observable (and, as far as I'm concerned, one of many, many more that will not be directly experienced in this lifetime at least!). H: But that then led to my *second* question: "Htoo, doesn't this strike you as a bit ironic, with the space that is experienced being "unreal," but the allegedly "real" space being unobservable? Hardness that is real is actually observed! Sounds that are real are actually observed! But "real" space - that's the sort of space we *cannot* observe!! J: I think you have just neatly summarised one of the essential points made by the Buddha, that what we think we experience is not real (is concept) while what is real (the dhammas) are not experienced as they truly are. H: (Something's wrooong here! ;-))" J: Yes, but nothing more than usual! ;-)) Jon 29167 From: gazita2002 Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 3:21am Subject: Vism.- elements, recap-Nina dear Nina, thank you for your assistance. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Azita, > op 12-01-2004 00:53 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > > > I require clarification on mind-element [manodhatu], is this the > > same as heart base? > N: The Abhidhamma is not for memorizing and when we understand, we shall > remember. I do believe this too Nina. I have been reading other posts on various aspects of rupa and it seems to me that to go 'back to basics' is a good idea. In Manual of Abhidhamma, Narada states 'to understand the intricacies of Abhidhamma one should critically read and re-read the Abhidhammattha Sangaha patiently and carefully, pondering at the same time on the profound teachings embodied therein.' When I went for a walk today, I had the thought that rupa is all around me. What I see, what I hear, what I feel, what I smell. That is on a very gross level. Then to read that 'it endures only for seventeen thought-moments. Rupa changes so rapidly that one cannot strike an identical place twice.' Lots of thinking, but I quite enjoy this kind of thinking. > I will be missing you in Bgk! > Nina. and I too, will miss you, I hope it is a very meaningful time for you, Nina, as I'm sure it will. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 29168 From: gazita2002 Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 3:50am Subject: Re: the return of Angulimala Dear Chris, I burst out laughing, loudly, when I read your comment as a similar thought had occured to me. However, thanks to Connie for the marathon effort she put into this - altho I'm still not sure who's who in this yarn. Maybe yarns in the form of Jataka stories could be suggested for Cooran, around the camp fire at night. See who can read out the scariest one! Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Holy Mackerel, Connie! Thanks for the Mother-of-All Incomprehensible > Tales. Without T.V., I imagine this style of story would have stood > in the place of the entertainment offered nowadays by T.V. movies and > serials around the fire, by lamplight, on a dark winters' night in > outer Mongolia. Same Old, same old though ... same old stereotypes, > and same old mentality... 29169 From: gazita2002 Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 4:05am Subject: Re: Space element a concept? Dear Jon, Hello there. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Howard > H: But that then led to my *second* question: "Htoo, doesn't this > strike you as a bit ironic, with the space that is experienced being > "unreal," but the allegedly "real" space being unobservable? Hardness > that is real is actually observed! Sounds that are real are actually > observed! But "real" space - that's the sort of space we *cannot* > observe!! > > J: I think you have just neatly summarised one of the essential > points made by the Buddha, that what we think we experience is not > real (is concept) while what is real (the dhammas) are not > experienced as they truly are. > A. and so neatly pointed out, Jon. I think we forget this time and time again, well at least I do, can really only speak for myself. I think that is why we are all still in Samsara. > H: (Something's wrooong here! ;-))" > > J: Yes, but nothing more than usual! ;-)) > > Jon Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 29170 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 4:13am Subject: Bangkok Hi everyone, We are often reminded about conditions. And about understanding conditions. Well, the soon to happen and keenly anticipated get-together in Bangkok will come about through conditions as well. And some of those conditions depend entirely on the rejection of all metaphysical impositions from ignorant but dominant social groups. What is the name of that sutta that obliquely refers to aeronautical engineering? No doubt there will be penetrating awarenesses of heart bases, vittaka, the four great elements, the umpteen kusala cetasikas and so forth as the various Boeings head towards Bangkok. But it is precisely the rejection of metaphysical paradigms that allows your metal airships to glide through the skies, ladies and gentlemen, as you head towards another encounter with the great guru. If your pilot confuses the wind-element with something else, we'll read about it in the papers. It is gross dishonesty to live with the gypsies but talk as though you are catholic. Enjoy the trip, nonetheless. Herman 29171 From: icarofranca Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 4:18am Subject: [dsg] Re: What the Buddha taught Dear Jon- > Actually, this is an important fact to keep in mind. It explains in > part at least why the underlying meaning of the suttas is so > difficult to discern. The suttas record an exchange between two > persons on a complex subject in which both were highly skilled (one > much more so that the other, of course), using everyday language and > images but with certain specialised meanings. Given this, it's no > wonder we need the help of the commentaries and the Abhidhamma to > understand the suttas. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Respctfully butting in at a so relevant matter! An attentive Abhidhamma reader will note just at the beginning (at the Dhammasangani, for example) a profound concordance with the all Buddistic Suttas. If you got the Suttas as a Bona Fide registry of all the years Buddha spent preaching and teaching, the Abhidhamma is the real key for understanding all the structured pattern of thoughts used by Siddhartha Gautama in his dispensation and live (the tale of the Abhidhamma "in nuce" being preaching by Him to his Mother`s court just after his illumination is a good example of these interplay between hidden meanings - if any! - and litteral signification). The Old Cardinal Mazarin of France used to say that he had`t any plan or project on his writings but the grammar. The same with The Suttas: The Abdhidhamma, The Suttas, The Vinaya and the own Buddha's live are embedded in one ground of Wisdom and Experience. Concepts as General, Specific, Exoteric, Esoteric, Private, Public, Hidden and Expounded and so on are below the abysm even of Pali language and its grammar...only Sammuit-Sacca. Beyond these, the Ultimate Reality, The Nibbana. ------------------------------------------------------------------ And anyway, we first need to know what wrong view is: > wrong view *of what*, for example? ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Mahayanists get the wrong side when, building their reasonings over the Sanskrit Language, stand the viewpoint that the Samsara, the negative, Akusala patterns of our lives, can become The Real Nibbana by a mere change of our thoughts. Wrong. -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > If the suttas and commentaries as they stand are not relevant to > ordinary lay-folk like you and me how will your hypothetical > bhikkhu-in-the-know be able to help (and how does one find such a > person in the first place)? ------------------------------------------------------------------- The common basis of Wisdom - Panna - Experience and even grammar makes all these efforts if not a real Dhamma preaching ( we are not Bhikkhus at a Sangha anyway) at least a good foundation for better understanding of our lives. If you like to take up these issues to the Kamma level, so one could say that it is a good Kamma at the last end: a good simpleton viewpoint is a good viewpoint for any means, nes't pas ? -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Another thing that needs to be considered is how (i.e., by reference > to what criteria) should the listener evaluate the answers he is > given? At some stage it all has to be figured out for oneself. The > other person can only help keep one on the right path. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Ditto, Jon! Is it necessary to quote the Mahaparinibbana Sutta to clarify this question ? ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Jon > (fellow world-limpet ;-)) > > PS > > The observation also does not hold true in the case of parents > > versus children :-) > ... > > I'd be quite interested, purely out of interest, to see some of the > > examples you have in mind. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- I am struggling yet with the German translation of the Visuddhi Magga. Good Hermann could have got hints about it!!!! Mettaya, Ícaro 29172 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 4:33am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Hi Eznir, You told me about what the Abhidhamma says. I'd rather that you told me something that you experienced, like what you did today or how your computer pisses you off. You don't need to tell me how you passed some once nutritive elements into the toilet, I assumed that already. I'm sure it was hot, too. Be happy Herman -----Original Message----- From: Eznir [mailto:eznir2003@y...] Sent: Sunday, 18 January 2004 5:13 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: Kamma and action Dear Herman, Quoting from the platform of Abhidamma: Material phenomena arises in four ways, (1) Kamma, (2) Mind, (3) Seasonal conditions (heat-element) and (4) Food. Herman: "The involuntary nervous system makes the body work and act without any reference to the mind at all." eznir: The causes of the behaviour of the involuntary nervous system, if not Kamma and Mind, would be due to the nutritive value in the food that we eat and the digestive system involving heat and of course the respiratory system apart from the actual intention of (though it appears autonomous) in-and-out-breathing. But note that even for (3) and (4) to be operative (1) and (2) must be already 'in place'. Perhaps this would be of some help. Be Happy! eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi Eznir, > > There is no problem at all. > > I am happy to have received your answer. The content of your answer ie> that action and intention, in the Buddhist canon, are identical, raises many questions for me. > > These questions are probably due to me not having a "Buddhist paradigm" at a gut level. > > I will leave the questions, for the time being. > > Thanks again for your reply. > > Herman > > 29173 From: icarofranca Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 4:39am Subject: Re: Bangkok Dear Herman- > We are often reminded about conditions. And about understanding > conditions. ------------------------------------------------------------------- A Latin Proverb: Tacita Conditio non est conditio ------------------------------------------------------------- > > Well, the soon to happen and keenly anticipated get-together in Bangkok > will come about through conditions as well. And some of those conditions > depend entirely on the rejection of all metaphysical impositions from > ignorant but dominant social groups. What is the name of that sutta that > obliquely refers to aeronautical engineering? ----------------------------------------------------------------- Good Herman, I intend to spent my Vacances at bgk one day of these. .. people here says that is a wonderful place!!! At the Mahamangala Sutta we got a Deva or Devaki that comes down from heaven to hear Buddha's sermon, but I cannot say to you if he or she came by plane... --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > No doubt there will be penetrating awarenesses of heart bases, vittaka, > the four great elements, the umpteen kusala cetasikas and so forth as > the various Boeings head towards Bangkok. But it is precisely the > rejection of metaphysical paradigms that allows your metal airships --------------------------------------------------------------------- If Citta and Cetasika come together in good harmony at Pilot`s brains, afore the real fears of terrorism, bombs and panic you can put aside all metaphysical fears that your plane could not arrive at Bgk safely! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > It is gross dishonesty to live with the gypsies but talk as though you > are catholic. > > Enjoy the trip, nonetheless. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Seeya over there! Mettaya, Ícaro P.S.: have you ever read The German Translation of Buddhaghosa's Visuddhi Magga ? 29174 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 4:56am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Bangkok Hi Icaro, P.S.: have you ever read The German Translation of Buddhaghosa's Visuddhi Magga ? Why would I do such a thing? Buddhaghosa is to Buddha, what Paul is to Jesus. Neither would I read St Augustine,Willebrord or le Marquis de Sade in German. I am Dutch. Small matter of cross-border hatred. You wouldn't be one of those SS officers who fled to South America, would you? Icaro sounds remarkably like Klaus. Ciao Herman 29175 From: icarofranca Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 5:42am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok Dear Herman > > > Why would I do such a thing? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Why not ? ------------------------------------------------------------------- Buddhaghosa is to Buddha, what Paul is to > Jesus. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Hmmm...don't. Buddhagosa's comments are more obstruse and intrincate than Paul's Epistoles. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Neither would I read St Augustine,Willebrord or le Marquis de > Sade in German. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Augustine ressembles more Buddhaghosa than Paul Apostle, with their unique use of Latin Language to express christian concepts. ------------------------------------------------------------------- I am Dutch. Small matter of cross-border hatred. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Good for you! You can visit German or Belgique by Bicycle! -------------------------------------------------------------------- You > wouldn't be one of those SS officers who fled to South America, would > you? Icaro sounds remarkably like Klaus. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Spelling is definitively defunct here... Mettaya, Ícaro > > Ciao > > Herman 29176 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 7:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: heartbase/rebirth Hi Larry, op 18-01-2004 02:32 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Would it be correct to say the heartbase could be an object of javana > only if the javana consciousness were a very high degree of amoha > (panna/wisdom)? At that level, presumably, there wouldn't be a future > life. N: When looking at the Patthana we see that it can also be an object of attachment, etc. Thus, not only in the case of arahats who will not have a future life. L:Even so, there is reason to doubt that this could happen. N: We never know, it depends on conditions, we cannot speculate about this. Heartbase is a condition by way of base, and also it can be a condition by way of object at the same time, during life or at the end of life, as we have seen (U Narada, refers to Patthana). Some people find it hard to accept that what can only be experienced through the mind-door and what they cannot experience now is not necessarily a concept. Heartbase is a reality, a rupa-dhamma. A concept can be a condition by way of object, but it could never be a condition by way of physical base, as is the case with the heart-base. Thus, how could heartbase be a concept, an idea, a product of thinking? L: I see that the Vism. commentary says the heartbase is to be known "from > scriptures and from reasoning", in other words, conceptually. N: I am glad you mention this. We have to return to the Pali text: How can this be known? aagamato: by the scriptures. Yuttito: by application. There is nothing about logical reasoning in the Pali text, this is too limited. Yutta: yoked, connected, applied to. You see here that this is a much larger meaning? Applied not just by thinking, it can be by direct experience. From the scriptures, yes, had the Buddha not taught us, we would not know that there is a heart-base. People may