36200 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fabric softener Hi Sarah > Phil, > > just a quick note - I have several of your super letters in front of me to > add points on, but am out of time.....(also on Htoo's and one or two > others). > > Anway, greatly appreciate the obvious fabric softener effects in the rough > and tumble wash cycles which come out in all your kind posts. Thanks! Of course there is conceit and the desire to make myself like mixed in as well - the thing that led James quite rightly to compare me to a friendly labrador that is constantly seeking approval. Don't say that to be self-deprecating. Just aware that there are always so many cittas arising to motivate us to post, some of them truly kusala, many/most of them not. In my case definitely most. > Like AndrewT, I'm not so sure about some of the methodology, but I > certainly appreciate the results here;-) Ph :I'll take this opportunity to say hi to Andrew T as well. I want to respond in that thread because the topic interests me a lot, but no time tonight. Sarah, if you were planning to respond in that thread, perhaps you could wait until I clarify what I'm getting at. Thanks! Metta, Phil 36201 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner6-Introduction(c) HI Htoo > Phil: Hello all > 1 -What if we *were* without cetasikas - just what would be going on? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: There is no citta that is not accompanied by cetasikas. And > there is no cetasika that exists without a citta. Thanks Htoo. I know it was a silly question but at least it drove home for me in a way I'll never forget that citta cannot be unaccompanied by cetasika. Rob M is a skilled engineer - perhaps he'll figure out a way to separate cetasika from citta and replace asobbhana ones with sobbhana ones. Cetasika transplants for the kusala-challenged! Just joking! Metta, Phil 36202 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:35am Subject: Jhana Journey ( 16 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, The jhana practitioner becomes an expert in the second jhana as he practise jhanic exercises of contemplating, reaching, determining, emerging, and scrutinising. After a long practice, he starts to notice that vicara ( sustained application ) looks like an enemy to his present jhana. Because vicara is nearly the same as vitakka in terms of attraction back to kama things. And he realises that vicara is the weakest link in his 2nd jhana jhanic factors. He then sees vicara as a blameable dhamma and he starts to try to drive out vicara and again he tries more and more than ever and reproaches again to patibaga nimitta( counter image ) of WHITE. He is trying very very hard and he contemplates on parts of his jhana. Ekaggata is good, sukha is good and piti is also good. Good here means as compared to vicara. But vicara is not good as it may bring him down to the first jhana and may even draw him back to kama citta and his jhana might be lost. With the very long practice on jhana, after passing away of indefinite bhavanga, manodvara-avajjana citta arises and then a series of mahakusala cittas arise. They are parikamma (preparatory mind ), upacara ( proximate mind of jhana ), anuloma ( balancing- negotiating mind ) and gotrabhu ( leaving mind or lineage-changing mind ). After gotrabhu citta, the third jhana arises once without vicara. Then bhavanga cittas follow indefinitely. Now he has achieved third jhana. He must practice all jhana exercises including avajjana ( contemplating ), samapajjana (reaching ),adhitthana ( determinating ), votthana ( terminating or emerging ) and paccavakkhana ( investigating or scrutinising ) exercises. If he exercises well he will soon become expert in third jhana. May you all attain third jhana. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36203 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 5:06am Subject: CSC4-Introduction(a) [Howard: "No, no!"] Thanks for your words of comfort, Howard. You have a good heart. In this case, though, you missed my point. To wit: Dan: > > I'm with you. But in my ignorance, I still struggle with the > > personification language and cringe when I hear it. I so dearly > > crave 'pure' language that is not wrapped in personifications that > > aversion tends to arise when 'impure' language is used to discuss > > something that I think should be clean of personification (viz., > > citta and cetasika). The cringing is evidence of lack of > > understanding: moha -> cringing. > > > Howard: > I don't think that is ignorance on your part, Dan. I agree with you > about the personifications - I think they are actually dangerous, playing right > into the hands of atta view. This is why, for example, I am uneasy with the > language that make cittas seem to be, as I put it, "little, knowing selves," and > as "agents of a sort" Mind with wisdom does not cringe, and mind that craves pure language is surely ignorant. [Ref: 1. dependent origination, 2. ignorance is root of all akusala]. I agree that the personifications can indeed play right into the hands of atta view, but must they? I think not, unless ignorance drives them that way. ------------------------- Dan: > > Well, to hell with what "I" think! Away, thou blasted rigidity that > > cringes! Walk onward to understanding, to liberation from craving and > > cringing and rigidity! > > > Howard: > No, no! I believe you are thinking quite properly. My point was only > that the personifications are avoidable. They should, in fact, be avoided I > think, or, if used, they should always be accompanied by disclaimers. I don't think hard and fast rules about what kind of language to use are helpful in breaking down our clinging fast to our conceptual frameworks. Buddha himself used lots of metaphorical language and personifications -- without always accompanying them by disclaimers. The task is to find language that clarifies the intended meaning. For me, the personifications don't work well at this time because my ignorance is of the type that conditions cringing at certain kinds of metaphorical language. So, "to hell with what 'I' think!" This only means that I see how the metaphors *could* reinforce sakayaditthi, I then crave purer language cringe because the pure language is not to be found. The problem? Clinging to entirely reasonable thinking (viz. "Metaphorical language is capable of reinforcing ditthi") reinforces ditthi -- emphatically! Why emphatic? Because the thinking is correct. When I say, "To hell with...," I mean the opposite of "cling to" even if (especially if) the thinking is correct. Metta, Dan 36204 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 5:14am Subject: CSS4-Introduction(a) [Howard: "...no object of experience." Dear Howard, A question for you: Dan: 'Citta' is simply the experiencing or cognizing of an object. Howard: Yes! And without a subject of the experience, there is no object of the experience. --> Are you sure? If so, what do you mean by "subject"? Howard: the use of 'citta' to denote a subjective, knowing agent is dangerous, IMO. --> Yes, it certainly is, as is the adoption of any language scheme. But is it even more dangerous that the danger of clinging to the notion of a perfect language or conceptual formulation for something as deep as 'citta' and 'cetasika'? And cringing when that conceptual formulation is imperfect? More metta, Dan 36205 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 5:40am Subject: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Dear Ken H, Welcome aboard the thread! Always nice to see you paddling around... I like your quiz: Ken H: > When we say, `Citta experiences an object,' are we talking about: > A, a single reality - an event, > B, two realities - the experiencing and the experienced, > C, three realities - the experience-er, the experiencing and the experienced, or, > D, none of the above? Certainly D is the best answer because no language is going to perfectly describe the experience. Now, the question becomes more along the lines of the following: Which formulation best induces an understanding of anatta, anicca, and dukkha in the listener? For me, with my current moha specialty, B works best. The commentators delineate three formulations, including B and C from above and one other. [BB's CMA, p. 27] "The commentators define 'citta' in three ways: as agent, as instrument, and as activity. As the agent, citta is that which cognizes and object (aaramma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m). As the instrument, citta is that by means of which the accompanying mental factors cognize the object (etena cintentii ti citta.m). As an activity, citta is itself nothing other than the process of cognizing the object (cintanamatta.m citta.m)." BB likes the third the best (answer B): "The third definition, in terms of sheer activity, is regarded as the most adequate of the three: that is, citta is fundamentally an activity or process of cognizing or knowing an object. It is not an agent or instrument possessing actual bein in itself apart from the activity of cognizing." Of course, the other two definitions have useful role as well. In BB's words (p. 27 again): "The definitions in terms of agent and instrument are proposed to refute the wrong view of those who hold that a permanent self or ego is the agent and instrument of cognition." Metta, Dan 36206 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 5:49am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 059 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, When the 5th jhana arises, it is said to be in the 5th rupa jhana. The 5th rupa jhana have ekaggata as jhana factor and it is accompanied by upekkha vedana. All higher jhanas that is all arupa jhanas are in upekkha vedana and the only jhana factor is ekaggata. So all arupa jhanas are counted as 5th jhana cittas as they have the same jhana factor as with 5th rupa jhana. Here, I am not going to discuss about abhinna, which bases on 5th rupa jhana. But to understand arupa jhanas, kasina kammatthanas have to be explained to some extent so that there have to be a clear picture of what arupa jhana and what are arupa jhana cittas and their objects. There are 10 kasina objects. As long as we are not arahats, we will be doing akusala or kusala. When we are doing kusala or wholesome actions, this may be dana kusala or offering. Or this may be sila kusala or observing moral conduct. or this may be bhavana kusala or mental cultivation of good mind. Bhavana may be samatha bhavana or vipassana bhavana. Vipassana bhavana is mahasatipatthana. There are 40 samatha bhavana kammatthanas. Samatha means samadhi that dries up kilesa and makes stillness and calm. Kammatthana is made up of 'kamma' and 'thana'. Kamma here means 'bhavana kusala kamma' and thana means place. Kammatthana means 'the place where bhavana kusala citta dwell. There are 40 samatha kammatthana. They are 10 kasina kammatthana, 10 asubha kammatthana, 10 anussati kammatthana, 4 brahmavihara kammatthana, 4 aruppa kammatthanas, 1 aharepatikulasanna and 1 catudhatuvavatthana. To develop arupa jhana, the practitioner must have 5th rupa jhana. Not every samatha kammatthana has the power to give rise to 5th rupa jhana. Among them 10 kasina kammatthana can give rise to all rupa jhanas that is from the 1st to 5th rupa jhana. Kasina means 'wholeness'. There are 10 kasina kammatthana. 1. pathavi kasina ( earth-substance ) 2. tejo kasina ( fire-flame ) 3. vayo kasina ( wind-movement ) 4. apo kasina ( water-substance ) 5. nila kasina ( dark-coloured object like brown ) 6. pita kasina ( golden-yellow ) 7. lohita kasina ( red ) 8. odata kasina ( white ) 9. aloka kasina ( light ) 10.akasa kasina ( bounded space ) As an example, let us take red-kasina. As initiation, the object has to be a circular object with red colour. When this colour is totally embedded in the mind, that is the real visual object appears exactly in the mind without looking at it, this is called uggaha nimitta. When the practitioner see the red, it is a reality. But when uggaha nimitta arises, it is pannatta. The idea arises in the mind. This uggaha nimitta or mental image once changes into another nimitta called patibhaga nimitta or counter image. This image is much much more beautiful than uggaha nimitta. This again is panatta. It is not reality. Patibhaga nimitta is not a rupaarammana. It never exists as a reality. But it is just a pannatta. The 1st jhana looks at this patigha nimitta as its sole object. So the object of 1st jhana citta with this lohita kasina or red-kasina is pannatta. This happens in all other higher rupa jhana. So the 5th rupa jhana has pannatta as its object. Even though rupa jhanas dry out all kilesa, actually they cannot eradicate them at all. This is momentary elimination of kilesa and called vikkhambana pahana. As long as in jhana, there is no lobha, no dosa, no moha. So jhanas are free of kilesa. But they cannot eradicate anusaya kilesa. As with lohita kasina, all other kasinas take pannatta as their object when in appana jhanas. Likewise, 10 asubha kammatthanas take the object pannatta. Dead bodies are not realities. They are just mental re-construction of ideas. Asubha kammatthana can give rise to the 1st rupa jhana. Anapanassati anussati kammatthana can give rise to all 5 rupa jhanas. But kayagatasati anussati kammatthana can give rise to only 1st rupa jhana. Other 8 anussati kammatthana give only upacara samadhi and they never give rise to appana samadhi. That is they never give rise to jhana. But they can clear away kilesa momentarily. Here all 10 anussati kammatthana take panatta as their object. They never take paramattha dhamma as their object. Metta, karuna, and mudita kammatthana can give rise to up to 4th rupa jhana. After that if the practitioner wants further jhana, he has to practise upekkha brahmavihara kammatthana, which will give rise to 5th rupa jhana. All 4 brahmavihara kamatthana take pannatta as their object. This pannatta is satta pannatta. That is the idea of beings, which is not a paramattha dhamma. All rupa jhanas take panatta as their object and they cannot take paramattha dhamma as their object. Here I just say all rupa jhanas. As all 5 rupa jhana kusala cittas take panatta as their object, all 5 rupavacara rupavipaka cittas take panatta as their object. Like rupakusala cittas, all rupakiriya cittas take panatta as their object. Before going up to arupa jhana, we will study again the first jhana with lohita kasina or red-kasina. Kasina means 'the whole' or 'wholeness'. Initially the practitioner has to look at the red-circle kasina object. His mind mas to be embedded through out the surface of the whole circle and not at a single point but as a whole. This wholeness is called kasina. The wholeness appears in his mind when it matures. This image called uggaha nimitta is almost the same as parikamma nimitta which is the initial object. But the difference is that uggaha nimitta can be seen by mind with closed eyes. At a time, there arise patibhaga nimitta which is counter image. That is some similarity with uggaha nimitta but much much more beautiful and free of any dirt, creeze, wrinkles, staining, blotches, spots and it is brilliant and it glows. When this red surface of patibhaga nimitta arises, there are no hindrances and vitakka put the practitioner's mind on that patibhaga nimitta, and vicara makes the mind just wandering over and over on patibhaga nimitta. Piti make the practitioner fresh, alert, affectionate and like the object patibhaga nimitta. Sukha makes him well calm and free of any worry, restlessness. Ekaggata makes him still. When these 5 jhana factors are apparently working in their fullest power and practitioners is free of hindrances like sensuous thoughts like thinking on kama matters like wanting to see that he like, wanting to hear what he like, wanting to smell what he like, wanting to eat or taste what he like, wanting to feel or touch what he like, and enjoying thinking what he like. Inappropriate thought on jhana may actually makes akusala and this likeness makes arising of lobha mula citta such as 'somanassa sahagatam ditthi gata vippayuttam asankharika citta'. This lobha citta has ekaggata. The practitioner has ekaggata. This lobha citta has piti or joy. The practitioner thinks this piti as jhana factor which is wrong. All lobha-rooted thinking must be cleared away. When 5 jhana factors are working to their fullest capacities, there are no ill will like wanting to attack, revenge, fight etc etc. His mind will be concentrated on patibhaga nimitta and not on any other object and he will be free of uddhacca or spreading mind like thinking on a thing then move to another thing and then move other things very quickly and does not stay still. If 5 jhana factors are working, there will be no repent. He will be active and alert and free of laziness, sloth and torpor that is thina-middha nivarana. He will have a good trust in the current practice and he is free of vicikiccha nivarana. As this happen, his mind is still and calm. At a indefinite time, all his mental faculties that is his citta, associated cetasikas including jhana factors take the jhana object that is patibhaga nimitta very close. It is so close that there is no space between object and the object taker and it seems that they are fused and merged each other and there is just a singleness. This state cannot be interrupted. When this absorptive state arises, then this can be called as the 1st jhana. Through 5 exercises that is contemplating exercising on 1st jhana, reaching exercise, determining-prescribing time on jhana, emerging- exiting exercise, and scrutinising exercise on the 1st jhana, the practitioner will see the weakness in jhana factors. First he will notice that vitakka is the weakest. Through exercise and continuing practice, without vitakka 2nd jhana arise, without vicara 3rd jhana arise, without piti 4th jhana arise, and without sukha the 5th rupa jhana arise with upekkha vedana. All these 5 rupa jhana take the object patibhaga nimitta as their object, which is panatta. This object is not a paramattha dhamma. This object is not a reality. It is not an ultimate truth. When he attain the 5th rupa jhana, he has to practise it to be proficient. At a time, he has to expand his patibhaga nimitta to fill up the whole universe. There is nothing but red. He will only see red and nothing more than that. He just knows the red. And this redness is endless and limitless. There is boundless redness or lohita patibhaga nimitta. The whole universe is free of things and there is only red or lohita patibhaga nimitta. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 36207 From: agriosinski Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 5:55am Subject: object in the reality of arising sounds Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: [...] > > So there are objects before they've been experienced? > N: Good Q. for thinking over. An object is known, otherwise it would not be > an object. A ruupa such as sound has to arise just a tiny fraction of time > before it can be known by citta, because rupa at its arising moment is weak. > It disturbs the bhavangacitta and then the process of cittas that know it > can begin. Thank you very much for your explanations. You helped me a lot. metta, Agrios 36208 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 6:00am Subject: CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Dear Herman, Excellent points you make about the structure of language. I agree that the sentence "Citta experiences an object" has a subject and is strongly *suggestive* of a substantialist representation. My beef with this formulation is that the language structure lends strength to that suggestion. However, don't you think metaphor can still be useful for elucidating elusive ideas? The citta-as-agent metaphor can be useful in the dissolution of the notion of an eternal, abiding Self. So, it needn't be read as incorrigibly "substantialist." Even if citta-as-agent is interpreted literally as a little Self, it attenuates the tendency to the Big Self interpretation of experiences happening to 'me'. This Little Self is not lasting (anicca) and thus does not have the characteristics of the "Self" that constitutes the sakayaditthi, i.u., the 'atta' that is 'icca'. Need the language be carried to the point that the citta-as-agent representation is rejected as vulgar and repulsive because of its *apparent* substantialism? "Apparent" because linguistic substantialism (i.e., a subject) is not necessarily existential substantialism in the sense that the Little Self need not be conceived as lasting. Kind regards, Dan ================ Herman: > When you say anything, you are using language to communicate. Language > has implicit rules and structure. The sentence "Citta experiences an > object" is composed of subject - verb - object. > The sentence "citta experiences an object", taking the rules of language > into account, should be taken as being a substantialist representation > of an event. 36209 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 6:06am Subject: CSC-Introduction(a) [Nina: "cittas are so fast"] Dear Nina, I think you hit the nail on the head. The citta-as-agent formulation is useful for communicating anicca and moving away from interpreting experience as happening to the great "Me". Well put. Dan Nina: > Perhaps this helps: the cittas are so fast, when we think about them > they are gone. We can ask ourselves: which one, which one? That is why the > Buddha said: what is impermanent is not self. > As to helpers, etc. just a simile which may be helpful for some people. > The same for goal. Citta has no time to think of any goal, it just arises > because of conditions, and falls away. 36210 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 6:22am Subject: Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner2-Preface(a) [Phil] Dear Herman, Thanks for you kind greetings. It's nice to be back, but I'm again realizing the time sink that dsg is and why I tend to just pop in and then out again after awhile... This time, though, I intend to stay awhile. I must say that your comments on Pali ring true. I'd add that even within the suttas themselves, the meanings of words vary tremendously, depending on context (e.g., dukkha, pañña, etc.). In the commentaries we see a proliferation of words as more and more detail is added to the descriptions. I also agree that modern English is capable of expressing far more nuance than Pali. However, the Pali expresses in single words some concepts that are just plain alien to English tradition. English explanations require tomes to express these concepts because the language has no experience with them and no words that point to them. Which words to use then? Pali, but augmented with tomes of nuanced English to explain what you mean by each word. So, in conclusion, I'll just reiterate your comment that: "...we should never imagine that it is possible to capture experience in words, of any language. But we can, and should be, mindful of our constant efforts to do so." Kind Regards (or 'metta' in Pali), Dan 36211 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 6:30am Subject: Deeds of Merit - only one way to decrease defilements Hello all More from the chapter on sila, avoidance of akusala, in K Sujin's "Deeds of Merit" Available at http://www.zolag.co.uk/ebook.html Metta, Phil S. : Defilements are repugnant. Their degree and strength determines to what extent they cause the citta to be distressed and agitated. It is not in anyone's power to prevent the arising of defilements, because they are devoid of self, they are anattaa. If we know the wholesome dhamma which is opposed to a particular defilement, and if we know the way leading to the elimination of defilements, it is possible to gradually decrease their strength. For someone who has been bitten by a poisonous snake or who suffers from diseases there may be a medicine which cures ills, but such medicine is not a cure for the mental disease which are the defilements. Defilements can decrease only by the development of all kinds of kusala. 36212 From: jwromeijn Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 6:32am Subject: Re: The First Council / The Fourth Precept --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi all, > Is it a breach of the fourth precept to put forward as fact something which is not known as fact? > What is the evidence for the reciting of the Abhidhamma at the First > Council? > Kind Regards > Herman Hallo Herman There is no evidence, you know that, Herman. Most buddhologists say the Abhidhamma is composed one or more centuries later. But is "wishful thinking" the same as "not speaking the truth" ? Perhaps but let's think with metta on these people. Joop 36213 From: Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 3:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Howard: "No, no!"] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 9/9/04 8:08:16 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@y... writes: > Thanks for your words of comfort, Howard. You have a good heart. In > this case, though, you missed my point. To wit: > > Dan: > >>I'm with you. But in my ignorance, I still struggle with the > >>personification language and cringe when I hear it. I so dearly > >>crave 'pure' language that is not wrapped in personifications > that > >>aversion tends to arise when 'impure' language is used to discuss > >>something that I think should be clean of personification (viz., > >>citta and cetasika). The cringing is evidence of lack of > >>understanding: moha -> cringing. > >> > >Howard: > > I don't think that is ignorance on your part, Dan. I agree > with you > >about the personifications - I think they are actually dangerous, > playing right > >into the hands of atta view. This is why, for example, I am uneasy > with the > >language that make cittas seem to be, as I put it, "little, knowing > selves," and > >as "agents of a sort" > > Mind with wisdom does not cringe, and mind that craves pure language > is surely ignorant. [Ref: 1. dependent origination, 2. ignorance is > root of all akusala]. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay - sure. I agree that "pure language" should not be "craved". However, it should be seen as very useful, and confusing language should be seen as confusing, and care should be taken in communicating so that the intended meaning can be viewed even by those with considerable dust in their eyes, for after all, that is most of us. When non-literal terminology is used, it should be made as clear as possible that the speech is metaphorical, if not at that moment, then by means of statements made at other times. -------------------------------------------------- > > I agree that the personifications can indeed play right into the > hands of atta view, but must they? I think not, unless ignorance > drives them that way. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: The trouble is that if the language use is not very well crafted, then, because ignorance is the rule rather than the exception, that usage may indeed drive the mind towards atta view. Certainly figures of speech will be seen through by wisdom, but when that wisdom is in hiding, it is good if the speech is well enough - subtly enough - crafted to coax wisdom out of its hiding place. ----------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------- > Dan: >>Well, to hell with what "I" think! Away, thou blasted > rigidity that > >>cringes! Walk onward to understanding, to liberation from craving > and > >>cringing and rigidity! > >> > >Howard: > > No, no! I believe you are thinking quite properly. My point > was only > >that the personifications are avoidable. They should, in fact, be > avoided I > >think, or, if used, they should always be accompanied by > disclaimers. > > I don't think hard and fast rules about what kind of language to use > are helpful in breaking down our clinging fast to our conceptual > frameworks. Buddha himself used lots of metaphorical language and > personifications -- without always accompanying them by disclaimers. > ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Sure. But the Buddha gave teachings upon teachings, day after day after day. Much of the language used was non-literal, without disclaimers - true. But much included disclaimers as well, and much was as literal as speech is capable of. Moreover, the Buddha formulated his teaching to suit the listener, and he was incredibly adept at that. (Of course one doesn't provide a disclaimer with every use of figurative speech. ALL our speech is fundamentally misleading, and to remove all defects from a sentence would require replacing that sentence by an infinite collection of sentences: S1 to correct the original sentence, S2 to correct S1, S3 to correct S2, and so on.) ---------------------------------------------------------- > The task is to find language that clarifies the intended meaning. For > me, the personifications don't work well at this time because my > ignorance is of the type that conditions cringing at certain kinds of > metaphorical language. > --------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, if you "cringe" at it because you see how it could be misleading, that is no "crime". It is far better than being taken in by it! Moreover, to cringe at it in the sense of having concern that some people might be fooled by it is good, being a matter of compassion rather than aversion. ------------------------------------------------------- > > So, "to hell with what 'I' think!" This only means that I see how the > metaphors *could* reinforce sakayaditthi, I then crave purer language > cringe because the pure language is not to be found. The problem? > Clinging to entirely reasonable thinking (viz. "Metaphorical language > is capable of reinforcing ditthi") reinforces ditthi -- emphatically! > Why emphatic? Because the thinking is correct. When I say, "To hell > with...," I mean the opposite of "cling to" even if (especially if) > the thinking is correct. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. Good not to cling. :-) ------------------------------------------------ > > Metta, > > Dan > > ======================== 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) 36214 From: Andrew Levin Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 7:58am Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" <> > > > > > Then I'm not sure what 'reducing self to one moment only' means. > Can > > you describe? > > +++++++++++++++++++ > Dear Andrew, > It is something Nina wrote to me a few times. Usually we are caught > up in the idea of me being this or that, doing this or that. But > actually there six worlds: that of seeing/visble object; > hearing/sound; tasting/tasted; and the other doors. All these worlds > have different causes and are distinct from each other, it is by > separating the worlds into one moment that self is reduced from the > whole of 'me' into oen moment only. > When my uncle was in hospital I said to him that we might take the > whole of the situation and think 'How bad'. But all the time there > are different moments. Moments with painful feeling, yes. But then > moments when the doctor says something nice. Or when he looks at the > pleasant(mildly) wallpaper. > All the time in life desirable vipaka and undesirable vipaka is > alternating, and then there are always different reactions after the > vipaka. But no self- only these different moments. So be mindful of nama and rupa, as opposed to having an idea of self this is happening to me, i am such and such? > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Also, what do you think are the necessary conditions for insight > to > > begin arising? Is it mere mindfulness of a single nama and rupa > here > > and there- as Phil suggests, or is it constant mindfulness and > > sustained energy in the practise and observation of phenomenon in > > their true nature, more of a systematic thing, seeing the three > > dharma seals in existence, as my practise guide says. > +++++++++ > The essential causes for insight are hearing true Dhamma, > considering it wisely and also pubbekata punnata (wholesome > accumulations from past lives). Yes, the true Dhamma. For instance, one has to not dwell with wrong views when practising insight meditation. How is this accomplished? Through vipassana meditation we can see the true nature of phenomenon as anatta and anicca, this is practising in accordance with the true dhamma. > Some people hear the Dhamma but it > means nothing and they turn away. Some hear it, get interested, but > consider unwisely and go wrong in various ways. > Andrew you have the ability to consider in a very wise way (and yet > you are young and currently having some problems); it shows good > accumulations. > I don't like the idea of rules about developing insight, most > importantly we have to learn what is sati and what only looks like > sati. Then different factors assist sati to arise. > ++++++++ I'm clueless. What is sati, then? > > > > > > Robert, when we are applying the principles of vipassana > meditation > > and seeing the true nature of phenomenon, shouldn't we be free of > > craving and clinging, or do we have to root out craving? (I would > > think craving would already be there waiting to be looked at, > whether > > we are mindful or not) > > > > ++++++++++++ > The main point with vipassana is to see how anatta every moment is, > that every moment arises by complex conditions. If craving arises it > is because it is conditioned to arise. It has to accepted and > studied so that the causes for craving can be seen. There are > four types of clinging(see visuddhimagga xvii 241-3). That of sense > desire clinging, wrongview > clinging, clinging to rules and rituals, and lastly > self view clinging. Note that three of the four are types of miccha- > ditthi (the three include all > types of wrong view from the gross to the very most subtle). These > three are the most dangerous type of clinging and the ones we > especially need to understand. See Vissudhimagga xvii246. The path of > vipassana gradually > eliminates all three types of micchaditthi until at sotapanna they > are eradicated forever. Later stages, after sotapanna, > then attenuate the clinging to sense desires. Robert, I'm currently unable to read and get an understanding of the different texts I have, including Vism. I can follow bare instructions, but when I try to read, it seems it is only putting more dust in my eyes as it were. I will await further development of the capability of understanding to develop, as it has in the past. > > I want to emphasize this because one of the big > mistakes I made in my > early buddhist life was to try to stop having sense > desire. It got so bad I > would feel guilty everytime I had an icecream. This all > comes from a deepseated idea of control and self. And > it is not the way to > understand. First there must be a gradual removal of > wrongview. We have accumulated much defilements and we have to learn > to understand them –not suppress them. Most of us have difficulty in > comprehending this point as "sense desire clinging is obvious …. not > so the other kinds (the three types of micchaditthi)" Visuddhimagga > Xvii 246. > RobertK. Suppression of the hindrances is a good thing, IMO, so we do not act with a hindered mind, out of the presence of gross defilements. Especially since it is not very difficult. At later stages the hindrances can be eradicated, as I'm sure I don't have to tell you. Understanding them would be necessary as per contemplation of dhammas, but what is wrong with suppressing them so that we can practise insight meditation unfettered? 36215 From: Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSS4-Introduction(a) [Howard: "...no object of experience." Hi, Dan - In a message dated 9/9/04 8:18:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > A question for you: > > Dan: 'Citta' is simply the experiencing or cognizing of an object. > > Howard: Yes! And without a subject of the experience, there is no > object of the experience. > > --> Are you sure? If so, what do you mean by "subject"? > --------------------------------------------- Howard: An experiencer - a "thing", whether static or dynamic, which is the doer, which experiences. ----------------------------------------------- > > > > Howard: the use of 'citta' to denote a subjective, knowing agent is > dangerous, IMO. > > --> Yes, it certainly is, as is the adoption of any language scheme. > But is it even more dangerous that the danger of clinging to the > notion of a perfect language or conceptual formulation for something > as deep as 'citta' and 'cetasika'? And cringing when that conceptual > formulation is imperfect? ------------------------------------------------- Howard: There can be no expectation of perfect formulation. It is simply a truism that clearer language, language that communicates more truly, is more useful than less adequate language. ------------------------------------------------- > > More metta, > > Dan > > ======================== 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) 36216 From: Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] object in the reality of arising sounds Hi Agrios, and Nina, and all - In a message dated 9/9/04 8:57:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, agriosinski@y... writes: > Hi Nina, > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > [...] > >>So there are objects before they've been experienced? > >N: Good Q. for thinking over. An object is known, otherwise it would not be > >an object. A ruupa such as sound has to arise just a tiny fraction of time > >before it can be known by citta, because rupa at its arising moment is > weak. > >It disturbs the bhavangacitta and then the process of cittas that know it > >can begin. > > Thank you very much for your explanations. > You helped me a lot. > > metta, > Agrios > > =========================== Nina, you write "... An object is known, otherwise it would not be an object. A ruupa such as sound has to arise just a tiny fraction of time before it can be known by citta, because rupa at its arising moment is weak. It disturbs the bhavangacitta and then the process of cittas that know it can begin." Where does that ruupa arise, Nina, at the initial moment when it is not yet known? What exactly constitutes that arising? 