32000 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Tiika Vis. XIV, 71, Htoo Dear Htoo, op 05-04-2004 20:34 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: H: Can upacaya exist at cuti? N: Cuti-citta, dying-consciousness is the last citta in life. When cuti-citta falls away, rupa produced by kamma falls away. Cuti-citta is very weak and it does not produce rupa, thus no rupa produced by citta. Nutrition also stops producing, it does not produce any rupa in a corpse. Only temperature or heat element goes on producing rupas. The corpse is like dead matter outside, originated by temperature. This is recollection of death, maranasati. Reckoned backward from cuti-citta, sixteen moments of citta before the cuti-citta kamma produces rupa for the last time. The characteristic of origination of rupa applies at that moment. Thus, not at the moment of cuti-citta, the rupa falls away together with cuti-citta, that is the characteristic of impermanence of rupa. H: Can aniccata exist at patisandhi? N: At the moment the patisandhi-citta arises, kamma produces, when birth is in the human plane, three decads: of bodysense, of heartbase and of sex. Thus, thirtythree rupas. They arise in three groups of ten each. That is the moment of their arising, thus, the characteristic of origination applies here. And the characteristic of origination has to be followed by continuation, decay and impermanence. This is nyama, the fixed law of Dhamma. Nobody can change this. > H: Can all 4 lakkhana rupa exist in a rupa? N: All four characteristics of rupa are to be applied to each rupa as it comes into being, develops, decays and breaks up, one after the other, and this happens unthinkably fast. All during the seventeen (or fiftyone) moments of citta. We cannot imagine how fast. And when thinking of the last moments of life, we cannot imagine how fast all that happens. Before we realize it, another life has begun, and if that is in a plane where there are nama and rupa, again the four characteristics of rupa apply. You give me a good meditation on death! Nina. 32001 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 10:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] classification of rupas Hi Howard, op 05-04-2004 23:51 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > I'm writing only to ask about the relation between the four principle > rupas and the derived rupas. > My question is whether or not it is detailed anywhere in the > Abhidhamma or in the Abhidhammic commentaries *in what manner* the derived > rupas are > derived - that is, in what manner they depend on the four primary elements. I > presume they are not *composites* of them in some sense, but merely arise with > principle rupas among the conditions for their arising. Is there more that can > be said on this? N: We can go straight to the Abhidhamma: Dhammasangani, p. 181: Patthana, taken from U. Narada Guide to Conditional Relations, Ch II, under conascent-condition:Great Primaries to Great Primaries and Derived Matter. One of the four Great Elements is a condition to the other three, and also to the derived rupas in that group by way of conascence (p. 29), Thus, they arise together. Tiika: For example about eyesense being dependent on the four great elements: You like Ledi Sayadaw, see Synchrony of Relations. He explains that there are groups of rupas, This makes it more understandable that there are groups of rupa. An example, using conventional terms, when one smells the odour of a rose, it is odour which is the derived rupa. But odour does not float by itself in the air. It needs the four great elements as a support: solidity is a foundation, cohesion holds the group of rupas together, heat maintains it, motion distends it, the other three derived rupas also have a function in assisting it. I do not know whether this answer is sufficient? You may say: give me a sutta. As said before: the four great elements are explained in the suttas, and derived rupas are given but not under that name. We read in the ³Discourse on the Manifold Elements² (Middle length Sayings, no 115, P.T.S.edition) that the Buddha said to Ananda: ³There are these eighteen elements, Ånanda: the element of eye, the element of material shape, the element of visual consciousness; the element of ear, the element of sound, the element of auditory consciousness... " etc. We see here the derived rupas mentioned that are the conditions for the sense-cognitions. H: (I'm omitting any comments I might have on the > rest of the material, as I view some of the so called subtle rupas, the > asabhava rupas, and the "rupas that are characteristics of rupas" as (largely well > grounded) pa~n~natti, but only pa~n~natti nonetheless, and I see little virtue > in reopening that aging can of worms. ;-)) N: need not be. You are not alone, many find this difficult. A debate becomes wearisome when different people mean different things by the words used. Concept: an idea *or* a term. A term can represent what is real, or what is not real. I think your explanation is good: < It has become experientially clear to me that I don't "hear rain," I hear sound. I don't "see a tree," I see a (patterned) sight. I don't "feel my body," I feel bodily sensation. But I do *think* of hearing rain, seeing trees, and feeling my body. After a while, when direct looking is practiced along with clear comprehension of what one actually experiences, the theory does not remain as theory.> The main thing is, is there any understanding of what is dhamma? Through insight rupa can be realized *as rupa*, not a person or thing, nama can be realized as only an experience, no person who experiences. But we do not have to call them nama and rupa. Thus, even when we think about the coarse rupas now, they are only concepts, we think about them. However, these concepts do represent realities. The thinking in the right way is a good foundation for insight. Coarse rupas are difficult to understand as rupa, and even more the rupas that are characteristics. They can only appear clearly to insight. See Ledi Sayadaw, the four lakkhana rupas, the three vikara rupas, rupas of changeability. Lightness, etc. We can notice when they are there, and thus, I find it understandable that they are real, contained in the list of rupas. They are not illusions or imaginations. I can add more about them, I do not get tired of the subject, but too long for this mail. Just one more thing. The sutta on "the all" was quoted. This is explained in detail elsewhere, in the suttas, also in the Patisambidhamagga, the Path of Discrimination (p. 10). And in Co. Is this in contradiction with the sutta, where the Buddha said that nothing should be added? In many suttas we read about the five khandhas: these include the eye and objects, all nama and rupa. The aayatanas: the same and in addition nibbana. The elements: the same and in addition nibbana. The Path of Discrimination: all that is real, nothing else. Nothing imaginary is added. What is the all? Is there any understanding of it now? When we understand seeing and visible object that present themselves now we begin to understand the all, not otherwise. There are many methods of teaching realities, this is because of the different capacities of people to be taught (Veneya satta). Just now I read them again in the Vis. Tiika. I see in these words great compassion. As Rob K often says: nowadays we need more details. We think that we understand the sutta, but do we? Actually through insight all the texts will become clear and alive. Then we shall understand more what Abhidhamma means: nothing else but dhamma now, no theory. But, insight cannot be brought about immediately, on command. Nina. 32002 From: Jeffrey Brooks Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 10:42am Subject: What is Enlighenment? While conducting my daily practice of study and reflection upon the discourses of the Buddha (sutta pitaka) I recently came accross this really excellent sutta. This sutta seems to discusses the ten qualities in a teacher of the dhamma that inspiring confidence, however it seesms to really be talking about the qualities that one would find in an enlighened teacher, not just any old teacher of the dhamma. Since the concept of enlightenment,and the path to enlightenment seems to be of central importance to this list I thought I would post portions of this sutta, because I found this sutta seems to focus very precisely upon what the historic Buddha had found in his enlightenment. Gopaka Moggallana Sutta, MN 108 Moggallana the Guardsman Ten Qualities in a teacher of the dhamma that Inspiring Confidence Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. "When asked, 'Is there, Master Ananda, any one monk you now honor, respect, revere, & venerate, on whom -- honoring & respecting -- you live in dependence?' you said, 'Yes, brahman, there is a monk we now honor, respect, revere, & venerate, on whom -- honoring & respecting -- we live in dependence.' Now how is the meaning of what you have said to be understood?" 13. "Brahman, there are ten inspiring qualities expounded by the Blessed One -- the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened. In whoever among us those ten qualities are found, we now honor, respect, revere, & venerate him; honoring & respecting him, we live in dependence on him. Which ten? [1] "There is the case where a monk is virtuous. He dwells restrained in accordance with the Patimokkha, consummate in his behavior & sphere of activity. He trains himself, having undertaken the training rules, seeing danger in the slightest faults. [2] "He has heard much, has retained what he has heard, has stored what he has heard. Whatever teachings are admirable in the beginning, admirable in the middle, admirable in the end, that -- in their meaning & expression -- proclaim the holy life entirely perfect & pure: those he has listened to often, retained, discussed, accumulated, examined with his mind, and well-penetrated in terms of his views. [3] "He is content with robes, alms food, lodgings, & medicinal requisites for curing the sick. [4] "He attains -- whenever he wants, without strain, without difficulty -- the four jhanas that are heightened mental states, pleasant abidings in the here-&-now. [5] "He experiences manifold supranormal powers. Having been one he becomes many; having been many he becomes one. He appears. He vanishes. He goes unimpeded through walls, ramparts, & mountains as if through space. He dives in & out of the earth as if it were water. He walks on water without sinking as if it were dry land. Sitting crosslegged he flies through the air like a winged bird. With his hand he touches & strokes even the sun & moon, so mighty & powerful. He exercises influence with his body even as far as the Brahma worlds. [6] "He hears -- by means of the divine ear-element, purified & surpassing the human -- both kinds of sounds: divine & human, whether near or far. [7] "He knows the awareness of other beings, other individuals, having encompassed it with his own awareness. He discerns a mind with passion as a mind with passion, and a mind without passion as a mind without passion. He discerns a mind with aversion as a mind with aversion, and a mind without aversion as a mind without aversion. He discerns a mind with delusion as a mind with delusion, and a mind without delusion as a mind without delusion. He discerns a restricted mind as a restricted mind, and a scattered mind as a scattered mind. He discerns an enlarged mind as an enlarged mind, and an unenlarged mind as an unenlarged mind. He discerns an excelled mind [one that is not at the most excellent level] as an excelled mind, and an unexcelled mind as an unexcelled mind. He discerns a concentrated mind as a concentrated mind, and an unconcentrated mind as an unconcentrated mind. He discerns a released mind as a released mind, and an unreleased mind as an unreleased mind. [8] "He recollects his manifold past lives (lit: previous homes), i.e., one birth, two births, three births, four, five, ten, twenty, thirty, forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, one hundred thousand, many aeons of cosmic contraction, many aeons of cosmic expansion, many aeons of cosmic contraction & expansion, [recollecting], 'There I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose there. There too I had such a name, belonged to such a clan, had such an appearance. Such was my food, such my experience of pleasure & pain, such the end of my life. Passing away from that state, I re-arose here.' Thus he remembers his manifold past lives in their modes & details. [9] "He sees -- by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human -- beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma: 'These beings -- who were endowed with bad conduct of body, speech, & mind, who reviled the noble ones, held wrong views and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views -- with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But these beings -- who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech, & mind, who did not revile the noble ones, who held right views and undertook actions under the influence of right views -- with the break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus -- by means of the divine eye, purified & surpassing the human -- he sees beings passing away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior & superior, beautiful & ugly, fortunate & unfortunate in accordance with their kamma. [10] "Through the ending of the mental fermentations, he remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & made them manifest for himself right in the here & now. "These, brahman, are the ten inspiring qualities expounded by the Blessed One -- the one who knows, the one who sees, worthy & rightly self-awakened. In whoever among us these ten qualities are found, we now honor, respect, revere, & venerate him; honoring & respecting him, we live in dependence on him...." 27. "And what sort of mental absorption did he praise? There is the case where a monk -- quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities -- enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is the sort of mental absorption that the Blessed One praised. Kindest regards, Jeff Brooks The Fruits of the Path Bell Springs 100 Day Summer Rains Retreat May 27 - Sept. 7, 2004 http://www.bellsprings.org .o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o. 32003 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 3:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Illusion of Control Dear All, Don't be surprised if you're having any delays with posts showing up on list - the one I wrote on 'Illusion of control' thread (to RobM) before several others was delayed quite a while and a note to Chris at around 9pm Hong Kong time still hasn’t shown up at 6.30am as I leave. Just post as usual and reflect on the illusion that you have any ultimate control in the matter.....;-) Metta, Sarah ===== 32004 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 5:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Illusion of Control Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear All, > > Don't be surprised if you're having any delays with posts showing up on > list - the one I wrote on 'Illusion of control' thread (to RobM) before > several others was delayed quite a while and a note to Chris at around 9pm > Hong Kong time still hasn't shown up at 6.30am as I leave. > > Just post as usual and reflect on the illusion that you have any ultimate > control in the matter.....;-) > > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== How come this one came through before the others?!! Do you have some special powers?!! Control?!! ;-)) Metta, Sukin 32005 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: Antony in Hospital Hi Christine (& Antony), --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > As you will see in this forwarded message, Antony may not reply for a > short time. .... Thanks for letting us know and Antony, if you see this anytime, I'm sure we all hope you get well very soon. (Also, apologies for spelling yr name wrong). Chris, you must be getting ready for your trip. Is it Friday you leave, I forget? If you're not too busy, do you have any favourite sutta links on the courage and patience theme? Talking of favourite suttas, please do add the commentary/other notes which accompany the Bhaddekaratta Sutta you quoted as I know not everyone has the text and as it's so often referred to on DSG it now has its own spot in U.P. (No hurry;-)). Metta, Sarah ======= 32006 From: connie Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 10:49pm Subject: Re: Robber Guests p.s Connie, hope you don't mind me robbing this thread of yours and Jon's. you're welcome to fine me;-) ===== You're fine, Sarah! Nothing really to say, but I'll say it anyway. About attachment to views and (mis)interpretations of Buddha's 'views'/vision, whether we start out agreeing or disagreeing with our understanding of what he taught, it's still 'me and mine' that bring us to consider them at all. In my case, the arrogance to think "Buddha agrees with me" when I really hadn't the slightest idea what he was saying. Or when I did, it really was slight now that I think back. I guess that's a good thing! But there's always someone/group out there to back up any opinion we might have... all those pegs. Thanks to everyone who's ever helped me see any or taken me down one. peace, connie 32007 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 11:03pm Subject: Impermanence & Impersonality ! Friends: The Subtle Fact of No-Self: Since all phenomena inevitably change & become otherwise: This all cannot be 'Mine', This all cannot be 'Me', This all is not 'My-Self' ! This all; whether internal or external, whether past, present or future, whether fine or gross, high or low, far or near - all this - 'I Am' Not !!! With the Noble purpose of eliminating false Egoism, Pride & Arrogance, this subtle teaching of No-Self, uniquely declared by only the Buddhas, is therefore to be given constant & close Attention ! Why ? Because clinging to a mere idea of an 'Ego', creates mental dependence. For one who is dependent, there is the instability of wavering. Relinquishing all ideas, opinions & assuming, produces independence. For one who is independent, there is neither instability nor wavering. When there is no wavering, there is stilled & stable tranquillity. When stilled & stable, there is neither inclination, attraction nor drifting. Neither inclined, attracted nor drifting, there is neither coming nor going. When there is no coming nor going, there is no passing away & reappearing. When there is neither passing away nor being reborn there cannot possibly be neither any 'Here' nor any 'There' nor any 'In Between' ... Only this itself, is the very End of Suffering !!! --ooOoo-- Source: The grouped sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya IV [59] http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/index.html Comments: Please (re)consider: When changing, how can there be any identity ? When dependent, how can there be any freedom ? When unborn, how can there be any death ? When death-less, how can there be any sorrow ? When sorrow-less, how can there be any suffering ? Bold is such repeated Sweep! All yours in the Dhamma. All Constructions Decay & Vanish. Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 32008 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 1:29pm Subject: Re: Pannatti (Concept) Friend Ken O, Ken: Since me and mine are also concepts so concepts are big deals when clung to ;-). James: Yes, that is what I wrote. Concepts cause a problem when clung to as `me' or `mine'. In that case, it would be adding mental shading to the concept that comes from the taint of delusion. For example, an unenlightened bhikkhu would know water falling from the sky as `rain'; the Buddha would also know water falling from the sky as `rain'. However, the bhikkhu would cling to the concept of `rain' in terms of `me' and `mine' while the Buddha wouldn't. This is anatta. Ken: In fact, ill will by itself is not the problem, it is ill will that goes along with me and mine and that is where all the big deals starts ;-)). James: I'm sorry but I can't quite follow you here. I don't know of a situation where ill will could even exist without the delusion of me and mine. To my understanding, they support and feed each other. Ken: The whole of satipatthana is getting rid of me and mine and is about rejecting, relinquishing the me and mine, hence the object of satipatthana cannot be concept since we wish to get rid of it in the first place. James: Can you quote to me where it says this either directly or indirectly in the Satipatthana Sutta? From my reading, one is to have mindfulness of concepts and, as you would say, ultimate realities in increasing levels of subtlety, penetration, and insight. The goal of Satipatthana isn't to rid the mind of all concepts; it is to rid the mind of all defilements, to my understanding. Thanks for writing. Long time no chat! ;-)) I have been enjoying your kind posts of late. Metta, James 32009 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Apr 7, 2004 3:05am Subject: Re: Illusion of Control Hi Rob M, Thanks for starting this new, important, thread. My contribution to it has become lost in the internet ether. This has turned out to be a good thing because I am only now beginning to understand what you wrote. So, if my first post does eventually turn up, please ignore it. You were saying that unwholesome action – action with ignorance and self-view, in particular – can condition wholesome action by object condition and by natural decisive support condition. I think, also, you were saying that prompted cittas are conditioned in the second way (natural decisive support). This understanding of yours leads you to believe that unwholesome action, now, is OK -- virtually wholesome, in fact -- if it is designed to condition wholesome consciousness in the future. Rob, doesn't this sound totally wrong to you? You are saying, in effect, that the way to enlightenment is by unwholesome action. (!!!) What sort of teaching would that be? I have a draft of my first message (saved in MS Word) which I will now snip severely – taking out the bits where I didn't quite grasp the enormity of your theory :-) I will repeat the remainder where I thought you were going dangerously close to advocating the `merits of akusala. ' (Little did I know!): ----------------- RM: > Intellectually, I know that I must abandon this raft after I have crossed the river, but for now the delusion of a self that has control serves a good purpose. > -------------------- Self-view can never be a raft for crossing over. The view of a self who strives to cross, or of a self who stands still, can never get us out of samsara. So it is not easy for an ignorant worldling to see the way out. Our only way of avoiding the two extremes is to learn the Buddha's Middle Way. And the only time for learning it is now. --------------------- RM: > Somebody recently coined the phrase, "DSG - Non Action Group (NAG)". -------------------- :-) It's a good name but totally inappropriate. While an Action Group would be one that supports a self who can strive, a Non-Action Group would be one that supports a self who can do nothing. Neither tag applies to the group that values Right Understanding (of anatta) first, foremost and now. ------------------------ RM: > I suspect that it was a joke, but it shows that a focus on "no self to control" can possibly lead to inaction and fatalism - clearly contrary to the Buddha's teaching. ----------------------- I think fatalism is conditionality as seen from the perspective of self. Are any of the NAG's in DSG fatalistic? Do any of them do nothing? Aren't they, in fact, our most active members? -------------------- RM: > The Buddha often encouraged monks to take action. The last words of the Buddha (SN VI.15) were, ---------------------- Now hang on Rob; the Buddha spent his life teaching a doctrine of anatta (no-self); wouldn't it be horribly inappropriate to interpret his last words as an endorsement of self-belief? :-) ------------------ RM: > "I exhort you, monks: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." ----------- There is no conflict with anatta: "I exhort you, monks" describes right speech and wise attention to that speech; the rest describes how the Eightfold Path conditions escape from samsara. --------------- RM: > The sixth step of the Noble Eightfold Path is "Right Effort". Consider SN XLV.8 which is full of exhortations to take action: "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. --------------------- Bad example, Rob :-) Even at its most superficial level, this language is descriptive, not prescriptive. But I see your point; some of the Buddha's language does appear prescriptive. However, when we know how to interpret the designations "I" and "you," all of the Buddha's statements -- even those beginning with "I exhort you" - - can only be understood as descriptive. The Dhamma is there to be understood, not to be acted out with ignorance. Right effort and right action will follow immediately from right understanding. --------------------- RM: > The Buddha never said that "Right Effort" was only for those who had abandoned self-view. --------------------------- Well, Right Effort – as a factor of the Eightfold Path -- is literally for those (sotapanna and above) who have abandoned self- view. Even mundane right effort (in a moment of satipatthana) it is never accompanied by self-view. (Though there may be a latent tendency for it). ----------------------------- RM: > As worldlings, we will travel the Noble Eightfold Path with self-view; the delusion that there is a self. --------------------------- I know what you mean, but we should be precise: we, well intentioned worldlings do not travel the Eightfold Path -- that is exclusively the path of the Ariyans. In any case, the path – whether ariyan eightfold or mundane fivefold -- never arises in a moment of self-view. -------------------------- RM: > Of course, when a Sotapanna performs "Right Effort", it is done without self-view and the kammic weight is much greater. --------------- Hmmm. Again, I know you saying (rightly or wrongly) that right effort can be `prompted' by self view, but the way you say it sounds dangerously close to, `can be *with* wrong view' -- which, of course, it can't. ---------------- RM: > Some DSG members have challenged the idea of meditation because it is rooted in an idea of a self that can control. ------------------ To be fair, I think that they (we) only say that about `formal meditation,' not about meditation per se. ----------------- RM: > I accept the idea that meditation can be rooted in an idea of a self that can control, but I reject the premise that this is justification for not meditating. ---------------------------- We are not talking here about `prompted and unprompted.' As I understand the argument against formal meditation, it has akusala roots in the sense that it has ignorance (moha) as its root- condition (hetu, mula). If you come to accept that, then I think you, too, will lose interest in formal meditation, don't you? ----------------------- RM: > Meditation is one form of mental development (bhavana); it is not the only form of bhavana but it is one form. If one has the accumulations for this form of bhavana, then it should be encouraged and supported. Even if this form of bhavana is performed with self-view (almost inevitable), it still brings good results. ----------------- Oh, maybe I spoke too soon. :-) But seriously, I have just read Sarah's comment on your statement. So I will cut-and-paste: "S: Mental development (bhavana) refers to the citta (consciousness or state of mind) with understanding of some degree and kind at the present moment. The highest form of bhavana is that of vipassana which eradicates defilements and begins with the wisdom which understands seeing, visible object, lust, hatred, delusion, wrong view and other realities for what they are regardless of time and situations which are merely conventional ideas about bhavana (meditation) as I see it." (end quote) So, meditation (bhavana, mental development), yes; formal meditation (conventional ideas about bhavana), no. :-) Looking to your further comments. Kind regards, Ken H 32010 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Apr 6, 2004 6:37am Subject: Re: Illusion of Control Hi Rob M, Don't worry, this post is not as long as it looks – it includes most of your previous post unsnipped. --------------------- RM: > Ken H (and members of DSG - NAG), The subject of the illusion of control has found its way into a number of our exchanges (meditation, free will and most recently mudita), so I am going to start a new thread to focus on this subject. Let us start by finding common ground with which we are both comfortable. There are actions, but the actor is an illusion. There is kamma but there is no creator of kamma. There is result of kamma (vipaka) but there is none to receive the vipaka (see SN XII.17). I think that we agree so far. ---------------- KH: Yes, although I'd like to point out that the first two sentences say the same thing. The only real action is kamma (as in the second sentence). Conventional action, that persists from moment to moment, is illusory – just like the actor. ----------------------- RM: > Now let us move from theory to practical. Each week, the five aggregates commonly called 'Rob M' studies the Dhamma. There are two motivations for this study: 1. A love of the dhamma (this could be called unprompted, spontaneous, automatic; asankharikam) 2. Fear of being unprepared to teach his Abhidhamma class on Sunday morning (this could be called prompted, sasankharikam) ---------------- KH: Yes, but I'm wondering how this effects the question of control and free will. A prompted citta (one that occurs after deliberation or after advice from others) is weaker than an unprompted one, but it is no more (or less) controlled for that. It arises purely when the conditions for its arising are present. -------------------- RM: > As it says in the Bhumija Sutta (Mn 126), results come from proper practice, not from intentions. As noted in Vism XVII 102, akusala actions can lead to kusala mental states (through both object condition and natural decisive support condition). > -------------------- KH: I keep meaning to look for that sutta on the net but haven't done so yet, sorry. Does the Vissudhimagga refer to it? In any case, I'm sure there is no suggestion that the way to enlightenment is by akusala action. :-) For the record, I think we agree: 1. Akusala cetana (like all cetasikas) can become the object of right understanding and 2. Some concepts (including conventional action) can, in a manner of speaking, condition citta. That is to say; in the past, dhammas (that actually condition citta) have occurred in perceptible patterns, or sequences (known as concepts). So, by reoccurring in those same patterns, dhammas can condition a response similar to those conditioned in the past (in the manner of a habit). (I hope I've got that right.) Here again, there is no evidence of control or free will. ----------------- RM: > Now since the act (studying the Dhamma) is the same, the nature of the kamma (kusala or akusala) will be the same. The "weight" of the kamma created will depend on the motivation: 1. Unprompted cittas create weightier kamma than prompted cittas 2. Cittas with pleasant feeling (piti) create weightier kamma than cittas with neutral feeling Based on the points above, it seems that: 1. Wholesome actions, even if they arise because of a delusion of a self that has control, still create good kamma > ------------------------------------ KH: You are not talking about good kamma at the level of satipatthana, are you? Advice or deliberation, that rejects the Buddha's teaching, cannot prompt Right Understanding, surely. (?) -------------------------- RM: > 2. Weightier kamma may be created if the wholesome actions arise without the delusion of a self that has control > ---------------------- KH: You mean, of course, "without having been prompted by advice or deliberation that contained the delusion of self." Sorry to be pedantic, but we mustn't give the impression that kusala cetana can sometimes arise *with* delusion (let alone with wrong view). -------------------- RM: > Though intellectually I know that there is no self that has control, I have not yet uprooted self-view (I have not yet reached Sotapanna stage). This means that the good kamma accumulated is not as "weighty" as it might have been. Nevertheless, it is still good kamma. I hope that we agree so far. > --------------------- KH: Well, I'm learning. I haven't really considered this topic from the angle of `prompted/unprompted' before. Are you saying that all the prompting a worldling receives – from his own deliberations and from others – contains self-view? I don't see why. Are you saying that all the good kamma he has accumulated has been prompted – none unprompted? Again, I don't see why. ----------------- RM: > The recent tongue-in-cheek examples of shaving my head to improve my lap-time as a competitive swimmer, or the novice Dhamma teacher getting stuck on how to proceed without words are meant to express that I have a long way to go on my journey. For now, I can accept wholesome actions, even if they arise because of a delusion of a self that has control, because they still create good kamma. Intellectually, I know that I must abandon this raft after I have crossed the river, but for now the delusion of a self that has control serves a good purpose. > -------------------- KH: Self-view can never be a raft for crossing over. The view of a self who strives to cross, or of a self who stands still, can never get us out of samsara. So it is not easy for an ignorant worldling to see the way out. Our only chance of avoiding the two extremes is to learn the Buddha's Middle Way. And the only time for learning it is now. --------------------- RM: > Somebody recently coined the phrase, "DSG - Non Action Group (NAG)". -------------------- KH :-) It's a good name but totally inappropriate. While an Action Group would be one that supports a self who can strive, a Non-Action Group would be one that supports a self who can do nothing. Neither tag applies to the group that values Right Understanding (of anatta) first, foremost and now. ------------------------ RM: > I suspect that it was a joke, but it shows that a focus on "no self to control" can possibly lead to inaction and fatalism - clearly contrary to the Buddha's teaching. ----------------------- KH: I think fatalism is conditionality as seen from the perspective of self. Are any of the NAG's in dsg fatalistic? Do any of them do nothing? Aren't they, in fact, our most active members? -------------------- RM: > The Buddha often encouraged monks to take action. The last words of the Buddha (SN VI.15) were, ---------------------- KH: Now hang on Rob; the Buddha spent his life teaching a doctrine of anatta (no-self); wouldn't it be horribly inappropriate to interpret his last words as an endorsement of self-belief? :-) ------------------ RM: > "I exhort you, monks: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." ----------- KH: There is no conflict with anatta: "I exhort you, monks" describes right speech and wise attention to that speech; the rest describes how the Eightfold Path conditions escape from samsara. --------------- RM: > The sixth step of the Noble Eightfold Path is "Right Effort". Consider SN XLV.8 which is full of exhortations to take action: "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. --------------------- KH: Bad example, Rob :-) Even at its most superficial level, this language is descriptive, not prescriptive. But I see your point; some of the Buddha's language does appear prescriptive. However, when we know how to interpret the designations "I" and "you," all of the Buddha's statements -- even those beginning with "I exhort you" - - can only be understood as descriptive. The Dhamma is there to be understood. Right effort will follow immediately from right understanding. --------------------- RM: > The Buddha never said that "Right Effort" was only for those who had abandoned self-view. --------------------------- KH: Well, Right Effort – as a factor of the Eightfold Path -- is literally for those (sotapanna and above) who have abandoned self- view. Even mundane right effort (in a moment of satipatthana) is never accompanied by self-view. (Though there may be a latent tendency for it). ----------------------------- RM: > As worldlings, we will travel the Noble Eightfold Path with self-view; the delusion that there is a self. --------------------------- KH: I know what you mean, but we should be precise: we (well intentioned) worldlings do not travel the Eightfold Path -- that is the exclusively path of the Ariyans. In any case, the path – whether ariyan eightfold or mundane fivefold -- never arises in a moment of self-view. -------------------------- RM: > Of course, when a Sotapanna performs "Right Effort", it is done without self-view and the kammic weight is much greater. --------------- KH: Hmmm. Again, I know you saying (rightly or wrongly) that right effort can be `prompted' by self view, but the way you say it sounds dangerously close to, `can be *with* wrong view' -- which, of course, it can't. ---------------- RM: > Some DSG members have challenged the idea of meditation because it is rooted in an idea of a self that can control. ------------------ KH: To be fair, I think that they (we) only say that about `formal meditation,' not about meditation per se. ----------------- RM: > I accept the idea that meditation can be rooted in an idea of a self that can control, but I reject the premise that this is justification for not meditating. ---------------------------- KH: We are not talking here about `prompted and unprompted.' As I understand the argument against formal meditation, it has akusala roots in the sense that it has ignorance (moha) as its root-condition (hetu, mula). If you come to accept that, you, too, will stop (formally) meditating, will you not? ----------------------- RM: > Meditation is one form of mental development (bhavana); it is not the only form of bhavana but it is one form. If one has the accumulations for this form of bhavana, then it should be encouraged and supported. Even if this form of bhavana is performed with self-view (almost inevitable), it still brings good results. ----------------- KH: Oh, maybe I spoke too soon. :-) But seriously, I have just read Sarah's comment on your statement. So I will cut-and-paste: "S: Mental development (bhavana) refers to the citta (consciousness or state of mind) with understanding of some degree and kind at the present moment. The highest form of bhavana is that of vipassana which eradicates defilements and begins with the wisdom which understands seeing, visible object, lust, hatred, delusion, wrong view and other realities for what they are regardless of time and situations which are merely conventional ideas about bhavana (meditation) as I see it." (end quote) So, meditation (bhavana, mental development) yes; formal meditation (conventional ideas about bhavana) no. :-) Looking to your further comments. Kind regards, Ken H 32011 From: abhidhammika Date: Wed Apr 7, 2004 7:02am Subject: Re: Sankhaarupaadaana, for Nina and Suan Dear Mike, Nina, Chris, Sarah and all How are you? Mike, when you wrote "sankhaarupaadaana", did you mean "sankhaarupekkhaa"? Sankhaarakhanda could be translated as the activation aggregate because it refers to activation (cetanaa cetasika). However, even though cetanaa cetasika is used as the head term (siisena), the activation aggregate covers all the remaining mental associates (cetasikas) as well - that is to say, those mental associates excepting feeling (vedanaa) which is covered by the feeling aggregate, and memory (saññaa) which is covered by the memory aggregate. On the other hand, the term "sankhaara" in the expression "sankhaarupekkhaa" covers all the five psychosomatic aggregates, and is the same term that occurs in the famous statements of the Buddha on three characteristics "Sabbe sankhaaraa aniccaa, sabbe sankhaaraa dukkhaa, sabbe sankhaaraa suññaa, sabbe dhammaa anattaa." "All phenomena are impermanent." "All phenomena are misery." "All phenomena are empty (of self)." With regards, Suan http://www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "mlnease" wrote: Hi Nina and Suan, If you have the time (and the inclination) would you please compare and contrast your translations of sankhaarakhanda, especially in the context of sankhaarupaadaana? Thanks in advance. mike 32012 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Apr 7, 2004 10:44am Subject: tiika Vis 72, part 1. tiika Vis 72, part 1 Intro to Tiika Vis. 72 (part I). The Tiika explains all the expressions of the Vis. used for: being without roots. This part seems very technical, but it is truly about life. Vis text: Vis. Pali: na hetu, ahetuka.m, hetu-vippayutta.m. Tiika explains: non-root, na-hetu, rootless, ahetuka.m, dissociated from roots, hetu-vippayutta.m. N: Sampayutta is associated with and vippayutta is dissociated from. These expressions are used in the classifications of cittas. Kusala citta, for example, can be associated with or dissociated from pa~n~naa. Akusala citta can be associated with or dissociated from wrong view. Rupa is na-hetu, meaning, non-root. Rupa it is not one of the akusala roots that are attachment, aversion, ignorance; or one of the sobhana (beautiful) roots that are: non-attachment, non-aversion and wisdom. In the Abhidhamma all realities can be classified as: root (hetu) and non-root (na-hetu). Citta, all the cetasikas other than these roots and nibbana are non-root. In Pali the terms ahetuka, without roots, and hetu-vippayutta, dissociated from roots are used. The term ahetuka is used for citta without roots, ahetuka citta. In the English translation the meaning of these terms cannot be rendered justice. It seems that there is a mere repetition of the same terms. However, the Tiika text emphazises with all these synonyms that rupa is entirely different from nama, that it is not associated with any of those roots. Rupa does not know anything. How could the Element of earth, solidity or hardness, be angry or attached? How could eyesense or visible object be attached? This seems obvious, but in the development of insight doubts are bound to arise when they actually appear. For example, the root of dosa, anger or fear, conditions bodily phenomena, such as hardness. Sati can be aware of one object at a time, but we may be confused as to the object that presents itself: is it the nama which has aversion or is it the rupa that is just hardness? Hardness is non-root. When visible object is seen, we can be reminded that it is only rupa, not a person. Visible object cannot be angry or attached, it is non-root. When we burn ourselves the element of heat impinges on the bodysense. Heat and bodysense are rupas, they are non-root, they cannot be accompanied by aversion. Painful bodily feeling and mental unhappy feeling may arise closely one after the other. It is difficult to distinguish these different dhammas. Painful bodily feeling is ahetuka vipakacitta and unhappy feeling is sahetuka, it accompanies the root that is dosa. At the first stage of insight nama and rupa are clearly distinguished from each other. It is beneficial to reflect on this concise text of the Tiika, it can remind us that understanding of the difference between nama and rupa should be developed. The word veneyya, people to be taught, is used in this text. Because of people¹s different capacities to absorb the Dhamma, different methods of teaching are used. We see the Buddha¹s great compassion in using different terms and different approaches. **** Tiika of Vis. 72. Sampayuttadhammaraasi hinoti etena pati.t.thahatiihi hetu, muula.t.thena lobhaadiko, alobhaadiko ca, taadiso hetu na hotiiti nahetu. As to the group of associated dhammas, this is the term for the roots that are foundations, meaning the roots of attachment etc., and non-attachment, and so on, and non-root means that there are not such roots. Naassa hetu atthiiti ahetuka.m, sahetukapa.tiyogibhaavato hetunaa saha na uppajjatiiti attho. Rootless (ahetuka) means that there is no root for it (rupa), meaning, it does not arise with a root .... Ahetukameva hetunaa vippayuttataaya hetuvippayutta.m. Since it is indeed rootless (ahetuka) it is because of its dissociation from roots, thus, it is dissociated from roots (hetuvippayutta). Dhammanaanattaabhaavepi hi saddatthanaanattena veneyyavasena dukantaradesanaa hotiiti dukapadavasena ceta.m vutta.m. Also, because there are different kinds of dhammas, different kinds of faithful and different people who are capable of being taught, there is the teaching of additional compounds, and thus this was expressed by way of compound words *. **** English: As to the group of associated dhammas, this is the term for the roots that are foundations, meaning the roots of attachment etc., and non-attachment, and so on, and non-root means that there are not such roots. Rootless (ahetuka) means that there is no root for it (rupa), meaning, it does not arise with a root ... Since it is indeed rootless (ahetuka) it is because of its dissociation from roots, thus, it is dissociated from roots (hetuvippayutta). Also, because there are different kinds of dhammas, different kinds of faithful and different people who are capable of being taught, there is the teaching of additional compounds, and thus this was expressed by way of compound words *. _________ *Hetu-vippayutta, dissociated from roots is a compound. ***** Nina. 32013 From: Date: Wed Apr 7, 2004 3:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tiika Vis 72, part 1. Hi Nina, I have been wondering about the cetasikas that arise with functional (rootless) consciousness. What cetasikas cannot arise with a functional consciousness and what cetasikas cannot arise with a great-functional consciousness (mahakiriya)? Is an arahant without wisdom and virtue? How can he or she function without understanding and values? Larry 32014 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 0:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Beings and Their Cittas Hi KenO, I meant to thank you for kindly reporting back so promptly after meeting up with RobM. It sounds like you had a good dinner and discussion. --- Ken O wrote: > I asked about assisted killing especially when medically we are > declared brain dead. He told me of a story where he heard during the > annual World Religion Conference in KL that a lady was in coma and > the doctor considered her brain dead and the doctor advise her son to > pull out the plug. The lady said she heard every single word that > converse between her son and doctor. He son did not do it. Luckily > for her and her son, she broke out of the brain dead situation and > become alive again. .... S: There has been a similar case here - the H.K./Taiwanese reporter involved in a horrific train accident in England in which all her colleagues were killed. She was declared brain dead, but her family took her to specialists in Beijing and she's now back at work part-time. We never know... ... >Then I remember what Htoo wrote in another > list, pulling off the plug is killing for the doer even though the > person is considered brain dead. .... S: I suppose it depends on their intention and whether the person is considered to be alive? .... >I think this is true also. So > next time I meet this case, at least I know that brain dead may not > be real death of the citta. And pulling out the plug even though > compassion is still killing. .... S: Compassion can never be killing. Different moments. There have to be those conditions for it to be killing, including the perception of it being a living being, intention to kill etc. I'm also thinking of Htoo's comments about the ocean of ignorance as we wonder about particular situations. Also, again is there any understanding or is it concern for 'my' kamma and its result? Hope you have more dinner discussions and interesting reports! Maybe you can suggest Swee Boon join next time as well;-) Metta, Sarah ===== 32015 From: robmoult Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 1:20am Subject: Re: Illusion of Control Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Thanks for starting this new, important, thread. My contribution to > it has become lost in the internet ether. This has turned out to be > a good thing because I am only now beginning to understand what you > wrote. So, if my first post does eventually turn up, please ignore > it. ===== I think that it did show up (as the next message in the queue) and as per your request, I will ignore it (couldn't resist peeking at it, though :-) ) ===== > > You were saying that unwholesome action – action with ignorance and > self-view, in particular – can condition wholesome action by object > condition and by natural decisive support condition. ===== Yes ===== > > I think, also, > you were saying that prompted cittas are conditioned in the second > way (natural decisive support). > ===== Don't think so (a minor point anyway) ===== > > This understanding of yours leads you to believe that unwholesome > action, now, is OK -- virtually wholesome, in fact -- if it is > designed to condition wholesome consciousness in the future. > ===== Whoa! I don't think that I said that unwholesome actions are OK. Unwholesome actions are, by definition 'not-OK'. They have the potential to create akusala kamma. The fact that akusala mental states can act as a conditioning factor to support the future arising of kusala mental states is supported by the texts and by our own experience. Each javana mental state has the possibility to condition the arising of vipaka. The akusala mental state will only create aksuala vipaka (when other supporting conditions arise) while the kusala mental state will only create kusala vipaka (when other supporting conditions arise). So in a simplistic model where an akusala citta acts as a condition for the arising of a kusala citta, then there are two separate cittas (one akusala and one kusala) and two separate potential vipakas (one akusala and one kusala vipaka). In my previous post, I gave the example of fear being a motivator for me to study the dhamma (to make sure that I was prepared for my class). To state this does not mean that I believe the fear is kusala. After this fear arose, I did two things: - Acknowledged this mental state as aksuala (object condition) - Allowed this mental state to motivate me (natural decisive support condition) These are examples of the two ways in which an akusala citta (fear in this case) can condition the arising of a kusala mental state. ===== > > Rob, doesn't this sound totally wrong to you? You are saying, in > effect, that the way to enlightenment is by unwholesome action. > (!!!) What sort of teaching would that be? > ===== Only wholesome mental states can bring us closer to enlightenment. My observation (supported by Vism) is that akusala cittas (99.9% of our thoughts according to your estimate, with which I agree) can act as a condition to the arising of wholesome mental states. I am not advocating akusala mental states at all; I am simply observing that they can lead to kusala mental states. No value judgement, just an observation. ===== > RM: > Intellectually, I know that I must abandon this raft after I > have crossed the river, but for now the delusion of a self that has > control serves a good purpose. > > -------------------- > > Self-view can never be a raft for crossing over. The view of a self > who strives to cross, or of a self who stands still, can never get > us out of samsara. So it is not easy for an ignorant worldling to > see the way out. Our only way of avoiding the two extremes is to > learn the Buddha's Middle Way. And the only time for learning it is > now. > ===== The Buddha used the metaphor of the raft where the raft was the dhamma. I was wrong to select this metaphor as it would be easy to misinterpret me as saying that self-view was similar to the dhamma. ===== > > Are any of the NAG's in DSG fatalistic? Do any of them do nothing? > Aren't they, in fact, our most active members? > ===== You are correct; but I still feel aversion to the label "Non Action Group". ===== > > -------------------- > RM: > The Buddha often encouraged monks to take action. The last > words of the Buddha (SN VI.15) were, > ---------------------- > > Now hang on Rob; the Buddha spent his life teaching a doctrine of > anatta (no-self); wouldn't it be horribly inappropriate to interpret > his last words as an endorsement of self-belief? :-) > ===== I am not saying that the Buddha endorsed self-belief. I am observing that the Buddha often encouraged monks to take action. The Buddha encouraged action with "desire, endeavour and persistance" without endorsing self belief. ===== > > RM: > Some DSG members have challenged the idea of meditation > because it is rooted in an idea of a self that can control. > ------------------ > > To be fair, I think that they (we) only say that about `formal > meditation,' not about meditation per se. > ===== I am confused. What is meant by 'formal meditation'; how is it different from 'informal meditation' (if that is the opposite)? ===== > ----------------------- > RM: > Meditation is one form of mental development (bhavana); it is > not the only form of bhavana but it is one form. If one has the > accumulations for this form of bhavana, then it should be encouraged > and supported. > Even if this form of bhavana is performed with self-view (almost > inevitable), it still brings good results. > ----------------- > > Oh, maybe I spoke too soon. :-) But seriously, I have just read > Sarah's comment on your statement. So I will cut-and-paste: > > "S: Mental development (bhavana) refers to the citta (consciousness > or state of mind) with understanding of some degree and kind at the > present moment. The highest form of bhavana is that of vipassana > which eradicates > defilements and begins with the wisdom which understands seeing, > visible object, lust, hatred, delusion, wrong view and other > realities for what they are regardless of time and situations which > are merely conventional > ideas about bhavana (meditation) as I see it." (end quote) ===== Now I am really confused. My understanding is that bhavana is an activity (like dana and sila), not a citta accompanied by wisdom. I looked up the term in Nyanatiloka's Dictionary and it would appear to agree with my understanding. Metta, Rob M :-) 32016 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 3:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi James, A few brief comments as I don’t have much time left: --- buddhatrue wrote: > James: Sarah, I think you are missing the point of the Nikayas. It > isn't that concepts formed in the mind by way of the senses are > inherently dangerous; it is dangerous when these concepts are clung > to as `me' and `mine'. .... S: I’m not sure there is any disagreement. I clarified further: “Proliferations (papanca) or distortional thinking (ma~n~nanaa) are described throughout the Nikayas, including the section of SN on Sa.laayatanasa.myutta. These terms always point to a distorted kind of thinking with a wrong grasp of the object (whether the concept relates to a reality as a sound or not).” Whilst ‘proliferating’, we live in the world of thinking and these concepts are taken for being real, like in a dream. As you stress, it is the realities themselves, the thinking, the attachment, the wrong view etc that should be known and seen as dangerous, not the concpts or objects of the dreams. .... > We could not function without > using concepts. Even the Buddha used concepts. There is no big > deal with concepts!! ;-)) .... S: We agree. As I wrote: “An arahant still uses descriptions of the world or conventional discourse or thinks about concepts, but there is no misconstruction, perversion (vipallasa) or doubt about the realities on which these are based or about the realities whilst thinking about concepts, unlike for us ‘madmen’. I think we can also see how our ignorance, attachments and wrong views lead to more and more thinking about stories and proliferations. We look at a line in the newspaper (actually, look at visible object and then think about a line) and then wander into fantasy-land, lost in our day-dreams about what we’ve seen. The summary of the Honeyball sutta was RobM’s which I used as I was addressing him and I didn’t have a problem with it. Thx for the quote. .... > So, is this sutta speaking against concepts? No. It is speaking > against underlying craving and defilements. The Buddha described > these unwholesome states as evil, not the concepts themselves. .... S: James, when we are referring to the proliferations, distorted perceptions and so on, we’re referring to the ‘underlying craving and defilements’,especially wrong views in these cases which take concepts such as ‘self’ or ‘things’ as objects as Ken O stressed. Let us know how you’re going in that section of SN. Sorry, this one’s a bit rushed, but I wanted to get back to you as we’ll be hiking and so on over the weekend and I may not have much chance to write. Metta, Sarah p.s Do you have any problem with the section on Pa~n~natti in Karunadasa's essay? We can use that to discuss further if you'd like too. ===== 32017 From: Sarah Date: Wed Apr 7, 2004 11:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's last word Dear Htoo, RobM, KenH & All, --- Htoo Naing wrote: > Just before going into silence, Bhgava last said, '' Behold now, > bhikkhus, I exhort you : All compounded things are subjected to vanish. > Strive with earnestness! '' <...> > And We all should pay special attention to The Buddha's last word '' > Appama dena sampadetha'' ' Strive with earnestness'. > > Sati or mindfulness should be our companion. We have to bring it up all > the time. .... S: I’d also been considering these last words when I saw RobM and KenH were also discussing them: .... RM: > The Buddha often encouraged monks to take action. The last words of the Buddha (SN VI.15) were, ---------------------- KH: Now hang on Rob; the Buddha spent his life teaching a doctrine of anatta (no-self); wouldn't it be horribly inappropriate to interpret his last words as an endorsement of self-belief? :-) ------------------ RM: > "I exhort you, monks: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." ----------- KH: There is no conflict with anatta: "I exhort you, monks" describes right speech and wise attention to that speech; the rest describes how the Eightfold Path conditions escape from samsara. ***** S: The commentary to the Parinibbana sutta adds: “ ‘Achieve with vigilance’: You should successfully perform (sampadeyatha) all your duties (sabbakiccaani) with no absence of mindfulness. Thus* did the Blessed One, while lying on his deathbed, give (adaasi) all the advice he had given for forty-five years by putting it into the single word “vigilance” (appamaada).”