doubt again. Only the sotapanna has eradicated doubt. By the development of satipatthana he has realized by direct experience many realities. Suppose many are realized but not all, this does not give rise to doubt, because of the confidence in the Dhamma has become unshakable. Because of direct experience through panna, confidence becomes steadfast and firm. L: Also, I was wondering what, if any, difference one's bhavanga citta > makes. If my last conscious moment manifests as a hatred for apples, > that javana series will have kammic consequences but will the hatred for > apples that manifests countless times as bhavanga in my next life have > any kammic consequences, become a latent tendency, or in any way > characterize my behaviour? N: Those last javanas with hate, dosa, condition an unhappy rebirth, in a woeful plane. The object taken by them can be an object through any of the six doors, it can be visible object (say, colour of apples), or a symbol of future rebirth, we cannot speculate about that. That same object , an echo of it, is experienced by the next rebirth-citta, and all bhavangacittas, but in those cases the object is not experienced through a doorway. The consequences: one has hatred accumulated as latent tendency, but also the other latent tendencies of desire, wrong view, etc. Dosa arises again and again, but not just dosa for apples! Dosa for countless objects. A Summary about heartbase: Rob K's posts have rendered many questions people may have about the heart, transplantation of heart, etc. He also explained that we may be clinging to an idea of my heart, but that the heartbase is a very subtle rupa that can only be experienced through the mind-door. Although we cannot experience it now, what can we learn about this? It is the physical basis for many cittas, included in mind-element and mind-consciousness element. It is a condition for other realities and it itself is conditioned by kamma which keeps on producing it throughout life, on and on. We are in a five khandha plane, meaning, what we call *we* are nama and rupa. Each citta takes a new base (be it sensebase or heartbase), except during the last javanacittas of a life which all depend on one heartbase. This study helps us to see at least intellectually, that the heartbase and the cittas that depend on it are very temporary, beyond control and not to be taken for mine or self. All these studies of details we do now are accumulated as a foundation so that later on panna can arise which understands the true nature of dhammas. Nina. 29177 From: Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 3:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Abhidhamma-Related Mathematical Model of Consciousness Hi, James - In a message dated 1/18/04 2:36:25 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > Howard: I don't understand. What do you mean by self-regulating? And > why do you say objects may or may not be cognized singly? In this > scheme there is consciousness when and only when there is an object > of consciousness, and that is all the time except at the instants of > object change, when there is neither consciousness nor object of > consciousness. > > James: Oh, then I didn't understand your model. Sorry, I tried ;-)) > > Metta, James > =========================== I apologize for not having been clearer. Giving a clear presentation was my responsibility. (One excuse for my lack of clarity: I didn't want to go on too long with the details and implications of the model, because it was already probably "too much," and, moreover, my only real purpose was to attempt to show that the Abhidhammic take on the flow of cittas can, indeed, be represented by a largely "continuous," gapless model.) I think you grasped what I was saying for the most part very, very well! 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) 29178 From: Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 3:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Aggregates and detachment (was, characteristics) Hi, Jon (and Michael) - In a message dated 1/18/04 3:13:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Hi again, Michael > > --- Michael Beisert wrote: >Hello Jon > M: The reason the Buddha used the five aggregates is because they > are the basis for clinging and his teaching was focused on > elimination of suffering. ... But in my view, viewing the aggregates > as completely empty, devoid of any characteristic of paramattha is > more conducive to detachment. > > J: Yes, let's talk about detachment and the development of the path. > The Dhamma is about the present moment. > > Detachment is the kusala that is the absence of attachment. > Attachment is gradually eradicated as insight into the true nature of > dhammas/the aggregates is developed. I think there is no > disagreement here. > > What is the significance or relevance of how we view the aggregates > in terms of paramattha, sabhava, emptiness etc? > > It is important I believe to realise that any idea we have about the > aggregates as a result of reading or studying, whether the suttas, > the Abhidhamma or the commentaries, is just a kind of *thinking > about* the aggregates (or, more correctly, about *our concept of* the > aggregates). There is no point in *trying to see* dhammas in that > particular way (to my understanding, that would probably be wrong > view leading the way to more accumulated wrong view). > > What is important is a correct intellectual grasp of what is or is > not meant by the aggregates/khandhas (the dhammas that can be the > object of insight), since without this the development of insight > cannot begin. > > So mere *ideas about* dhammas as 'paramattha' or 'sabhava' are not > part of the development of the path at the present moment. However, > a strongly-held and innate *view* on that issue, if not a correct > one, could constitute an obstacle to the development of the path (for > reasons you have mentioned in the past). > > The Dhamma is all about the dhammas of this very moment and the > truths relating to them. Seeing and visible-object, hearing and > sound, etc. Thinking, feeling, attachment. The five khandhas, the > elements, the sense-bases. > > Jon > =============================== I see acquiring the knowing of anatta/su~n~nata as something that has an aspect of "layers" to it. An outer layer is the distinguishing of pa~n~natti from paramattha dhammas. To an ordinary worldling, paramattha dhammas such as anger are already recognized to some extent as being insubstantial and as not remaining, though this is not known at all well or deeply. However, the "person who gets angry from time to time," appears to be an enduring entity with changing features! This is the difference between paramattha dhamma and pa~n~natti, even for a worldling. Seeing through pa~n~natti is a "layer" of acquired wisdom. The further unraveling of our refiying of paramattha dhammas, seeing down to the bone their insubstantial, dependent, and ephemeral status - that is, freeing actualities from their current defiled conceptually-grasped status is a deeper "level." I think both are needed. 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) 29179 From: Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg]process cittas Thanks, Jon. I very much appreciate your going to the effort to keep track of this! ;-)) With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/18/04 3:15:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > I'll add process-of-cittas concepts and the Pts.M. to the list. > > ;-)) > /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) 29180 From: Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 4:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Space element a concept? Hi, Jon - In a message dated 1/18/04 4:12:31 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, Nina - > ... > H: One thing that I hoped you might address in the discussion > of the issue of space as a rupa is the two questions I raised in my > post to Htoo. The first of these pertains to space seemingly being > experienced through more than one sense door. > > J: If you're anything like me, the "space seemingly being > experienced through more than one sense door" is rather like the > hardness that is seemingly perceived through more than one sense door > too. In either case, whatever else there is, there is a lot of > conceptualising about space or hardness. ------------------------------------------- Howard: I only seem to exparience hardness