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) 36217 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 10:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Dear Dan, op 08-09-2004 15:36 schreef Dan D. op onco111@y...: > "Yeah, but how can there an experience with no one to experience it?" ... > Here, the word 'experiencing' is not the greatest because it does > tend to evoke the response of "who experiences?" and is used so > frequently in English other purposes. In particular, we need a word > for 'experience at a single moment', and that is how 'citta' is used. N: I think that is good. You are still wondering about the usefulness of the idea of subject and object. And I remember, you wrote about it about two years ago. And Rob K answered you at that time. A. Sujin would say, it does not matter what word you use, but know the characteristic that appears, know it as dhamma, which is not self. When insight has developed and dhammas are directly experienced, no words are needed. But I am not as far yet. You said that you find it so difficult to understand citta: same, same for all of us. When sati sampajañña (sati and pañña) arise only then, can its characteristic be directly penetrated. And all the moments we are intellectualizing, making definitions, we all do, doubts will arise. If I remember correctly, you were also present at the short visit with A. Sujin up North (her Alaska trip) when Jim was there? About three years ago. How did it come over to you what she said? She may have talked about seeing now. Was it strange to you? Jim mentioned as topic sati-sampajañña, he found that not easy. I took that to heart, that is why I remember. What one feels about one remembers (Howard likes this one.). I find it so important and would like to help others and myself. We need sati-sampajañña, it arises when there are enough conditions for it, that is firm, correct understanding of nama and rupa. People may wonder why A. Sujin speaks about seeing so often. There are seeing and hearing all the time, not only thinking. But usually we do not pay attention to such moments, we are more interested at thinking about what we see and hear. Don't you find that?? I am inclined to thinking all the time. By talking about seeing, people may be drawn just for a moment to pay attention to seeing or to what appears through the eyes. Just a very short moment, but this can be accumulated. This is a way to begin to understand what citta is, citta is nama, and I do not dare to say to you: it experiences. But if we gain right understanding we do not fall over words like *it*. When there can be direct awareness and understanding, we are no longer tricked by experiencers, subject, little selves, etc. It actually depends on sati-sampajañña whether we can cross the border of intellectualizing, reasoning, being misled by the choice of words. D: Reading through the types of cittas, we see things such as seeing- > consciousness and "one [lobha-rooted] consciousness, accompanied by > joy, associated with wrong view, unprompted." The seeing- > consciousness is simply the registering of a visual object in the > mind. N: I would not say: in the mind. Then again we have something that lasts. Whereas mind is ephemeral, impermanent. It is citta. The first stage of tender insight is knowing nama as nama and rupa as rupa and then we begin to understand what anatta really is. The first stage of principal insight is directly understanding the arising and falling away of nama and rupa. Then there will be more understanding that what is impermanent cannot be self. How could there be a self in what arises and then falls away immediately? But the wrong view of self is not yet eradicated, that will happen when enlightenment of the first stage is attained. Thus I would say: The seeing-consciousness is simply the experience of visual object. And leave out: in the mind. I am disinclined to the word registering, because I think seeing is such a direct experience: visible object impinges on eyesense, the eyebase, and this conditions seeing. D:The lobha-rooted cittas are the experiencings (cittas) of > objects (thoughts), colored by different shades (cetasikas) such as > pleasant feeling (vedana), desire for more pleasure (lobha), and the > yabbut of 'I like this' (ditthi). N: Colored by different shades may be confusing, I think. What about conditions? They are conditioned by pleasant feeling, etc. And this is mutual, the feeling is conditioned by the lobha. They all influence each other. Nina. 36218 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 10:48am Subject: Intro Vis. XIV, 99. Text Vis. XIV, 99: And this eightfold resultant consciousness without root-cause is of two kinds as well because of having an invariable object and a variable object. It is of three kinds as classed according to [bodily] pleasure, [mental] joy, and equanimity. For (34)-(38) the five consciousnesses have each an invariable object since they occur respectively only with respect to visible data, and so on. The others (39)-(41) have a variable object. For here (39) the mind-element occurs with respect to the five beginning with visible data, and (40)-(41) the two mind-consciousness-elements occur with respect to [all] six. Here, however, body-consciousness is associated with [bodily] pleasure. The mind-consciousness-element (40) with two positions is associated with [mental] joy; the other (41) is associated with equanimity. Intro Vis. XIV, 99. The Vis. deals here with the eight rootless profitable resultants (ahetuka kusala vipaakacittas). They are: the five sense-cognitions that are kusala vipaakacitta (seeing, etc.), receiving-consciousness (sampa.ticchana-citta) that is kusala vipaakacitta, and two types of investigating-consciousness (santiira.na-citta), one accompanied by pleasant feeling (when the object is extraordinarily pleasant) and one accompanied by indifferent feeling. These ahetuka vipaakacittas can be classified as twofold: with an invariable object and with a variable object. As the Vis. explains in this section, the five sense-cognitions have each an invariable (fixed, in Pali: nyaata) object. Thus, seeing experiences only visible object, hearing experiences only sound, etc. The receiving-consciousness receives the object experienced by the preceding sense-cognition, thus, this is any of the five sense-objects. Therefore, its object is variable, not fixed (in Pali: anyaata). The two types of investigating-consciousness experience six kinds of objects and therefore, their object is also variable. When these eight kusala vipaakacittas are classified with regard to the accompanying feelings, they can, as the case demands, be accompanied by happy feeling, by indifferent feeling and by bodily pleasant feeling. The Vis states: One type of investigating-consciousness is accompanied by pleasant feeling, and this type has two positions: it can perform the function of investigating, santiira.na, in a sense-door process, and also the function of retention, tadaaramma.na after the javana-cittas. The body-consciousness that is kusala vipaakacitta is accompanied by pleasant bodily feeling (sukhasampayutta). The Tiika explains that when a pleasant tangible object strikes the bodysense, the impact is strong, and that it is therefore accompanied by bodily pleasant feeling. Whereas when visible object that is a derived ruupa impinges on the eyesense, the impact is weak, and therefore it is accompanied by indifferent feeling. The same is true for the sense-cognitions of hearing, smelling and tasting. N: Ruupas are classified as the four Great Elements and the derived ruupas which are twentyfour ruupas. Tangible object are three of the four Great Elements or principal ruupas, namely, solidity (appearing as hardness or softness), heat (appearing as heat or cold) and motion (appearing as motion or pressure). The bodysense is a ruupa that is all over the body. The Vis. (XIV, 52) states: The Vis. (XIV, 41) states about the bodysense: The great Elements are the support of the bodysense. The Expositor (II, p. 349) explains that in the case of the eye-door, ear-door, nose-door and tongue-door, derived ruupa strikes on derived ruupa. Whenever we touch things or walk, elements are impinging on elements, and the body-consciousness that is vipaakacitta is accompanied by pleasant bodily feeling or unpleasant bodily feeling. When we touch something we may believe that the bodily feeling is indifferent, but this is not so. Bodily feeling is merely result and it is very ephemeral, only lasting for one moment. Bodily pleasant feeling has nothing to do with happy feeling accompanying citta rooted in attachment, which is akusala and arises because of different conditions. It may arise very shortly after the body-consciousness and then one may confuse the two kinds of feeling, one being vipaaka and one being akusala. When the javana-cittas in a process are akusala, there are seven of the same type succeeding one another, accompanied by the same type of feeling. Summarizing the three feelings dealt with in this section: of the eight cittas that are ahetuka kusala vipaakacittas, one is accompanied by happy feeling, one is accompanied by pleasant bodily feeling, and the other six are accompanied by indifferent feeling. The different classifications by way of variable or invariable object, which depends on the position or occasion of the cittas involved, or by way of feeling, have as objective to show different aspects and different conditions of realities. This will help us to have more understanding of the fact that they are elements which are beyond control, anattaa. ***** Nina. 36219 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 10:48am Subject: transgressions, Phil Hello Phil, You were still wondering about the abandonment of coarse defilements and what could be done. Only the sotapanna has eradicated them. The development of understanding now is the answer. Today I read this sutta to Lodewijk: In the following sutta we are reminded that ignorance and wrong view give rise to all kinds of akusala, whereas right understanding leads to freedom from all defilements. The ³streamwinner², sotåpanna, who has attained the first stage of enlightenment, has eradicated wrong view and wrong practice, he cannot deviate from the right Path. He has no more conditions to commit evil deeds leading to an unhappy rebirth. We read in the ³Gradual Sayings² (Book of the Tens, Ch XI, § 5, By knowledge): Monks, when ignorance leads the way, by the reaching of states unprofitable, shamelessness and recklessness follow in its train. In one who is swayed by ignorance and is void of sense, wrong view springs up. Wrong view gives rise to wrong thinking, wrong thinking to wrong speech, wrong speech to wrong action, wrong action to wrong livelihood, wrong livelihood to wrong effort, wrong effort to wrong mindfulness, wrong mindfulness to wrong concentration, that to wrong knowledge, and that to wrong release. But, monks, when knowledge leads the way, by the attainment of profitable states, the sense of shame and self-restraint follow in its train. In one who is swayed by knowledge and has good sense, right view springs up. Right view gives rise to right thinking... right concentration gives rise to right knowledge, and that to right release. **** Nina. 36220 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 11:32am Subject: Re: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 04 ) by Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: Dear Dhamma Friends, This is a good ebook called 'Theory Behind the Buddha's Smile' written by Rob M and this ebook can be viewed at 'Files' section. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Rob M, I could not open the file of your ebook. This makes me delay in make progress in our discussions. With respect, Htoo Naing 36221 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 2:20pm Subject: Re: The First Council / The Fourth Precept --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > > Hi all, > > Is it a breach of the fourth precept to put forward as fact > something which is not known as fact? > > What is the evidence for the reciting of the Abhidhamma at the First > > Council? > > Kind Regards > > Herman > > Hallo Herman > > There is no evidence, you know that, Herman. Most buddhologists say > the Abhidhamma is composed one or more centuries later. > But is "wishful thinking" the same as "not speaking the truth" ? > Perhaps but let's think with metta on these people. +++++++++ Dear Joop, Buddhaghosa lived 1500 years ago. Here is what he wrote: I found this in the attakattha to the Dhammasangani (first book of the Abhidhamma) the Atthasalini: from the introductory discourse "The ancient commentary [to the Abhidhamma] therof was sang By the First council, Mahakassapa Their leader, and later again by seers, Mahinda bought it to the peerless isle, Ceylon,.."endquote He says that not only was the Abhidhamma recited at the first council but also the commentary to it. Your modern buddhologists say this is wrong: How would they know ? Do believe Buddhaghosa made up stories or the monks before him? Robertk 36222 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 3:06pm Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" wrote: > > > All the time in life desirable vipaka and undesirable vipaka is > > alternating, and then there are always different reactions after > the > > vipaka. But no self- only these different moments. > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > So be mindful of nama and rupa, as opposed to having an idea of self > this is happening to me, i am such and such? > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dear Andrew, In essence, yes. When there is only nama and rupa there are no problems. But because ignorance is conditioned to arise we can't always have such understanding. When we have a hassle we can start to see that it always circles around self. The unpleasant feeling that arises is a good reminder that we are valuing self - then we can remember that there are only namas and rupas arising. We don't get annoyed with seeing or sound. But we can get enraged by thinking "she did that to me" - and both he and she (and 'that' too) are only concepts. ______________ > > > Also, what do you think are the necessary conditions for insight > > to > > > begin arising? Is it mere mindfulness of a single nama and rupa > > here > > > and there- as Phil suggests, or is it constant mindfulness and > > > sustained energy in the practise and observation of phenomenon in > > > their true nature, more of a systematic thing, seeing the three > > > dharma seals in existence, as my practise guide says. > > +++++++++ > > The essential causes for insight are hearing true Dhamma, > > considering it wisely and also pubbekata punnata (wholesome > > accumulations from past lives). > > Yes, the true Dhamma. For instance, one has to not dwell with wrong > views when practising insight meditation. How is this accomplished? > Through vipassana meditation we can see the true nature of phenomenon > as anatta and anicca, this is practising in accordance with the true > dhamma. ++++++++++++++++ Without hearing enough true Dhamma we have the tendency to take what is not vipassana for vipassana. This is because wrong view can be so subtle and it is powerful, we think we are going right when going wrong. So we have to be brave to examine what we are listening to and how we are interpreting it. The true path always comes with detachment and that needs much patience (one of the parami). Did you read the post by Sukin today - it shows some examples. > > > ++++++++ > > I'm clueless. What is sati, then? > +++++++++++++ It is to be known each for himself. Sati comes with alobha (detachment), never attachment. It knows the presently arising moment. > clinging to sense desires. > > Robert, I'm currently unable to read and get an understanding of the > different texts I have, including Vism. I can follow bare > instructions, but when I try to read, it seems it is only putting > more dust in my eyes as it were. I will await further development of > the capability of understanding to develop, as it has in the past. > +++++++++++++ yes, very good. It has to take time to let understanding grow. I think if you can find the right things to read they will be the food that nourishes wisdom. I kept a copy of this book with me constantly for almost year and would read it even for a few minutes any chance I got: http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm . +++++++++++++ > >> Suppression of the hindrances is a good thing, IMO, so we do not act > with a hindered mind, out of the presence of gross defilements. > Especially since it is not very difficult. At later stages the > hindrances can be eradicated, as I'm sure I don't have to tell you. > Understanding them would be necessary as per contemplation of > dhammas, but what is wrong with suppressing them so that we can > practise insight meditation unfettered? +++++++++++++ Remember that insight meditation is showing us that each moment is conditioned. When we have the idea of practising in such a way (unfettered and without hindrances) we are not being realistic to the way conditions work. Whenever there is momentary understanding of a hindrance such as craving then at that moment (of understanding) there is tadanga (temporary ) removal of the hindrance. BUT more importantly there is also some erasement of the idea of self. On the otherhand if we think we first have to be hindrance free and then start doing vipassana, we are missing the chance now to understand the hindrances as they are. Robertk 36223 From: robmoult Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 3:11pm Subject: Re: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 04 ) by Htoo HI Htoo, I am confused. Clearly, you had been able to view the file for the first three sets of comments. What has changed? If it helps, I will temporarily upload another copy to the files section. It is true the sometimes Yahoo! misbehaves, so you might want to save a copy of the file on your computer to browse at your lesure (even when not online). MIght this help? Your comments are great and I will be incorporating them into the text. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" > wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > This is a good ebook called 'Theory Behind the Buddha's Smile' > written by Rob M and this ebook can be viewed at 'Files' section. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > Dear Rob M, > > I could not open the file of your ebook. This makes me delay in make > progress in our discussions. > > With respect, > > Htoo Naing 36224 From: Herman Hofman Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 3:19pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi Ken (and Howard), ====================== Now, where is the problem? Why am I happy with this while you, both, are not? Is it the word substantialist? I have no problem with substantialism unless it says that concepts are substantial - which they are not, of course. ====================== No problem, really. I am happy for you to be happy, regardless of what you believe. I am less happy when matters of fact are misrepresented. I accept this can happen in good faith, and that it also happens for other reasons. What was taught by whom, to whom, when, and where is not a matter of conjecture. We all have access to the same facts. What was meant by what was taught is not a matter of fact, and we may well toss our ideas and the ideas of others to and fro. What was heard from the Buddha's mouth is not a matter of contention. Neither is what is written in the Abhidhamma. But the suggestion that the Buddha was in any way the author is overstepping the boundaries of known fact. And what often follows from the incorrect attribution of authorship ie uncritical acceptance of the Abhidhamma, is not just a problem, it is plain dangerous. In summary, I am happy for people to be substantialists. The Buddha did not teach substantialism. I am not happy for people to say that the Buddha was a substantialist. Kind Regards Herman 36225 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 3:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi Herman, and all >What was heard from the Buddha's mouth is not a matter of contention. >Neither is what is written in the Abhidhamma. But the suggestion that >the Buddha was in any way the author is overstepping the boundaries of >known fact. And what often follows from the incorrect attribution of >authorship ie uncritical acceptance of the Abhidhamma, is not just a >problem, it is plain dangerous. Isn't a greater danger getting caught up in doubt that prevents you from remaining open to the Buddha's teaching, or that can lead you speaking in a way that could be seen as creating divisions? Why not remember that people are the owners of their kamma, and respond or don't respond to the Buddha's teaching according to accumulations? And believe what they will or won't according to accumulations. There's nothing you can do to change their view in a real way compared to the amount of mental energy that must be expended in the attempt, which must only feed everyone's restlessness, and possibly even ill-will, which are hindrances. (You posted some e-mails yesterday which gave rise to ill-will in those who read them, I'd say.) If we learn to accept others' views as beyond our control we can relax and devote ourselves to what we believe to be the true Dhamma. That's what I do - most of the time except right now, for example! :) You might say that it is dangerous to let what one considers wrong view to prevail, but remember the context. It's not like those of us who take the Abhidhamma to be the Buddha's most refined teaching are running rampant in the streets, burning copies of Bhikkhu Bodhi's wonderful sutta anthologies! Why not let us have our cetasikas in peace! I say that in a friendly way. There are other forms of much more prevalent and fast spreading and dangerous wrong view that we can *all* agree on. Why not turn your attention to Soka-Gakkai! I can give you their address! (Just joking.) Metta, Phil 36226 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 3:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] transgressions, Phil Hello Nina Thank you for reminding me of the way right view leads the way. Now I remember that when I met with Robert K, the first thing we talked about was the sutta about the way right view precedes the others, like the dawn leads....now I can't even remember what it was. But though I can't remember the sutta, I seem to have remembered it's importance, and I'm aware that establishing right view comes first. In my practice, it comes first every morning as well, with my coffee. Every morning, I reflect on what I know of the Four Noble Truths, The Eightfold Path, The 3 characteristics, the Brahma-Viharas and what they do and don't mean. And during the day, since I don't know yet (haven't remembered yet) how to reflect on the qualities of the Buddha, I reflect on the above when the opportunity arises. Of course, reflecting on these things and being "swayed by knowledge" are very different things. I know it is all thinking for me now. Alas, I learned last month how transgressions arise in a yet uncontrollable way for me. But I also learned that a wiser response to transgressions arose as well. No beating myself over the head for days about it. Instead there were wholesome moments of shame over akusala and concern over consequences (I like the image in the commentary that is mentionned in Rob M's book, if I recall, about not wanting to grab the excrement smeared end of the stick and not wanting to grab the red hot end of the stick to describe these two kusala cittas) that gave way to gratitude to the Buddha for teaching the way that gradually leads to the ending of transgressions. The only way, in my opinion. You taught me recently that panna, right wisdom such as it were, is included in right view. There is right view that can be understand intellectually, and then there is this deeper right view, panna, that comes from seeing realities through the six doors. That has not often arisen yet. I press on patiently, not trying to have satipatthana, but ready to welcome it into my daily life. Metta, Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina van gorkom" To: Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:48 AM Subject: [dsg] transgressions, Phil Hello Phil, You were still wondering about the abandonment of coarse defilements and what could be done. Only the sotapanna has eradicated them. The development of understanding now is the answer. Today I read this sutta to Lodewijk: In the following sutta we are reminded that ignorance and wrong view give rise to all kinds of akusala, whereas right understanding leads to freedom from all defilements. (snip) 36227 From: Herman Hofman Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:37pm Subject: RE: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Hi Dan, Howard and everyone, Thank you for this post and the others in the series. Excellent stuff!! ============ D > Excellent points you make about the structure of language. I agree that the sentence "Citta experiences an object" has a subject and is strongly *suggestive* of a substantialist representation. My beef with this formulation is that the language structure lends strength to that suggestion. ============== H > Yes, you are quite right. Any baby born just about anywhere nowadays inherits this structure of language with its implicit subject - object duality. And human infants acquire language by aping, mimicking, uncritical osmosis. How language affects perception and how perception affects the development of language are huge, and fascinating topics. But the fact remains, here we all are, armed with our inherited subject - object paradigm. ================ D > However, don't you think metaphor can still be useful for elucidating elusive ideas? The citta-as-agent metaphor can be useful in the dissolution of the notion of an eternal, abiding Self. So, it needn't be read as incorrigibly "substantialist." Even if citta-as-agent is interpreted literally as a little Self, it attenuates the tendency to the Big Self interpretation of experiences happening to 'me'. This Little Self is not lasting (anicca) and thus does not have the characteristics of the "Self" that constitutes the sakayaditthi, i.e., the 'atta' that is 'icca'. Need the language be carried to the point that the citta-as-agent representation is rejected as vulgar and repulsive because of its *apparent* substantialism? "Apparent" because linguistic substantialism (i.e., a subject) is not necessarily existential substantialism in the sense that the Little Self need not be conceived as lasting. ================= H > When there is understanding that all language is metaphor, yes, than the clever use of metaphor can be very useful in all sorts of ways. But the reality for many is that words are taken as reality. At a most basic level, words are instructions, commands. People will uncritically act on the words, past or present, of others. Words condition action and vice versa (verbal thoughts being sublimated speech). It is clear that many people, until the day they die, remain programmed, whether positively or negatively, by the words of others. Many indeed crave that programming (for those so afflicted there could be nothing worse than mindstates free of discursive thought, discursive thought being nothing more than the regurgitated words a sometimes guarded / most times unguarded mind has allowed in). In a Buddhist context, the best use for words is to end suffering. The Buddha pointed the way to Nibbana. The suttas demonstrate the road to a consciousness free from the hotch-potch of words which is the reality of the unguarded moment. So I'm with Howard on this one, and say that precision is the order of the day. And sometimes silence is the most accurate. And most pleasant :-) I like your distinction between linguistic and existential substantialism. Great discussing with you, Dan Herman 36228 From: Andrew Levin Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:38pm Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" > wrote: > > > > All the time in life desirable vipaka and undesirable vipaka > is > > > alternating, and then there are always different reactions after > > the > > > vipaka. But no self- only these different moments. > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > So be mindful of nama and rupa, as opposed to having an idea of > self > > this is happening to me, i am such and such? > > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Dear Andrew, > In essence, yes. When there is only nama and rupa there are no > problems. But because ignorance is conditioned to arise we can't > always have such understanding. > When we have a hassle we can start to see that it always circles > around self. The unpleasant feeling that arises is a good reminder > that we are valuing self - then we can remember that there are only > namas and rupas arising. We don't get annoyed with seeing or sound. > But we can get enraged by thinking "she did that to me" - and both > he and she (and 'that' too) are only concepts. Right, this makes sense, we want to view our nama and rupa more from a detached, laboratory-like perspective, not from the standpoint of a person or being. So we try to be mindful and aware of nama and rupa as they arise. Im somewhat OK with that, as my meditation is starting to show up in my daily life, and I know I can be mindful of some nama and rupa when I practise the foundations of mindfulness. > > > > Also, what do you think are the necessary conditions for > insight > > > to > > > > begin arising? Is it mere mindfulness of a single nama and > rupa > > > here > > > > and there- as Phil suggests, or is it constant mindfulness and > > > > sustained energy in the practise and observation of phenomenon > in > > > > their true nature, more of a systematic thing, seeing the > three > > > > dharma seals in existence, as my practise guide says. > > > +++++++++ > > > The essential causes for insight are hearing true Dhamma, > > > considering it wisely and also pubbekata punnata (wholesome > > > accumulations from past lives). > > > > Yes, the true Dhamma. For instance, one has to not dwell with > wrong > > views when practising insight meditation. How is this > accomplished? > > Through vipassana meditation we can see the true nature of > phenomenon > > as anatta and anicca, this is practising in accordance with the > true > > dhamma. > > ++++++++++++++++ > Without hearing enough true Dhamma we have the tendency to take what > is not vipassana for vipassana. This is because wrong view can be so > subtle and it is powerful, we think we are going right when going > wrong. So we have to be brave to examine what we are listening to > and how we are interpreting it. The true path always comes with > detachment and that needs much patience (one of the parami). Did you > read the post by Sukin today - it shows some examples. > > > > Yes, I read the post. I think hearing the true Dhamma does not necessarily mean hearing from a teacher, but can also be putting together an understanding from scripture or other sources. For example, I have a guide to walking meditation that I am reading by Ven. U Silananda, and I consider it the true Dhamma. However, I think that the phrase "not dependent on wrong views" in some of the interpretations I have seen of satipatthana applies, and this means seeing the three dharma seals, or the true nature of reality, in reality. I think this may be necessary for further progress, as with wrong views we cannot have the eradication of craving and clinging as I gather from the commentaries. > > > > ++++++++ > > > > I'm clueless. What is sati, then? > > > +++++++++++++ > It is to be known each for himself. Sati comes with alobha > (detachment), > never attachment. It knows the presently arising moment. > > > > clinging to sense desires. > > > > Robert, I'm currently unable to read and get an understanding of > the > > different texts I have, including Vism. I can follow bare > > instructions, but when I try to read, it seems it is only putting > > more dust in my eyes as it were. I will await further development > of > > the capability of understanding to develop, as it has in the past. > > > +++++++++++++ > > yes, very good. It has to take time to let understanding grow. > I think if you can find the right things to read they will be the > food that nourishes wisdom. I kept a copy of this book with me > constantly for almost year and would read it even for a few minutes > any chance I got: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm > . Explain to me, if you would, how this kind of wisdom, wisdom from considering the teachings, relates to wisdom arising from concentration, that is to say panna. Panna is the wisdom arisen from concentration, right? > +++++++++++++ > > > >> Suppression of the hindrances is a good thing, IMO, so we do > not act > > with a hindered mind, out of the presence of gross defilements. > > Especially since it is not very difficult. At later stages the > > hindrances can be eradicated, as I'm sure I don't have to tell > you. > > Understanding them would be necessary as per contemplation of > > dhammas, but what is wrong with suppressing them so that we can > > practise insight meditation unfettered? > +++++++++++++ > Remember that insight meditation is showing us that each moment is > conditioned. When we have the idea of practising in such a way > (unfettered and without hindrances) we are not being realistic to > the way conditions work. Whenever there is momentary understanding > of a hindrance such as craving then at that moment (of > understanding) there is tadanga (temporary ) removal of the > hindrance. BUT more importantly there is also some erasement of the > idea of self. > On the otherhand if we think we first have to be hindrance free and > then start doing vipassana, we are missing the chance now to > understand the hindrances as they are. > Robertk I can't quite say I understand. For example, I was downstairs last night with some of my books in the basement for some time, reading and trying in vain to get some breathing meditation going. However, it was good to be away from the computer and by myself. When I came back to the computer, it was extremely clear that as soon as I got my hand on the mouse, craving was present. I have never seen craving with such clarity before. I would learn towards saying this is closer to understanding craving, (I concede your point on the principles of insight meditation), but would you really say this is temporary removal? I wouldn't know how such a thing would be known. Furthermore, I am anxious to get one really decent session of concentration meditation going, because I know that on at least one occasion where I have, I come out and am not dependent on wrong views of reality. And to me, momentary concentration, or access concentration (it seems the two are somewhat related, to me), is one of the milestones of concentration meditation, so, I naturally link these two together and would like their arisal before I go on to practise further. Good discussing Dharma with you. Regards, AL 36229 From: plnao Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Deeds of Merit - only one way to decrease defilements Hello all K.S > > Defilements can decrease only by the development of all kinds of kusala And by "all kinds of kusala" Khun Sujin is referring to the 10 deeds of merit lying within dana, sila and mental development. I find this idea very interesting. When I came to DSG and found Abdhidhamma, I developed an idea that only panna could eradicate defilements, and that this could only happen in a very gradual way, with no direct action on my own part. That was an oversimplification, and a misunderstanding of the teaching I had come across. I wonder if this analogy is helpful? A doctor removes visible tumours (coarse defilements) in a fairly purposeful way. The scalpel represents wholesome deeds.. But when it comes to the latent forms of the disease, if you will, the scalpel is no longer enough. A much more patient, holistic approach becomes necessary. There is less hope of making a clear prognosis. It will take time, and it is now much further beyond the doctor's ability to control things. And this patient, holistic method represents panna, when it comes to subtle defilements. But there are still wholesome deeds to be done. Mental development, especially, might be the kusala that is most helpful with subtle defilements. Of course, mental development will involve cultivating panna. K.S > > . For someone who has been bitten by a poisonous snake or who > suffers from diseases there may be a medicine which cures ills, but such > medicine is not a cure for the mental disease which are the defilements. The only cure, Khun Sujin tells us, is wholesome deeds. And "if we know the wholesome dhamma which is opposed to a particular defilement, and if we know the way leading to the elimination of defilements, it is possible to gradually decrease their strength," she writes.I don't know yet which wholesome dhamma is opposed to which particular defilement, but that is why I'm reading the book. No hurry to figure out that one. I hope I will remember to come back to this question when I have finished reading the book. . Metta, Phil 36230 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 4:54pm Subject: The Buddha as physician (was Re: [dsg] Herman on anatta / was Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matt roke" wrote: > Hi Robetk and Kenh, > If I choose to go and buy soap rather than not wash, would I be showing a > lack of confidence in the Dhamma by trying to change conditions rather > than understanding them? > > Confidence in Dhamma is knowing that there is no one there because there > is only that which impinges on the eye or some other sense door, nothing > more. > Is it not? > Hi Matt, We seem to agree on this subject and you seem to have answered your own question. Nonetheless, I will have a go at it. Wise people, without wrong view, wash just as well as foolish people, with wrong view. Daily life activities go on regardless of understanding. A foolish person may decide, "I will not buy soap, I will not wash, I will fall in a heap on the floor and experience my own non-existence!" That foolish behaviour then becomes his daily life activity – there is no escaping it. A learned trainee, when he is buying soap, knows he is buying soap, but, during the course of that activity, he also knows rupa as rupa, nama as nama, lobha as lobha, alobha as alobha – and so on. A not-so-learned trainee (such as you or I), when he is buying soap, knows he is buying soap, but, during the course of that activity, he also knows – even if only at the back of his thinking mind – "there is only nama and rupa here." The learned trainee does not think, "It is not good enough to know lobha as lobha, I must set up the conditions for alobha." That would, as Robert has said, indicate a lack of faith in the Dhamma – a lack of faith in the efficacy of knowing dhammas as they are. That learned trainee might entertain the thought, "I do not like lobha, therefore I will have alobha instead." If so, he will have the opportunity for knowing lobha as lobha. In our not-so-learned position, we might also have opportunities for knowing doubt as doubt or even (perish the thought) belief-in-self as belief-in-self. Is that how you see it? Ken H 36231 From: Herman Hofman Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 5:45pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi Phil, >What was heard from the Buddha's mouth is not a matter of contention. >Neither is what is written in the Abhidhamma. But the suggestion that >the Buddha was in any way the author is overstepping the boundaries of >known fact. And what often follows from the incorrect attribution of >authorship ie uncritical acceptance of the Abhidhamma, is not just a >problem, it is plain dangerous. Isn't a greater danger getting caught up in doubt that prevents you from remaining open to the Buddha's teaching, or that can lead you speaking in a way that could be seen as creating divisions? ================= H > Thank you very much for speaking honestly with me. I value that highly. Let me ask you some questions. In terms of the present moment, how do the bona fides of the authors whose thoughts you are repeating figure? Is a teaching good or useful or true because of who is teaching it? Or is a teaching good or useful or true because it accurately models what happens or can happen? I am very open to the teachings of the Buddha, because I find they liberate from suffering. And I also have a critical faculty that understands that people look for external authority, through which fact one discarded view will be rapidly replaced with another. =========================== P > Why not remember that people are the owners of their kamma, and respond or don't respond to the Buddha's teaching according to accumulations? And believe what they will or won't according to accumulations. ============================ H > Again, some questions if I may? How do these views, and further down the page, accord with your experience? If your experience is that nothing can be done, why stand in front of a classroom and teach? If your experience is that you can do things that influence the course of events, why parrot views that are not your experience? ================= P > There's nothing you can do to change their view in a real way compared to the amount of mental energy that must be expended in the attempt, which must only feed everyone's restlessness, and possibly even ill-will, which are hindrances. ================ H > I'd say I post emails that give rise to ill-will all the time. People are very attached to their views, you know, the more baseless the greater the attachment (of necessity). ================== P > (You posted some e-mails yesterday which gave rise to ill-will in those who read them, I'd say.) =================== H > If you care to be more specific, I will be happy to address it. Like you, I am not a trigger-happy blithering idiot, and I do consider what I say before I say it. ======== P > If we learn to accept others' views as beyond our control we can relax and devote ourselves to what we believe to be the true Dhamma. That's what I do - most of the time except right now, for example! :) You might say that it is dangerous to let what one considers wrong view to prevail, but remember the context. It's not like those of us who take the Abhidhamma to be the Buddha's most refined teaching are running rampant in the streets, burning copies of Bhikkhu Bodhi's wonderful sutta anthologies! Why not let us have our cetasikas in peace! =================== H > Am I spoiling your lobha ? :-) I encourage you to compare what Abhidhamma you have osmosed with the dhatuvibhangasutta. http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/majjhima/140-dhatuvibhanga-e.htm I appreciate your honesty Phil. You are a true friend. Kind Regards Herman 36232 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 6:28pm Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" <> Right, this makes sense, we want to view our nama and rupa more from a > detached, laboratory-like perspective, not from the standpoint of a > person or being. So we try to be mindful and aware of nama and rupa > as they arise. Im somewhat OK with that, as my meditation is starting > to show up in my daily life, and I know I can be mindful of some nama > and rupa when I practise the foundations of mindfulness. > +++++++++++++ Dear Andrew, very good, so even a little mindfulness can make a big difference. But usually we want more- and this might show we don't accept conditions as they are now. ++++++++++++++++++++ > > > I think if you can find the right things to read they will be the > > food that nourishes wisdom. I kept a copy of this book with me > > constantly for almost year and would read it even for a few minutes > > any chance I got: > > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm > > .++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > Explain to me, if you would, how this kind of wisdom, wisdom from > considering the teachings, relates to wisdom arising from > concentration, that is to say panna. Panna is the wisdom arisen from > concentration, right? > > > +++++++++++++ What sort of concentration is meant by the visuddhimagga(xiv7) when it says that concentration is the proximate cause of panna (wisdom)? Obviously it is not miccha-samadhi. Bear in mind that miccha-samadhi(wrong concentration) comes in countless variations. If it arises in conjunction with refined lobha(desire) it will feel calm and peaceful. Samma-samadhi is of two main types: that associated with satipatthana vipassana and that associated with samatha (concentration meditation). Whenever any citta arises there is also samadhi. At any moment of satipatthana, correct understanding of a paramattha dhamma, there must be samadhi associated with it it. That type of samadhi is samma-samadhi but it only lasts for that moment or moments that insight is occuring. It has the function of fixing or focusing on the object. If samma-samadhi did not arise then panna would not have a clear object to insight. At the moments of vipassana-nana samadhi becomes very strong and the minddoor process is vividly seen. However, both before and after those moments, samadhi may be at its usual daily life levels. Samma-samadhi is a most necessary ingredient of the eighfactored path but we must know that it can only arise when there is samma-ditthi. You can ask Nina too, but I think I am right in saying that 'proximate cause' doesn't always mean in time sequence. The Patthana gives conditions that are co-nascent arisng at the same time. Some teachers don't study Abhidhamma and may tend to interpret 'proximate' as always meaning prior. Samma-ditthi(right understanding) should be given prominence : "Bhikkhus, just as the dawn is the forerunner and first indication of the rising of the sun, so is right view the forerunner and first indication of wholesome states. For one of right view, bhikkhus, right intention springs up. For one of right intention, right speech springs up. For one of right speech, right action springs up. For one of right action, right livelihood springs up. For one of right livelihood, right effort springs up. For one of right effort, right mindfulness springs up. For one of right mindfulness, right concentration springs up. For one of right concentration, right knowledge springs up. For one of right knowledge, right deliverance springs up. Anguttara Nikaya 10:121" And reading/considering the teachings helps right understanding to develop. > > +++++++++++++ > > Remember that insight meditation is showing us that each moment is > > conditioned. When we have the idea of practising in such a way > > (unfettered and without hindrances) we are not being realistic to > > the way conditions work. Whenever there is momentary understanding > > of a hindrance such as craving then at that moment (of > > understanding) there is tadanga (temporary ) removal of the > > hindrance. BUT more importantly there is also some erasement of the > > idea of self. > > On the otherhand if we think we first have to be hindrance free and > > then start doing vipassana, we are missing the chance now to > > understand the hindrances as they are. >__________________________________________________________ > > I can't quite say I understand. For example, I was downstairs last > night with some of my books in the basement for some time, reading and > trying in vain to get some breathing meditation going. However, it > was good to be away from the computer and by myself. When I came back > to the computer, it was extremely clear that as soon as I got my hand > on the mouse, craving was present. I have never seen craving with > such clarity before. I would learn towards saying this is closer to > understanding craving, (I concede your point on the principles of > insight meditation), but would you really say this is temporary > removal? I wouldn't know how such a thing would be known. > > Furthermore, I am anxious to get one really decent session of > concentration meditation going, because I know that on at least one > occasion where I have, I come out and am not dependent on wrong views > of reality. And to me, momentary concentration, or access > concentration (it seems the two are somewhat related, to me), is one > of the milestones of concentration meditation, so, I naturally link > these two together and would like their arisal before I go on to > practise further. > > Good discussing Dharma with you. > > +++++++++ Good discussing with you too. I spent over 2 years trying to duplicate some clarity that I had had. But finally I realized this actually stopped new insights coming. Now my approach is taking every moment as a new one and learning from it. This new approach doesn't disqualify any moment or preference any moment. (Taking this in the wrong way (as I do often) we might think nothing at all is to be done- wrong practice is always ready to happen whatever we do. ) I wrote some letters to an American writer that were edited and put on the net, that you might like reading. http://www.dhammastudy.com/corr.html RobertK 36233 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 9:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Merely Pondering, no 1. Dear Sarah, op 09-09-2004 10:16 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y... >> There may not be any wrong view or idea of self. For example, when there > is atta-sa~n~naa, there is not necessarily any wrong view of self. It is a > vipallasa (perversion) of sa~n~naa, but not necessaily ditthi vipallasa > (perversion of view).< > ***** > S: In other words, there may be a distortion of perception in some regard > as there is with every unwholesome citta arising, but not necessarily > wrong view. N: I still find it difficult to understand what atta-sa~n~naa is. What kind of atta? Perhaps just with clinging, and not necessarily wrong view? It is opposed to anattaa-sañña, and when hearing these in one context I just wonder. Good for India? In B. Dict. it says: the sotapanna eradicates the perversion of sañña, citta and ditthi that the impersonal is a personality. What do you think? Nina. 36234 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 9:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] object in the reality of arising sounds Hi Howard, op 09-09-2004 17:10 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Nina, you write "... An object is known, otherwise it would not be an > object. A ruupa such as sound has to arise just a tiny fraction of time before > it can be known by citta, because rupa at its arising moment is weak. It > disturbs the bhavangacitta and then the process of cittas that know it can > begin." > Where does that ruupa arise, Nina, at the initial moment when it is > not yet known? What exactly constitutes that arising? N: There are four factors that can originate rupa: kamma, citta, heat or nutrition. When we see colour of what we call the body, this colour can be originated by one of these four. When we see colour outside it is only originated by heat (utu, temperature). When colour impinges on the eye-sense it can become an object of citta, and at that moment we can say that the eyesense is a doorway. We can see the colour of the moon; the moon is far way, but colour can impinge on the eyesense. That colour is originated by temperature. So it is complex in each of these cases. You can look at Vis. 99 Intro for the tangible object that hits the bodysense. That is a more violent impact compared to colour that impinges on the eyesense. Nina. 36235 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 9:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner2-Preface(a) [Phil] Dear Dan, Do stay longer this time. See below. op 09-09-2004 15:22 schreef Dan D. op onco111@y...: > So, in conclusion, I'll just reiterate your comment that: "...we > should never imagine that it is possible to capture experience in > words, of any language. But we can, and should be, mindful of our > constant efforts to do so." N: May I add: and be mindful of what can be experienced through eyes, ear, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind, that is the way to check the truth. 36236 From: Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 6:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] object in the reality of arising sounds Hi, Nina - In a message dated 9/10/04 12:50:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nilo@e... writes: > > Hi Howard, > op 09-09-2004 17:10 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > > >Nina, you write "... An object is known, otherwise it would not be an > >object. A ruupa such as sound has to arise just a tiny fraction of time > before > >it can be known by citta, because rupa at its arising moment is weak. It > >disturbs the bhavangacitta and then the process of cittas that know it can > >begin." > >Where does that ruupa arise, Nina, at the initial moment when it is > >not yet known? What exactly constitutes that arising? > N: There are four factors that can originate rupa: kamma, citta, heat or > nutrition. When we see colour of what we call the body, this colour can be > originated by one of these four. When we see colour outside it is only > originated by heat (utu, temperature). When colour impinges on the eye-sense > it can become an object of citta, and at that moment we can say that the > eyesense is a doorway. We can see the colour of the moon; the moon is far > way, but colour can impinge on the eyesense. That colour is originated by > temperature. > So it is complex in each of these cases. You can look at Vis. 99 Intro for > the tangible object that hits the bodysense. That is a more violent impact > compared to colour that impinges on the eyesense. > Nina. > > ============================= I really didn't make myself clear. The moon is just concept. What does "the moon's color" refer to? Where is that color? Where does it arise? If not in "mind", then where? In space? Space is concept. What does it mean for color to be "outside"? Outside of what? The body? Body is just concept. If "outside color", whatever that is, is originated by temperature, then where is that temperature? Where does *it* arise? It seems to me that none of this is explained, and none of it makes much sense. 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) 36237 From: Dighanakha Nutcracker Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 10:54pm Subject: Cullapalobhana Jataka CULLA-PALOBHANA-JATAKA (No. 263) "Not through the sea," etc. This story the Master told at Jetavana, also about a backsliding Brother. The Master had him brought into the Hall of Truth, and asked if it were true that he was backslider. Yes, said he, it was. "Women," said the Master, "in olden days made even believing souls to sin." Then he told a story. Once on a time Brahmadatta, the King of Benares, was childless. He said to his queen, "Let us offer prayer for a son." They offered prayer. After a long time, the Bodhisatta came down from the world of Brahma, and was conceived by this queen. So soon as he was born, he was bathed, and given to a serving woman to nurse. As he took the breast, he cried. He was given to another; but while a woman held him, he would not be quiet. So he was given to a man servant; and as soon as the man took him, he was quiet. After that men used to carry him about. When they suckled him, they would milk the breast for him, or they gave him the breast from behind a screen. Even when he grew older, they could not show him a woman. The king caused to be made for him a separate place for sitting or what not, and a separate room for meditation, all by himself. When the lad was sixteen years old, the king thought thus within himself. "Other son have I none, and this one enjoys no pleasures. He will not even wish for the kingdom. What's the good of such a son?" And there was a certain dancing girl, clever at dance and song and music, young, able to gain ascendancy over any man she came across. She approached the king, and asked what he was thinking about; the king told her what it was. "Let be, my lord," said she: "I will allure him, I will make him love me." "Well, if you can allure my son, who has never had any dealings whatsoever with women, he shall be king, and you shall be his chief queen!" "Leave that to me, my lord," said she; "and don't be anxious." So she came to the people of the guard, and said, "At dawn of day I will go to the sleeping place of the prince, and outside the room where he meditates apart I will sing. If he is angry, you must tell me, and I will go away; but if he listens, speak my praises." This they agreed to do. So in the morning time she took her stand in that place, and sang with a voice of honey, so that the music was as sweet as the song, and the song as sweet as the music. The prince lay listening. Next day, he commanded that she should stand near and sing. The next day, he commanded her to stand in the private chamber, and the next, in his own presence; and so by and bye desire arose in him; he went the way of the world, and knew the joy of love. "I will not let another have this woman," he resolved; and taking his sword, he ran amok through the street, chasing the people. The king had him captured, and banished him from the city along with the girl. Together they journeyed to the jungle, away down the Ganges. There, with the river on one side and the sea on the other, they made a hut, and there they lived. She sat indoors, and cooked the roots and bulbs; the Bodhisatta brought wild fruits from the forest. One day, when he was away in search of fruits, a hermit from an island in the sea, who was going his rounds to get food, saw smoke as he passed through the air, and alighted beside this hut. "Sit down until it is cooked," said the woman; then her woman's charms seduced his soul, and brought it down from his Jhana, making a breach in his purity. And he, like a crow with broken wing, unable to leave her, sat there the whole day till he saw the Bodhisatta coming, and then ran off quickly in the direction of the sea. "This must be an enemy," thought he, and drawing his sword set off in chase. But the ascetic, making as though he would rise in the air, fell down into the sea. Then thought the Bodhisatta, "Yon man is doubtless an ascetic who came hither through the air; and now that his Jhana is broken, he has fallen into the sea. I must go help him." And standing on the shore he uttered these verses:-- "Not through the sea, but by your magic power, You journeyed hither at an earlier hour; Now by a woman's evil company You have been made to plunge beneath the sea. "Full of seductive wiles, deceitful all, They tempt the most pure-hearted to his fall. Down -- down they sink: a man should flee afar From women, when he knows what kind they are. "Whomso they serve, for gold or for desire, They burn him up like fuel in the fire." "Hallucination, sorrow, and disease, Mirage, distress (and solid bonds are these), The snare of death, deep-seated in the mind -- Who trusts in these is vilest of his kind. When the ascetic heard these words which the Bodhisatta spake, he stood up in the midst of the sea, and resuming his interrupted Jhana, he rose through the air, and went away to his dwelling place. Thought the Bodhisatta, "Yon ascetic, with so great a burden, goes through the air like a fleck of cotton. Why should not I like him cultivate the Jhana, and pass through the air?" So he returned to his hut, and led the woman among mankind again; then he told her to be gone, and himself went into the jungle, where he built him a hut in a pleasant spot, and became an ascetic; he prepared for the Jhana, cultivated the Faculties and the Attainments, and became destined for the world of Brahma. When this discourse was ended, the Master declared the Truths: (now at the conclusion of the Truths the backsliding Brother became established in the Fruit of the First Path:) "At that time,' said he, "I was myself the youth that had never had anything to do with women." FINIS Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36238 From: antony272b2 Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 11:58pm Subject: Re: Deeds of Merit - only one way to decrease defilements Dear Phil, Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: "Merit and Spiritual Growth The performance of deeds of merit forms one of the most essential elements of Buddhist practice. Its various modes provide in their totality a compendium of applied Buddhism, showing Buddhism not as a system of ideas but as a complete way of life. Buddhist popular belief has often emphasized merit as a productive source of worldly blessings -- of health, wealth, long life, beauty and friends. As a result of this emphasis, meritorious activity has come to be conceived rather in terms of a financial investment, as a religious business venture yielding returns to the satisfaction of the agent's mundane desires. While such a conception no doubt contains an element of truth, its popularization has tended to eclipse the more important function merit plays in the context of Buddhist practice. Seen in correct perspective, merit is an essential ingredient in the harmony and completeness of the spiritual life, a means of self-cultivation, and an indispensable stepping-stone to spiritual progress." and: "Merit and knowledge together constitute the two sets of equipment the spiritual aspirant requires in the quest for deliverance, the equipment of merit (puññasambhara) and the equipment of knowledge (ñanasambhara), respectively. Each set of equipment has its own contribution to make to the fulfillment of the spiritual life. The equipment of merit facilitates progress in the course of samsaric wandering: it brings a favorable rebirth, the encounter with good friends to guide one's footsteps along the path, the meeting with opportunities for spiritual growth, the flowering of the lofty qualities of character, and the maturation of the spiritual faculties required for the higher attainments. The equipment of knowledge brings the factor directly necessary for cutting the bonds of samsaric existence: the penetration of truth, enlightenment, the undistorted comprehension of the nature of actuality." for the whole essay: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel259.html Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote: "...when the Buddha talked about the forms of merit, he > said, "Don't be afraid of merit, for merit is another word for happiness." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dana-giving/message/1 with metta / Antony. 36239 From: Andrew Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 0:58am Subject: On Facts and Absolutisms Dear Members A very well-known scholar of Buddhism, Professor Peter Harvey, writes in his book, An Introduction to Buddhism, that: "the claim that the whole of the present Vinaya and Sutta sections of scripture were recited then [at the First Council] is probably an exaggeration." He writes that the purpose of the First Council was "to agree the contents of the Dhamma and Vinaya which the Buddha had left as `teacher'". Although he nowhere expressly states that the Abhidhamma was not included in that "Dhamma" recited at the First Council, he does allude in his Introduction to the possibility of "little" new material being added to the Pali Canon after it was committed to writing in Sri Lanka around 80 BC. Obviously, therefore, he does not hold the view that the Pali Canon of today is the same as that recited by the Arahats at the First Council. As Rob K has pointed out, Abhidhamma texts make the claim that the Abhidhamma was recited at the First Council. Others, such as Herman and Joop, dispute that claim. If I am correct, they believe that the overwhelming conclusion of scholars is that the Abhidhamma was a centuries-later addition and, as such, was not recited at the First Council. Herman has gone so far as to query whether failure to acknowledge this scholarship verbally amounts to a breach of the 4th precept against false speech. In his posts, he often alludes to the "fact" of the Abhidhamma not having been taught by the Buddha. This interesting DSG discussion has prompted me to take a closer look at the concept of "fact" and its implications for the way we should communicate with each other. My first resort is to one of my favourite thinkers of all time, the palaeontologist and science historian, Stephen Jay Gould. He discusses the concept of "fact" in his essay "Evolution as Fact and Theory". The first point he makes is that "fact" does not mean "absolute certainty". This is obvious. When Buddhist scholars consider the facts of Buddhist history, they are referring to the facts as we currently believe them to be based upon available evidence. If more evidence comes to light (as it often does), the "facts" may change. Facts are not absolutisms and it is foolish in the extreme to treat them as such. Gould continues: "In science, `fact' can only mean `confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent'". By its very terms, this scientific treatment of "fact" contains a question of degree and a value judgment. That being so, nobody can be surprised if person A reaches a different factual conclusion from person B. Neither of these two persons in disagreement is claiming absolute certainty about his position. They are disagreeing about an interpretation of data. Transferring this to DSG, my understanding is that Herman is not claiming that it is an absolute certainty that the Abhidhamma was not recited at the First Council. He is claiming that the degree of scholarly agreement is such that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent to that proposition. By implication, those who dissent from the proposition are, in Herman's opinion, doing so contrary to the balance of evidence. Were archaeologists to excavate the site of the First Council and discover tablets indicating that Abhidhamma was indeed recited at the First Council, Herman would review his factual assessment accordingly. That is how I understand the state of play. From the scientific point of view, I have no issue with the above approach except to add an important caveat. Gould's many books stand testament to the fact that, in the history of science, there have been many periods when the available evidence has compelled acceptance of what subsequently turned out to be a falsehood. This is always a sobering possibility to be kept in mind. But there is one more crucial question here. Did the Buddha teach that followers should approach Dhamma in this scientific way? In the Kalama Sutta, what did the Buddha mean when he said that people should not accept something "because it is a product of mere reasoning … because of a superficial assessment of the facts, or because it conforms with one's preconceived notions"(Harvey p. 30)? Could it not be argued that Gould's method of ascertaining facts – when applied to facts like whether or not an historical event occurred – is a product of mere reasoning? According to Harvey, the Kalama Sutta is addressed to the Dhamma and the Buddha is telling us to base our views on "the examination and analysis of actual experience". If Harvey is right (and I believe he is), the Kalama Sutta is not relevant to a question like "was the Abhidhamma recited at the First Council?" The sutta is, however, extremely relevant to the question "is the Abhidhamma correct?" That question can be tested against actual experience. And as the actual experience of person A is separate from the actual experience of person B, all A and B can exchange is a personal account of their experience. What advice did the Buddha give on how we should go about exchanging our personal accounts? In the Aranavibhanga Sutta (The Exposition of Non-Conflict), the Buddha addressed the bhikkhus thus (Bh. Bodhi & Bh. Nanamoli transl): "One should know what it is to extol and what it is to disparage, and knowing both, one should neither extol nor disparage but should teach only the Dhamma." This is all very well but it seems to require an understanding of what the Dhamma is. However, the Buddha goes on to explain that he is talking about a manner of expression. Saying the following is disparaging: "all those who have not abandoned the fetter of being … have entered upon the wrong way." Teaching only the Dhamma, a bhikkhu says instead: "as long as the fetter of being is unabandoned, being too is unabandoned." As an example of a modern day teaching by a bhikkhu that is full of disparaging language, I invite you to read Bhikkhu Sujata's article "The Mystique of the Abhidhamma" recently discussed on DSG. In the Aranavibhanga Sutta, it is also interesting to note that the Buddha says not to use covert speech at all and not to use overt sharp speech. I am not sure, but I assume covert speech is sarcastic speech and speech with double meanings. I am clearly not blameless in this regard as I have posted sarcastic speech on DSG. Some of my speech has probably also been sharp. I need to be more mindful of that. In conclusion, it therefore seems to me that disputation about whether the Buddha taught Abhidhamma is peripheral to the real meat of Dhamma, whether one calls it "practice" or "understanding realities now". On DSG, we should be exchanging views we have formed from analyzing and examining actual experience. We should not expect others to identify with those views and we certainly should not become sarcastic and sharp with our speech when we find others unimpressed with our outlook. This is particularly so with peripheral academic topics like "was the Abhidhamma recited at the First Council". Finally, I want to express my view (based on my own experience of reality) that approaching the Dhamma with trustful confidence (saddha) seems to encourage continued interest in Dhamma, more so than taking a strictly scientific approach of what is empirically proven by others and what is not. With best wishes to all Andrew T 36240 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:07am Subject: 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Introduction [contd] ***** Citta and its accompanying cetasikas are closely associated and they condition one another. There is a relationship and interdependence between them. Citta conditions cetasikas. When the citta is wholesome, kusala, all accompanying cetasikas are also kusala, even those kinds of cetasikas which can arise with each type of citta. When the citta is unwholesome, akusala, all the accompanying cetasikas are akusala. Feeling, for example, is a cetasika which accompanies each citta. When there is pleasant feeling, it can accompany kusala citta or akusala citta rooted in attachment, but its quality is different in each case. Cetasikas condition the citta they accompany, and the cetasikas which arise together also condition one another. For example, the cetasika understanding, panna, conditions the citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies. When the citta with generosity is accompanied by panna which realizes that generosity is kusala, the degree of kusala is higher than in the case of kusala citta without panna. When there is generosity, there is no person who is generous, generosity is a cetasika performing its function while it assists the kusala citta. When there is attachment, there is no person who is attached, attachment is a cetasika performing its function. The cetasikas which accompany the citta experience the same object as the citta while they each perform their own function. At one moment there can be attachment to colour which is experienced through the eye-door, at another moment there can be attachment to sound which is experienced through the ear-door, at another moment there can be attachment to the concept of a person which is an object experienced through the mind-door. Citta and its accompanying cetasikas arise and fall away extremely rapidly. When right understanding has not been developed we cannot distinguish between different objects experienced through the different doorways. We are inclined to join different realities together into a 'whole", and thus we cannot realize their arising and falling away, their impermanence, and their nature of non-self. Through the study of the Buddhist teachings there can first be more understanding of the true nature of realities on the theoretical level. Only through the development of direct understanding of realities one will know the truth through one's own experience. ***** [Introduction to be continued] Metta, Sarah ====== 36241 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] transgressions, Phil Hello Phil, Thank you for your post. I just have a remark on right view. op 10-09-2004 00:18 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > You taught me recently that panna, right wisdom such as it were, is > included in right view. There is right view that can be understand > intellectually, and then there is this deeper right view, panna, that comes > from seeing realities through the six doors. That has not often arisun yet. N: Right view, sammaa di.t.thi, is pañña cetasika, but it is used mostly in the context of the Path factors. The Path facor right view is more than just intellectual understanding. When the foundation of intellectual understanding is firm there are conditions for a beginning of direct understanding, another level of pañña, as you know. This can be gradually developed, by being aware of dhammas as they appear through the six doors. Nina. 36242 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:56am Subject: The Removal of Distracting Thoughts, no 11 The Removal of Distracting Thoughts, no 11 Sutta: ***** The Commentary elaborates on the simile of the strong man who takes a weaker man by his shoulders and head and presses his throat tightly so that he becomes frightened and eventually dies. Evenso is the bhikkhu like a wrestler who opposes his unwholesome thoughts. He can abandon them by applying great effort. The Commentary then refers to a text about the Bodhisatta¹s supreme effort before he attained Buddhahood. When he sat down under the Bodhi-tree he said: He would not leave his seat until he had reached Buddhahood. N: We read in the Middle Length Sayings, no 36, the Greater Discourse to Saccaka, that the Buddha spoke about his ascetical practices before he became the Sammasambuddha. He said to Aggivessana: He said that while he was doing so sweat poured from his armpits. The Commentary to the Greater Discourse to Saccaka, (partly rendered by Ven. Bodhi) gives the reasons for the Bodhisatta¹s austerities before his enlightenment: to show his own exertion to the world, because the quality of invincible energy gave him joy. And also out of compassion for later generations, by inspiring them to strive with the same determination that he applied to attain Buddhahood. N: The clenching of the teeth shows the Bodhisatta¹s supreme effort, but this was accompanied by paññaa of a high degree. The bhikkhu referred to in the who has to abandon his unwholesome thoughts is on the way to arahatship. This cannot be attained without right effort which has to be accompanied by paññaa. As we read in this sutta, quoted above, he should restrain, subdue and beat down the (evil) mind by the (good) mind. If someone just clenches his teeth with dispair or fear because he does not want to have unwholesome thoughts, it is not the right effort that must be accompanied by paññaa. ***** Nina. 36243 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:56am Subject: Perversions Hi Sarah and all, I found more material, Patisambidhamagga, Ch VIII (p. 277). We also talked about it long ago. I have the Thai Co which I only partly understand. It brings us back to the child, villager and money changer who see a coin, as a simile. But now it refers to the degree of ignorance. Sañña is the weakest perversion, citta is less weak and wrong view, ditthi is the strongest. I need more time for this co. Also see the Netti, the Guide: p. 117-119.And Vis. 545, 546. This is difficult because we have to understand the four kinds of nutrition. These are also explained in the Co. to the Sammaditthi sutta. Thus, quite a study. Perhaps Rob K or others can help. Nina. 36244 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:55am Subject: Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner2-Preface(a) [Phil] Dear Dan, Herman and others, Would like to add my 2-cents worth here, but firstly, to Dan....... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Dear Herman, > Thanks for you kind greetings. It's nice to be back, but I'm again > realizing the time sink that dsg is and why I tend to just pop in and > then out again after awhile... This time, though, I intend to stay > awhile. > I'm curious to know what you mean by 'the time sink that dsg is..' > I must say that your comments on Pali ring true. I'd add that even > within the suttas themselves, the meanings of words vary > tremendously, depending on context (e.g., dukkha, pañña, etc.). In > the commentaries we see a proliferation of words as more and more > detail is added to the descriptions. I also agree that modern English > is capable of expressing far more nuance than Pali. However, the Pali > expresses in single words some concepts that are just plain alien to > English tradition. English explanations require tomes to express > these concepts because the language has no experience with them and > no words that point to them. Which words to use then? Pali, but > augmented with tomes of nuanced English to explain what you mean by > each word. > Azita: IMO, I think that the use of Pali, when it comes to talking about realities, is of utmost importance. My conceptual understanding of citta, at the pariyatti level, is much more precise than the word consciousness. I know it can be a case of 'splitting hairs' but citta indicates to me a very momentary event whereas consciousness has other meanings. As a nurse, consciousness can mean many things to me, whereas Citta is precise. And how do we translate Cetasika? Well for me who has trouble with very basic english :-) trying to describe cetasikas to someone....its just easier to use cetasika. I think of this Dhamma study as a completly new topic as if I am learning a new career all over again and I have to learn new concepts first before they can be put into practice, so to speak. So, in conclusion, I'll just reiterate your comment that: "...we > should never imagine that it is possible to capture experience in > words, of any language. But we can, and should be, mindful of our > constant efforts to do so." > Azita: Not only to do so in any language, but to try and capture the experience! > Kind Regards (or 'metta' in Pali), > > Dan Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 36245 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi Herman > Isn't a greater danger getting caught up in doubt that prevents you from > remaining open to the Buddha's teaching, or that can lead you speaking > in a > way that could be seen as creating divisions? > > ================= > H > Thank you very much for speaking honestly with me. I value that > highly. Ph: I noticed! (wink) Certainly honesty is good. Also at times renouncing one' s opinion is good. More middle way stuff. > Let me ask you some questions. In terms of the present moment, how do > the bona fides of the authors whose thoughts you are repeating figure? > Is a teaching good or useful or true because of who is teaching it? Or > is a teaching good or useful or true because it accurately models what > happens or can happen? Ph: For me, I measure it in terms of impact on my life. A reduction in anger is the main result for me. There are subtler changes I can't put my finger on as easily. Before coming across Abdhidhamma I would read of metta and read of "now wild words shall pass my lips," and the material in Dhammapada about anger and I would make vows, based on wanting to develop an ideal self, and see the project crumble. Abhidhamma, and Nina's books, and discussions here (especially one memorable post from Sarah that made me see that a lack of right understanding was at the heart of my anger) have given me something much more lasting. And Abhidhamma has laid the path to understanding anatta before my eyes. Now when I read suttas, I can appreciate them more deeply. I'm very excited about reading BB's Samyutta Nikaya anthology in the new year. So for me what I've learned here, through books and discussions, and reading suttas in the light of what I've learned her, help me understand what happens - definitely. > H :> I am very open to the teachings of the Buddha, because I find they > liberate from suffering. And I also have a critical faculty that > understands that people look for external authority, through which fact > one discarded view will be rapidly replaced with another. > Ph: I'm with you there. I appreciated your reference to Christian fundamentalism America. Now *that* is dangerous. People turn over any sense of self-respnsibility. There is talk of no control, no self, in Buddhism, but paradoxically we know there is great self-resonsibility. "Rely on yourself," I think the Buddha said. Anything we gain from the Buddha's teaching can only be verified through examining our own experience. (Alas, here in Japan, many folk versions of Buddhism are prevalent in which the Buddha is perceived as a deity who intercedes and dishes out blessings. There is this need for people to turn to external authority, to a deity. That is the kind of regression a person like yourself with critical faculties can be on the lookout for in Dhamma. But I don't see devotees of Abdhidhamma in this light and I still don't really understand why you do. Though I am probably missing your point - not trying hard. Sorry. Just home from work, and I'm kind of lazy about discussing intellectual topics like this. > > P > Why not remember that people are the owners of their kamma, and > respond or don't respond to the Buddha's teaching according to > accumulations? And believe what they will or won't according to > accumulations. > > > ============================ > H > Again, some questions if I may? How do these views, and further down > the page, accord with your experience? If your experience is that > nothing can be done, why stand in front of a classroom and teach? If > your experience is that you can do things that influence the course of > events, why parrot views that are not your experience? Ph: This is my experience. I get up and teach the same things hudnreds of times, knowing that the students won't use what I teach them. They have accumulations that my teaching won't overcome. In TESL, we call this "fossilized language." Their language runs in grooves that will never be ungrooved. This doesn't apply to beginners. And it may be a Japanese thing. Certainly northern Europeans come to speak splendid English. (And write books in it!) But I continue teaching in order to practice Brahma-Viharas and put some bread on the table. I am a friendly and patient teacher but I have no hopes of any but a few peculiar students becoming proficient in English because of my lessons. I also have come to understand that a sense of calm and well-being that I can share with students thanks to BVs will not last long. It is just temporary. Condiitons will arise in an unpredictable way and wash that well being away. My gosh, anyone's experience can confirm that. Can you hold on to happiness? Of course not. That is my experience. Anyone's experience. It is found in the Buddha's teaching, of course. > P > There's nothing you can do to change their view in a real way > compared to the amount of mental energy that must be expended in the > attempt, which must only feed everyone's restlessness, and possibly > even > ill-will, which are hindrances. > > ================ > > H > I'd say I post emails that give rise to ill-will all the time. > People are very attached to their views, you know, the more baseless the > greater the attachment (of necessity). Ph: Yes, if people feel ill-will, so be it. People are certainly attached to wthier opinions. WHy do you want to be? I feel one aspect of liberation will be becoming detached from opinions. I've never had strong ones, and now they're getting weaker and weaker. "The Buddha made a point of avoiding useless discussions", or words to that effect. I read that somewhere. The Buddha would know when there was no point in continuing a discussion. It would seem to me that trying to convince someone that their view is wrong is almost always in vain. A pointless discussion. Just solidifying and hardening your own views. I think right views are never hardened. That's the middle way. > ================== > P > (You posted some e-mails yesterday which > gave rise to ill-will in those who read them, I'd say.) > > =================== > > H > If you care to be more specific, I will be happy to address it. Like > you, I am not a trigger-happy blithering idiot, and I do consider what I > say before I say it. > Ph: No need for that. Clearly you think about what you say. I'm the blitherer. > > > P > If we learn to accept others' views as beyond our control we can > relax and devote ourselves to what we believe to be the true Dhamma. > That's what I do - most of the time except right now, for example! :) > You might say that it is dangerous to let what one considers wrong view > to > prevail, but remember the context. It's not like those of us who take > the > Abhidhamma to be the Buddha's most refined teaching are running rampant > in > the streets, burning copies of Bhikkhu Bodhi's wonderful sutta > anthologies! > Why not let us have our cetasikas in peace! > > =================== > H > Am I spoiling your lobha ? :-) Ph: Not yet. But I suppose if the Cetasika study corner turned out to be constantly dealing with discussion about whether "Cetasikas" involves the Buddha's teaching or not it would become tiresome and I worry a bit that some people whose wisdom I value greatly would give up on it out of debate fatigue and no longer participate at DSG. My reason for posting this was quite selfish actually, in that respect. But of course there is no way to control what people will say or do. > I encourage you to compare what Abhidhamma you have osmosed with the > dhatuvibhangasutta. > > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/majjhima/140-dhatuvibhanga-e.htm > > I appreciate your honesty Phil. You are a true friend. Thanks Herman. I won't bug you anymore. I've had my say. Metta, Phil 36246 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Deeds of Merit - only one way to decrease defilements Hi Antony It's always good to hear from you. I hope you've been feeling well. Thanks for the interesting links. They will help me to recognize opportunities for wholesome deeds. Metta, Phil >> Dear Phil, Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: . (snip) for the whole essay: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel259.html Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote: "...when the Buddha talked about the forms of merit, he > said, "Don't be afraid of merit, for merit is another word for happiness." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dana-giving/message/1 with metta / Antony. 