** *Thus - Spk1 adds: “As a landlord of great wealth lying on his deathbed would explain to his sons the value of his property.” ** Appamaada: In the commentaries it is often explained as the presence of mindfulness (see Nyantiloka dict)..Narada (in his translation of Appamaada Vagga in Dhp) says that literally it means non-infatuation. ..... Like Ken H, I certainly don’t read these lines as being any endorsement of self-belief or self-action. Just before these last lines, the Buddha had stressed that the Dhamma-Vinaya was to be our teacher after his parinibbanae and the commentary elaborates in detail on these words, stresseing satipa.t.thaana, the khandhas, the aayatana, the dhaatu, etc. Finally it says: “Thus all of this has been told and discussed for forty-five years from my enlightenment to my parinibbaana; three baskets, five Nikaayas, nine branches (a’nga), eight-four thousand groups of dhamma: these are the major divisions. Thus these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma remain. I alone attain parinibbaana, and now I alone advise and instruct. After I have attained parinibbaana, these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, will advise and instruct you.” Just before these lines, which stress the three baskets etc, it also says: “I have analysed these things in detail and taught the Abhidhamma-pi.taka, which is adorned by the Mahaapa.t.thaana with its countless methods and its twenty-fourfold complete origin (samantapa.t.thaana). All of that, the basket of the Abhidhamma, will perform the role of the Teacher for you when I attain parinibbaana.” S: As we know, the Buddha’s omniscience is said to have found its ‘opportunity’ when considering The Pa.t.thaana and thenty-four conditions and golden rays emanated from his body. U Narada who translated the Patthana(Conditional Relations) into English, wrote in his Guide: “In essence, Patthana deals with the conditioned (sappaccaya) and formed(sankhata) states that arise and cease at every instant withut a break and which make up what are said to be animate and inanimate things. These states arise dependent on root and the other conditions and are not at the will and mercy of any being. They do so, not from one cause alone, but from many causes such as the conditioning forces given in the Analytical Exposition of the Conditions. So Patthana is the teaching of anatta.” Look forward to any further comments. Are we all in agreement on the meaning of the last words? Metta, Sarah ===== 32018 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 3:48am Subject: Notes to Majjhima Nikaya 131 Bhaddekaratta Sutta 'A Single Excellent Night' note 1209: This discourse with a lengthy introduction and notes is available separately in a translation by Bhikkhu Nanananda under the title "Ideal Solitude". note 1210: In the first edition of this work I followed Nm in rendering bhaddekaratta as "one fortunate attachment". At the suggestion of Ven. Thaanissaro Bhikkhu, however, I have changed it to "one excellent night", which certainly corresponds to the original literal meaning. Ratta and ratti could be taken to represent either Skt. raatra and raatri (= night) or Dkt. rakta and rakti (= attachment). The fact that neither MA nor MT gloss ratta implies that "night" is intended; for if the word were used to mean attachment, an undesirable quality in typical Buddhist discourse, some commentarial clarification would have been offered. The Central Asian Skt., the Skt. title at the head of the Tibetan version, and the Tibetan translation itself all use bhadraka-raatri. This confirms the identification of ratta with 'night'; the change from -e to -a- can be understood as an attempt to convert a difficult reading into a more familiar one. (I am grateful to Peter Skilling for this information.) Ms. contains the following note by Nm on the expression: This term has elsewhere been translated by "true saint" and like phrases, which, however, quite miss the point. The commentary says only this: "Bhaddekarattassa means 'of one who is fortunate (bhadda) in having one (eka) attachment (ratta or ratti); this is because of his possessing application to insight. "The subcommentary resolves the compound ekaratta (one-attachment) into ekaa ratti, and says only that "bhaddekaratta means one who has a fortunate single attachment (bhaddo ekaratto etassa); it is a term for a person who is cultivating insight". There appears to be no other mention of this term elsewhere in the Canon and its commentaries. The Pali word ratta (adj.) or ratti (n.) in this instance is from the root raj, "to take pleasure in." So the "bhaddekaratta" appears to be the one who is applying himself invincibly, unshakeably, to know and to study the present state as it occurs (see verse). This application or attachment is auspicious or fortunate because it leads to liberation ... It might be supposed that the expression "bhaddekaratta" was a popular phrase taken over by the Buddha and given a special sense by him, as was not infrequently done, but there seems to be no reason to do so and there is no evidence for it in this case. It is more likely to be a term coined by the Buddha himself to describe a certain aspect of development. It should be noted that the comments in MA and MT do not have to be interpreted as referring to "attachment," but would make equally good sense if ratta and ratti are understood to mean "night". Nm's derivation of ratta and ratti from the root raj is in no way compulsory here, and to me seems unlikely in this context. note 1211: More literally the first two lines would be translated: "Let not a person run back to the past or live in expectation of the future." The meaning will be elucidated in the expository passage of the Sutta. note 1212: MA: He should contemplate each presently arisen state, just where it has arisen, with insight into its impermanence, etc. note 1213: Asa.mhiiram asankuppam. MA explains that this is said for the purpose of showing insight and repeated insight; for insight is "invincible, unshakeable" because it is not vanquished or shaken by lust and other defilements. Elsewhere the expression "the invincible, the unshakeable" is used as a description of Nibbaana (e.g., Sn v.1149) or of the liberated mind (e.g., Thag v.649), but here it seems to refer to a stage in the development of insight. The recurrence of the verb form sa.mhiirati in 8 and 9 suggests that the intended meaning is contemplation of the present moment without being misled into the adoption of a personality view. note 1214: The "Peaceful Sage" (santo muni) is the Buddha. note 1215: MA: One "finds delight" by bringing to bear upon the past either craving or a view associated with craving. It should be noted that it is not the mere recollection of the past through memory that causes bondage, but the reliving of past experiences with thoughts of craving. In this respect the Buddha's teaching differs significantly from that of Krishnamurti, who seems to regard memory itself as the villain behind the scene. note 1216: Perhaps this sentence, and all the parallel sentences to follow, should be translated: "One does not find delight there thinking, 'I had such material form in the past.'" The translation as it stands suggests that such thoughts arise but without the accompaniment of delight, while the alternative proposed here suggests that these thoughts do to arise at all. The same alternative construction can also be applied to thoughts about the future in 7. The Pali can admit either rendering. note 1217: Perhaps this phrase should be taken as an exclamation: "May I have such material form in the future!" note 1218: The verb here and in the next paragraph, sa.mhiirati, refers back to the line in the verse, "invincibly, unshakeably." MA glosses: "One is dragged in by craving and views because of the lack of insight." 32019 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 1:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] breath Dear Nina, We don’t leave till next Wednesday, so plenty of time for any qus;-) I’m enjoying your discussions with Larry and also looking forward to your reflections on your last trip. --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Sarah, a question for Bgk: I understood blowing the air out is not > breathing, it is blowing. There are questions sometimes. Breathing > through > the mouth? A lot is unclear to me. I would like to hear more about it. .... S: I know K.Sujin will ask me what you want to hear more about or what you mean. Could you elaborate further? .... N:> But > we have to differentiate breath as meditation suibject as described in > the > Vis. which is very special, very precise, so that it leads to detachment > from sense objects. > Now we are talking about breathing in a wider sense. It conditions > tangible > object at many places in the body, and sure I take these for granted, > but > they can be objects of awareness. .... S: Yes, like with ‘foulness’ which Jon was mentioning, we always have to distinguish between the concept as object, such as parts of the body, of samatha and elements or realities, such as hardness/softness as objects of satipatthana. One moment there can be samatha, next satipatthana, next ignorance or wrong view of self. It depends on conditions and understanding. ... N:>But when I start to think of this I > know > that I am thinking and selecting, and this is not awareness which is > aware > of whatever presents itself. .... S: Even then there can be awareness of that wishing and thinking, motivated by attachment or self again. Sometimes I laugh when there is such thinking again;-) In my yoga, there is a lot of focus on breathing and so one tends to be quite conscious of it (usually with lots of ignorance). Occasionally there is some wise reflection or even moments of awareness of tangible objects, but never when wishing, selecting or thinking about them;-) .... N:>There is a whole area here for discussion. > But > I think A. Sujin may answer: do not cling to words. .... S: If you can elaborate on your qus, it makes it easier for me to pursue the points, but I’ll raise them and others you’ve mentioned anyway. ***** On respect in your post to Jon: N:>I was considering listening, because in Bgk someone asked the meaning of listening with respect (doj kawrop). A. Sujin answered: listening and understanding what you hear. As always she stressed listening very much. Thus, we should not think too soon that we have understood already, that we know it all. I often consider that we should study the texts of the Tipitaka and the Commentaries with great respect. .... S: I agree and like to consider these points more. I think the emphasis here is on understanding and really considering, not just listening or reading as we tend to use these terms. Then the respect increases naturally, rather than setting any rules about how we study. These were some notes I came across from a discussion I had with K.Sujin in Bkk (‘86): K.Sujin: “One may go to the Temple or to see monks to show respect instead of going to see friends. If, however, one would like to have something in return by showing respect, then it’s not kusala citta: it’s like craving, wanting something by doing such and such action. So one has to thoroughly examine and be aware of one’s mind. If one wants something in return, it’s not wholesome, it’s not paying respect. One pays respect in different ways.” Qu (by Sarah): “What’s the highest form of paying respect?” KS: “Developing right understanding so that one can understand the Buddha and how he spoke only for the benefit of others.” Qu: “Can this kind of respect be at any time?” KS: “Even at this moment one can be aware and develop right understanding.” Qu: “If one knows that the highest form of respect is developing right understanding, what would be the purpose of lighting incense or visiting monks?” KS: “It doesn’t matter - it depends on the citta. Sometimes we like to do this, sometimes that. We don’t know from moment to moment what we’ll do. It depends on accumulations and conditions....” ..... Later quotes from the same discussion which is now about studying texts and details: Qu: “You put emphasis on direct experience and yet we know that we have to hear and consider a lot before there is any awareness of seeing and visible object or other realities. KS: ”But what is the purpose of studying the texts and details? To have more doubts and curiosity or something that conditions awareness to be aware of realities which present themselves? We don’t have to remember the details or numbers, but by having more understanding, it can condition awareness to be aware of the realities which present themselves at this moment.” Qu: “One’s motives are bound to be very mixed and unless there’s a lot of awareness already developed, one’s motives and purposes are bound to often be unwholesome.” KS: ”If one is reading the Atthasalini and there are many points that one doesn’t understand, what should be done at that very moment? Because why is one reading the text? To understand reality, especially to be aware of reality which appears. One takes visible object as masculine or feminine, but by reading the Atthasalini one can see what conditions such a thought. If there is no masculinity or femininity, can there be the idea of them? In reality, it’s just a rupa which conditions such a thought. It’s all over the body.” Qu: “Isn’t that just thinking about it?” KS: “Just to understand why one takes the visible object this way or that way. it helps one to have less attachment to visible object as a real being when it’s only a process of arising and falling away namas and rupas. One doesn’t have to hurry to get rid of all attachment and aversion because it’s impossible. “The purpose is to get rid of wrong view and ignorance. One will have lobha and dosa as usual, but less with understanding.......... “The Buddha’s teachings are concerned with one thing...developing understanding, because all dukkha comes from ignorance. It has ignorance as its root by clinging to reality which changes all the time. It seems that we can control life, but realities arise by conditions. You don’t want nice things to change, but they change all the time. You don’t want to get old, but you’re getting old all the time. You don’t want to part from things or people, but one day even this body will be scattered about. So we live very temporarily in a moment and we don’t know what will be the next moment.” ***** This is followed by a discussion on space (akasa rupa), speech intimation and other details;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 32020 From: robmoult Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 0:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] tiika Vis 72, part 1. Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > I have been wondering about the cetasikas that arise with functional > (rootless) consciousness. What cetasikas cannot arise with a functional > consciousness and what cetasikas cannot arise with a great- functional > consciousness (mahakiriya)? Is an arahant without wisdom and virtue? How > can he or she function without understanding and values? I have time for a quick answer (Nina can correct any mistakes): The kiriya cittas are as follows: Five sense door adverting consciousness, with indifferent feeling: - 7 ethically variable universal cetasikas - initial application - sustained application - determination Mind door adverting consciousness, with indifferent feeling: - 7 ethically variable universal cetasikas - initial application - sustained application - determination - energy Smile producing consciousness of an Arahant, with pleasant feeling - 7 ethically variable universal cetasikas - initial application - sustained application - determination - energy - zest (all cittas with pleasant feeling include zest) Eight maha-kiriya cittas (play role of javana for arahants in kamavacara) that can be prompted or unprompted, associated or not associated with wisdom, with pleasant or indifferent feeling - 7 ethically variable universal cetasikas - initial application - sustained application - determination - energy - zest (zest only arises with cittas with pleasant feeling, not with cittas with indifferent feeling) - desire - 19 wholesome universal cetasikas - compassion (sometimes, must have person as object) - sympathetic joy (sometimes, must have person as object) - wisdom (wisdom only arises with cittas associated with wisdom, not with cittas not associated with wisdom) There are also kiriya cittas that play the role of javana for arahants in rupavacara and arupavacara. From this, it is clear that an Arahant can have mental states that arise without wisdom. These are still beautiful mental states (they have the 19 wholesome universal cetasikas), but at these moments, the Arahant is not thinking about the Dhamma. Metta, Rob M :-) 32021 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Illusion of Control Hi Sukin, --- Sukinderpal Singh Narula wrote: Sarah: > > Just post as usual and reflect on the illusion that you have any > ultimate > > control in the matter.....;-) ... Sukin: > How come this one came through before the others?!! > Do you have some special powers?!! Control?!! > ;-)) .... I noticed you had the magic touch too...must come from all that non-active NAG-ging leading to special powers;-) Just noticed there are still delays, but the last post I wrote to James has jumped the queue of several others I sent before. Must be influenced by his special powers too;-) Enjoying your discussions with Eznir. Keep going. See you next week. Metta, Sarah ====== 32022 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 0:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipassanaa As A Synonym Of Anupassanaa In Satipa.t.thaana Suttam Dear Suan, I’ve been meaning to get back to our Vibha~nga thread: --- abhidhammika wrote: > > The Section 550 Pali on my CD ROM also comes with omissions > (pe "peyyaala") as follows. > > 550. "Sato sampajaano"ti. Tattha katamaa sati? Yaa sati anussati …pe… sammaasati– ayam vuccati "sati". > Tattha katamam sampajaññam? Yaa paññaa pajaananaa …pe… amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi– idam vuccati "sampajaññam". Iti imaaya ca satiyaa iminaa ca sampajaññena upeto hoti …pe… samannaagato. Tena vuccati "sato >sampa-jaano"ti. ***** Sarah: In the English translation, it reads: 550. “Mindful and aware” means: therein what is mindfulness? that which is mindfulness, constant mindfulnes, [see para 220], right mindfulness. This is called mindfulness. Therein what is awareness? That which is wisom, understanding, [see para 525], absence of dullness, truth investigation, right view. This is called awareness. thus of this mindfulness and this awareness he is possessed, [see para 357], furnished. Therefore this is called ‘mindful and aware’.” ***** Para 220 refers to the controlling faculties (indriyas)of eye, ear, mind and so on and is very long. Paras 525 and 357 we’ve had before. We’ve already discussed how awareness is rather inadequate for sampajanno (clear comprehension, wisdom etc). I also tend to pause rather at translations using ‘constant mindfulness’ (here for anussati). What do you think? We know that no states are constant, not even for arahants (and of course only arising with javana cittas) and yet we see this suggestion of non-stop mindfulness so often. Is it a literal translation? Suan, Could you also kindly give me the Pali for 358 ‘Dwells’ and 359 ‘Ardent’ so we can consider these terms more as well. .... Suan: > Today I was reading Anguttara and Majjhima commentaries on > Aaka~nkheya Suttam (in both Nikaayas) where the term "vipassanaaya" > occurs. Aacariya Buddhaghosa defines Vipassanaa as Anupassanaa and > mentions 7 Anupassanaas. .... Sarah: If you have time to elaborate, I’d be interested. .... Suan: > The Bhaddekaratta Suttam highlights the urgency of the present > moment, so here the Buddha no longer cares about Samatha Jhaanas. > Without furhter ado, he simply asks us "to wisely observe the present > phenomenon wherever it arises (paccuppanna~nca yo dhammam, tattha > tatha vipassati)." .... Sarah: This is interesting and relates to my comment above. Nina wrote ‘Tatthaa tatthaa vipassati: he sees with insight (realities) here and there.’ This is similar to your translation. I think tatthaa means ‘there’? B.Bodhi’s words sound good(‘..with insight each presently arisen state.’), but again it may read as suggesting a constant insight. What do you think? I hope you and Nina will help us consider these favourite DSG sutta lines even more deeply. Metta, Sarah Bhaddekaratta Suttam "Atiitam naanvaagameyya, nappa.tika~nkhe anaagatam; yadatiitam pahiinam tam, appattañca anaagatam. "Paccuppannañca yo‚ dhammam, tattha tattha vipassati; asamhiiram asamkuppam, tam vidvaa manubruuhaye. "Ajjeva kiccamaatappam, ko jaññaa mara.nam suve; na hi no sa~ngaram tena, mahaasenena maccunaa. "Evam vihaarim aataapim, ahorattamatanditam; tam ve bhaddekarattoti, santo aacikkhate muni". --- abhidhammika wrote: > 32023 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 0:34am Subject: Abhidhamma in the Suttanta (was: Re: [dsg] BB4 - Space) Hi Ken O, I thought your post (a week ago) contained good points. Yesterday I replied to BB's last letter to me on this topic(which I posted) and gave links to your post, Dharmajim's on MN editions and one of Jon's on a Susima sutta and a few more comments of my own on another passage in CMA. I'll post any response if there is one. --- Ken O wrote: > Hi Sarah > > I have immerse respect for B Bodhi but I like to make a presentation > was Abdhidhamma after the Nikayas. > > To me, let see whether there are pieces of Abdhidhamma in the Nikayas <...> > --- Then again we look again at one more sutta quote > MN 32, Mahaagosinga Sutta para 8 > <<"Here friend Sariputta, two bhikkhus engage in a talks on the > Higher Dhamma* and they questions each other, and each being > questioned by the other answers without foundering, and their talk > rolls on in accordance with the Dhamma. That kind of bhikkhu could > illuminate this Gosinga Saala-tree Wood." > Then later in the same sutta we see Buddha approve of B. Moggallana. > >> > > * - the Higher Dhamma (translated from the pali word- > abhidhammakatham)- B Bodhi personal notes. < the word cannot refer to the Pitaka of that name - obviously the > produce of a phase and Buddhist thought later than the Nikayas - it > may well indicate a systematic and analytical approach to the > doctrine that served as the original nucleus of the Abhidhamma > Pitaka. In a careful study of the context which the word > "Abhidhamma" occurs in the sutta Pitakas of the early recension, the > Japanese Pali Scholar Fumimaro Watanabe concludes that the Buddha's > own disciple formed the conception of Abdhidhamma as an elementary > philosophical study that explore their mutual relations.>> .... S: I read Watanabe's paper a long time ago and forget the details, but I didn't agree with his conclusions at all. As I recall, his scholarship was not based on the ancient Pali texts, such as the ancient commentaries or Abhidhamma itself at all, but on other modern scholarship and possibly the Chinese texts. As I say, this was a while back. It may be on the net I think. In the end, I think it depends on what one wishes to use as 'authority' and one's confidence in the Patthana and other teachings included in the Abhidhamma. .... > The there arise these questions, why did the Buddha approved it if it > is not of the dhamma, so in that sense it rise doubt whether it is > philosophical. Even if Buddha did not teach it as some has said, his > mere approval has bear a lot of weight that Abhidhamma originate > during the time of Nikayas and not after it. Furthermore , it is > the other chief disciple and not Ven Sariputta who said the word on > higher dhamma because usually Ven Sariputta is known to be the main > proponent of Abhidhamma. .... Good points. Let's see if BB or anyone else responds. Metta, Sarah ======= 32024 From: Sarah Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 2:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Beings and Their Cittas Hi Howard (& James), --- upasaka@a... wrote: > You may find it amusing in an ironic way (or you may not! ;-)) > that I > have just saved this post of yours [S: the one with all the quotes on the world] in my "filing cabinet" under the > title > 'Phenomenalism in the Suttas'!! In any case, I thoroughly enjoyed this > post of > yours, and I consider the material you quoted there well worth saving! .... S: It was certainly most encouraging to know I’d made it at long last to your sacred ‘filing cabinet’;-) Now I know the trick: 95% quote and a few comments from James and the briefest oneliners from me;-) Seriously, I’m not at all surprised you appreciate these passages. K.Sujin also refers to them in ch 23 ‘The World’, Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, translated by Nina and soon to be published by the Foundation in Bkk. http://www.abhidhamma.org/Para10.htm This is a quote from it: “It seems that there is the universe, the world full of beings, people and things. However, in reality there is citta which thinks about the shape and form of the four great Elements of earth, water, fire and wind. They appear in different combinations, they appear as beings, people, the moon, the sun, the stars, as many different things. When we experience things through touch, only cold, heat, softness, hardness, motion or pressure appear. If we know dhammas as they are, we realize what the world is: the dhammas which arise and fall away very rapidly, which are transitory. All dhammas which arise have to fall away, without exception. If one does not realize the arising and falling away of dhammas, one only pays attention to conventional truth. The cittas of the mind-door process remember a “whole”, the shape and form of what appears through the eyes, they remember the meaning of high and low sounds which appear through the ears. The names of different things are remembered, and then only concepts are known.” James, thanks for posting the footnote to the all (sabba). When it refers to the ‘all of the sense bases (ayatanasabba), i.e the phenomena of the four planes’, as Nina mentioned, we have to understand that this section of Salaayatana is always referring to these aayatana which include all realities (not concepts as I’ve discussed with Htoo). As the commentary note explains, however, sometimes nibbana is included in the ‘all’ as in the Sabba sutta and at other times, like ‘Burning’, obviously not. Also we need to distinguish in our discussions whether we’re just referring to what is experienced and can be known (as appeals to Howard) and what is known only by the Buddha’s omniscience - ie anything he put his attention on. As you suggest, Howard, this knowledge is ‘beyond range’, but it doesn’t mean it was beyond range for the Buddha;-) So I don’t think there is any problem with the commentary note James gave (also see posts under Sabba Sutta in U.P. if inclined), but let me know if so. Meanwhile, I hope James continues to post these commentary notes for you. Maybe one day they’ll make it to the ‘filing cabinet’ too;-) Metta, Sarah > Note 6: Spk: The all (sabba) is fourfold: (i) the all-inclusive all > (sabbasabba)), i.e., everything knowable, all of which comes into > range of the Buddha's knowledge of omniscience; (ii) the all of the > sense bases (ayatanasabba), i.e. the phenomena of the four planes, > (iii) the all of personal identity (sakkayasabba), i.e. the > phenomena of the three planes; and (iv) the partial all (padesabba), > i.e., the five physical sense objects. Each of these, from (i) to > (iv), has a successively narrower range than its predecessor. In > this sutta the all of the sense bases is intended. 32025 From: christine_forsyth Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 3:52pm Subject: Patience and Courage : was[Re: [dsg] Fwd: Antony in Hospital] Hello Sarah and all, Yes, I'm getting ready for the trip to Bkk. Leave Bris. for Syd, thence Syd -> Bkk for the usual midnight arrival on Saturday night. Trying the Holiday Inn (Silom) this time - maybe we can ferry across the River for breakfast with you chaps - or vice versa? Ring when you arrive. Looking forward to seeing everyone again, and to the discussions. Hopefully I can locate Shakti, and I know Azita will role up on time. Been busy this last week - my older brother is quite ill in hospital, but on the mend now hopefully. Regarding courage and patience: Courage is also called viriya in Pali, combined with perseverance it is often translated as 'energy'. I never used to understand why energy could be seen as courage in Buddhism. But I think courage is steadfastness, endurance and not giving up. These are the outward signs of the Perfection of Energy. The first thing to decline when faced with chronic or ongoing anxiety, fear and stress is energy. What needs to be done to develop it? Energy as one of the Paramis (Perfections) http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of% 20enlightenment.htm#Chapter%206 OR http://tinyurl.com/2gudk Some DSG discussions on Courage: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15591 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15592 For previous posts about Patience (khanti) click on the shortened Useful Post link and then on 'P': http://tinyurl.com/2c0k "Patience is the unimpeded weapon of the good in the development of noble qualities, for it dispels anger, the opposite of all such qualities, without residue. It is the adornment of those capable of vanquishing the foe; the strength of recluses and brahmins; a stream of water extinguishing the fire of anger; the basis for acquiring a good reputation; a mantra for quelling the poisonous speech of evil people; the supreme source of constancy in those established in restraint. Patience is an ocean on account of its depth; a shore bounding the great ocean of hatred; a panel closing off the door to the plane of misery; a staircase ascending to the worlds of the gods and Brahmas; the ground for the habitation of all noble qualities; the supreme purification of body, speech and mind." Commentary to the 'Basket of Conduct' (Miscellaneous Sayings)" Patience is one of the Paramis (Perfections) http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of% 20enlightenment.htm#Chapter%207 OR http://tinyurl.com/35qzt I'm still not understanding the use of the term 'develop' on dsg - e.g. in 'we must develop' this or that quality - khanti, viriya, or any of the perfections, or panna. Isn't this requiring a 'self' to 'do something'? How would this be different to 'formal meditation'? (smile) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Christine (& Antony), > > --- christine_forsyth wrote: > Hello Sarah, > > > > As you will see in this forwarded message, Antony may not reply for a > > short time. > .... > Thanks for letting us know and Antony, if you see this anytime, I'm sure > we all hope you get well very soon. (Also, apologies for spelling yr name > wrong). > > Chris, you must be getting ready for your trip. Is it Friday you leave, I > forget? If you're not too busy, do you have any favourite sutta links on > the courage and patience theme? > > Talking of favourite suttas, please do add the commentary/other notes > which accompany the Bhaddekaratta Sutta you quoted as I know not everyone > has the text and as it's so often referred to on DSG it now has its own > spot in U.P. (No hurry;-)). > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= http://mail.english.yahoo.com.hk 32026 From: Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 4:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tiika Vis 72, part 1. Hi Rob M., Nice to see you again. Thanks for the comprehensive answer. Next question, how is it that an arahant's desire is rootless? In other words, if desire, in itself in a javana series doesn't initiate kamma, what does? Also, I was wondering if an arahant can be angry or wrathful. The Tibetans have something like this. Larry 32027 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 8:12am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Friend Sarah and All, Sarah: James, when we are referring to the proliferations, distorted perceptions and so on, we're referring to the `underlying craving and defilements',especially wrong views in these cases which take concepts such as `self' or `things' as objects as Ken O stressed. James: Who is `we'? You use this pronoun quite often and I usually have a hard time figuring out who you are referring to. Could you explain who `we' is? But back to the message, I can't assume what someone means when they write something. When you write that concepts are the central teaching of the Buddha, I have to disagree. Then you reply, "Well, when we say this we actually mean that." Huh? I can't even figure out who this `we' is much less to be able to figure out what they really mean when they write something. ;-)) Sarah: Let us know how you're going in that section of SN. James: I have been reading it, and pondering, and reading Hume and Nietzsche for additional viewpoints, but I don't think I am going to post anything- so you and others can stop waiting ;-)). I do think there is an objective reality beyond the traditional five senses and their traditional objects, which is what the Buddha was addressing in the Salayatanasamyutta, but in order to demonstrate this I would have to discuss supernormal powers, ESP (Divine Eye, Divine Ear, etc.), and the Buddha's omniscience. These topics have caused incredulity and irritation in this group in the past so I won't discuss them again. This is a purely philosophical topic anyway and not worthy of in-depth discussion. For all practical purposes, the `all' and the `world' should be considered how the Buddha described it in that sutta and there is no practical reason to consider a broader all. Sarah: Sorry, this one's a bit rushed, but I wanted to get back to you as we'll be hiking and so on over the weekend and I may not have much chance to write. James: I hope that you have a lovely time. Metta, James p.s Do you have any problem with the section on Pa~n~natti in Karunadasa's essay? We can use that to discuss further if you'd like too. James: No, I don't. But he describes pannatti much differently that K. Sujin does in her article. Remember, we were discussing how K. Sujin explains panatti. I think the appropriate question would be if you have any problem with how Karunadasa explains pannatti? Do you agree with his section on "Pannatti and the Two Truths"? If so, we can stop discussing this issue of pannatti. http://www.abhidhamma.org/dhamma_theory_philosophical_corn.htm 32028 From: Jeffrey Brooks Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 11:10am Subject: A Practice Strategy that leads to Nonmaterial Absorption A Practice Strategy that leads to Nonmaterial Absorption Arupa Jhana Practice Paths Aneñja-sappaya Sutta, MN 106 Conducive to the Imperturbable Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. 3) ..."What if I -- overpowering the world [of the five senses] and having determined my mind -- were to dwell with an awareness that was abundant & enlarged? Having done so, these evil, unskillful mental states -- greed, ill will, & contentiousness -- would not come into being. With their abandoning, my mind would become unlimited, immeasurable, & well developed.' Practicing & frequently abiding in this way, his mind acquires confidence in that dimension. There being full confidence, he either attains the imperturbable[1] now or else is committed to discernment. With the break-up of the body, after death, it's possible that this leading-on consciousness of his will go to the imperturbable. This is declared to be the first practice conducive to the imperturbable. 4)..."every form, is the four great elements or a form derived from the four great elements.' Practicing & frequently abiding in this way, his mind acquires confidence in that dimension... consciousness of his will go to the imperturbable. This is declared to be the second practice conducive to the imperturbable. 5)..."perceptions in lives to come; forms here & now; forms in lives to come; form-perceptions here & now; form-perceptions in lives to come: both are inconstant. This is declared to be the third practice conducive to the imperturbable. (The Base of Nothingness) 6. ..." perceptions of the imperturbable: all are perceptions. Where they cease without remainder: that is peaceful, that is exquisite, i.e., the dimension of nothingness.' This is declared to be the first practice conducive to the dimension of nothingness. Practicing & frequently abiding in this way, his mind acquires confidence in that dimension...This is declared to be the first practice conducive to the dimension of nothingness. 7."Then again, the disciple of the noble ones, having gone into the wilderness, to the root of a tree, or into an empty dwelling, considers this: 'This is empty of self or of anything pertaining to self.' Practicing & frequently abiding in this way, his mind acquires confidence in that dimension...This is declared to be the second practice conducive to the dimension of nothingness. 8."Then again, the disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'I am not anyone's anything anywhere; nor is anything of mine in anyone anywhere'... This is declared to be the third practice conducive to the dimension of nothingness. (the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception) 9. "Then again, the disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'Sensuality here & now; sensuality in lives to come; sensual perceptions here & now; sensual perceptions in lives to come; forms here & now; forms in lives to come; form-perceptions here & now; form-perceptions in lives to come; perceptions of the imperturbable; perceptions of the dimension of nothingness: all are perceptions... This is declared to be the practice conducive to the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. (Nibbana) 10. "It should not be, it should not occur to me; it will not be, it will not occur to me. What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' -- obtains equanimity... What is, what has come to be, that I abandon' -- obtains equanimity. He relishes that equanimity, welcomes it, remains fastened to it. 12. "Without clinging/sustenance, Ananda, a monk is totally unbound." 13. "There is the case, Ananda, where a disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'Sensuality here & now; sensuality in lives to come; sensual perceptions here & now; sensual perceptions in lives to come; forms here & now; forms in lives to come; form-perceptions here & now; form-perceptions in lives to come; perceptions of the imperturbable; perceptions of the dimension of nothingness; perceptions of the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception: that is an identity, to the extent that there is an identity. This is deathless: the liberation of the mind through lack of clinging/sustenance.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn106.html 32029 From: robmoult Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 6:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tiika Vis 72, part 1. Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > How is it that an arahant's desire is rootless? In other > words, if desire, in itself in a javana series doesn't initiate kamma, > what does? ===== I used the word "desire" as a translation of the Pali term chanda. Other terms used as a translation of chanda include zeal or wish. Chanda has the characterisitic of being a desire to act. Its function is to search for an object. It's manifestation is a need for an object. It's proximate cause is the object itself. It can be regarded as the extending of the mental hand in the apprehending of an object. Chanda arises in all cittas with roots except moha-mula cittas (in other words, moha-mula cittas do not extend their mental hand to an object). All of the beautiful cittas have chanda. In rupavacara and arupavacara cittas, the cittas extend their mental hand to the meditation object. In lokuttara cittas, the cittas extend their mental hand to the object of Nibbana. Every action begins with chanda; a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Chanda is also a necessary factor for the development of calm (chanda is the beginning; the discarding of the hindrances is the middle; absorption is the end). Chanda does not create kamma, it is the cetasika cetana that creates kamma. Cetana is often translated as volition but it can also be translated as intention or will. Cetana arises in all cittas. When it arises in a citta that is not a javana citta, cetana plays the role of coordinating or organizing the citta and other cetasikas to work together. Cetana plays the role of a manager. In javana cittas, cetana is doubly energetic; in these cases, cetana is like the manager who also plays an active role in getting the work done. In AN VI.63, the Buddha said, "Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech, & intellect." In this case, the Pali word "cetana" has been translated as "intention". ===== > > Also, I was wondering if an arahant can be angry or wrathful. The > Tibetans have something like this. ===== It is impossible for an Arahant to have dosa-mula cittas. I guess it is possible that an uninformed person could interpret the behaviour of an Arahant as "angry or wrathful", but the underlying mental states of the Arahant cannot be dosa-based. I recall a story of a monk who had deep accumulations of speaking with a scolding voice. Even after attaining Arahantship, the monk still spoke with a scolding voice because of his deep accumulations. In other words, the observable behaviour does not always reflect the inner state of mind. Last night, my wife and I went to a Dhamma talk on compassion. The talk was given by a psychiatric doctor who worked at a government hospital. As you can imagine, he needs a lot of compassion to do his job. The talk was called, "A booster dose of Vitamin C (Compassion)"; the speaker gave 12 techniques of supporting the development of compassion. In one example, he talked of visualizing the baby inside the person crying out, "I have pain... please help me". He talked about how he used this visualization when dealing with drug addicts. On the surface, the drug addict's behaviour can be abusive and very unpleasant. However, when one considers the baby inside, karuna can arise. Again, the observable behaviour does not always reflect the inner state of mind. Metta, Rob M :-) 32030 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 8:29pm Subject: Patience and Courage : was[Re: [dsg] Fwd: Antony in Hospital] Hi Christine, To be honest, I am sending this post mainly to test a theory. If I `send' from the original (or edit) page then it will go straight through – and, in the process, free my earlier post which is stuck in the pipeline (and which was sent from the preview page). It worked last time when I didn't really want it to. My answer to your question is; we develop wholesome qualities in order to make them our own. It is all very well to appreciate -- marvel at -- the wholesome qualities (metta, patience, good cheer,) of other dsg members, but we need to develop those qualities for ourselves. As for its being like formal meditation; bite your tongue! It is nothing of the sort! :-) Kind regards, Ken H 32031 From: Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 8:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tiika Vis 72, part 1. Hi Rob, Are you saying that there is no intention in an arahant's javana cittas? Is the cause of suffering intention? Larry 32032 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 9:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's last word Dear Sarah, I am especially moved by the words: these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, will advise and instruct you. The Buddha taught so that we can develop panna ourselves. Not depending on people. People are only the means through which we can hear the dhamma, who can point to the way. These eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, they are dhammas, realities, we do not have to think of lists in a textbook. We can discover them and check them ourselves as far as we are able to. Then one will find out that the Abhidhamma that is included in these eighty-four thousand groups of dhammas is quite different from what one thought at first. There is nothing abstract here, no theory. Nina. op 08-04-2004 08:19 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > “Thus all of this has been told and discussed for forty-five years from my > enlightenment to my parinibbaana; three baskets, five Nikaayas, nine > branches (a’nga), eight-four thousand groups of dhamma: these are the > major divisions. Thus these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma remain. > I alone attain parinibbaana, and now I alone advise and instruct. After I > have attained parinibbaana, these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, > will advise and instruct you 32033 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 9:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] respect Dear Sarah, Thank you for this lovely post. You have other points that I did not have, I like it. Nina. op 08-04-2004 10:45 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > Qu (by Sarah): “What’s the highest form of paying respect?” > > KS: “Developing right understanding so that one can understand the Buddha > and how he spoke only for the benefit of others.” > > Qu: “Can this kind of respect be at any time?” > > KS: “Even at this moment one can be aware and develop right > understanding.” 32034 From: Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 9:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) James: "For all practical purposes, the `all´ and the `world´ should be considered how the Buddha described it in that sutta and there is no practical reason to consider a broader all." Hi James and Sarah, Did the Buddha say anything about reason? Isn't reason a reason to reason a greater reality? Isn't the functioning of a sense-base understood (by us, james, sarah & larry) by reason? According to abhidhamma the only thing we (j, s, &l) know directly is meaningless sense data. In a way, becoming absorbed in meaningless sense data is an at least temporary end of desire just because it is meaningless. Larry 32035 From: robmoult Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 10:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] tiika Vis 72, part 1. Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Are you saying that there is no intention in an arahant's javana cittas? > Is the cause of suffering intention? The cetasika cetana (traslated as intention or volition) is in every citta. In an Arahant's javana citta, the function of the cetasika cetana is only to organize the actions of the citta and the other cetasikas. Unlike the javana cittas of non-Arahants, cetana does not create kamma when it arises in an Arahant's javana citta. The second noble truth is that the cause of suffering is craving. The mechanism by which craving creates kamma is the associated intention (cetana). The "weightiness" of the kamma produced depends on the intensity of the cetana. Metta, Rob M :-) 32036 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 2:24pm Subject: Re: Illusion of Control Hi Rob M, With help from my dsg friends, I am learning to understand Dhamma strictly in terms of nama and rupa. Some say I take it too far: they say (perhaps with some justification) that the Buddha didn't only teach ultimate truth, he also taught conventional truth. But I will have none of that. If any so-called teaching of the Buddha can't be understood in terms of nama and rupa, then I don't want to know about it. :-) You wrote: ----------- > My understanding is that bhavana is an activity (like dana and sila), not a citta accompanied by wisdom. > --------------------- Sorry, this does not compute! :-) What activity could you be referring to? What activity (of action, speech or thought) is there that is other than citta and cetasika? You are an expert on the classification of cittas, so I am hesitant to suggest which of them can qualify as bhavana. Presumably it can be prompted, or unprompted, joyful or indifferent, always karmically wholesome and always with panna. In the sensuous field, that narrows the field to four, does it not? And what about dana and sila? According to my understanding, they include the same four plus those karmically wholesome cittas without panna – making eight. Corrections welcome. -------------- RM:> I looked up the term in Nyanatiloka's Dictionary and it would appear to agree with my understanding. ---------------- When we read a definition of mental development, we need to remember that our mind is not something that persists in time and which we can mould into shape (or put things into and take things out of). The mind is born and dies in a single, fleeting moment; that is when mental development must take place. Working backwards through your post (just to be different), I see you have asked: ---------------- > What is meant by 'formal meditation'; how is it different from 'informal meditation' (if that is the opposite)? > ---------------------- Formal meditation is a concept. Sarah described it as the `idea of meditation.' Just like ideas of seeing and hearing, ideas of bhavana are easy to grasp and dwell on because they can arise with ignorance (and we have plenty of that). The actual, momentary, seeing, hearing and bhavana, we don't grasp nearly so well. They can only be known by citta with panna. To digress: The thing that intrigues me is that we might admit we can't control paramattha dhammas but still think we can control concepts. (I fall into that trap all the time.) In fact, there is no control over anything (the uncontrollable dhammas created the concepts in the first place). We might say; "Look, I wanted to sit down and now I am sitting down – control! I wanted to close my eyes and think about anatta and that is what I am doing. Maybe there is no control over ultimate reality but there certainly is over conventional reality!" That is what happens during formal meditation – belief in control. Admittedly, it also happens throughout the rest of the day but at those other times we are not turning it into a ritualistic practice. ---------- RM: > I am not saying that the Buddha endorsed self-belief. I am observing that the Buddha often encouraged monks to take action. The Buddha encouraged action with "desire, endeavour and persistance" without endorsing self belief. > ------------ Or, to put that another way, "without endorsing the idea of control." The monks, who heeded the Buddha's encouragement, didn't formally (ritualistically) practice the Dhamma. Desire, endeavour, persistence, and so on, happened because the required conditions for their happening were there. -------------- RM: > In my previous post, I gave the example of fear being a motivator for me to study the dhamma (to make sure that I was prepared for my class). To state this does not mean that I believe the fear is kusala. After this fear arose, I did two things: - Acknowledged this mental state as aksuala (object condition) - Allowed this mental state to motivate me (natural decisive support condition) -------------- No argument there. Those things can happen before we even think about them – before we can introduce the idea of control. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 32037 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 11:31pm Subject: Video Games? Dear Friends, I read an article the other day that had me considering practical applications to the dhamma. I wanted to share my thoughts even though they are quite preliminary and untested at this point. I read a news article about how playing video games increases the surgical skill of doctors significantly: http://news.yahoo.com/news? tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040407/ap_on_he_me/video_game_surgery_4 I thought about this and considered that the video games not only increased the eye-hand coordination ability, it probably also increased concentration skills. Making a leap to Buddhism, I considered how often the Buddha stressed the `skill of concentration' for release. I started to wonder if playing video games would also increase concentration during meditation. Personally, I have never really cared for any type of game because I have viewed them as pointless and self-indulgent (even as a child I had this non-traditional viewpoint). However, considering that video games could increase the ability to concentrate I have begun a type of mini-study. I found some Yahoo games that are skill based (non- violent) and free for the download. I have found that playing these games, keeping mindful of developing concentration, will improve my concentration during meditation if I play them immediately before the sitting session. I know that this is non-traditional, and I have never read of such a thing elsewhere, but I thought I would give it a shot! ;-)) (Non-traditional is my middle name! LOL!) Anyway, just thought I would share. If anyone finds it difficult to concentrate for long periods during meditation, video games could possibly help in this regard. Metta, James 32038 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 11:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Friend Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > James: "For all practical purposes, the `all´ and the `world´ should > be considered how the Buddha described it in that sutta and there is no > practical reason to consider a broader all." > > Hi James and Sarah, > > Did the Buddha say anything about reason? Isn't reason a reason to > reason a greater reality? Isn't the functioning of a sense-base > understood (by us, james, sarah & larry) by reason? According to > abhidhamma the only thing we (j, s, &l) know directly is meaningless > sense data. In a way, becoming absorbed in meaningless sense data is an > at least temporary end of desire just because it is meaningless. > > Larry I have read what you have written here but I don't quite understand what you are asking or the point you are making. As monks would often ask of the Buddha, could you please explain in detail what you have stated in brief? ;-)) Maybe Sarah will better connect to your post so I will wait for her to post and may comment further. Thanks for writing!! (You don't usually write to me. I must be doing something right lately! ;-)). Metta, James 32039 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Larry, op 08-04-2004 00:54 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: >. What cetasikas cannot arise with a functional > consciousness N: Let us first talk about kiriyacitta of the sensuous plane of citta. In a sense-door process we have the sense-door adverting consciousness, mind-door adverting-consciousness and this last one performs the function of determining in the sense-door process. These two are ahetuka, not accompanied by roots, and they are not accompanied by piti and somanassa, but by upekkha, indifferent feeling. The sense-door adverting-consciousness is not accompanied by viriya, but the mind-door adverting-consciousness is. They are not accompanied by akusala cetasikas and not by sobhana cetasikas. As to the smile-producing consciousness of the arahat, this is accompanied by somanassa, not by upekkha. It is accompanied by viriya. L: and what cetasikas cannot arise with a great-functional > consciousness (mahakiriya)? N: akusala cetasikas. Sobhana cetasikas do arise, but not the three abstinences. Since they have eradicated all akusala there are no more opportunities for them to abstain. They do not need these. Compassion and sympathetic joy only arise when there are opportunities for them, not all the time. As to wisdom, panna, there are four maha-kiriyacittas associated with it and four without it. L: Is an arahant without wisdom and virtue? How > can he or she function without understanding and values? N: He is endowed with great wisdom and virtue. The Buddha is endowed with the greatest wisdom and virtue of all: vijjaacara.na sampanno. As to the four maha-kiriyacittas without wisdom: the arahat when he goes on his almsround and greets people will not have wisdom all the time, this does not arise with each citta. Cittas are so fast, so, in between those with wisdom there are other types without wisdom. But such maha-kiriyacittas are accompanied with all the other good qualities, such as sati, confidence, detachment, etc. So he functions in the most optimal way one could think of. Nina. P.S. I am not so good at counting, corrections from Rob M welcome! 32040 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 0:36am Subject: Re: Video Games? Hi James, > increased concentration skills. Making a leap to Buddhism, I > considered how often the Buddha stressed the `skill of > concentration' for release. I started to wonder if playing video > games would also increase concentration during meditation. As you probably know, I play games on the computer all the time. ;-) My habit started from the days of the `game machines'. I have always had a difficulty concentrating. My children too have attention problems. The other day my wife suggested that she should take our older son to play badminton everyday so as to develop his concentration. I said that it all depended on `interest', which he may or may not retain any interest in the sport, and even if he did, it does not mean that his concentration will be developed per se. I quite clearly see at the root of my sustained interest in computer games and movies, akusala tendencies. I am always looking to be entertained. So James, concentration may or may not be developed, but surely lobha, dosa and moha will most definitely be accumulated. This relates to why I once questioned the need to formal practice and why I and others have been stressing the fact that concentration arises with every citta. I don't believe there should be any idea to practice concentration in order to be able to insight realities. Because this mental factor like all the other mental factors, simply take the object what ever the citta takes. So what is being developed and accumulated is determined by the root of the citta. If and only if there is sati and panna, then the concentration will be right. Still, it is only panna which does the function of `insighting' and `understanding' realities, and concentration is just a supporting factor in this case, I think. True, that samatha can be developed to a degree that concentration of jhana can be achieved and this is indeed good. But again, if one is to walk the Buddha's path, it is via vipassana panna and the practice of satipatthana. And satipatthana has only `wrong view' as its only hindrance. Any dhamma can be the object of insight including the wrong view, panna does not mind anything. Avijja on the other hand, tend to pick and choose. This includes the idea of choosing to develop concentration. Please seriously consider this James. I am not trying to start any debate nor do I want to just argue. ;-) Metta, Sukin. 32041 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 0:54am Subject: Patience and Courage : was[Re: [dsg] Fwd: Antony in Hospital] Hello Ken, And that's it? From one of the champions of no-control? If one can, as you say, 'develop' wholesome qualities like metta, patience and good cheer, then one can develop sati. What's your method? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Christine, > > To be honest, I am sending this post mainly to test a theory. If > I `send' from the original (or edit) page then it will go straight > through – and, in the process, free my earlier post which is stuck > in the pipeline (and which was sent from the preview page). It > worked last time when I didn't really want it to. > > My answer to your question is; we develop wholesome qualities in > order to make them our own. It is all very well to appreciate -- > marvel at -- the wholesome qualities (metta, patience, good cheer,) > of other dsg members, but we need to develop those qualities for > ourselves. As for its being like formal meditation; bite your > tongue! It is nothing of the sort! :-) > > Kind regards, > Ken H 32042 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 1:40am Subject: [dsg] Re: the self. . . how ? #1. Dear Eznir (and Sarah), I appreciate that you put in so much effort into responding and trying to make me understand. I had composed as always, long replies to your posts. But every time I read over them, I want to change something and add something else, and the posts get even longer. This is not a big problem. However, I also see that something is lacking, but I can't put my finger on it. I get the feeling that I am not doing justice to your well considered replies and am mostly only repeating the same points even as I try to change contexts. So Eznir, I am thinking that maybe we let this thread go?! Besides the points I make are the same ones that others seem to be making on other threads. And these are the evergreen topics of dsg. ;-) So I am sure we will have plenty of opportunity to discuss them together in the future. Sarah, it seems like I've got only so much stamina. Hope you are not disappointed. ;-) See you in a few days. Metta, Sukin --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Eznir" wrote: > Dear Sukin, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinderpal Singh Narula" > wrote: 32043 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 0:07am Subject: Autopilot Elevation ! Friends: The 5th degree of Lifting Joy: Just as tuft of cotton or wool, Ananda, or a feather being very light leaves the ground, arises into the air & drifts away with the wind, even & exactly so, do the body of the Well-Gone-One, when he immerses the body in the mind & the mind in the body, by entering the absorption of bodily blissful buoyancy. Then this physical frame of the Well-Gone-One rises without any difficulty or effort & leaves the ground up into the free air, like wafted by the breeze: The grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya V [283-5]. ________________ As he moves thus, he can if he wishes, create a path in space by entering absorption into the meditation object of solidity & then walk as on foot. Or, if he so decides, he can fly freely by mentally resolving on entering absorption into the meditation object of motion. Then, he is carried by the force of determination like the arrow shot by an archer: The Path of Purification. Visuddhi-Magga. ________________ One should rise gradually, first one feet, then after repeating slowly up to 2 meters in order not to evoke fear, which will make one fall out of the mentally unified absorption. Q: If one looses absorption, can one then fall down ? A: No! Since the state begins on the meditation seat ! If, after having gone far, one looses the absorption, then one reaches the original sitting place, sees the body sitting there, and thinks: 'This One possesses supra-human power. This is his absolute calm!': The Path of Freedom. Vimutti-Magga --oo0oo-- Remember: Any wish can only be fulfilled by first purifying Moral. Sources: Samyutta Nikaya selection: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/index.html The grouped Sayings of the Buddha: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 The path of Purification: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=771110 The path of Freedom: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=404208 All yours in the Dhamma. Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/ http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/TrueDhamma 32044 From: Ken O Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 2:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi James James concept and defilements are two different aspect of dhamma. Just like clinging and aggregates even though are inseparable but still distinct. Concept of me and mine is usually the result of moha (IMHO) because of not knowing that conditions arise on it own (anatta). James you are right to say that satipatthana is used to eradicate defilements and not eradicating concepts. But since concepts of me and mine are conditioned by moha and lobha, that is why we cannot used it as a basis to for satipatthana. Then again I should apologise first and rephrase my earlier statement (sorry moha is very strong still ;-) ), it is not the me and mine that is big problem because Buddha also used the word I, me to explain dhamma, it is attachment to me and mine that is the problem and moha not knowing them as empty. Since Buddha has eradicate lobha and moha, so his usage of me and mine are just mere expressions ;-). Ken O 32045 From: robmoult Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 3:01am Subject: Re: Illusion of Control Hi Ken H (Howard and all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > With help from my dsg friends, I am learning to understand Dhamma > strictly in terms of nama and rupa. Some say I take it too far: > they say (perhaps with some justification) that the Buddha didn't > only teach ultimate truth, he also taught conventional truth. But I > will have none of that. If any so-called teaching of the Buddha > can't be understood in terms of nama and rupa, then I don't want to > know about it. :-) ===== For now, I only have time to reply to this portion; expect another message in a few days (this reply should be controversial enough to last until then). I am reminded of a number of exchanges that I have had with Howard on Buddhist Phenomenology. Howard's belief is that the Buddha's teaching are phenomenological (Howard, feel free to jump in if I am misrepresenting you). I do not agree with Howard's position. My position is: - There are a large number of areas where the Buddha's teaching and phenomenology agree (in fact, one may find it difficult to find a sutta quote that does not agree with phenomenology) - The Dhamma is not phenomenological because the purpose of the Dhamma and the purspose of phenomenology are very different. The Buddha taught the Dhamma to support the holy life and the attainment of enlightenment. Phenomenology was developed as a theory of what exists and what does not exist. Saying that the Dhamma is phenomenological is taking the Dhamma out of context and that is very dangerous. The Abhidhamma has a very different focus than the Suttas. I am not aware of any areas of disagreement between the two, but the treatment is very different. Much of the Abhidhamma focuses on "ultimate realities". I do not believe that the Pali word for ultimate reality, "Paramattha Dhamma" can be found in the Suttas. The Abhidhamma provides the theory that underpins the Dhamma, but if you want guidance on how to apply the Dhamma, I strongly suggest looking into the Suttas rather than the Abhidhamma. The Suttas do not focus on ultimate realities. I am concerned that focusing on ultimate realities to guide your practice may be applying the Abhidhamma out of context. Ken H, these ideas are just starting to crystalize in my mind. I may abandon this direction of thinking after condidering the viewpoints of others. Metta, Rob M :-) PS: To put the record straight, I agree that there is no such thing as control and that "free will" is an illusion 32046 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 5:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re:_Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_5._Contentment_(§_5.1.) Hi Sarah, Thank you for this message and the quote you provided. I find the following helpful: `The one not mourning that which is past, not longing for that not yet come, (but) sustaining himself with that which is present, is the one declared `content' ` I wonder if anyone has any example on how a lay person is being content? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor (& Icaro), > > [snip] > S:I have more for you today from the Udana commentary, Meghiya chapter > 229: > > " "Talk on contentment (santu.t.thikathaa)': as regards `contentment' > (santu.t.thi) in this connection santu.t.thi (contentment) is satisfaction > (tu.t.thi) with what is one's own (sakena), with what one has oneslef > acquired; or alternatively, santu.t.thi (contentment) is saisfaction > (tu.t.thi) that is balanced (samaa) after abandoning wanting where the > requisites are concerned that is unbalanced, or again santu.t.thi > (contentment) is satisfaction (tu.t.thi) with what is existent (santena), > with what is known to exist. And there is this that is said: > `The one not mourning that which is past, not longing for that not yet > come, (but) sustaining himself with that which is present, is the one > declared `content' ` > > Later we also read: > > "Thus `talk on contentment' is talk that proceeds by way of explaining the > advantages of such contentment, together with the method of demonstrating > this and so on, and by way of explaining the peril in the state of being > carried away by wanting, divided into the states of wanting to excess and > so forth, (which state) is opposed thereto." > ***** > We don't have to emulate MahaKassapa's fine example as given in the verses > -- he was after all `foremost' in ascetic practices (dhutangas), Icaro, > but we can appreciate the quality of contentment or being satisfied at the > present moment with whatever kamma has produced, whether living in the > forest or the city, don't you think? > > Metta, > > Sarah 32047 From: Jeffrey Brooks Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 6:49am Subject: Training Strategy Training Strategy Some people tell me that the path of the ecstatic (jhana) is "unsuitable for modern times when most people do not have the right perfections, or enough time to cultivate ecstasy (jhana)." This however seems like a severe case of ignorance, delusion and doubt that has been sold in the name of the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha. I am certain the path to liberation has never changed. There has never been a time in history when people do not have the "right perfections, or enough time" to cultivate ecstasy (jhana). My life is proof that anyone who engages in the Buddha's Noble Eight Fold Path can and will give rise to jhana and why not liberation as well? As a simple house-holder who found a small amount of time to engage in the Noble Eight Fold Path everyday, I have given rise to the fruits of the practice. So, why cannot anyone else? Kindest regards, Jeff Brooks The Fruits of the Path Bell Springs 100 Day Summer Rains Retreat May 27 - Sept. 7, 2004 http://www.bellsprings.org .o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o.o0o. Ganakamoggallana Sutta, MN 107 Translated from the Pali by I.B. Horner. For free distribution only. From Taming the Mind: Discourses of the Buddha (WH 51), edited by the Buddhist Publication Society, (Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society, 1983). Copyright ©1983 Buddhist Publication Society. Used with permission. Morality "'Come you, monk, be of moral habit, live controlled by the control of the Obligations, endowed with [right] behavior and posture, seeing peril in the slightest fault and, undertaking them, train yourself in the rules of training.' As soon, brahman, as the monk is of moral habit, controlled by the control of the Obligations, endowed with [right] behavior and posture; seeing peril in the slightest fault and, undertaking them, trains himself in the rules of training, the Tathagata disciplines him further saying: Sense-control 4. "'Come you monk, be guarded as to the doors of the sense-organs; having seen a material shape with the eye, do not be entranced with the general appearance, do not be entranced with the detail... Moderation in eating 5. "As soon, brahman, as a monk is guarded as to the doors of the sense-organs, the Tathagata disciplines him further, saying: 'Come you, monk, be moderate in eating... Vigilance 6. "As soon, brahman, as a monk is moderate in eating, the Tathagata disciplines him further, saying: 'Come you, monk, dwell intent on vigilance; during the day while pacing up and down, while sitting down, cleanse the mind of obstructive mental states; during the middle watch of the night, lie down on the right side in the lion posture, foot resting on foot, mindful, clearly conscious, reflecting on the thought of getting up again; during the last watch of the night, when you have arisen, while pacing up and down, while sitting down, cleanse the mind of obstructive mental states.' Mindfulness and clear consciousness 7. "As soon, brahman, as a monk is intent on vigilance, the Tathagata disciplines him further, saying: 'Come you, monk, be possessed of mindfulness and clear consciousness... Overcoming of the five hindrances 8. "As soon, brahman, as he is possessed of mindfulness and clear consciousness, the Tathagata disciplines him further, saying: 'Come you, monk, choose a remote lodging in a forest... 9. On returning from alms-gathering after the meal, the monk sits down crosslegged, holding the back erect, having made mindfulness rise up in front of him"..."he dwells benevolent in mind; compassionate and merciful towards all creatures and beings"... "Getting rid of doubt, he dwells doubt-crossed; unperplexed as to the states that are skilled,[5] he cleanses his mind of doubt. hana 10. "He, by getting rid of these five hindrances"... "enters and abides in the first meditation" (jhana through 4th jhana) ... 11. "Brahman, such is my instruction for those monks who are learners who, perfection being not yet attained, dwell longing for the incomparable security from the bonds. But as for those monks who are perfected ones, the cankers destroyed, who have lived the life, done what was to be done, shed the burden, attained to their own goal, the fetters of becoming utterly destroyed, and who are freed by perfect profound knowledge -- these things conduce both to their abiding in ease here and now as well as to their mindfulness and clear consciousness." "Even so, brahman, nibbana does exist, the way leading to nibbana exists and I exist as adviser. But some of my disciples, on being exhorted and instructed thus by me attain the unchanging goal -- nibbana, some do not attain it. What can I, brahman, do in this matter? A shower of the way, brahman, is a Tathagata." When this had been said, the brahman Ganaka-Moggallana spoke thus to the Lord: 15. "Good Gotama, as for those persons who, in want of a way of living, having gone forth from home into homelessness without faith, who are crafty, fraudulent, deceitful, who are unbalanced and puffed up, who are shifty, scurrilous and of loose talk, the doors of whose sense-organs are not guarded, who do not know moderation in eating, who are not intent on vigilance, indifferent to recluseship, not of keen respect for the training, who are ones for abundance, lax, taking the lead in backsliding, shirking the burden of seclusion, who are indolent, of feeble energy, of confused mindfulness, not clearly conscious, not concentrated but of wandering minds, who are weak in wisdom, drivellers -- the good Gotama is not in communion with them. But as for those young men of respectable families who have gone forth from home into homelessness from faith, who are not crafty, fraudulent or deceitful, who are not unbalanced or puffed up, who are not shifty, scurrilous or of loose talk, the doors of whose sense-organs are guarded, who know moderation in eating, who are intent on vigilance, longing for recluseship, of keen respect for the training, who are not ones for abundance, not lax, shirking, backsliding, taking the lead in seclusion, who are of stirred up energy, self-resolute, with mindfulness aroused, clearly conscious, concentrated, their minds one-pointed, who have wisdom, are not drivellers -- the good Gotama is in communion with them. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn107.html 32048 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Thu Apr 8, 2004 9:55pm Subject: The Main Buddhist Points ! Friends: The 18 Principal Insights: 1: Consideration of Transience leaves behind false perception of Permanence. 2: Contemplation of Dissatisfaction abrogates wrong perception of Pleasure. 3: Consideration of Impersonality cuts off erroneous perception of Identity. 4: Contemplation of Disgust reduces the detrimental greed within any Lust. 5: Consideration of Disillusion dampens the Craving inherent in any Delight. 6: Contemplation of Ceasing Stopping & Ending eliminates Initiation of new. 7: Consideration of Relinquishing reduces the panic inherent in any Clinging. 8: Contemplation of the inevitable Decay ends perception of Compactness. 9: Consideration of the Vanishing reduces wrong perception of Accumulation. 10: Contemplation of Change abrogates the misleading perception of Stability. 11: Consideration of the Signless leaves the notion of an Entity of Substance. 12: Contemplation of Desirelessness abandons the purpose of any Longing. 13: Consideration of Emptiness stops insisting on assuming an existing 'Self'. 14: Insight into Higher Understanding gives up assuming an existing 'Core'. 15: Seeing & knowing how it really develops overcomes any blinding Confusion. 16: Contemplation of the inherent Danger conquers reliance on False Safety. 17: Consideration of Reflection counteract the risk following Careless Neglect. 18: Contemplation of Turning Away breaks the bars of mental Bondage. Unattracted; Unrepulsed; Unbound & Unestablished there is Absolute Freedom! All yours in the Dhamma. Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. http://groups.msn.com/DirectDhamma/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/ http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/TrueDhamma 32049 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 4:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Recollection of the body (as elements) Nina --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Jonothan, ... > N: the heat, by which what you eat is cooked and digested, and the > motion element to move it along. J: Yes, and what I hadn't previously considered is that there is no aspect of foulness in these elements, only in the elements of solidity and fluidity. > N: The foulness is so good to remind us that the body is only rupa elements. > And we cannot escape from the four characteristics inherent in all rupas: > integration (arising), continuity, decay and destruction. The Tiika makes me > reflect more on these. J: Yes, the information you've been giving us on the four characteristics is very interesting, something I've not read about in such detail before. Much to reflect on. Please keep going! > I was considering listening, because in Bgk someone asked the > meaning of > listening with respect (doj kawrop). A. Sujin answered: listening and > understanding what you hear. As always she stressed listening very much. J: Yes, she stresses listening, and she also stresses listening that is done *for the purpose of (ultimately) developing understanding*. This is where the respect comes in. Not for the purpose of gaining knowledge or ability to expound, nor because of wanting to 'show respect' (or any other outward form of action) nor to be accumulating more kusala, but for the purpose of a better understanding of the realities of the present moment. There is something about this in the 'Satipatthana' series I'm listening to at the moment. > Thus, we should not think too soon that we have understood already, that we > know it all. I often consider that we should study the texts of the Tipitaka > and the Commentaries with great respect. Kh Anop and his sister Kh Tida > Ratana were examplary in their dedication when looking up tetxs, studying > them and reading them aloud, during our Sunday afternoon session at the end > of all the other sessions. They took so much trouble finding the right > texts. Also during the sutta and commentary sessions the texts were printed > out for all participants, as you know. Knotty points were > discussed, that is the way to do it. J: Those who live in Bangkok are fortunate to have this kind of opportunity. A proper in-depth study needs good translations of a wide range of the texts including comm. and sub-comm. The latter are not generally available in English, but there is still quite a body of material to refer to. > J: Looking forward to your series on the last Bangkok trip. How's it coming on? > N: Thanks for your kind interest. Lodewijk approved of the first Ch, and > two more on his desk, but I want to have more done before I start posting it > here. I get on slowly, but will also use material of my Emails > since these > contain many thoughts about what I learnt in Bgk. Now Ch 4 is in the making. J: Good news. Jon 32050 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 5:24am Subject: Re: [dsg]satipatthanasutta James --- buddhatrue wrote: > Friend Jon, James: [Jon: Since breath as object of samatha is a concept (long breath, short breath, etc), the development of that alone can never lead to insight. As we know, insight must have a dhamma as its object.] This is a very important statement. Could you provide some evidence from the Nikayas that the Buddha said this? From my understanding, the Buddha, Ven. Ananda, and Ven. Sariputta said the opposite of this in different suttas. They each said that concentration and mindfulness of the breath can lead all the way to Nibbana. I could quote a lot of suttas to show this but I think you have the burden of proof to support your claim since you have made it first :-). Jon: As you say, there are many, many suttas dealing with mindfulness of breathing. Perhaps you have in mind the ones that begin with the question, How is samatha with breath as object developed and cultivated so that it fulfils the four establishments of mindfulness? As I read these suttas, the short answer to the question is, by developing insight into the true nature of arising dhammas, that is to say, not just by developing samatha with breath as object. Taking the mindfulness of breathing section of the Satipatthana Sutta (because the text of the sutta is similar to the ones we are now discussing, and the commentary is available in soft copy), I think the small section of the commentary that I've pasted below indicates that that the practitioner emerges from absorption and contemplates dhammas and the dependent origination. This is just a preliminary and outline answer; I'd be happy to go into more detail if you'd like, taking the text of 1 or more of the suttas you're familiar with. Jon From Soma Thera's 'The Way of Mindfulness', The Section on Breathing (part of The Contemplation of the Body) Sutta passage: "Calming the activity of the body I shall breathe in .... breathe out, thinking thus, he trains himself." He thinks: " I shall breathe in and I shall breathe out, quieting, making smooth, making tranquil and peaceful the activity of the in-and-out-breathing body. And in that way, he trains himself." ... Comm: Indeed, to that yogi training in respiration-mindfulness according to the method taught thus: "He, thinking 'I breathe in long,' understands when he is breathing in long ..... Calming the activity of the body ..... I breathe out, thinking thus, he trains himself", the four absorptions arise in the respiration sign. In the respiration sign = In the reflex image [patibhaga nimitta]. Having emerged from the absorption, he lays hold of either the respiration body or the factors of absorption. There the meditating worker in respiration examines the body (rupa) thinking thus: Supported by what is respiration? Supported by the basis. The basis is the coarse body. The coarse body is composed of the Four Great Primaries and the corporeality derived from these. The worker in respiration examines the respiration while devoting himself to the development of insight through the means of corporeality. ... The worker in respiration examines the mind and the body, sees the Dependent Origination of ignorance and so forth, and concluding that this mind and this body are bare conditions, and things produced from conditions, and that besides these there is neither a living being nor a person, becomes to that extent a person who transcends doubt. Besides these phenomena there is neither a living being nor a person refers to vision that is purified. 32051 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 5:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) James --- buddhatrue wrote: > Friend Jon, ... James: [Jon: That indeed would be so as long as the understanding remains at an intellectual level. But the teachings about satipatthana and vipassana are given to demonstrate the possibility of direct realization of these truths, by a gradually deepening understanding of the presently occurring dhammas.] But what K. Sujin was writing about was purely intellectual. She didn't write anything about satipatthana and vipassana, she wrote about an intellectual construct. She described a way to view the world in an artificial manner in order to somehow force wisdom. If I start viewing everything as a concept is that going to make me enlightened? Wouldn't that even make the viewing itself a concept? Concept piled on concept piled on concept. Where does it all end? I don't think this is what the Buddha taught. He taught to rid the mind of defilements (desire, ill-will, and ignorance) and then reality will be viewed properly. He didn't teach to somehow view reality like an enlightened person would and, consequently, that will make one become enlightened. This approach is fake to me and not what the Buddha taught. Jon: If you have another look at the passage (which I've pasted at the end of this message) I think you'll find it doesn't really say what you perhaps at first took it to mean. One or two instances of this come up in the remaining part of your message (see following). James: You didn't give me a sutta reference like I requested in this post, where the Buddha said that everything should be viewed as concepts of an identical nature (thanks for not using a bunch of Pali though!! ;-)). Jon: Actually, no-one is saying that everything should be viewed as concepts, whether of an identical nature or otherwise; I think the main thrust of the comments has been that the distinction between dhammas and concepts needs to be known. When the Buddha spoke about dhammas (or aggregates, sense bases, elements, truths, dependent origination, and the like) this is to be understood as not including concepts. In understanding the distinction between dhammas and concepts, it needs to be remembered that both the idea of a grape and the idea of a picture of a grape are equally not dhammas, but concepts. BTW, there was no request for a sutta reference in your post as far as I can see (Msg No. 31940). You just said, "I would welcome any explanation (with as few Pali words as possible ;-) if you either feel so inclined." , which I dutifully did. ;-)). James: [Jon: Absolutely; the enlightened person does not lose the conventional perspective, but he no longer takes it for something that it isn't.] And what is it not? How do you know? Are you claiming to be enlightened or at least close enough to know this? I am not criticizing you, I just need to consider the source of this information. After all, you and I both have a lot of delusion in our minds- how can we determine what an enlightened person knows? Jon: I was simply referring to the fact that the sotapanna has eradicated the fetter of wrong view. James: [Jon: And hardly a word of Pali (none you wouldn't use yourseld, I think ;-))] ... Now, if I could just get you into the habit of quoting sutta references! ;-)) After all, the Nikayas are a more pure source of insight than either of our opinions. Jon: Agreed, and I'm happy to provide sutta references for any point of mine that you find doubtful or controversial. Jon "The instant one recognizes the things appearing is the instant one knows pannatti because pannatti is to make known in such and such a way. Even without naming them, to see painting of fruits and real ones, which is pannatti? Both are. Pannatti is not paramattha. What are paramattha? What are the differences between real fruits and their paintings? In the instant of seeing through the eyes, all that appear through the eyes are not animals, people, the selves or objects of any kinds whether in the instant of seeing paintings of grapes or that of seeing the fruits. Some might misunderstand that only the painting is pannatti, and not the fruit. But in reality both the picture and the fruit that appear through the eyes are pannatti-arammana of the continued processes of the mano-dvara-vithi-citta because the cakkhu-dvara- vithi-citta would know the colors that appear while the mano-dvara- vithi-citta would know pannatti or the meanings of grapes, because it is made known in such and such a manner that they are grapes whether they are the grapes or their paintings, both are pannatti- arammana, and not paramattha-arammana." 32052 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 5:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - Covetousness and grief Rob M --- robmoult wrote: > Hi Jon (and Nina), > > I realize that a Dhamma discussion should not be conducted like > haggling at a fish market, but.... tell ya what, let's meet half way :-) ... > I will agree with your first point that the Sutta refers to the > temporary abandoning overcoming of the hindrances (not the > uprooting of the hindrances). > > I ask you to agree with my point that this is a pre-condition to > satipatthana rather than an outcome. I base this on two points: > 1. The text certainly reads this way (at least to me) > 2. Accepting the alternative is contradictory; it would imply from > the introduction that satipatthana leads to the overcoming of > hindrances (and as we know, this leads to jhanas) wheras the > conclusion clearly states that satipatthana leads to sainthood > (non- > returning) > > So what'cha say, we gotta deal? :-) I'm always happy to do a deal with an agreeable guy like you, Rob, but would it be in both our best interests? ;-)) Regarding your first point, <<1. The text certainly reads this way (at least to me)>>, please consider the excerpts from the sutta and commentary pasted below, especially the bits I have highlighted or commented on. Do they not seem to indicate that there is no such precondition to satipatthana? Regarding your second point, <<2. Accepting the alternative is contradictory; it would imply from the introduction that satipatthana leads to the overcoming of hindrances (and as we know, this leads to jhanas) wheras the conclusion clearly states that satipatthana leads to sainthood (non-returning)>>, I think the introduction to the sutta refers to the *eradication* of the kilesas (eradication being something that is final and irreversible); and eradication is associated with the attainment of enlightenment. In the case of jhana it is the *abandonment* of the kilesas that is referred to, and this means temporary suppression only. I would add in relation to jhanas/the abandonment of the hindrances that, to my understanding, it is the strength of absorption that suppresses the hindrances, rather than the suppression of hindrances that leads to jhana. Happy to be corrected on this. Jon From 'The Way of Mindfulness' by Soma Thera (translation of the Satipatthana Sutta and commentary) Sutta: Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus as follows: "This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the *purification of beings*, for the *overcoming of sorrow and lamentation*, for the *destruction of suffering and grief*, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." "What are the four? "Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending (it) and mindful (of it), having overcome, in this world, covetousness and grief; ... Comm: After the pointing out of the things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness through body-contemplation, there is the pointing out of the things that make up the condition which should be abandoned in this practice with the words, "having overcome, in this world, covetousness and grief" = Vineyya loke abhijjhadomanassam. ... [J: It seems to me the commentary here is saying that the qualities of being 'ardent, clearly comprehending and mindful' as mentioned in the sutta are the 'things that make up the condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness', while the 'covetousness and grief' of the sutta are the 'things that make up the condition which should be abandoned' in the practice], "Having overcome" refers to the discipline of knocking out an evil quality by its opposite good (that is by dealing with each category of evil separately) or through the overcoming of evil part by part [tadangavinaya] and through the disciplining or the overcoming of the passions by suppression in absorption [vikkhambhana vinaya]. Sub-Comm: Preliminary practice connected with the *mundane path of mindfulness* is pointed out by the commentator here. Comm: "In this world." In just this body. Here the body [kaya] is the world [loka], in the sense of a thing crumbling. As covetousness and grief are abandoned in feeling, consciousness, and mental objects, too, the Vibhanga says: "Even the five aggregates of clinging are the world." Covetousness stands for sense desire; and grief, for anger. As sense desire and anger are the principal hindrances, the abandoning of the hindrances is stated by the overcoming of covetousness and grief. ... By the instruction dealing with the overcoming of covetousness and grief, yogic power and yogic skill are shown. ... Sutta: [The Contemplation on Mental Objects 1. The Five Hindrances] "And how, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in mental objects? "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances. "How, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in the mental objects of the five hindrances? "Here, O bhikkhus, *when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with understanding: 'I have sensuality,'* or when sensuality is not present, he knows with understanding: 'I have no sensuality.'.... *When anger is present, he knows with understanding: 'I have anger,'* or when anger is not present, he knows with understanding: 'I have no anger.' ... 32053 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg]satipatthanasutta Jack --- Jackhat1@a... wrote: ... > The Buddha had specific teachings aimed at people at different > levels of > mental accomplishment. He taught recognizing breath as long, short, etc., to > beginners to get them to recognize how one breath is different from another and > temporary, how the body (sensation of the breath) can affect the mind, etc. It depends on your definition of 'beginner' ;-)). It's true that in the Anapanasati Sutta (which you mention below) the monks who were practising mindfulness of breathing were the least attained of the monks mentioned by the Buddha, but I think it's also apparent that they were well-accomplished in the development of insight. Likewise, in the Satipatthana Sutta the teaching is described as being for a person who is able to *arouse mindfulness in the object of meditation*, namely, the breath which is in front of him, and this to me indicates a person of well-developed mindfulness. > As one develops mental muscles, one is taught how to use to breath to increase > concentation and develop insight. The Anapanasati Sutta presents this progression > of use of the breath very well. As I see it, the Anapanasati Sutta teaches those who are adept at samatha with breath as object how insight can be developed on the basis of their samatha practice. But that insight development involves objects other than breathing. > It starts with recognizing the breath as long > or short and ends with use of the breath to see phenomena as > temporary, empty and not satisfactory. But on my reading, the phenomena that are seen a anicca/dukkha/anatta are not the breath or even necessarily the phenomena that are taken as being the breath. In short, when it comes to insight breath is just the jumping off point. I'd be happy to look at particular passages from the Anapanasati Sutta (or any other) if you'd like to pursue this interesting subject further. Jon 32054 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 6:11am Subject: Re: [dsg]satipatthanasutta Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Ken) - ... Howard: Jon, I agree with your response, and, Ken, I think you made a good point. The Satipatthana and Anapanasati Suttas describe both formal meditation and infromal,and both samatha and vipassana bhavana, and the vipassana bhavana is definitely mailny in the context of "informal meditation". Jon: I see the suttas as a whole as making a distinction between samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana, and the monk's life and lay life, but not between 'formal meditation' and 'informal meditation'. As far as I'm aware, these 2 terms do not represent any particular terms used or situations described in the texts. The references to sitting cross-legged and with an erect spine etc appear mainly (or wholly) in the context of (advanced) mindfulness of breathing. There are of course a number of references to 'sitting' and 'walkling' in the texts, and exhortations for monks to live a solitary, forest life and the like because of the benefits to be gained, but nowhere are these referred to in contradistinction to non-formal 'practice'. Jon 32055 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 6:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James (and Jon) - ... James, I agree with you about "mere belief". However, knowing what to look for sometimes helps one's direct investigations (though, of course, it can also skew them). I have long had a phenomenalist view, but I have now also had it confirmed to an extent by "direct looking". It has become experientially clear to me that I don't "hear rain," I hear sound. I don't "see a tree," I see a (patterned) sight. I don't "feel my body," I feel bodily sensation. But I do *think* of hearing rain, seeing trees, and feeling my body. After a while, when direct looking is practiced along with clear comprehension of what one actually experiences, the theory does not remain as theory. With metta, Howard Jon: But 'direct looking' is not part of the teachings found in the suttas (unless it is your own term for something else mentioned there). So whatever a person experienced or realized as a result of such a practice would not be the understanding of which the Buddha spoke, regardless of how great the similarities may appear to the person. Jon 32056 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 7:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Rob M Thanks for the extract from the PTS Dictionary. As I see it, the crucial question here is whether pannatti are included among the 'dhammas' (or the aggregates, the sense-bases, the elements, the truths) as mentioned by the Buddha throughout the suttas. Quite a lot turns on the answer to that. If the relatively few references in the texts has any significance, it may point to a 'no' answer. Any thoughts? Jon --- robmoult wrote: > Hi James and all, > > The term pannatti is not included in Nyanatiloka's Dictionary. > > I found the following entry in the 1778 page PTS Pali Dictionary: > > Paññatti (f.) [fr. paññapeti, cp. paññatta] making known, > manifestation, description, designation, name, idea, notion, > concept. > On term see Cpd. 3 sq., 198, 199; Kvu trsln 1; Dhs trsln 340. -- M > III.68; S III.71; IV.38 (mara-), 39 (satta-, dukkha-, loka-); A > II.17; V.190; Ps II.171, 176; Pug 1; Dhs I.309; Nett 1 sq., 38, > 188; > KhA 102, 107; DA I.139; SnA 445, 470; PvA 200. The spelling also > occurs as pannatti, e. g. at J II.65 (-vahara); Miln 173 (loka-); > KhA > 28; adj. pannattika (q. v.). > > Here are the expansions for the short forms of the texts: > Cpd. = Compendium of Philosophy (Abhidhammatthsangaha) > Kvu = Kathavatthu - 5th book of Abhidhamma > Dhs = Dhammasangani - 1st book of Abhidhamma > M = Majjhima Nikaya > S = Samyutta Nikaya > A = Anguttara Nikaya > Ps = Patisambhidamagga > Pug = Puggala-Paññatti - 4th book of Abhidhamma > Nett = Netti-Pakarana > Kha = Khuddaka-Patha Commentary > DA = Sumangala-Vilasini > SnA = Sutta-Nipata Commentary > PvA = Peta-Vatthu Commentary > J = Jataka > Miln = Milindapañha > > Clearly, this is a very minor term in the Nikayas. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 32057 From: abhidhammika Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 7:24am Subject: Re: Vipassanaa As A Synonym Of Anupassanaa In Satipa.t.thaana Suttam Dear Sarah, Nina, Chris and all How are you? Sarah wrote: "I also tend to pause rather at translations using `constant mindfulness' (here for anussati). What do you think?" The Pali term "anussati" has the verb form "anussarati". The linguistic meaning of "anussarati" is simply to recollect, remember again and again. Thus, the Pali term "sati" means remembering or recollecting or following of the present phenomena while "anussati" would mean consistent remembering or consistent following of the same phenomenon again and again. Mindfulness as a translation of the Pali term "sati" is now more popular and well established. But, I tend to feel that being mindful is the result of remembering the present phenomenon. To keep the vipassanaa practice within our conceptual control, I prefer the operational understanding of sati as remembering or consistent following of our present fresh experiences of phenomena as they occur. The result of such consistent remembering or consistent following of the present phenomena would be mindfulness, of course. I will, of course, come back to the further discussion of Bhaddekaratta Suttam as I promised Nina as well. :-) In the meanwhile, either you or Chris, please reproduce here a translation of "Aaka~nkheyya" Suttam from Majjhimanikaaya by Bhikkhu Bodhi. I saw a translation of the same Suttam from Anguttaranikaaya by Thannissaro Bhikkhu in asscesstoinsight. The version from Majjhimanikaaya is more elaborate than the Anguttara one. The following is the Pali passages from Vibha~nga as you requested. 358. Viharatiiti. Iriyati vattati paaleti yapeti yaapeti carati viharati. Tena vuccati "viharatii"ti. 359. Aataapiiti. Tattha katamo aataapo? Yo cetasiko viiri yaarambho …pe… sammaavaayaamo– ayam vuccati "aataapo". Iminaa aataapena upeto hoti samupeto upaagato samupaagato upapanno sampanno samannaagato. Tena vuccati "aataapii"ti. With regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: Dear Suan, I've been meaning to get back to our Vibha~nga thread: --- 32058 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 4:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] tiika Vis 72, part 1. Hi, Larry (and Rob) - In a message dated 4/8/04 11:57:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Rob, > > Are you saying that there is no intention in an arahant's javana cittas? > Is the cause of suffering intention? > > Larry > ===================== My understanding has been that the cetana of an arahant is neutral (kiriya - purely functional), and I have taken that to mean that is is fully divested of,and unconditioned by, any sense of I or mine or graspable "thing", and, thus, is unaccompanied by tanha or upadana, the primary causes of dissatifaction. As I understand it, in a non-arahant the sankhara khandha and sa~n~na are infected by the tendency towards internal and external reification (primal ignorance), but in the arahant, this infection has been completely and permanently removed, and along with that removal came the radical purification of all functions and the cessation of some such as craving, aversion, and grasping. This process of purification and removal would leave cetana operations of only a neutral sort. Even the compassion, lovingkindness, and sympathetic joy so characteristic of an arahant's personality are balanced by his/her fully developed equanimity and selflessness, and would function in a purified form, freed of even the slightest element of self-orientation. 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) 32059 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 4:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/9/04 12:12:31 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > James: "For all practical purposes, the `all´ and the `world´ should > be considered how the Buddha described it in that sutta and there is no > practical reason to consider a broader all." > > Hi James and Sarah, > > Did the Buddha say anything about reason? Isn't reason a reason to > reason a greater reality? Isn't the functioning of a sense-base > understood (by us, james, sarah &larry) by reason? According to > abhidhamma the only thing we (j, s, &l) know directly is meaningless > sense data. In a way, becoming absorbed in meaningless sense data is an > at least temporary end of desire just because it is meaningless. > > Larry > ============================= Reason is concept manipulation of a certain type. It is useful for wending our way through our mind-constructed storybook. When misused, it keeps our head buried in the book. When used well, it can help us realize that there is something more than our book of stories, and lead us to put that book down from time to time, and instead learn to develop our underused "wisdom eye" which sees directly what is what. 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) 32060 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 4:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Illusion of Control Hi, Ken (and Rob) - I agree with pretty much everything you write below, Ken. But there is a "Yet, still!" that needs to be added, which I will discuss mainly at the end. I also include a few comments throughout the body of your post. In a message dated 4/9/04 2:32:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Hi Rob M, > > With help from my dsg friends, I am learning to understand Dhamma > strictly in terms of nama and rupa. Some say I take it too far: > they say (perhaps with some justification) that the Buddha didn't > only teach ultimate truth, he also taught conventional truth. But I > will have none of that. If any so-called teaching of the Buddha > can't be understood in terms of nama and rupa, then I don't want to > know about it. :-) ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, it all can be understood in such a manner. But there is understanding, and there is understanding. An intellectual translation of the Buddha's suttic teachings into "ultimate form" is not the sort of understanding that is liberative, though it can certainly be useful. ---------------------------------------------- > > You wrote: > ----------- > >My understanding is that bhavana is an > activity (like dana and sila), not a citta accompanied by wisdom. > > --------------------- > > Sorry, this does not compute! :-) What activity could you be > referring to? What activity (of action, speech or thought) is there > that is other than citta and cetasika? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yep, I agree - that is the reality. ------------------------------------------------- > > You are an expert on the classification of cittas, so I am hesitant > to suggest which of them can qualify as bhavana. Presumably it can > be prompted, or unprompted, joyful or indifferent, always karmically > wholesome and always with panna. In the sensuous field, that narrows > the field to four, does it not? > > And what about dana and sila? According to my understanding, they > include the same four plus those karmically wholesome cittas without > panna – making eight. Corrections welcome. > > -------------- > RM:> I looked up the term in Nyanatiloka's Dictionary and it would > appear to agree with my understanding. > ---------------- > > When we read a definition of mental development, we need to remember > that our mind is not something that persists in time and which we > can mould into shape (or put things into and take things out of). > The mind is born and dies in a single, fleeting moment; that is when > mental development must take place. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Agreed. Now if only we *knew* that, and didn't just conceive it! --------------------------------------------------- > > Working backwards through your post (just to be different), I see > you have asked: > ---------------- > > What is meant by 'formal meditation'; how is it > different from 'informal meditation' (if that is the opposite)? > > ---------------------- > > Formal meditation is a concept. Sarah described it as the `idea of > meditation.' Just like ideas of seeing and hearing, ideas of > bhavana are easy to grasp and dwell on because they can arise with > ignorance (and we have plenty of that). The actual, momentary, > seeing, hearing and bhavana, we don't grasp nearly so well. They can > only be known by citta with panna. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, all true. However - there are complex relations that hold among the momentary actualities, and a concept such as that of a process of meditation is a way of (indirectly) grasping not only the actualities involved, but also the multi-layered pattern of relations among them. ------------------------------------------------ > > To digress: The thing that intrigues me is that we might admit we > can't control paramattha dhammas but still think we can control > concepts. (I fall into that trap all the time.) In fact, there is > no control over anything (the uncontrollable dhammas created the > concepts in the first place). > > We might say; "Look, I wanted to sit down and now I am sitting down – > control! I wanted to close my eyes and think about anatta and that > is what I am doing. Maybe there is no control over ultimate reality > but there certainly is over conventional reality!" > > That is what happens during formal meditation – belief in control. > Admittedly, it also happens throughout the rest of the day but at > those other times we are not turning it into a ritualistic practice. > > ---------- > RM: >I am not saying that the Buddha endorsed self-belief. I am > observing > that the Buddha often encouraged monks to take action. The Buddha > encouraged action with "desire, endeavour and persistance" without > endorsing self belief. > > ------------ > > Or, to put that another way, "without endorsing the idea of > control." > > The monks, who heeded the Buddha's encouragement, didn't formally > (ritualistically) practice the Dhamma. Desire, endeavour, > persistence, and so on, happened because the required conditions for > their happening were there. > > -------------- > RM: >In my previous post, I gave the example of fear being a > motivator for > me to study the dhamma (to make sure that I was prepared for my > class). To state this does not mean that I believe the fear is > kusala. After this fear arose, I did two things: > - Acknowledged this mental state as aksuala (object condition) > - Allowed this mental state to motivate me (natural decisive support > condition) > -------------- > > No argument there. Those things can happen before we even think > about them – before we can introduce the idea of control. :-) > > Kind regards, > Ken H > ========================= If we are honest with ourselves, our world of experience is 98% a world of conceptual experience. Using the intellect to conceive of a world of actuality is still involving oneself in the world of concepts, but we can easily fool ourselves into thinking otherwise. The fact is, we start where we are, not where we would hope to be. The Buddha addressed beings like us, fully immersed in the sham world of mental construct, and he taught us to proceed with specific efforts from within our current sham world which cultivate, and train, and purify, so that we take ourselves from within the very midst of the darkness of ignorance into the light of wisdom. But substituting belief in a intellectual theory of ultimate reality is an ineffective alternative to engaging in the conventional practices taught by the Buddha that lead to purification of mind and to liberation. 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) 32061 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 5:11am Subject: Re: [dsg]satipatthanasutta .. jack:> The Buddha had specific teachings aimed at people at different > levels of mental accomplishment. He taught recognizing breath as long, short, etc., to beginners to get them to recognize how one breath is different from another and temporary, how the body (sensation of the breath) can affect the mind, etc. Jon:>>It depends on your definition of 'beginner' ;-)). It's true that in the Anapanasati Sutta (which you mention below) the monks who were practising mindfulness of breathing were the least attained of the monks mentioned by the Buddha, but I think it's also apparent that they were well-accomplished in the development of insight. Likewise, in the Satipatthana Sutta the teaching is described as being for a person who is able to *arouse mindfulness in the object of meditation*, namely, the breath which is in front of him, and this to me indicates a person of well-developed mindfulness.<< Jon, we interpret this differently. For instance, I disagree with your last sentence above. I don't think the Satipatthana Sutta is aimed at individuals many not above the attainment of people we interact with on different Buddhist Internet lists. When I said beginner, I didn't mean someone who is just starting out meditating. It is my experience that even very experienced meditators are beginners at times. I don't mean this in the sense of "beginners mind." I know a senior monk who many times begins his mediation practice by awareness of the length of a breath (step 1 in the Anapanasati Sutta), then goes through the subsequent steps. Our powers wax and wane and, at times, require our going back to the basics. jack> As one develops mental muscles, one is taught how to use to breath to increase concentation and develop insight. The Anapanasati Sutta presents this progression of use of the breath very well. jon: As I see it, the Anapanasati Sutta teaches those who are adept at samatha with breath as object how insight can be developed on the basis of their samatha practice. But that insight development involves objects other than breathing. See Below. All steps in the Anap. Sutta involve the breath. > It starts with recognizing the breath as long > or short and ends with use of the breath to see phenomena as > temporary, empty and not satisfactory. jon: >>But on my reading, the phenomena that are seen a anicca/dukkha/anatta are not the breath or even necessarily the phenomena that are taken as being the breath. In short, when it comes to insight breath is just the jumping off point.<< Anapanasati is translated as mindfulness of breathing. All the 16 steps involve learning anicca/dukkha/anatta through contemplation of breathing. For instance, the 13th step involves learning impermanence by observing the breath. jack I'd be happy to look at particular passages from the Anapanasati Sutta (or any other) if you'd like to pursue this interesting subject further. Jon 32062 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 11:08am Subject: Tiika Vis 72, no 2. Tiika Vis 72, no 2. Relevant text Vis 72: ...with conditions, mundane, subject to cankers' (Dhs. 584), and so on. sappaccaya.m lokiya.m saasavamevaatiaadinaa nayena ekavidha.m. Tiika Vis. 72 (part 2) Paccayaadhiinavuttitaaya saha paccayenaati sappaccaya.m. As to the expression, with conditions, this is with reference to what was said about conditions and so on *. Attano paccayehi loke niyutta.m, viditanti vaa lokiya.m. It (rupa) is by its own conditions joined to the world, or it is known as mundane **. Aa bhavagga.m, aa gotrabhu.m vaa savantiiti aasavaa, saha aasavehiiti saasava.m, aasavehi aalambitabbanti attho. The intoxicants (cankers) flow up to the topmost plane of existence, and up to the adaptation-consciousness, and thus they are intoxicants *** , (materiality) occurs with the intoxicants and thus it is co-intoxicant, and this means that it takes hold of the intoxicants ****. Aadisaddena sa.myojaniiya.m oghaniiya.m yoganiiya.m niivara.niiya.m sa.mkilesika.m paraama.t.tha.m As to the expression, Œand so on¹ (subject to cankers and so on), this refers to its being object of clinging for the fetters, the floods, the yokes, the hindrances, the defilements *****. acetasika.m cittavippayutta.m naruupaavacara.m na-aruupaavacara.m na-apariyaapanna.m Rupa is not cetasika, dissociated from citta, not jhanacitta of material or immaterial jhana, it is unincluded (not lokuttara), aniyata.m aniyyaanika.m aniccanti evamaadiina.m sa"ngaho da.t.thabbo. it is inconstant, not leading out (of the cycle), it is indeed impermanent, and thus this treatise should be regarded. ***** English: Relevant text Vis 72: ...with conditions, mundane, subject to cankers' (Dhs. 584), and so on. Tiika Vis. 72 (part 2) As to the expression, with conditions, this is with reference to what was said about conditions and so on *. It (rupa) is by its own conditions joined to the world, or it is known as mundane **. The intoxicants (cankers) flow up to the topmost plane of existence, and up to the adaptation-consciousness, and thus they are intoxicants *** , (materiality) occurs with the intoxicants and thus it is co-intoxicant, and this means that it takes hold of the intoxicants ****. As to the expression, Œand so on¹ (subject to cankers and so on), this refers to its being object of clinging for the fetters, the floods, the yokes, the hindrances, the defilements *****. Rupa is not cetasika, dissociated from citta, not jhanacitta of material or immaterial jhana, it is unincluded (not lokuttara), it is inconstant, not leading out (of the cycle), it is indeed impermanent, and thus this treatise should be regarded. _______________ * Rupa arises because of conditions and it is itself a condition for other rupas and for nama. **Expositor I, p. 63: States which are joined to the world by being included therein are termed worldly. All those rupas experienced through the six doors are the world in which we live. *** The word association is lost in the English translation: ³aa² is ³up to² and ³savati² is to flow. Aa-sava is canker or intoxicant. They are: the intoxicant of sensuous desire, of desire for rebirth, of wrong view and of ignorance. They are to be found even in the highest plane of existence. They are only eradicated stage by stage by the lokuttara magga-cittas. The adaptation-consciousness, gotrabhuu, is the last mundane citta arising in the process during which enlightenment occurs. **** the co-intoxicants are the rupas which are the objects of intoxicants occurring together with the arisen intoxicants. Remark: rupa is the object of numerous kinds of defilements. However, its duration is extremely short, only as long as seventeen moments of citta and then it is gone completely. It is very insignificant, but we think about rupa with intoxicants and make it into something very great and important. *****These are different defilements classified as groups: the fetters fetter us to the cycle of birth and death, the floods submerge us in the cycle, the bonds tie us to it, the hindrances obstruct us, the defilements are impure and defile the mind. Note: rupa is not cetasika, not associated with citta: this reminds us that rupa is entirely different from nama and should be known as such. ******* Nina. 32063 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sankhaara, Suan and Mike Dear Suan and Mike, Suan, thank you very much. Mike: could you give the passage with the compound sankhaarupaadaana? It looks to me this way: clinging to conditioned dhammas (san"khaara dhammas). Sankhaarakkhandha, as Suan explained, < even > though cetanaa cetasika is used as the head term (siisena), the > activation aggregate covers all the remaining mental associates > (cetasikas) as well - that is to say, those mental associates > excepting feeling (vedanaa) which is covered by the feeling > aggregate, and memory (saññaa) which is covered by the memory > aggregate.