through the body door. Of course, when one "sees" a table or rock etc, one assumes that "touching it" will result in hardness, or, to put it conventionally, that tables and rocks are hard. Perhaps that is what you mean. I find space to be different. It does seem to be experienced through eye door, body door, and ear door, but I believe that it is really *only* experienced through mind door, and not as a reality, but as pa~n~natti. ------------------------------------------- > > H: The answer which I understand Htoo to have given and you to > concur with is that "that space" is mere concept, but the "real > space," the paramattha dhamma, is a rupa - an unobserved rupa. > > J: There is no need to think of 'real space' as being a rupa, since > we are unlikely to conceptulaise this correctly in any event, and it > may only create internal conflict. Can we not just think of there > being, according to the teachings, a rupa that has a certain > function, characteristic and proximate cause and to which the name > 'space' has been given, this rupa being one of several that are not > observable (and, as far as I'm concerned, one of many, many more that > will not be directly experienced in this lifetime at least!). > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, as you know, I have no use for alleged unobservable rupas. --------------------------------------------- > > H: But that then led to my *second* question: "Htoo, doesn't this > strike you as a bit ironic, with the space that is experienced being > "unreal," but the allegedly "real" space being unobservable? Hardness > that is real is actually observed! Sounds that are real are actually > observed! But "real" space - that's the sort of space we *cannot* > observe!! > > J: I think you have just neatly summarised one of the essential > points made by the Buddha, that what we think we experience is not > real (is concept) while what is real (the dhammas) are not > experienced as they truly are. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Sorry, but there is a difference between an unobservable, on the one hand, and something observed wrongly or not currently observed. I do not believe in unobservables, because they are beyong confirmation or refutation. When something, such as a self, is unobservable, that is pragmatic basis for assuming its nonexistence. ------------------------------------------------- > > H: (Something's wrooong here! ;-))" > > J: Yes, but nothing more than usual! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- Howard: LOL! ---------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 29181 From: Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 6:12am Subject: Dismissing My Model - and All Models Hi, all - I have learned something. I've learned it by looking into my own mind. My model making has resulted in consternation in me, and neither peace nor insight. Any such exercise is a conceptual enterprise, but reality cannot be held onto by concept, and can't be truly known, with wisdom, by concept. We cannot think our way to realization, but only by looking at what is right here, right now - always. Model making leads only to clinging, and here is the laugh, clinging to a completely inadequate and false substitute for reality. What is actual is right here, and need only be seen. The Zen folks are right when they say "Look! Look!" The Buddha's teachings, themselves, can also be dead ends if they are handled wrongly. They only point the way. They are not the "truth". The truth is right here, right now. (There was truth that day when I sat in my college cafeteria and looked, not at anything in particular, but at the visual flux. There it was! Reality!!) What is critical in the Buddhadhamma is that we put it into practice, constantly. We can check back with the Dhamma to correct ourselves when we go astray, but we must not treat the Dhamma as a set of facts and rules to memorize and cling to. We must let go, and we must look! With metta, Howard P.S. I would like to cease discussing my "model". I think that both the model, and the activity of discussing it, are near worthless. /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) 29182 From: connie Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 10:54am Subject: Re: the return of Angulimala --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > Dear Well-Rested and Fatigued, > Let me confess that I awoke in the middle of the night under a big white > flag with the motto "how stupid" for dancing about trying to find the > object of bhavangas and wonder if I might hide myself at James' while I > relax with a Pali dictionary, Icaro's influence on me. Hmmm...are you trying to tell me something? Metta, James Yes and no, James... I was feeling foolish for having said the cuti passes it's object on and not even knowing where all my confusion lies so I have trouble making a coherent post & remembered your comment about not wanting any evidence left lying around later... maybe a UP thread? But I have thought a few times of telling you that I'm glad you haven't quit talking here. So please just take it as a friendly greeting, connie 29183 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 0:32pm Subject: Re: the return of Angulimala/ Azita Dear Azita (any lurking Cooranites), Andrew has assured me that he has had the place cleared of Bunyips, and that there is "nothing to worry about". And Andrew wouldn't lie.... .. Anyway, as a precaution, I always keep KenH and Steve between me and any likely waterhole. :-) [We only THINK it is the delinquent micro-wave oven that is causing KenH to keep Noble Silence, but what if ... maybe the Bunyip ..?] Cooran at night, is a bit of a worry - most of the men clear off and sleep in a little shed together up near the main house, and leave the ladies down the paddock to fend for themselves between two large dams ... a bit like the chosen sacrifices really. :-) Come to think of it, I DID hear scary growling sounds and 'something large' crashing around in the bushes - but just assumed it was AndyMcL looking for "the bathroom". :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" > > Maybe yarns in the form of Jataka stories could be suggested > for Cooran, around the camp fire at night. See who can read out the > scariest one! > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > Azita. 29184 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 3:20pm Subject: Re: Dismissing My Model - and All Models Hi Howard (and All), I want to express something to you and to everyone reading in, but I am not sure if I will do it justice. Please forgive me if I stumble. First, about your model of consciousness, I think it is brilliant!!...But probably only for you, if you can understand what I mean. You cannot transfer your thoughts and insights to anyone else with a model (as you have pointed out). That is, of course, why the Abhidhamma is inherently flawed and should not be taken so seriously by some folk around here ;-)). Was your model better or worse than the Abhidhamma? Same-Same. Models are just models: artificial constructs of the real thing. But the second point I want to make is: who cares? ;-)) It really does you justice to form such a model and to be willing to display it, unformed and all, in such a public forum. I really do wish that more people in this group were willing to take such risks and to have such open trust. This group is really advanced in the dhamma, as I have stated before, but that advancement has caused an unnatural need to be `perfect' and `correct' all the time with many members (it reminds me of my advanced classes…where competition was outrageously stiff). Again…conceit, conceit, conceit!!! I have said it before; I will say it again; and I will keep saying it until people listen. Was the Buddha perfect? `Perfect' doesn't apply. Was the Buddha `correct'? `Correct' doesn't apply. The Buddha was just `Awake'. Okay, now that I am off my soapbox! Hehehe… I hope that you will offer further thoughts and models and observations, and whatever… especially for the mathematically challenged like myself! ;-)). They do us all some good. Thanks for being you… Metta, James 29185 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 3:25pm Subject: Re: the return of Angulimala Hi Connie, Connie: Yes and no, James... I was feeling foolish for having said the cuti passes it's object on and not even knowing where all my confusion lies so I have trouble making a coherent post & remembered your comment about not wanting any evidence left lying around later... maybe a UP thread? But I have thought a few times of telling you that I'm glad you haven't quit talking here. So please just take it as a friendly greeting, James: Thanks for clarifying, Connie. I didn't really take offense (at least not when I thought about it deeply ;-) but I could sense that you were thinking about me in a very deep and a somewhat contradictory manner. Okay, glad you cleared that up. Take care. Metta, James 29186 From: Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 0:45pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dismissing My Model - and All Models Hi, James - Thank you. No need to say more. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/18/04 6:23:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Hi Howard (and All), > > I want to express something to you and to everyone reading in, but I > am not sure if I will do it justice. Please forgive me if I > stumble. First, about your model of consciousness, I think it is > brilliant!!...But probably only for you, if you can understand what I > mean. You cannot transfer your thoughts and insights to anyone else > with a model (as you have pointed out). That is, of course, why the > Abhidhamma is inherently flawed and should not be taken so seriously > by some folk around here ;-)). Was your model better or worse than > the Abhidhamma? Same-Same. Models are just models: artificial > constructs of the real thing. > > But the second point I want to make is: who cares? ;-)) It really > does you justice to form such a model and to be willing to display > it, unformed and all, in such a public forum. I really do wish that > more people in this group were willing to take such risks and to have > such open trust. This group is really advanced in the dhamma, as I > have stated before, but that advancement has caused an unnatural need > to be `perfect' and `correct' all the time with many members (it > reminds me of my advanced classes…where competition was outrageously > stiff). Again…conceit, conceit, conceit!!! I have said it before; I > will say it again; and I will keep saying it until people listen. > Was the Buddha perfect? `Perfect' doesn't apply. Was the > Buddha `correct'? `Correct' doesn't apply. The Buddha was > just `Awake'. > > Okay, now that I am off my soapbox! Hehehe… I hope that you will > offer further thoughts and models and observations, and whatever… > especially for the mathematically challenged like myself! ;-)). They > do us all some good. Thanks for being you… > > Metta, James > > /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) 29187 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 7:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the return of Angulimala Hi Connie Many thanks for the details I like the story very much. Do you have the details between Angulimala and Buddha when Buddha trying to educate him. I heard it is another moving story. The part that Angulimala body is burning with hell fire, partly substantial the principle of here and now of kamma. best wishes Ken O 29188 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 9:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the return of Angulimala Hello Connie, Ken O, Azita, and all, Hopefully my reply to Connie was seen only as good-natured teasing. If not, please know that that is all it was meant to be, and apologies if it didn't come across that way to anyone. I am still interested in Angulimala and the questions he raises for me concerning consequences for actions committed, what erases it, and what about the "collateral damage" of the wrecked lives of his victims relatives ... much of which would have continued for years, long after he had happily attained Nibbana ... I think the fact that there are so many stories, explaining things and filling in the ethical gaps, means that it raised a lot of quesitons for a lot of people since it was first told. I have taken into consideration, and still am thinking over, some of the great posts I got in return. Further reading I have come across: "How to Reform a Serial Killer: The Buddhist Approach to Restorative Justice" by David R. Loy. Journal of Buddhist Ethics http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-MISC/101789.htm "Angulimala: A Story of the Power of Compassion" (As told by Ven. Walpola Piyananda Thera in Love in Buddhism) http://www.sinc.sunysb.edu/Clubs/buddhism/story/angulimala.html metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Connie > > Many thanks for the details I like the story very much. Do you have > the details between Angulimala and Buddha when Buddha trying to > educate him. I heard it is another moving story. > > The part that Angulimala body is burning with hell fire, partly > substantial the principle of here and now of kamma. > > > best wishes > Ken O 29189 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 10:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] the return of Angulimala Hi Christine One thing about Kamma - it can look very cruel. From my own opinion, the deed of killing by Angulima is effected when he killed a person but what the family felt due to the death of the person(be it extreme grieve and later commit suicide) or the person is the sole bread winner and hence caused hardship to the famiy - got nothing to do with the killing. Angulima is not responsible for the consequences of the person death, he is only responsible for the immediate death of the person. This is what I think of kamma and I could be wrong. I will be delighted to be corrected. One of the reason I think kamma works this way bc if we keep accumulating the consquences there will be no end to kamma. thanks and regards Ken O 29190 From: Kenneth Ong Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 10:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok Hi Herman H: If your pilot confuses the wind-element with something else, we'll read about it in the papers. k: Pse do send me flowers. Ahhh kamma, isn't it wonderful. I am the least worry about being crash or blow to death bc the death is seen to be instanteous, the fear is lesser as compare to my experience in the dentist chair ;-). I am also the least worry about last citta, bc it was too instanteous to know it is going to be kusala. Even it is the worst - going to the Avici Hell - so what - eventually the kamma will die out and *poof* I may be human again and if I am lucky I may happen to learn Buddhism again bc of accumulated tendecies. Hence I am the least worry ;-). Cheers Ken O p.s. - that reminds me of buying tour insurance. 29191 From: Sarah Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 11:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Victor, (Michael, Herman & All) --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah and all, > > I hope you don't mind me jumping in to this thread to share some > thoughts regarding the five aggregates (pancakkhandha), or for that > matter, the five aggregates of sustenance/clinging > (pancupadanakkhandha). ..... S: Of course, I was glad to have you jumping in - anytime!! Thank you for your well-considered and reasoned post. Excuse some big ‘snips’ for now. .... V: > When the Buddha taught the noble truth of dukkha, he started with > specific instances of what is dukkha and ended with the statement > > "in brief, the five aggregates subject to clinging are suffering." > /"In short, the five clinging-aggregates are stressful." > > The phrase "in brief"/"in short", in the last statement is of > significance. It indicates a change from listing the specific to > stating the general. .... S: sankhitta - concisely, briefly. In other words, the 5 clinging-aggregates only. Jon wrote before: “note the implication of the words "In short", in relation to the other 11 preceding aspects of the truth. The Visuddhi-Magga says in connection with the 5 aggregates as the truth of suffering (Vis XVI): "60. It is impossible to tell it all without remainder, showing each kind of suffering, even by going on doing so for many aeons, so the Blessed One said 'In short the five aggregates [as objects] of clinging are suffering' in order to show in short how all that suffering is present in any of a five aggregates [as objects] of clinging in the same way that the taste of the water in the whole ocean is to be found in a single drop of its water." Jon: "....It seems to me that while the language is conventional the references are to paramattha dhammas. For example,birth is not only a conventional event, it is also the paramattha dhamma that is the first moment of consciousness in a given life(patisandhi citta), and the arising of each moment of consciousness.” ***** S: From SN1:25, Devatasamyutta, I quoted the following: “Though the wise one has transcended the conceived, he still might say, ‘I speak’, He might say too, ‘they speak to me.’ He uses such terms as mere expressions.” Whatever we are reading in the Tipitaka, we have to keep in mind that there are only the 5 khandhas of clinging appearing now. Other expressions are for mere convention. .... You quote from SN22:94, Flowers here: V:> > At Savatthi. "Bhikkhus, I do not dispute with the world; rather, it > is the world that disputes with me. A proponent of the Dhamma does > not dispute with anyone in the world. Of that which the wise in the > world agree upon as not existing, I too say that it does not exist. > And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I > too say that it exists. > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > not existing, of which I too say that it does not exist? Form that > is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to change: this the wise > in the world agree upon as not existing, and I too say that it does > not exist. Feeling … Perception … Volitional formations … > Consciousness that is permanent, stable, eternal, not subject to > change: this the wise in the world agree upon as not existing, and I > too say that it does not exist. > "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as not > existing, of which I too say that it does not exist. > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is > impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the > world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling > … Perception … Volitional formations … Consciousness that is > impermanent, suffering, subject to change: this the wise in the > world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. > "That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as > existing, of which I too say that it exists. > [3] > > So regarding the question whether computers exist or not, what the > Buddha said about what does not exist and what does can be of > reference. .... S: The sutta continues: “That, bhikkhus, is what the wise in the world agree upon as existing, of which I too say it exists.” [S: implication: other things do not exist such as computers. In 22:85 in the same section, it was already made clear that the Tathagata, self and things are not ‘real and actual’.] continuing with the sutta: “There is, bhikkhus, a world-phenomenon* in the world to which the Tathagata has awakened and broken through. Having done so, he explains it, proclaims it, establishes it, discloses it, analyses it, elucidates it.” [S: we don’t need a Tathagata to awaken us to the ‘existence’ of computers and their impermanence!! This would be on a par with the idea that we are taught to be mindful of sitting, eating and washing up in the suttas. ] “And what is that world-phenomenon in the world to which the Tathagata has awakened and broken through? Form, bhikkhus, is a world-phenomenon in the world to which the Tathagata has awakened and broken through. Having done so, he explains it, teaches it, proclaims it, establishes it, discloses it, analyses it, elucidates it. When it is being thus explained.......elucidated by the Tathagata, if anyone does not know or see, how can I do anything with that foolish worldling, blind and sightless, who does not know and does not see?” [S: rupas (form) are not seen for what they are and have to be understood to exist. Computers and vases are not rupas. Let’s not be foolish worldlings here;-))] “Feeling.....Perception......Volitional formations....Consciousness is a world-phenomenon in the world to which the Tathagata has awakened and broken through. Having done so, he explains it, teaches it, proclaims it, establishes it, discloses it, analyses it, elucidates it. When it is being thus explained....and elucidated by the Tathagata, if anyone does not know and see, how can Ido anything with that foolish worldling, blind and sightless, who does not know and does not see? “Bhikkhus, just as a blue, red, or white lotus is born in the water and grows up in the water, but having risen up above the water, it stands unsullied by the water, so too the Tathagata was born in the world and grew up in the world, but having overcome the world, he dwells unsullied by the world.”** From: > [3] The Connected Discourses of the Buddha: A New Translation of the > Samyutta Nikaya. Translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi, p.949-950 * note 186 “Lokadhamma. Spk: The five aggregates are called thus because it is their nature to disintegrate (lujjanasabhaavattaa). Loka is derived from lujjati at 35:82.” S: Michael, here we have sabhaava (nature/characteristic) linked with lujjana (to disintegrate) as referred to the khandhas in the comy note. The nature of conditioned realities, the khandhas is to exist temporarily and to disintegrate. ** note 187 “Spk: In this sutta three types of world are spoken of. When it is said, “I do not dispute with the world,” it is the world of beings (sattaloka). “A world-phenomenon in the world”: Here, the world of formations (sa’nkhaaraloka). “The Tathaagata was born in the world”: here, the geographic world (okaasaloka).” S: Herman, note how conventional and ultimate language are used and mixed all the time. It depends on the understanding of the listener whether the tangle will be disentangled.: SN1:23, Tangle “A tangle inside, a tangle outside, this generation is entangled in a tangle. I ask you this, O Gotama, Who can disentangle this tangle?” “A man established on virtue, wise, Developing the mind and wisdom, A bhikkhu ardent and discreet: He can disentangle this tangle.” Metta, Sarah p.s I look f/w to reading any replies, but any further responses from me will have to be later after my return to HK. Glad if others contribute further with pithy or non pithy comments meantime. ====== 29192 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Jan 18, 2004 11:49pm Subject: Human Rebirth (Re: Bangkok) Hi Ken O and All, > k: Pse do send me flowers. Ahhh kamma, isn't it wonderful. I am > the least worry about being crash or blow to death bc the death is > seen to be instanteous, the fear is lesser as compare to my > experience in the dentist chair ;-). I am also the least worry about > last citta, bc it was too instanteous to know it is going to be > kusala. Even it is the worst - going to the Avici Hell - so what - > eventually the kamma will die out and *poof* I may be human again and > if I am lucky I may happen to learn Buddhism again bc of accumulated > tendecies. Hence I am the least worry ;-). Good attitude. You know, you bring up a subject I have been wondering about. It is said that being reborn in the human realm is the most fortuitous for learning the dhamma; however, from reading all of the deva suttas I have been reading I see that those who follow the dhamma in the human realm are more likely to be reborn a deva than a human if not reaching enlightenment. The Buddha also gave various suttas on how to be reborn a deva, but what about being reborn a human? What are the conditions that must be present for that? What is one wants to be reborn again in the human realm, what are the types of actions that must be done? Be good but not too good? ;-)) I know this might be a silly question but I was just wondering. Maybe someone here will have the answer. Metta, James 29193 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 19, 2004 0:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi James, You gave some helpful comments on this thread too: --- buddhatrue wrote: > Victor has provided a very important sutta, I am glad that you > appreciate it. However, Victor being the clever minx that he is ;-) > failed to provide his viewpoint of this sutta. I believe that you > both have misinterpreted this sutta; please allow me to explain and > provide another sutta that more clearly demonstrates the Buddha's > position. The important part of this sutta is the beginning: > > "Bhikkhus, I do not dispute with the world; rather, it > is the world that disputes with me. A proponent of the Dhamma does > not dispute with anyone in the world. Of that which the wise in the > world agree upon as not existing, I too say that it does not exist. > And of that which the