36247 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Hello all Suddenly I'm all confused. But seeing how confused I am is good. No need to panic about it. When I've read about these things they make so much sense, but if I try to write down what I understand, there is a mess. > When the citta is wholesome, >kusala, all accompanying cetasikas are also kusala, If the kusala citta is kusala vipaka, a resultant of kusala kamma, all accompanying cetasikas will be kusala, and therefore in a sense will also be resultant of that kusala kamma, right? Do we say vipaka cetasika? The above passage is referring to just one mental state, one citta with accompanying cetasikas. In the next mental state, will it be one more citta with another set of accompanying cittas, also kusala, conditioned by the mental state that just fell away? Will that be vipaka too? At some point lobha may arise. Will arise. Is this after many cittas have risen and fallen away conditoning one another? Or is there one sense-door citta and accompanying cetasikas followed by one mind-door citta and accompanying cetasikas, and then lobha or dosa arising because of accumulations in the mind-door citta? When lobha arises, does it arise as cetasika plus universal cetasikas plus one or more particular cetasikas plus lobha? And then fall away, and rise again immediately in a way that makes us feel we have a continuous feeling? I am rereading ADL to try to figure this sort of thing out, but am currently in the later chapters. It is time to go back to the beginning. But perhaps an answer here will help drive it home the way I've alread had some points clearly driven home here. Sorry if I'm getting ahead of things here. Many thanks in advance Metta Phil 36248 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: Hi Phil, Thanks for sitting the citta test. You wrote: -------------- > My first impulse is to say C. Yes, B looks good. The" internal sense-fields" and the "classes of consciousness" would be nama. The "external sense field" (object) would be rupa. Nama (ie citta) is that which experiences, rupa (object) is that which is experienced. For what it's worth, I go with B. ---------------- Although I can't argue with any part of your answer, it wasn't the answer I was looking for. When I asked what you understood by, "Citta experiences an object," I was really looking for the meaning of citta. Let me rephrase the question: Is citta inseparable from the experience-er, the experience-ing and the experience-ed (combined as an event)? (Herman and Howard chose this answer.) Is it just the experience-ing and there is no experience-er? (Dan opted for this one.) Is it the experience-er as distinct from the experience-ing, the latter being a separate dhamma? (You and I liked the sound of this but not enough to vote for it.) Or is it none of the above? (I voted for this one). My understanding was (and still is) that citta is the experience-er and that the experience-ing is not a separate dhamma but a function of the same experience-er. If I am right, you and Dan sneak through with a pass minus. Herman and Howard get an F because they had the audacity to say I was wrong. :-) Kind regards, Ken H 36249 From: Dan D. Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Howard: "No, no!"] Dear Howard (and Herman, Nina, et al.), Yes, yes. Confusing language should surely be seen as confusing. Let's work an example. Suppose someone says, "citta cognizes an object." It's easy to object: "Hold on, pardner! The language here clearly implies a subject." What goes unsaid is that that subject has such a 'noun' feel to it. What kind of noun? A concrete noun? Couldn't be! Because citta would be a rupa then. An abstract noun? Couldn't be! Because citta would then have to be a concept. Neither of those descriptions match with our experience and understanding of the distinction between nama and rupa. 'Citta' has much more of a verb-like feel to it because the activity of citta is so intense and rapid, while the activity of rupa is non-existent. At moments when the distinction between nama and rupa is clear, citta may appear as sheer activity, while rupa is entirely non-active. Hearing "citta" used as noun then grates on the ears. Must it? I don't think so. It does mean extending our notion of noun to include 'nama,' which is unlike any noun we ever encounter in our everyday life. Alternatively, we could extend our notion of 'verb' to include activities like "citta" (a noun, in Pali) that don't have a subject that is distinct from the activity. With the understanding of citta as an extended noun (as opposed to a concrete or abstract noun), things like "Citta cognizes an object" sound fine. With the understanding of 'citta' as an extended verb, "citta is the cognizing of an object" is not a problem. Because of deficiencies of the English language to adequately express the distinction between nama and rupa so succinctly, neither of these is entirely adequate. So what? A big danger is to get so hung up on the language that we cringe when we hear formulations of citta that sound too noun-ish (which is what I sometimes do) or we develop elaborate and dubious theories of reality to match our understanding of the language (e.g., arguing that because the conventional notion of 'subject' in a sentence doesn't adequately reflect what we observe as 'citta', the notion of 'object' must be bunk). The sentence "citta cognizes an object" is certainly confusing if you want citta to be a concrete noun or an abstract. Let's make it a verb- noun (or "nama") instead. The sentence "citta is the cognizing of an object" is likewise confusing if we assume that the cognizing must be done by a 'subject' (in the conventional sense). Let's make the 'cognizing' a subject-verb (or "nama") instead. Either way gets us out of the language trap that leads to proliferation of theory and clouding of vision. > Howard: > Well, if you "cringe" at it because you see how it could be > misleading, that is no "crime". It is far better than being taken in by it! Moreover, to > cringe at it in the sense of having concern that some people might be fooled > by it is good, being a matter of compassion rather than aversion. If we cringe when we see how a little piece of language could mislead someone, we'll have a life of cringing and frustration -- not very enlightening! As for fearing "being taken in by it," Narada Mahathera classes "Permanent Scepticism" (niyata micchaadi.t.ti) in with the Weighty Kammas (viz. creation of schism in the Sangha, wounding of a Buddha, murder of an arahant, matricide, parricide) [Manual of Abhidhamma, p. 260]. Fine to be skeptical, but it is also important to be mindful of where the skepticism is leading. Metta galore, Dan 36250 From: Dan D. Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSS4-Introduction(a) [Howard: "...no object of experience." You write: "There can be no expectation of perfect formulation. It is simply a truism that clearer language, language that communicates more truly, is more useful than less adequate language." Despite being Mr. Skeptical and Mr. Contrarian, I can't disagree with that. But it begs the question, "Adequate for what?" The sentence "citta cognizes an object" is designed to de-personalize the nama by making it something other than the big "I". The citta runs by very fast, it grasps one object and then it's gone; immediately, another citta arises to grasp another object and just as quickly, it too passes. On and on. Anicca, anicca. No room for a big "I". That's useful language isn't it? Metaphorical to be sure, but surely it is useful. Dan 36251 From: robmoult Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:08am Subject: Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > > When the citta is wholesome, > >kusala, all accompanying cetasikas are also kusala, > > If the kusala citta is kusala vipaka, a resultant of kusala kamma, all > accompanying cetasikas will be kusala, and therefore in a sense will also be > resultant of that kusala kamma, right? Do we say vipaka cetasika? ===== Let's take a step back here. A "kusala" mental state is wholesome, it has wholesome roots of non-attachment (alobha) and non-aversion (adosa). The citta (consciousness) and the various associated mental factors (cetasikas) are all wholesome. For example, the contact cetasika (phassa) in this mental state is wholesome. Now let's talk about a kusala eye consciousness mental state. This is a kusala vipaka mental state. This mental state is not wholesome; it does not have any wholesome roots (i.e. no alobha, no adosa). These mental states are rootless and are of indeterminate ethical value (avyakata); not wholesome, not unwholesome. The contact cetasika (phassa) in the kusala eye consciousness mental state is indeterminate. So what is so "kusala" about a kusala eye consciousness mental state? In this case, the term "kusala" just refers to the ethical quality of mental state for which this mental state is the resultant. In other words, a kusala mental state is ethically wholesome and this mental state creates kamma (technically the volition/cetana cetasika creates the kamma). The resultant of this kusala mental state inherits the name "kusala" but it is ethically indeterminate. ===== > The above passage is referring to just one mental state, one citta with > accompanying cetasikas. > In the next mental state, will it be one more citta with another set of > accompanying cittas, also kusala, conditioned by the mental state that just > fell away? Will that be vipaka too? ===== Citta-niyama (the laws of nature as they relate to citta) determine what kind of mental state will arise when a specific mental state falls away. For example, when a determining (votthapana) mental state falls away, there will always be a javana mental state which arises next (this is according to citta-niyama). The determining mental state is indeterminate but the javana mental state creates kamma. There are many factors which determine which type of javana mental state (i.e. kusala or akusala) arise (i.e. accumulations, etc.). ===== > At some point lobha may arise. Will > arise. Is this after many cittas have risen and fallen away conditoning one > another? Or is there one sense-door citta and accompanying cetasikas > followed by one mind-door citta and accompanying cetasikas, and then lobha > or dosa arising because of accumulations in the mind-door citta? When lobha > arises, does it arise as cetasika plus universal cetasikas plus one or more > particular cetasikas plus lobha? And then fall away, and rise again > immediately in a way that makes us feel we have a continuous feeling? ===== Lobha arises in a javana mental state. You are correct that accumulations (i.e. craving) are one of the conditions causing lobha (clining) to arise. Javana mental states arise as determined by citta-niyama. ===== > I am rereading ADL to try to figure this sort of thing out, but am > currently in the later chapters. It is time to go back to the beginning. > But perhaps an answer here will help drive it home the way I've alread had > some points clearly driven home here. Sorry if I'm getting ahead of things > here. Hope that this helps. Metta, Rob M :-) 36252 From: Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi, Ken (and Phil, and all) - In a message dated 9/10/04 8:45:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Although I can't argue with any part of your answer, it wasn't the > answer I was looking for. When I asked what you understood > by, "Citta experiences an object," I was really looking for the > meaning of citta. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Now I'm really becoming confused. Originally I thought you were asking about how best to characterize experience. My first response, based on understanding your question in that way was "As you might suspect, I like C the least - I think it is a terrible choice! ;-) What I find the most interesting is your having D as primary choice, and, indeed, I think that choice D is, itself, very interesting. Care to say anything more about D?" Then, based on Herman's reply, I assumed I misunderstood you, and that you really didn't want to know how to characterize experience but to understand "... what the statement 'Citta experiences an object' means!" In that case, I went on to reply as follows: "Actually, I think that is a statement that should not be made!! You [Herman] are correct: On the basis of our language use, it says there is some thing, citta, some thing, the object, and a relation holding between them. The citta is an experiencer, the object the experienced, and the experiencing the relation, making C the closest to describing the meaning. And that is indeed why this is a bad statement." Now it appears that maybe my original understanding of your question was correct, because you say now that you were "really looking for the meaning of citta." ------------------------------------------------------- > > Let me rephrase the question: > > Is citta inseparable from the experience-er, the experience-ing and > the experience-ed (combined as an event)? (Herman and Howard chose > this answer.) > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: If, as I now suspect, you are asking about the nature of experience, as it is, and not asking about how certain language is used, then I must say that I certainly do NOT choose the above answer, C, because it presupposes entities that I do not accept. ---------------------------------------------------- > > Is it just the experience-ing and there is no experience-er? (Dan > opted for this one.) > > Is it the experience-er as distinct from the experience-ing, the > latter being a separate dhamma? (You and I liked the sound of > this but not enough to vote for it.) > > Or is it none of the above? (I voted for this one). > ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: It is "none of the above" because there is no experiencer! There is just the arising of experiential content. The notion of "experiencer" is atta view. ------------------------------------------------------- > > My understanding was (and still is) that citta is the experience-er > and that the experience-ing is not a separate dhamma but a function > of the same experience-er. ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: Here you countenance an "experiencer" which has the function of experiencing. This is quintessential atta view, roundly dismissed by the Buddha and by Buddhaghosa (and Nagarjuna, and a host of others) after him. -------------------------------------------------------- > > If I am right, you and Dan sneak through with a pass minus. Herman > and Howard get an F because they had the audacity to say I was > wrong. > > -------------------------------------------------------- Howard: Make it not just an F for me, but an unconditional expulsion from the course with reregistering prohibited! I, indeed, say you are totally wrong on this one, Ken. :-) =========================== 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) 36253 From: Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSS4-Introduction(a) [Howard: "...no object of experience." Hi, Dan - In a message dated 9/10/04 9:11:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@y... writes: > You write: "There can be no expectation of perfect formulation. It is > simply a truism that clearer language, language that communicates > more truly, is more useful than less adequate language." > > Despite being Mr. Skeptical and Mr. Contrarian, I can't disagree with > that. But it begs the question, "Adequate for what?" The > sentence "citta cognizes an object" is designed to de-personalize the > nama by making it something other than the big "I". The citta runs by > very fast, it grasps one object and then it's gone; immediately, > another citta arises to grasp another object and just as quickly, it > too passes. On and on. Anicca, anicca. No room for a big "I". That's > useful language isn't it? Metaphorical to be sure, but surely it is > useful. > > Dan > ============================= There are degrees to things. Certainly "Citta cognizes an object" is superior to "I cognize an object" but it is still inadequate. Inadequate for what, you ask? Inadequate for clear understanding. Yes, there is some usefulness to the formulation - and some danger as well. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 36254 From: Dan D. Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:10am Subject: Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Dear Nina, So much of the dsg struggle is directed toward ways to adequately describe various aspects of Dhamma. Because Dhamma is such a different way of thinking about the world than we encounter in everyday life, it tends to be quite difficult to discuss clearly. "Citta" is a fundamental idea in Theravada, and it is difficult to express what citta is in a way that does not lead to error. Sometimes I cringe at the formulation "citta cognizes an object" or "seeing sees" because the distinguishing characteristic of citta is its sheer activity (as opposed to the non-activity of the rupa), but the noun-verb-object formulation somewhat over emphasizes a "being" aspect of citta. This shouldn't matter. The formulation of citta as sheer activity overly emphasizes the non-being aspect of citta -- even to the point where it can lead into the language trap of "No subject? Then, no object either." Neither formulation is right for all purposes, but both serve useful functions in describing the nature of citta. It is madness to cling so strongly to one formulation or another that one ends up verbally assaulting someone who uses another formulation, as I did to you some time ago. I apologize. > When insight has developed and dhammas are directly experienced, no words > are needed. Needed for what? I don't understand. Words are surely needed to describe the experience to others and for helping clarify the words in the tipitaka. In addition, wrestling with words helps bring the experience into the proper location in the vast net of words and ideas of the teachings, thus making more comprehensible the words that describe insights not yet experienced. > You said that you find it so difficult to understand citta: same, same for > all of us. Yes. Just look at the matika of the Dhammasangani! So many distinctions between cittas that only an arahant could comprehend... Struggling with citta is a long-term project. > If I remember correctly, you were also present at the short visit with A. > Sujin up North (her Alaska trip) when Jim was there? About three years ago. I did meet Sujin and Jim (and Amara) in Niagara about three years ago. We talked for about 2 hours. Sujin's voice was so quiet, and we were sitting so close together and Jim so far away that I don't think he heard much of our conversation. > How did it come over to you what she said? She may have talked about seeing > now. Was it strange to you? I don't recall her talking about seeing. She knocked on the table and asked whether hardness was light or dark. She said lobha was a great teacher -- so easy to follow. > By talking about seeing, people may be drawn just for a moment to pay > attention to seeing or to what appears through the eyes. Just a very short > moment, but this can be accumulated. This is a way to begin to understand > what citta is, citta is nama, and I do not dare to say to you: it > experiences. But if we gain right understanding we do not fall over words > like *it*. When there can be direct awareness and understanding, we are no > longer tricked by experiencers, subject, little selves, etc. It actually > depends on sati-sampajañña whether we can cross the border of > intellectualizing, reasoning, being misled by the choice of words. I agree. Now, how to express "citta" in a way that guarantees that no one who hears it will be misled by experiencers, subjects, and little selves? Can't be done. Once again, I apologize for earlier (two years ago? or only one year ago?) demanding that you do so. > > Dan: The seeing-onsciousness is simply the registering of a visual object in the > > mind. > N: I would not say: in the mind. Then again we have something that lasts. > Whereas mind is ephemeral, impermanent. It is citta. Yup, that's exactly right. So the struggle for proper linguistic formulation of "citta" in English continues... > The first stage of tender insight is knowing nama as nama and rupa as rupa > and then we begin to understand what anatta really is. The first stage of > principal insight is directly understanding the arising and falling away of > nama and rupa. Then there will be more understanding that what is > impermanent cannot be self. How could there be a self in what arises and > then falls away immediately? There cannot be. That is why the linguistically troublesome expression "citta experiences object" is not such a big problem, Dhammically speaking. > Thus I would say: The seeing-consciousness is simply the experience of > visual object. And leave out: in the mind. Yup. I'd add that the "in the mind" is a potentially confusing redundancy. > I am disinclined to the word > registering, because I think seeing is such a direct experience: visible > object impinges on eyesense, the eyebase, and this conditions seeing. I cringed when I wrote "registering" because the word is clearly not adequate for describing seeing-consciousness. > D:The lobha-rooted cittas are the experiencings (cittas) of > > objects (thoughts), colored by different shades (cetasikas) such as > > pleasant feeling (vedana), desire for more pleasure (lobha), and the > > yabbut of 'I like this' (ditthi). > N: Colored by different shades may be confusing, I think. Yup. I'd say that it is certainly confusing in some senses. But it also can be helpful in pointing to distinctions between citta and cetasika -- not perfect, but possibly helpful for some. > What about > conditions? They are conditioned by pleasant feeling, etc. And this is > mutual, the feeling is conditioned by the lobha. They all influence each > other. I don't quite see how the 'colors' metaphor clouds vision of conditions. Can you expand on this? Thanks, Nina. Mudita, Dan 36255 From: Dan D. Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Dear Herman, Great to see you again. Just a quick comment or two because I'm very much pressed for time now... Herman: "So I'm with Howard on this one, and say that precision is the order of the day." Is it too late to say, "I'm with Howard too"? If not, then consider it said by me. Now, how can we *precisely* express "citta" in English? Certainly not by Ken's A, B, or C. But I don't see any good alternatives (although the subject-verb-object and the verb-object are clearly more in line with Buddha's teachings than is the verb- NoObject). Dan 36256 From: Dan D. Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 7:19am Subject: Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner2-Preface(a) [Azita] Dear Azita, Good to see you again! Just a few very quick responses to your comments > I'm curious to know what you mean by 'the time sink that dsg > is..' It takes a lot of time to read posts, consider, and respond, so I end up sinking a lot of time into dsg when I am active here. With so many other responsibilities, it is hard to keep going. > > Azita: IMO, I think that the use of Pali, when it comes to talking > about realities, is of utmost importance. My conceptual > understanding of citta, at the pariyatti level, is much more precise > than the word consciousness. I know it can be a case of 'splitting > hairs' but citta indicates to me a very momentary event whereas > consciousness has other meanings. As a nurse, consciousness can mean > many things to me, whereas Citta is precise. > And how do we translate Cetasika? Well for me who has trouble > with very basic english :-) trying to describe cetasikas to > someone....its just easier to use cetasika. > I think of this Dhamma study as a completly new topic as if I > am learning a new career all over again and I have to learn new > concepts first before they can be put into practice, so to speak. Well said! Thanks. > So, in conclusion, I'll just reiterate your comment that: "...we > > should never imagine that it is possible to capture experience in > > words, of any language. But we can, and should be, mindful of our > > constant efforts to do so." > > > > Azita: Not only to do so in any language, but to try and capture > the experience! Not easy, but a good thing to do. Metta, Dan 36257 From: Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 3:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Hi, Dan (and Herman, and all) - In a message dated 9/10/04 10:17:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@y... writes: > > Dear Herman, > Great to see you again. Just a quick comment or two because I'm very > much pressed for time now... > > Herman: "So I'm with Howard on this one, and say that precision is > the order of the day." > > Is it too late to say, "I'm with Howard too"? If not, then consider > it said by me. ------------------------------------------- Howard: :-) ------------------------------------------- > Now, how can we *precisely* express "citta" in > English? Certainly not by Ken's A, B, or C. But I don't see any good > alternatives (although the subject-verb-object and the verb-object > are clearly more in line with Buddha's teachings than is the verb- > NoObject). -------------------------------------------------- Howard: We cannot express "citta" with perfect precision in any language. We just cannot. We can only take our best shot, by using several alternative formulations, explanations, and paraphrases plus heavy use of quotation marks and disclaimer after disclaimer after disclaimer. This entire thread amounts to one big explanation and disclaimer. Just one thing I think is critically important to emphasize with regard to any discussion by Buddhists: Whatever the topic, whether it be citta or anything else, emptiness is preeminent, and it must always be placed at the fore. By "emptiness", I mean impersonality and non-agency, dependency, corelessness, insubstantiality, impermanence, and unworthiness of being clung to (and the futility of clinging). ---------------------------------------------------- > > Dan > > =========================== 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) 36258 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 10:18am Subject: Re: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 04 ) by Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > HI Htoo, > > I am confused. > > Clearly, you had been able to view the file for the first three sets > of comments. What has changed? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Rob M, Thanks for your reply. Could you please tell me how to save? SO that I can read even if I am not on line. Htoo Naing 36259 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Deeds of Merit - only one way to decrease defilements Hello all, Here are a few more colourful and inspiring passages from Bhikkhu Bodhi's essay on merit: "But while merit (punna) and knowledge (nana) thus occupy coordinate positions, it is merit that claims priority from the standpoint of spiritual dynamics. The reason is that works of merit come first in the process of inner growth. If knowledge be the flower that gives birth to the fruit of liberation, and faith (saddha) the seed out of which the flower unfolds, then merit is the soil, water and fertilizer all in one -- the indispensable nutriment for every stage of growth. Merit paves the way for knowledge, and finds in knowledge the sanction for its own claim to a place in the system of Buddhist training..." and "The achievement of such a purification of our inward being (note: i.e nibbana) is the work of merit. Merit scours the mind of the coarser defilements, attenuates the grip of the unwholesome roots, and fortifies the productive power of the wholesome, beneficial states. Through its cumulative force it provides the foundation for wisdom's final breakthrough to the unconditioned. It is the fuel, so to speak, for the ascent of wisdom from the mundane to the supramundane. Just as the initial stages of a lunar rocket work up the momentum that enables the uppermost stage to break the gravitational pull of the earth and reach the moon, so does merit give to the spiritual life that forward thrust that will propel the wisdom-faculty past the gravitational pull of the mundane order and permit it to penetrate the transcendental truth." Ph: Interesting. I've always assumed that it would be panna that provides the final liberation from samsara's orbit, so to speak. The propelling force from merit, helping panna to .... I don't know enough about rocket ships, or about panna, to know where panna would fit in this analogy! But it's a nice one to read in the morning. Blast off! "When merit is said to "purge and purify the mental continuum," it is so described in reference to its capacity to arrest the surging tide of the defilements which threatens to sweep the mind towards the perilous deep of transgressional action. Only wisdom -- the supramundane wisdom of the noble paths -- can eradicate the defilements at the level of latency, which is necessary if the bonds of existence are to be broken and deliverance attained. But the practice of merit can contribute much towards attenuating their obsessive force and establishing a foothold for wisdom to exercise its liberating function. Wisdom can operate only upon the base of a purified mind; the accumulation of merit purifies the mind; hence merit provides the supporting condition for wisdom." Ph: This seems to support my feeling that deeds of merit would be especially helpful in eradicating coarse defilements. Very helpful essay. Thanks again, Antony. Metta, Phil > >> Dear Phil, > > Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: > > . (snip) > > for the whole essay: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel259.html > > Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote: > > "...when the Buddha talked about the forms of merit, he > > said, "Don't be afraid of merit, for merit is another word for > happiness." > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dana-giving/message/1 > > with metta / Antony. > 36260 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 4:27pm Subject: Basic citta processes (was Re: [dsg] Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d)) Hi Rob Thanks for the feedback. I'll rename this thread and use it to try to solidify my grasp of basic processes. Ph> > > > > When the citta is wholesome, > > >kusala, all accompanying cetasikas are also kusala, > > > > If the kusala citta is kusala vipaka, a resultant of kusala > kamma, all > > accompanying cetasikas will be kusala, and therefore in a sense > will also be > > resultant of that kusala kamma, right? Do we say vipaka cetasika? > > ===== > R > Let's take a step back here. A "kusala" mental state is wholesome, > it has wholesome roots of non-attachment (alobha) and non-aversion > (adosa). The citta (consciousness) and the various associated mental > factors (cetasikas) are all wholesome. For example, the contact > cetasika (phassa) in this mental state is wholesome. > > Now let's talk about a kusala eye consciousness mental state. This > is a kusala vipaka mental state. This mental state is not wholesome; > it does not have any wholesome roots (i.e. no alobha, no adosa). > These mental states are rootless and are of indeterminate ethical > value (avyakata); not wholesome, not unwholesome. The contact > cetasika (phassa) in the kusala eye consciousness mental state is > indeterminate. Ph:: OK. Would the former be javana citta? Am I correct in thinking that javana is the first point at which "fresh" kusala, if you will, rather than resultant kusala appears on the scene? As we know, akusala is much more prevalent than kusala. so let's talk about that. So, if I'm correct, there is all this vipaka akusala rising, and then all this "fresh" javana akusala arising? Because of proliferation, is there always much more akusala citta produced in javanas than the akusala vipaka citta that is fed into the process? That's enough for today. I'll be rereading ADL and your book as well as asking questions here to try to figure out citta processes. I know you're busy these days. Thanks as always for your time. Metta, Phil 36261 From: Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:10pm Subject: Vism.XIV,100 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 100. III. i. A. (a) 2. But that 'with root-cause' is (42)-(49) that associated with non-greed, etc., as the cause of the result. It is of eight kinds because it is classed according to joy, etc., like the profitable of the sense sphere (1)-(8). But it does not occur with respect to the six objects38 through giving, etc., as the profitable does; for it occurs only with respect to the six objects that are included among limited states,39 as rebirth-linking, life-continuum, death, and registration. But the prompted and unprompted states should be understood here as due to the source it has come from, and so on.40 [456] And while there is no difference in the associated states, the resultant should be understood as passive like the reflection of a face in a looking-glass while the profitable is active like the face. -------------------- Note 38. 'To the six kinds of objects all classed as limited, etc., past, etc., internal, etc.' (Pm.474). Note 39. Registration consciousness does not, it is stated, occur with an object of exalted consciousness--see VbhA. 154. Note 40. ' "The source it has come from, and so on" means the source it has come from and its condition. Here, in the opinion of certain teachers the result of the unprompted profitable is unprompted and the result of the prompted is prompted, like the movement of the face's reflexion in a looking-glass when the face moves; thus it is 'due to the source it has come from.' But in the opinion of other teachers the unprompted arises due to powerful kamma as condition and the prompted does so due to weak kamma; thus it is 'due to its condition' ' (Pm.474). 36262 From: plnao Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 5:58pm Subject: Deeds of Merit - Paying respect through speech, body and mind Hello all More from "Deeds of Merit" by K Sujin available at http://www.zolag.co.uk/meri2.html Moving on to the next part of the "Sila" branch: . Paying respect ( Apacaayana.) S. : Defilements are akusala dhammas, unwholesome realities, which arise with the citta, they cause the citta to be impure. The eradication of defilements is wholesome, this causes the citta to be pure. The meritorious action which is apacaayana, that is, paying respect to those who deserve it, stems from the citta which is wholesome, kusala. We read in the Gradual Sayings ( I, Book of the Threes, Ch XV, 149, Homage): Monks, there are these three kinds of homage. What three? Homage done with body, speech and mind. These are the three.... Ph: I think I can predict what homage done with body and speech are. I wonder about homage done with mind. I'll think about that today. It must cross over with the bhavana (mental development) branch.. I think we will be reminded about how these branches (dana, sila and bhavana) grow together and support each other Metta, Phil 36263 From: Herman Hofman Date: Fri Sep 10, 2004 6:53pm Subject: RE: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Hi Dan, Thanks for your comments (and those of everyone else as well). I appreciate the development of the thread. I owe a number of posts to a number of people, they are still fermenting....... as is my desire to do a number of things around the house :-) ====================== D > Now, how can we *precisely* express "citta" in English? Certainly not by Ken's A, B, or C. But I don't see any good alternatives (although the subject-verb-object and the verb-object are clearly more in line with Buddha's teachings than is the verb- NoObject). =================== This is a very good and useful question to ask. And to answer it I think it is very important to understand the "why" of expressing something, the reason for saying it. And in answering your question for themselves, the reader may well discover the perfect peace of free-range citta (as opposed to the captured kind) :-) We have all learned to think, speak and write through years and years of schooling, and it might be reasonable to say that much of what passes through our minds and mouths is automatic. We repeat what we have learnt, what we have remembered. And so often when we attempt to describe experience, we are including all sorts of material that has nothing to do with what is actually experienced, or what we actually want to convey. The grammar of language incorporates all sorts of inferences about causality and assumes all sorts of fixed elements like time and space, subjects and objects. So if we want to communicate *citta as experience only* we need to adopt a different grammar, the grammar of experience. I don't think it would look anything like the English we use. It may not even be a spoken grammar. Healthy humans can very accurately convey their emotional state or intentions to others, to the point where the experience is duplicated in the other, without the utterance of a single sound. I would typify the above *citta as experience* (or removing the redundancies leaving either just *citta* or just *experience*) as becoming. Becoming is a process, not a thing. On the other hand, *thinking about citta* is *becoming attempting to be*, or *having*. Having creates the subject - object duality. Having is all about things. Things with nature, essence, characteristics and the like. So communication about *thinking about citta* is best done in terms of process, not objects. Hope this wasn't too much of a ramble :-) Kind Regards Herman 36264 From: jwromeijn Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:24am Subject: Re: On Facts and Absolutisms --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > Dear Members > > A very well-known scholar of Buddhism, Professor Peter Harvey, writes ... > In conclusion, it therefore seems to me that disputation about > whether the Buddha taught Abhidhamma is peripheral to the real meat > of Dhamma, whether one calls it "practice" or "understanding > realities now". On DSG, we should be exchanging views we have formed > from analyzing and examining actual experience. We should not expect > others to identify with those views and we certainly should not > become sarcastic and sharp with our speech when we find others > unimpressed with our outlook. This is particularly so with > peripheral academic topics like "was the Abhidhamma recited at the > First Council". > > Finally, I want to express my view (based on my own experience of > reality) that approaching the Dhamma with trustful confidence > (saddha) seems to encourage continued interest in Dhamma, more so > than taking a strictly scientific approach of what is empirically > proven by others and what is not. > > With best wishes to all > Andrew T Dear Andrew and all Thanks Andrew, for your wise words about the Abhidhamma and its history. It is important if the Buddha COULD have spoken or written "the" Abhidhamma (and I'm convinced he could), not if he has done it or if they were recited during First Council (of one of the seven books that is impossible: the Kathavatthu). But the most important today is something else and maybe that makes me sarcastic and sharp in parts of my messages. That is the lack of dynamics in Theravada, the fact that it's too less future-directed and too much past-directed; the orthodoxy that makes that most westerners interested in Buddhism prefer the Tibetan or Zen tradition or only do (vipassana-)meditation without Dhamma at all. And I'm afraid this lack on dynamcis accelerates the end of Theravada in the Asian countries too. The so called 'Commentaries' are a screen between the Tipitaka and the reception and understanding of it today; we need more modern commentaries, using MODERN METAPHORES in explaining the Dhamma, not he metaphores of the daily life millennia ago. Metta Joop 36265 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:33am Subject: 'Cetasikas' study corner8-Introduction(e) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Introduction [contd] ***** There is no abiding ego or self who can direct the operations of the mind. There is a different citta all the time and it is accompanied by different cetasikas. They arise because of their own conditions. We are so used to thinking in terms of a mind belonging to the human person. It is difficult to understand that there is no ego who can direct his mind, who can take his destiny in his own hands and shape it. If everything is beyond control where is the human dignity? If one walks the Buddha's Path one will know the difference between what is true in the ultimate sense and what is only imagination or a dream. There will be less delusion about the truth and there will eventually be elimination of all that is impure and unwholesome. This is mental emancipation and is that not the highest good one could attain? ***** [Introduction to be continued] Metta, Sarah ====== 36266 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 4:34am Subject: RE: [dsg] On Facts and Absolutisms Hi Andrew, What you say makes a lot of sense. You make a good case. I feel a little uneasy persevering with the discussion, because I wish to express disagreement on some minor points. The refutation may appear sharp and sarcastic, but it is mostly straight sutta quotes, which I cannot water down in any satisfactory way. If you are interested in persevering, I will be happy to reply, if not, it is not a big deal for me either. I have snipped your excellent post for reasons of brevity, and because I am not quoting any of it in this short reply. Kind Regards Herman 36267 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 4:46am Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > > > I think if you can find the right things to read they will be > the > > > food that nourishes wisdom. I kept a copy of this book with me > > > constantly for almost year and would read it even for a few > minutes > > > any chance I got: > > > http://www.abhidhamma.org/perfections%20of%20enlightenment.htm > > > .