> I would like to add something. Sa.nkharoti: to prepare, put together. A. Sujin often says, sati and pa~n~naa are accumulated as sankhaarakkhandha and this is very meaningful. Listening, intellectual understanding of Dhamma, considering, beginning to be aware, all those moments are accumulated together with the good qualities that are included in sankhaarakkhandha, arising and falling away each moment. Confidence, detachment, kindness, energy for kusala, generosity, they all condition and are conditioned by understanding, even understanding on the intellectual level. Take for example confidence: to the extent understanding grows confidence in the Triple Gem also grows, confidence in the Path we have to continue developing with courage and perseverance. Generosity helps to become less self-involved. Suan uses the word activation aggregate, and this shows that there is no passivity, no non-action. We learn Abhidhamma so that we understand that citta and cetasika take action. Thus, all good qualities are accumulated, they condition one another and they condition the arising of sati-sampaja~n~na, sati and pa~n~naa that is directly aware and understands whatever appears. Sati does not arise often, but, it is understanding that matters and understanding grows. Nina. op 07-04-2004 16:02 schreef abhidhammika op suanluzaw@b...: > Mike, when you wrote "sankhaarupaadaana", did you > mean "sankhaarupekkhaa"? 32064 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 11:08am Subject: Re:Patience and Courage Dear Christine, op 09-04-2004 00:52 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > I'm still not understanding the use of the term 'develop' on dsg - > e.g. in 'we must develop' this or that quality - khanti, viriya, or > any of the perfections, or panna. Isn't this requiring a 'self' > to 'do something'? N: Not at all! Understanding is the great motivator. When you consider the perfections and read about them, understand them, you see their benefit. They are all cetasikas and they grow together with understanding of nama and rupa. There are citta and cetasika, where is room for a self who does something? We learn Abhidhamma in order to understand anatta. I like the word viriya, it is associated with the word for heroe: viiro. We have to be heroic to be aware of the reality of this moment, so that we eventually cross the flood of the cycle of existence. That means, never losing courage, even when sati of satipatthana does not often arise. Understanding is growing for sure, even when we do not see much progress. Who speaks of inaction? See my post to Mike. We can accumulate all good qualities exactly in daily life, even in very small, seemingly insignificant matters. That is the development. But you do, by your work in the hospital. Don't you accumulate patience, good speech, kindness, compassion? When understanding sees more and more the benefit of these qualities you become more sensitive for the occasions to practise them when you are with other people. Ch: How would this be different to 'formal meditation'? (smile) N: As Rob M wrote: I believe, different people mean something different by the word formal. This can give rise to needless misunderstandings and debates about words. And, as Rob says, meditation is bhavana, mental development. But, as I see it, each form of bhavana needs to be done with right understanding. There are several forms of it: studying texts, listening, considering, discussing, and also calm, why not? And vipassana. When I consider the teachings my confidence in the Buddha grows. I can pay respect to the Buddha, I can reflect on his virtues. Or reflect on death, or reflect on Abhidhamma. Is that not meditation? I remember Dan's words, when reflecting on the Abhidhamma the Master is not far from you. Yes, through the Abhidhamma we come to know the Enlighted One. I can reflect in the kitchen, a good place. Also, early morning, in between during the day and late (for me late!) at night, after my Pali Tiika study, I listen to MP3, sitting quietly! Listening with care and respect, making notes for reflection. Call it meditation, that is fine. Moreover, when we understand that it is citta and cetasika which meditate, and that understanding is the goal, we shall fare safely. Everyone should find out what is beneficial for him, and also, it depends on the circumstances of his life what he is able to do. But, as A. Sujin keeps on asking us: is there any understanding of this moment? Some quotes: Nina. P.S. Sarah, I can recommend to Jon the MP3 of Pakinnakas, there are two of them. Excellent. 32065 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sabbasutta Dear Sarah, Rob K wrote about the sabbasutta. Could you please repost it? Nina op 08-04-2004 11:32 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: . K.Sujin > also refers to them in ch 23 ‘The World’, Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, > translated by Nina and soon to be published by the Foundation in Bkk. 32066 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 1:34pm Subject: Re:Patience and Courage Hi Nina, and all, Thank-you for your reply - I'll print it and read it on the plane - wa-a-a-y behind with packing, and need to do two trips to take the dog, and his bedding down to the Boarding Kennels. Hard to make an unwilling Great Dane cross get in the back of a toyota Echo when he is saying, "Hell no! we won't go!" ... I never knew that'd come back to haunt me after all these years. (smile) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time --- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Christine, > op 09-04-2004 00:52 schreef christine_forsyth op cforsyth@v...: > > > I'm still not understanding the use of the term 'develop' on dsg - > > e.g. in 'we must develop' this or that quality - khanti, viriya, or > > any of the perfections, or panna. Isn't this requiring a 'self' > > to 'do something'? > N: Not at all! Understanding is the great motivator. When you consider the > perfections and read about them, understand them, you see their benefit. 32067 From: Htoo Naing Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 2:15pm Subject: How Release HOW RELEASE When it comes, it comes. When it goes, it goes. When it stays, it stays. When it strays, it strays. When it calms, it calms. When it smiles, it smiles. When it stills, it stills. When it releases, it releases. HTOO NAING 32068 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sabbasutta Dear Nina, --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Sarah, > Rob K wrote about the sabbasutta. Could you please repost it? ..... I can’t recall the post you’re thinking of - I asked Jon and he can’t either. Perhaps you’re thinking of one by Kom, Suan or myself? There are some detailed messages, also looking at some key terms and the commentary notes by Kom, Christine, Jon, Sarah (2), Suan, Howard, in U.P: ‘Sabba Sutta (The All)’ 18364, 19013, 19095, 22807, 22836, 23097, 29452 I also checked escribe under ‘Sabba’ for Rob, but couldn’t find one, unless you’re referring to one of these: http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m18871.html> http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m1910.html> Perhaps someone else may recall sth and be able to help or you could ask Rob himself. It may have been saved under another category and I’ve forgotten. Metta, Sarah ====== 32069 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 3:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipassanaa As A Synonym Of Anupassanaa In Satipa.t.thaana Suttam Dear Suan, I'll get back on the rest of your post later when I have time. Many thanks. Just one thing: --- abhidhammika wrote: > > In the meanwhile, either you or Chris, please reproduce here a > translation of "Aaka~nkheyya" Suttam from Majjhimanikaaya by Bhikkhu > Bodhi. I saw a translation of the same Suttam from Anguttaranikaaya > by Thannissaro Bhikkhu in asscesstoinsight. The version from > Majjhimanikaaya is more elaborate than the Anguttara one. .... It's an interesting sutta and I look f/w to any discussions. Chris is flying off on holiday today and I'll also be busy before I leave in a few days(and in any case have to try to avoid such long typing - dr's orders). Many people have this text, perhaps others can help - maybe a section at a time, or perhaps someone has access to a scanner? The title Aakankheyya is translated by BB as 'If a Bhikkhu Should Wish'. Do you have any comments on the Pali term? Metta, Sarah ====== 32070 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 4:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Rob, Nina, and Howard, What is the difference between rooted compassion and rootless compassion? Technically, no form of desire could arise in a compassionate javana series. So there can't be a question of self-interest except in a broader manifold. (Although ordinary consciousness is always a jumble of many elements.) Is it a question of how precisely can we qualify "intention"? Is intention desire or something else? Inertia? Goal orientation? Is an arahant's javana intention like an ordinary person's sense consciousness intention? Larry 32071 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 5:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi James, Here's an autocommentary: Sarah thinks sense consciousness is the "all" and any forming of that consciousness is concept. So sankhara in the sense of mental formation is concept. Concept is unconditioned and not-impermanent. A loaf of bread is unconditioned, not made, and not impermanent. But the color, texture, temperature, smell, taste, and nutritional essence associated with the bread concept is conditioned, produced, impermanent. Furthermore, the association of color with texture etc. is conceptual as far as we (Sarah, James, & Larry) can determine. In other words, a matter of reason, not direct knowledge. As far as Sarah directly knows, the "bread" texture only "exists" when she touches it. Likewise for the other qualities. Food just happens for Sarah. There is no thing in the world called "bread" _that_we_can_directly_know. What do we (S,J,L) directly know? Random, disconnected sense data and emotions. Is this really all there is? Larry ps: Howard has the same view as Sarah but his definitions are eclectic. ---------------- L: "Did the Buddha say anything about reason? Isn't reason a reason to reason a greater reality? Isn't the functioning of a sense-base understood (by us, james, sarah & larry) by reason? According to abhidhamma the only thing we (j, s, &l) know directly is meaningless sense data. In a way, becoming absorbed in meaningless sense data is an at least temporary end of desire just because it is meaningless. 32072 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 2:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/9/04 7:28:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Rob, Nina, and Howard, > > > What is the difference between rooted compassion and rootless > compassion? Technically, no form of desire could arise in a > compassionate javana series. So there can't be a question of > self-interest except in a broader manifold. (Although ordinary > consciousness is always a jumble of many elements.) Is it a question of > how precisely can we qualify "intention"? Is intention desire or > something else? Inertia? Goal orientation? Is an arahant's javana > intention like an ordinary person's sense consciousness intention? > > ====================== Well, I'll reply first - because I don't know what I'm talking about, and we might just as well get the unknowing answer out of the way fast! ;-)) It seems to me that intention is not desire nor even a more general chanda, though related closely to the latter. Intention, as I see it, is a sort of motive force or active inclination - and the term javana/impulsion/impulse is a very good one for it. I also believe that intention and compassion and all other mental operations are multiply, and variably, conditioned. Just as sa~n~na, for example, can be visual or auditory or tactile etc depending on conditioning sense medium, compassion can be variably conditioned. Compassion can be pure and strong and general, or tainted, weak, and restricted depending on what other mental conditions affected it. Perhaps it is so that desire doesn't enter into compassion per se, but even if that is so, doesn't that still allow for varying degrees of and types of compassion, and doesn't it also allow for a rapid alternation of compassion and less noble emotions? Even a monster like Hitler no doubt experienced compassion to some extent in certain contexts, but for the most part his compassion had to be weak, greatly restricted, rarely occurring, and intermixed with the basest of emotions and inclinations. On the other hand, an arahant's compassion would be frequent, powerful, and unrestricted, and pure (with no base states alternating with it), all this due to that compassion being conditioned only by fully untainted states. 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) 32073 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 2:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi, Larry (and James, and Sarah) - In a message dated 4/9/04 8:32:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi James, > > Here's an autocommentary: > > Sarah thinks sense consciousness is the "all" and any forming of that > consciousness is concept. So sankhara in the sense of mental formation > is concept. Concept is unconditioned and not-impermanent. A loaf of > bread is unconditioned, not made, and not impermanent. But the color, > texture, temperature, smell, taste, and nutritional essence associated > with the bread concept is conditioned, produced, impermanent. > Furthermore, the association of color with texture etc. is conceptual as > far as we (Sarah, James, &Larry) can determine. In other words, a > matter of reason, not direct knowledge. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I can't speak for Sarah. I just don't know whether you are characterizing her position properly on this or not. But my position on the assertion " Concept is unconditioned and not-impermanent" is that no matter how one looks at it, this is either false or meaningless. If a concept is, as I think of it, an idea mentally produced and arising in the mind, then that is definitely conditioned and impermanent. If on the other hand, by 'concept' one is referring to an alleged literal referent of a complex idea such as "tree", then it is meaningless to say it is unconditioned and meaningless to say it is not-impermanant, because, literally, there is no tree to have any property. On the other hand, if one is talking conventionally, as, of course, we do 99% of the time, to truly believe that a tree is unconditioned and not-impermanent is to be simply out of one's mind! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- > > As far as Sarah directly knows, the "bread" texture only "exists" when > she touches it. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: That sounds more like me than Sarah. I would be pleased were that her position, but I don't think it is. ------------------------------------------------ Likewise for the other qualities. Food just happens for> > Sarah. There is no thing in the world called "bread" > _that_we_can_directly_know. What do we (S,J,L) directly know? Random, > disconnected sense data and emotions. Is this really all there is? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: No, there is also an extraordinarily complex net of relations holding among these phenomena/events. Without that web of relations, we would be unable to form concepts. ---------------------------------------------- > > Larry > ps: Howard has the same view as Sarah but his definitions are eclectic. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I don't think Sarah holds the same phenomenalist position as I do. Also, my definitions aren't eclectic - they're just idiosyncratic and weird! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------ > ---------------- > L: "Did the Buddha say anything about reason? Isn't reason a reason to > reason a greater reality? Isn't the functioning of a sense-base > understood (by us, james, sarah &larry) by reason? According to > abhidhamma the only thing we (j, s, &l) know directly is meaningless > sense data. In a way, becoming absorbed in meaningless sense data is an > at least temporary end of desire just because it is meaningless. ========================= 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) 32074 From: robmoult Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 8:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > What is the difference between rooted compassion and rootless > compassion? Technically, no form of desire could arise in a > compassionate javana series. So there can't be a question of > self-interest except in a broader manifold. (Although ordinary > consciousness is always a jumble of many elements.) Is it a question of > how precisely can we qualify "intention"? Is intention desire or > something else? Inertia? Goal orientation? Is an arahant's javana > intention like an ordinary person's sense consciousness intention? Only time for a quick answer. Compassion can only arise in beautiful cittas. All beautiful cittas have at least two roots (alobha, adosa). Some beautiful cittas also have the root of panna. In brief, I am not sure what you mean by "rootless compassion". I suggest that you do not use the term "desire" when referring to the cetasika chanda. It is too easy to confuse "desire" with lobha. You can describe chanda as "the mind reaching out to touch the object". Hope that this helps. Gotta go... Metta, Rob M :-) 32075 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Howard, I agree that compassion can manifest in various versions but I think, for consistency's sake anyway, we should analyze it the same way we analyze a 5-door object. As such, can we say compassion or any other emotion is a compound? Is hardness a compound? The main point of my line of reasoning is to get at what makes a root (kamma producer). Is your position that rootedness is in the quality of the dominant cetasika rather than in the quality of the intention? If so, should we say rooted wholesome cetasikas are not completely wholesome? Larry 32076 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 9:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi again Howard, Looks like we're the only birds in the bush tonight. That concepts are unconditioned and therefore not impermanent is standard abhidhamma. My guess is the reasoning for this is something like you described here: H: "If on the other hand, by 'concept' one is referring to an alleged literal referent of a complex idea such as "tree", then it is meaningless to say it is unconditioned and meaningless to say it is not-impertinent, because, literally, there is no tree to have any property. L: The only reason it isn't completely meaningless is because a concept is a dhamma, an object of consciousness, and it is a conditioner (but not conditioned). -------------------- L: "What do we (S,J,L) directly know? Random, disconnected sense data and emotions. Is this really all there is?" H: "No, there is also an extraordinarily complex net of relations holding among these phenomena/events. Without that web of relations, we would be unable to form concepts." ---------------------- L: Are relations directly known by you? If so, how so? I don't think they are directly known by me in this very restricted sense of direct knowing of a rupa or cetasika. What the Buddha knows is only a concept for me. I agree there is a web of relations, but how do we know? Larry 32077 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 9:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Rob: "I am not sure what you mean by "rootless compassion"." Hi Rob, I mean the compassion of an arahant. What is the difference between an arahant's compassion and an ordinary person's compassion in terms of cetasikas in a javana series? Also, is an arahant's javana intention the same as an ordinary person's functional consciousness intention? What accounts for an arahant's skill in terms of consciousness process? Larry 32078 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 9:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Dear Jon, op 09-04-2004 16:24 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > As I see it, the crucial question here is whether pannatti are > included among the 'dhammas' (or the aggregates, the sense-bases, the > elements, the truths) as mentioned by the Buddha throughout the > suttas. N: The Saddaniti (by Agavamsa, in the year 1154), as you remember, gives many meanings to the word dhamma, and one of these is pannatti. This is different from the suttas, it is another context. Such a study helps me to be careful in what context a term is used. You will find the terms nirutti and adhivacana we also saw in the Vis, and Tiika about the four Discriminations. This is what I wrote before: The Saddaniti explains the meaning of dhamma as concept: N: Words: pa~n~natti : designation, name, idea, notion. adhivacana (n): term attribute nirutti (f): interpretation, expression. The word pa~n~natti, concept, stands for name and for the idea expressed by a name or term. Names can designate what is reality in the absolute sense (paramattha dhammas, such as kusala, akusala, sound, etc.) and also what is not real in the absolute sense, such as person, house. Nina. 32079 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 9:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi Larry (& Victor & Howard), S: An autocommentary on what I’m meant to have said gets my attention and jumps the queue;-) --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi James, > > Here's an autocommentary: > > Sarah thinks sense consciousness is the "all" and any forming of that > consciousness is concept. .... S: Sorry, but no;-). In my recent post to Howard and James, I referred to: ‘all of the sense bases (ayatanasabba), i.e the phenomena of the four planes’. As you don’t like links, I think I’ll just requote a post below which elaborates in detail on this and I’ll be happy to discuss further. (Actually, you don't like long posts, so just ignore the re-post if you prefer). The sense consciousness are certainly not the ‘all’, nor is it a concept. .... >So sankhara in the sense of mental formation > is concept. .... S: Not as I understand. .... >Concept is unconditioned and not-impermanent. .... S: I wouldn’t say it like this. The only unconditioned dhamma is nibbana. Concepts don’t *exist*. .... >A loaf of > bread is unconditioned, not made, and not impermanent. But the color, > texture, temperature, smell, taste, and nutritional essence associated > with the bread concept is conditioned, produced, impermanent. > Furthermore, the association of color with texture etc. is conceptual as > far as we (Sarah, James, & Larry) can determine. In other words, a > matter of reason, not direct knowledge. .... S: Yes! .... > > As far as Sarah directly knows, the "bread" texture only "exists" when > she touches it. Likewise for the other qualities. .... S: I wouldn’t quite say that the texture ever *exists*. Only hardness/softness, temperature and motion are experienced by touch. Sorry to be picky, but as you’re giving me a commentary....;-) .... >Food just happens for > Sarah. There is no thing in the world called "bread" .... S: Sounds like it drops from the heavens for me;-) .... > _that_we_can_directly_know. What do we (S,J,L) directly know? Random, > disconnected sense data and emotions. Is this really all there is? > > Larry > ps: Howard has the same view as Sarah but his definitions are eclectic. .... S: ;-) I see you have your commentary too, Howard. .... > ---------------- > L: "Did the Buddha say anything about reason? Isn't reason a reason to > reason a greater reality? Isn't the functioning of a sense-base > understood (by us, james, sarah & larry) by reason? ... S: Thinking and reasoning will never understand realities or sense-bases (aayatanas). But it’s important to get the facts straight. .... >According to > abhidhamma the only thing we (j, s, &l) know directly is meaningless > sense data. In a way, becoming absorbed in meaningless sense data is an > at least temporary end of desire just because it is meaningless. .... S: Remember that all realities are included in the ‘all’ - also cittas, cetasikas and even nibbana. You could say sense data are meaningless or worthless - impermanent, unsatisfactory and anatta. Victor asked about examples of contentment now in daily life and I think the true meaning is the detachment and acceptance of whatever is experienced now, for example, a pleasant or unpleasant visible object, taste, sound, bodily experience, smell or mind consciousness object. Don’t we usually wish for another object or for the present one to last without any detachment or real contentment? Metta, Sarah ======== http://www.escribe.com/religion/dhammastudygroup/m18111.html Dear Friends, There have been many discussions on whether concepts (pannatti) can be the objects of consciousness and whether they can be known by knowledge or wisdom. Most of us rely on English translations and in any case have limited knowledge of the terms and ideas being referred to. Some of the differences in understanding are related to the widely held understanding that all objects (arammana) of consciousness are equivalent to the internal and external sense fields (ayatana) and that the latter therefore include concepts (pannatti). Many have referred to different suttas, but Swee Boon wrote a particularly clear post on this topic: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/messages/21647 From previous detailed discussions on ayatana, I believe the equating of ayatanas with arammana (as elaborated in Swee Boon’s post) is incorrect, though very widely held by Pali scholars. I hope I can present the differences simply and clearly here. ============================================================ ARAMMA.NA (object) ******** 1. visible object 2. sound 3. odour 4. taste 5. body-impression 6. mind-object (dhammaaramma.na) ..... Note: Dhammarammana (mind-object) 1. nama, inc. nibbana 2. rupa 3. concept (pannatti) ..... Note: any arammana, including concepts can be the object (i.e experienced by) of consciousness (citta/mano/vi~n~nana) ==================== AAYATANA (bases, sense fields) ******* a) 6 internal bases 1. eye-base/sense (cakkhu pasada rupa = cakkhayatana) 2. ear-base 3. nose-base 4. tongue-base 5. body-sense base 6. mind-base/consciousness (manaayatana) (refers to ALL cittas) ...... b) 6 external bases 1. visible object (rupayatana) 2. sound 3. odour 4. taste 5. tactile object - cohesion, temperature, solidity 6. mind-object (dhammayatana) ....... Note: Dhammayatana (mind-objects) includes: 1. All cetasikas 2. subtle rupas (sukhuma rupas) 3. nibbana ....... Note: Ayatanas refer ONLY to ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) and NOT to concepts. ================================================= Confusions arise from translated terms of dhamma, dhammarammana, mano, manayatana, dhammayatana etc . Furthemore, sometimes, dhammarammana refers to dhammayatana and we have to look at the context and commentary notes. ..... Note: dhamma can refer to paramattha dhammas only or to dhammarammana inc pannatti and has to be understood in context. ..... A rough guide: B.Bodhi:- ayatana -base mano (manayatana)- mind, mental dhamma (dhammayatana), dhammarammana- mental phenomenon, mental object, mind object B.Thanissaro:- mano (manayatana) - intellect dhamma (dhammayatana) - ideas ..... Examples from Salyatanasamyutta(Connected Discourses on the Six Sense Bases), Samyutta Nikaya. As is apparent in the heading, ‘Salayatana’, it is the ayatanas being referred to. The first section furthermore refers to the internal and external bases (ayatanas) as listed above under ayatana. We have looked at translations of the Sabba Sutta before. The Comy notes make it clear that the all (sabba) refers to everything knowable, the all of the sense bases (aayatanasabba), the 12 ayatana. ..... Note: intellect and ideas as used by Thanissaro Bhikkhu below, refer to manayatana and dhammayatana as classified above: i.e cittas, cetasikas, subtle rupas and nibbana. I believe the notes he gives after the sutta are therefore incorrect. These are not easy aspects to comprehend, but I hope these notes may help clarify a little other discussions about sutta passages being discussed where there is some controversy about whether paramattha dhammas or pannatti are being referred to by translation terms, such as mind, mind objects, intellect or ideas. Of course any comments are welcome. For more details on ayatanas, see posts under ‘ayatana’ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Metta, Sarah ===== http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn35-023.html Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.23 Sabba Sutta The All Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." -------------------------------------------------------- 32080 From: Sarah Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 10:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi James, Just a quick clarification here as well. --- buddhatrue wrote: > Friend Sarah and All, > > Sarah: James, when we are referring to the proliferations, distorted > perceptions and so on, we're referring to the `underlying craving > and defilements',especially wrong views in these cases which take > concepts such as `self' or `things' as objects as Ken O stressed. > > James: Who is `we'? .... S: Perhaps 'I' would have been more appropriate. As I used 'we', without checking back, I believe in my two earlier messages I had quoted from both RobM and B.Bodhi as well as giving my own comments on the use of proliferations and distorted thinking and perceptions in the suttas and commentary referred to. Also, as Ken O had chipped in and seemed to be in agreement too, the 'we' referred to how I understood all of us to understand the use of these terms (papa~nca, ma~n~nanaa & vipallaasa)in the texts. .... >You use this pronoun quite often and I usually > have a hard time figuring out who you are referring to. .... S: I'll try to be more specific. Thx for the prompt. Perhaps it's an English hang-up about saying 'I think', 'I say', 'it seems to me', suggesting 'my' understanding or view is of any importance;-) .... >But back to the message, I can't assume what > someone means when they write something. When you write that > concepts are the central teaching of the Buddha, I have to > disagree. ... S: Again, it would be easier if you quote me. Probably I said to effect that clearly distinguishing realities from the concepts we're used to taking for realities and understanding these same realities as anatta is at the heart of the teachings. While we think we really see, feel and taste bread, there cannot be any development of satipatthana. .... > James: I have been reading it, and pondering, and reading Hume and > Nietzsche for additional viewpoints, but I don't think I am going to > post anything- so you and others can stop waiting ;-)). I do think > there is an objective reality beyond the traditional five senses and > their traditional objects, which is what the Buddha was addressing > in the Salayatanasamyutta, but in order to demonstrate this I would > have to discuss supernormal powers, ESP (Divine Eye, Divine Ear, > etc.), and the Buddha's omniscience. These topics have caused > incredulity and irritation in this group in the past so I won't > discuss them again. .... ;-/ ?? ... This is a purely philosophical topic anyway and > not worthy of in-depth discussion. For all practical purposes, > the `all' and the `world' should be considered how the Buddha > described it in that sutta and there is no practical reason to > consider a broader all. .... S: No problem either way. I'm happy to discuss any all, but may not be able to give prompt responses for a while. Whether we're referring to the worldling's 'all', the ariyan's 'all or the omniscient 'all', the realities are still cittas, cetasikas and rupas with the addition of nibbana for the ariyans. .... > > Sarah: Sorry, this one's a bit rushed, but I wanted to get back to > you as we'll be hiking and so on over the weekend and I may not have > much chance to write. > > James: I hope that you have a lovely time. .... S: thank you for your kind wishes. I hope you're having a good holiday weekend too. .... > p.s Do you have any problem with the section on Pa~n~natti in > Karunadasa's essay? We can use that to discuss further if you'd like > too. > > James: No, I don't. But he describes pannatti much differently that > K. Sujin does in her article. .... S: Certainly different styles appeal to different people, but you may be referring to some difference in factual content? .... >Remember, we were discussing how K. > Sujin explains panatti. I think the appropriate question would be > if you have any problem with how Karunadasa explains pannatti? Do > you agree with his section on "Pannatti and the Two Truths"? If so, > we can stop discussing this issue of pannatti. > http://www.abhidhamma.org/dhamma_theory_philosophical_corn.htm .... S: I don't have time now to check again, but I've quoted the parts I find are particularly well explained before (to Michael and others). I think there was little I had any problem with - mostly in parts of his intro and conclusion as I recall, in treating the Abhidhamma as a 'theory' rather than life at this very moment to be directly known. I'm glad you appreciate the article, James and I agree that it's useful to recommend to others too. Metta, Sarah ======== 32081 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 11:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.6.) Hi Ken O, Thank you for this comparison. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi Victor > > When you quote this sutta and the sutta on a Single excellent night, > there is much similarity here, let us recap > > Sutta of a single excellent night > < And the future has not been reached. > Instead with insight let him see > Each presently arisen state; [note 1212]>> > > the in this sutta you quote > The Blessed One said: "And how is living alone perfected in its > details? There is the case where whatever is past is abandoned, > whatever is future is relinquished, and any passion & desire with > regard to states of being attained in the present is well subdued. > That is how living alone is perfected in its details." > > on note 1212, > MA: He should comtemplate each presently arisen state, just where it > has arisen, by way of seven comtemplation of insight (insight into > impermanece, suffering, non-self, disenchantment, dispassion, > cessation, relinquishment) > > > > Ken O 32082 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 7:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/9/04 11:43:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I agree that compassion can manifest in various versions but I think, > for consistency's sake anyway, we should analyze it the same way we > analyze a 5-door object. As such, can we say compassion or any other > emotion is a compound? Is hardness a compound? > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: It seems to me that compassion, other emotions, and hardness are, indeed, simple, direct elements of experience. What I wrote in my previous post in this thread wasn't contrary to this. (One disclaimer: Some mental processes we *call* emotions are really more likely groups of mental phenomena rather than single phenomena. Grief, for example, may be such a complex.) ---------------------------------------------------- > > The main point of my line of reasoning is to get at what makes a root > (kamma producer). Is your position that rootedness is in the quality of > the dominant cetasika rather than in the quality of the intention? If > so, should we say rooted wholesome cetasikas are not completely > wholesome? > ----------------------------------------------------------- Howard: To be completely honest with you on this question - and I certainly don't want to be any other way - I have no position on it. This question is rooted in many Abhidhammic presumptions, presumptions that I have no direct reason to believe are reflective of reality, and that I would have to take on faith, and so I have no basis for expressing an opinion on it. I see this question as meaningful only with respect to and dependent upon a particular intellectual theory thst requires acceptance, and, moreover, even if all these presumptions were correctly representative of the way things are, I would still see them as having no bearing on the goal of the Dhamma, namely liberation, and as of only idle interest. At best, the presumptions, and this particular question, are among the many leaves in the forest that the Buddha did not hold in his hand. Everything the Buddha taught in the suttas points to suffering, its cause, the posibility of its cessation, and the means to that end, including the four noble truths, the tilakkhana, dependent origination, and the numerous teachings on the emptiness and illusory aspect of our mind-created world. To the extent that detailed discussion of dhammas reveals their impermanence, insubstantiality, impersonality, relative immunity to control, and their inappropriateness as sources of satisfaction, that formal analysis is worthwhile and is part of the Dhamma.To the extent that it does not, it is at best of moderate, tangential interest. I realize that my reply to this question in my last post on this thread didn't really properly respond to what you were after. It didn't, because I chose to address matters that I thought were closer to core Dhamma instead, and I didn't want to get into a discussion of matters that I view as of purely technical interest and not leading to progress on the path. Sometimes I am more willing to engage in discussing matters of such purely technical and theoretical interest. I must admit that I do engage in that from time to time - too often, in fact. But at the moment - and you certainly are not expected to be a mind reader (!) - I find that I am tiring of discussing matters that cannot be at all verified by direct observation and that are not, to my mind, conducive to progress on the path. This is solely my "fault". It has nothing at all to do with you, but only pertains to my current state of mind. I apologize if this is off-putting. I truly hope you will forgive me - I don't mean to offend. (Tomorrow, who can say? Perhaps I'll be exactly in the mood to discuss such matters. Of course when I *am* in the "mood" to discuss such things, I wouldn't blame you if you were not. ;-) -------------------------------------------------------- > > Larry > > ============================== 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) 32083 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 11:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.6.) Hi Sarah, Thank you for this message. I didn't know that talk on seclusion is a favourite of yours. Living with husband or wife is not living in seclusion, not living alone. The Buddha was speaking on how living alone is perfected in its details. It is not that there are two meanings of 'living alone' - true ideal or commonplace. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Ken O & Victor, > > Talk on Seclusion is a favourite of mine as Victor knows. Hope you don't > mind if I requote from old posts and add a little more perhaps: [snip] > liberation that takes this as its object." > ***** > S: So there are the two meanings of 'living alone'.For some by inclination > or natural tendency (pakati or bokati in Thai)they will live alone in the > first sense like Thera. However, we all have to learn to live alone > without 'desire and lust' regardless of whether we're in the forest or the > village, alone or with others. [snip] > ***** > > Metta, > > Sarah 32084 From: Date: Fri Apr 9, 2004 7:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/10/04 12:06:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > L: Are relations directly known by you? If so, how so? I don't think > they are directly known by me in this very restricted sense of direct > knowing of a rupa or cetasika. What the Buddha knows is only a concept > for me. I agree there is a web of relations, but how do we know? > ========================= I don't know. There is no question that they are known via the mind, and not via any other sense door. Whether the mind knows relations only by inference or whether relations are (or can be) directly apprehended to some extent, I don't know. 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) 32085 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:37am Subject: Re: Video Games? Friend Sukin, I didn't know that you play games on the computer all the time. That is a very bad habit; you should try to break yourself of that habit. That is not what I was talking about. I was not encouraging people to play video games all the time! LOL! I was just wondering if playing video games, while keeping mindful of the purpose, could improve concentration. So far it is working great for me! Yesterday I was able to meditate for 2 and a half hours quite effortlessly (stretching legs every 45 minutes or so for blood flow because I follow the Thai custom and don't used a pillow). I don't find myself wanting to play video games all the time now: it is just a means to and end. Of course this could be a dangerous activity for most, and the Buddha wouldn't allow his monks to play games of any sort, so maybe it would be best for most people to not do it. You write, "So James, concentration may or may not be developed, but surely lobha, dosa and moha will most definitely be accumulated". I'm sorry Sukin, but you don't know me well enough to make such a prediction. You can't know what is going to happen because of me doing something (who's being the psychic now?? ;-)) I am curious as to why you wanted to respond to this post anyway because you are obviously a `card-carrying' member of the `NAG' (Non_Action_Group) sub-group of this group;-)), and you disavow meditation. Obviously, my post wasn't directed to you. You will not understand it and it will have no application to your life. We have traveled down this merry path of `concentration' before, on numerous occasions, so I am not sure why you bring it up again. Just to let you know, I haven't changed my mind. ;-)) The concentration that the Buddha spoke about had nothing to do with the concentration inherent in each citta. You write, "I have always had difficulty concentrating" and then later you write "I and others have been stressing the fact that concentration arises with every citta", well, you are either contradicting yourself or you a shy a few cittas! LOL! (just kidding). Just open the Nikayas, any one of the collections, and start reading with an open mind. The Buddha taught the importance of formal meditation (sitting with legs crossed, back straight, and mindfulness set to the fore, as well as walking and lying meditation) on numerous occasions. That is what his bhikkhus did: they got up in the morning, did some walking meditation, went on alms rounds, came back and ate the food, found a spot to spend the `day's abiding' which consisted predominately of breath meditation, and then in the evening they would stop and meet with fellow monks to discuss dhamma or ask questions. Sometimes this schedule would change while they were traveling but this is pretty much what they did all day. Read the Nikayas and find out what the Buddha really taught. You continue to stress `knowing realities' but you are not being observant of that reality. You write, "Please seriously consider this James" Why would I listen to you as my teacher if you cannot acknowledge reality? Metta, James 32086 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Friend Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Hi James > > > James concept and defilements are two different aspect of dhamma. > Just like clinging and aggregates even though are inseparable but > still distinct. Concept of me and mine is usually the result of moha > (IMHO) because of not knowing that conditions arise on it own > (anatta). James you are right to say that satipatthana is used to > eradicate defilements and not eradicating concepts. But since > concepts of me and mine are conditioned by moha and lobha, that is > why we cannot used it as a basis to for satipatthana. > > Then again I should apologise first and rephrase my earlier statement > (sorry moha is very strong still ;-) ), it is not the me and mine > that is big problem because Buddha also used the word I, me to > explain dhamma, it is attachment to me and mine that is the problem > and moha not knowing them as empty. Since Buddha has eradicate lobha > and moha, so his usage of me and mine are just mere expressions ;- ). > > > Ken O Again, this issue goes back to what the Buddha taught. He taught to work diligently on riding the mind of the defilements and then the rest will take care of itself. Either good or bad concepts are not important to consider. It is not possible to `think' yourself to enlightenment unless your mind is already pretty clear of defilements (maybe a once-returner who did the necessary ground work in a previous life?). Anyway, keep working on what the Buddha taught and the concepts will take care of themselves. Metta, James 32087 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) Jack Thanks for these further comments, and for referring to a particular passage from the Anapanasati Sutta. --- Jackhat1@a... wrote: > .. ... > All steps in the Anap. Sutta involve the breath. This of course is true, but the different sections ('tetrads' -- groups of four) involve the breath in different ways. > Anapanasati is translated as mindfulness of breathing. All the 16 steps > involve learning anicca/dukkha/anatta through contemplation of > breathing. For > instance, the 13th step involves learning impermanence by observing the breath. As we know from our reading of the suttas, impermanence in the teachings is one of the three characteristics commmon to all conditioned dhammas, so here too it is likely to be impermanence as a characteristic of conditioned dhammas, and not impermanence in some more general sense, that is being referred to. Of course, breath is dierctly involved, but we need to help of the commentaries to know in exactly what way. Nina has written about this in her 'Anapanasati' series (Anapanasati 6 a -- see link below). She gives the following passage from the sutta and general comment from the Visuddhi-Magga: <<<<<<<<<<< [Sutta:] (xiii) He trains thus 'I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence'; he trains thus 'I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence'. (xiv) He trains thus 'I shall breathe in contemplating fading away'; he trains thus 'I shall breathe out contemplating fading away'. (xv) He trains thus 'I shall breathe in contemplating cessation'; he trains thus 'I shall breathe out contemplating cessation'. (xvi) He trains thus 'I shall breathe in contemplating relinquishment'; he trains thus 'I shall breathe out contemplating relinquishment'. (then as translated by Ven. Nyanatiloka:) <..on that occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating mental objects in mental objects, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful ,having put away covetousness and grief with regard to the world. Having see with understanding what is the abandoning of covetousness and grief, he becomes one who looks on with complete equanimity. That is why on that occasion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating mental objects in mental objects, ardent, clearly comprehending, mindful, having put away covetousness and grief with regard to the world. That is how respiration-mindfulness, developed and repeatedly practised, perfects the four foundations of mindfulness.> [Nina:] The Visuddhimagga (VIII, 237) states about the fourth tetrad, "This tetrad deals only with pure insight while the previous three deal with serenity and insight." >>>>>>>>>>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/27840 I continue now with more from Visuddhi-Magga VIII, 234, also quoted by Nina in her post, which contains the detailed word commentary on the fourth tetrad. Here it explains that in order to understand what is meant by 'contemplating impermanence' in the sutta passage "He trains thus 'I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence'", one needs to understand 4 terms, namely (a) the impermanent, (b) impermanence, (c) the contemplation of impermanence and (d) one contemplating impermanence. As to these terms, it says: (a) Herein, the five aggregates are 'the impermanent', because their essence is rise and fall and change.' (b) 'Impermanence' is the rise and fall and change in those same aggregates, or it is their non-existence after having been; the meaning is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. (c) 'Contemplation of impermanence' is contemplation of materiality, etc., as 'impermanent' in virtue of that impermanence. (d) 'One contemplating impermanence' possesses that contemplation. What is the significance of these explanations? Firstly, the explanations at (a) and (c) seem to be saying that contemplation of the impermanence of *any of the five aggregates* (not just of the 'breath' rupas of the rupa aggregate only) is contemplation of impermanence within the meaning of the tetrad. Secondly, the explanations at (c) and (d) seem to be saying that whenever such contemplation occurs, the person in question is to be regarded as 'one contemplating impermanence', with the emphasis on the *occurrence* of that contemplation, rather than on its *doing*. The Visuddhi-Magga passage word commentary then concludes by saying: <> This draws together all the foregoing: when there occurs, in a person who is practised in samatha with breath as object, contemplation of the impermanence of the five aggregates, then that person is said to be 'training himself' in the manner stated in the sutta. So while the tetrad is indeed all about insight, it is about insight into the five aggregates in general, and not insight into 'breath' per se, nor even necessarily into those particular rupas of the rupa aggregate that are taken as breath. The significance of the breath here lies in the occasion on which the insight occurs (i.e., person developing samatha with breath as object), rather than in the actual object of insight. That's as I read the commentary. Comments welcome. Jon 32088 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 1:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Friend Jon, Thank you for this sutta quote and commentary but it doesn't answer the statement you made before. You stated "[Jon: Since breath as object of samatha is a concept (long breath, short breath, etc), the development of that alone can never lead to insight. As we know, insight must have a dhamma as its object.] You quote a sutta, analyze it to show that breath is used as the vehicle for calmness and then abandoned to direct insight to realities, and think that this proves your statement. This doesn't prove your statement. You would have to have a statement from the Buddha that stated, to the effect "Mindfulness of the breath alone can not lead to insight. Insight must have a dhamma as its object". What you quoted doesn't say that. Remember, the Buddha is the enlightened and Blessed One, he is the expert, I will only believe what the Buddha said. I think that you should also only believe what the Buddha said and not extrapolate various meanings from what he taught. Jon: As you say, there are many, many suttas dealing with mindfulness of breathing. Perhaps you have in mind the ones that begin with the question, How is samatha with breath as object developed and cultivated so that it fulfils the four establishments of mindfulness? James: No, actually the first sutta I have in mind is MN 62 "The Greater Discourse of Advice to Rahula". In this sutta, Rahula, the Buddha's son, is following the Buddha into town for alms rounds. He looks at the Buddha's body and starts to think about how beautiful it is and how his body must also be beautiful because he is his son. The Buddha immediately knows his thoughts with his mind and gives him a firm talking down to. Rahula decides that he has been too naughty to go on alms rounds so he goes back to the forest and sits cross-legged under a tree for the day's abiding. He is 18- years-old at this point and has been a novice monk since he was seven. Ven. Sariputta sees him sitting under the tree and assumes that he is developing mindfulness of breathing. He says to him, "Rahula, develop mindfulness of breathing. When mindfulness of breathing is developed and cultivated, it is of great fruit and great benefit." At the end of the day, during the traditional time to ask questions, Rahula approaches the Buddha and asks him about mindfulness of breathing. First the Buddha, knowing that Rahula is overly attached to form, teaches him about the Four Great Elements, then he teaches about mindfulness of breathing. He starts with the section that you quote in this post "Breathing in long, he understands: `I breathe in long'; or breathing out long, he understands: `I breathe out long. Etc." But then the section ends with "He trains thus: `I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence'; he trains thus: `I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence.' He trains thus: `I shall breathe in contemplating fading away'; he trains thus: `I shall breathe out contemplating fading away. Etc." Jon, do you develop mindfulness of breathing? If not, why? The Buddha taught that it is of great fruit and great benefit. Only Mara, the Evil One, tried to convince people not to practice mindfulness of breathing. Are you under the influence of Mara? Are your intentions pure or evil? (And I am being completely serious). Metta, James 32089 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 1:36am Subject: Re: Pannatti (Concept) Friend Jon, Jon: BTW, there was no request for a sutta reference in your post as far as I can see (Msg No. 31940). You just said, "I would welcome any explanation (with as few Pali words as possible ;-) if you either feel so inclined." , which I dutifully did. ;-)). James: There was a sutta request. In post 3194 I wrote, "Why? Did the Buddha teach this? I have read a lot of suttas and I have never come across this idea in any of them. Can anyone provide a sutta where the Buddha taught this, very directly?" And, in this post you still haven't provided a sutta quote! ;-)) Jon: I think the main thrust of the comments has been that the distinction between dhammas and concepts needs to be known. James: Again, quote where the Buddha said this very specifically, without extrapolating, and I will believe you. Metta, James 32090 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:55am Subject: Essentially Inherent Freedom ! Friends: No choice necessary ! Ananda, no moral one needs to speculate about: 'How shall I be freed of regret ?' because absence of remorse is essentially inherent in morality itself. No-one freed of regret has to worry about: 'How shall I be glad ?' since joyous gladness is essentially inherent in absence of remorse itself. No glad one needs to ponder about: 'How shall I be happy ?' because happiness is essentially inherent in gladness itself. No happy one has to choose: 'How can I relax ?' since calmness is essentially inherent in happiness itself. No tranquil one needs to speculate: 'How shall I find pleasure ?' because pleasure is essentially inherent in calmness itself. No-one feeling pleasure has to wonder: 'How shall I reach absorbed concentration ?' since absorption is essentially inherent in pleasure itself. No-one absorbed in concentration needs to ask: 'How shall I understand ?' since understanding is essentially inherent in concentration itself. No-one understanding how it really is needs to ask: 'How shall I dampen greed ?' because dispassion is essentially inherent in real understanding itself. No disgusted one needs to worry about: 'How shall this lust fade away ?' since fading of lust is essentially inherent in dispassioned disgust itself. No-one whose lust has faded away has to think: 'How shall I be released ?' because mental release is essentially inherent in the fading of lust itself. No-one mentally released needs to figure out: 'How can I directly experience absolute Freedom ?' since Freedom is essentially inherent in mental release itself! ---oo0oo--- Source: The Numerical Sayings of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya V [2-3]: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=130185 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=204050 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=403155 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=403238 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/index.html Comment: All advantageous states are thus initiated by the morality of right behaviour! What is right behaviour ? Right behaviour is avoidance is Killing, Stealing, Abusing, Lying, Scolding, Slandering, Gossipping, Envy, Ill-Will & Wrong View... That is right behaviour ... All yours in the Dhamma. Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. http://groups.msn.com/DirectDhamma/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/ http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/TrueDhamma 32091 From: Larry Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 7:31am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Larry (& Victor & Howard), > > S: An autocommentary on what I'm meant to have said gets my attention and > jumps the queue;-) Hi Sarah, The autocommentary is an explanation of what I wrote to you and James regarding what James replied to you, but James didn't understand it, hence the autocommentary on the text at the bottom (not included here) . > --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi James, > > > > Here's an autocommentary: > > > > Sarah thinks sense consciousness is the "all" and any forming of that > > consciousness is concept. > .... > S: Sorry, but no;-). In my recent post to Howard and James, I referred to: > `all of the sense bases (ayatanasabba), i.e the phenomena of the four > planes'. As you don't like links, I think I'll just requote a post below > which elaborates in detail on this and I'll be happy to discuss further. > (Actually, you don't like long posts, so just ignore the re-post if you > prefer). The sense consciousness are certainly not the `all', nor is it a > concept. > .... ----------------------------------------------- L: We are just talking about you, me and James. Do you directly know the sense bases or anything other than the objects of the 5 doors and emotions? -------------------------------------------- > >So sankhara in the sense of mental formation > > is concept. > .... > S: Not as I understand. -------------------------------------------- L: Are combinations of rupa concepts _for_you? ------------------------------------------ > .... > >Concept is unconditioned and not-impermanent. > .... > S: I wouldn't say it like this. The only unconditioned dhamma is nibbana. > Concepts don't *exist*. -------------------------------------------------- L: Is concept classified as asankhara in abhidhamma? ------------------------------------------------- > .... > >A loaf of > > bread is unconditioned, not made, and not impermanent. But the color, > > texture, temperature, smell, taste, and nutritional essence associated > > with the bread concept is conditioned, produced, impermanent. > > Furthermore, the association of color with texture etc. is conceptual as > > far as we (Sarah, James, & Larry) can determine. In other words, a > > matter of reason, not direct knowledge. > .... > S: Yes! > .... > > > > As far as Sarah directly knows, the "bread" texture only "exists" when > > she touches it. Likewise for the other qualities. > .... > S: I wouldn't quite say that the texture ever *exists*. Only > hardness/softness, temperature and motion are experienced by touch. Sorry > to be picky, but as you're giving me a commentary....;-) ----------------------------------------------------------- L: I agree. That's why I used parentheses around "exists". (remainder of your message snipped) Larry 32092 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 8:53am Subject: Re: Video Games? Hi James, > You continue to stress `knowing > realities' but you are not being observant of that reality. You > write, "Please seriously consider this James" Why would I listen to > you as my teacher if you cannot acknowledge reality? Sorry about this. I had assumed that you would agree with what I said about playing video games being wrong practice, and thought that you should consider the similarity between this and 'formal meditation'. This is why I urged you to consider what I had written seriously. There was no thought about being a teacher. I know I am not observant of reality, but live all the time in a world of concepts. My posts stress on "intellectual Right View" which does points to the need to distinguish between concepts and realities, hence the mention every now and then about this. But I am curious, when you say "Why would I listen to you as my teacher if you cannot acknowledge reality?" How have you come to this conclusion about my not acknowledging reality? Do you acknowledge reality? If so, what are those realities according to you? Look forward to your response. Metta, Sukin 32093 From: Larry Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 9:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Howard, I can certainly appreciate an unwillingness to engage in technical and probably theoretical matters, but I think what makes a root is indeed at the heart of the matter. To my mind the cause of suffering and the cause of kamma are synonymous. Maybe we can revisit this latter. I've run out of ideas anyway. Larry 32094 From: Larry Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 10:21am Subject: Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi all, One oversight on my part on this thread: I forgot about feeling. I'm not sure but, considering my own experience, I think I can say the only reality I am attached to is pleasant feeling. All my other attachments are to concepts. Even taste and smell seems to be a complex of sense data and therefore conceptual. This leaves the question, what about attachment to concepts? We can't dispel this attachment by recourse to observation of impermanence. Therefore, the path of purification is irrelevant in this regard. I think the "path" here is to simply observe that I am mistaking concept for reality. But what if I say, "I am an idea, not conditioned, not impermanent". What if I knowingly embrace attachment to concepts. I can easily see this happening as a religious or spiritual strategy. How does one dispel or refute this attachment? Larry 32095 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 6:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/10/04 12:59:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I can certainly appreciate an unwillingness to engage in technical > and probably theoretical matters, but I think what makes a root is > indeed at the heart of the matter. To my mind the cause of suffering > and the cause of kamma are synonymous. Maybe we can revisit this > latter. I've run out of ideas anyway. > > Larry > ====================== The whole "root" business is unclear to me. What does it mean, for example, for anger to have tanha as root other than tanha being a condition for the arising of anger? And anger being conditioned by tanha is something that should be directly seen by introspection, not memorized as a book fact. I don't see how the "root" notion adds much. All the jargon, to me, is just a distraction. The entire Sutta Pitaka, practice-based and experience-based, appears to be jargon-free, and I often feel that near-Talmudic hair splitting based on portions of a theory that presupposes notions unmentioned or given short shrift in the suttas is at best a diversion. (Of course, everyone likes a diversion from time to time. ;-) ========================== 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) 32096 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 6:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/10/04 1:32:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > > Hi all, > > One oversight on my part on this thread: I forgot about feeling. I'm > not sure but, considering my own experience, I think I can say the > only reality I am attached to is pleasant feeling. All my other > attachments are to concepts. Even taste and smell seems to be a > complex of sense data and therefore conceptual. > > This leaves the question, what about attachment to concepts? We can't > dispel this attachment by recourse to observation of impermanence. > Therefore, the path of purification is irrelevant in this regard. I > think the "path" here is to simply observe that I am mistaking > concept for reality. But what if I say, "I am an idea, not > conditioned, not impermanent". What if I knowingly embrace attachment > to concepts. I can easily see this happening as a religious or > spiritual strategy. How does one dispel or refute this attachment? > > Larry > ======================= I think that it is always feeling for which there is direct attachment. Craving, aversion, and attachment pertain to dhammas other than feeling only indirectly, by association, with the feelings their experiencing elicits. Look at the dependent origination scheme: feeling -> craving -> clinging. 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) 32097 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 6:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi again, Larry - In a message dated 4/10/04 1:48:57 PM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@a... writes: > I think that it is always feeling for which there is direct > attachment. Craving, aversion, and attachment pertain to dhammas other than > feeling only > indirectly, by association, with the feelings their experiencing elicits. > Look at the dependent origination scheme: feeling -> craving -> clinging. > ========================= An extra comma made my secod sentence unintelligible. It should read as follows: "Craving, aversion, and attachment pertain to dhammas other than feeling only indirectly, by association with the feelings their experiencing elicits." 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) 32098 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Larry, op 10-04-2004 01:25 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > What is the difference between rooted compassion and rootless > compassion? N: I know what you mean: compassion of the arahat with maha-kiriyacitta. Well, his kiriya citta which is sobhana, cannot produce vipaka. The arahat has vipakacittas that are results of former kamma, but the cetana co-arising with the compassion of the arahat does not produce new vipaka. L:Technically, no form of desire could arise in a > compassionate javana series. So there can't be a question of > self-interest except in a broader manifold. N: When there is true compassion, no self interest, no self involvement, though this can arise shortly afterwards. Not clear what is a broader manifold? L: (Although ordinary > consciousness is always a jumble of many elements.) N: I think you mean after kusala citta there are bound to be akusala cittas, but, not at the same time. A jumble or a tangle, I would say. Abhidhamma can help us! And satipatthana! L:Is it a question of > how precisely can we qualify "intention"? Is intention desire or > something else? Inertia? Goal orientation? N: The Abhidhamma helps us to be very precise. Intention or volition is cetana cetasika, and as Rob M explained, it arises with all cittas. It directs the tasks of the conascent dhammas. With kusala citta or akusala citta it can motivate deeds through body, speech and mind. Kamma is cetana. This cetasika cannot be changed into something else, it is paramattha dhamma with its own characteristic. It is not desire, inertia or anything else. L:Is an arahant's javana > intention like an ordinary person's sense consciousness intention? N: Same cetasika, but this cetana cannot perform kamma that brings result. It directs the accompanying cetasikas. It intends to perform what is noble and right, it has conditions to operate in that way. L:What accounts for an arahant's skill in terms of consciousness process? N: Do not forget, the process of cittas takes its own course, because of conditions, citta nyama, the fixed order of cittas. But since he has eradicated all defilements and latent tendencies, there is no like, no dislike, not any defilement with the javana cittas in the process. No new accumulation of akusala, not adding on more and more, as we do all the time. Nina. 32099 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Larry, just butting in. op 10-04-2004 05:41 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > Hi Howard, > > I agree that compassion can manifest in various versions but I think, > for consistency's sake anyway, we should analyze it the same way we > analyze a 5-door object. As such, can we say compassion or any other > emotion is a compound? N: No, it is one of the cetasikas arising with sobhana citta. L: Is hardness a compound? N: It arises within a group of other rupas, that group is the compound, not that one rupa-element that is hardness (Element of Earth). L: The main point of my line of reasoning is to get at what makes a root > (kamma producer). N: A root is the foundation of a citta, like the root of a tree. It conditions kusala citta and akusala citta by way of root-condition, important and strong, but root, hetu, is not cetana, kamma that produces result. Different conditions, different functions. Kamma that produces result does so by way of kamma-condition. L: Is your position that rootedness is in the quality of > the dominant cetasika rather than in the quality of the intention? N: We have to be precise when speaking of dominant. There is predominance condition , but this is more complex, depending on being co-nascent or by way of object. L: If so, should we say rooted wholesome cetasikas are not completely > wholesome? N: Kusala is kusala, akusala is akusala, and they cannot be conascent. That is a contradiction. Nina. 32100 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - Covetousness and grief Dear Jon, Thank you, very inspiring. The sutta text is also very convincing. The monk should be aware of the hindrances, they still arise. Why would there be this passage if all hindrances were already eradicated? I want to add, see below. op 09-04-2004 14:48 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > > Sutta: .....> "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the mental objects > in the mental objects of the five hindrances. > "How, O bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu live contemplating mental objects in > the mental objects of the five hindrances? > "Here, O bhikkhus, *when sensuality is present, a bhikkhu knows with > understanding: 'I have sensuality,'* or when sensuality is not > present, he knows with understanding: 'I have no sensuality.'.... > *When anger is present, he knows with understanding: 'I have anger,'* > or when anger is not present, he knows with understanding: 'I have no > anger.' ... N: We can see how the Abhidhamma helps us to understand the suttas, and how the Abhidhamma is indispensable to start on the right Path. The hindrances are only akusala cetasikas, arising because of conditions, they have no owner. In this sense they are beyond control. But panna is the controller. It is indriya or leader. Only panna can eventually eradicate them. The hindrances and panna are sankharakkhandha. The Abhidhamma helps us to understand the real meaning of khandha: it arises and falls away, it is non-self. We read in the suttas about the four noble Truths, but without the Abhidhamma we cannot understand the characteristic of dukkha: the arising and falling away of nama and rupa that are no refuge, not worth clinging to. I heard more on listening this morning. A. Sujin said that the development of the Path is detachment from the beginning to the end. When we listen, the goal should be detachment from wrong view. Also when we listen there can be a degree of detachment from our wrong ideas about self. The development of the eightfold Path is not just observing or noticing realities. This might be done with lobha or an idea of, "I can do something". The development is not a matter of doing something, but it is the development of panna that detaches. We learn from the Abhidhamma that all conditioned dhammas are only citta, cetasika and rupa. Right view or panna is a cetasika, not my panna. She repeated that such understanding should go to our very bone (an expression in Thai). This shows us that it is not an intellectual exercise to know that there are only nama and rupa as objects of right understanding. The study of the Abhidhamma should not be an intellectual exercise. I also heard the voice of the late Abbot, Kh Sukol's brother, talking about his going to hospital, backwards and forwards. He referred to Jivaka, the physician who took care of the Buddha and the monks. A. Sujin said that the life of the arahat is ordinary life, just like ours, he also becomes sick and has to see a doctor. But the difference is in the wisdom. For us, when we see, like or dislike arise immediately. The arahat has maha-kiriyacittas instead. The arahat has only vipakacittas and kiriyacittas. Also for the sotapanna, life is just ordinary. The sotapanna has attachment and aversion, and he must develop understanding to see them as only nama. He sees the danger of attachment to realities and knows that the development of whatever reality appears must continue. Would you tell me what else you heard about the satipatthanasutta? Another thing. Please could you ask Kh Sukol to send me the memorial book on the occasion of the Abbot's cremation? Some questions for Bgk: One of the teachers said about tangible object: the *three* Great elements impinge on the bodysense, but one of these characteristics (like hardness) is experienced. I thought: of the octad only one of the great Elements impinges and then its characteristic is experienced. Kh Anop was going to ask A. Sujin. Another one: observing and awareness: we all fall into that trap of taking the observing for awareness, though it may seem similar, and this is good for discussing among us and with A. Sujin. What do you think about this matter? I think that it is good to realize that lobha comes in easily, wanting to take us away from the present object. Best is not to think of satipatthana at all. Once you start thinking about it, it is wrong, no awareness but thinking with desire. Thank you, Nina. 32101 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.4.) Hi Sarah, Thank you for this message. Could you summarize your points? Thanks. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor & All, > > --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > § 6.4. > > MahaKassapa: > > One shouldn't go about > > surrounded, revered > > by a company: > > one gets distracted; > > concentration > > is hard to gain. > > Fellowship with many people > > is painful. > > Seeing this, > > one shouldn't approve > > of a company. > <...> > > [Thag XVIII] > ..... > From an earlier post; > > Sarah: > > Also in MN 32, Mahagosinga Sutta, we read the discussion between the > leading disciples, including Ven Sariputta, Maha Mogallana, Maha Kassapa > and Ven Ananda, about `what kind of bhikkhu could illuminate the [snip] > ..... > S: In other words, as I understand, it is not the forest or marsh in the > wooded area that is of itself significant, but the intentions, `need' or > sincerity of purpose and understanding whilst dwelling there according to > conditions and habitual inclinations. > > Sarah 32102 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.5.) Hi Sarah, Thanks for this message. It would be helpful if you don't mind summarizing your points. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor & All, > [snip] > ***** > S: In the sutta itself in this section under contentment, it says: > > "Just as a bird, wherever it goes, flies with its wings as its only > burden, in the same way a bhikkhu is content with robes to protect his > body and almsfood to sustain his belly; wherever he goes he sets out > taking only (his requisites) along with him. In this way, great king, the > bhikkhu is content". > ..... > S: Such passages are very inspiring. There have been discussions recently > on whether such passages are descriptive or prescriptive. If we were to > shed all belongings like a bird and set out for the jungle thickets, would > it be helpful for the development of jhana and vipassana? > > I don't think so, because the necessary `requisites' are not in place. [snip] > > I look forward to further comments. > > Sarah 32103 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:37pm Subject: [dsg] Re:_Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.3.) Hi Sarah, Thank you again this message. What would be the benefit of living in seclusion? Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, > > More to come;-) > > --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi all, [snip] > to a climax by way of arahantship. > ***** > Metta, > > Sarah 32104 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:45pm Subject: Re: Recognizing the Dhamma - 7. Persistence (§ 7.1.) 7. Persistence § 7.1. "'This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? There is the case where a monk keeps his persistence aroused for abandoning unskillful mental qualities and taking on skillful mental qualities. He is steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking his duties with regard to skillful mental qualities. 'This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy.' Thus was it said. And with reference to this was it said. [AN VIII.30] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/recognizing.html#persistence 32105 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:48pm Subject: Recognizing the Dhamma - 7. Persistence (§ 7.2, § 7.3) § 7.2. As if struck by a sword, as if his head were on fire, a monk should live the wandering life -- mindful -- for the abandoning of sensual passion. [Thag I.39] § 7.3. "Furthermore, the monk finds pleasure & delight in developing [skillful mental qualities], finds pleasure & delight in abandoning [unskillful mental qualities]. He does not, on account of his pleasure & delight in developing & abandoning, exalt himself or disparage others. In this he is diligent, deft, alert, & mindful. This is said to be a monk standing firm in the ancient, original traditions of the noble ones." [AN IV.28] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/recognizing.html#persistence 32106 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 2:28pm Subject: Re: Video Games? Friend Sukin, Sukin: Sorry about this. I had assumed that you would agree with what I said about playing video games being wrong practice, and thought that you should consider the similarity between this and 'formal meditation'. This is why I urged you to consider what I had written seriously. There was no thought about being a teacher. James: There is no problem with being a teacher. I wouldn't mind if, at times, you were my teacher. Many people in this group are at times my teachers, either directly or indirectly. Perhaps, sometimes, I am their teacher. However, in order for you to be my teacher in this regard I need to have confidence in what you are trying to teach me. If you want to teach me that meditation is wrong practice you would need to explain the reason why (I already know about video games being a diversion and not Buddhist practice. I have explained that. Don't jump on one thing and try to make a federal case over it! ;-). So far your reasoning is like a sieve- it doesn't hold anything. It may look solid from far away but up close I can see that it is full of holes. ;-)) Sukin: But I am curious, when you say "Why would I listen to you as my teacher if you cannot acknowledge reality?" How have you come to this conclusion about my not acknowledging reality? James: Because you state that formal meditation is wrong practice. This is not acknowledging reality because the Buddha taught that it is right practice on numerous occasions and in numerous ways. Granted, not all forms of meditation are right practice and sometimes people practice the wrong thing, but that isn't reason to declare all meditation practice wrong. As the saying goes, "There is no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater" ;-)). Not all meditation practice is wrong, or dirty. There is a pretty simple rule to follow: Meditation should only be done to gain wisdom and release. Meditation is gain supernormal powers is wrong. Meditation is gain ecstatic states is wrong. Meditation to contact deva, ghost, or hell realms is wrong. Meditation to align or strengthen your chakras is wrong. Meditation to become physically beautiful is wrong. Meditation to cure physical disease is wrong. Etc. I do not do wrong meditation so I do not believe that you are dealing in reality. I clearly know the difference between right and wrong meditation; you do not. That is why I say you do not acknowledge reality. Sukin: Do you acknowledge reality? If so, what are those realities according to you? James: Yes, I acknowledge reality-as much as I am able to (Those around me tell me that I am more based in reality than just about anyone they know! ;-)). Reality and `realities' are two different things. To use a simile, if all you can see are the puzzle pieces but not the puzzle they form when together, you do not acknowledge reality. Metta, James 32107 From: Htoo Naing Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 2:44pm Subject: Powerful Friends Coming Together ( 02 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The meditator has been practising mahasatipatthana. Mindfulness reminds him to be at the meditational object all the time. Mindfuless or sati becomes more and more potent and it becomes very powerful. When sati becomes very powerful, it also helps its friends become powerful. Sati arises most of the meditative time that is the whole day and night except in deep sleep. This powerful sati or mindfulness helps his friends wisdom or panna to investigate into each phenomenon. When panna becomes an investigative mental factor it investigates into all phenomena whenever they arise. This panna or wisdom is called dhammavicaya or investiagative mind and he is a powerful friend of sati or mindfulness. As sati is reminding each citta, another friend of sati comes and joins with them. He is viriya or effort. As sati is mindful to meditate without ever withdrawing from meditative object, this act becomes an effortful action and this is because of another member of powerful friends called viriya or effort. Viriya is vividly working along with his friends sati or mindfulness and panna or dhammavicaya sambhojjanga. As these three freinds are there working together, joy arises and it makes likeness of meditative object. This likeness becomes joy and later on this joy suffuses the whole body of the meditator and rapture arises. The meditator knows rapture arises. When it stays he knows it stays. This rapture or piti energizes the meditator not to be tired and he is able to continue through out day and night. As these four friends are working together, there arises calmness and all mind process are being in a state of tranquility. Mind seems to be standing still and seems to keep all fire extinguished and the meditator feels peaceful. Tranquility or passaddhi becomes a powerful friend as his four friends are there working together. As these 5 factors arise, the meditator becomes well concentrated and his mind stays still at the arising of phenomena and panna is constantly investigating while mindfuless is in place together with piti and passaddhi while these are brought together by effort. The meditator is free of hindrances and he is well concentrated. His concentration becomes a powerful friend and helps arising of penetrative wisdom. While all these six friends are working together, the seventh factor cannot stay away from them as he is very willing to make a balance among his friends and this balancing mind works as upekkha and it also becomes a powerful friend. It becomes uppekkha sambhojjanga. When all these seven factors arise together, meditator knows that he is quite right on the right tract and he is quite close to the Path. His mindfulness works in all aspects. His effort in meditation prevent arising of akusala cittas. His effort causes existing akusala kamma have no time to come in. Continuous effort makes arising of higher and higher knowledge. This effort also helps existing kusala dhamma to be much much more powerful as in above instance. His wish to attain higher nana makes him effortful, mindful and makes him continuously meditating. As he is mindful, his mind is always occupied by meditative processes. He is well confident in dhamma and the practice. As he goes through all investigations, he realizes that he is going to be on the right Path. May all beings be on the right Path ( NEP -Noble Eightfold Path ). With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing htootintnaing@y... 32108 From: robmoult Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 3:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Larry, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Rob: "I am not sure what you mean by "rootless compassion"." > > Hi Rob, > > I mean the compassion of an arahant. What is the difference between an > arahant's compassion and an ordinary person's compassion in terms of > cetasikas in a javana series? > > Also, is an arahant's javana intention the same as an ordinary person's > functional consciousness intention? What accounts for an arahant's skill > in terms of consciousness process? For a worldling, the javana function is performed by one of the eight "sense sphere wholesome" cittas. From an arahant, the javana function is performed by one of the eight "sense sphere functional" cittas. Each of the eight sense sphere wholesome cittas has a corresponding sense sphere functional citta of the same name and containing exactly the same set of cetasikas except that the wholesome cittas can possibly inlcude the three abstinences (no wrong action, no wrong speech and no wrong livelihood) and the functional cittas cannot. An arahant does not need to deliberately refrain from wrong action / speech / livelihood. In other words, the same cetasikas are included in a worldling's compassion citta and an arahant's compassion citta. Both cittas have the cetana cetasiaka, however the worldling's compassion citta will have stronger cetana (it creates kamma). The difference becomes more pronounced when one moves "up one layer of perspective" from looking at cittas/cetasikas to looking at multiple citta processes. Here is an analogy. Person A is in a well lit room looking at the surroundings. Person W is in a dark room when suddenly the light flashes on for a moment allowing a quick glimpse of the surroundings. If we consider only the moment that the dark room has been illuminated, then Person A and Person W can see the same things. (As I am sure you have guessed, Person A = Arahant and Person W = worldling). From this analogy, you can imagine that an Arahant's compassion is far "deeper" and "more complete" than a worldling's compassion because of the possibility of "continuous compassion" rather than "snaphsot compassion". Why is this so? The difference between an Arahant and a worldling is that an Arahant has uprooted all defilements. It is the defilements of the worldling that cause akusala javana cittas to arise (through natural decisive support condition). Ken H recently estimated that this happens 99.9% of the time for worldlings and I agree. Because of defilements, it is rare for a compassion citta to arise in a worldling. Because of defilements, the compassion citta of a worldling is quickly followed by an akuala citta. Though kusala cittas are statistically extremely rare, they are of such INTENSE BEAUTY that they create a very strong impression (good kamma) when they arise. In an Arahant, these beautiful cittas arise continuously. To a worldling, the bliss of an Arahant is unimaginable. Metta, Rob M :-) 32109 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) Jon: >Jack Thanks for these further comments, and for referring to a particular passage from the Anapanasati Sutta.< jack> All steps in the Anap. Sutta involve the breath. This of course is true, but the different sections ('tetrads' -- groups of four) involve the breath in different ways. Jon, Yes, that is what my next sentences below say. jack> Anapanasati is translated as mindfulness of breathing. All the 16 steps > involve learning anicca/dukkha/anatta through contemplation of > breathing. For > instance, the 13th step involves learning impermanence by observing the breath. Jon: >As we know from our reading of the suttas, impermanence in the teachings is one of the three characteristics commmon to all conditioned dhammas, so here too it is likely to be impermanence as a characteristic of conditioned dhammas, and not impermanence in some more general sense, that is being referred to. Of course, breath is dierctly involved, but we need to help of the commentaries to know in exactly what way.<< I'm not sure what impermanence in the general sense means. In the Anap. Sutta, we are taught to recognize impermanence in all phenomena (is this what you mean by the general sense?) through mindfulness of particular breaths. [snip] jon:>Secondly, the explanations at (c) and (d) seem to be saying that whenever such contemplation occurs, the person in question is to be regarded as 'one contemplating impermanence', with the emphasis on the *occurrence* of that contemplation, rather than on its *doing*.<< I don't know what you mean when you say emphasis on the occurance rather than on its doing. Jon: >>The Visuddhi-Magga passage word commentary then concludes by saying: <> This draws together all the foregoing: when there occurs, in a person who is practised in samatha with breath as object, contemplation of the impermanence of the five aggregates, then that person is said to be 'training himself' in the manner stated in the sutta. So while the tetrad is indeed all about insight, it is about insight into the five aggregates in general, and not insight into 'breath' per se, nor even necessarily into those particular rupas of the rupa aggregate that are taken as breath. The significance of the breath here lies in the occasion on which the insight occurs (i.e., person developing samatha with breath as object), rather than in the actual object of insight.<< I don't understand. As we are mindful of the breath, all of what we think of as Iâ€? or a person (the 5 aggregates) can come into play. As we become aware of the body sensation of a breath in our nose, we can watch consciousness, sensation, perception and mental formations all arise. Though mindfulness of the breath we can see that this breath phenomena is impermanent, unsatisfactory and empty. We are thus lead to see that all phenomena is impermanent, unsatisfactory and empty. I think we have a basic disagreement but I don't know what it is. Are you thinking the teaching of "I shall breath in...shall breath out contemplating impermanence" means that we should contemplate the general concept of impermanence as we breath? I think it means we should watch our breaths and try to discover that the breath and all that arise with it is impermanent. Jack 32110 From: robmoult Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 3:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > The whole "root" business is unclear to me. What does it mean, for > example, for anger to have tanha as root other than tanha being a condition for > the arising of anger? And anger being conditioned by tanha is something that > should be directly seen by introspection, not memorized as a book fact. I don't > see how the "root" notion adds much. All the jargon, to me, is just a > distraction. The entire Sutta Pitaka, practice-based and experience- based, appears to > be jargon-free, and I often feel that near-Talmudic hair splitting based on > portions of a theory that presupposes notions unmentioned or given short shrift > in the suttas is at best a diversion. (Of course, everyone likes a diversion > from time to time. ;-) Here is my perspective (I'm not suggesting that you should change your perspective). The concept of roots helps to better understand what is at the core (or root) of our current mental state. It gives us a vocabulary that helps us properly label the elements of a mental state and, like all technical jargon, helps us to communicate effectively. How effective would the medical community be without technical jargon? BTW, a minor correction; anger does not have tanha (lobha) as a root, the roots of anger are dosa and moha. For some people, reflecting on the nature of dosa and the nature of moha and seeing how they are present in moments of anger is helpful. I agree with you that the Ahidhamma can be a dangerous diversion (my recent tirade against the DSG - Non Action Group) from the path. As I see it, the problem lies not with the Abhidhamma per se, but rather how people apply (or do not apply) the Abhidhamma to daily life. Metta, Rob M :-) 32111 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 0:12pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi, Rob - In a message dated 4/10/04 6:44:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > The whole "root" business is unclear to me. What does it > mean, for > >example, for anger to have tanha as root other than tanha being a > condition for > >the arising of anger? And anger being conditioned by tanha is > something that > >should be directly seen by introspection, not memorized as a book > fact. I don't > >see how the "root" notion adds much. All the jargon, to me, is just > a > >distraction. The entire Sutta Pitaka, practice-based and experience- > based, appears to > >be jargon-free, and I often feel that near-Talmudic hair splitting > based on > >portions of a theory that presupposes notions unmentioned or given > short shrift > >in the suttas is at best a diversion. (Of course, everyone likes a > diversion > >from time to time. ;-) > > Here is my perspective (I'm not suggesting that you should change > your perspective). > > The concept of roots helps to better understand what is at the core > (or root) of our current mental state. It gives us a vocabulary that > helps us properly label the elements of a mental state and, like all > technical jargon, helps us to communicate effectively. > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay, so it is terminology and concept - good, of course, for communication and for thinking. Not so great for liberation except as background. Reading the menu doesn't fill the belly, though it is a good first step. ------------------------------------------- How effective > > would the medical community be without technical jargon? BTW, a minor > correction; anger does not have tanha (lobha) as a root, the roots of > anger are dosa and moha. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, as I understand it, 'dosa' MEANS "anger". So - anger is a root of anger? Not very helpful, I'm afraid. What is clear to me, however, is that anger is always the result of (thwarted) desire/greed (tanha/lobha), and, thus, tanha is a central condition for anger. What does 'root of' mean if not "central condition for"? ---------------------------------------------- For some people, reflecting on the nature of > > dosa and the nature of moha and seeing how they are present in > moments of anger is helpful. > > I agree with you that the Ahidhamma can be a dangerous diversion (my > recent tirade against the DSG - Non Action Group) from the path. As I > see it, the problem lies not with the Abhidhamma per se, but rather > how people apply (or do not apply) the Abhidhamma to daily life. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) > > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 32112 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 4:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Howard: "What does it mean, for example, for anger to have tanha as root other than tanha being a condition for the arising of anger?" Hi Howard, I don't know what this means either. Where did you read it? My thinking is: "what is the nature of desire", "what is the nature of ignorance", and "what is root" are all the same question and an answer to one could as well be an answer to the others. Larry 32113 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 4:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi Howard, Good point. Larry ------------------------ H: "I think that it is always feeling for which there is direct attachment. Craving, aversion, and attachment pertain to dhammas other than feeling only indirectly, by association, with the feelings their experiencing elicits. Look at the dependent origination scheme: feeling -> craving -> clinging." 32114 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 4:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Nina, What makes intention condition kamma in an ordinay person's javana cittas but not in an arahant's? Larry 32115 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 4:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Howard, I see what you mean by root and I agree root means cause. I was interested in root as a characteristic of an ordinary person's javana cittas that cause kamma while an arahant's javana cittas are not roots and don't cause kamma. Causing kamma, causing suffering, and causing dependent arising seem to me to be the same. Larry 32116 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 2:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/10/04 7:25:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Howard: "What does it mean, for example, for anger to have tanha as root > other than tanha being a condition for the arising of anger?" > > Hi Howard, > > I don't know what this means either. Where did you read it? My thinking > is: "what is the nature of desire", "what is the nature of ignorance", > and "what is root" are all the same question and an answer to one could > as well be an answer to the others. > > Larry > ======================= Where did I read *what*? (All I'm saying is that I don't understand the sense of 'root' as anything other than "central condition for".) 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) 32117 From: Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 2:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi, Larry - In a message dated 4/10/04 7:50:53 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I see what you mean by root and I agree root means cause. I was > interested in root as a characteristic of an ordinary person's javana > cittas that cause kamma while an arahant's javana cittas are not roots > and don't cause kamma. Causing kamma, causing suffering, and causing > dependent arising seem to me to be the same. > > Larry > ========================== I'm still not entirely sure what you are driving at. In a non-arahant, mindstates are rooted in delusion and possibly also in greed and/or hate, on the one hand, or the opposite of these on the other, varying, I suppose, from person to person, and from occasion to occasion. In an arahant, there is only wisdom, non-grasping, and generosity. In a non-arahant, the three poisonous traits condition unwholesome intention ("bad kamma"), and the three noble traits condition wholesome intention ("good kamma"). But, apparently, in an arahant the noble traits, the only ones that ever arise in such a being, condition only "functional" intention, which is not kamma, and which bears no kammic fruit. Perhaps it is the complete and permanent absence of ignorance that is the reason for this distinction. 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) 32118 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 9:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Larry, butting in again, op 10-04-2004 18:58 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: Larry wrote to Howard: > > I can certainly appreciate an unwillingness to engage in technical > and probably theoretical matters, but I think what makes a root is > indeed at the heart of the matter. N: Yes, Root-condition is the first mentioned condition in the Patthana, and then comes object-condition. So many important conditions that play their part in our life. To me it is important to understand better how this puppet is moving. It certainly helps much to study conditions, roots, cetana, etc. so that we know the true meaning of anatta. I find that by studying the Abhidhamma (I do not say all details, but the main principles) and reflecting on it over and over again, it helps to understand the suttas and to apply them. Therefore, I do not see the matters discussed as technical or theoretical. L: To my mind the cause of suffering > and the cause of kamma are synonymous. N: The cause of suffering is desire as we read in the sutta. The second noble truth. Through the abhidhamma we learn that desire is a cetasika arising with citta, and that it also arises now, when seeing has fallen away. Desire for all objects, for colour, sound, etc. for all of the five khandhas, not only feelings. For citta, for cetasikas. Feeling is more obvious and thus it seems we mainly cling to feeling, but there are many more objects to which we cling. Also concepts, certainly. Ideas and concepts we form up all the time. We cling to people, that is to concepts. What stories we spin out in a day. The cause of kamma: going back to D.O. Ignorance and also craving are the causes for kamma- formations. You are right. But these factors are representative and thus given in the D.O. It is more complex than that. L; This leaves the question, what about attachment to concepts? We can't dispel this attachment by recourse to observation of impermanence. N: Only panna can dispel it, but not immediately. By insight impermanence can be realized, an important step. In K IV, the Buddha teaches: what is impermanent is not self. Understanding impermanence is closely connected with understanding dukkha and anatta. L:Therefore, the path of purification is irrelevant in this regard. N: On the contrary, the only, only way! L: I think the "path" here is to simply observe that I am mistaking concept for reality. N: We all do, but it can be unlearnt by awareness and right understanding of seeing now, visible object now. Gradually we learn that these are dhammas. It will be seen what dhamma, reality, is. No mistakes, but a long way to go. L: But what if I say, "I am an idea, not conditioned, not impermanent". N: That is thinking, and that thinking is only a conditioned nama. Also thinking should be realized as nama. We think about stories. We can verify what is true at this moment of thinking. L:What if I knowingly embrace attachment to concepts. I can easily see this happening as a religious or spiritual strategy. How does one dispel or refute this attachment? N: It is not a matter of "me" embracing such attachment, it just happens because of conditions. What are we: citta, cetasika and rupa, nothing else. It is so helpful the way the Abhidhamma keeps on teaching this and giving the details of what kind of citta, cetasikas and rupas. Citta, cetasika and rupa, is not a general statement, but very precise. And precision helps, a remedy against confusion of mind. What the Abhidhamma teaches is so real and therefore of immmediate help to develop the Path. That means: to be aware of dhamma now. The Abhidhamma teaches about the khandhas, elements, aayatanas (sensefields) in more detail than the suttas. Only with the purpose to get rid of the idea of self. At the present time we need more details than in the Buddha's time. Yes, one may be attached to certain techniques. How to dispel it? First one should know it when it occurs, and that is very difficult. One may be immersed in it. Only understanding can go through all dhammas that occur. Only panna can do the job, nothing else. I like your questions, and again, nothing technical to me. Actually, they help me to consider and work out things for myself while I am on this long, long journey. Nina. 32119 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 9:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Larry wrote to Howard, N: butting in again > L: Are relations directly known by you? If so, how so? I don't think >> they are directly known by me in this very restricted sense of direct >> knowing of a rupa or cetasika. What the Buddha knows is only a concept >> for me. I agree there is a web of relations, but how do we know? N: Let us just choose one relation, the object-condition. Is there hearing now? Then you know that there must be a citta that experiences, otherwise nothing would appear. That citta experiences sound. We call it object, but the name is not important. Sound has a relation to the citta that hears, it is called object-condition. This may be a way to understand that certain dhammas condition other dhammas by way of a specific relation. In this case the object conditions citta by way of object-condition. And this condition is never lacking, not even when there are bhavangacittas, when you are asleep and not dreaming. Citta still experiences an object. As to the direct experience of nama or rupa as being conditioned, this will be at the second stage of insight. But not all conditions will be directly understood for everybody. That is understanding without thinking. Insight is not thinking. Nina. 32120 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 11:43pm Subject: Re: kiriyacittas Friend Nina, Nina: At the present time we need more details than in the Buddha's time. James: This is a point that makes me want to make a few observations. First, to quote from SN 65 "Bhaddali Sutta": 29. "Venerable sir, what is the cause, what is the reason, why there were previously fewer training rules and more bhikkhus became established in final knowledge? What is the cause, what is the reason, why there are now more training rules and fewer bhikkhus become established in final knowledge?" 30. "That is how it is, Baddali. When beings are deteriorating and the true Dhamma is disappearing, then there are more training rules and fewer bhikkhus become established in final knowledge…" Observations: 1.More rules (or more details of the dhamma) are not necessarily a good thing nor will they increase the dhamma in the faithful. They are a sign of deterioration and a subsequent substitute for the true Dhamma. 2.There was nothing particularly special about living in the Buddha's time. The Dhamma was already deteriorating during the Buddha's lifetime and he saw it, recognized it, and was powerless to do anything about it. 3.The Abhidhamma is a substitute for the true dhamma but it may be a necessary substitute for certain people. However, it will not appeal to those who are more interested in the true Dhamma and not any substitutes. Metta, James 32121 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 0:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kiriyacittas James (and Nina) I hope you dont' mind me coming in here. I think the reason we need more details in this day and age is because levels of panna are generally lower than in the Buddha's time. This reflects the general phenomenon that those ripe for enlightenment tend to get reborn during the time of a Buddha, or close to that, and those with less panna at a later and later time after a Buddha. The deterioration of the teachings is an exacerbating factor but not the primary one, as I see it. The question of the place of the Abhidhamma in the Buddha's teaching is a hotly debated one, but as you know on this list members are encouraged to take it as part and parcel of the teachings. You of course are entitled to your personal views on the matter;-)) Jon --- buddhatrue wrote: > Friend Nina, > > Nina: At the present time we need more details than in the Buddha's time. > > James: > Observations: > 1.More rules (or more details of the dhamma) are not necessarily a > good thing nor will they increase the dhamma in the faithful. They > are a sign of deterioration and a subsequent substitute for the > true Dhamma. > 2.There was nothing particularly special about living in the > Buddha's time. The Dhamma was already deteriorating during the > Buddha's lifetime and he saw it, recognized it, and was powerless to > do anything about it. > 3.The Abhidhamma is a substitute for the true dhamma but it may be a > necessary substitute for certain people. However, it will not > appeal to those who are more interested in the true Dhamma and not any substitutes. > > Metta, James 32122 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 2:00am Subject: Patience and Courage : was[Re: [dsg] Fwd: Antony in Hospital] --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Ken, > > And that's it? From one of the champions of no-control? If one can, > as you say, 'develop' wholesome qualities like metta, patience and > good cheer, then one can develop sati. What's your method? > Hi Christine, I hope you're enjoying your holiday in Thailand. Judging from its results, my method should be avoided like the plague. :-) Wholesome qualities (like patience) belong to wholesome consciousness. So it's no use wanting it -- I won't have it till I've got it. We'll have to be patient. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 32123 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 2:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) Jack Thanks for going to the trouble of drawing out the differences between us, which you've done very well. I am clearer now on what you are saying. I think we're in agreement on one essential point, and that is that the expression 'contemplating impermanence' in the teaching "I shall breath in...shall breath out contemplating impermanence" is a reference to insight into the impermanence of any of the five aggregates (i.e., of any presently arisen dhamma). Hope I'm not putting words in your mouth here ;-)) I'd like to respond on some of your individual comments also. Apologies for the length and technicality of what follows, but you've raised some fine points. --- Jackhat1@a... wrote: > Jon: Jack: Jon, Yes, that [i.e., the different sections ('tetrads' --groups of four) involve the breath in different ways] is what my next sentences below say. > Anapanasati is translated as mindfulness of breathing. All the 16 steps > involve learning anicca/dukkha/anatta through contemplation of > breathing. For > instance, the 13th step involves learning impermanence by observing the breath. Jon: Thanks for this clarification. To make sure that we're on the same page, may I just say that to my reading the term 'anapanasati/mindfulness of breathing' is used in the texts in two senses, namely, as samatha bhavana (i.e., concentration/jhana with breath as object) and as vipassana bhavana (i.e., insight into the true nature of a presently arising reality/dhamma, somehow associated with breath as object of consciousness). Is this how you see it too? Now the relevance of this, to my understanding, is that the precise moment of samatha bhavana/jhaana with breath as object cannot be a moment of insight into the true nature of a presently arising reality (for one thing, at that moment the object of consciousness is a mental image ('nimitta') of the breath). And furthermore, nor can a moment of insight of the level of vipassana have breath as object, at least not in quite the same sense that breath is object of samatha bhavana/jhaana, since the dhammas/five aggregates do not include a dhamma of 'breath'. Hope we're still in agreement here ;-)) What the Anapanasati Sutta does, as I see it, is to show how despite this lack of 'overlap' insight can be nonetheless be developed, following upon or arising interspersed with moments of samatha bhavana with breath as object, without sacrificing the samatha bhavana aspect. Jack: I'm not sure what impermanence in the general sense means. In the Anap. Sutta, we are taught to recognize impermanence in all phenomena (is this what you mean by the general sense?) through mindfulness of particular breaths. Jon: Here I'm going to get a bit technical but not, I hope, unintelligible ;-)) Because impermanence in the context of insight is impermanence as a *characteristic pertaining to* dhammas, it is something that can be known only by the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas, and this of course must be a presently arisen dhamma. This development is gradual and long-term, and it is only after the particular nature of individual dhammas has been known that their shared characteristics of anicca/dukkha/anatta also become apparent to panna. Now as I think you can see from the above, impermanence as a characteristic of conditioned dhammas would not be the same thing as, for example, noticing the impermanence of thoughts, feelings, etc by directing one's attention to those thoughts, feelings etc. The latter is something that anyone could observe and acknowledge; it doesn't need any wisdom to see that thoughts, feelings etc are impermanent in the general sense of the word (and the same goes for breath). Jack: I don't know what you mean when you say emphasis on the occurance rather than on its doing. Jon: This needs a close reading of the text (which I've repasted below). The text explains that 'person contemplating impermanence' means that the person *is possessed of contemplation on the impermanence* of five aggregates. My point is that rather than pointing out something 'to be done', or a deliberate practice, the text is referring just to the occurrence of insight into impermanence. Jack: As we are mindful of the breath, all of what we think of as 'I' or a person (the 5 aggregates) can come into play. As we become aware of the body sensation of a breath in our nose, we can watch consciousness, sensation, perception and mental formations all arise. Though mindfulness of the breath we can see that this breath phenomena is impermanent, unsatisfactory and empty. We are thus lead to see that all phenomena is impermanent, unsatisfactory and empty. Jon: Yes, but as explained above the text is making a distinction between moments when (image of) breath is the object of consciousness (i.e., samatha bhavana) and other moments when any of the five aggregates is object of insight (i.e., vipassana bhavana). The two cannot co-occur at precisely the same moment. Jack: I think we have a basic disagreement but I don't know what it is. Are you thinking the teaching of "I shall breath in...shall breath out contemplating impermanence" means that we should contemplate the general concept of impermanence as we breath? I think it means we should watch our breaths and try to discover that the breath and all that arise with it is impermanent. Jon: Well, perhaps one of the areas of disagreement is the point I've just mentioned, that the moments with breath as object will be different moments to those where the characteristic of impermanence of the five aggregates is apparent. I hope my explanation on this has been clear (I fear it hasn't). Furthermore (and this is just a corollary to what I've said above about the purpose or effect of the sutta), in my view the sutta does not go so far as to say that if the aim is to develop the insight that sees the impermanence of all dhammas, then one should first develop samatha bhavana with breath as object. This is perhaps another area of disagreement. Jon (from previous post) Visuddhi-Magga VIII, 234 ... explains that in order to understand what is meant by 'contemplating impermanence' in the sutta, one needs to understand the 4 terms (a) the impermanent, (b) impermanence, (c) the contemplation of impermanence and (d) one contemplating impermanence. As to these terms, it says: (a) Herein, the five aggregates are 'the impermanent', because their essence is rise and fall and change.' (b) 'Impermanence' is the rise and fall and change in those same aggregates, or it is their non-existence after having been; the meaning is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. (c) 'Contemplation of impermanence' is contemplation of materiality, etc., as 'impermanent' in virtue of that impermanence. (d) 'One contemplating impermanence' possesses that contemplation. 32124 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 3:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Nina --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Jon, ... N: The Saddaniti (by Agavamsa, in the year 1154), as you remember, gives many meanings to the word dhamma, and one of these is pannatti. This is different from the suttas, it is another context. Such a study helps me to be careful in what context a term is used. You will find the terms nirutti and adhivacana we also saw in the Vis, and Tiika about the four Discriminations. This is what I wrote before: The Saddaniti explains the meaning of dhamma as concept: J: Thanks for this reminder; context is so important. One needs to be careful when generalising! There is a similar passage to the one you've just given in the Paramatthamanjusa, quoted in Vism (and included in one of Larry's posts on Ch XIV): Ch. VIII, Note 68. 'In such passages as "Dhammas that are concepts" (Dhs., p. 1;1308) even a non-entity (abhava) is thus called a "dhamma" since it is borne (dhariyati) and affirmed (avadhariyati) by knowledge. That kind of dhamma is excluded by [the comment] "Dhammas [means] individual essences". (Pm. 282) N: Words: pa~n~natti : designation, name, idea, notion. adhivacana (n): term attribute nirutti (f): interpretation, expression. The word pa~n~natti, concept, stands for name and for the idea expressed by a name or term. Names can designate what is reality in the absolute sense (paramattha dhammas, such as kusala, akusala, sound, etc.) and also what is not real in the absolute sense, such as person, house. J: I would just add, in view of comments I have seen in other posts, that from the point of view of the teachings both categories of names (i.e., names designating what is reality in the absolute sense, and names designating what is not real in the absolute sense) are equally concepts; one is not less 'unreal', or more grounded in reality, than the other. Jon 32125 From: Jeffrey Brooks Date: Sat Apr 10, 2004 6:33pm Subject: Resolving Disputes Upakkilesa Sutta, MN 128 Imperfections When many voices shout at once None considers himself a fool; Though the Sangha is being split None thinks himself to be at fault. They have forgotten thoughtful speech, The talk obsessed by words alone. Uncurbed their mouths, they bawl at will; None knows what leads him so to act. 