wise in the world agree upon as existing, I > too say that it exists." > SN, 22, 93 "Flowers" > > In other words, the Buddha is going to use conventional language > of `existing' and `not existing', just as other people do, so as to > not dispute with them (obviously there are no Buddhas who post on > this list! ;-)). However, he did not truly believe in 'existence' > or 'non-existence' of anything, khandas included, and saw beyond such > dualistic concepts. .... S: I think we need to be careful with this word exists - the meaning depends on the context. Khandhas (form etc) exist in the sense they can be directly known, they arise and fall away. .... Let me quote another important sutta which > provides a counter-point: > SN, 12, 15(5) > > "Dwelling at Savatthi... Then Ven. Kaccayana Gotta approached the > Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As > he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, 'Right view, > right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?" > > "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its > object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. ... S: Pls read all the notes which BB helpfully provides on this. Here 'existence and non-existence' refer to the wrong views of eternalism and annihilationism. Pls read the commentary notes, some of which I gave in this post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15227 Metta, Sarah p.s I agree with your kind comments and encouragement to Howard. Let's keep stumbling together and learn from our falls and test runs without conceit being an obstacle;-) Connie, thanks to you in this regard as well. ===================================== 29194 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Jan 19, 2004 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok - kamma Hello KenO, Herman, and All, This is where kamma gives me another head-ache. How do all those people whose kammic seeds will ripen in a catastrophe manage to get together on the one plane at the one time? Or are there just so many 'catastrophe seeds' in everyone's continuum that there doesn't need to be a special gathering of those with catastrophe potential? ... we all have it?... metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Kenneth Ong wrote: > Hi Herman > > H: If your pilot confuses the wind-element with something else, we'll > read about it in the papers. > > > k: Pse do send me flowers. Ahhh kamma, isn't it wonderful. I am > the least worry about being crash or blow to death bc the death is > seen to be instanteous, the fear is lesser as compare to my > experience in the dentist chair ;-). I am also the least worry about > last citta, bc it was too instanteous to know it is going to be > kusala. Even it is the worst - going to the Avici Hell - so what - > eventually the kamma will die out and *poof* I may be human again and > if I am lucky I may happen to learn Buddhism again bc of accumulated > tendecies. Hence I am the least worry ;-). > > > Cheers > Ken O > > p.s. - that reminds me of buying tour insurance. 29195 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Jan 19, 2004 1:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <> Hi Sarah, Sarah: You gave some helpful comments on this thread too: James: Don't I always? ;-)) Sarah: I think we need to be careful with this word exists - the meaning depends on the context. Khandhas (form etc) exist in the sense they can be directly known, they arise and fall away. James: No, I think YOU need to be careful with this word `exists'. Khandhas no more exist than anything else. Sarah: Pls read all the notes which BB helpfully provides on this. Here 'existence and non-existence' refer to the wrong views of eternalism and annihilationism. Pls read the commentary notes, some of which I gave in this post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15227 James: Yes, I read them before I posted the sutta and I had no issue with them. `Eternalism" and `Annihilationism' relate to the Khandas also, not just conventional reality. You seem to be suffering the same `duality' in thinking that the Buddha warned against. Sarah: I agree with your kind comments and encouragement to Howard. Let's keep stumbling together and learn from our falls and test runs without conceit being an obstacle;-) James: I am glad that you agree. I went a bit over the top, but don't I always? ;-)) Howard is a great guy; Howard is a really, really great guy; I think we all need to give Howard and others encouragement (hehehe…I bet Howard is not liking this! ;-)) Okay, I better stop before he sends me a computer virus! ;-) Metta, James 29196 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 19, 2004 1:52am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Michael, --- Michael Beisert wrote: M: >But another point here is how can > you > say that something ‘exists momentarily’? Either the thing exists or it > does > not exist. Because for a thing to exist it has to have something in it > that > justifies its existence. And non existence is the absence of that. .... S: Exactly. Khandhas have characteristics and are conditioned, hence they exist *momentarily* and disintegrate by conditions too. The exception, of course, is the non-conditioned reality, nibbana. .... M: >So > how is > it possible that a thing exists and then loses that something and > suddenly > does not exist anymore. ..... S: Conditions, conditions. It is the conditioned nature of realities to arise and fall away. Hence the dukkha, hence the first Noble Truth. “Momentary present” (kha.nikapaccuppanna), existing momentarily. In particular, conditions such as contiguity (samanantara paccaya) and other crucial conditions ensure the continuous succession of cittas. In the article by Karunadasa, ‘Time and Space’ , a lot of helpful detail and quotes from the commentaries were given. He wrote: “Thus from the point of view of the Abhidhamma doctrine of momentariness, past means the dhammas which have ceased after having gone through the three moments of origination, existence, and dissolution (tayo khane patva niruddha); future means the dhammas which have not yet arrived at the three moments (tayo khane asampatta); and present means the dhammas that pass through the three moments (tayo khane sampatta, khanattaya-pariyapanna).” Lots of detail is given in the Atthasalini on the meanings of Time (Expositor, PTS, Analysis of Terms). For example: “Very small is the interval for exercising moral thoughts,and the extreme rarity of such moments may be understood from the Commentary on the sutta (of Dalhadhanuggaha, SNii.266), where it is said,‘Bhikkhus, there is the speed of this man; greater is the speed of the sun and the moon; greater is the speed of the Yama God who runs before the sun and the moon; swifter yet than that is the perishing of life’s activities.’ “Here, first of all, the short duration of the physical life-control is described......And no illustration can convey the shortness of time they occupy. Hence the Blessed One has said: Bhikkhus, it is no easy matter to illustrate the quickness of thoughts in their changing. (AN i.10).” ***** I wrote more details on the various meanings of Time from the Atthasalini and Kathavatthu before (pls look if you have time;-)) and recently to Howard on examples of suttas indicating the speed of time: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/11927 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/12391 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/29088 At the end of one of the quoted passages from the Kathavatthu, it says: “A: does the mind of the devas who have reached the plane of space-infinity arise and cease moment by moment? Th: It does” **** M: >Show me a sutta where the Buddha said that > things > exist momentarily. Not commentaries, suttas. .... S: OK, I need to know what I’m looking for, so humour me a little. So far we have kha.na (momentary or in a moment) or Momentary present (kha.nikapaccuppanna). The dictionary gives: ‘a (short), moment, wink of time; in phrase khanen'eva "in no time" for kha.na’ We also have lots of references to moment (kha.na) and kha.nikasamaadhi (momentary concentration) in the Abhidhamma, Visuddhimagga and so on and cross referenes to ‘one conscious moment’ in the Niddesa (part of Khuddaka Nikaya, Suttapitaka). Further, especially for you, Michael, let me quote from AN, Bk of 7s,150, Life’s Brevity (Bodhi transl in ‘Numerical Discourses of the Buddha’: “Just as a dew-drop on the tip of a