++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > Explain to me, if you would, how this kind of wisdom, wisdom from > > considering the teachings, relates to wisdom arising from > > concentration, that is to say panna. Panna is the wisdom arisen > from > > concentration, right? > > > > > +++++++++++++ > What sort of concentration is meant by the visuddhimagga(xiv7) > when it says that concentration is the proximate cause of panna > (wisdom)? Obviously it > is not miccha-samadhi. Bear in mind that miccha-samadhi(wrong > concentration) comes in countless variations. If it arises in > conjunction with refined lobha(desire) it will feel calm and > peaceful. Samma-samadhi is of two main types: that associated > with satipatthana vipassana and that associated with samatha > (concentration meditation). > > Whenever any citta arises there is also samadhi. At any moment of > satipatthana, correct understanding of a paramattha dhamma, > there must be samadhi associated with it it. That type of > samadhi is samma-samadhi but it only lasts for that moment or > moments that insight is occuring. Robert, I have had this type of 'insight' or some form that looks like insight, while meditating on the body, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that it's a vipassana nana or that it lead to any changes in my life. And to nit, wouldnt samma-samadhi be ever-present where the insight knowledges arise only periodically? IOW, I would think you would have to be concentrated for some time before insights arise. > It has the function of fixing > or focusing on the object. If samma-samadhi did not arise then > panna would not have a clear object to insight. At the moments > of vipassana-nana samadhi becomes very strong and the minddoor > process is vividly seen. However, both before and after those > moments, samadhi may be at its usual daily life levels. > Samma-samadhi is a most necessary ingredient of the eighfactored > path but we must know that it can only arise when there is > samma-ditthi. You can ask Nina too, but I think I am right in saying > that 'proximate cause' doesn't always mean in time sequence. The > Patthana gives conditions that are co-nascent arisng at the same > time. Some teachers don't study Abhidhamma and may tend to > interpret 'proximate' as always meaning prior. > > Samma-ditthi(right understanding) should be given prominence : > "Bhikkhus, just as the dawn is the forerunner and first > indication of the > rising of the sun, so is right view the forerunner and first > indication of > wholesome states. > For one of right view, bhikkhus, right intention springs up. For > one of > right intention, right speech springs up. For one of right > speech, right > action springs up. For one of right action, right livelihood > springs up. For > one of right livelihood, right effort springs up. For one of > right effort, > right mindfulness springs up. For one of right mindfulness, > right > concentration springs up. For one of right concentration, right > knowledge > springs up. For one of right knowledge, right deliverance > springs up. > > Anguttara Nikaya 10:121" > > And reading/considering the teachings helps right understanding to > develop. > > This is a big stumbling block for me. I'm not currently at the point where I can put two and two together and plainly read the texts I have to put together an understanding. So we have different ways of putting together right view. When one understands any of the different subjects that Venerable Sariputta illustrates in MN9, we have right understanding. But right view is often said to be a few different things: I understand it to be absence of wrong view, specifically that things are permanent, have a self, or a soul, and also the definition sometimes espoused that there is this world, the next world, fruit & result of good & bad actions, what is given and what is offered, and preists and contemplatives who have realized all this through their own direct knowledge. That last part is a big one to develop a view of. I'd say a lot of mixed view is possible as the last one is probably a tall order to try to develop all at once. I've had some success with coming close to understanding some of the psycho-physical processes like the sixfold sense base and what have you, just on taking mindful walks, so this is a definite opportunity for the arising of right view. But again, I will lack a certain level of confidence in my practise if I am going out there and not seeing impermanence or selflessness, especially after having seen it once. Seeing the true nature of reality is important, so maybe you could understand how I want that good concentration meditation session leading to seeing the three dharma seals in existence. > > > > > +++++++++++++ > > > Remember that insight meditation is showing us that each moment > is > > > conditioned. When we have the idea of practising in such a way > > > (unfettered and without hindrances) we are not being realistic > to > > > the way conditions work. Whenever there is momentary > understanding > > > of a hindrance such as craving then at that moment (of > > > understanding) there is tadanga (temporary ) removal of the > > > hindrance. BUT more importantly there is also some erasement of > the > > > idea of self. > > > On the otherhand if we think we first have to be hindrance free > and > > > then start doing vipassana, we are missing the chance now to > > > understand the hindrances as they are. > >__________________________________________________________ > > > > I can't quite say I understand. For example, I was downstairs last > > night with some of my books in the basement for some time, reading > and > > trying in vain to get some breathing meditation going. However, it > > was good to be away from the computer and by myself. When I came > back > > to the computer, it was extremely clear that as soon as I got my > hand > > on the mouse, craving was present. I have never seen craving with > > such clarity before. I would learn towards saying this is closer > to > > understanding craving, (I concede your point on the principles of > > insight meditation), but would you really say this is temporary > > removal? I wouldn't know how such a thing would be known. > > > > Furthermore, I am anxious to get one really decent session of > > concentration meditation going, because I know that on at least one > > occasion where I have, I come out and am not dependent on wrong > views > > of reality. And to me, momentary concentration, or access > > concentration (it seems the two are somewhat related, to me), is > one > > of the milestones of concentration meditation, so, I naturally link > > these two together and would like their arisal before I go on to > > practise further. > > > > Good discussing Dharma with you. > > > > +++++++++ > Good discussing with you too. > I spent over 2 years trying to duplicate some clarity that I had > had. But finally I realized this actually stopped new insights > coming. > Now my approach is taking every moment as a new one and learning > from it. This new approach doesn't disqualify any moment or > preference any moment. (Taking this in the wrong way (as I do often) > we might think nothing at all is to be done- wrong practice is > always ready to happen whatever we do. ) > I wrote some letters to an American writer that were edited and put > on the net, that you might like reading. > http://www.dhammastudy.com/corr.html > RobertK Robert, I had read the letters and had something to bring up about it but circumstances required me to leave the house and I can't remember what it was. 36268 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 4:59am Subject: Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Hi Dan, We were discussing the meaning of, "Citta experiences an object." You think it refers to just two things, an experiencing and an object. (No mention of an experiencer.) As I have said, I think there are three things involved. Two of them are paramattha dhammas and the third, (the `experiencing,') is a function of one of those paramattha dhammas (citta, the experiencer). You quote Bhikkhu Bodhi: ------------ > [BB's CMA, p. 27] "The commentators define 'citta' in three ways: as agent, as instrument, and as activity. As the agent, citta is that which cognizes and object (aaramma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m). As the instrument, citta is that by means of which the accompanying mental factors cognize the object (etena cintentii ti citta.m). As an activity, citta is itself nothing other than the process of cognizing the object (cintanamatta.m citta.m)." ------------ I wonder if the Commentaries use the words "nothing other." If citta can be defined as "nothing other than the process of cognising the object," where does that leave the other two definitions, null and void? You continue: ---------------------- > BB likes the third the best (answer B): > ---------------------- Yes, it does seem as if he would have chosen answer B. ------------- > "The third definition, in terms of sheer activity, is regarded as the most adequate of the three: that is, citta is fundamentally an activity or process of cognizing or knowing an object. It is not an agent or instrument possessing actual being in itself apart from the activity of cognizing." > ------------- Why does he say "most adequate?" Is he saying the commentaries give two inadequate definitions and one comparatively adequate definition? I am more inclined to think all three definitions are adequate and mutually inclusive. Depending on how you look at it, citta is the experience-er of an object, or it is the means by which the cetasikas also experience the object, or it performs the function of experiencing the object. ------------- D: > Of course, the other two definitions have useful role as well. In BB's words (p. 27 again): "The definitions in terms of agent and instrument are proposed to refute the wrong view of those who hold that a permanent self or ego is the agent and instrument of cognition." > ------------- I suppose that could be the right interpretation, but I would need more convincing. To me, it seems that the commentaries describe three ways in which citta can be directly known - in three separate moments of satipatthana. And, I would think it very important that we learn all three. Kind regards, Ken H 36269 From: plnao Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Hello all " When there is generosity, there is no person who is generous, generosity is a cetasika performing its function while it assists the kusala citta. When there is attachment, there is no person who is attached, attachment is a cetasika performing its function. " Ph: I can understand why some people are uncomfortable with this. The image leaped to my mind of generosity and kusala citta hand in hand, skipping through a meadow. (Perhaps because cetasika is such a pretty sounding word to me - I think of a Eastern European milk maiden.) But I will want to let go of the part of my mind that struggles to explain everything rationally, and relax into accepting this as a helpful simile. The Buddha laid out Abhidhamma in these terms for a reason. The point is that there is no person who is generous. If cetasika as helper leads to a better understand of no self that is generous, it is helpful. The Buddha knew that different people would respond to different aspects of his teaching. Aren't there wonderful descriptions of him seeing across worlds, into the different insight levels of different people? Instead of seeking to limit the insight of others by competition of views, we should open our minds to the many different branches of Dhamma, the incredible wealth that came to be as a result of the the Buddha's insights into different tendencies, different limitations. I feel joy arising at this moment thinking of the great wealth of Dhamma, so varied in its expression, so powerful in its liberating reach. Ad that feeling of gratitude to Buddha is a cetasika. (I don't know which one.) It is not self. I am mindful of it. "The cetasikas which accompany the citta experience the same object as the citta while they each perform their own function." Ph: This is something I don't understand yet. How a cetasika experiences an object. It seems there would need to be a sense-door citta, or mind-door citta, to experience and object. How can a cetasika like conceit, for example, or energy (a universal) experience an object, I wonder. Metta Phil 36270 From: plnao Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner8-Introduction(e) Hello all When I made a feeble attempt this summer to explain my interest in Dhamma to friends in Canada, and spoke of things being beyond our control, the response was befuddled, as though I had given up hope in being able to accomplish anything, and had become a nihilist or something. People thought it sounded depressing. I hadn't yet gained enough confidence to talk about Dhamma. I wish I had written this passage on the inside of my sleeve so I could have turned to it when I needed it: " If everything is beyond control where is the human dignity? If one walks the Buddha's Path one will know the difference between what is true in the ultimate sense and what is only imagination or a dream. There will be less delusion about the truth and there will eventually be elimination of all that is impure and unwholesome. This is mental emancipation and is that not the highest good one could attain?" Great stuff. Some will say that Abhidhamma devotees are seeing or practicing towards seeing ultimate realities (true in the ultimate sense) where there are in fact only concepts. (ie imagination and dreams.) How can I as a beginner say they are wrong? I guess it is faith in the Buddha and his teaching, based on the positive changes it has brought into my life, that allows me to say so. Metta, Phil 36271 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:37am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Cooran 13-15 August, 2004 Hi Ken, 2 weeks is a long time, and we're not even in politics :-) ============ KH: That sounds right to me: whenever there is a concept (e.g., "a tree") then there is intention (cetana) and its associated sankharas. But they are not known at that precise moment. At the moment of "tree awareness" there is no awareness of cetana. So the paramattha dhammas known as `thinking' (cetana, vicara, vitakka, etc.) can be known with satipatthana but not so, "tree." ============= Am I reading you correctly, are you sure you mean satipatthana? If so, can you explain that a bit ? Kind Regards Herman H: > Perhaps we investigate differently. ---------------- How do you investigate? I assume we are talking about some sort of Buddhist meditation: we are not talking about how a scientist investigates H2O, for example. When I used to indulge in formal Buddhist meditation (forgive the oxymoron) I would concentrate on concepts; sometimes with the aim of seeing them arising, persisting and falling away. One instruction manual had me hearing a birdcall with the understanding; "beginning of birdcall" "middle of birdcall" "end of birdcall." That is why I was saying to Eric that the investigation of concepts just comes up with more concepts. Kind regards, Ken H 36272 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:38am Subject: CSC4 Ken's quiz: Whining about my grade Dear Ken, I really like your quiz, but your grading is the pits! You ask: > When we say, `Citta experiences an object,' are we talking about: > A, a single reality - an event, > B, two realities - the experiencing and the experienced, > C, three realities - the experience-er, the experiencing and the experienced, or, > D, none of the above? I stick by my original answer, viz. "Certainly D is the best answer because no language is going to perfectly describe the experience." You have me down for picking B: "Is it just the experience-ing and there is no experience-er? (Dan opted for this one.)" Explanation? "Citta" does not neatly fit into grammatical categories of "noun" and "verb." It fits into both categories "experiencing" and "experiencer" (B and C), but the match is not perfect in either case. Which answer best describes citta? The one that best teaches about: i. the distinction between nama and rupa (in the sense of nama being active, rupa non-active), and/or ii. the characteristic of anatta. Whether B or C better delivers the message depends on the hearer. Sometimes B works better; sometimes C. Your explanation for D was: > My understanding was (and still is) that citta is the experience-er > and that the experience-ing is not a separate dhamma but a function > of the same experience-er. This is a fine formulation -- so long as it is not clung to too adamantly! Dan 36273 From: plnao Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4 Ken's quiz: Whining about my grade > Dear Ken, > I really like your quiz, but your grading is the pits! Ph: I protest too. If I recall correctly, someone wrote that Bhikkhu Bodhi also did choose or would have chosen B, based on a passage from M of Ab. I want at least a B- for that. (That being said, I'm too lazy intellectually to pursue the point, so I guess it's a weak pass after all.) ;) Metta, Phil 36274 From: kenhowardau Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi Howard, I was wondering: ---------------- > where is the problem? Why am I happy with this while you, , > are not? Is it the word substantialist? I have no problem with > substantialism unless it says that concepts are substantial - which > they are not, of course. > ---------------- You replied: --------------- H: > It is not only concepts the Buddha states are insubstantial. All dhammas are said to be hollow and void. --------------- Hollow and void, yes, but realities are not insubstantial. I am very sure the Buddha said the five khandhas are substantial. ----------------- H: > There are the following two paragraphs from The Snake, in the Sutta Nipata: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > He who does not find core or substance > in any of the realms of being, > like flowers which are vainly sought > in fig trees that bear none, > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. ---------------- Needless to say, this is an excellent simile: Fig trees are substantial, in the conventional sense of the word, but they are empty of flowers. Similarly, dhammas are substantial, in the absolute sense of the word, but they are empty of self. ----------------- > He who neither goes too far nor lags behind > and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," > -- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, > just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. > ------------------ Hmmm, that's a tricky one! I would have to assume it means the conventional world is unreal. Otherwise, the meaning is at odds with the Dhamma as a whole. As in the other (snipped) excellent quotes you have provided: the meaning is that paramattha dhammas are empty of self. They lack the substance of self, but they have their own substance. They are real: they have their own functions and characteristics and they need their own special conditions to arise. The five khandhas are not mere ideas made up to serve a purpose (as teaching aids). ------------------------- H: > With heartfelt (but quite insubstantial ;-) metta, Howard > -------------------------- Your metta is substantial; I have no doubt about that. Metta, Ken H 36275 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:10am Subject: CSC4 [Howard: "emptiness is preeminent"] Dear Howard, YOu write: "Whatever the topic, whether it be citta or anything else, emptiness is preeminent..." What do you mean by "emptiness"? You answer: "impersonality and non- agency, dependency, corelessness, insubstantiality, impermanence, and unworthiness of being clung to (and the futility of clinging)". I'd remove "non-agency" and "dependency" from the litany and question "insubstantiality" and "corelessness". 1. Non-agency is not the same thing as impersonality. To discuss citta as an impersonal agent can a useful part of the bridge to an understanding of anatta. The distinction between "agent" and "personality"? "Personality" has a connotation of "lasting," while "agent" may be ephemeral. 2. Nibbana, the unconditioned, has anatta as characteristic, so "dependency" doesn't fit in the litany. 3. Insubstantiality? I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Citta is certainly brief and hasn't any "substance". But do you also interpret it to mean that there isn't any world "out there"? 4. And "corelessness" is a fine metaphor too to reinforce and develop an understanding of anicca (and hence anatta). But it seems like this metaphor can so easily be misapplied to support a denial of "characteristic" (sabhava). Another question: Why do you prefer "emptiness" (suññata) to anatta? Is there some aspect of Dhamma that "emptiness" portrays better to you than does "anatta"? If so, could you elaborte? Dan 36276 From: Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas' study corner4-Introduction(a) Hi, Ken - In a message dated 9/11/04 9:06:34 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > I was wondering: > ---------------- > >where is the problem? Why am I happy with this while you, Herman>, > >are not? Is it the word substantialist? I have no problem with > >substantialism unless it says that concepts are substantial - > which > >they are not, of course. > > > ---------------- > > You replied: > > --------------- > H: >It is not only concepts the Buddha states are insubstantial. > All dhammas are said to be hollow and void. > --------------- > > Hollow and void, yes, but realities are not insubstantial. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: What do you think 'hollow' and 'void' mean if not "insubstantial"! -------------------------------------------------- I am > > very sure the Buddha said the five khandhas are substantial. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: I can't imagine what the source of such sureness might be! ------------------------------------------------- > ----------------- > H: >There are the following two paragraphs from The Snake, in the > Sutta Nipata: > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >He who does not find core or substance > >in any of the realms of being, > >like flowers which are vainly sought > >in fig trees that bear none, > >-- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, > >just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. > ---------------- > > Needless to say, this is an excellent simile: Fig trees are > substantial, in the conventional sense of the word, but they are > empty of flowers. Similarly, dhammas are substantial, in the > absolute sense of the word, but they are empty of self. > > ----------------- > >He who neither goes too far nor lags behind > >and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," > >-- such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, > >just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. > > > ------------------ > > Hmmm, that's a tricky one! I would have to assume it means the > conventional world is unreal. Otherwise, the meaning is at odds with > the Dhamma as a whole. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not at all. --------------------------------------------------- > > As in the other (snipped) excellent quotes you have provided: the > meaning is that paramattha dhammas are empty of self. They lack the > substance of self, but they have their own substance. They are real: > they have their own functions and characteristics and they need > their own special conditions to arise. The five khandhas are not > mere ideas made up to serve a purpose (as teaching aids). > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Too bad you snipped the Phena Sutta. It is the most telling quote for expressing the insubstantiality of all dhammas. The opening lines say it all: > Form is like a glob of foam; > feeling, a bubble; > perception, a mirage; > fabrications, a banana tree; > consciousness, a magic trick -- > this has been taught > by the Kinsman of the Sun. > ------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------- > H: >With heartfelt (but quite insubstantial ;-) metta, > Howard > > -------------------------- > > Your metta is substantial; I have no doubt about that. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Thanks, Ken. ------------------------------------------------ > > Metta, > 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) 36277 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:34am Subject: Re: Theory and Practice _Sukin & Htoo Hi Htoo, You said: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: This post was originally from Sukin to Eric. But as I have not > long communicated with Sukin, and as this message is very interesting > and valuable I just butt in. If there is any inconvenience, please > forgive me. :-) You are welcome anytime to respond to any of my posts Htoo. I value your wisdom highly, so it can only be good for me to hear your comments. So thanks very much for responding here. Besides already it has been so many days that you wrote me off-list and I haven't found the time to respond to you yet, so this is good excuse to write something now. Now I go to other parts of your post. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Htoo: > I met a monk who was strongly believed to be an arahat. He was also > extremely calm. Whenever he had a chance to talk, what he would > preach was 'to stay in the present'. That is when we move, we must > know that we move. When hear, just hear, when see just see, when look > just note want to look and then look at, and note all the present. Sukin: I think it takes a long time through close association, for a serious putthujana to come to any correct estimation of another's level of understanding, namely in terms of Right View. I know that you have an excellent knowledge and understanding of the Teachings and so are equipped with the necessary tool to assess the monk. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: > Even though I did not know whether they were ariyas or arahats, they > were well calm and free of anything that you would accuse them of. Sukin: Do you think it is possible that the conditions are such that some person will remain calm and peaceful for a long time, but the kilesas are in fact still quite intact? And when they expound the dhamma, it comes from sanna more than from panna? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: The Four Noble Truths, if a teaching is consistent with this, > then it would qualify as Right View, otherwise not. Which is another > way of saying that only the Buddha and his followers were/can be > enlightened. > Htoo: Other beings who are not Buddhas and followers of The Buddhas > and become enlightened are paccekabuddhas. Otherwise, no one can be > enlightened. Sukin: It didn't come to my mind at that time about paccekabuddhas, thanks for reminding. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin:It seems odd that people, including monks, have meditated (in > some cases on the breath) for 20, 30 or 40 years and all they can > talk about at the end of it, is `calm', `happiness', `peace' and so > on. And when they advice anyone on `understanding' dhamma, they point > to the `formal practice'. > Htoo: Partly agree. But there are some who really urge to practise > mahasatipatthana of attending realities. But as you said there are > some who constantly encouraging to do meditation because it makes > calm, happiness, and peace. That is in the very formal way like going > to a quiet place and sit in cross-legged. Sukin: Good to hear about those who encourage mahasatipatthana in daily life. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: Forget about `wrong view', but do these people even know about > `avijja'!! They talk about experiencing the vipassana nanas, and yet > when it comes to knowing seeing, hearing, smelling and so on, they do > not find it important enough to consider these. > Htoo: The right view starts with understanding of avijja. Sukin: Yes, only the Buddha taught about the danger of avijja, other religions can see the danger only in lobha, dosa and mana and the value of metta, karuna, dana, sila and so on. But without Right View, can anyone really come to a perfect understanding of any of these unwholesome and wholesome dhammas? And Avijja is really so hard to see, no? We can see to some extent other akusala and be reminded about developing all kinds of Kusala. But Avijja!! It is just darkness! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: It is ignorance as in `ignoring' these very presently arising > realities that causes them to cling to rites and rituals "formal > meditation", and be deluded by illusory results. > Htoo: This is the site where there is obstruction and deters the > progress. Sukin: Glad that you agree. (-: -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: They are in fact encouraging ignorance though otherwise they > claim to practice in order to "know". > Htoo: How do you suggest here, Sukin? Sukin: When someone points to the formal practice and does not give due importance to whatever dhammas that arise at other times, this means that those other moments are being conditioned by ignorance. And as you said above, "The right view starts with understanding of avijja", this would seem then that they would unlikely have Right Understanding even during formal practice. So I think we can conclude on the whole that whatever their view of practice is, it must on the whole condition more avijja and wrong view. I think one mistake many Buddhists make, is to think that the mind must first be calm or wholesome or one pointed before dhammas can be known to any degree. Many don't understand the significance of the relationship between, pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha. In addition to this, there is the idea that the `deliberate looking'(intentional observation) actually leads to `seeing' (sati), or worse, that it *is* sati. All this it seems is failure at the level of pariyatti itself. Because of this lack of pariyatti, here referring to the panna of this level, there is misunderstanding of what practice involves. Pariyatti is not the `verbal knowledge' but indeed the level of understanding which *knows* at least the value of developing satipatthana and that this very moment is conditioned and anatta. And though it may only be `thinking' in the beginning about just fallen away dhammas, it knows that what ever level of panna arises is just what is meant to be, and with this is already some detachment. And in this case, more understanding about conditionality and anatta is accumulating as sankhara. Which is why, without correct pariyatti and knowing conditioned realities in daily life, one will be deluded into thinking that *more* can be achieved through some deliberate effort on one's part via some formal practice or `deliberate looking'. And this is to go against the principal of anatta and conditionality. This is how it seems to me Htoo, what do you think? Again, thank you for your response and giving me a chance to learn something of your understanding. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing Metta, Sukin 36278 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Dear Dan & KenH & All, --- kenhowardau wrote: > You quote Bhikkhu Bodhi: > ------------ > > [BB's CMA, p. 27] "The commentators define 'citta' in three ways: > as agent, as instrument, and as activity. As the agent, citta is > that which cognizes and object (aaramma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m). > As the instrument, citta is that by means of which the accompanying > mental factors cognize the object (etena cintentii ti citta.m). As > an activity, citta is itself nothing other than the process of > cognizing the object (cintanamatta.m citta.m)." > ------------ > I wonder if the Commentaries use the words "nothing other." If > citta can be defined as "nothing other than the process of cognising > the object," where does that leave the other two definitions, null > and void? ..... S: Let me add the exact text from the commentary to the Abhidhammathasangaha, transl in Summary & Exposition of theTopics of Abhidhamma (PTS), which B.Bodhi’s Guide notes are based on. Prologue, p7 “Consciousness (citta) is that which is conscious; the meaning is that it knows (vijaanaati) an object. So it is said: ‘Consciousness has the characteristic of knowing objects.’ ( As112) for although such causal conditions as those of support and immediate contiguity are also relevant, consciousnes does not arise in the absence of an object, and therefore its characteristic is spoken of with reference to that. This rejects the view that consciousness arises in the absence of an object. “Or else consciousness is the means by which the associated dhammas are conscious. Alternatively, consciousness is the mere act of being conscious (cintana). For it is its mere occurrence in accordance with conditions that is called ‘a dhamma with its own particular nature’ (sabhaava-dhamma). In consideration of this, it is the definition of the particular natures of ultimate dhammas that is taken as absolute; the explanation by way of agent (kattar) and instrument (kara.na) should be seen as a relative manner of speaking. For a dhamma’s being treated as an agent, by attributing the status of ‘self’ to the particular function of a dhamma, and also its being [treated] in consequence as an instrument, by attributing the state of agent to a group of conascent dhammas, are both taken as a relative manner of speaking. The explanation in these terms should be understood as for the purpose of indicating the non-existence of an agent, etc. apart from the particular nature of a dhamma. The meaning of the word citta is also elaborated as that which causes variegation and so on. Thus it is summarized: ‘It is consciousness because it causes variegation (vicitta), or because it is itself variegated; it is gathered (cita) by kamma and defilements, or it preserves what has been gathered thus; it gathers its own continuity, and it has a variety of objects.’ (Abhid-av 2,v.9) “That which exists in the mind (cetasi) by occurring in dependence upon it is mentality (cetasika). For it is unable to take an object without consciousness; in the absence of consciousness there is no arising of any mentality at all. But consciousness does occur with an object in the absence of certain mentalities; so mentality is said to occur in dependence upon consciousness. Therefore the Blessed One has said: ‘Dhammas have mind as their forerunner.’ (Dhp 1) This refutes erroneous opinions such as that happiness, etc., are permanent and exist in the absence of consciousness. (cf Vism 511, ChXV1, 85) Alternatively mentality is that which is combined with consciousness.” ***** S: There is also a lot more detail in the Atthasalini, transl as the Expositor, Analysis of Terms, p 84f which I know Dan has studied. When seeing consciousness or any other citta is the object of awareness, the characteristic of knowing its particular object is clear. However, I think the discussions you and others are having on the meaning of these key terms are very useful and important. I look forward to more! Metta, Sarah ======= 36279 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Good tidings to you, Herman. In response to my question: "how can we *precisely* express "citta" in English?" You write: "...I think it is very important to understand the "why" of expressing something, the reason for saying it. And in answering your question for themselves, the reader may well discover the perfect peace of free-range citta (as opposed to the captured kind) :- )" Great answer! > And so often when we attempt to describe experience, we are including > all sorts of material that has nothing to do with what is actually > experienced, or what we actually want to convey. I think that is right. One variant of that is when hearing a word or a doctrine, we might latch onto it to build up an elaborate, speculative theory about "the world" as opposed to the task of describing experience. The metastasis of theories is a nasty disease. > The grammar of language > incorporates all sorts of inferences about causality and assumes all > sorts of fixed elements like time and space, subjects and objects. Yup. But it is tough to express things outside the grammar, so we have to make approximations and not get too hung-up on the absolute correctness or incorrectness of a particular formulation. "citta experiences object" vs. "citta is the experiencing of an object" are both wrong, but they have both been used to good effect in Theravada Buddhism for millenia. However, I don't recall seeing "there is no subject and no object, just experience" appearing anywhere in the Tipitaka. Is it not useful? Is it potentially useful but very easy to misinterpret? Does it too often lead to proliferation of theory? My working hypothesis is that the farther removed from experience that a view is, the more it lends itself to proliferation of theories rather than description of experience. It is apparently not necessary to stray all the way to "no subject, no object" to understand anatta, and attempting to do so would then carry an elevated risk of developing a thicket of views -- Give me machete! Give me Dhamma! > So if we want to communicate *citta as experience only* we need to adopt > a different grammar, the grammar of experience. I don't think it would > look anything like the English we use. I agree. I'd also throw in that it is not necessary to do so. > I would typify the above *citta as experience* (or removing the > redundancies leaving either just *citta* or just *experience*) as > becoming. Becoming is a process, not a thing. I see. E.g.: Dependent origination is an expression of process or becoming. DO seems readable without needing to evoke subject+bject. However, DO is not "citta". In the "citta" formulation, there *must* be an object -- it's built into the system. > On the other hand, *thinking about citta* is *becoming attempting to > be*, or *having*. Having creates the subject - object duality. Having is > all about things. Things with nature, essence, characteristics and the > like. So communication about *thinking about citta* is best done in > terms of process, not objects. You lost me, Herman. I agree that thinking about citta involves thinking about objects of cittas. You propose dismissing the citta formulation because it introduces "things with nature, essence, characteristics"? Or, you want to subvert the citta formulation by removing characteristic and object from the notion? I object! It just doesn't work -- at least not in Theravada Buddhism. But "citta" is a Pali term, for goodness sake. No hijacking Pali terms for non- Theravada usage! Dan 36280 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Dear Dan, You take so much trouble to answer all our posts. That is very kind of you. But since you have your work, it may become too much. There is a risk of your leaving because of this burden. You said years ago that there is no obligation to answer Emails and people should not apologize when they delay in answering. I would rather have Dan with scarcity of posts than no Dan at all! op 10-09-2004 16:10 schreef Dan D. op onco111@y...: It is madness to cling so strongly to one > formulation or another that one ends up verbally assaulting someone > who uses another formulation, as I did to you some time ago. I > apologize. N: Oh no, absolutely nothing to apologize about. You were always so kind, only at times cringing at language. What I especially remember from you, shortly before leaving the forelast time, you wrote: when you meditate on the Abhidhamma the Master's eye is not far away. I quoted that later on because I found it very touching. True, when considering the Abhidhamma it is fitting to feel deep gratitude and respect to the Master. D: Sometimes I cringe at the formulation "citta cognizes an > object" or "seeing sees" because the distinguishing characteristic of > citta is its sheer activity (as opposed to the non-activity of the > rupa) N: I considered this. Still, rupa is active in its own way, conditions make it that way. Like a sense-organ: ready for impact of a relevant sense object. Also rupa has a function, each rupa a different one. I see your point, I would say, it is personal. I also believe that when we think too much, or wrestle with words, it might distract from the direct experience. I come back to that in a minute. D: >> When insight has developed and dhammas are directly experienced, no > words are needed.>> > Needed for what? I don't understand. N: For direct understanding of characteristics of realities. You said about your talk with Kh Sujin: That's it, that's it. She knocked on the table and asked whether hardness was light or dark. In order to directly experience the characteristic of hardness there is no need to name it, you can call it anything. Now we come closer. Hardness is a characteristic of dhamma and it cannot be changed into something else. She wants to help people not to get stuck with words but to be directly aware of different namas and rupas. D: Words are surely needed to > describe the experience to others and for helping clarify the words > in the tipitaka. In addition, wrestling with words helps bring the > experience into the proper location in the vast net of words and > ideas of the teachings, thus making more comprehensible the words > that describe insights not yet experienced. N: Sure, we try to describe realities as best as we can. But when a stage of insight arises, no words are needed, realities are directly experienced with paññaa through the mind-door. The same is the case with enlightenment. The Tipitaka and Commentaries are scarce with words about these matters. In the suttas there is allusion to the pariññas (this is insight) with the term clear comprehension, and this is further explained in the Commentaries. I liked your exchnage with Azita: > So, in conclusion, I'll just reiterate your comment that: "...we >> should never imagine that it is possible to capture experience in >> words, of any language. But we can, and should be, mindful of our >> constant efforts to do so." >>> Azita: Not only to do so in any language, but to try and capture > the experience!