'He abused me, he struck me, He defeated me, he robbed me'-- In those who harbor thoughts like these Hatred will never be allayed. For in this world hatred is never Allayed by further acts of hate. It is allayed by non-hatred: That is the fixed and ageless law. Those others do not recognize That here we should restrain ourselves. But those wise ones who realize this At once end all their enmity. Breakers of bones and murderers, Those who steal cattle, horses, wealth, Those who pillage the entire realm-- When even these can act together Why can you not do so too? If one can find a worthy friend, A virtuous, steadfast companion, Then overcome all threats of danger And walk with him content and mindful. But if one finds no worthy friend, No virtuous, steadfast companion, Then as a king leaves his conquered realm, Walk like a tusker in the woods alone. Better it is to walk alone, There is no companionship with fools. Walk alone and do no evil, At ease like a tusker in the woods." (Majjhima Nikaya trans. Bhikkhus Nanamoli & Bodhi, Wisdom, 1995) 32126 From: buddhatrue Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 3:22am Subject: Re: kiriyacittas Friend Jon, Jon: I hope you dont' mind me coming in here. James: Of course not. Jon: I think the reason we need more details in this day and age is because levels of panna are generally lower than in the Buddha's time. This reflects the general phenomenon that those ripe for enlightenment tend to get reborn during the time of a Buddha, or close to that, and those with less panna at a later and later time after a Buddha. James: Where did you get this information? Right off hand, this doesn't seem to make much sense to me. Beings have to be reborn somewhere and they will each have various levels of panna (wisdom) and virtue (sila). They cannot necessarily pick and choose where they will be reborn because the choices are limited. The way you describe it, there would almost have to exist a cosmic `waiting room' for those beings with enough panna who wish to be reborn in the time of a Buddha. ;-)) I look at this matter a bit differently. I think it is predominately an impersonal, cosmic phenomenon but there can be limited influence on the part of individual karma streams (if you notice, rarely is anything entirely one-sided ;-). First, not all kalpas will witness the arising of a Buddha. It is a chance experience that isn't regular or standard: "There are so many of these world systems and the length of a single kalpa so incredibly long, that the appearance of a Buddha is a comparatively rare event. Some kalpas are known as empty kalpas because a Buddha does not appear. Other more fortunate kalpas may be blessed by one or more Buddhas. Our own world system has been favored by 28 Buddhas, including Sakyamuni, during the course of many kalpas. The kalpa in which we are now living has the distinction of being a greatly auspicious kalpa of five Buddhas: Kusanda, Konagamana, Kasyapsa, Sakyamuni and Maitreya, who is yet to come." http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma2/budcosmo.html So, what was special about India, the Ganges region during the late 6th century B.C.E.? Conditions were ripe for the arising of a Buddha in that geographical area and time period because it was a period of a spiritual malaise after a long bout of spiritual seeking. Nietzsche described this historical background in terms of tragedy: "In the Birth of Tragedy, Nietzsche described three paradigmatic models of cultural life, the Alexandrian, the Hellenic, and the Buddhistic. He used these historical designations to indicate the principal means a culture used to reconcile itself to the given conditions of its life; respectively, those means were knowledge, art, and wisdom. He argued in this early work that all culture is a mixture of these powerful "stimulants" and that as proportions vary, "we have either a dominantly Socratic or artistic or tragic culture." http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/ew26932.htm Karen Armstrong in her book "Buddha" described it in terms of an `Axial Age': "Some historians call this period (which extended from about 800 to 200 B.C.E) the `Axial Age' because it proved pivotal to humanity. The ethos forged during this era has continued to nourish men and women to the present day. Gotama would become one of the most important and most typical of the luminaries of the Axial Age, alongside the great Hebrew prophets of the eighth, seventh and sixth centuries; Confucious and Lao Tzu, who reformed the religious traditions of China in the sixth and fifth centuries; the sixth- century Iranian sage Zoroaster; and Socrates and Plato (c. 427-327), who urged the Greeks to question even those truths which appeared to be self-evident. People who participated in this great fransformation were convinced that they were on the brink of a new era and that nothing would ever be the same again. The Axial Age marks the beginning of humanity as we now know it. During this period, men and women became conscious of their existence, their own nature and their limitations in an unprecedented way. Their experience of utter impotence in a cruel world impelled them to seek the highest goals and an absolute reality in the depths of their being. The great sages of the time taught human beings how to cope with the misery of life, transcend their weakness, and live in peace in the midst of this flawed world." Armstrong, Karen. `Buddha'. London: Phoenix Books, 2000. Pg. 10. In summary, I don't think that we should focus on how far we are from the Buddha's time, but how we have all been born in a time and on a planet that is very advantageous in many ways. Panna (wisdom) is not an inherent quality in beings and it can be lost in a gradual manner just as it is gained in a gradual manner. It is all up to us to be diligent and work for the increase of panna rather than its decrease. Jon: The deterioration of the teachings is an exacerbating factor but not the primary one, as I see it. James: Okay, I would agree with this statement. However, I wonder what you do consider the exacerbating factor? From your first statements it seems that you are implying that each being's inherent panna is the main factor. If so, I couldn't disagree more! Panna is not inherent in beings. In MN 65 "To Bhaddali', which I quoted earlier, the Buddha further explains that the Sangha has less monks who have attained Final Liberation not because all of those monks with `inherent panna' got there already but because the Sangha was becoming too famous and popular. Conditions started to arise that stood in the way of the true Dhamma. The Sangha had become a victim of its own popularity. Again, it had nothing to do with the Buddha being present, the time period, or beings with inherent panna, it had to do with impersonal conditions. Jon: The question of the place of the Abhidhamma in the Buddha's teaching is a hotly debated one, but as you know on this list members are encouraged to take it as part and parcel of the teachings. You of course are entitled to your personal views on the matter;-)) James: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend anyone (including Nina). I just wanted to stress that the teachings are not what make a difference. She stated that we need a lot of details in this day and age. Why? Is the fact of having more details important? Not according to the Buddha. The Buddha taught the proper role of the teachings: MN 70 "At Kitagiri" 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at once. On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress. 23. And how is final knowledge achieved by gradual training, gradual practice, and gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a teacher] visits him; when he visits him, he pays respect to him; when he pays respect to him, he gives ear; one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma, he memorizes it; he examines the meaning of the teachings he has memorized; when he examines their meaning, he gains a reflective acceptance of those teachings; when he has gained a reflective acceptance of those teachings, zeal springs up in him; when zeal has sprung up, he applies his will; having applied his will, he scrutinizes; having scrutinized, he strives; resolutely striving, he realizes with the body the supreme truth and sees it by penetrating it with wisdom" (708) Note 708: With the mental body he realizes Nibbana, the ultimate truth, and he penetrates it with the wisdom pertaining to the supramundane path. From this passage, it can be seen that the Buddha intended the Dhamma to be of a nature so that a person could memorize it. Is it possible to memorize the Abhidhamma? I don't think so! One would have to be a literal genius to do such a thing! Any teachings beyond the ability to memorize them is overkill and unproductive to the Buddha's path, in my opinion and according to what he taught. Metta, James 32127 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 6:43am Subject: Vis. 73 and Tiika Vis. 73 and Tiika Vis. 73. This part gives an all over review of all the twentyeight rupas we have studied. They are all included in rupakkhandha. Khandha is past, future or present, it arises and falls away. A selection of parts of the Vis and Tiika: Vis. 73 Herein, the five kinds beginning with the eye are 'internal' because they occur as an integral part of the selfhood (in oneself); the rest are 'external' because they are external to that selfhood (personality). Pali: tattha cakkhaadipa~ncavidha.m attabhaava.m adhikicca pavattattaa ajjhattika.m, sesa.m tato baahirattaa baahira.m. N: the Pali word attabhaava, self nature, is here translated as selfhood or personality. It can also be translated as individuality. The Expositor (II, p. 404) explains: ³Because it is grasped by foolish folk, as Œthis body or this collection of the five aggregates is my self,¹ therefore both the bodily frame or this collection of the five aggregates is called Œself-state¹ (attabhaava, i.e. personality). ŒIncluded in personality¹ is comprised in and depending on just that.² Individuality can be used to refer to the rupas in one¹s body. The Tiika explains: Aahito aha.m maano etthaati attaa, attabhaavo. Self includes here ³I² conceit, and thus there is the word selfhood, personality. Ta.m attaana.m adhikicca uddissa pavattaa ajjhattaa indriyabaddhadhammaa, tesu bhava.m ajjhattika.m, cakkhaadi. Beginning with the eye, they occur as an integral part of the individuality (in oneself), internal, dhammas that are connected with faculties, and thus their nature is internal. Vis. The eighteen kinds of matter, that is to say, the four elements, the thirteen beginning with the eye, and physical nutriment, are 'produced' because they can be discerned through their own individual nature, having exceeded the [purely conceptual] states of [matter as] delimitation, [matter as] alteration, and [matter as] characteristic; the rest, being the opposite, are 'unproduced'. Pali: catasso dhaatuyo, cakkhaadiini terasa, kaba.liikaaraahaaro caati a.t.thaarasavidha.m ruupa.m paricchedavikaaralakkha.nabhaava.m atikkamitvaa sabhaaveneva pariggahetabbato nipphanna.m, sesa.m tabbipariitataaya anipphanna.m. Remark: The Pali does not have the words that are in brackets: the [purely conceptual] states of [matter as] delimitation.... It has: They are concrete matter, different from characteristics of rupas such as delimitation (the space that separates groups) etc. All of them are included in the twentyeight rupas. The expression ³purely conceptual² could imply that they are not paramattha dhammas. Text Vis: ...The five kinds beginning with the eye are 'sensitive matter' through their being conditions for the apprehension of visible data, etc., because they are, as it were, bright like the surface of a looking glass. Pali: cakkhaadipa~ncavidha.m ruupaadiina.m gaha.napaccayabhaavena aadaasatala.m viya vippasannattaa pasaadaruupa.m Tiika: Sotaadiinampi cakkhuno viya pasannasabhaavattaa eva yathaasaka.m visayaggaha.napaccayataati dassento aaha ³cakkhaadi..pe.. pasaadaruupan²ti. He taught with reference to the earsense in like manner as to the eyesense, that they are, because of their nature of brightness and of the condition of apprehending each their own object, "beginning with the eye... sensitive matter². N: There is a word association that is lost in the English translation: pasanna: bright, vipassanna: very bright, and pasaada: clearness, brightness. Pasaada rupas are the sense-organs, or sensitive matter that is bright. They are compared in the Vis with the surface of a looking glass. When an object impinges upon them it can appear clearly to the relevant sense-cognition. Seeing clearly experiences visible object that impinges on the pasaada ruupa of the eyesense. Text Vis: Sensitive matter itself, together with the three beginning with the femininity faculty, is 'faculty' in the sense of predominance. Pali:itthindriyaadittayena saddhi.m adhipatiya.t.thena indriya.m Tiika: Adhipatiya.t.thenaati ettha cakkhaadiina.m taava pa~ncanna.m cakkhuvi~n~naa.naadiisu aadhipateyya.m tesa.m pa.tumandabhaavaanuvattanato, As to the expression, in the sense of predominance, this means here, that the eye and so on are the rulers over the five sense-cognitions of eye-consciousness and so on, in as far as the latter are compliant (to the ³rulers²) in a keen or slow manner *. Tiika: itthipurisindriyadvayassa sakicce jiivitindriyassa sahajaruupaanupaalane. As to (predominance of) the pair of the faculties of femininity and masculinity, these have each their own task, and as to the life-faculty, this maintains the conascent materiality. Vis text: What we shall later describe as 'kamma-born' (par. 75 and Ch. XX, par. 27) is 'clung to' because that is 'clung-to', [that is, acquired] by kamma. Pali: ya.m kammajanti parato vakkhaama, ta.m kammena upaadi.n.nattaa upaadi.n.na.m Tiika: Upaadinnattaati gahitattaa. As to the expression, clung to, this is in the sense of acquired. Kammanibbatta~nhi ³mameta.m phala.m²nti kammunaa gahita.m viya hoti apa.tikkhepato. It is not refuted that originated by kamma means as it were acquired by kamma, with the thought, ³this fruit is mine². ***** _________________ * The eyesense may be keen or slow, and this is conditioned by kamma, by sickness or decay. It is the same with the other senses. This is compared with being prompt or slow in following the ruler, the faculty. Remark: The Vis. said that the senses are bright like the surface of a looking glass. By means of them the relevant sense objects appear very clearly to the sense-cognitions. We are very impressed by what we experience through the senses and attach great importance to it. The world comes to us through the senses. We are attached to the image of a whole, a long lasting world with people. But actually, there is only one moment at a time of experiencing an object, and all these realities we are attached to do not last. ****** Nina. 32128 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 6:44am Subject: dialogue on satipatthana Dear Jon and Howard, Lodewijk wrote something by hand I type out. It is a question for Bgk. end quote. I can add: Lodewijk said that this whole matter upsets him. We were talking about western ways of reasoning and eastern ways. I find myself very confortable with the last way, but, Lodewijk said that does not help westerners. He thinks there are many like him. He finds it very difficult when A. Sujin answers with the example of seeing now or dhamma now. We were talking about it that her and my way is more like thinking and explaining in spirals, not a straight description. That is what he wants, a clear, straight description. He says I always give fragments, lots of fragments, but not a whole. When I say: know the object of satipatthana: paramattha dhammas, or: the goal is understanding non-self, he still answers: "only bits and pieces". Jon, maybe you have an idea yourself or someone else in Bgk. It is material for thought how to help others. You are so good at defining, you will get this across. I still feel myself, that it must take years and years of getting bits and pieces, and lots of patience before we understand. Thank you very much, Nina. 32129 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 6:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma-condition Hi Larry, op 11-04-2004 01:34 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > What makes intention condition kamma in an ordinay person's javana > cittas but not in an arahant's? N: Intention, cetana is kamma. But kamma has different aspects. Kamma working at the same time is conascent kamma, arising with each citta, also with vipakacittas and kiriyacittas, coordinating the work of the conascent dhammas. Cetana with kusala citta and akusala citta has a double task, it wills or intends kusala or akusala. The kusala and akusala has different strengths. When it is strong it can motivate deeds through body, speech and mind. This is what we usually mean by kamma. It can bring a result later on, and then we speak of kamma working from a different time. Now some examples of cetana with the javanacittas. Akusala citta rooted in moha and dosa may arise. This citta is conditioned by these roots by way of root-condition, and this condition is always conascent. This should be remembered, it brings more clarity in the understanding of conditions. Aversion may be slight, just some uneasiness, and then the accompanying cetana does not have the strength of motivating bad speech or an evil deed. More moments may follow and it grows into anger, and if there is the right object for anger it motivates bad speech, which also has different degrees. This can produce a result later on. As discussed before, different factors make kamma into completed action, kamma patha, and this can even produce rebirth-consciousness of a next life. We take dosa for self, or the sound we hear for a person or thing, but, the Abhidhamma teaches us that there are only citta, cetasika and rupa. We have not eradicated dosa (only the non-returner has) but this outlook can help to have, at times, more equanimity towards persons and events. Not always of course. You discussed clinging or desire being a condition for dosa. Our accumulated desire is a condition for wanting the pleasant worldly conditions, and if these do not happen we have aversion. The desire does not arise at the same time like the roots that condition the dosamulacitta. But still it conditions it by another type: by way of natural strong dependence-condition. Thus you see that it is helpful to study conditions. Otherwise our life is guesswork. Now lobha-mulacitta that conditions bad speech. Suppose someone enjoys joking, likes to join in when others joke. What is the citta like? At the moment of laughing and enjoying there is citta rooted in lobha and moha, ignorance. There are different intensities. There is not always the intention to harm or hurt. When one intends to hurt others the cetana is motivating akusala kamma through speech. Before one realizes it there is this intensity. That is why the Buddha in the Vinaya forbade the monks to tease. We can learn a great deal from the Vinaya. I like to remember that it is a small sacrifice only to swallow a joke. Then there is no risk. You wrote: You are thinking about ignorance of the D.O. In what ways does it condition kamma. So long as there is the latent tendency of ignorance that is not eradicated, it conditions kamma: akusala kamma, kusala kamma and imperturbable kamma. It conditions it even when it is not a root-condition. It is also natural strong dependence-condition. Nina. 32130 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 6:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) Dear Jon, Thank you very much. I find this post very helpful and clear. I shall prin tit out for Lodewijk. Nina. op 10-04-2004 09:45 schreef Jonothan Abbott op jonoabb@y...: > I continue now with more from Visuddhi-Magga VIII, 234, Here it explains that in order to understand what > is meant by 'contemplating impermanence' in the sutta passage "He > trains thus 'I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence'", one > needs to understand 4 terms, namely (a) the impermanent, (b) > impermanence, (c) the contemplation of impermanence and (d) one > contemplating impermanence. > > As to these terms, it says: > (a) Herein, the five aggregates are 'the impermanent', because their > essence is rise and fall and change.' > (b) 'Impermanence' is the rise and fall and change in those same > aggregates, or it is their non-existence after having been; the > meaning is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their > momentary dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. > (c) 'Contemplation of impermanence' is contemplation of materiality, > etc., as 'impermanent' in virtue of that impermanence. > (d) 'One contemplating impermanence' possesses that contemplation. > > What is the significance of these explanations? > > Firstly, the explanations at (a) and (c) seem to be saying that > contemplation of the impermanence of *any of the five aggregates* > (not just of the 'breath' rupas of the rupa aggregate only) is > contemplation of impermanence within the meaning of the tetrad. > > Secondly, the explanations at (c) and (d) seem to be saying that > whenever such contemplation occurs, the person in question is to be > regarded as 'one contemplating impermanence', with the emphasis on > the *occurrence* of that contemplation, rather than on its *doing*. > > The Visuddhi-Magga passage word commentary then concludes by saying: > < be understood of him: 'He trains thus: "I shall breathe in ... > shall breathe out contemplating impermanence"'.>> > > This draws together all the foregoing: when there occurs, in a person > who is practised in samatha with breath as object, contemplation of > the impermanence of the five aggregates, then that person is said to > be 'training himself' in the manner stated in the sutta. > > So while the tetrad is indeed all about insight, it is about insight > into the five aggregates in general, and not insight into 'breath' > per se, nor even necessarily into those particular rupas of the rupa > aggregate that are taken as breath. The significance of the breath > here lies in the occasion on which the insight occurs (i.e., person > developing samatha with breath as object), rather than in the actual > object of insight. 32131 From: robmoult Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 7:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > ------------------------------------------- > > How effective > > > would the medical community be without technical jargon? BTW, a minor > > correction; anger does not have tanha (lobha) as a root, the roots of > > anger are dosa and moha. > > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, as I understand it, 'dosa' MEANS "anger". So - anger is a root > of anger? Not very helpful, I'm afraid. > What is clear to me, however, is that anger is always the result of > (thwarted) desire/greed (tanha/lobha), and, thus, tanha is a central condition > for anger. What does 'root of' mean if not "central condition for"? Dosa can mean many things... Aversion, hatred, anger, guilt, fear. A citta and its cetasikas lasts for a moment. The root is like the foundation of the citta. It arises at the same time as the citta and falls away with the citta. It is like the root of a tree. I am not sure that lobha is always the central condition for the arising of dosa, but let's but that aside and asume that it was (BTW, the texts define "a grounds for annoyance" as the proximate cause of dosa). In this case, the citta with lobha must have occured before the citta with dosa for it to act as a condition for its arising. Lobha and dosa never arise in the same citta. They are mutually exclusive. Dosa is always accompanied by unpleasant feeling (vendana cetasika) while Lobha can be accompanied by neutral or pleasant feeling. The central conditions for the arising of a tree are seed, soil, rain, sun, etc. The roots are not the central condition for the arising of the tree. When a tree exists, the roots are the foundation. Hopefully this analogy clarifies the difference between root and "central condition". Metta, Rob M :-) 32132 From: Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 3:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Hi, Nina (and Jon, and Lodewijk) - In a message dated 4/11/04 9:43:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nilo@e... writes: > Dear Jon and Howard, > > Lodewijk wrote something by hand I type out. It is a question for Bgk. > Abhidhamma], Nina and I got into a discussion on Satipatthana. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Now I'm wondering: What did I say? What did I say?" ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- I said that> > after so many years of listening, I still did not quite understand what > exactly satipatthana means. Nina said:"It is the same as vipassana", "the > same as the eightfold Path", "the same as panna.", but this led me further > astray. Does it mean:"the six doors" or "Seeing now"? Maybe, yes and no. I > said:"That is just bits and pieces, but I still do not get a coherent, > logical answer to my question:"What is exactly is satipatthana?" The answer > cannot be:"You will know the answer as soon as you canbe aware of realities > as they are." Maybe yes, but that is not the way to convince people like > Howard [and me] !> end quote. > I can add: Lodewijk said that this whole matter upsets him. We were talking > about western ways of reasoning and eastern ways. I find myself very > confortable with the last way, but, Lodewijk said that does not help > westerners. He thinks there are many like him. He finds it very difficult > when A. Sujin answers with the example of seeing now or dhamma now. We were > talking about it that her and my way is more like thinking and explaining in > spirals, not a straight description. That is what he wants, a clear, > straight description. He says I always give fragments, lots of fragments, > but not a whole. When I say: know the object of satipatthana: paramattha > dhammas, or: the goal is understanding non-self, he still answers: "only > bits and pieces". > Jon, maybe you have an idea yourself or someone else in Bgk. It is material > for thought how to help others. You are so good at defining, you will get > this across. I still feel myself, that it must take years and years of > getting bits and pieces, and lots of patience before we understand. Thank > you very much, > Nina. > ========================= I *do* believe that vipassana is a matter of directly seeing what is actual, and seeing it "right here and right now"! I do *not* believe that one must be immersed in a jhana in order for wisdom "at the level of vipassana" to be operative, though Sariputta's example shows that insight from a jhanic base is a "way". But insight into the nature of dhammas can arise - no, *will* arise - whenever the exact assemblage of conditions for that is in place, and these conditions include a properly cultivated mind. What I do believe is that long and intensive conventional cultivation is required to mold the mind into an instrument suitable for effective investigation of dhammas, and this cultivation is multi-pronged and includes formal and informal methods of training that produce heightened mindfulness, calm, concentration, and clarity of attention and rather consistent non-grasping. I also strongly believe that mere waiting for results without establishing conditions that will lead to the results is an unfortunate error. 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) 32133 From: Larry Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 7:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Nina, Howard, and Rob, I think this is what you mean and I agree. All rooted consciousness is rooted in ignorance. To be rooted means to be drawn from the reservoir of one's accumulations. An arahant has accumulations also but they aren't a mass of ignorance. Somehow the change of lineage consciousness instantaneously purifies this entire reservoir and millennia of confusion and bewilderment suddenly makes sense. This happens in 4 stages and culminates in the complete purification of the arahant's accumulations. Perhaps we can gain a little understanding of an arahant's mahakariya cittas by studying the rootless nature of rupas. Rupas are not happy or sad or confused. They are just what they are. It is a fine distinction but I think we can discriminate between the rootless mind-door rupa of intimation and the consciousness rooted in ignorance that produces it. Larry 32134 From: Larry Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 7:55am Subject: Re: Vis. 73 and Tiika Hi Nina, What is the difference between delimitation and shape? Larry 32135 From: Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 4:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi, Rob - In a message dated 4/11/04 10:32:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, rob.moult@j... writes: > The central conditions for the arising of a tree are seed, soil, > rain, sun, etc. The roots are not the central condition for the > arising of the tree. When a tree exists, the roots are the > foundation. Hopefully this analogy clarifies the difference between > root and "central condition". > ========================== Okay, I believe I see what you are driving at. A root or mula is defined as follows (from Nyanatiloka): > 'roots', also called hetu (q.v.; s. paccaya, 1), are those conditions which > through their presence determine the actual moral quality of a volitional > state (cetaná), and the consciousness and mental factors associated therewith, > in other words, the quality of karma (q.v.). There are 6 such roots, 3 karmica > lly wholesome and 3 unwholesome roots, viz.,: greed, hate, delusion (lobha, > dosa, moha), and greedlessness, hatelessness, undeludedness (alobha, adosa, > amoha). =========================== So, a root for a volitional mindstate is not a central condition for the *arising* of that state, but something more like a central morality-determining *characteristic* of that state. So, for example, an intentional impulse dominated by generosity would have a root of alobha. To reiterate, I take it, then, that roots are conditions that are primary moral characteristics of volitional mindstates rather than primary generative conditions of such states. 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) 32136 From: robmoult Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 2:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kiriyacittas Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > So, a root for a volitional mindstate is not a central condition for > the *arising* of that state, but something more like a central > morality-determining *characteristic* of that state. So, for example, an intentional impulse > dominated by generosity would have a root of alobha. > To reiterate, I take it, then, that roots are conditions that are > primary moral characteristics of volitional mindstates rather than primary > generative conditions of such states. This is correct. One of the benefits of studying Abhidhamma is that it helps us to realize the more subtle aspects of our observed mind. For example, when it comes to roots, the Abhidhamma tells us: - Lobha root always arises together with moha root - Dosa root always arises together with moha root - Lobha and dosa are mutually exclusive - Restlessness and doubt are examples of moha root without lobha or dosa - Alobha and adosa always arise together - When there is panna, there is always alobha and adosa as well In other words, after studying the Abhidhamma, I can take your example, "an intentional impulse dominated by generosity would have a root of alobha." and add that adosa must also be present at the same moment. Metta, Rob M :-) 32137 From: Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 3:19pm Subject: VISM.XIV 74 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 74. Again, all matter is of three kinds according to the visible (sanidassana) triad, the kamma born triad, etc. (see Dhs., p.2). Herein, as regards the gross, a visible datum is 'visible with impact'; the rest are 'invisible with impact'; all the subtle kinds are 'invisible without impact'. So firstly it is of three kinds according to the visible triad. 32138 From: Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 3:49pm Subject: immaterial space Hi Nina, I have a doubt about the reality status of the four bases of immaterial jhana. These are: "boundless space", "boundless consciousness", "nothingness", and "neither perception nor non-perception". I believe these are classified as concepts because the objects of the lower levels of jhana are concepts and because they are not listed in the list of realities. However, it seems to me (1) a base is a reality, (2) the description of the base of neither perception nor non-perception sounds like a reality, and (3) the 'profitable consciousness' of the fine-material sphere is associated with jhana factors (realities) and the 'profitable consciousness' of the immaterial sphere is associated with the bases [this suggests to me that the bases are realities]. If this is the case then there are three kinds of space: the rupa (delimitation), the concept of the rupa (imagined space), and immaterial 'boundless' space. What is your view on this? Larry 32139 From: Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 2:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) jon: Thanks for going to the trouble of drawing out the differences between us, which you've done very well. I am clearer now on what you are saying. I think we're in agreement on one essential point, and that is that the expression 'contemplating impermanence' in the teaching "I shall breath in...shall breath out contemplating impermanence" is a reference to insight into the impermanence of any of the five aggregates (i.e., of any presently arisen dhamma). Hope I'm not putting words in your mouth here ;-)) jack: Jon, the usual explanation is it involves realization of the impermanence of the 5 aggregates, the 12 links of Dependent Origination and the 6 internal sense bases. jon:I'd like to respond on some of your individual comments also. Apologies for the length and technicality of what follows, but you've raised some fine points. Jack: Jon, Yes, that [i.e., the different sections ('tetrads' --groups of four) involve the breath in different ways] is what my next sentences below say.> Anapanasati is translated as mindfulness of breathing. All the 16 steps > involve learning anicca/dukkha/anatta through contemplation of > breathing. For > instance, the 13th step involves learning impermanence by observing the breath. Jon:Thanks for this clarification. To make sure that we're on the same page, may I just say that to my reading the term 'anapanasati/mindfulness of breathing' is used in the texts in two senses, namely, as samatha bhavana (i.e., concentration/jhana with breath as object) and as vipassana bhavana (i.e., insight into the true nature of a presently arising reality/dhamma, somehow associated with breath as object of consciousness). Is this how you see it too? Now the relevance of this, to my understanding, is that the precise moment of samatha bhavana/jhaana with breath as object cannot be a moment of insight into the true nature of a presently arising reality (for one thing, at that moment the object of consciousness is a mental image ('nimitta') of the breath). Sure. A minor point is that I think the Visud. says that a nimitta arising is not necessary for samatha bhavana/jhana. One may attain samatha bhavana/jhana without a nimitta. jon: And furthermore, nor can a moment of insight of the level of vipassana have breath as object, at least not in quite the same sense that breath is object of samatha bhavana/jhaana, since the dhammas/five aggregates do not include a dhamma of 'breath'. jack: I'm still not sure of your point here. It's evident that using the breath as object during samatha is different than during insight. When mindful of the breath, all 5 aggregates are involved. jon: What the Anapanasati Sutta does, as I see it, is to show how despite this lack of 'overlap' insight can be nonetheless be developed, following upon or arising interspersed with moments of samatha bhavana with breath as object, without sacrificing the samatha bhavana aspect. jack: I don't think it is saying that. The first 3 triads are strengthening the mind for the 4th triad which involves insight. It is a progression of teachings, each building on the ones before. Al the teaching use mindfulness of the breath. Jack: I'm not sure what impermanence in the general sense means. In the Anap. Sutta, we are taught to recognize impermanence in all phenomena (is this what you mean by the general sense?) through mindfulness of particular breaths. Jon:Here I'm going to get a bit technical but not, I hope, unintelligible ;-)) Because impermanence in the context of insight is impermanence as a *characteristic pertaining to* dhammas, it is something that can be known only by the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas, and this of course must be a presently arisen dhamma. This development is gradual and long-term, and it is only after the particular nature of individual dhammas has been known that their shared characteristics of anicca/dukkha/anatta also become apparent to panna. Jack: Do you see this as different than what I have been saying in the last quote of mine above? jon: Now as I think you can see from the above, impermanence as a characteristic of conditioned dhammas would not be the same thing as, for example, noticing the impermanence of thoughts, feelings, etc by directing one's attention to those thoughts, feelings etc. The latter is something that anyone could observe and acknowledge; it doesn't need any wisdom to see that thoughts, feelings etc are impermanent in the general sense of the word (and the same goes for breath). jack: I disagree here. Realizing the impermanence of the breath, emotions, etc., is not just realizing that they have a beginning and an end. It is realizing each breath, to use breath as an example, is different, i.e., our internal world, our external world and the interaction between them is ever changing each moment. Realization of impermanence also involves realization of not-self and suffering. So, realization of the impermanence of the breath is the same as realizing the impermanence of any conditioned dhamma. Jack:I don't know what you mean when you say emphasis on the occurance rather than on its doing. Jon: This needs a close reading of the text (which I've repasted below). The text explains that 'person contemplating impermanence' means that the person *is possessed of contemplation on the impermanence* of five aggregates. My point is that rather than pointing out something 'to be done', or a deliberate practice, the text is referring just to the occurrence of insight into impermanence. jack: I would say a close reading of the text would cause one to come to a different conclusion, that deliberate practice is called for. But, that is something I think we just accept as a difference in the way we interpret the texts. Jack: As we are mindful of the breath, all of what we think of as 'I' or a person (the 5 aggregates) can come into play. As we become aware of the body sensation of a breath in our nose, we can watch consciousness, sensation, perception and mental formations all arise. Though mindfulness of the breath we can see that this breath phenomena is impermanent, unsatisfactory and empty. We are thus lead to see that all phenomena is impermanent, unsatisfactory and empty. Jon: Yes, but as explained above the text is making a distinction between moments when (image of) breath is the object of consciousness (i.e., samatha bhavana) and other moments when any of the five aggregates is object of insight (i.e., vipassana bhavana). The two cannot co-occur at precisely the same moment. jack: I don't understand why you think this is a response to my previous paragraph. Why is their not occuring at the same moment, of which I agree, important here? Jack: I think we have a basic disagreement but I don't know what it is. Are you thinking the teaching of "I shall breath in...shall breath out contemplating impermanence" means that we should contemplate the general concept of impermanence as we breath? I think it means we should watch our breaths and try to discover that the breath and all that arise with it is impermanent. Jon:Well, perhaps one of the areas of disagreement is the point I've just mentioned, that the moments with breath as object will be different moments to those where the characteristic of impermanence of the five aggregates is apparent. I hope my explanation on this has been clear (I fear it hasn't). jack: As I said above, I don't see the relevance to our discussion. Furthermore (and this is just a corollary to what I've said above about the purpose or effect of the sutta), in my view the sutta does not go so far as to say that if the aim is to develop the insight that sees the impermanence of all dhammas, then one should first develop samatha bhavana with breath as object. This is perhaps another area of disagreement. jack: Yes, it seems to be a point of disagreement. Jon: (from previous post) Visuddhi-Magga VIII, 234 ... explains that in order to understand what is meant by 'contemplating impermanence' in the sutta, one needs to understand the 4 terms (a) the impermanent, (b) impermanence, (c) the contemplation of impermanence and (d) one contemplating impermanence. As to these terms, it says: (a) Herein, the five aggregates are 'the impermanent', because their essence is rise and fall and change.' (b) 'Impermanence' is the rise and fall and change in those same aggregates, or it is their non-existence after having been; the meaning is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. (c) 'Contemplation of impermanence' is contemplation of materiality, etc., as 'impermanent' in virtue of that impermanence. (d) 'One contemplating impermanence' possesses that contemplation. I agree with the above but don't see its relevance here. The internet is an imperfect means of communication. When I say above that I don't agree, don't see the relevance, etc., I am trying to understand your reasoning not attacking it. jack 32140 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 6:47pm Subject: Re: Recognizing the Dhamma - 7. Persistence (§ 7.1.) Hi all, It occurs to me that persistence is about right effort: "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort." -- SN XLV.8 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/samma-vayamo.html Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > 7. Persistence > > > § 7.1. > "'This Dhamma is for one whose persistence is aroused, not for one > who is lazy.' Thus was it said. With reference to what was it said? > There is the case where a monk keeps his persistence aroused for > abandoning unskillful mental qualities and taking on skillful mental > qualities. He is steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking his > duties with regard to skillful mental qualities. 'This Dhamma is for > one whose persistence is aroused, not for one who is lazy.' Thus was > it said. And with reference to this was it said. > > [AN VIII.30] > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/recognizing.html#persistence 32141 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 7:10pm Subject: Re: Recognizing the Dhamma - 7. Persistence (§ 7.2, § 7.3) Hi all, At the first glance it seems to me that the passage § 7.2. is not about persistence. It gives me a sense of urgency with "As if struck by a sword, as if his head were on fire," The passage mentions being mindful and abandoning of sensual passion and it reminds me of mindfulness as a factor for Awakening and it's relation to persistence: "[1] On whatever occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world, on that occasion his mindfulness is steady & without lapse. When his mindfulness is steady & without lapse, then mindfulness as a factor for Awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[2] Remaining mindful in this way, he examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment. When he remains mindful in this way, examining, analyzing, & coming to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[3] In one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, unflagging persistence is aroused. When unflagging persistence is aroused in one who examines, analyzes, & comes to a comprehension of that quality with discernment, then persistence as a factor for Awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. "[4] In one whose persistence is aroused, a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises. When a rapture not-of-the-flesh arises in one whose persistence is aroused, then rapture as a factor for Awakening becomes aroused. He develops it, and for him it goes to the culmination of its development. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn54-013.html And the relation between persistence and rapture is found in passage § 7.3: "Furthermore, the monk finds pleasure & delight in developing [skillful mental qualities], finds pleasure & delight in abandoning [unskillful mental qualities]. Comments are welcome. Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "yu_zhonghao" wrote: > § 7.2. > As if struck by a sword, > as if his head were on fire, > a monk should live the wandering life > -- mindful -- > for the abandoning of sensual passion. > > [Thag I.39] > > > § 7.3. > "Furthermore, the monk finds pleasure & delight in developing > [skillful mental qualities], finds pleasure & delight in abandoning > [unskillful mental qualities]. He does not, on account of his > pleasure & delight in developing & abandoning, exalt himself or > disparage others. In this he is diligent, deft, alert, & mindful. > This is said to be a monk standing firm in the ancient, original > traditions of the noble ones." > > [AN IV.28] > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/recognizing.html#persistence 32142 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 7:14pm Subject: Recognizing the Dhamma - 7. Persistence (§ 7.4) § 7.4. "And how is a monk devoted to wakefulness? There is the case where a monk during the day, sitting & pacing back & forth, cleanses his mind of any qualities that would hold the mind in check. During the first watch of the night [dusk to 10 p.m.], sitting & pacing back & forth, he cleanses his mind of any qualities that would hold the mind in check. During the second watch of the night [10 p.m. to 2 a.m.], reclining on his right side, he takes up the lion's posture, one foot placed on top of the other, mindful, alert, with his mind set on getting up [either as soon as he awakens or at a particular time]. During the last watch of the night [2 a.m. to dawn], sitting & pacing back & forth, he cleanses his mind of any qualities that would hold the mind in check. This is how a monk is devoted to wakefulness." [AN IV.37] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/recognizing.html#persistence 32143 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 7:16pm Subject: Recognizing the Dhamma - 7. Persistence (§ 7.5) § 7.5. The Buddha: To me -- resolute in exertion near the river Nerañjara, making a great effort, doing jhana to attain security from bondage -- Namuci[1] came, speaking words of compassion: "You are ashen, thin. Death is in your presence. Death has 1,000 parts of you. Only one part is your life. Live, good sir! Life is better. Alive, you can do acts of merit. Your living the holy life, performing the fire sacrifice, will heap up much merit. What use is exertion to you? Hard to follow -- the path of exertion -- hard to do, hard to sustain." Saying these verses, Mara stood in the Awakened One's presence. And to that Mara, speaking thus, the Blessed One said this: "Kinsman of the heedless, Evil One, come here for whatever purpose: I haven't, for merit, even the least bit of need. Those who have need of merit: those are the ones Mara's fit to address. In me are conviction austerity, persistence, discernment. Why, when I'm so resolute do you petition me to live? This wind could burn up even river currents. Why, when I'm resolute, shouldn't my blood dry away? As my blood dries up gall & phlegm dry up. As muscles waste away, the mind grows clearer; mindfulness, discernment, concentration stand more firm. Staying in this way, attaining the ultimate feeling,[2] the mind has no interest in sensual passions. See: a being's purity! Sensual passions are your first army. Your second is called Discontent. Your third is Hunger & Thirst. Your fourth is called Craving. Fifth is Sloth & Drowsiness. Sixth is called Terror. Your seventh is Uncertainty. Hypocrisy & Stubbornness, your eighth. Gains, Offerings, Fame, & Status wrongly gained, and whoever would praise self & disparage others. That, Namuci, is your army, the Dark One's commando force. A coward can't defeat it, but one having defeated it gains bliss. Do I carry muñja grass?[3] I spit on my life. Death in battle would be better for me than that I, defeated, survive. Sinking here, they don't appear, some priests & contemplatives. They don't know the path by which those with good practices go. Seeing the bannered force on all sides -- the troops, Mara along with his mount -- I go into battle. May they not budge me from my spot. That army of yours, that the world with its devas can't overcome, I will smash with discernment -- as an unfired pot with a stone. Making my resolve mastered, mindfulness well-established, I will go about, from kingdom to kingdom, training many disciples. They -- heedful, resolute, doing my bidding -- despite your wishes, will go where, having gone, there's no grief." Mara: "For seven years, I've dogged the Blessed One's steps, but haven't gained an opening in the One Self-awakened & glorious. A crow circled a stone the color of fat -- 'Maybe I've found something tender here. Maybe there's something delicious' -- but not getting anything delicious there, the crow went away. Like the crow attacking the rock, I weary myself with Gotama." As he was overcome with sorrow, his lute fell from under his arm. Then he, the despondent spirit, right there disappeared. [Sn III.2] Notes: 1. Mara. [Go back] 2. The highest equanimity that can be attained through jhana. [Go back] 3. Muñja grass was the ancient Indian equivalent of a white flag. A warrior expecting that he might have to surrender would take muñja grass into battle with him. If he did surrender, he would lie down with the muñja grass in his mouth. The Buddha, in asking this rhetorical question, is indicating that he is not the type of warrior who would carry muñja grass. If defeated, he would rather die than surrender. [Go back] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/recognizing.html#persistence 32144 From: Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 3:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 4/11/04 4:43:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, James (and Jon) - > ... > James, I agree with you about "mere belief". However, knowing > what to look for sometimes helps one's direct investigations (though, > of course, it can also skew them). I have long had a phenomenalist > view, but I have now also had it confirmed to an extent by "direct > looking". It has become experientially clear to me that I don't "hear > rain," I hear sound. I don't "see a tree," I see a (patterned) sight. > I don't "feel my body," I feel bodily sensation. But I do *think* of > hearing rain, seeing trees, and feeling my body. After a while, when > direct looking is practiced along with clear comprehension of what > one actually experiences, the theory does not remain as theory. > > With metta, > Howard > > Jon: > But 'direct looking' is not part of the teachings found in the suttas > (unless it is your own term for something else mentioned there). So > whatever a person experienced or realized as a result of such a > practice would not be the understanding of which the Buddha spoke, > regardless of how great the similarities may appear to the person. > > Jon ========================== I honestly don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. What is vipassana/satipatthana, then, if not "direct looking" - that is, seeing what actually arises, and not substituted for with concepts? I'm talking about ongoing mindfulness and clear comprehnsion of what actually arises and ceases at any time. Are you saying this is not Dhamma?!! With metta and not just a little perplexity, 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) 32145 From: m. nease Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sankhaarupaadaana, for Nina and Suan Hi Suan, Thanks for the response. ----- Original Message ----- From: "abhidhammika" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 7:02 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: Sankhaarupaadaana, for Nina and Suan Dear Mike, Nina, Chris, Sarah and all Mike, when you wrote "sankhaarupaadaana", did you mean "sankhaarupekkhaa"? No--I was interested in your translation (activation aggregate) which you've explained below--but most particularly in the context of the upaadaanakhandhas. Sankhaarakhanda could be translated as the activation aggregate because it refers to activation (cetanaa cetasika). However, even though cetanaa cetasika is used as the head term (siisena), the activation aggregate covers all the remaining mental associates (cetasikas) as well - that is to say, those mental associates excepting feeling (vedanaa) which is covered by the feeling aggregate, and memory (saññaa) which is covered by the memory aggregate. Understood-- On the other hand, the term "sankhaara" in the expression "sankhaarupekkhaa" covers all the five psychosomatic aggregates, and is the same term that occurs in the famous statements of the Buddha on three characteristics "Sabbe sankhaaraa aniccaa, sabbe sankhaaraa dukkhaa, sabbe sankhaaraa suññaa, sabbe dhammaa anattaa." Interesting--I wasn't familiar with 'sankhaarupekkhaa', though of course I'm familiar with this quotation. "All phenomena are impermanent." "All phenomena are misery." "All phenomena are empty (of self)." This I pretty much take for granted! Thanks Suan, mike 32146 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Hi Howard, Thanks for writing. I'll tell Lodewijk. I tell you later what you said and what we were talking about you. Nina. op 11-04-2004 16:50 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Howard: > Now I'm wondering: What did I say? What did I say?" ;-)) > ----------------------------------------------- > ========================= > I *do* believe that vipassana is a matter of directly seeing what is > actual, and seeing it "right here and right now"! I do *not* believe that one > must be immersed in a jhana in order for wisdom "at the level of vipassana" to > be operative, though Sariputta's example shows that insight from a jhanic base > is a "way". 