blade of grass will quickly vanish at sunrise and will not last long; even so, brahmins, is human life like a dew-drop. It is short, limited and rief; it is full of suffering, full of tribulation. This one should wisely understand. One should do good and live a pure life; for none who is born can escape death..... Just as a mountain stream, coming from afar, swiftly flowing, carrying along much flotsam, will not stand still for a moment* , an instant, a second, but will rush on, swirl and flow forward; even so, brahmins, is human life like a mountain stream. It is short...for none who is born can escape death.” Many other examples are given. “But at that time, O monks, the human lifespan was 60,000 years, and at 500 years girls were marriageable. In those days people had but six afflictions: cold, heat, hunger, thirst, excement and urine. though people lived so long and had so few afflictions, that teacher Araka gave to his disciples such a teaching: “Short is the life of human beings... But nowadays, O monks, one could rightly say, “Short is the life of human beings...” *PTS transl note: “kha.no vaa layo vaa muhutto vaa. The Chinese traveller, Hiuen Tsiang, has the following note on these periods: The shortest period of time is called ksha.na.....” ..... Sutta Nipata10, U.t.thaana Sutta, ‘Arousing’ “Overcome this craving To which gods and men remain attached and seek pleasure. Do not let the opportune moment (kha.na) pass. those who let the unopportune moment (akha.na) pass Grieve when they are consigned to woe.” ..... S: Hence we’re continually reminded to understand and appreciate the shortness of this moment and the momentary nature of life. We are urged to not revive the past or build our hopes on the future, but with insight to see ‘each presently arisen state’ (MN131). I don’t expect these efforts and quotes to satisfy, but I appreciate the opportunity to consider further. With metta, Sarah ====== 29197 From: Eznir Date: Mon Jan 19, 2004 2:00am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dismissing My Model - and All Models Dear Friends! Talking of Mathematical Models.... here is a another one on the Fundamental Structure of Things at: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/9366/fundstr1.htm Metta eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > Thank you. No need to say more. :-) > > With metta, > Howard > > In a message dated 1/18/04 6:23:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, > buddhatrue@y... writes: > > > Hi Howard (and All), > > > > I want to express something to you and to everyone reading in, but I > > am not sure if I will do it justice. Please forgive me if I > > stumble. First, about your model of consciousness, I think it is > > brilliant!!...But probably only for you, if you can understand what I > > mean. You cannot transfer your thoughts and insights to anyone else > > with a model (as you have pointed out). That is, of course, why the > > Abhidhamma is inherently flawed and should not be taken so seriously > > by some folk around here ;-)). Was your model better or worse than > > the Abhidhamma? Same-Same. Models are just models: artificial > > constructs of the real thing. > > > > But the second point I want to make is: who cares? ;-)) It really > > does you justice to form such a model and to be willing to display > > it, unformed and all, in such a public forum. I really do wish that > > more people in this group were willing to take such risks and to have > > such open trust. This group is really advanced in the dhamma, as I > > have stated before, but that advancement has caused an unnatural need > > to be `perfect' and `correct' all the time with many members (it > > reminds me of my advanced classes…where competition was outrageously > > stiff). Again…conceit, conceit, conceit!!! I have said it before; I > > will say it again; and I will keep saying it until people listen. > > Was the Buddha perfect? `Perfect' doesn't apply. Was the > > Buddha `correct'? `Correct' doesn't apply. The Buddha was > > just `Awake'. > > > > Okay, now that I am off my soapbox! Hehehe… I hope that you will > > offer further thoughts and models and observations, and whatever… > > especially for the mathematically challenged like myself! ;-)). They > > do us all some good. Thanks for being you… > > > > Metta, James 29198 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Jan 19, 2004 2:02am Subject: Human Rebirth (Re: Bangkok) Hello James, and all, This is a good question - everyone hopes for a fortunate rebirth, but the Teachings indicate that chances are not good, unless one becomes a sotapanna in this lifetime. Only then is one assured that the door to the (apaya) woeful realms is closed. In the Samyutta Nikaya 56 Saccasamyutta 47 (7) Yoke with a Hole (1) and 102 (1) Passing Away as Human (1) the difficulty and rarity of human or deva rebirth is spoken of by the Buddha. The Samyutta Nikaya also contains the Connected Discourses on Stream- Entry - 55 The Sotaapattisamyutta which points to the way to security from being reborn in bad destinations. Would you like to move the Samyutta Corner discussions over to this Samyutta for a while? It could be fruitful. :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > > Good attitude. You know, you bring up a subject I have been > wondering about. It is said that being reborn in the human realm is > the most fortuitous for learning the dhamma; however, from reading > all of the deva suttas I have been reading I see that those who > follow the dhamma in the human realm are more likely to be reborn a > deva than a human if not reaching enlightenment. The Buddha also > gave various suttas on how to be reborn a deva, but what about being > reborn a human? What are the conditions that must be present for > that? What is one wants to be reborn again in the human realm, what > are the types of actions that must be done? Be good but not too > good? ;-)) I know this might be a silly question but I was just > wondering. Maybe someone here will have the answer. > > Metta, James 29199 From: Sarah Date: Mon Jan 19, 2004 2:12am Subject: RE: [dsg] Abhidhamma Ripley's show <>(Hi KenO;-)) Hi Michael (& Icaro), --- Michael Beisert wrote: > Hello Sarah, > Michael: > I don’t see the Buddha pointing out the ‘real and actual’. I see him > rejecting the notion that there is a ‘real and actual’ as well as its > opposite ‘not real and not actual.’ I see the Buddha pointing towards > dependent origination all the time. And dependent origination is not > ‘real > and actual’ nor ‘not real and not actual.’ .... S3: I think my posts to Victor and James have addressed these points, along with Jon’s, Ken O’s and all the others on paramattha dhammas;-) .... > S2: Could you give me some Tipitaka references which suggest that > concepts > and entities are conditioned, share the 3 characteristics and can be > object of insight. > S2: Exactly, concepts are non existent except as imaginary constructs. > > > Michael: > Concepts = Paññatti, for example a human being. > Entities = Khandhas. > Can you give me a sutta which states that paññatti, or a human being, is > non > existent. .... S3: Hmmm....I assume this means that no sutta comes to mind to support your statements that concepts are conditioned and share the 3 characteristics which can be object of insight;-) By entities, I would be referring to people and things (eg computers, vases). These are not the khandhas. Perhaps you’d explain what you mean by entities. I gave ones from the Khandhavagga which clearly indicate the Tathagatha and people are not ‘real and actual’. I think the one I’m discussing with Victor, ‘Flowers’, clearly shows that only the khandhas are real and actual (unless nibbana is being experienced!!). Michael, as I mentioned in another post, apart from a few very brief responses to others which I may or may not get round to making, I need to be signing off as in my case I haven't begun to think about packing or a number of chores that I need to get onto before our departure on Friday. I've greatly enjoyed and appreciated our discussions. I look forward to reading any replies you give and any further posts you write to others too. Metta, Sarah p.s Icaro, have you seen Michael’s wonderful Portuguese website? I don’t have it handy. Michael, perhaps you’d repost it. The German website you use looks great - Michael, it has the Kathavatthu in German if that’s any use and the Visuddhimagga with hyper-links to suttas. http://www.palikanon.com/ =====