32147 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:22pm Subject: Re: Illusion of Control Hi Rob M, You were saying: -------------------------- > For now, I only have time to reply to this portion; expect another message in a few days (this reply should be controversial enough to last until then). > -------------- :-) Do we agree that there is only nama and rupa? Given that fact, we need only to know it with deeper and deeper certainty. --------------- RM: > Saying that the Dhamma is phenomenological is taking the Dhamma out of context and that is very dangerous. ------------------- You are saying, no doubt, that the Abhidhamma (the teaching of ultimately real phenomena) is not the whole Dhamma. I'm not so sure: I think the suttas give the same teaching but in a number of different ways. ------------------ RM: > The Abhidhamma has a very different focus than the Suttas. I am not aware of any areas of disagreement between the two, but the treatment is very different. Much of the Abhidhamma focuses on "ultimate realities". I do not believe that the Pali word for ultimate reality, "Paramattha Dhamma" can be found in the Suttas. ----------------- That argument is a non-starter. The suttas deal (directly and indirectly) in realities and the ancient commentators gave those realities the overall name, paramattha dhammas. If we don't like that name, we can use another one. ----------------- RM: > The Abhidhamma provides the theory that underpins the Dhamma, but if you want guidance on how to apply the Dhamma, I strongly suggest looking into the Suttas rather than the Abhidhamma. The Suttas do not focus on ultimate realities. > ---------------- I think they do. Take the Satipatthana-sutta where it gives the simile of the butcher: Having slaughtered and butchered a cow he looks at the remains thinking, "this is heart, this is liver, this is kidney" without any idea "this is a cow." You and I, in our way, do the same thing when we study Abhidhamma. When we are learning about this citta, that cetasika, that rupa, we are not thinking, "this is me." It's an intellectual practice but it's a good start. ---------------- RM: > I am concerned that focusing on ultimate realities to guide your practice may be applying the Abhidhamma out of context. > --------------- My main problem, I think, is I don't fully comprehend that the namas and rupas I am learning about are, in fact, here right now. Looking forward to your next instalment :-) Kind regards, Ken H 32148 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Apr 11, 2004 10:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Root condition (was, kiriyacittas) Howard I applaud this reply of yours, not because you are agreeing with the Abhidhamma (I don't think you have given your verdict on the point yet anyway!) but because you are prepared to consider the explanation given on its merits rather than in terms of the label assigned to it (in this case, 'root condition'), and I know this is something you have on occasion found difficult to do. --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Rob - Howard: Okay, I believe I see what you are driving at. A root or mula is defined as follows (from Nyanatiloka): 'roots', also called hetu (q.v.; s. paccaya, 1), are those conditions which through their presence determine the actual moral quality of a volitional state (cetaná), and the consciousness and mental factors associated therewith, in other words, the quality of karma Jon: Of course, choice of label has significance, but we should not let that aspect intrude on our assessment of the underlying matter. To do so is to make our appreciation of the teachings slave to current language usage and conventions and cultural conventions. So whether or not we regard 'root' as the best or even an appropriate choice of label for what is being discussed here is of relatively little significance; what matters is the nature of the condition being described. Howard: So, a root for a volitional mindstate is not a central condition for the *arising* of that state, but something more like a central morality-determining *characteristic* of that state. So, for example, an intentional impulse dominated by generosity would have a root of alobha. To reiterate, I take it, then, that roots are conditions that are primary moral characteristics of volitional mindstates rather than primary generative conditions of such states. Jon: Similar considerations apply as regards the use of 'condition' to describe something co-arising with what is being conditioned. To our (21st century, western) way of thinking, a co-arising aspect of something is a characteristic of it rather than a condition for it which, as you say, contains a 'generative' implication. This, however, is yet another 'labeling' difference to be put to one side while we review the underlying explanation. In the teachings, conditions describe the relationship between 2 dhammas (that's perhaps an over-generalization, but will do for present purposes), according to the pattern 'Dhamma A (the conditioned dhamma) is related to Dhamma B (the conditioning dhamma) by way of X condition', or, more colloquially, 'B is X condition for A'. Now according to this approach, the conditioning dhamma can precede, co-exist with or even succeed the conditioned dhamma, so obviously 'condition' is being used differently here to what you or I may have experienced before coming across it in the teachings. But, so what? No-one has a monopoly on assigning labels/defining terms. As long as it is done for a reason and the label is used consistently, we should be able to follow without difficulty, and without feeling the need to judge the underlying explanation by reference to the chosen label (although as a legislative drafter with the power to declare that black means white, I'm well aware that there is definitely an appropriate and an inappropriate way to choose and use labels ;-)). Anyway, to get back to my reason for writing, glad to see you not finding difficulty with the choice of label here. Now if only we could persuade you to adopt the same approach in considering other parts of the Abhidhamma (for example, those parts that carry the labels paramattha dhammas, nutriment/nutritive essence, space; I think there may be a few others too) ;-)) Jon 32149 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 0:49am Subject: Re: Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) Friends Jon, Jack and All, I have been following this discussion about mindfulness of breathing (Anapanasati Sutta) and I have been finding it very amusing. ;-)) It is easier for me to find discussions amusing if I am not participating in them. ;-)) Here we have Jon going to great lengths to explain why the sutta isn't really talking about breath at all, since that is a concept and not a dhamma, and on the other side we have Jack who is patiently answering observations that don't seem to make any sense to him (much more patiently than I probably would ;- ). This reminds me of the following story found in the book `Thoughts Without a Thinker': "In the early days of my interest in Buddhism and psychology,I was given a particularly vivid demonstation of how difficult it was going to be to forge an integration between the two. Some friends of mine had arranged for an encounter between two prominent visiting Buddhist teachers at the house of a Harvard University psychology professor. These were teachers from two distinctly different Buddhist traditions who had never met and whose traditions had in fact had very little contact over the past thousand years. Before the worlds of Buddhism and Western psychology could come together, the various strands of Buddhism would have to encounter one another. We were to witness the first such dialogue. The teachers, seventy-year-old Kalu Rinpoche of Tibet, a veteran of years of solitary retreat, and the Zen master Seung Sahn, the first Korean Zen master to teach in the United States, were to test each other's understanding of the Buddha's teachings for the benefit of the onlooking Western students. This was to be a high form of what was being called _dharma_ combat (the clashing of great minds sharpened by years of study and meditation), and we were waiting with all the anticipation that such a historic encounter deserved. The two monks entered with swirling robes -- maroon and yellow for the Tibetan, austere grey and black for the Korean -- and were followed by retinues of younger monks and translators with shaven heads. They settled onto cushions in the familiar cross-legged positions, and the host made it clear that the younger Zen master was to begin. The Tibetan lama sat very still, fingering a wooden rosary (_mala_) with one hand while murmuring, _"Om mani padme hum"_ continuously under his breath. The Zen master, who was already gaining renown for his method of hurling questions at his students until they were forced to admit their ignorance and then bellowing, "Keep that don't know mind!" at them, reached deep inside his robes and drew out an orange. "What is this?" he demanded of the lama. "What is this?" This was a typical opening question, and we could feel him ready to pounce on whatever response he was given. The Tibetan sat quietly fingering his mala and made no move to respond. "What is this?" the Zen master insisted, holding the orange up to the Tibetan's nose. Kalu Rinpoche bent very slowly to the Tibetan monk near to him who was serving as the translator, and they whispered back and forth for several minutes. Finally the translator addressed the room: "Rinpoche says, 'What is the matter with him? Don't they have oranges where he comes from?" The dialog progressed no further." Hehehe…I find this story so hilarious! ;-)) Metta, James 32150 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 1:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Howard (and Nina and Lodewijk) --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Nina (and Jon, and Lodewijk) - ... Howard: I *do* believe that vipassana is a matter of directly seeing what is actual, and seeing it "right here and right now"! I do *not* believe that one must be immersed in a jhana in order for wisdom "at the level of vipassana" to be operative, though Sariputta's example shows that insight from a jhanic base is a "way". Jon: I have not forgotten your earlier post with its reference to the Anupada Sutta (MN 111), but have not had time to reply in detail on that part of the post. This is a quick reply before we leave for Bangkok (after what I expect to be a very busy day at work tomorrow). In that post you said: <> You don't say which passage you rely on for your last sentence, but it runs counter to what I've read elsewhere. The BB translation of the sutta has a footnote from the commentary which reads: "The Elder Sariputta cultivated serenity and insight in paired conjunction and realised the fruit of non-returning. Then he entered the attainment of cessation, and after emerging from it he attained arahantship." From this I'd be inclined to think that it's a case of jhana and insight arising alternately, as described elsewhere in relation to serenity and insight in paired conjunction, where the citta accompanied by insight takes the (just previously occurring) jhana citta as its object. Happy to discuss further, but would appreciate some more detailed reference from you for the particular passage(s) from the sutta that you have in mind. Howard: But insight into the nature of dhammas can arise - no, *will* arise - whenever the exact assemblage of conditions for that is in place, and these conditions include a properly cultivated mind. Jon: Yes, a properly cultivated mind. Indeed, apart from that and a sense of urgency, are any other conditions necessary? Howard: What I do believe is that long and intensive conventional cultivation is required to mold the mind into an instrument suitable for effective investigation of dhammas, and this cultivation is multi-pronged and includes formal and informal methods of training that produce heightened mindfulness, calm, concentration, and clarity of attention and rather consistent non-grasping. I also strongly believe that mere waiting for results without establishing conditions that will lead to the results is an unfortunate error. Jon: I think I detect a veiled reference to myself and others in your last sentence, Howard ;-)). Perhaps the NAG label should be changed to WAG (Waiting for Action Group). Some damn us for tripping off to Bangkok and India, others think we are just waiting for results. It's a no-win situation around here!! Jon 32151 From: Ken O Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 2:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Illusion of Control Hi RobM RM: > The Abhidhamma provides the theory that underpins the Dhamma, but if you want guidance on how to apply the Dhamma, I strongly suggest looking into the Suttas rather than the Abhidhamma. The Suttas do not focus on ultimate realities. > k: If you have the book Dispeller of Delusion, please read the section on mindfullness, I dont think you give a fair judgement that Abdhidhamma dont apply the dhamma. I think in certain ways, Abdhidhamma teaches the detail application of the damma. They both work hand in hand, they complement each other and not exlusive. IMHO Abdhidamma is like an extension of the sutta pitika, making the difficult terms in sutta easy to understand. Just like the word we have discuss sampajaano (I hope got the spelling right)(translated as awareness), only in the Abhidhamma the term is explain fully. Just like the word dukkha is explain in eight ways and aggregates in 11 ways. Without Abhidhamma, it is a very difficult to teach the sutta and I have seen practitioners have fallen into the trap of wrong views. Recently I seen someone who said that Buddha preaches an inherent wisdom which is like the Buddha nature of the Mahayana. The person got it all wrong because, he does not read the Abhidhamma, the commentary and ask questions or investigate about the meaning. It is dangerous to read sutta without Abhidhamma because even the word sankhara is used differently in different context, confusion arise and wrong views developed. That is to me very sad and sadder to have it preach to others. So one cannot say that it is the sutta that show the dhamma, it is both the sutta and the Abdhidamm that show the dhamma. One does not take precedence of the other because they are like two legs that help us walk. Ken O P.s. When could we have a cup of coffee again, this time my turn to pay, maybe together with Jaran ;-). 32152 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:38am Subject: Re: dialogue on satipatthana Friend Jon and All, Jon: Some damn us for tripping off to Bangkok and India, others think we are just waiting for results. It's a no-win situation around here!! James: I have never said anything negative about your trips to Bangkok (heck, I may want to join you all there one day! ;-), but with this statement you are implying that trips to Bangkok and India are somehow following the Buddha's path. I don't believe that this is true. One doesn't need to go anywhere to follow the Buddha's path. Not only that, pleasure vacations are definitely not a way to free one's self from the five cords of sensual pleasure. If I ever joined you in Bangkok I would be completely honest with myself and others that the trip was only marginally related to the dhamma. Again, this all goes back to what the Buddha taught. We all need to take a personal inventory of ourselves to determine where the three poisons influence our thoughts/feelings, actions, and words. Of course, we all have these three poisons in us (sensual desire, ill will, and delusion) but I believe we each have different concentrations of each. We should focus first on the worst areas and then after focus on the less worse areas (It may be hard to tackle them all at once unless you become a monk). And we have to be brutally honest with ourselves about this evaluation. For example, my greatest weakness is sensual desire. I try to seek pleasure, and avoid pain, in many different ways (sometimes in ways that make me very ashamed). This is something I continue to work on. I am not so bad in the areas of ill will and delusion. I have a good heart (I think so and many people tell me so) and I am pretty grounded in reality (I think so and many people tell me so). My advice is that you determine where you are the weakest and go from there. Create a plan of self-improvement: don't just meditate or study the dhamma and have no idea why you are doing it. Don't just expect results like pennies from heaven ;-)). Be proactive in your Buddhist practice. If you do this I don't think anyone could call you a member of the NAG anymore ;-). Metta, James 32153 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:44am Subject: Re:_[dsg]_Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.5.) Hi Victor, This is just a note to see that I'll be very glad to summarize the posts, answer your qus, but you've caught me at a busy time - I'll try to get back on some other posts and these tomorrow, but I'll depend on work and so on. I have some students for assessments and so on. Meanwhile, appreciate your feedback and posts on 'persistence'. I hope others respond too. Apologies for any delays. Metta, Sarah ======= --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for this message. It would be helpful if you don't mind > summarizing your points. 32154 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti, Q. Bgk Dear Jon and Howard, First, Jon, about concepts. I asked A. Sujin: when we reflect in the right way on paramattha dhammas, the object is still a concept so long as panna does not directly realize the dhamma that appears. We are still thinking *about* realities. Answer: yes. This is a good subject to discuss. Thus we have to make this distinction: when does a concept represents conventional truth and when ultimate truth, she also stressed that point. We are thinking anyway. Should't we know what the object of thinking is? Now Howard's post below. op 12-04-2004 04:26 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: Jon: But 'direct looking' is not part of the teachings found in the suttas >> (unless it is your own term for something else mentioned there). So >> whatever a person experienced or realized as a result of such a >> practice would not be the understanding of which the Buddha spoke, >> regardless of how great the similarities may appear to the person. > ========================== H: What is vipassana/satipatthana, then, if not "direct looking" - that is, seeing what > actually arises, and not substituted for with concepts? I'm talking about > ongoing mindfulness and clear comprehnsion of what actually arises and ceases > at any time. Are you saying this is not Dhamma?!! N: I think Howard knows that observing is not direct *seeing*. Here is the word direct looking, but this stands for direct seeing or understanding. That is, without thinking. Vipassana means: seeing clearly. The word anupassana is also used: anu: following (the object). Passati: seeing, or dassana. : understanding and mindfulness are faculties, indriyas, and when they have been developed they become powers, balas. (See Ven. Nyanaponika who explains this very well!) Then they can arise in any situation, at any time. But, beginning is beginning. When it is a power, I do not think it can be directed to be a non-stop mindfulness. Here the Abhidhamma can help: the processes of cittas, sense-door and mind-door processes. Bhavangacittas in between. And then, understanding is the most important, it is accompanied by sati. Now Howard's post to Lodewijk. He appreciated it, though it is above his head, he said. I lift out a few points worthy of discussion in Bgk, because Jon does not have much time now. H: < I *do* believe that vipassana is a matter of directly seeing what is actual, and seeing it "right here and right now"! I do *not* believe that one must be immersed in a jhana (snip) But insight into the nature of dhammas can arise - no, *will* arise - whenever the exact assemblage of conditions for that is in place, and these conditions include a properly cultivated mind. What I do believe is that long and intensive conventional cultivation is required to mold the mind into an instrument suitable for effective investigation of dhammas, and this cultivation is multi-pronged and includes formal and informal methods of training that produce heightened mindfulness, calm, concentration, and clarity of attention and rather consistent non-grasping. I also strongly believe that mere waiting for results without establishing conditions that will lead to the results is an unfortunate error. > N: this point: seems the essence for mental development. That stubborn root lobha, it is not yet uprooted. When we do certain things, like listening, according to inclination and circumstances, such moments just arise because of conditions, but, lobha can come in, one wants more mindfulness. One hopes for something. Very human. Difficult to see. But this is bhavana, mental development: with understanding, and also alobha, detachment. The goal is detachment and it has to be with detachment. N: very good point. Lodewijk agrees very much here. The conditions, often repeated also by Jon: association with the right friend, listening, considering and practice in accordance with the Dhamma. Many of my Thai friends are in the position to listen early morning to the many radio programs, they rush to work, but, because of listening they remember the Dhamma. In the weekened there is time for personal discussion at the Foundation. It depends again on conditions: inclination and circumstances of life, and these are also conditioned. Good to discuss. What if there is no time for any listening, only hurry to work? Reading a sutta now and then, following a discussion on dsg? Is that enough? But circumstances cannot be forced. And all the time: we have to be on the look out for lobha. To conclude with breath, Sarah asked me to rephrase. I think there is breath as meditation subject as described in the Vis. (it appears at nosetip or upperlip) and there is breath in a wider, conventional sense. My Q was: is breathing through the mouth also included in the Vis? And what is blowing , and what is air? Air is not breath. But what is it, a conventional notion? These are Q. people ask. Some observations. Because of the dialogue between Larry and Howard I realize more how much I cling to breath. It is my life, my breath. This may be the reason that it is the first subject under mindfulness of the Body. Recently heard: all the dhammas such as parts of the body, hair, nails, etc. or breath we take for self, all the other subjects in the Satipatthana sutta are explained here as a means to be mindful of dhammas, realities, that are appearing. Breath is only the rupa of hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure. Nina. 32155 From: Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 3:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Hi, Jon (and Nina and Lodewijk) - In a message dated 4/12/04 4:25:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Howard (and Nina and Lodewijk) > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, Nina (and Jon, and Lodewijk) - > ... > Howard: > I *do* believe that vipassana is a matter of directly seeing > what is actual, and seeing it "right here and right now"! I do *not* > believe that one must be immersed in a jhana in order for wisdom "at > the level of vipassana" to be operative, though Sariputta's example > shows that insight from a jhanic base is a "way". > > Jon: > I have not forgotten your earlier post with its reference to the > Anupada Sutta (MN 111), but have not had time to reply in detail on > that part of the post. This is a quick reply before we leave for > Bangkok (after what I expect to be a very busy day at work tomorrow). > In that post you said: > > < detailing the approach to and attaining of final enlightenment by > Sariputta, shows how the jhanas themselves, and the fact of their > being subject to the tilakkhana, can be a basis for liberating > vipassana. This sutta shows as well that all the cetasikas required > for analysis of dhammas are present when in absorption - at least in > the sort of absorption that Sariputta attained.>> > > You don't say which passage you rely on for your last sentence, but > it runs counter to what I've read elsewhere. The BB translation of > the sutta has a footnote from the commentary which reads: > "The Elder Sariputta cultivated serenity and insight in paired > conjunction and realised the fruit of non-returning. Then he entered > the attainment of cessation, and after emerging from it he attained > arahantship." > > From this I'd be inclined to think that it's a case of jhana and > insight arising alternately, as described elsewhere in relation to > serenity and insight in paired conjunction, where the citta > accompanied by insight takes the (just previously occurring) jhana > citta as its object. > ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Here's just one example, Jon. There is the same for all the higher jhanas through the sphere of nothingness: *********************** Again, bhikkhus, Saariputta, dispelling pleasantness and unpleasantness, earlier having overcome pleasure and displeasure purifying mindfulness with equanimity abides in the fourth jhaana These things of the fourth jhaana such as equanimity, neither unpleasant nor pleasant feelings, observed feelings not enjoyed, purified mindfulness, one pointedness of mind, contact, feelings, perceptions, intentions, interest, resolution, effort, equanimity and attention, follow one after the other to him. They rise, persist and fade with his knowledge. He knows, these things come to be and cause feelings to rise. When these things follow one after the other, he abides with a mind that does not settle, is not bound, is released and unyokedand is unrestricted. knows there is an escape beyond this. With much practise they come to him. ************************ I particularly point out "contact, feelings, perceptions, intentions, interest, resolution, effort" as cetasikas conducive to analysis of dhammas. When, in the context of equanimity, concentration, and purified mindfulness there are also present contact, recognition, volition, interes t, and resolve, then cetasikas adequate to vipassana are present. --------------------------------------------------- > > Happy to discuss further, but would appreciate some more detailed > reference from you for the particular passage(s) from the sutta that > you have in mind. > > Howard: > But insight into the nature of dhammas can arise - no, *will* arise - > whenever the exact assemblage of conditions for that is in place, and > these conditions include a properly cultivated mind. > > Jon: > Yes, a properly cultivated mind. Indeed, apart from that and a sense > of urgency, are any other conditions necessary? > > Howard: > What I do believe is that long and intensive conventional > cultivation is required to mold the mind into an instrument suitable > for effective investigation of dhammas, and this cultivation is > multi-pronged and includes formal and informal methods of training > that produce heightened mindfulness, calm, concentration, and clarity > of attention and rather consistent non-grasping. I also strongly > believe that mere waiting for results without establishing conditions > that will lead to the results is an unfortunate error. > > Jon: > I think I detect a veiled reference to myself and others in your last > sentence, Howard ;-)). Perhaps the NAG label should be changed to > WAG (Waiting for Action Group). > > Some damn us for tripping off to Bangkok and India, others think we > are just waiting for results. It's a no-win situation around here!! > > 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) 32156 From: Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Hi again, Jon - Just one more tid bit about the Anupada Sutta. In his book Abhidhamma Studies, Ven Nyanaponika Thera sites that discourse "as a sutta source for Abhidhamma terminology," and he does so after a strong defense of its authenticity against an attack by Ms. Rhys Davids to the effect that this sutta is a clear after-the-fact compilation and not the Buddha word. Ms. Rhys Davids, according to the Venerable, apparently also went off the deep end in what he calls her "hypercriticism" of Abhidhamma, itself. It seems that she thought not only that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is not likely the literal word of the Buddha, for which many think a good argument can be made, but that it is not even "the message of the Founder" and was concocted by later monks. The inference I draw from Nyanaponika is that she thought that the Abhidhamma was largely cut from whole cloth. 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) 32157 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 2:25pm Subject: Re: dialogue on satipatthana Friend Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, Jon - > > Just one more tid bit about the Anupada Sutta. In his book Abhidhamma > Studies, Ven Nyanaponika Thera sites that discourse "as a sutta source for > Abhidhamma terminology," and he does so after a strong defense of its > authenticity against an attack by Ms. Rhys Davids to the effect that this sutta is a > clear after-the-fact compilation and not the Buddha word. > Ms. Rhys Davids, according to the Venerable, apparently also went off > the deep end in what he calls her "hypercriticism" of Abhidhamma, itself. It > seems that she thought not only that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is not likely the > literal word of the Buddha, for which many think a good argument can be made, > but that it is not even "the message of the Founder" and was concocted by later > monks. The inference I draw from Nyanaponika is that she thought that the > Abhidhamma was largely cut from whole cloth. > > With metta, > Howard I think I agree with Ms. Rhys Davis. That sutta doesn't seem to make a bit of sense to me. I believe I have expressed my incredulity about that sutta before…remember? I was not aware of this scholarship by Ms. Rhys Davis (I don't own that book you reference). The Anupada Sutta claims that Sariputta was able to combine jhana and vipassana in such a way that the Buddha doesn't describe in other suttas. It is just plain weird! ;-)) I still do not believe it is possible or that the Buddha gave that sutta. Not only that, the sutta states: 19. "Again, bhikkhus, by completely surmounting the base of neither- perception-nor-non-perception, Sariputta entered upon and abided in the cessation of perception and feeling. And his taints were destroyed by his seeing with wisdom. (1052) 20. "He emerged mindful from that attainment. Having done so, he recalled the states that had passed, ceased, and changed, thus: `So indeed, these states, not having been, come into being; having been, they vanish.' (1053) Regarding those states, he abided unattracted, unrepelled, independent, detached, free, dissociated, with a mind rid of barriers. He understood: `There is no escape beyond,' and with the cultivation of that [attainment], he confirmed that there is not (1054) Note 1052: MA offers this explanation of the passage, transmitted by "the elders of India": "The Elder Sariputta cultivated serenity and insight in paired conjunction and realized the fruit of non- returning. Then he entered the attainment of cessation, and after emerging from it he attained arahantship." Note 1053: Since there are no mental factors in the attainment of cessation, MA says that "these states" here must refer either to the states of material form that were occurring while he attained cessation, or to the mental factors of the preceding fourth immaterial attainment. Note 1054: Note the realization that there is "no escape beyond" the attainment of arahatship. Now, my reading of this is that Sariputta attained arahantship during jhana meditation, like the Buddha did. Does this match the facts? NO!! Sariputta attained arahantship while fanning the Buddha and listening to a discourse on feelings! He was not in jhana meditation when he destroyed the taints. From SN 74 "To Dighanakha": 14. Now on that occasion the venerable Sariputta was standing behind the Blessed One, fanning him. Then he thought: "The Blessed One, indeed, speaks to us of the abandoning of these things through direct knowledge; the Sublime One, indeed, speaks to us of the relinquishing of these things through direct knowledge." As the venerable Sariputta considered this, through not clinging his mind was liberated from the taints. (738) Note 738: MA: Having reflected on the discourse spoken to his nephew, Ven. Sariputta developed insight and attained arahantship. Dighanakha attained the fruit of stream-entry. James: Now, obviously one of these two suttas is incorrect. It is not possible for Sariputta to have destroyed the taints and become an arahant on two different occasions and in two different ways. I believe the "To Dighanakha" sutta is the correct one because it is recorded in the Theragatha how Sariputta attained arahantship: "Two stanzas in the Theragatha (995, 996) relate, in words ascribed to the Venerable Sariputta himself, the way in which he attained Arahatship. There he tells us: "It was to another that the Blessed One was teaching the Dhamma; to the Dhamma-preaching I listened intently for my own good. And not in vain, for freed from all defilements, I gained release."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel090.html James: I believe that if the Anupada Sutta is mistaken in this very important and telling fact, the entire thing should not be trusted. (Sorry…I know you like this sutta :-( Metta, James 32158 From: Jeffrey Brooks Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:25am Subject: One should pursue pleasure (jhana) within oneself. One should pursue pleasure (jhana) within oneself. Often it is heard that one should avoid the ecstasies of the absorption states, because one might become "addicted" or "side tracked." And those who do not revere noble ones even say they are "bliss bunnies" for seeking the ecstasies. I do not seem to have become "addicted" to bliss and ecstasy. Every day I am just more happy, more content and fulfilled than I can ever recall being. If that is an addiction to being a "bliss bunny," I'll take it over an anxiety disorder, depression or dependence on stimulants and depressants. The historic Buddha said, bliss and ecstasy "should be pursued ... it should be developed ... should be cultivated, and ... should not be feared." Aranavibhanga Sutta, MN 139 3. "One should not pursue sensual pleasure...and one should not pursue self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and unbeneficial. The Middle Way discovered by the Tathagata avoids both extremes; giving vision, giving knowledge, it leads to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana... 9. ..."One should know how to define pleasure, and knowing that, one should pursue pleasure within oneself"..."Here bhikkhus, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unwholesome states, a bhikkhu enter upon and resides in the first (absorption) jhana"... (through 4th jhana). "This is called the bliss of renunciation, the bliss of seclusion, the bliss of peace, the bliss of enlightenment. I say of this kind of pleasure that it should be pursued, that it should be developed, that it should be cultivated, and that it should not be feared." "So it was in reference to this that I said, 'One should know how to define pleasure, and knowing that, one should pursue pleasure within oneself." 13. Here, bhikkhus, the bliss of renunciation, the bliss of seclusion, the bliss of peace, the bliss of enlightenment, is a state without suffering (dukkha)... and it is the right way. Therefore this is a state without conflict." (Majjhima Nikaya trans. Bhikkhus Nanamoli & Bodhi, Wisdom, 1995) Jhanasamyutta, SN 34 "Therein, bhikkhus, the meditator who is skilled both in meditation regarding absorption (jhana) and in attainment regarding absorption (jhana) is the chief, the best the foremost, the highest, the most excellent of these four kinds of meditators." (Samyutta Nikaya tans. Bhikkhu Bodhi, Wisdom, 2000) Jhanasamyutta, SN 9.53 "Bhikkhus, just as the River Ganges slants, slopes and inclines toward the East, so too a bhikkhu who develops and cultivates the four absorptions (jhanas) slants, slopes, and inclines toward nibbana." (Samyutta Nikaya tans. Bhikkhu Bodhi, Wisdom, 2000) In conclusion it appears that the historic Buddha taught an 8 fold practice path, that included right or noble mindfulness (samma-sati). Based upon the Satipatthana Sutta, MN 10, we can conclude he called the cultivation of mindfulness (sati) "satipatthana" (DN 22), not "vipassana." And, the conclusion, or successful execution, of satipatthana was specifically for giving rise to right or correct meditation (samma-samadhi) (DN 22.21); which he defined in terms of the four material, or rupa jhanas, (DN 22.21); which he called "Di.t.thadhammasukhavihaaraa;" which is often translated as a "pleasant abiding in the here and now" (MN 8); which he considered to be supramundane (Lokuttara) (NM 31.10-18). Kindest regards, Jeff Brooks 32159 From: Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 0:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Hi, James - In a message dated 4/12/04 5:26:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > Now, my reading of this [The Anupada Sutta] is that Sariputta attained > arahantship > during jhana meditation, like the Buddha did. Does this match the > facts? NO!! Sariputta attained arahantship while fanning the > Buddha and listening to a discourse on feelings! He was not in > jhana meditation when he destroyed the taints. From SN 74 "To > Dighanakha": > > 14. Now on that occasion the venerable Sariputta was standing behind > the Blessed One, fanning him. Then he thought: "The Blessed One, > indeed, speaks to us of the abandoning of these things through > direct knowledge; the Sublime One, indeed, speaks to us of the > relinquishing of these things through direct knowledge." As the > venerable Sariputta considered this, through not clinging his mind > was liberated from the taints. (738) > > Note 738: MA: Having reflected on the discourse spoken to his > nephew, Ven. Sariputta developed insight and attained arahantship. > Dighanakha attained the fruit of stream-entry. > > James: Now, obviously one of these two suttas is incorrect. It is > not possible for Sariputta to have destroyed the taints and become > an arahant on two different occasions and in two different ways. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Very interesting. It would certainly seem these two are mutually contradictory! -------------------------------------------- I > > believe the "To Dighanakha" sutta is the correct one because it is > recorded in the Theragatha how Sariputta attained arahantship: > "Two stanzas in the Theragatha (995, 996) relate, in words ascribed > to the Venerable Sariputta himself, the way in which he attained > Arahatship. There he tells us: > "It was to another that the Blessed One was teaching the Dhamma; to > the Dhamma-preaching I listened intently for my own good. And not in > vain, for freed from all defilements, I gained release."" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel090.html > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Good point, James. (BTW, you're becoming quite the adept scholar! :-) --------------------------------------------------- > > James: I believe that if the Anupada Sutta is mistaken in this very > important and telling fact, the entire thing should not be trusted. > (Sorry…I know you like this sutta :-( > > -------------------------------------------------- So what? There are lots of things I like. :-) ======================== This is a very interesting analysis you have provided, James. I'd be very interested in reading what others have to say about this issue. 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) 32160 From: Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 5:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Hi Nina and all, This is a good exercise that everyone could do, even Lodewijk. Try to explain satipatthana in a simple but comprehensive way with an emphasis on cogency (no jargon or specialist knowledge). Here's my attempt; I would like to see one from everyone. Be bold! 'Sati' means recognition of the Buddha's teaching as it arises in present experience. Experience is divided into 4 parts and the teaching is divided into 3 parts, in this case. 'Sati' is usually translated as 'mindfulness', and 'patthana' means '4 parts' (usually translated as '4 foundations'). So 'satipatthana' = 'four foundations of mindfulness'. The 4 parts of experience are body, feeling, emotions, groups. The arising of individual instances of any kind of materiality is included in body. The arising of individual instances of pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral feelings is included in feeling. The arising of any kind of emotion, eg. love, hate, bewilderment etc., is included in emotions. Understanding and misunderstanding are also included in emotions. Emotions can be virtuous or not virtuous. 'Groups' is the arising of these factors in a group such as a person. The 3 parts of the teaching are impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, not-self. An easy way to understand 'not-self' is as not me or mine. So the idea is to recognize in the arising of an instance of any one of these 4 areas of experience that it is impermanent, or unsatisfactory, or not me or mine. There is also a fifth kind of recognition that is implicit in this procedure. That is the recognition that a concept that arises in discursive thinking is not an experience. If I am thinking about satipatthana or anything else I am not experiencing satipatthana etc. Concepts are empty of experience. Recognizing the emptiness of concepts can lighten one's burden as much as recognizing the impermanence of a pleasant or unpleasant feeling. Now you. Larry 32161 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:49pm Subject: Re:_[dsg]_Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.6.) Hi Victor, --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thank you for this message. I didn't know that talk on seclusion is > a favourite of yours. ..... S: Yes, talk on seclusion, solitutude and living alone is the most inspiring aspect of the Tipitaka for me. Indeed, while suttas like the Migajala sutta have always been my favourites, I read all the texts as being concerned with this theme. Desire is the mate, always looking for its partner to date amongst the sense objects, the feelings, the experienes, the mental states and the fantasy worlds we live in based on these elements. It wanders around looking for a ‘trophy’ visible object, a ‘model’ new sound or taste or that very transitory pleasant feeling. When wrong view accompanies it, it’s convinced that if the scenery is changed, all will be well, not realizing that any of its dates are so very temporary and that sickness, old age and death are on the way. .... > Living with husband or wife is not living in seclusion, not living > alone. The Buddha was speaking on how living alone is perfected in > its details. It is not that there are two meanings of 'living > alone' - true ideal or commonplace. ..... As Ken O wrote (regarding the Thera sutta): > the in this sutta you quote > The Blessed One said: "And how is living alone perfected in its > details? There is the case where whatever is past is abandoned, > whatever is future is relinquished, and any passion & desire with > regard to states of being attained in the present is well subdued. > That is how living alone is perfected in its details." .... --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thank you for this message. Could you summarize your points? --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thanks for this message. It would be helpful if you don't mind > summarizing your points. > --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Thank you again this message. > > What would be the benefit of living in seclusion? ..... S: I hope you’ll accept a little light verse for my summary this time for a change, Victor: [to pick uo on some other threads too -] *** If you live with a WAG And you’re known as a NAG Life sometimes seems a DRAG..... *** [On the other hand -] *** If by Dhamma you’re led And by DSG fed Seclusion’s here ‘tis said. *** [So, to answer your last qu.....] *** You can live in a crowd Even Hong Kong’s allowed. It’s only inner noise that’s loud. **** Metta, Sarah p.s [and a last thought....] *** Though Nibbana you aspire When your mate is desire There’s no escaping the fire. **** =================== 32162 From: sarahdhhk Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 10:59pm Subject: Re: Essentially Inherent Freedom ! Dear Ven Samahita, I looked through the Bk of 5s in both Numerical Discourses (an anthology) and the fuller PTS bk, but can't find the sutta you're translating or quoting. Nor can I understand your reference to [2-3] as the Pali ref (as in PTS transl given) starts at [3-1] for Bk of 5s. Can you give more help? Thank you. Sarah ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu Samahita wrote: > Friends: > > No choice necessary ! > > Ananda, no moral one needs to speculate about: > 'How shall I be freed of regret ?' because absence > of remorse is essentially inherent in morality itself. > > No-one freed of regret has to worry about: > 'How shall I be glad ?' since joyous gladness is > essentially inherent in absence of remorse itself. > No glad one needs to ponder about: > 'How shall I be happy ?' because happiness is > essentially inherent in gladness itself. > No happy one has to choose: > 'How can I relax ?' since calmness is > essentially inherent in happiness itself. <....> > Source: > The Numerical Sayings of the Buddha. > Anguttara Nikaya V [2-3]: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/index.html .... 32163 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] immaterial space Hi Larry & All, A quick 'butt in' as I'd intended to post the following passage anyway for consideration: --- LBIDD@w... wrote: >If > this is the case then there are three kinds of space: the rupa > (delimitation), the concept of the rupa (imagined space), and immaterial > 'boundless' space. What is your view on this? .... Lots of good reflections, Larry. A good piece on satipatthana too. Hope others will follow your lead. From the Debates Commentary (comy to Kathavatthu, Points of Controversy, PTS), chV1, V1: “Now follows the controversy about space. ‘Space is of three modes: as confined or delimited [S:pariccheda or aakaasa ruupa], as abstracted from object (kasi.n’ugghaatim-, referring to Jhana procedure only), as open (aja.ta-). Of these the first is conditioned, the other two are mere concepts. But some, like the Uttaraapathakas and Mahi.msaasakas hold that the two latter modes also, inasmuch as (being mental fictions) they are not conditioned, must therefore be unconditioned.’(Points of Controversy, p192).” Metta, Sarah p.s I looked through more of Karunadasa’s references on ‘space’ such as those in Milindapanha. I take these as referring to the third kind ‘as open’. As he says, it’s ‘not the same as the space-element listed in the Dhammasangani.’ To conclude therefore that in general all kinds of space are concepts is incorrect and also to conclude that any anipphanna rupas (non-concrete) rupas are concepts is not correct as I discussed with B.Bodhi and as Nina has been pointing out with the Vism extracts. Nina, I appreciate your notes a lot. I had also noted that ~Naa.namoli had inserted one or two somewhat misleading references to conceptual when referring to these rupas. ======================= 32164 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Hi James (& Howard). > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi again, Jon - > > > > Just one more tid bit about the Anupada Sutta. In his book > Abhidhamma > > Studies, Ven Nyanaponika Thera sites that discourse "as a sutta > source for > > Abhidhamma terminology," and he does so after a strong defense of > its > > authenticity against an attack by Ms. Rhys Davids to the effect > that this sutta is a > > clear after-the-fact compilation and not the Buddha word. ... James, if you're interested to read Nyanaponika's 'Abhidhamma Studies', it's a slim. inexpensive paperback now from Wisdom and also on line: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm Here's an extract on the authenticity of the Abhidhamma: THE EVALUATION OF ABHIDHAMMA AND THE QUESTION OF ITS AUTHENTICITY Even in olden days opinions about the Abhidhamma Pitaka moved between the extremes of unquestioning veneration and entire repudiation. Very early there were doubts about the authenticity of the Abhidhamma Pitaka as genuine Buddha word. The early sect of the Sautrantikas regarded, as their name indicates, only Sutta and Vinaya as canonical, but not the Abhidhamma. It may have been a follower of that sect who is introduced in the //Atthasalini// as criticising the Abhidhamma lecture of a monk thus: 'You have quoted, O preacher, a long Sutta that seems to girdle Mount Meru. What is the name of it?' - 'It is an Abhidhamma Sutta.' - 'But why did you quote an Abhidhamma Sutta? Is it not befitting to cite a Sutta that has been proclaimed by the Buddha?' - 'And by whom do you think the Abhidhamma was proclaimed?' - 'It was not proclaimed by the Buddha.' Thereupon that monk is severely rebuked by the preacher, and after that the //Atthasalini// continues: 'He who excludes the Abhidhamma (from the Buddha-Word) damages the Conqueror's Wheel of Dhamma (//jina-cakkam paharam deti//). He excludes thereby the Omniscience of the Tathagata and impoverishes the grounds of the Master's Knowledge of Self-confidence' (//vesarajja-nana// to which Omniscience belongs); he deceives an audience anxious to learn; he obstructs (progress to) the Noble Paths of Holiness; he makes all the eighteen causes of discord appear at once. By so doing he deserves the disciplinary punishment of temporary segregation, or the reproof of the assembly of monks.' This very severe attitude seems somewhat extreme, but it may be explained as a defensive reaction against sectarian tendencies at that period. The main arguments of Theravada against those who deny the authenticity of the Abhidhamma, are as follows: 1) The Buddha has to be regarded as the first Abhidhammika, because, according to the //Atthasalini//, 'he had already penetrated the Abhidhamma when sitting under the tree of Enlightenment.' 2) 'The Abhidhamma, the ultimate doctrine, is the domain of the omniscient Buddhas only, not the domain of others' (Asl). These profound teachings are unmistakably the property of an enlightened being, a Buddha. To deny this is as senseless as stealing the horse of a World Ruler, unique in its excellency, or any other possession of his, and showing oneself in public with it. And why? Because they obviously belong to and are befitting for a king (Asl). ***** Metta, Sarah p.s I loved the orange story too;-)Beautifully told. ================================== 32165 From: Sarah Date: Mon Apr 12, 2004 11:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kiriyacittas Hi James & All, --- buddhatrue wrote: > MN 70 "At Kitagiri" > 22. "Bhikkhus, I do not say that final knowledge is achieved all at > once. On the contrary, final knowledge is achieved by gradual > training, by gradual practice, by gradual progress. > 23. And how is final knowledge achieved by gradual training, gradual > practice, and gradual progress? Here one who has faith [in a > teacher] visits him; when he visits him, he pays respect to him; > when he pays respect to him, he gives ear; one who gives ear hears > the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma, he memorizes it; he examines > the meaning of the teachings he has memorized; <....> > From this passage, it can be seen that the Buddha intended the > Dhamma to be of a nature so that a person could memorize it. Is it > possible to memorize the Abhidhamma? I don't think so! One would > have to be a literal genius to do such a thing! .... S: Actually there are people (mostly bhikkhus) who do just this! However, I’m not convinced that this is what is meant here, though of course all the texts were memorized. I can’t follow all the Pali, but the key word for ‘he memorizes’ seems to be ‘upaparikkhati’ which according to the Buddhadatta dict means ‘he investigates or he examines (it)’. And then for where it gives ‘he examines ...’ above, the Pali gives ‘nijjhaayati’, which according to the dictionary means ‘he reflects....’. I'll welcome any input for those more familiar with the terms. The investigation and reflection must be with wise attention (yoniso manasikaara). ... >Any teachings > beyond the ability to memorize them is overkill and unproductive to > the Buddha's path, in my opinion and according to what he taught. .... S: It always comes back to the wise consideration and understanding, regardless of whether memorized or not. What was ‘natural’ for a bhikkhu at that time may certainly not be natural for us, so I think we’re in agreement here;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 32166 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 0:17am Subject: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Friend Sarah, Sarah: James, if you're interested to read Nyanaponika's 'Abhidhamma Studies', it's a slim. inexpensive paperback now from Wisdom and also on line: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm James: I checked out this link and I cannot find `Abhidhamma Studies' among the texts linked (I found Nina's book though! She's famous! ;-)) I found a different book by Nyanaponika on the Abhidhamma called `The Abhidhamma Philosophy'. Can you give me a direct link if it is online? I wish to read about the points and counterpoints concerning Ms. Rhys Davis. Sarah: [Abhidhamma Studies]: The main arguments of Theravada against those who deny the authenticity of the Abhidhamma, are as follows: 1) The Buddha has to be regarded as the first Abhidhammika, because, according to the //Atthasalini//, 'he had already penetrated the Abhidhamma when sitting under the tree of Enlightenment.' James: This type of argument is circular and makes no sense. It is the same type of argument used by monotheists: Of course God created the universe because only God can create a universe. ;-)) 2) 'The Abhidhamma, the ultimate doctrine, is the domain of the omniscient Buddhas only, not the domain of others' (Asl). These profound teachings are unmistakably the property of an enlightened being, a Buddha. To deny this is as senseless as stealing the horse of a World Ruler, unique in its excellency, or any other possession of his, and showing oneself in public with it. And why? Because they obviously belong to and are befitting for a king (Asl). James: If the Abhidhamma is the `domain of omniscient Buddhas only' then only omniscient Buddhas would be able to comprehend it. What would be the point of teaching it to worldlings or devas? Really, this is the same argument as number one but worded differently. Sarah: I loved the orange story too;-)Beautifully told. James: Glad that you liked it. So, is it an orange, a collection of rupas processed by cittas, or both or neither? ;-)) Metta, James 32167 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Illusion of Control Hi KenO & RobM, RM: > The Abhidhamma provides the theory that underpins the Dhamma, > but if you want guidance on how to apply the Dhamma, I strongly > suggest looking into the Suttas rather than the Abhidhamma. > The Suttas do not focus on ultimate realities. > > > k: If you have the book Dispeller of Delusion, please read the > section on mindfullness, I dont think you give a fair judgement that > Abdhidhamma dont apply the dhamma. I think in certain ways, > Abdhidhamma teaches the detail application of the damma. They both > work hand in hand, they complement each other and not exlusive. .... S: Certainly U Narada in his introduction to the transl of Dhaatu-Kathaa, an Abhidhamma text (PTS:Discourse on Elements) agrees with what you say, Ken O. “The Abhidhamma is presented in technical language where the philosophical terms, denoting ultimate truths, are defined and explained. The Suttas are presented in conventional language though philosophical terms are included. So a good knowledge of the Abhidhamma is essential for grasping the true significance of the Teaching of the Suttas. Therefore it must be studied before the latter so that a deeper and clearer knowledge of them may be gained.” ... S: Like you, KenO, I prefer to see them ‘work hand in hand’. Without the Abhidhamma would be understand the conditioned nature of elements? Two more quotes from the same introduction: “The elements are not permanently present. They arise to exhibit their own characteristic natures and perform their own characteristic functions when the proper conditions are satisfied, and they cease after their span of duration. Thus no being has any control over the arising and ceasing of the elements and they are not at his mercy or will however mighty and powerful he may be. In other words, the elements have no regard for anyone, show no favour to anyone and do not accede to the wishes of anyone. They are entirely dependent on conditions. “For example, when the four conditions: a visible object, the sense of sight, light and attention, are present, the eye-consciousness element arises. No power can prevent this element from arising when these conditions are present or cause it to arise when one of them is absent.” .... “....But because the functions of the elements give rise to the concepts of continuity, collection and form the ideas arise of 1) the initial effort that has to be exerted when a deed is about to be performed and 2) the care that has to be taken while the deed is being performed to its completion. And this leads to the subsequent ideas 3) “I can perform” and 4) “I can feel”. Thus these 4 imaginary characteristic functions of being have brought about a dep-rooted belief in their existence. But the elements have not the time or span of duration to carry out such functions.” **** Metta, Sarah ==== KenO:>IMHO > Abdhidamma is like an extension of the sutta pitika, making the > difficult terms in sutta easy to understand. Just like the word we > have discuss sampajaano (I hope got the spelling right)(translated as > awareness), only in the Abhidhamma the term is explain fully. Just > like the word dukkha is explain in eight ways and aggregates in 11 > ways. Without Abhidhamma, it is a very difficult to teach the sutta <...> 32168 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 0:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Hi James, --- buddhatrue wrote: > Friend Sarah, > > Sarah: James, if you're interested to read Nyanaponika's 'Abhidhamma > Studies', it's a slim. inexpensive paperback now from Wisdom and > also on line: http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebidx.htm > > James: I checked out this link and I cannot find `Abhidhamma > Studies' among the texts linked .... Hmmm....I got from there through a google search and can't retrace my steps. Try this one: http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh02.htm Metta, Sarah ======= 32169 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 0:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kiriyacittas Hi James Have you heard Buddha said anything about Abhidhamma invented by others and not Buddha himself. In fact Buddha approves the Higher Dhamma (which is usually refering Abdhidhamma) in Mahagosina Sutta MN 32. Regardless of what B Bodhi say, but the approval itself (even B Bodhi cannot disprove) shown that it is already taught and practise in Buddha times. Even one can say it is invented by others, the mere approval shown that it dhamma. Why would the Sumpreme One approve it in the first place if it is not the dhamma that benefit for generations to come? Ken O 32170 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 0:59am Subject: Re: kiriyacittas Friend Sarah (and Howard), Sarah: Actually there are people (mostly bhikkhus) who do just this! James: Memorize all seven books of the Abhidhamma?? You must be joking!! ;-)) Give me the name of one. Sarah: However, I'm not convinced that this is what is meant here, though of course all the texts were memorized. James: I can never convince you of anything you disagree with already!! Even when the evidence is unquestionable and overwhelming. And again, the Abhidhamma was not memorized. It is obviously a written text that was formulated. I have read this in numerous locations but I won't quote them here because I know you still `won't be convinced' ;-)). Sarah: I can't follow all the Pali, but the key word for `he memorizes' seems to be `upaparikkhati' which according to the Buddhadatta dict means `he investigates or he examines (it)'. And then for where it gives `he examines ...' above, the Pali gives `nijjhaayati', which according to the dictionary means `he reflects....'. I'll welcome any input for those more familiar with the terms. The investigation and reflection must be with wise attention (yoniso manasikaara). James: Pali words can have twenty different meanings each so it is important to look at the context. It would be redundant for the sutta to read "one who gives ear hears the Dhamma; having heard the Dhamma, he examines it; he reflects on the meaning of the teachings he has examined;" Examines and reflects mean the same thing; so to keep the parallelism of the teaching that the Buddha intended different meanings for those Pali words must be intended. (BTW, do you have the Pali versions of the entire Tipitaka??!! If so, why?) Sarah: It always comes back to the wise consideration and understanding, regardless of whether memorized or not. James: I disagree. If the teachings aren't memorized the wise consideration and understanding will last only as long as the text is in front of you. The Buddha intended for Buddhist practice to be an ongoing activity. Again, I believe that the teachings must be of a nature which can be memorized. (Even today, Bhikkhus ever day recite the teachings of the Buddha, which are memorized.) Sarah: What was `natural' for a bhikkhu at that time may certainly not be natural for us, so I think we're in agreement here;-) James: No, we're not in agreement here; I have no idea what you are referring to. (Do you notice that sometimes you write statements and give voluminous information which is unrelated to what I wrote?) Can you please explain why you think we are in agreement? No where in this post do I write about what is `natural' for a bhikkhu at that time as compared to nowadays. We still have the same brains today as then. If we put effort into it, we can memorize the teachings. Howard has noticed that I have become quite the scholar recently. That is because I read suttas, and various other Buddhist articles online, everyday and I remember everything I read. Why do I remember everything I read? I remember everything I read, and where I read it, because I meditate. Meditation helps to make my mind clear and sharp and able to remember. Meditation and Dhamma Study are not mutually exclusive. Metta, James 32171 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vipassanaa As A Synonym Of Anupassanaa In Satipa.t.thaana Suttam Dear Suan (& Jeff), Thank your for your further kind assistance, --- abhidhammika wrote: > > The Pali term "anussati" has the verb form "anussarati". The > linguistic meaning of "anussarati" is simply to recollect, remember > again and again. .... S: ‘again and again’ or repeatedly are better than ‘constant’ I think too. .... > Thus, the Pali term "sati" means remembering or recollecting or > following of the present phenomena while "anussati" would mean > consistent remembering or consistent following of the same phenomenon > again and again. > > Mindfulness as a translation of the Pali term "sati" is now more > popular and well established. But, I tend to feel that being mindful > is the result of remembering the present phenomenon. .... S: Yes, mindfulness is generally used now. Actually, I like ‘awareness’ too. I have some difficulty with ‘remembering’, because it’s conventional useage of thinking about and not forgetting (concepts) is so ingrained for me. Even when there is conventional forgetfulness, there can be awareness. don’t you think? .... > To keep the vipassanaa practice within our conceptual control, I > prefer the operational understanding of sati as remembering or > consistent following of our present fresh experiences of phenomena as > they occur. > > The result of such consistent remembering or consistent following of > the present phenomena would be mindfulness, of course. .... S: I’m not quite with you here. I’m not sure if it’s just the use of our words or whether there is any fundamental difference in understanding. .... > In the meanwhile, either you or Chris, please reproduce here a > translation of "Aaka~nkheyya" Suttam from Majjhimanikaaya by Bhikkhu > Bodhi. I saw a translation of the same Suttam from Anguttaranikaaya > by Thannissaro Bhikkhu in asscesstoinsight. The version from > Majjhimanikaaya is more elaborate than the Anguttara one. .... Perhaps Jeff might help us with this other translation of this interesting sutta he posted?? .... > The following is the Pali passages from Vibha~nga as you requested. .... S: Thanks Suan, these are commonly used terms in the suttas: .... > 358. Viharatiiti. Iriyati vattati paaleti yapeti yaapeti carati > viharati. Tena vuccati "viharatii"ti. .... S: English: 358: “’Dwells’ means: Assumes the four postures, exists, protects, keeps going, maintains, turns about, dwells. Therefore this is called ‘dwells’.” ***** > 359. Aataapiiti. Tattha katamo aataapo? Yo cetasiko viiri > yaarambho …pe… sammaavaayaamo– ayam vuccati "aataapo". Iminaa > aataapena upeto hoti samupeto upaagato samupaagato upapanno sampanno > samannaagato. Tena vuccati "aataapii"ti. .... S: English: 359: “ ‘Ardent’ means: therein what is ardour? That which is the arousing of mental energy, :see para 220: right effort. This is called ardour. Of this ardour he is possessed, well possessed, attained, well attained, endowed, well endowed, furnished. Therefore this is called ‘ardent’.” (220 is the long para on the controlling faculties). How about we go back to the beginning of this section on the ‘Analysis of the Foundation of Mindfulness’? Would you kindly give me the Pali for 355 and I’ll add the English after I get back next week. Many thanks for your help and these interesting discussions, Suan. Metta, Sarah ===== 32172 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 3:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi Larry, S:I forgot to reply to a couple of short qus here: --- Larry wrote: > > Hi Sarah, > > The autocommentary is an explanation of what I wrote to you and > James regarding what James replied to you, but James didn't > understand it, hence the autocommentary on > the text at the bottom (not included here) . .... S: As long as James was clear;-) .... > ----------------------------------------------- > L: We are just talking about you, me and James. Do you directly know > the sense bases or anything other than the objects of the 5 doors and > emotions? > -------------------------------------------- .... S: Only pa~n~na that can ever know. What about the sense experiencing cittas such as seeing and hearing? Also thinking? These are more ‘obvious’ than the sense bases I think. By emotions, I think you mean various cetasikas, right? In that case, feelings too can be known, though no need to pinpoint whether it’s say lobha or pleasant feeling, dosa or unpleasant feeling at any given moment. I think that any pa~n~na is so brief in the beginning that it can easily be followed by doubt or ignorance. It’s not necessary or helpful, I find, to check or count, otherwise it’s clinging again. ..... > > >So sankhara in the sense of mental formation > > > is concept. > > .... > > S: Not as I understand. > > -------------------------------------------- > L: Are combinations of rupa concepts _for_you? > ------------------------------------------ ... S: We were talking about either sankhara khandha (50 cetasikas) or ‘combinations of rupa’ here, we use concepts to describe realities. Like a group of elements - it’s nothing more than the elements themselves arising in combinations and under specific conditions. ..... > -------------------------------------------------- > L: Is concept classified as asankhara in abhidhamma? > ------------------------------------------------- ... S: Not that I know of. Asankhara is only used as ‘unconditioned’ to refer to nibbana. We can say concept is not conditioned, but that doesn’t mean it’s ‘unconditioned’. .... > ----------------------------------------------------------- > L: I agree. That's why I used parentheses around "exists". ... S: Thx for clarifying. A good and brave description of satipatthana, Larry. Sorry, I’m out of time for new threads, but hope to read others. Metta, Sarah ===== 32173 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 3:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] VISM.XIV 74, remarks. VISM.XIV 74 > "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV > > 74. Again, all matter is of three kinds according to the visible > (sanidassana) triad, the kamma born triad, etc. (see Dhs., p.2). Herein, > as regards the gross, a visible datum is 'visible with impact'; the rest > are 'invisible with impact'; all the subtle kinds are 'invisible without > impact'. So firstly it is of three kinds according to the visible triad. Remarks: Dhammas can be classified as triads. We see for example in the Gradual Sayings, and even more so in the Abhidhamma that dhammas are grouped as ones, twos, threes, etc. This may seem technical, but there are several reasons for it. In this way it becomes easier to recite and memorize the texts, especially at a time when there was only the oral way of handing down the Dhamma. The classification by way of numbers is a way of teaching different aspects for people with different inclinations: for people who are capable to be taught (veneya satta). This method is also a recapitulation and it serves as a way to verify for ourselves whether we have really understood what we learnt. In this case there are all the twentyeight rupas dealt with again, but now under other aspects. Here the visible triad is dealt with first. The only rupa that is visible is visible object or colour. The gross rupas are the five senses and the relevant sense objects that impinge on them. Only visible object is visible and impinging, the others are invisible and impinging. As to the third of the visible triad: those are the subtle rupas that are invisible and not impinging. We read in te Matika of the Dhammasangani: 22: States [dhammas] that are visible and reacting; invisible and reacting; neither. We read in § 980: The sphere of [mental] states is dhammaayatana, which includes the subtle rupas that can be experienced only through the mind-door. These are: feminine faculty, masculine faculty, life-faculty, bodily intimation, verbal intimation, space, the three rupas of changeability (lightness, plasticity and wieldiness), the four rupas as characteristics, nutrition. We are reminded that there is only one rupa that is visible: colour or visible object. It seems that we are seeing all day long, but seeing falls away and then countless other types of cittas arise. If we had not learnt about the cittas arising and falling away in processes and also in between processes, we would not know that each citta falls away immediately. It seems that we can see people and things, but we are clinging to an image we remember. When we touch something, tangible object is experienced through the bodysense. Tangible object is invisible. The aspect of the visible triad can remind us of the truth. Hardness is invisible and impinging. The subtle rupas do not impinge, they are the third triad: invisible and not reacting. One may believe that verbal intimation impinges on the earsense, but this is not so. As we read in the Vis: Thus, it is not the speech sound, it is a subtle rupa that is the condition for it. Studying this triad can be of help to correct wrong understanding of dhammas. **** Nina P.S. I may not use the Tiika here, but I will make a selection for § 75. 32174 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 3:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Dear Jon and Larry, Larry, Lodewijk thanks you and finds your post very helpful and sympathetic. I like to add a little more to the last part, on thinking. op 13-04-2004 02:35 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...:> > So the idea is to recognize in the arising of an instance of any one of > these 4 areas of experience that it is impermanent, or unsatisfactory, > or not me or mine. There is also a fifth kind of recognition that is > implicit in this procedure. That is the recognition that a concept that > arises in discursive thinking is not an experience. If I am thinking > about satipatthana or anything else I am not experiencing satipatthana > etc. Concepts are empty of experience. Recognizing the emptiness of > concepts can lighten one's burden as much as recognizing the > impermanence of a pleasant or unpleasant feeling. N: We keep on thinking about concepts and stories, and these are not realities, in fact, when the object of citta is not a reality, it is a concept. But, we should not forget that there are these roots, we think with unwholesome roots most of the time. We take the thinking for self, and we never think with indeterminate cittas, it is either with kusala citta or with akusala citta, but most of the time with akusala citta. In the fourth application of mindfulness the hindrances are pointed out as objects of mindfulness so that we see them as only dhammas. Two of these are roots: sensuous desire and anger (or aversion). In some classifications ignorance is added as a hindrance. Thus then the three akusala hetus are complete. (This is not a contradiction but a matter of stress on certain aspects). There is seeing of visible object and afterwards we define what we see: this or that person or thing. Even before we realize it, akusala citta has already arisen. Even before we spin out long stories with attachment or aversion. When we learn more about the cittas arising in processes, we understand how extremely fast cittas succeed one another. Unwholesome roots are unwelcome but they can serve as reminders and this is very useful. They are realities, dhammas, and suitable objects of awareness. That is the only way leading to their eradication. This morning I discussed satipatthana again with Lodewijk. He thinks that the confusion about it is also caused by the language used to explain it. I gave him the three definitions of satipatthana: sati of satipatthana which is actually sati-sampaja~n~na: mindfulness and understanding of nama and rupa. Satipatthana: the objects of mindfulness grouped as four applications. And the third: the way Buddhas and disciples walked. As to the second: as said before, all the aspects of the body in the first application serve as a means to being non-forgetful of rupas. There is the body all the time, when standing, sitting, going, lying down, but we are forgetful of the dhammas that are bodily phenomena. There are pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling, indifferent feeling all the time, but we are forgetful. The same for all the other aspects in the other two applications. They all serve to bring us back to reality. Often we are dreaming but sometimes there can be non-forgetfulness of visible object, or sound, just one dhamma at a time. Non-forgetfulness without thinking, without using terms. That is the characteristic of sati that is directly aware of a dhamma. When we discern the difference between moments of forgetfulness and a moment, even a single moment, of sati, we can verify its characteristic. This is the right condition for it to develop. Lodewijk thinks that when I say vipassana is the same, the eightfold Path is the same as satipatthana I create confusion. He suggests: vipassana developed in stages leads to lokuttara by means of satipatthana. The goal is understanding that can eradicate defilements. As to the development of the eightfold Path, panna together with the other factors is developed to reach enlightenment. This is also done by means of satipatthana. Maybe Jon has more suggestions. Nina. 32175 From: Philip Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 4:51am Subject: Re: A Single Excellent Night - and Year Hello all I hope you've been well. I have been busy and not studying dhamma as intently as I was last month, but I'm happy to report that the benefits I gained from even a small degree of right understanding thanks to Nina's books and articles and discussions at this post are carrying through. Having a sense -albeit an intellectual one - of conditioned dhammas rising and falling in the world has been consistently liberating. Really don't become annoyed or frustrated by people. Who's there to get annoyed at? I was looking through the Useful Posts and came across this kind greeting from Andrew, which I apparently failed to acknowledge the first time, back in December. If there are any newcomers reading this, I recommend reading the below post, as well as the other posts in the "new to the list" section of the Useful Posts Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > Hi Philip > Nice to hear from you and to learn a little bit about Japan. Don't > be afraid to post more as there are many like you and I whose > knowledge of Dhamma is limited - but growing (and that's the main > thing to keep in mind). > > You wrote: I certainly don't want to revive the past- it makes me > queasy just > > thinking about it!- but I do believe in revisiting it. I've been > > going through my diaries from the last 3 years rather obsessively > > during the last week, finding patterns of backliding and diversions > > from the path. I think I've learned a lot about how to avoid the > > mistakes I've made in the past and conduct my life more skillfully > > this year. > > I, too, have a tendency to revisit the past - mostly in an unskilful > manner. I re-live my "glorious" moments (doesn't take long) and > agonise over past bad "choices". While I'm revisiting the past and > planning the future, the present moment passes unskilfully and I > don't really learn anything. In the sense given in the sutta, > reviving the past involves taking delight in thoughts about the past - > I take this to mean not just "I want" thoughts but also "I don't > want" thoughts. Sometimes, doing this is actually a form of conceit > (mana) in which we wallow in thoughts of our "inferiority". > I think re-visiting the past is useful IF AND ONLY IF we can do it as > a means of wise reflection on Reality as taught by the Buddha. > > Philip, you may have already noticed that, on DSG, words > like "practice" and "meditation" spark debate. Sometimes, > the "debaters" can't agree. Sometimes they define their terms and > find some stratum of agreement. If only a Buddha were teaching > today, we could all go and ask him directly! But he isn't and we all > do our individual best to comprehend his Teachings as they have come > down to us. Some interesting areas of controversy are: > 1. the teaching of conditionality - do we really have "choices" or is > choice an illusion? > 2. when does "Dhamma practice" become the fetter of merely adhering > to rules and rituals? > 3. what to do with the doctrine of "anatta" (not-self) - leave it to > the monks and Ariyans or at least grapple with it on an intellectual > level. > If interested, you can always search the archives and read the > differing views that have been expressed on these topics. If you are > at all like me, these things take a long time to digest but I think > the results are worthwhile. > Personally speaking, I have gone from blaming myself for not being > able to keep "on the Path" to believing that, whatever happens (good > or bad) can become an object for Insight. To me, it's understanding > the present that really matters. Too much re-visiting the past can > cloud that. Do you agree? > With metta > Andrew > > > > 32176 From: Sarah Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Robber Guests Hi Connie & Victor, I had intended to include your interesting quote below in my post to Victor on seclusion for his comments, but have only just located it: --- connie wrote: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/suttanipata/index.html > section IV. Atthaka Vagga: > <1. Although these poems were originally composed for an audience of > wandering, homeless monks, they offer valuable lessons for lay people as > well. Even the passages referring directly to the homeless life can be > read as symbolic of a state of mind. Ven. Maha Kaccana's commentary, > mentioned above, shows that this has been done ever since canonical > times. Addressing a lay person, and commenting on a verse describing the > behavior of a sage who has abandoned home and society, he interprets > "home" as the khandhas and "society" as sense impressions. Thus in his > hands the verse develops an internal meaning that lay people can apply > to their lives without necessarily leaving their external home and > society. Other verses in the poems can be interpreted in similar ways. > .... S:This is from the very detailed commentary that has always been part of the Sutta Pitaka as far as I understand, rehearsed at the First Council. There's no English translation as yet, though I keep hoping;-)Pls add any further useful comments T.B. or anyone gives. Connie, do you have a poem (as I gave mine, I was thinking you'd be the one to wax lyrical;-)) or a little on satipatthana following Larry's suggestion? Metta, Sarah p.s Thanks for your other post to me: Connie> "But there's always someone/group out there to back up any opinion we might have...all those pegs." ======== 32177 From: Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) In a message dated 4/12/04 12:50:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: Here we have Jon going to great lengths to explain why the sutta isn't really talking about breath at all, since that is a concept and not a dhamma, Jon, James pointed out something here that I didn't pay any attention to in my response to you. I keep forgettting I am talking to non-doers. When the Buddha (or I) am talking about paying attention to the breath, he is using the concept of breath to point us toward an area of attention. I think this is a valid use of the concept of breath. The usual method of meditation instuction is to, at first, teach to pay attention to the breath in general. Then farther down the road, the instuctions are to pay attention to the body sensations at one point where the breath touches the body. We are taught to reduce the breath down to ultimates such as hot/cold. hardness, etc. Another point is that the first teaching in the Anap. Sutta is to pay attention to a long breath. "Long breath" is a concept that uses a comparison. One point of doing this is to show us to be mindful of the effect that a long breath has on the body and mind. Some people with a lot of experience using the Anap. Sutta in their practice start off each of their meditation sessions with deliberately breathing long and being mindful of what is happening then breathing short (the 2nd teaching) and being mindful of that, working themselves through each step. But, once the deliberate invocation of a step is completed, they leave that technique behind. There would be no deliberately breathing long, for instance. They are just mindful, pure seeing in the seeing. jack 32178 From: Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) In a message dated 4/12/04 12:50:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: The teachers, seventy-year-old Kalu Rinpoche of Tibet, a veteran of years of solitary retreat, and the Zen master Seung Sahn, the first Korean Zen master to teach in the United States, were to test each other's understanding of the Buddha's teachings for the benefit of the onlooking Western students. James, What was your reaction to this story? Mine was that here was two valid (effective) Buddhist techniques colliding. I don't believe that either technique was shown to be wrong or are wrong. jack 32179 From: Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 3:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Hi, James - This seems to be it: http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm 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) 32180 From: Eznir Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 7:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: the self. . . how ? #1. Dear Sukin, I see that you have reviewed your post. I too did the same and wish to say something about it. We seem to have discussed the dhamma from two different platforms, Abhidhamma and The Suttas. Perhaps this may be the reason why our views do not tally. It's like you are seated on top of a tall wall with an admirable view and I, at the foot of this wall, peeping through the crevices and discussing the same view. Our views should tally in an ultimate sense. It's just the defilements that stands in the way. Metta eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinderpal Singh Narula" wrote: > Dear Eznir (and Sarah), > > I appreciate that you put in so much effort into responding and > trying to make me understand. I had composed as always, long replies > to your posts. But every time I read over them, I want to change > something and add something else, and the posts get even longer. > This is not a big problem. However, I also see that something is > lacking, but I can't put my finger on it. I get the feeling that I > am not doing justice to your well considered replies and am mostly > only repeating the same points even as I try to change contexts. > So Eznir, I am thinking that maybe we let this thread go?! Besides > the points I make are the same ones that others seem to be making on > other threads. And these are the evergreen topics of dsg. ;-) So I > am sure we will have plenty of opportunity to discuss them together > in the future. > > Sarah, it seems like I've got only so much stamina. Hope you are not > disappointed. ;-) See you in a few days. > > Metta, > Sukin > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Eznir" > wrote: > > Dear Sukin, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinderpal Singh > Narula" > > wrote: 32181 From: Ken O Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Hi James That is the problem with people who dont practise the Abdhidhamma. There are many scholars in Abdhidhamma and they have arrived with many conclusions but there are very few who practise for salvation and fewer who know what is non-action. People who practise Abhidhamma will have the fullest confidence that it is taught by the Buddha, likewise for people who believe in action group will believe that the Satipatthana sutta is all about concepts ;-). We always forget that cittas are very fast, the so called moment for Ven Sariputta to fan the Buddha, millions of cittas will have arise and ceased. During this fanning, Ven Sariputta will have enter jhanas countless times in and out. Time is relative, to a mosquito, a average two months lifespan is the same as the 80 years of a human life. I hope this answer both suttas and there is no contradictions. Ken O 32182 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:48am Subject: Re: Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) Friend Jack, Jack: What was your reaction to this story? James: I laughed hysterically! ;-)) Jack: Mine was that here was two valid (effective) Buddhist techniques colliding. I don't believe that either technique was shown to be wrong or are wrong. James: You are right, the author did tell the story to show the differences in approaches, not to say that one was right or wrong. However, personally, I agree with the Tibetan Lama. It is an orange, plain and simple. Maybe you can describe it in different ways: object of the five senses, spherical object orange in color, citrus fruit, orange ball, ripened ovaries of a seed-bearing tree, formation of rupas processed by cittas, object of impermanence- suffering-nonself, illusion, void, etc. I don't think it would make a difference how one describes it. They are all concepts. What is important is that one doesn't cling to the orange or think of the orange in terms of me or mine…and this is something that is beyond words to explain to others. Metta, James 32183 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, James - > > This seems to be it: http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm > > With metta, > Howard Thanks Howard. I will search for the section you refered to. Metta, James 32184 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 9:00am Subject: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Friend Ken O, Ken: That is the problem with people who dont practise the Abdhidhamma. James: How are people supposed to practice the Abhidhamma? Ken: During this fanning, Ven Sariputta will have enter jhanas countless times in and out. James: Does the Abhidhamma really say that!! You mean I am entering jhanas countless of times while I write this post? Wow, that is pretty convenient! I should save my legs and back and stop meditating for jhana! ;-)) Seriously, I don't believe the Buddha taught this. (This reminds me of a funny link I found regarding Buddhism, just perfect for the NAG! ;-)): http://www.serve.com/cmtan/buddhism/Lighter/GoodKarma/index.html ) Metta, James 32185 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 1:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) James --- buddhatrue wrote: > Friend Jon, > > Thank you for this sutta quote and commentary but it doesn't answer > the statement you made before. ... > ... You would have to have a statement from the > Buddha that stated, to the effect "Mindfulness of the breath alone > can not lead to insight. Insight must have a dhamma as its > object". What you quoted doesn't say that. ... I think that you should also only > believe what the Buddha said and not extrapolate various meanings > from what he taught. I don't think I suggested that my statement was a direct quote of the Buddha's. I see nothing wrong with summaries, re-statements or 'extrapolations' as long as they correctly reflect the Buddha's teaching (if only direct quotes were allowed we'd all be limited to exchanging sutta excerpts with each other ;-)). I'm sorry that you find the quote already provided insufficient to support the statement. I'll try and do better, but I think I'll first have to narrow down the exact point(s) in contention, as it will need more than one quote. Which one (or more) of the following would you take issue with in particular: - The dhammas/five aggregates spoken of in the suttas do not include 'breath'. - The object of the development of insight (vipassana bhavana) is always a dhamma/one of the five aggregates. - Samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana are separate and distinct forms of bhavana leading to different outcomes -- jhaana and rebirth in an appropriate plane, in the case of samatha bhavana, and enlightenment with no further rebirth, in the case of vipassana bhavana. > ... No, actually the first sutta I have in mind is MN 62 "The > Greater Discourse of Advice to Rahula". > ... He starts with the > section that you quote in this post "Breathing in long, he > understands: `I breathe in long'; or breathing out long, he > understands: `I breathe out long. Etc." But then the section ends > with "He trains thus: `I shall breathe in contemplating > impermanence'; he trains thus: `I shall breathe out contemplating > impermanence.' He trains thus: `I shall breathe in contemplating > fading away'; he trains thus: `I shall breathe out contemplating > fading away. Etc." As you'll have noticed, I've been discussing this same passage (from another sutta) with Jack, together with the commentary on the statement "He trains thus: `I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence'; he trains thus: `I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence.' In brief, it seems to mean impermanence as a characteristic of any of the five aggregates. > Jon, do you develop mindfulness of breathing? If not, why? As you'll also have seen from my exchanges with Jack, mindfulness of breathing can refer to either samatha bhavana or vipassana bhavana. Whichever you're referring to, I don’t exclude it, just as I don’t exclude any other form of kusala. The > Buddha taught that it is of great fruit and great benefit. Yes, if properly developed and cultivated, that is. And we shouldn't forget that many other aspects of samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana are also highly praised by the Buddha in different suttas. Only > Mara, the Evil One, tried to convince people not to practice > mindfulness of breathing. Hmm, are you trying to say something here? ;-)) Just for the record, I have never tried to convince anyone not to practice mindfulness of breathing (of course, I may have disagreed with others as to what mindfulness of breathing involves). > Are you under the influence of Mara? Are > your intentions pure or evil? (And I am being completely serious). I appreciate your concern about my being in the grip of Mara ;-)). My answer to your 2 questions is the same as anyone else's would be, I believe: for the first, technically yes, as I understand it, whenever the citta is akusala, (i.e., most of the time), and for the second, mixed but again technically more impure than pure ;-)) I'd be interested to know what your own answers to these 2 questions would be. Jon 32186 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 1:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) James --- buddhatrue wrote: > Friend Jon, ... > Jon: I think the main thrust of the comments has been that the > distinction between dhammas and concepts needs to be known. > > James: Again, quote where the Buddha said this very specifically, > without extrapolating, and I will believe you. Let me rephrase my statement. The reference in the suttas to conditioned dhammas, the five aggregates, the sense-bases, the elements, dependent origination, the four foundations of mindfulness, and the Four Noble Truths do not include concepts. There is no direct statement in the suttas to exactly this effect (and nor is there one to the contrary). The explanation is to be found in the Abhidhamma and the commentaries. But I fear that won't suffice for you ;-)) Jon 32187 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 2:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati Sutta (was, satipatthanasutta) Jack Thanks for following up again. We are in agreement that the sutta distinguishes between moments of samatha bhavana (i.e., when [image of] breath is the object of consciousness) and moments of vipassana bhavana (i.e., when any of the five aggregates is object of insight); but you question the relevance of that distinction to the present discussion. Again this brings us to the nub of the matter. The distinction is relevant when we come to consider what the sutta is saying about the relationship between the two forms of bhavana. We have touched on this point briefly already. In general terms, the sutta could be saying any of the following: 1/ If insight is to be developed, then samatha with breath as object should first be developed ; 2/ Insight can be better developed if samatha with breath as object is also developed; 3/ Samatha with breath as object will be of greater value if insight is also developed in conjunction with the samatha. To my reading, No. 3 comes closest. I base this not only on the commentary but also on the wording of the sutta itself. Consider the oft-quoted passage: <> The emphasis here is on how to 'make the most' of samatha with breath as object, rather than being a general exhortation on the importance of the development of insight. Let's not forget that there are hundreds of suttas that give a teaching on the development of insight, and do so without mentioning mindfulness of breathing. So this sutta is for those who already have a particular interest in samatha with breath as object, i.e., in whom that skill is well developed. Consider also the somewhat oblique way the five aggregates are referred to in the sutta, notwithstanding their central importance to it, in contrast to the prominence given to the five aggregates in numerous other suttas dealing with the development of insight. Consider also the necessary 'qualifications' for inclusion among those to whom the sutta is addressed: <<"There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out.>> How many people are there today for whom this would be a description of their regular daily life, in whom mindfulness is developed to the stage where it can be 'set to the fore' just like that, who can remain 'always mindful' as they breathe in and out. This does not describe any person I know or have heard of. This I believe is a teaching for those who are not only ready for enlightenment but who have the potential for that enlightenment to be attained with jhana as base. That's the relevance as I see it. I think what I've said addresses most of the comments in your post, but I'll reply separately on what remains, as all your points are of interest. Jon --- Jackhat1@a... wrote: ... > Jon: Yes, but as explained above the text is making a distinction > between > moments when (image of) breath is the object of consciousness > (i.e., > samatha bhavana) and other moments when any of the five aggregates is > object of insight (i.e., vipassana bhavana). The two cannot > co-occur at precisely the same moment. > > jack: I don't understand why you think this is a response to my > previous > paragraph. Why is their not occuring at the same moment, of which I agree, > important here? ... > Jon:Well, perhaps one of the areas of disagreement is the point > I've just > mentioned, that the moments with breath as object will be different > moments to those where the characteristic of impermanence of the five > aggregates is apparent. I hope my explanation on this has been > clear (I fear it hasn't). > > jack: As I said above, I don't see the relevance to our discussion. 32188 From: Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 3:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] dialogue on satipatthana Nina: "We keep on thinking about concepts and stories, and these are not realities, in fact, when the object of citta is not a reality, it is a concept. But, we should not forget that there are these roots, we think with unwholesome roots most of the time." Hi Nina, This is a good point. How should we analyze it? Is it unwholesome vitakka and vicara? Can we say concepts are produced by consciousness in the same way as intimation? Where do concepts come from? Is discursive thinking a form of speech? Larry 32189 From: Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 4:05pm Subject: Vism.XIV 75 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 75. According to the kamma-born triad, etc., however, that born from kamma is 'kamma-born'; that born from a condition other than that is 'not-kamma-born'; that not born from anything is 'neither-kamma-born-nor-not-kamma-born' That born from consciousness is 'consciousness-born'; that born from a condition other than consciousness is 'not-consciousness-born'; that not born from anything is 'neither-consciousness- born-nor-not-consciousness-born'. That born from nutriment is 'nutriment-born'; that born from a condition other than that is 'not-nutriment-born'; that not born from anything is 'neither-nutriment-born-nor-not- nutriment-born'. That born from temperature is 'temperature-born'; that born from a condition other than that is 'not-temperature-born'; that not born from anything is 'neither-temperature-born- nor-not-temperature-born'. 32190 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 4:26pm Subject: Re:_[dsg]_Recognizing_the_Dhamma_-_6._Seclusion(§_6.6.) Hi Sarah, Just a short note: I think this verse of yours is quite neat/cool!! Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Hi Victor, [snip] > S: I hope you'll accept a little light verse for my summary this time for > a change, Victor: > > [to pick uo on some other threads too -] > *** > If you live with a WAG > And you're known as a NAG > Life sometimes seems a DRAG..... > *** > [On the other hand -] > *** > If by Dhamma you're led > And by DSG fed > Seclusion's here `tis said. > *** > [So, to answer your last qu.....] > *** > You can live in a crowd > Even Hong Kong's allowed. > It's only inner noise that's loud. > **** > Metta, > > Sarah > > p.s [and a last thought....] > *** > Though Nibbana you aspire > When your mate is desire > There's no escaping the fire. > **** 32191 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 4:44pm Subject: Re: Pannatti (Concept) Hi Jon and James, Jon, regarding what you said : - The dhammas/five aggregates spoken of in the suttas do not include 'breath'. you might find the following quote helpful: "Now, lady, what are fabrications?" "These three fabrications, friend Visakha: bodily fabrications, verbal fabrications, & mental fabrications." "But what are bodily fabrications? What are verbal fabrications? What are mental fabrications?" "In-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications." "But why are in-&-out breaths bodily fabrications? Why are directed thought & evaluation verbal fabrications? Why are perceptions & feelings mental fabrications?" "In-&-out breaths are bodily; these are things tied up with the body. That's why in-&-out breaths are bodily fabrications. Having first directed one's thoughts and made an evaluation, one then breaks out into speech. That's why directed thought & evaluation are verbal fabrications. Perceptions & feelings are mental; these are things tied up with the mind. That's why perceptions & feelings are mental fabrications." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn044.html Metta, Victor --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > James > [snip] > > I'm sorry that you find the quote already provided insufficient to > support the statement. I'll try and do better, but I think I'll > first have to narrow down the exact point(s) in contention, as it > will need more than one quote. Which one (or more) of the following > would you take issue with in particular: > - The dhammas/five aggregates spoken of in the suttas do not include > 'breath'. [snip] > > Jon 32192 From: Philip Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 8:22pm Subject: Misuzu Kaneko Hello all I've been translating some poems by my favourite Japanese children's poet Misuzu Kaneko. (She lived at the turn of the century, and sadly killed herself at the age of 26 when she was forbidden by her abusive husband to continue writing.) I don't know to what degree she was influenced by the Buddha's teaching - probably not much- but some of her poems get at dhamma in a very lovely way. Please allow me to share one of my favourites. (I'll include the original Japanese in romaji in case Rob K is reading or in case anyone else is interested in Japanese.) Lotus Renge softly open hirai-i-ta softly shut tsu-u-bonda the lotus in the pond o-tera no ike de of the temple renge no hana ga softly open hirai-i-ta softly shut tsub-u-bonda a ring of children o-tera no niwa de holding hands te tsunaide kodomo in the temple yard softly open hi-i-raita softly shut tsu-u-bonda beyond the temple o-tera no soto de the houses o-ie ga and the town o-machi ga For me, this poem very nicely expresses the feeling I've had since coming across the Abdhidhamma, and beginning to understand paramattha dhamma. All is rising, and falling, and rising, and falling, in all people, and living creatures, and even inanimate objects. This leads to a sense of peace, I think, and a maintainable preview of ultimate liberation. Metta, Phil 32193 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 9:10pm Subject: FW: greetings from Rob Epstein. For those who know Rob Epstein, here are his greetings and familiy news. Maybe Sarah could react? Van: Robert Epstein Datum: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 07:21:18 -0700 (PDT) Aan: nina van gorkom Onderwerp: Re: greetings Hi Nina. Thank you for your kind greeting, and Happy Easter to you! I do miss my friends at dsg, but I have felt that dropping in every now and then just to say hello or throw in a comment was a bit annoying to some of the more serious posters. The dsg discussions tend to move with great energy and intensity, which I always enjoyed, but I haven't wanted to "interrupt the flow" after trying it a few times. We have had nice Holidays. We went to a Seder for Passover and also had a bit of fun with Easter eggs on Easter morning. It is nice to have a few traditions to fool around with! : ) My book is not yet finished, but I am about ready to do the "final editing" [I hope.] I am sure you have written another book or two while I have been procrastinating. You are pretty inspirational in that sense! Emily is doing great. She is in Kindergarten and is just a great girl. She is doing her ballet and struggling a bit to learn to play the violin. We manage to keep her fairly busy! She is very sweet, going on 6 years old. My work with actors is going along quite well. I have a new group that I am teaching who are doing quite well. It is a process that I have now been involved with for over twenty years, which is somewhat mind-boggling. It's hard to believe that I have been at something for that long. But it is also nice to do something consistently and feel that you are a *bit* [only] of an expert. At least there is some sense of contributing something to a particular field. I know you must have this satisfaction with all the translations and writings that you have given to practitioners. Well, it is so nice to hear from you. Thank you for thinking of me. It is very nice to know that I am not completely removed from my dsg comrades! Please give my best wishes to all of my friends on dsg, and tell them I miss them too! Best Regards, Robert 32194 From: Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] FW: greetings from Rob Epstein. Hi, Nina - Thanks for passing this on to the group. It'sreally good to hear from Rob! 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) 32195 From: Eznir Date: Tue Apr 13, 2004 10:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fwd: Paticcasamupada Dear Sarah, On closer examination of the meanings of Sankhara in the different contexts as given in the Suttas one would find that they all converge to a basic meaning that "Things are based on other Things". That is to say, Things(sankhata dhamma) are based on other Things(sankhara). The Thing that is based on, is a sankhara. Hence this bhava is based on merit/demerit performed in the past(punna, apunnabhisankhara). And so is bodily, verbal and mental activity based on kaya, vaci and cittasankhara. This is very much like how a `Greeting' is understood by different nations with respect to their backgrounds. Let me give an illustration: See how a greeting is performed in different countries. Some hug, some kiss, some shake hands, some bow, some keep on bowing twice or thrice, still some dance! Therefore to understand what is being said or done one has to understand the respective cultures of different nations to get at the meaning of the performance(which is a greeting). A person from the Middle East if he were to go to India and start hugging his penpal an Indian in the form of a greeting he would be misunderstood, right? Or if an European were to go to the Middle Eastern country and started kissing his penpal on the road as a form of a greeting he would be arrested according to the laws of that country, right? Therefore to understand what is being said or done one has to understand the respective cultures of different nations to get at the meaning of the performance(which is a greeting). But the fundamental meaning of the performance is a greeting, whatever the nation may be, which is the *essence* of the performance. Hence in Sankhara, like `greeting' above, the essence is the same whatever the context. Sweeping statements that the Buddha made like " Sabbe sankhara anicca", " Sabbe sankhara dukkha" is better understood when the essence of Sankhara is known. This is how I see Sankhara. Metta eznir --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > Dear Eznir, > > You're having a good discussion with Sukin. I hope you continue. > > --- Eznir wrote: > > Refer Sammaditti Sutta MN-09 > > > > With the arising of taints there is the arising of ignorance. Now one > > of the taints is the taint of ignorance. Which means that with the > > arising of ignorance there is the arising of ignorance. Therefore the > > foundation of ignorance is ignorance itself! This implies that to an > > uninstructed person it is intrinsically impossible to know that he is > > ignorant, to know what he is ignorant of, since he is in ignorance. > ... > > Your post on ignorance was very clear and helpful. Do you have any similar > clear comments or quotes on sankhara (formations) as used in D.O.? As I > just wrote in the post to Nina and all, I think we have to clearly > distinguish the meanings in different contexts. Perhaps you can extract > the references from your earlier post to me which were just related to > this D.O. meaning. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== > > 32196 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Apr 14, 2004 0:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: Illusion of Control Hi Howard, ---------------------- H: > Yes, it all can be understood in such a manner. But there is understanding, and there is understanding. An intellectual translation of the Buddha's suttic teachings into "ultimate form" is not the sort of understanding that is liberative, though it can certainly be useful. ---------------------- Mere intellectual understanding is liberating in its way. To understand that there is no self, only nama and rupa, is to have a weight lifted from your shoulders. Don't you get this from your own, phenomenalist viewpoint? ---------------------- Howard: > Yes, all true. However - there are complex relations that hold among the momentary actualities, and a concept such as that of a process of meditation is a way of (indirectly) grasping not only the actualities involved, but also the multi-layered pattern of relations among them. --------------------- I agree that we have to know how concepts are created. I am not convinced, however, that the concept of a process of meditation bears any relation to actual, momentary, meditation. I believe there can be outward, conceptual, signs that right understanding has been developed. For example, an arahant, walking on his alms round, fixes his gaze one plough-length ahead. This is because he has no desire to be looking about in search of visual stimulation. But there would be no sense in your or my walking in this way: it is not a ritual for creating wisdom. ----------------- H: > Using the intellect to conceive of a world of actuality is still involving oneself in the world of concepts, but we can easily fool ourselves into thinking otherwise. ----------------- I'm not sure of the danger you are warning against, here. While we are merely studying Dhamma, are we especially likely to be fooling ourselves? Wouldn't there be a greater risk if we presumed to be practising -- rather than studying -- Dhamma? ---------------------------- H: > The fact is, we start where we are, not where we would hope to be. -------------------------- No, the fact is, there is no we; there is only nama and rupa. That is either true or false: there are no half measures. ------------------------ H: > The Buddha addressed beings like us, fully immersed in the sham world of mental construct, and he taught us to proceed with specific efforts from within our current sham world which cultivate, and train, and purify, so that we take ourselves from within the very midst of the darkness of ignorance into the light of wisdom. --------------------------- So, for all your phenomenalist beliefs, you resort to concepts when it comes to the crunch. You don't have to, you know: it is not necessary to throw your understanding of nama and rupa out the window. ---------------------------- H: > But substituting belief in a intellectual theory of ultimate reality is an ineffective alternative to engaging in the conventional practices taught by the Buddha that lead to purification of mind and to liberation. -------------------- But is that so? Did the Buddha specify conventional practices? Here at dsg, we are shown a wealth of evidence to the contrary. Why side against it? Why not stay true to your phenomenalist leanings? Kind regards, Ken H 32197 From: Ken O Date: Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dialogue on satipatthana Hi James > James: How are people supposed to practice the Abhidhamma? k: Practising paramatha dhammas and not concepts - and that make a lot of difference ;-). And know the difference between rupas and nama > James: Does the Abhidhamma really say that!! You mean I am entering >> jhanas countless of times while I write this post? Wow, that is > pretty convenient! I should save my legs and back and stop > meditating for jhana! ;-)) Seriously, I don't believe the Buddha > taught this. k: I told you already, a moment is different for different people. I remember a story about this disciple who jump down from a cliff, then while falling down, he attain enlightment and enter jhanas. time is a concept, where our one secs, is not one secs to a person who is enlighted. One secs in the higher heavens means a few hours or minute of human life. Ken O 32198 From: Date: Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Illusion of Control Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/14/04 3:24:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > ---------------------- > H: >Yes, it all can be understood in such a manner. But there is > understanding, and there is understanding. An intellectual > translation of the Buddha's suttic teachings into "ultimate form" is > not the sort of understanding that is liberative, though it can > certainly be useful. > ---------------------- > > Mere intellectual understanding is liberating in its way. To > understand that there is no self, only nama and rupa, is to have a > weight lifted from your shoulders. Don't you get this from your > own, phenomenalist viewpoint? > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Correct intellectual understanding - and we can't be too sure when our understanding *is* correct - is helpful. It is an important factor. In itself, however, it is only liberating, as you say, "in its way". ------------------------------------------------ > > ---------------------- > > Howard: >Yes, all true. However - there are complex relations that > hold among the momentary actualities, and a concept such as that of > a process of meditation is a way of (indirectly) grasping not only > the actualities involved, but also the multi-layered pattern of > relations among them. > --------------------- > > I agree that we have to know how concepts are created. I am not > convinced, however, that the concept of a process of meditation > bears any relation to actual, momentary, meditation. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I haven't a clue as to what "momentary meditation" might be. Meditation, of any stripe, is a multi-faceted process lasting over many mind-moments. -------------------------------------------------- > > I believe there can be outward, conceptual, signs that right > understanding has been developed. For example, an arahant, walking > on his alms round, fixes his gaze one plough-length ahead. This is > because he has no desire to be looking about in search of visual > stimulation. But there would be no sense in your or my walking in > this way: it is not a ritual for creating wisdom. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I sure agree with that! ----------------------------------------------- > > ----------------- > H: >Using the intellect to conceive of a world of actuality is > still involving oneself in the world of concepts, but we can easily > fool ourselves into thinking otherwise. > ----------------- > > I'm not sure of the danger you are warning against, here. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: The danger is in fooling oneself - in thinking that one sees "face to face", when it it really yet "through a glass, darkly." ----------------------------------------------- While we > > are merely studying Dhamma, are we especially likely to be fooling > ourselves? Wouldn't there be a greater risk if we presumed to be > practising -- rather than studying -- Dhamma? ------------------------------------------------ Howard: We can be fooling ourselves in either case - whenever we mistake what we seem to understand and what we seem to be doing for what is actually understood and done. In particular, we are fooling ourselves when we mistake beief and view for wisdom. ---------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------- > H: >The fact is, we start where we are, not where we would hope to > be. > -------------------------- > > No, the fact is, there is no we; there is only nama and rupa. That > is either true or false: there are no half measures. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ahh, suddenly attempting to switch language style, Ken? Look at what you wrote earlier in your post. Didn't you say "you" and "I", and didn't you speak of an "arahant" and of "the Dhamma" as if these were actual phenomena. Ken we are *conversing*, which means we are using concepts. Concepts are tools for communication, between minds and within a mind. There is *no* speech or thought without concepts. It is a different matter as to whether one sees through concepts or not. ----------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------ > H: >The Buddha addressed beings like us, fully immersed in the sham > world of mental construct, and he taught us to proceed with specific > efforts from within our current sham world which cultivate, and > train, and purify, so that we take ourselves from within the very > midst of the darkness of ignorance into the light of wisdom. > --------------------------- > > So, for all your phenomenalist beliefs, you resort to concepts when > it comes to the crunch. You don't have to, you know: it is not > necessary to throw your understanding of nama and rupa out the > window. ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay, Ken, I'll play your game. Ready? Okay, here goes: "Why, Ken! How silly! There are no such things as beliefs - they are concept only; there is nothing called "phenomenalism" either. Oh, and guess what? As soon as you *talk* about namas and rupas, as soon as you *think* about them, you are dealing with mere concept and not actuality. Oh, yes - also, as soon as you talk or think about concept, that, itself, is mere concept. In fact, Ken, in order to think or talk without concept, and yet to deal only with experiential reality, the thinking and talking must take the form of what follows between the subsequent corner brackets: < >." ------------------------------------------------ > > ---------------------------- > H: >But substituting belief in a intellectual theory of ultimate > reality is an ineffective alternative to engaging in the > conventional practices taught by the Buddha that lead to > purification of mind and to liberation. > -------------------- > > But is that so? Did the Buddha specify conventional practices? > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed. --------------------------------------------------- Here > > at dsg, we are shown a wealth of evidence to the contrary. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: And in the 45 years of the Buddha's teaching as recorded in the Sutta Pitaka, we are shown exactly what I claim. If I need to choose between the two, you can be assured that there is little doubt as to my decision. -------------------------------------------------- Why side > > against it? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Because I am a *Buddhist* (!), not a DSG-er or even an Abhidhammika. ----------------------------------------------- > Why not stay true to your phenomenalist leanings? > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I most assuredly do. To be a thoroughgoing phenomenalist doesn't require not communicating. It only requires understanding the difference between what is merely manner of speaking and what is actuality. ----------------------------------------------- > > Kind regards, > Ken H > ====================== 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) 32199 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: Pannatti (Concept) Friend Jon, Jon: I don't think I suggested that my statement was a direct quote of the Buddha's. I see nothing wrong with summaries, re-statements or 'extrapolations' as long as they correctly reflect the Buddha's teaching (if only direct quotes were allowed we'd all be limited to exchanging sutta excerpts with each other ;-)). James: Hey, that would be fun!! ;-)) Yea, you are right that there is nothing inherently wrong with extrapolating from the Buddha's teachings. Ven. Sariputta did it quite often in various suttas. However, the key here is if these extrapolations `correctly reflect the Buddha's teaching'. In this case, we have the Buddha speaking about how mindfulness of breath can be used to lead to liberation, and we have you directly contradicting this by assembling various meanings from obscure commentaries and adding your own interpretations to even these commentaries. It is not necessary to go through so many layers of thought and interpretation to figure out what the Buddha was teaching. He was teaching mindfulness of breath! You know: breathing! Pulling air into your lungs and pushing it back out again by contracting and expanding the diaphragm. What is so difficult to understand about that? Jon: I'm sorry that you find the quote already provided insufficient to support the statement. I'll try and do better, but I think I'll first have to narrow down the exact point(s) in contention, as it will need more than one quote. Which one (or more) of the following would you take issue with in particular: - The dhammas/five aggregates spoken of in the suttas do not include 'breath'. - The object of the development of insight (vipassana bhavana) is always a dhamma/one of the five aggregates. - Samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana are separate and distinct forms of bhavana leading to different outcomes -- jhaana and rebirth in an appropriate plane, in the case of samatha bhavana, and enlightenment with no further rebirth, in the case of vipassana bhavana. James: This shouldn't need more than one quote. You are making this far more complicated than it has to be. For starters, give me a quote (one quote) from the Buddha that directly states your number 2: "the object of the development of insight is always a dhamma/one of the five aggregates". This shouldn't be difficult to find because it is a key issue: development of insight. If you can provide a quote, I will leave you alone ;-). Jon: As you'll have noticed, I've been discussing this same passage (from another sutta) with Jack, together with the commentary on the statement "He trains thus: `I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence'; he trains thus: `I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence.' In brief, it seems to mean impermanence as a characteristic of any of the five aggregates. James: If you sit down and do it, mindfulness of breathing, you will eventually figure out what it means. There is no reason to start looking at numerous commentaries to figure it out. It means that the person will breathe in and out contemplating the impermanence of samsara. Samsara would include dhammas and those things that are fabricated...and the breath. They are all impermanent. Doing this can rid the mind of defilements through non-clinging. It is almost as if you see Enlightenment as `knowing something', and it is to a certain extent, but Enlightenment is more freeing the mind of those things which keep in enslaved. Mindfulness of the breath can free the mind in this regard. Almost anything can free the mind in this regard. For example, as we have been discussing, Sariputta became enlightened just thinking about what the Buddha was teaching. His mind was completely engaged in concepts when it was freed of the taints. Freedom from the taints doesn't require contemplation of raw phenomena in all cases (though in most cases it does because that will greatly assist in fostering non-clinging). Metta, James