>> N: Yes, the direct experience of realities by pañña. This is essential. It is the way leading to detachment. D:... Now, how to express "citta" in a way that guarantees that no > one who hears it will be misled by experiencers, subjects, and little > selves? Can't be done. >> D:The lobha-rooted cittas are the experiencings (cittas) of >>> objects (thoughts), colored by different shades (cetasikas) such > as >>> pleasant feeling (vedana), ...>> I don't quite see how the 'colors' metaphor clouds vision of > conditions. Can you expand on this? N: If you find it helpful, do use it. It is personal. I used to think that this would help, but later on I dropped it as being insufficient. When I learnt about the many aspects of citta I came to different ideas. For instance, as was discussed before, I see the importance of knowing the four jaatis of kusala, akusala vipaaka and kiriya. Seeing is vipaka, it is entirely different from the cittas with attachment to what is seen which may follow closely. Feeling that is vipaaka is entirely different from feeling that is akusala. We have to learn this when they occur at this moment. That is the meaning of understanding characteristics. It is good to begin with the Matika of the Dhamma Sagani, even only the first words, because seeing different aspects of citta will help not to see them as little selves. I have the Pali next to it, because the transl is insufficient. Also the Co, the Expositor helps. In Kh. Sujin's book Survey of Paramattha dhammas she goes over all the different aspects of citta as explained by the Expositor, p. 84, 85. The Commentator uses different wordings with the purpose to show different aspects. The purpose is not linguistics. Citta is vicitta: variegated (or citra), and how! This will cure us from taking it for self. It accumulates kamma and defilements from moment to moment. The study of all of this should bring us to the present moment, and that has to be understood more thoroughly. Nina. 36281 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:22am Subject: Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Good morning, Ken! I don't have any idea whether or not it's morning when you are reading this, but the sun is now up here. You wrote: > We were discussing the meaning of, "Citta experiences an object." > You think it refers to just two things, an experiencing and an > object. (No mention of an experiencer.) > > As I have said, I think there are three things involved. Two of them > are paramattha dhammas and the third, (the `experiencing,') is a > function of one of those paramattha dhammas (citta, the experiencer). My point is that both those formulations are wrong, but both are right enough to be helpful in their own way. The danger is in dogmatically clinging to one as "right" and the other as "wrong." For me, right now, the "citta experiences an object" works better, but it isn't helpful to cling to that as a view. > I suppose that could be the right interpretation, but I would need > more convincing. To me, it seems that the commentaries describe > three ways in which citta can be directly known - in three separate > moments of satipatthana. And, I would think it very important > that we learn all three. I wonder... My initial inclination is that these are three different descriptions of the direct knowing of cittas, i.e., for some people, one description seems to fit best; for other people, a different description fits best. Perhaps it really is three ways that citta can be known in three different satipatthanas, but given the vagueries of language, I incline to the former as my working hypothesis. Thanks. Dan 36282 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] object in the reality of arising sounds Hi Howard, op 10-09-2004 07:01 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...:>> >>> Where does that ruupa arise, Nina, at the initial moment when it is >>> not yet known? What exactly constitutes that arising? >> N: There are four factors that can originate rupa: kamma, citta, heat or >> nutrition. ... > ============================= H: I really didn't make myself clear. N: Yes, I think you made yourself clear. I knew that you would wonder: is the colour first in space before it comes to the doorway, and how could this be so? And right, I saw your following post with space mentioned, as I thought it would be. I wanted to stress conditions in my answer but I realised that you had something else in mind. You thought: no rupas out there. They are only in the mind. And you thought, how could she say, they are there before they are cognized; that is a reification, substantialism. I try again from other angles, and today I highlight kamma-condition. H: The moon is just concept. What does > "the moon's color" refer to? N: It is only an example to indicate: a certain colour. The commentary uses it to indicate that colour impinges in a way different from smell, flavour and tangible which impinge directly on the sense base. Evenso re colour of a bodypart, it has colour. In the past when we discussed colour and you explained you saw it as a replica in the mind, I switched to sound, thinking it would be easier to discuss. For colour, I took the body as an example, colour of some part of the body. Because what we call body consists of many groups of rupa, some produced by kamma, some by citta, some by nutrition, some by heat. Thus also colour of a body can be originated by one of these four. But I remember that you did not take to groups of rupa. We can leave that. Here is the passage I meant, taken from my Vis. study on rupakkhandha: > It is a different matter in the case of odours, flavours, and tangible object. That is why their experience is taken separately by using the term muta, sensed. It reminds us of the direct contact of these objects with the relevant sense-organs. Thus, this is a fourfold classification of the experience of objects through the six doors, of the aayatanas. The Vis. stresses that the different elements are coming together at the right time so that there can be the experience of objects. We read about a classification of what occurs now, all the time. They exhibit their own characteristics and are gone before one can do anything about them. > The senses are rupas produced by kamma, so that we in this life can receive vipaaka, results of kamma such as seeing, hearing, etc. Seeing that is pleasant or unpleasant, hearing that is pleasant or unpleasant. Some rupas are produced by citta: Citta can cause blushing, and we see a reddish colour, for example. Yes, blushing is a conventional term but it explains this colour produced by citta. Or citta causes laughing. This is a conventional term, but it explains these rupas. Sound of laughing for instance. Nutrition: affects the body and can have visible effects. Heat: sunburn, can it not be seen? A colour? About nutrition from Vis. study on rupakkhandha: > This passage helps us to see all the more how intricate the different conditioning factors are that cooperate to cause the functioning of the body. We can be reminded that the body we cling to are only conditioned rupas, not mine. We cling to our physical health, but we are not the owner of the body. Kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition originate rupas of the body during our life. It depends on kamma how long life lasts.> H: Where is that color? Where does it arise? If not > in "mind", then where? In space? Space is concept. N: Inward space is a rupa, not a concept, but we do not talk about that now. You mean outward space and that is a concept. First colour is nowhere, then it comes into being because of specific conditions, then it ceases and it is not to be found. Example: strike a match and the result is fire. The fire was not kept somewhere in space and traveled to the match stick. There were the right conditions of match stick and matchbox, or a lighter if you like, so that fire originated. (the teachings give: the rubbing of two match sticks). We have to keep in mind the aim of the teachings: many conditions are shown so that there will be detachment from the idea of self. There are mere elements arising because of specific conditions, and what arises because of conditions cannot stay. I also have to keep on reminding myself! We cannot expect a scientific description of what exactly happens before sound or colour impinge on the sense base, becfore they are known. But multiplicity of conditions is stressed. This is the key. I think you have confidence in the operations of kamma in your life. Such as, why was there this coincidence, why did this or this happen at a certain moment that was just right? There was gain and loss, bodily wellbeing and sickness. These are again conventional terms but they denote different sense-cognitions caused by kamma. Your sickness, and hearing bad news about it, then hearing good news. Hearing is produced by kamma. I speak now about vipaka, your was with equanimity. Another example: why did Rob M tried on Google and then landed in our group? For a long time he was wondering about free will and then changed his mind because he understood conditions after many discussions in our group. You may understand that kamma produces the sense-cognitions. Kamma sees to it that visible object, sound, turns up at the right moment so that it can be experienced. I find it is useless to think where they came from (somewhere in space) and that is also what you find. Your point is: senseobjects cannot exist before they are experienced, you think that they are due to the workings of the mind. I think that this is not enough. That it is more beneficial to understand conditons. They are just elements and can be objects of understanding at this moment. This can lead to detachment. H: What does it mean for color to be "outside"? Outside of what? The > body? Body is just concept. > If "outside color", whatever that is, is originated by temperature, > then where is that temperature? Where does *it* arise? > It seems to me that none of this is explained, and none of it makes > much sense. N: I know this is hard for you to take, rupas outside. By rupas outside I mean, not belonging to a living body. Take fire. Touch it, it is hot. This heat is heat outside, not of the body. You will say, yes, but it exists only when it is experienced, thus it occurs due to the mind. I think that this heat must impinge on the bodysense so that it is experienced. As to condition: when it is not conditioned by kamma, citta or nutrition, it is conditioned by utu, translated as climate, or temperature. You ask My answer again: the right condition at the right moment. I understand that this seems odd to you, an easy out answer. In fact, the way conditions work seems like a miracle, agreed. But above I elaborated on kamma in your life and in other people's lives, and also in such cases it seems that there are miracles. That is the way conditions including kamma work, it should not surprise us. I feel no need to ask myself how exactly and which temperature conditions which one. And if I am in a speculative mood and do so inspite of knowing better, it deviates me from the goal. Then I feel very frustrated. Temperature arises and falls away and can condition another unit with temperature, that is also momentary. Only momentary rupas, momentary conditions. You could ask, how can it be that a rupa which will be sense-object has to arise before it impinges? It happens and we cannot trace it all in a scientific way. It is not the purpose of the teachings to answer such questions. Detachment is the purpose. Just as in the case of kamma-condition, we cannot trace how it exactly operates, impossible. But we see the workings of kamma in our lives. To clarify a little more the purpose of the teaching on rupas and conditions, I quote from my Vis. study: Nina 36283 From: Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 3:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4 [Howard: "emptiness is preeminent"] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 9/11/04 9:54:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > > YOu write: "Whatever the topic, whether it be citta or anything else, > emptiness is preeminent..." > > What do you mean by "emptiness"? You answer: "impersonality and non- > agency, dependency, corelessness, insubstantiality, impermanence, and > unworthiness of being clung to (and the futility of clinging)". > > I'd remove "non-agency" and "dependency" from the litany and > question "insubstantiality" and "corelessness". > > 1. Non-agency is not the same thing as impersonality. To discuss > citta as an impersonal agent can a useful part of the bridge to an > understanding of anatta. The distinction between "agent" > and "personality"? "Personality" has a connotation of "lasting," > while "agent" may be ephemeral. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I don't perceive these connotations. The conventional "person" for most westerners is a "changing entity", and an agent could be permanent or impermanent. ----------------------------------------- > > 2. Nibbana, the unconditioned, has anatta as characteristic, > so "dependency" doesn't fit in the litany. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I have no clue as to what "thing" nibbana might be. I see it as an absence - the absence of the three poisons. But I agree that it is not dependent. It's realization is dependent, but it is not, because reality is already free of the three poisons in the same way as a chalkboard, even when covered by chalk dust, is, itself, free of chalk dust. So, dependency is not a characteristic of nibbana, and thus not part of what makes of what makes nibbana empty. Nor is impermanence part of it either. But both impermanence and dependency are part of what make conditions empty. In fact, I would say that the dependent origination of all conditions is virtually synonymous with their emptiness. --------------------------------------------------- > > 3. Insubstantiality? I'm not exactly sure what you mean. Citta is > certainly brief and hasn't any "substance". > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Whatever has no substance, no core, is insubstantial and coreless. ---------------------------------------------- But do you also interpret > > it to mean that there isn't any world "out there"? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't even know what "out there" might be except concept. ----------------------------------------------- > > 4. And "corelessness" is a fine metaphor too to reinforce and develop > an understanding of anicca (and hence anatta). But it seems like this > metaphor can so easily be misapplied to support a denial > of "characteristic" (sabhava). ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not by me. I certainly believe that distinguishing characteristics is valid. However, 'sabhava', in my opinion, should not be used in place of 'lakkhana', because 'sabhava' literally means "own being". It is a misleading term. ------------------------------------------------- > > Another question: Why do you prefer "emptiness" (suññata) to anatta? > Is there some aspect of Dhamma that "emptiness" portrays better to > you than does "anatta"? If so, could you elaborte? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: The Buddha used the term. In any case, I am including under 'emptiness' for dhammas other than nibbana, not only anatta, but also impermanence, dependency, corelessness, and insecurity (i.e., not serving as a safe haven - unworthingess of being clung to). Nibbana must be excluded here. With the realization of nibbana, the absence of any sense of self or lasting core in anything, the absence of any sense of separate, self-sufficient conditions, the absence of craving and aversion and of clinging to anything whatsoever constitute a lasting, independent, safe haven - an island of peace. ------------------------------------------------ > > Dan > ========================== 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) 36284 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:32am Subject: Re: CSC 4-[Sarah: "citta is..."] Dear Sarah (et al.), Thanks for adding these excellent and pertinent elaborations. My summary: Citta is citta, and three ways to talk about citta are as agent, instrument, or activity. All involve object. Is there a way to read it as saying that the agent/instrument/activity are really three ways to "experience 'citta'" rather than describe it? I don't have much time to discuss right now. Dan 36285 From: Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 3:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] object in the reality of arising sounds Hi, Nina - In a message dated 9/11/04 10:28:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nilo@e... writes: > H: Where is that color? Where does it arise? If not > >in "mind", then where? In space? Space is concept. > N: Inward space is a rupa, not a concept, but we do not talk about that now. > ====================== Ahh, but I think we *should* be talking about that now! This may be the crux of the matter. What is this "inward space"? With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning0in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 36286 From: Dan D. Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:53am Subject: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Dear Nina, > D: Sometimes I cringe at the formulation "citta cognizes an > > object" or "seeing sees" because the distinguishing characteristic of > > citta is its sheer activity (as opposed to the non-activity of the > > rupa) > N: I considered this. Still, rupa is active in its own way, conditions make > it that way. Like a sense-organ: ready for impact of a relevant sense > object. Also rupa has a function, each rupa a different one. Another way to express my point is that rupa cannot experience an object, but nama does. > D: >> When insight has developed and dhammas are directly experienced, no > > words are needed.>> > > > Needed for what? I don't understand. > N: For direct understanding of characteristics of realities. I'm still not sure what you mean. Clearly, direct insight has nothing to do with words or putting together any particular formulation of words or weaving together this theory or that theory. Discussion of insight or dhammas does require words, though, and it is good to try to find words that are helpful rather than words that are not helpful. > That's it, that's it. She knocked on the table and asked whether hardness > was light or dark. In order to directly experience the characteristic of > hardness there is no need to name it, you can call it anything. O.K. This is good. When she asked that, my immediate response was to laugh inside -- no light or dark! But after recollecting hardness a moment later, I answered "dark," because there is no light whatsoever in experiencing hardness. > She wants to help people not to get stuck with words but to > be directly aware of different namas and rupas. Right. And her questions are helpful. > >> D:The lobha-rooted cittas are the experiencings (cittas) of > >>> objects (thoughts), colored by different shades (cetasikas) such > > as > >>> pleasant feeling (vedana), ...>> > I don't quite see how the 'colors' metaphor clouds vision of > > conditions. Can you expand on this? > N: If you find it helpful, do use it. It is personal. I used to think that > this would help, but later on I dropped it as being insufficient. It is certainly insufficient. Its utility is solely in making a first pass distinction between citta and cetasika. Thanks. Dan 36287 From: m. nease Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 8:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Hi Dan, Hope you don't mind a quick interjection: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan D." To: Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 7:22 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] > My point is that both those formulations are wrong, but both are > right enough to be helpful in their own way. The danger is in > dogmatically clinging to one as "right" and the other as "wrong." For > me, right now, the "citta experiences an object" works better, but it > isn't helpful to cling to that as a view. On the contrary--as I see it, understanding that citta does indeed experience an object (with no 'experiencer' behind the event) is very much a part of conceptual right view. Clinging (upadaana) and right view do not arise at the same time. Valuable to know this I think. mike 36288 From: m. nease Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Facts and Absolutisms Hi Joop, All this presupposes that your understanding of the Dhamma is superior to that of the ancient ("so-called?") commentators. I admit this is a possibility--not one that's well-served by coarse speech however, even in the unlikely event that it's true. The Dhamma (according to the Suttanta) is bound to decline regardless of the various sects that have arisen since the life of the Buddha, despite "the lack of dynamics"(!) you infer from the Abhidhamma. All of the dynamics in the world (sankharaloka, the totality of all physical and mental phenomena) that are pertinent to dukkha and the end of dukkha are purportedly enumerated in the Abhidhamma. I find this quite plausible and wonder what 'dynamic' you think is missing. Finally, the Dhamma, whether in the Suttanta or the Abhidhamma is neither 'past-directed' or 'future-directed'--it pertains to the present moment, though with obvious implications for understanding past and future events. If you can find support for the idea that "we need more modern commentaries, using MODERN METAPHORES" from any of the texts, I'd like to read it. Otherwise it seems to me that you're simply placing your own opinions and speculations before and above all the Tipitaka, not just the Abhidhamma. Just my opinions, of course--with apologies for my own ill-spokenness. Somehow in spite of my own lofty attainments, I still find my own thought, speech and action to be all too subject to the nivaara.nas. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "jwromeijn" To: Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 2:24 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: On Facts and Absolutisms > But the most important today is something else and maybe that makes > me sarcastic and sharp in parts of my messages. That is the lack of > dynamics in Theravada, the fact that it's too less future-directed > and too much past-directed; the orthodoxy that makes that most > westerners interested in Buddhism prefer the Tibetan or Zen tradition > or only do (vipassana-)meditation without Dhamma at all. And I'm > afraid this lack on dynamcis accelerates the end of Theravada in the > Asian countries too. > The so called 'Commentaries' are a screen between the Tipitaka and > the reception and understanding of it today; we need more modern > commentaries, using MODERN METAPHORES in explaining the Dhamma, not > he metaphores of the daily life millennia ago. > > Metta > Joop 36289 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 0:59pm Subject: Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 Hi there, Looking through Abhidhamma in daily life. Some points I want to bring up: It is said of Lobha-mula-citta, citta with attachment, 'it should be regarded as taking beings with it to states of loss, as swift-flowing river goes to the great ocean.' Should we thus regard all cittas rooted in lobha as just as dangerous and be wary of them? If so, how is it that we decrease unwholesome states and increase wholesome ones? Is it by observing dana, sila, and bhavana? Should it be our objective to recognize unwholesome states and dispel them with the methods the Buddha suggests in the Pali Canon? Or do they subside by mere recognition? Jumping ahead a little bit, how can there be lobha-mula-citta that is not accompanied with wrong view? Shouldn't right view of reality, seeing as selflessness, impermanence, preclude craving and clinging? Or can attachment happen to pleasant sense objects even when seeing their true nature? That's all for now, more to come later. -AL 36290 From: m. nease Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 1:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 Hi Andrew, Hope you don't mind my butting in-- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Levin" To: Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 12:59 PM Subject: [dsg] Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 > Hi there, > > Looking through Abhidhamma in daily life. > > Some points I want to bring up: > > It is said of Lobha-mula-citta, citta with attachment, 'it should be > regarded as taking beings with it to states of loss, as swift-flowing > river goes to the great ocean.' Should we thus regard all cittas > rooted in lobha as just as dangerous and be wary of them? If so, how > is it that we decrease unwholesome states and increase wholesome ones? Right effort (sammavaayaama) does this (not we)-- > Is it by observing dana, sila, and bhavana? Should it be our > objective to recognize unwholesome states and dispel them with the > methods the Buddha suggests in the Pali Canon? In my opinion, this is a fine thing to do-- > Or do they subside by > mere recognition? They do, they do! Akusala can't arise associated with knowledge) (~naa.nasampautta)( (recognizing akusala as such e.g.)--or, as you write, with daana, siila or bhavana (assuming the bhaavana is kusala--there is also akusala bhavana). The advantage of pa~n~naa over kusala is that the former erdadicates accumulated defilements while the latter only suppresses them temporarily. > Jumping ahead a little bit, how can there be lobha-mula-citta that is > not accompanied with wrong view? According to abhidhamma, lobhamuulacittaani can be associated with wrong view (di.t.thigatasampayutta.m) or dissociated from wrong view (di.t.thigatavippayutta.m) but not associated with right view. So absence of wrong view doesn't imply presence of right view. > Shouldn't right view of reality, > seeing as selflessness, impermanence, preclude craving and clinging? Yes--for the moment, at least. > Or can attachment happen to pleasant sense objects even when seeing > their true nature? I don't think so. Just my opinions, hope they're of some use. mike 36291 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Andrew, > > Hope you don't mind my butting in--] Not at all. [snippage] > > Jumping ahead a little bit, how can there be lobha-mula-citta that is > > not accompanied with wrong view? > > According to abhidhamma, lobhamuulacittaani can be associated with wrong > view (di.t.thigatasampayutta.m) or dissociated from wrong view > (di.t.thigatavippayutta.m) but not associated with right view. So absence > of wrong view doesn't imply presence of right view. > > > Shouldn't right view of reality, > > seeing as selflessness, impermanence, preclude craving and clinging? > > Yes--for the moment, at least. > So then seeing the true nature of relaity, *how can there be attachment and clinging!* This is what I don't understand and can't resolve. > > Or can attachment happen to pleasant sense objects even when seeing > > their true nature? > > I don't think so. > > Just my opinions, hope they're of some use. > > mike Thanks mike, alevin 36292 From: m. nease Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 Hi Again Andrew, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Levin" To: Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2004 2:00 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 > So then seeing the true nature of reality, *how can there be > attachment and clinging!* > This is what I don't understand and can't > resolve. Easy one, Andrew--~naa.na, knowledge, only arises for one moment (cittakha.na) at a time. Afterwards, wrong view can still re-arise until the ariyaamagga~naa.na of stream entry (and probably will); delusion can continue to arise (and subside of course) until the bodhi~naa.na of arahantship. So the texts tell us anyway, and I have no reason to doubt them to date. Cheers! mike p.s. Hope I got all this Paali correct. 36293 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 2:55pm Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" <> > Whenever any citta arises there is also samadhi. At any moment of > > satipatthana, correct understanding of a paramattha dhamma, > > there must be samadhi associated with it it. That type of > > samadhi is samma-samadhi but it only lasts for that moment or > > moments that insight is occuring. > > Robert, I have had this type of 'insight' or some form that looks > like insight, while meditating on the body, but I wouldn't go so far > as to say that it's a vipassana nana or that it lead to any changes in > my life. > +++++++++++ Dear Andrew, Good you see it wasn't vipassana nana yet. There are many levels of panna (right understanding) but even the first touch of genuine satipatthana is worthwhile. There are other types of panna that are not satipatthana. > > And to nit, wouldnt samma-samadhi be ever-present where the insight > knowledges arise only periodically? IOW, I would think you would have > to be concentrated for some time before insights arise. > +++++++++++++++ No samma-samadhi is anicca, it arises and then falls away immediately. If there are no conditions for samma-samadhi it cannot arise, and it must arise together with right understanding. ++++++++++++ > > > > And reading/considering the teachings helps right understanding to > > develop. > > > > > > This is a big stumbling block for me. I'm not currently at the point > where I can put two and two together and plainly read the texts I have > to put together an understanding. ++++++++++++ It takes time. The pali phrase it cira-kala-bhavana (long time development). You are doing well- already studying Abhidhamma. And that is the basis for helping to understand the profound meaning of the suttas. In the old days Sri Lankan monks began their studies with the Abhidhammatthasangaha, a summary of the Abhidhamma. You know that in the Atthasalini (commentary to the Dhammasangani) it is said that one who studies teh suttanta only can devlop wrong view becuase in the suttas they use conventional language such as 'beings' and 'I' and 'people'. The one who knows Abhidhamma understands that these are mere terms. +++++++++++++++++ > > So we have different ways of putting together right view. When one > understands any of the different subjects that Venerable Sariputta > illustrates in MN9, we have right understanding. But right view is > often said to be a few different things: I understand it to be > absence of wrong view, specifically that things are permanent, have a > self, or a soul, and also the definition sometimes espoused that there > is this world, the next world, fruit & result of good & bad actions, > what is given and what is offered, and preists and contemplatives who > have realized all this through their own direct knowledge. That last > part is a big one to develop a view of. I'd say a lot of mixed view > is possible as the last one is probably a tall order to try to develop > all at once. I've had some success with coming close to understanding > some of the psycho-physical processes like the sixfold sense base and > what have you, just on taking mindful walks, so this is a definite > opportunity for the arising of right view. But again, I will lack a > certain level of confidence in my practise if I am going out there and > not seeing impermanence or selflessness, especially after having seen > it once. Seeing the true nature of reality is important, so maybe you > could understand how I want that good concentration meditation session > leading to seeing the three dharma seals in existence. ++++++++++++++ I like all you said here except for the last sentence. While you believe you have to have this special condition (a good concentration meditation session) you are limiting the opportunities for insight to grow at all other times. Insight can come in very fast and see what is present, and right concentration will be present at that same time. Also the first stage of insight is delimiting nama from rupa. This has to be known deeply before direct insight into anicca, dukkha and anatta can occur, It is all cira-kala-bhavana. > > > > > > Robert, > > I had read the letters and had something to bring up about it but > circumstances required me to leave the house and I can't remember what > it was. No problem, always enjoy discussing with you anytime. robertk 36294 From: plnao Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 3:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 Hi Andrew > It is said of Lobha-mula-citta, citta with attachment, 'it should be >regarded as taking beings with it to states of loss, as swift-flowing >river goes to the great ocean.' Should we thus regard all cittas >rooted in lobha as just as dangerous and be wary of them? Ph: From what I understand, subtle forms of lobha are inevitable for all but the Arahant. They are what keep us going through daily life. Nina (in ADL) uses a nice example of reaching for the hot water tap when your bath is going a bit cool. There are even subtler form, I guess. Sitting up a little bit straighter in the chair when you feel a slight discomfort in your butt. (Well, I guess that would be dosa.) Being wary of subtle forms of lobha would make us too uptight to stay open to Dhamma in a relaxed and natural way. I think the other day in your discussion with Robert K he mentioned a period early on when he was afraid to eat an ice cream cone because of his over-eagerness to root out all lobha. I must admit the line you quote sounds pretty scary. There are forms of lobha that lead to harsh kamma. I discovered that this summer. Is it wisdom (panna) that leads us to recognize the difference between the inevitable (at this stage) forms of lobha and the immediately dangerous ones? Metta, Phil 36295 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma study corner ch 4 Hello Mike and Andrew, I enjoy all these answers from you Mike, so just want to add a little more: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Andrew, > .........snip > > Hi there, > > > > Looking through Abhidhamma in daily life. > > > > Some points I want to bring up: ....lots more snipping... > > Shouldn't right view of reality, > > seeing as selflessness, impermanence, preclude craving and clinging? > > Yes--for the moment, at least. > > > Or can attachment happen to pleasant sense objects even when seeing > > their true nature? > > I don't think so. Azita: Attachment can and does happen when there are pleasant sense objects, but not at the moment when there is seeing their true nature. Seeing the true nature of sense objects, IMO, is a very highly developed degree of panna [wisdom] accompanied by sati [awareness] and that moment is kusala, whereas being attached to sense objects is akusala. > Just my opinions, hope they're of some use. > > mike Azita: Andrew, you ask some very pertinent questions, at least for me anyway, they make me 'ponder' on my own knowledge of dhamma. May we all have much patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 36296 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 5:48pm Subject: Sabhava Hi everyone, Sorry for starting a new thread. There's plenty else to discuss, but I am a bit pressed for time, and feel indebted to some very kind people who have taken the time to write to me. And there are some very "core" discussions taking place. And to properly contribute to all of this, I just want to check on a matter of fact. Is sabhava used in the suttas at all? Whether it is or isn't will not lead me to insist that others reach certain conclusions. My inkling is just that sabhava is a post-sutta term. Happy to be wrong :-) Thanks and Regards Herman 36297 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Dear Phil, I enjoy reading yours posts Phil, feel like I can learn a lot from them. -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > Hello all > > > " When there is generosity, there is no person who is generous, generosity > is a cetasika performing its function while it assists the kusala citta. > When there is attachment, there is no person who is attached, attachment > is a cetasika performing its function. " . ....lots of snips... > "The cetasikas which accompany the > citta experience the same object as the citta while they each perform > their own function." > > Ph: This is something I don't understand yet. How a cetasika experiences an > object. > It seems there would need to be a sense-door citta, or mind-door citta, to > experience > and object. Azita: Yes, true. I'm wondering what other cittas you think there are? How can a cetasika like conceit, for example, or energy (a > universal) > experience an object, I wonder. > > Metta > Phil Azita: hmmmmm, tricky but I'll have a go. Every citta that arises [and passes away] must have an object, and we know that cetasikas cannot arise without citta, and citta does not arise without cetasika - at least 7 - as is the case with a vipaka citta which experiences a sense object. That particular sense object lasts for a least 17 moments of citta [in a sense door process]. During the javana cittas of this sense door process, let's say conceit arises along with lobha. The object is still the same as was experienced by the vipaka citta in this same process, because that object has not yet fallen away. I want to leave it here, at the sense door process, to see what your thoughts are on this. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 36298 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 11:58pm Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > arise together with right understanding. > ++++++++++++ > > > > > > > And reading/considering the teachings helps right understanding > to > > > develop. > > > > > > > > > > This is a big stumbling block for me. I'm not currently at the > point > > where I can put two and two together and plainly read the texts I > have > > to put together an understanding. > ++++++++++++ Dear Andrew , I quote a sutta about the advantages of hearing/considering (and insighting) Dhamma: http://www.abhidhamma.org/anguttara_nikaya.%20(2)%2020htm.htm Anguttara Nikaya BRETHREN, four blessings should be expected from listening to with the ear, constant recitation with the voice, careful consideration with the mind and penetration of the Norm through insight (1). What four ? Herein, brethren, a brother masters the Norm consisting of the Suttas..... Vedalla (2). He thus listens to, constantly recites, carefully ponders over and penetrates the Norm. When he dies bewildered (3) in mind and is reborn in a certain assembly of devas, there the blissful ones recite to him the stanzas of the Norm. Brethren, the arising of mindfulness is slow, but such a being quickly achieves distinction therein.(4) Brethren, this is the first blessing that should be expected from listening to, constant recitation, careful consideration and penetration of the Norm through insight. ++++++++ 1 Diññiyà,. Comy. says 'himself penetrates it by his wisdom both as regards sense and cause.' 2 See suppra, P. 8. 3 Comy. says 'he is still a puthujjana'' One dying without reaching the Paths is said to die with mindfulness not established. 4 Comy`. He becomes nibbàna-gàmin (bound for the goal).' +++++++++ RobertK 36299 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 1:59am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner9-Introduction(f) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Introduction [contd] ***** The reader may find it cumbersome to know which types of cetasikas can accompany which types of citta, and to learn the different classifications of the groups of defilements. Such details, however, help us to be able to see the danger of unwholesomeness and the benefit of wholesomeness. When we know with what types of citta the various cetasikas are combined we will come to understand the underlying motives of our actions, speech and thought. Detailed knowledge will prevent us from taking for kusala what is akusala. In order to help the reader to understand the variety of cetasikas which accompany different cittas, I shall first summarize a few basic points on citta I also dealt with in my Abhidhamma in Daily Life. Cittas can be classified in many ways and one of these is the classification by way of "jati" (literally birth or nature). Cittas can be of the following four jatis: akusala kusala vipaka (result ) kiriya (inoperative, neither cause nor result) The cetasikas which accompany citta are of the same jati as the citta they accompany. Some cetasikas accompany cittas of all four jatis, others do not. Cittas arise and fall away very rapidly and we often do not know that a different citta of another jati has arisen after the present citta has fallen away. For example, we may think that the present citta is still vipakacitta, the result of kamma, when it is actually akusala citta with attachment or with aversion on account of the object which is experienced. Seeing, for instance, is vipaka-citta. The moment of seeing is extremely short. Shortly after it has fallen away, cittas rooted in attachment, aversion or ignorance may arise and these are of a different jati: the jati which is akusala. ***** [Introduction to be continued] Metta, Sarah ====== 36300 From: dighanakha Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:12pm Subject: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Dear dsg members. In the Commentary to the Jataka Ananda the Vulture King says: "Women are not so formed, this man to love and that abhor, They court the man they hate as much as one that they adore, E'en as a ship that hugs alike the near and farther shore. "It's not a case of love or hate with womenfolk you see, It is for gold they hug a man, as parasites a tree." - from the Kunala Jataka Is this true? And was the cuckoo Kunala (the Bodhisatta) right in advising that we not credit anything a woman says? What practical implications do passages like this have for those committed to a fundamentalist hermeneutic in which everything in the Commentaries is treated as infallible? Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36301 From: dighanakha Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:08pm Subject: Kunala Jataka 1 A Tale from the Kunala Jataka's Story Cycle Once upon a time the wife of Brahmadatta, Pingiyani by name, opening her window looked out and saw a royal groom, and, when the king had fallen asleep, she got down through the window and misconducted herself with him, and then again climbed back to the palace and shampooed her person with perfumes and lay down with the king. Now one night the king thought, "I wonder why at midnight the person of the queen is always cool: I will examine into the matter." So one day he pretended to be asleep and got up and followed her and saw her committing folly with a groom. He returned and climbed up to his chamber, and she too after she had been guilty of adultery came and lay down on a truckle bed. Next day the king, in the presence of his ministers, summoned her and made known her misconduct, saying, "All women alike are sinners." And he forgave her offence, though it really deserved death, imprisonment, mutilation, or cleaving asunder, but he deposed her from her high rank and made someone else his queen consort. At that time King Kunala was Brahmadatta, and so it was that he told this story as of something he had seen with his own eyes, and by way of illustration he repeated this stanza: Fair Pingiyani was as wife adored By Brahmadatta, earth's all conquering lord, Yet sinned with her devoted husband's slave, And lost by lechery both king and knave. After telling of the sins of women in old-world stories, in yet another way, still speaking of their misdeeds, he said: Poor fickle creatures women are, ungrateful, treacherous they, No man if not possessed would deign to credit aught they say. Little reck they of duty's call or plea of gratitude, Insensible to parents' love and ties of brotherhood, Transgressing every law of right, they play a shameless part, In all their acts obedient to the wish of their own heart. However long they dwell with him, though kind and loving he, Tender of heart and dear to them as life itself may be, In times of trouble and distress, leave him they will and must, I for my part in womenfolk can never put my trust. How often is a woman's mind like shifty monkey's found, Or like the shade cast by a tree on height or depth around, How changeful too the purpose lodged within a woman's breast, Like tire of wheel revolving swift without a pause or rest. Whene'er with due reflection they look round and see their way To captivate some man of wealth and make of him their prey, Such simpletons with words so soft and smooth they captive lead, E'en as Kambojjan groom with herbs will catch the fiercest steed. But if when looking round with care they fail to see their way To get possession of his wealth and make of him a prey, They drive him off, as one that now has reached the furthest shore And cuts adrift the ferry boat he needeth nevermore. Like fierce devouring flame they hold him fast in their embrace, Or sweep him off like stream in flood that hurries on apace; They court the man they hate as much as one that they adore, E'en as a ship that hugs alike the near and farther shore. They not to one or two belong, like open stall are they, One might as soon catch wind with net as women hold in sway. Like river, road, or drinking shed, assembly hall or inn, So free to all are womenfolk, no limits check their sin. Fell as black serpent's head are they, as ravenous as a fire, As kine the choicest herbage pick, they lovers rich desire. From elephant, black serpent, and from flame that's fed on ghee, From man besprinkled to be king, and women we should flee. All these whoso is on his guard will treat as deadly foe, Indeed their very nature it is very hard to know. Women who very clever are or very fair to view, And such as many men admire -- all these one should eschew: A neighbour's wife and one that seeks a man of wealth for mate, Such kind of women, five in all, no man should cultivate. When he had thus spoken, the people applauded the Great Being, crying, "Bravo, well said!" and after telling of the faults of women in these instances he held his peace. On hearing him, Ananda the Vulture King said, "My friend, Kunala, I too by my own powers of knowledge will tell of women's faults," and he began to speak of them. Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36302 From: dighanakha Date: Sat Sep 11, 2004 10:09pm Subject: Kunala Jataka 2 A Tale from the Kunala Jataka's Story Cycle (the verses of Ananda the Vulture King) The Blessed One by way of illustration said: "Then, verily, Ananda the Vulture King, marking the beginning, middle and end of what the bird Kunala had to say, at this time uttered these stanzas": "Although a man with all this world contains of golden gear Should her endow of womenkind his heart may count most dear, Yet, if occasion serves, she will dishonour him withal -- Beware lest thou into the hands of such vile wretches fall. A manly vigour he may show, from worldly taint be free, Her maiden wooer may perhaps winsome and loving be, In times of trouble and distress leave him she will and must, I for my part in womenkind can never put my trust. Let him not trust because he thinks 'she fancies me, I trow,' Nor let him trust because her tears oft in his presence flow; They court the man they hate as much as one that they adore, E'en as a ship that hugs alike the near and farther shore. Trust not a litter strewn with leaves and branches long ago, Trust not thy whilom friend, perchance now grown into a foe, Trust not a king because thou thinkst, 'My comrade once was he,' Trust not a woman though she has borne children ten to thee. Women are pleasure-seekers all and unrestrained in lust, Transgressors of the moral law: in such put not your trust. A wife may feign unbounded love before her husband's face; Distrust her: women common are as any landing place. Ready to mutilate or slay, from nothing do they shrink, And after having cut his throat they e'en his blood would drink: Let no man fix his love on them, creatures of passion base, Licentious and as common as some Ganges landing place. In speech they no distinction make between the false and true, As cows the choicest herbage pick, rich lovers they pursue. One man they tempt with looks and smiles, another by their walk, Some they attract by strange disguise, others by honeyed talk. Dishonest, fierce and hard of heart, as sugar sweet their words, Nothing there is they do not know to cheat their wedded lords. Surely all womenfolk are vile, no limit bounds their shame, Impassioned and audacious they, devouring as a flame. Women are not so formed, this man to love and that abhor, They court the man they hate as much as one that they adore, E'en as a ship that hugs alike the near and farther shore. It's not a case of love or hate with womenfolk you see, It is for gold they hug a man, as parasites a tree. A man may corpses burn or e'en dead flowers from temples rake, Be groom of horse or elephant, or care of oxen take, Yet women after such low castes will run for money's sake. One nobly born they leave if poor, as 'twere a low outcaste, To such an one, like carrion vile, if rich, they hie them fast." Thus did Ananda the Vulture King tell of the bad qualities of women, and then held his peace. Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36303 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:50am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hello DN_N, all, Gosh! Dighanaka Nutcracker (I got rhythm, I got music ...) you must have been typing away for hours and hours to bring us these obscure (though interestingly salacious and sexist) Jataka tales. I'm still exhausted from the Vesantara Jataka controversy of last year (or was it the year before?). ======================= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dighanakha" wrote: > Dear dsg members. > > In the Commentary to the Jataka Ananda the Vulture King says: > > "Women are not so formed, this man to love and that abhor, > They court the man they hate as much as one that they adore, > E'en as a ship that hugs alike the near and farther shore. > > "It's not a case of love or hate with womenfolk you see, > It is for gold they hug a man, as parasites a tree." > - from the Kunala Jataka > > Is this true? CJF: It may be a case of trying to ask Ananda the Vulture King. Any Abhinnas - like knowledge of past lives? I'm just shattered - Ananda (i.e. The Buddha's Attendant Ananda) has always been my hero - just goes to show that one shouldn't cling to anyone. ========================== > > And was the cuckoo Kunala (the Bodhisatta) right in advising that we not credit > anything a woman says? CJF: Now this is trickier - I hesitate to practise Species-ism ... but, really, what would a cuckoo know? Can't even bring up their own children ... =================== > > What practical implications do passages like this have for those committed to a > fundamentalist hermeneutic in which everything in the Commentaries is treated as > infallible? CJF: I think it was established at that time of the Vesantara Controversy (at least, to MY satisfaction) that the Jataka verses, though a little incomprehensible at times, are part of the Tipitaka, but the Jataka tales aren't. ====================== > Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker > metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 36304 From: robmoult Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:04am Subject: Re: Sabhava Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Sorry for starting a new thread. There's plenty else to discuss, but I > am a bit pressed for time, and feel indebted to some very kind people > who have taken the time to write to me. And there are some very "core" > discussions taking place. And to properly contribute to all of this, I > just want to check on a matter of fact. > > Is sabhava used in the suttas at all? > > Whether it is or isn't will not lead me to insist that others reach > certain conclusions. My inkling is just that sabhava is a post- sutta > term. Happy to be wrong :-) ===== The PTS Pali English Dictionary gives three definitions of sabhava on page 1645: 1. state (of mind), nature, condition Miln 90, 212, 360; PvA 39 (ummattaka-), 98 (santa-), 219 2. character, disposition, behaviour PvA 13, 35 (ullumpana-), 220 (lokiya-). 3. truth, reality, sincerity Miln 164; J V.459; V.198 (opp. musavada); J VI.469; sabhava sincerely, devotedly J VI.486. --dhamma principle of nature J I.214; --dhammatta= -dhamma Vism 238. --bhuta true J III.20 From this, it is clear that the term sabhava is post-canonical (Miln = Milindapañha, Pva = Peta-Vatthu Commentary, J = Jataka) Metta, Rob M :-) 36305 From: robmoult Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:10am Subject: Re: Rob M'sTheory Behind The Buddha's Smile ( 04 ) by Htoo Hi Htoo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > Thanks for your reply. Could you please tell me how to save? SO that > I can read even if I am not on line. When you bring up a .PDF file in your browser, a new menu bar will appear at the top of your browswer window. The left-most button is "save". Once you have saved the file on your hard disk, you can bring it up at any time (without your browser) by double-clicking on it. Metta, Rob :-) 36306 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking and thoughts -- status of Hi, Howard --- upasaka@a... wrote: Hi, Jon - ... The word 'vi~n~nana' isn't used consistently throughout the suttas. Often it means nothing more than awareness or experience or presence of experiential content. I don't deny the reality of that - anything but. In the scheme of dependent origination, however, the word appears to me to denote subjectivity or the cognitive activity of an apparent subject that apprehends an apparent object (vi~n~nana as subject impacting namarupa as object), the relating of two separate, self-existing and substantial realities, subject and object, and this is the focal point for avijja - this is where avijja does its work. Vi~n~nana as knowing subject (or cittas as little knowing selves) is what I object to. I think the Sheaves of Reeds sutta is one of the most important suttas in clarifying this issue. Jon: The suttas have a lot to say about sankhara dhammas in general, including vinnaana. Dhammas are classified in many ways -- as the five aggregates (khandhas), as sense-bases (ayatanas) and as elements (dhatus), etc -- but however they are classified there is consistency throughout the teachings as to the fact that any arisen dhamma is potentially knowable to panna for what it is (this being the meaning of insight). In the case of, for example, seeing consciousness and visible-object, it is clear from the suttas that (a) these are both are dhammas, albeit dhammas of two different kinds, and (b) at the moment at which visible-object is the object of seeing consciousness each retains its own set of characteristics both individual and shared, so that seeing consciousness is always distinguishable to panna as seeing consciousness and visible-object as visible-object. There is no reference in the suttas to any 'merging' of the two into a single 'event'. To regard the moment of seeing as being in absolute terms an event of which there is no nama knowable to panna as nama and no rupa knowable to panna as rupa (if that is what you are saying) seems to me to be inconsistent with what is in the suttas. You mention the Sheaves of Reeds sutta in this context, and quoted an extract from it in your message to Sarah. In the passage quoted, however, the simile of the mutually dependent sheaves is given in reference to the links in the chain of dependent origination, and I don’t think it can be applied to the occurrence of a single moment of seeing consciousness and visible-object. Besides, elsewhere in the suttas it is said that seeing consciousness arises dependent on visible-object (and other dhammas such as eye-base and contact between eye base and visible-object); nowhere is it said or implied that visible-object arises dependent on seeing consciousness or on any of the other factors just mentioned. (BTW, I do not think we can deduce anything about the basic nature of individual dhammas from an (attempted) interpretation of the teaching on dependent origination. Dependent origination is an extremely complex part of the teachings, and a correct grasp of the nature of dhammas as expounded in the teachings, such as what we are discussing here, is necessary in the first place in order to unravel it.) Howard: Another point that I think should not be overlooked is that the"world" of an arahant - that is, reality - is not the same of the "world" of non-arahants who seem to observe a realm of separate, discrete, yet somehow interacting "things" and "selves". Jon: If we take the actual moment at which visible-object is the object of seeing consciousness, there is as far as I know no difference between the world of the two classes of individual at that precise moment, although the mind-moments that follow are of course radically different in the two cases. Regards Jon 36307 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: flippin off the moon Hello, Joop Thanks for coming in on this thread. --- jwromeijn wrote: > Hallo Jon, Ben and all ... > Joop: I don't agree with that, Jon. > It's a orthodox view on Theravada that is to defensive, not future- > directed. > The Tipitaka (I don't talk about the commentaries) is "strong" enough > it to compare it with other texts. And it is healthy for the > development for somebody conversed (or partly conversed) to Theravada > to read other texts. And I think it's healthy for a "born" Theravadin > too. I have nothing against anyone reading other texts if they feel so inclined, but the question I think needs to be asked, and that I asked Ben, is how one evaluates what one reads in the other texts. > I for example like to study Nagarjuna and read in the book of the > (Sri Lankan born) Kalupahana that Nagarjuna is not a Mahayanist. And > Nagarjuna talks too about "two truths". There is no lack of writings by erudite scholars. But by what standard do you measure the views expressed by these other writers? Do you trust your own judgment in the matter? > You better could have asked, and now I do, to Ben: > What is the disadvantage of clinging to realities? A question well worth considering and discussing. As Ben has not responded, perhaps you would share with us your own thoughts on the subject. Regards Jon 36308 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anapanasati Sutta Hi, Rob Ep --- Robert Epstein wrote: ... > Hi Jon. > I appreciate this discussion. I think it is very easy to fall into > the desire for self-abnegation as a means to enhance spirituality. I > think the Buddha explicitly rejected this as too extreme. In a sense > the quashing of the self rather than seeing it as a formation through > insight makes the self appear to be more real; an "enemy" that has to > be defeated, and can create further ego-games. Yes, although to be exact self is neither quashed nor seen through insight. It is dhammas that are seen through insight, and it is by the development of this insight that the illusion of self is gradually eroded. > On the other hand, I wonder whether you wouldn't agree that certain > practices could be seen as indulging the view of a self and that it > might be more expedient to challenge that view? I'm not sure I've understood you here, but I would say that any practice designed to induce insight or deal with self is likely, given our stage of development, to result in a reinforcing of the idea of self. There is no need to challenge the view of self. With the development of insight into the true nature of reality that view is whittled away naturally; but no amount of effort directed to 'dealing' with that view will be of any useful effect, in my view. Nice to hear from you again. Jon 36309 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Howdy, Mike. Good to hear an interjection(!) from you. You commented on my point: > > My point is that both those formulations are wrong, but both are > > right enough to be helpful in their own way. The danger is in > > dogmatically clinging to one as "right" and the other as "wrong." For > > me, right now, the "citta experiences an object" works better, but it > > isn't helpful to cling to that as a view. > > On the contrary--as I see it, understanding that citta does indeed > experience an object (with no 'experiencer' behind the event) is very much a > part of conceptual right view. Clinging (upadaana) and right view do not > arise at the same time. Valuable to know this I think. Two comments (that are, as always, working hypotheses that need working over): 1. Conceptual right view? Boy does this sound strange! I know that Buddha makes a distinction between "mundane right view" and "supramundane right view" in The Great Forty (MN 117), but the distinction is apparently between the right view arising with moments of mundane satipatthana vs. right view arising in full path consciousness (according to the commentaries). Right view is a cetasika (pañña) that arises in satipatthana (e.g., see VII, §130 in BB's CMA). It has nothing to do with concepts or the formulation of theories. Is "conceptual right view" something like "conventional right effort"? 2. In my point quoted above, I am referring not to the right view that arises when citta is known directly; instead, I am referring to the descriptions of the understanding of citta. Should it be described as "citta experiences an object" or "citta is the experiencing of an object"? Neither formulation should be taken as a view because right view is an understanding, not a conceptual framework. Dan 36310 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:20am Subject: Re: Sabhava Hi Herman, I found 757 sabhâv* variations on the CSCD. Some of the variations occur hundreds of times in the Pali literature. The vast majority of the occurances are in the commentaries (including the Netti and Vism. and many, many others), but there were many from the khuddaka nikaya (petavatthu, apadana, Buddhavamsa, cariyapitaka). I did not find any from the 4 nikayas, though. (However, the books of the 4 nikayas are not listed in the simplest way for quick scanning.) Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > Sorry for starting a new thread. There's plenty else to discuss, but I > am a bit pressed for time, and feel indebted to some very kind people > who have taken the time to write to me. And there are some very "core" > discussions taking place. And to properly contribute to all of this, I > just want to check on a matter of fact. > > Is sabhava used in the suttas at all? > > Whether it is or isn't will not lead me to insist that others reach > certain conclusions. My inkling is just that sabhava is a post-sutta > term. Happy to be wrong :-) > > > Thanks and Regards > > > Herman 36311 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Dear Dan, op 11-09-2004 16:53 schreef Dan D. op onco111@y... > > Another way to express my point is that rupa cannot experience an > object, but nama does. N: Yes. I find it difficult to realize this directly, without thinking. But, as A. Sujin always stresses, we need patience, being aware of the characteristic that appears. Thus, patience and perseverance, not giving up. D: >> D: >> When insight has developed and dhammas are directly > experienced, no >>> words are needed.>> >> >>> Needed for what? I don't understand. >> N: For direct understanding of characteristics of realities. > > I'm still not sure what you mean. Clearly, direct insight has nothing > to do with words or putting together any particular formulation of > words or weaving together this theory or that theory. Discussion of > insight or dhammas does require words, though, and it is good to try > to find words that are helpful rather than words that are not helpful. N: Yes, I agree. For me also it is difficult not to get stuck with words. Beyond the words are the characteristics to be directly known. D: She knocked on the table and asked whether > hardness >> was light or dark. In order to directly experience the > characteristic of >> hardness there is no need to name it, you can call it anything. > > O.K. This is good. When she asked that, my immediate response was to > laugh inside -- no light or dark! But after recollecting hardness a > moment later, I answered "dark," because there is no light whatsoever > in experiencing hardness. N: I think there is still another meaning behind this event. Light and dark cannot be experienced through touch, only through the eyes. We are not used to separating the six doorways. In the Suttas this is emphasized all the time. But how difficult. We mix them all up, thinking of a whole of impressions. Whereas only one characteristic appears through one doorway at a time. When light (or colour) appears, hardness cannot appear at the same time. Citta can experience only one object at a time. Awareness is aware of only one dhamma at a time and this is the way to gain a more precise understanding of realities. Mostly we are taken in by the concepts of people and events, but this is common. How many aeons were we like that? Nina. 36312 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg]space Hi Howard, op 11-09-2004 16:43 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: >> H: Where is that color? Where does it arise? If not >>> in "mind", then where? In space? Space is concept. >> N: Inward space is a rupa, not a concept, but we do not talk about that now. >> > ====================== > Ahh, but I think we *should* be talking about that now! This may be > the crux of the matter. What is this "inward space"? N: I do not know whether this is helpful for you now in order to understand the impingement of colour on eyesense. It is rather detailed. But, you are welcome. Inward space. This rupa surrounds the groups of rupa. As mentioned in the Vis and tiika (under rupakkhandha) rupas do not arise alone, but in groups. Visible object needs the four great elements as support and other rupas. Space, akaasa, is one of the twentyeight rupas, but it is subtle and far, meaning, not easy to penetrate. But through insight that has been developed it can be directly experienced. Quoting texts I used before, so all this is more like a recap: , meaning, it is not a living being. We read in the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta: "And what, Rahula, is the space element? The space element may be internal or external. And what, Rahula, is the internal space element? That, internally, and individually, is space, void, and clung to, namely: the cavity of the ear, the orifice of the nose, the opening of the mouth, and whereby (one) swallows what is tasted, chewed, drunk and eaten, and where (food) being tasted, chewed, drunk and eaten remains, and whereby (food) being tasted, chewed, drunk and eaten passes out of the body lower down, or whatever else internally, and individually is space, void, sky, empty, an opening, hollow, untouched by flesh and blood, and clung to. This, Rahula, is called the internal space element. But that very internal space element and that external space element are simply space element. Thus "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not myself" is to be seen with right wisdom just as it is. Having seen this with right wisdom just as it is, the mind becomes dispassionate towards (and) detaches (itself) from the space element." ..... Co to the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta: I do not know whether this is enough info. Nina. 36313 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Hello Phil, good you mention this, it is a difficult subject. op 11-09-2004 14:13 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > Ph: This is something I don't understand yet. How a cetasika experiences an > object. > It seems there would need to be a sense-door citta, or mind-door citta, to > experience > and object. How can a cetasika like conceit, for example, or energy (a > universal) > experience an object, I wonder. N: This is a theoretical answer: cetasika is nama, not rupa. Thus, it experiences an object. Since it arises with the citta it must experience the same object. Now all this is very intricate. It is difficult to know the characteristic of a specific cetasika. When insight is more developed the difference between citta and cetasika can be known more precisely. When citta experiences a sense object and it is accompanied by lobha, lobha clings to that object, thus, it also experiences that object. There can be conceit on account of any object, also on account of visible object. When citta with lobha experiences visible object, conceit may also accompany this citta and be conceited on account of that object. BTW energy is not a universal. It arises with many cetasikas, but not with every citta. Seeing sees, it does not need energy. Nina. 36314 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 6:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) > Dear Phil, > I enjoy reading yours posts Phil, feel like I can learn a lot > from them. Hi Azita You're too kind. I always enjoy your posts too, and I love your sign off phrase. I think of "patience, courage and good cheer" quite often these days as I realize that 9 moons after discovering Abhidhamma and despite having done a lot of reading, I still don't know what a citta is. Still haven't retained very basic stuff. >> > "The cetasikas which accompany the > > citta experience the same object as the citta while they each > perform > > their own function." > > > > Ph: This is something I don't understand yet. How a cetasika > experiences an > > object. > > It seems there would need to be a sense-door citta, or mind-door > citta, to > > experience > > and object. > > Azita: Yes, true. I'm wondering what other cittas you think there > are? Ph: You see, this is the kind of thing I *still* don't know yet. Haven't retained. For some reason I was thinking that javana cittas are outside the sense-door or mind door processes, that vipaka cittas (resultants) are what happen in sense door process, and javanca cittas are where the fresh, if you will, non-resultant kusala or akusala is produced, due to accumulations, and proliferation. I see now that I was wrong - the javanas are right in there in the sense-door and mind-door processes/is being, before the determining citta. I'm very interested in the point at which sheer sense experience ends and proliferation begins, and I thought javanas had something to do with that. Maybe they do. I've read already 4or 5 times in different books (ADL, Manual of Abh, Rob M's book) what goes on in these processes, and I understand it when I read it, but I don't retain it. That is natural enough when these are cittas that are largely not identifiable in daily life, for the unenlightened at least. No worries. It'll soak in. So, I guess now from what you say above that there are no other cittas that are not sense-door or mind-door cittas, except for "process freed cittas?" Ph> How can a cetasika like conceit, for example, or energy (a > > universal) > > experience an object, I wonder. > > > > Azita: hmmmmm, tricky but I'll have a go. > > Every citta that arises [and passes away] must have an object, and > we know that cetasikas cannot arise without citta, and citta does not > arise without cetasika - at least 7 - as is the case with a vipaka > citta which experiences a sense object. > That particular sense object lasts for a least 17 moments of > citta [in a sense door process]. > During the javana cittas of this sense door process, let's say > conceit arises along with lobha. The object is still the same as was > experienced by the vipaka citta in this same process, because that > object has not yet fallen away. > > I want to leave it here, at the sense door process, to see what > your thoughts are on this. Ph: Well, I know that there has been a lot of talk in other threads about the implications of "object", and I am guilty of not having read those threads thoroughly enough. My understanding of cetasika is still too frail to understand how they have objects but I can see waht you mean about them having objects in the sense of sharing the same object that has been/is being "run through" by javanas, and was the object of the vipaka cittas. Studying "Cetasikas" is going to help my understanding a lot, by exposing my ignorance. Thank you very much for your encouragement, Azita. > Patience, courage and good cheer, > Azita. Metta, Phil 36315 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 7:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Hi Nina I didn't see your post before I replied to Azita. Just home after a very, very, very long day in Tokyo. Sometimes I think it is right effort to apply myself to a bit of Dhamma discussion when I am as sleepy as I am now, sometimes I think it is not a good idea and an abuse of the precious opportunity to discuss Dhamma. > good you mention this, it is a difficult subject. Ph: That is reassuring. >How can a cetasika like conceit, for example, or energy (a > > universal) > > experience an object, I wonder. > N: This is a theoretical answer: cetasika is nama, not rupa. Thus, it > experiences an object. Since it arises with the citta it must experience the > same object. Ph: As Azita said. It certainly makes sense, theoretically. > Now all this is very intricate. It is difficult to know the characteristic > of a specific cetasika. When insight is more developed the difference > between citta and cetasika can be known more precisely. Ph: It will be a long process. I will be studying this book for months, a few years, but even that time will allow me only a basic intellectual grasp. The insight that will bring real understanding about cittas will arise in many years or lifetimes rather than months. It's good I can see that and accept that now. I am comfortable with that now. I think my new interest in deeds of merit and the eradication of coarse defilements is helping me feel patient about subtle insight into cittas and cetasikas. to be honest, I feel intellectual understanding of cittas and cetasikas will condition deeper insight in future lifetimes, though I know you have told me not to limit things in that way of talking about conditions. > When citta experiences a sense object and it is accompanied by lobha, lobha > clings to that object, thus, it also experiences that object. Ph: Ah, experience through clinging. That's clearer. >There can be > conceit on account of any object, also on account of visible object. When > citta with lobha experiences visible object, conceit may also accompany this > citta and be conceited on account of that object. Ph: I can see conceit arising as a result of an associated citta experiencing an object, but I can't yet understand conceit experiencing the object on its own. "On account of the object" doesn't really fill in that blank in my mind. My problem is I am still kind of thinking of cetasikas in an almost biological way, as vice or virtue germs floating around in the mind like those globules in the body in "Fantastic Voyage." (The movie where the scientists are shrunk and sent in a little submarine through a man's body to do soemthing or other.) Still haven't really got it. But I'm not sweating it. > BTW energy is not a universal. It arises with many cetasikas, but not with > every citta. Seeing sees, it does not need energy. Ph: Right. Thanks Nina. Metta, Phil 36316 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 7:53am Subject: Deeds of Merit - paying respect through speech Hello all More from "Deeds of Merit" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, available at http://www.zolag.co.uk/meri2.html In the last post, we learned that respect can be paid through body, speech and mind. Today we learn about paying respect through speech, plus a very interesting bit about the way citta conditions the rupa of tone of voice. In the exchange, as used in the book, "W" is Ms. Wandhana Thippewan. S is K Sujin. (I hope "K" is a respectful enough term. I notice Nina uses "A" and other people also use "K" I think K stands for Khun, and is a respectul term.) Metta, Phil S. : Homage through speech is just showing respect by ones speech. Paying respect through speech is, for example, speaking words of homage to the Buddha: Namo tassa Bhagavato Arahatto Sammaasambuddhassa, which means: Homage to Him, the Blessed One, the Worthy One, the Fully Enlightened One. W. : Apart from paying respect through speech to the Triple Gem, can one also pay respect through speech to other people? S. : Certainly. Respectful and courteous behaviour is a way of showing respect through the body. Speech which is polite, gentle and kind is a way of paying respect through speech. W. : By such behaviour and speech we can find out what the nature of the citta is at that moment. S. : If someone is a keen observer, he can notice when there is a change in a persons usual appearance. Even from a slight change in the expression of his eyes, the colour of his face, the tone of his voice or his intonation, it can be known what the citta is like at such moments. The sound of speech is a kind of ruupa which is produced by citta. There are four factors which produce the ruupas of the body, namely: kamma, citta, temperature (cold or heat), and nutrition. 36317 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 8:31am Subject: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. > > O.K. This is good. When she asked [whether hardness was light or dark], my immediate response was to > > laugh inside -- no light or dark! But after recollecting hardness a > > moment later, I answered "dark," because there is no light whatsoever > > in experiencing hardness. > N: I think there is still another meaning behind this event. Light and dark > cannot be experienced through touch, only through the eyes. We are not used > to separating the six doorways. In the Suttas this is emphasized all the > time. But how difficult. We mix them all up, thinking of a whole of > impressions. Whereas only one characteristic appears through one doorway at > a time. When light (or colour) appears, hardness cannot appear at the same > time. Citta can experience only one object at a time. Awareness is aware of > only one dhamma at a time and this is the way to gain a more precise > understanding of realities. Mostly we are taken in by the concepts of people > and events, but this is common. How many aeons were we like that? I know that when she asked that, my initial, rationalistic repsonse was just as you say: "Light and dark cannot be experienced through touch!" But in the experience of hardness, there is a complete absense of seeing, no light whatsoever, complete darkness. So, then, the question arises whether dark can be experienced through the eyes. I don't think I've experienced seeing in complete darkness, and I'm speculating that it is impossible. Sujin's response to my "dark" was [paraphrase]: "[Laughing] That's right. Complete darkness. No seeing at all." Dan 36318 From: Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thinking and thoughts -- status of Hi, Jon - Much disagreement on this one, but I'll only give a couple comments: In a message dated 9/12/04 7:33:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > Hi, Howard > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon - > ... > The word 'vi~n~nana' isn't used consistently throughout the suttas. > Often it means nothing more than awareness or experience or presence of > experiential content. I don't deny the reality of that - anything but. In > the scheme of dependent origination, however, the word appears to me to > denote subjectivity or the cognitive activity of an apparent subject that > apprehends an apparent object (vi~n~nana as subject impacting namarupa as > object), the relating of two separate, self-existing and substantial > realities, subject and object, and this is the focal point for avijja - > this is where avijja does its work. Vi~n~nana as knowing subject (or > cittas as little knowing selves) is what I object to. I think the Sheaves > of Reeds sutta is one of the most important suttas in clarifying this > issue. > > Jon: > The suttas have a lot to say about sankhara dhammas in general, including > vinnaana. Dhammas are classified in many ways -- as the five aggregates > (khandhas), as sense-bases (ayatanas) and as elements (dhatus), etc -- but > however they are classified there is consistency throughout the teachings > as to the fact that any arisen dhamma is potentially knowable to panna for > what it is (this being the meaning of insight). > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Terminology is not consistenly used throughout the suttas, the word 'sankhara' itself being a case in point, but I agree that the nature of dhammas, most specifically the tilakkhana, is knowable by pa~n~na. ------------------------------------------------- > > In the case of, for example, seeing consciousness and visible-object, it > is clear from the suttas that (a) these are both are dhammas, albeit > dhammas of two different kinds, and (b) at the moment at which > visible-object is the object of seeing consciousness each retains its own > set of characteristics both individual and shared, so that seeing > consciousness is always distinguishable to panna as seeing consciousness > and visible-object as visible-object. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: I didn't deny that experiential content (what you call object) and its presence (vi~n~nana) are distinguishable. All that I maintained is that 'vi~n~nana' in the scheme of paticcasamupada is more than mere experiencing - it is defiled experiencing, defiled by the sense of subject, by I-making. ------------------------------------------------- > > There is no reference in the suttas to any 'merging' of the two into a > single 'event'. To regard the moment of seeing as being in absolute terms > an event of which there is no nama knowable to panna as nama and no rupa > knowable to panna as rupa (if that is what you are saying) seems to me to > be inconsistent with what is in the suttas. > ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Actually, I think there is. I think that is what "vi~n~nanam anidassanam" pertains to, and I think that the absence of that, the "normal" experience of sentient beings, is what the Sheaves of Reeds Sutta points to. That's the way I see it. I understand that you do not, and I have no problem in the slightest with our differing on this. I think we both have rather strong opinions with regard to this. So long as we each realize that opinion is all that that is and we have the willingness to drop the opinion as easily as we picked it up should we "see the light," then we are in good shape. ------------------------------------------------ > > You mention the Sheaves of Reeds sutta in this context, and quoted an > extract from it in your message to Sarah. In the passage quoted, however, > the simile of the mutually dependent sheaves is given in reference to the > links in the chain of dependent origination, and I don’t think it can be > applied to the occurrence of a single moment of seeing consciousness and > visible-object. > --------------------------------------------- Howard: In my opinion, the scheme of dependent origination best applies to neither the 3-lifetime scheme nor to a single instant, but applies best as a practical matter pertaining to "moment-to-moment mental flux". I agree that it does not apply to a "single moment of seeing consciousness and visible-object". So what? Why should it? But the meaning of 'vi~n~nana' in the context of dependent origination I definitely believe is that of ignorance-conditioned experiencing. And, if I were permitted to know about only one aspect of the Dhamma and be (directly) ignorant of the rest, it would be dependent origination that I would choose. For me, it is the core of the Dhamma. ------------------------------------------------- > > Besides, elsewhere in the suttas it is said that seeing consciousness > arises dependent on visible-object (and other dhammas such as eye-base and > contact between eye base and visible-object); nowhere is it said or > implied that visible-object arises dependent on seeing consciousness or on > any of the other factors just mentioned. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Vi~n~nana and namarupa are mutually dependent. The Sheaves of Reeds Sutta says that. So called visible-object is an instance of namarupa. --------------------------------------------- > > (BTW, I do not think we can deduce anything about the basic nature of > individual dhammas from an (attempted) interpretation of the teaching on > dependent origination. Dependent origination is an extremely complex part > of the teachings, and a correct grasp of the nature of dhammas as > expounded in the teachings, such as what we are discussing here, is > necessary in the first place in order to unravel it.) > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Again, if I had to, I'd keep D.O. and drop all the rest, for all the rest is implicit in D.O. ------------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > Another point that I think should not be overlooked is that the"world" of > an arahant - that is, reality - is not the same of the "world" of > non-arahants who seem to observe a realm of separate, discrete, yet > somehow interacting "things" and "selves". > > Jon: > If we take the actual moment at which visible-object is the object of > seeing consciousness, there is as far as I know no difference between the > world of the two classes of individual at that precise moment, although > the mind-moments that follow are of course radically different in the two > cases. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Perhaps so, Jon. The thought occurs to me that a worldling is without wisdom, or at least without much, at all times. At the time a Buddha is seeing, is he also without wisdom? But perhaps it is true that there is no wisdom in either case at the time of merely seeing. I agree that wisdom or its lack is a matter of mind, not form. -------------------------------------------------- > > Regards > 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) 36319 From: Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 4:48am Subject: Re: [dsg]space Hi, Nina - Thank you for the following. I see that I misunderstood what you meant by "inward space." All that you mean by it is space within the body. (As far as I view this matter, this is concept only.) With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/12/04 10:03:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time, nilo@e... writes: > > Hi Howard, > op 11-09-2004 16:43 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > >>H: Where is that color? Where does it arise? If not > >>>in "mind", then where? In space? Space is concept. > >>N: Inward space is a rupa, not a concept, but we do not talk about that > now. > >> > >====================== > >Ahh, but I think we *should* be talking about that now! This may be > >the crux of the matter. What is this "inward space"? > N: I do not know whether this is helpful for you now in order to understand > the impingement of colour on eyesense. It is rather detailed. But, you are > welcome. > Inward space. This rupa surrounds the groups of rupa. As mentioned in the > Vis and tiika (under rupakkhandha) rupas do not arise alone, but in groups. > Visible object needs the four great elements as support and other rupas. > Space, akaasa, is one of the twentyeight rupas, but it is subtle and far, > meaning, not easy to penetrate. But through insight that has been developed > it can be directly experienced. > Quoting texts I used before, so all this is more like a recap: > > matter. > Its function is to display the boundaries of matter. It is manifested as > the confines of matter; or it is manifested as untouchedness, as the > state of gaps and apertures (cf. Dhs. 638). Its proximate cause is the > matter delimited. And it is on account of it that one can say of > material things delimited that 'this is above, below, around, that'. > > Conventional terms such as cavity of the ear, nose, spaces in the body, are > used, helping us to understand its nature. It seems a mere nothing, like > air, but still, it performs very neatly its function, separating the groups > of rupa. What chaos there would be without it. The groups would not be > distinct, they would permeate each other. Each of the groups of octads, > nonads, decads etc. plays its own part, it is important that they are > distinct. The eyedecad contains eyesense, a necessary condition for seeing. > Nobody can say, be there in time, don¹t fall away, so that you can be base > for seeing. It performs its function, arising just for a moment and then > gone. ... Space surrounds all these different groups. > ***** > Though it is not concrete matter and an asabhava rupa, it is bound up with > concrete matter since it delimits them. It delimits the groups originated by > kamma, citta, nutrition and temperature and therefore reckoned as originated > by these four factors. It arises and falls away with them. It is also called > an element, dhatu, space-element in the Expositor (II, 425). And the Co to > the Abh. Sangaha states:, > meaning, it is not a living being. > We read in the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta: > "And what, Rahula, is the space element? The space element may be > internal or external. And what, Rahula, is the internal space > element? That, internally, and individually, is space, void, and > clung to, namely: the cavity of the ear, the orifice of the nose, the > opening of the mouth, and whereby (one) swallows what is tasted, > chewed, drunk and eaten, and where (food) being tasted, chewed, drunk > and eaten remains, and whereby (food) being tasted, chewed, drunk and > eaten passes out of the body lower down, or whatever else internally, > and individually is space, void, sky, empty, an opening, hollow, > untouched by flesh and blood, and clung to. This, Rahula, is > called the internal space element. But that very internal space > element and that external space element are simply space element. > Thus "this is not mine, this I am not, this is not myself" is to be > seen with right wisdom just as it is. Having seen this with right > wisdom just as it is, the mind becomes dispassionate towards (and) > detaches (itself) from the space element." > ..... > Co to the Mahaaraahulovaadasutta: > In order to point out the derived material phenomena. > Before he had spoken about the four great Elements, not about the derived > physical phenomena. > Therefore, in order to point these out in that way, he explained in detail > the element of space. > He also made known the matter that is delimitated by the internal space. > > ³He proceeds to clarify matter that is delimitated by space. > The Guide explained this so that it was clear to him in that way.² > > > I do not know whether this is enough info. > Nina. > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 36320 From: Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Hi, Dan (and Nina) - In a message dated 9/12/04 11:37:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@y... writes: > I know that when she asked that, my initial, rationalistic repsonse > was just as you say: "Light and dark cannot be experienced through > touch!" But in the experience of hardness, there is a complete > absense of seeing, no light whatsoever, complete darkness. So, then, > the question arises whether dark can be experienced through the eyes. > I don't think I've experienced seeing in complete darkness, and I'm > speculating that it is impossible. > > Sujin's response to my "dark" was [paraphrase]: "[Laughing] That's > right. Complete darkness. No seeing at all." > > Dan > ========================== Dark is the absence of light. Silence is the absence of sound. We can experience darkness, can we not? We also can experience silence. And they are distinguishable!! So absences are realities. The question is: Where are they experienced? I think the correct answer may be "via the mind door". (And yet, doesn't it seem that one actually SEES darkness? I think so. So the matter is unclear.) 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) 36321 From: Andrew Levin Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:24am Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > arise together with right understanding. > > ++++++++++++ > > > > > > > > > > And reading/considering the teachings helps right understanding > > to > > > > develop. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a big stumbling block for me. I'm not currently at the > > point > > > where I can put two and two together and plainly read the texts I > > have > > > to put together an understanding. > > ++++++++++++ > Dear Andrew , > I quote a sutta about the advantages of hearing/considering (and > insighting) Dhamma: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/anguttara_nikaya.%20(2)%2020htm.htm > Anguttara Nikaya > > > BRETHREN, four blessings should be expected from listening to with > the ear, constant recitation with the voice, careful consideration > with the mind and penetration of the Norm through insight (1). What > four ? > > Herein, brethren, a brother masters the Norm consisting of the > Suttas..... Vedalla (2). He thus listens to, constantly recites, > carefully ponders over and penetrates the Norm. When he dies > bewildered (3) in mind and is reborn in a certain assembly of devas, > there the blissful ones recite to him the stanzas of the Norm. > Brethren, the arising of mindfulness is slow, but such a being > quickly achieves distinction therein.(4) Brethren, this is the first > blessing that should be expected from listening to, constant > recitation, careful consideration and penetration of the Norm through > insight. Robert, this looks somewhat dogmatic to me, to assume that one can be reborn in the devas going on the mere recitation of the texts. Careful consideration is again something not possible for me at this point, I'm not well enough to read through and develop an understanding, as I've said previously, and even pondering over would be difficult for me at this stage. Thanks anyway, Andrew 36322 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Hi Dan, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan D." To: Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 6:09 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] > Two comments (that are, as always, working hypotheses that need > working over): > 1. Conceptual right view? Boy does this sound strange!* Agreed, I don't like it much myself--I'll try to come up with a better expression. Right View is such a huge subject...What I meant though, was that there's the right view e.g. that "Killing living beings is unwholesome" (from MNIX, Sammaadi.t.thisutta); this I take to be a concept and a correct one. In the context of The Abhidhamma, sammaadi.t.thi refers to a cetasika, not a concept. The difference in the Great Forty I take to be between "...And what is the right view that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions." (Would you agree that this is conceptual? It seems to me to refer to ideas rather than to 'realities'.) and the path factor, "...And what is the right view that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view in one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from fermentations, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without fermentations, transcendent, a factor of the path." (This I take to refer to the cetasika, not the concept.) > I know that Buddha makes a distinction between "mundane right view" and "supramundane right view" in The Great Forty (MN 117), but the > distinction is apparently between the right view arising with moments of mundane satipatthana vs. right view arising in full path consciousness > (according to the commentaries). Right view is a cetasika (pañña) that arises in satipatthana (e.g., see VII, §130 in BB's CMA). It has nothing > to do with concepts or the formulation of theories. Thanks for this--I've never really clearly delineated 'mundane' vs. 'conceptual' for myself, this his helpful. Personally I'm inclined to think that there's an entirely conceptual level to a great deal of the Suttanta but I've been told I'm wrong before and I very well could be. At least now I hope you know what I meant, even if mistaken. > Is "conceptual right view" something like "conventional > right effort"? As above, subject to the same proviso (that I'm likely just mistaken). > 2. In my point quoted above, I am referring not to the right view that arises when citta is known directly; instead, I am referring to the > descriptions of the understanding of citta. Should it be described as "citta experiences an object" or "citta is the experiencing of an object"? The way I see it, citta (in the abhidhamma sense) does indeed experience the object. It 'views correctly' rather than 'is the correct view', in other words, I guess I think of it more as a verb than a noun, rather than being something a priori or presumptive. If there IS such a thing as 'conceptual right view (or effort)', it would be presumptive, in the sense of 'formed or conceived beforehand'. Sorry for the clumsy writing--hope my meaning (which I'm not representing as Dhamma--just my take on things) is clear. > Neither formulation should be taken as a view because right view is an understanding, not a conceptual framework. I think I've addressed this to the best of my ability. I guess I would say that it seems to me that 'right view' can refer to (a) a correct idea of what's wholesome vs. unwholesome and so on; (b) the mundane right view that occurs with a moment of satipatthaana; or (c) Right View of the Noble Eightfold Path, something that only occurs with the attainment of magga and phala. If this is correct, then the meaning of 'right view' depends mainly on context. mike *[Remember how strange 'citta' and 'cetisaka' sounded when we first heard them?] 36323 From: robmoult Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 3:23pm Subject: Basic citta processes (was Re: [dsg] Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d)) Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > R > Let's take a step back here. A "kusala" mental state is wholesome, > > it has wholesome roots of non-attachment (alobha) and non- aversion > > (adosa). The citta (consciousness) and the various associated mental > > factors (cetasikas) are all wholesome. For example, the contact > > cetasika (phassa) in this mental state is wholesome. > > > > Now let's talk about a kusala eye consciousness mental state. This > > is a kusala vipaka mental state. This mental state is not wholesome; > > it does not have any wholesome roots (i.e. no alobha, no adosa). > > These mental states are rootless and are of indeterminate ethical > > value (avyakata); not wholesome, not unwholesome. The contact > > cetasika (phassa) in the kusala eye consciousness mental state is > > indeterminate. > > Ph:: OK. > Would the former be javana citta? ===== Yes, a "kusala" mental state performs the function of javana. ===== > Am I correct in thinking that javana is > the first point > at which "fresh" kusala, if you will, rather than resultant kusala appears > on the scene? ===== You are correct that javana is the stage of the process at which new kamma is created. In a sense door process, the javana stage is preceded by a determining stage. The mental state that arises at the determining stage is functional (kiriya); not kamma creating and not a result of past kamma. The stages preceding the determining stage are the sense-consciousness, receiving and investigating stages; these stages are the result of past kamma. In a mind door process, the javana stage is preceded by a mind-door-adverting stage (again, a kiriya mental state). ===== > > As we know, akusala is much more prevalent than kusala. so let's talk > about that. > So, if I'm correct, there is all this vipaka akusala rising, and then all > this "fresh" javana akusala > arising? Because of proliferation, is there always much more akusala citta > produced in > javanas than the akusala vipaka citta that is fed into the process? ===== Not quite correct. I will give you a longer answer later today. Metta, Rob M :-) 36324 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Cooran 13-15 August, 2004 Hi Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > Hi Ken, > > 2 weeks is a long time, and we're not even in politics :-) > :-) Thanks for resurrecting this message. When I sent it, I was forgetting you would be away (despite your having taken the trouble to warn us). I won't post the reply I have prepared: it gives the same definitions of satipatthana you must have seen here a hundred times before. I should try instead to understand what you are asking me to explain – what part of my message seemed so surprising to you? If I remember correctly, you said `thinking is intention,' and I replied: ============ KH: >> That sounds right to me: whenever there is a concept (e.g., "a tree") then there is intention (cetana) and its associated sankharas. But they are not known at that precise moment. At the moment of "tree awareness" there is no awareness of cetana. So the paramattha dhammas known as `thinking' (cetana, vicara, vitakka, etc.) can be known with satipatthana but not so, "tree." > > ============= H: > Am I reading you correctly, are you sure you mean satipatthana? If so, can you explain that a bit? > ------------- KH: I'll reword it a bit. Whenever there is a concept, there is consciousness (citta) with its cetasikas (including cetana, intention). At that time, the object being experienced is the concept, not the citta nor any of its cetasikas. So there is no possibility of satipatthana at that precise moment. (Satipatthana has a dhamma, not a concept, as its object.) However, any of those dhammas that are present (experiencing the concept) can become the object of satipatthana in the next [mind-door] process of cittas. Is that any more intelligible? (I can see now that the original was not well worded.) Kind regards, Ken H 36325 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas' study corner9-Introduction(f) Hello all, >Shortly after it (the moment of seeing) has fallen away, cittas rooted in attachment, >aversion or ignorance may arise and these are of a different jati: the >jati which is akusala. I've asked Nina about a similar sentence to this before but I'm sorry to say I can't remember her response. My apologies. Is it a bit misleading to say that such cittas "may" arise? Isn't it all but a certainty, except for Arahants, when we consider the rarity of wholesome cittas? Would it be more accurate to say "will probably" or "will almost surely" arise? It's natural for me to think this because it is often stressed in Nina's books how relatively rare kusala cittas are to akusala cittas. Metta, Phil p.s maybe we have different feelings about how probable "may" is. p.p.s some might think that seeing unwholesome cittas as far more prevalent than wholesome ones is pessimistic and disempowering. What's the point of studying Dhamma if that's the case? I don't think so. Understanding the rarity of truly wholesome cittas can motivate us to better understand the conditions necessary for kusala to arise, and make us more sensitive to the opportunities for kusala when they arise. The turban on fire sense of urgency, samvega. 36326 From: plnao Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:27pm Subject: Re: Basic citta processes (was Re: [dsg] Re: 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d)) Hello Rob Thanks as always for the helpful explanations. > Not quite correct. I will give you a longer answer later today. Please don't feel any pressure to write today. I'll be having lots of questions for you in this thread and I don't want to wear out my welcome. Metta, Phil p.s needless to say, everybody, jump on in if this topic interests you. 36327 From: m. nease Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 7:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas' study corner9-Introduction(f) Hi Phil, ----- Original Message ----- From: "plnao" To: Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 5:13 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas' study corner9-Introduction(f) > Understanding the rarity of truly wholesome cittas can motivate us to better understand the conditions necessary for kusala to arise, and make > us more sensitive to the opportunities for kusala when they arise. Couldn't agree more--one of the great values of abhidhamma, I think--that is, learning to tell kusala from akusala in a very clear, specific way. mike 36328 From: connieparker Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:04pm Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? >> In the Commentary to the Jataka Ananda the Vulture King says: >> >> "Women are not so formed, this man to love and that abhor, >> They court the man they hate as much as one that they adore, >> E'en as a ship that hugs alike the near and farther shore. >> >> "It's not a case of love or hate with womenfolk you see, >> It is for gold they hug a man, as parasites a tree." >> - from the Kunala Jataka >> >> Is this true? > > CJF: It may be a case of trying to ask Ananda the Vulture King. Any > Abhinnas - like knowledge of past lives? > I'm just shattered - Ananda (i.e. The Buddha's Attendant Ananda) has > always been my hero - just goes to show that one shouldn't cling to > anyone. > ========================== CP: Not to worry, CJF - all a matter of every self being "hare today, goon tomorrow". Nothing trustworthy in any case (and gender irrelevant), as the hero himself nobly crowed: "Trust not a king because thou thinkst, 'My comrade once was he'". peace, connie 36329 From: Herman Hofman Date: Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:23pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Sabhava Hi Rob and Dan, Thanks very much for the information. Kind Regards Herman ===== The PTS Pali English Dictionary gives three definitions of sabhava on page 1645: 1. state (of mind), nature, condition Miln 90, 212, 360; PvA 39 (ummattaka-), 98 (santa-), 219 2. character, disposition, behaviour PvA 13, 35 (ullumpana-), 220 (lokiya-). 3. truth, reality, sincerity Miln 164; J V.459; V.198 (opp. musavada); J VI.469; sabhava sincerely, devotedly J VI.486. --dhamma principle of nature J I.214; --dhammatta= -dhamma Vism 238. --bhuta true J III.20 >From this, it is clear that the term sabhava is post-canonical (Miln = Milindapañha, Pva = Peta-Vatthu Commentary, J = Jataka) Metta, Rob M :-) 36330 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 0:34am Subject: Brisbane Monthly Group - dogs and rebirth Hello All, Yesterday, Sunday afternoon, I was at a meeting of Dhamma friends. One of our members was unable to attend due to the family beagle being hit by a car and killed that morning. Someone left the front gate open and the dog wandered out onto a busy road. Not having met the beagle, I didn't have any strong reaction to the news, other then karuna and wishing our friend and family ease in their distress. But it brought home a sort of a dichotomy between intellectually understanding the Teachings, and living buddhism in daily life. Intellectually, I fully accept re-becoming in any sentient form - but somehow 'other sentient beings' still seem to be viewed much differently. For instance, some others at the meeting couldn't really understand why he didn't still come. The feeling seemed to be that, yes, it was upsetting, but the Dhamma was more important. But they wouldn't have had that opinion if it had been a relative who was killed. Just a stream of consciousness in different form, no? ... We are working through Ron Wijewantha's BPS book on Paticcasamuppada (Dependent Origination)Pt II. One question. RW says that by doing good deeds and keeping sila, one is assured of a human rebirth or higher. I felt that the first level of enlightenment - Sotapanna - was the only safe protection from rebirth in the lower realms, and it took a little more that keeping sila? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 36331 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 0:45am Subject: RE: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Hi Dan, Thanks for your great post. We agree on a lot, and that leaves only a little bit unsnipped. > I would typify the above *citta as experience* (or removing the > redundancies leaving either just *citta* or just *experience*) as > becoming. Becoming is a process, not a thing. I see. E.g.: Dependent origination is an expression of process or becoming. DO seems readable without needing to evoke subject+object. However, DO is not "citta". In the "citta" formulation, there *must* be an object -- it's built into the system. ================= Things get a little bit muddy depending on how / where citta is used. Citta in early Buddhism is the heart, or the intentional / feeling aspect of being. In this usage there is no sense of a distinction between agent and act. It is only in later usage that citta comes to mean thought or consciousness, with its particular appropriation of nama and rupa, which usage is also quite different from earlier usage. So yes, I agree with you, citta must have an object, but only in the Abhidhamma and beyond. ================= > On the other hand, *thinking about citta* is *becoming attempting to > be*, or *having*. Having creates the subject - object duality. Having is > all about things. Things with nature, essence, characteristics and the > like. So communication about *thinking about citta* is best done in > terms of process, not objects. You lost me, Herman. I agree that thinking about citta involves thinking about objects of cittas. You propose dismissing the citta formulation because it introduces "things with nature, essence, characteristics"? Or, you want to subvert the citta formulation by removing characteristic and object from the notion? I object! It just doesn't work -- at least not in Theravada Buddhism. But "citta" is a Pali term, for goodness sake. No hijacking Pali terms for non- Theravada usage! ================== Citta has never been a Buddhist term only. It was, and still is a thoroughly common Indian word, used by many different sects, in many different ways. I find it very worthwhile to examine how a particular formulation can create the semblance of the independent existence of what it proposes. Nobody doubted the substantiality of "the ether" when it was introduced to prop up other beliefs, until it was looked for and couldn't be found. It is good to come to understand what different schools of thought propose, but reality is what it is, despite the theories. Kind Regards Herman Dan 36332 From: gazita2002 Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Dear Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > Hi Azita .....snip..... > Ph: You see, this is the kind of thing I *still* don't know yet. Haven't > retained. For some reason I was > thinking that javana cittas are outside the sense-door or mind door > processes, > that vipaka cittas (resultants) are what happen in sense door process, and > javanca cittas are where the fresh, if you will, non-resultant kusala or > akusala > is produced, due to accumulations, and proliferation. I see now that I was > wrong - the javanas > are right in there in the sense-door and mind-door processes/is being, > before the determining citta. Azita; the determining citta [votthapana-citta] actually comes before the javana cittas. I'm very interested in > the point at which sheer sense experience ends and proliferation begins, and > I thought javanas had something to do with that. Azita: An object impinges on a sense door/base and vipaka citta experiences it - not me, not you. It is happening now and javana cittas are arising now, either kusala or akusala. But are you able to tell the difference? Cittas arise and fall sooooooo incredibly fast, you can't 'catch' them - only a highly developed degree of wisdom and understanding will know, and I'm not too sure of this myself, but I think the knowledge of knowing vipaka from javana might just be Buddha-only knowledge. I've read > already 4or 5 times > in different books (ADL, Manual of Abh, Rob M's book) what goes on in these > processes, and I understand it when I read it, but I don't retain it. That > is natural enough > when these are cittas that are largely not identifiable in daily life, for > the unenlightened at least. > No worries. It'll soak in. Yes, it takes mountains and mountains of 'patience, courage and good cheer'. > So, I guess now from what you say above that there are no other cittas > that are not sense-door > or mind-door cittas, except for "process freed cittas?" Azita: Well that was a bit of a trick question. There are other cittas, bhavanga cittas for example. I'm not sure what you mean by 'process freed cittas', I've not heard that before - well not that I remember. I think the rebirth consciousness - patisandhi citta, and death consciousness - cuti citta, are also cittas that arise without a sense or mind door process. > > Ph: Well, I know that there has been a lot of talk in other threads > about the implications of "object", and I am guilty of not having > read those threads thoroughly enough. My understanding of cetasika is still > too frail to > understand how they have objects but I can see waht you mean > about them having objects in the sense of sharing the same object > that has been/is being "run through" by javanas, and was the object of the > vipaka cittas. > Studying "Cetasikas" is going to help my understanding a lot, by exposing > my ignorance. Azita: just remember that it's not your understanding or your ignorance, that knows or doesn't know, it is understanding or ignorance which arises because of conditions and falls away again. No Azita, no Phil just nama and rupa, impermanent, not self and therefore very unsatisfactory because we can't make things happen the way we want. > Thank you very much for your encouragement, Azita. > Metta, > Phil Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 36333 From: gazita2002 Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:31am Subject: Re: Brisbane Monthly Group - dogs and rebirth dear Chris, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello All, > > Yesterday, Sunday afternoon, I was at a meeting of Dhamma friends. .....snip... But they wouldn't have had that opinion if it had been a > relative who was killed. Just a stream of consciousness in different > form, no? ... Yes, I guess so, but we humans consider us humans a cut above dogs, no? > We are working through Ron Wijewantha's BPS book on Paticcasamuppada > (Dependent Origination)Pt II. > One question. RW says that by doing good deeds and keeping sila, > one is assured of a human rebirth or higher. > I felt that the first level of enlightenment - Sotapanna - was the > only safe protection from rebirth in the lower realms, and it took a > little more that keeping sila? A Sotapanna cannot be born in a realm lower than human, but we Puthujjanas can be reborn in any realm, depending on former deeds. 'Keeping' sila is a great thing to aim for, IMHO, but remember that 'keeping' sila is really only a moment of refraining from doing evil. > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 36334 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:38am Subject: More comments on Phil's fabric softening posts Hi Phil, As I mentioned, I wished to add a few further comments to those given by others on some of your posts: 1. Deeds of Merit ============== >K.S. : “Each kind of wholesome deed means actually giving up or elimination of defilements. Kusala which is daana, generosity, is the giving up or elimination of avarice, of clinging to possessions.” Phil> So I wonder if K Sujin “Èeach kind of wholesome deed means actually giving up or elimination of defilements” is tilted towards coarse defilements. Well, avarice, which she mentions, is not that coarse, I guess. I’ll keep learning more as I read.< .... S: At that moment. When there is daana, no akusala. Nothing finally eliminated except by panna arising with lokuttara cittas. Other kinds of kusala (other than satipatthana) support, but without satipatthana, no eradicating at any level as you say. For this reason, I question some of the comments made in B.Bodhi’s article you quoted on how ‘works of merit comes first in the process of inner growth’ etc. As I wrote:S:>I heard K.Sujin on a tape remind people that only vipassana can eradicate kilesa, not even jhana, much less right speech or action without any panna. Because if “that person is still that person, there is no idea of how to eradicate the idea of self”.< .... Phil> Surely I am attached to thinking, to books., to words. If I brought this kind of babbling inquiry to K Sujin she would urge me to consider what is happening *now*.< .... S: You got it;-) ‘What is real now?’, ‘What is dhamma (or the dhamma) now/’. If it’s thinking or attachment, that is what has to be known. As Nina quoted: N:>I found a text in the Co to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A.) but in connection with the Brahma viharas, about citta without pañña: < .... 2. “Who are you angry at?” ===================== Phil >Somewhere in a sutta there is the line "who are you angry at? the form aggregate? the feeling aggregate? etc." This is all about understanding annata in theory, in my opinion. That theory has been hugely helpful for me in reducing anger in my life. Theory is gradually leading to deeper realization in practice.< .... S: Yes, understanding dhammas as anatta now at any level is very helpful. This is why a sotapanna with no wrong view of self will no longer have any jealousy or stinginess or inclination to kill or steal for example. 3. Suitable Remedies =============== S:> This time, she stressed more than once: 'Each has one's own way'. Whatever is one's way, develop sati(awareness). 'It's always one's own way - if you happen to be that way'.< .... Ph: >Surely this "right way" will vary, if not day to day, maybe year to year. We are in flux, so the suitable remedy out of the many remedies the Buddha taught will be different day by day or year by year, I guess. I'm interested in the various suttas in which the Buddha goes through a series of remedies. "If this doesn't work, try this" kind of thing.< ..... S: The right way according to conditions at that very time or moment. Whilst following ‘one’s own way’ or taking course a) or b), develop sati. That’s all. If we think ‘we’ can do any selecting or that such a selection will necessarily result in more kusala or even a development of satipatthana, it shows the idea of self and wrong practice again and a lack of appreciation of kamma-vipaka and accumulations. For example, you quoted the sutta on ‘removing annoyance’ starting with loving-kindness. So we can test out that when there is metta, there is no annoyance at all. Understanding the characteristic and value of metta, it will develop, but not by an idea of a self choosing or selecting to have it out of various options. Again, as you suggest,by beginning to understand more about kamma and ‘ownership of deeds’ will be a condition naturally for more understanding and sympathy for others, but not by choosing it as a method or by ‘using it effectively’ as you mentioned, otherwise it’s self again ‘doing’ and wishing to have less dosa for oneself too. I really liked the comments Nina gave from the commentary in her series on ‘Removal of Distracting Thoughts’ about the bhikkhu without strong panna which knows the danger of akusala, ringing the bell so that the bhikkhus would have a meeting to discuss the problems and encourage him to see the danger in unwholesome thoughts. ..... N: >If the bhikkhu is humble and not too conceited to ask advice, he can ring the bell and ask for support from the Sangha. We see here the importance of good and noble friendship the Buddha emphasizes time and again....... .... Paññaa that has become strong by vipassana sees more and more the disadvantage of akusala and the benefit of kusala.< .... S: I hope we can all ‘ring the bell’ and offer each other assistance as and when required!! ..... 4. Listening to Dhamma, theory to direct knowledge ======================================= S: You referred to this in a post(36029) referring to ‘staying open to the Dhamma and understanding inevitably arising’ . Nothing is ever certain about the next moment. But again, perhaps we can stress that it depends on the kind of listening, considering, discussing that we’re talking about. ‘Listening’ doesn’t just mean reading lots of texts or sitting in Bangkok with K.Sujin and other Dhamma friends. It has to be with understanding of the present realities, just a little in the beginning, so that the understanding can grow. That’s why it’s always stressed that ‘Abhidhamma isn’t in the book’. 5. Seeking benefits ============= You were discussing the benefits of developing the Perfections (35782). Ph:>I think of the benefits of Metta that we often see taught: one will sleep better, have a nice complexion (is that in there?), be loved by other beings etc. I have never responded to those teachings, perhaps fearing that it would motivate me to seek benefits in an unwholesome way. But maybe I am missing out on something good. Seeking benefits can be encouraging and invigorating in a wholesome way and not a form of spiritual materialism?< ... S: No, I think you are right. Seeking benefits sounds like clinging to oneself again. The sutta is just showing what the benefits are as a matter of fact. Developing metta in order to sleep better would be an oxymoron I think, but we can find out that by developing metta, that this is a result. As you say, a greater benefit is in the ‘gradually getting rid of defilements”. Again, this is a result or benefit, rather than something that should be wished for with clinging once more. 6. Self-preservation ============== From (35814) Ph:>I am always aware that a lot of what I am doing and thinking and my discussions related to Dhamma now is motivated by a kind of self-preservation, a desire to have life explained in a way that makes sense and life pleasant and full of deep meaning. And a lot more is motivated by self-image. There is this desire to be a wise man, to be the kind of person that people turn to for advice the way I turn to you and other members of the group. I see myself with a grey beard and a cool Thai shirt, with a generous smile dispensing wisdom that gives confidence to others. But at least I'm aware of this fantasy. < ... S: Excellent stuff;-) Understanding the various wholesome and unwholesome states as you often refer to is the way not to be fooled that “Oh, it’s Dhamma, it must be pure” , as Dan might say. Thanks again for all the fabric softening touches and friendship on DSG, Phil and also for all your fine reflections. Metta, Sarah ====== 36335 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:43am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner10-Introduction(g) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Introduction [contd] ***** Cittas perform different functions. For examine, seeing is a function (kicca) of citta. Seeing consciousness which performs the function of seeing arises in a process of cittas; it is preceded and followed by other cittas which perform their own functions. Whenever there are sense-impressions there is not merely one citta, but several cittas arising in a process, and each of these cittas performs its own function. It is the same with cittas arising in a mind-door process. As for cittas which do not arise in either sense-door process or mind-door process, they also have to perform a function. The rebirth-consciousness (patisandhi-citta), the life-continuum (bhavanga-citta) and the dying-consciousness (cuti-citta) do not arise in a process of citta. There are bhavanga-cittas in between the different processes of citta. ***** [Introduction to be continued] Metta, Sarah ====== 36336 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 2:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) Dear Htoo, Thank you for kindly responding so promptly to all my reflections and comments. --- htootintnaing wrote: > Htoo: Please do not misunderstand. Jhanas are always pure. When > anatta was still not known there were jhana practitioners. Jhanas > exist even before The Buddha. Do you assume that jhanas only appeared > after The Buddha? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Exactly. With respect,this is just why I wrote the following: > S: All dhammas are within the `boundaries of Buddhism'. There > is no > such thing as a `Buddhist jhana' or `non-Buddhist > jhana' in the sense > that the realities, the cittas, have their characteristics and > functions regardless of how they are described or any views about them .... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sarah: In terms of the cittas, is there any difference at all in a > samatha development citta or a jhana citta of one who has heard the > Buddha's teachings and developed a little or a lot of vipassana > and > one who hasn't? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: Totally different. In what terms? Before The Buddha anatta was > not recognised even in thinking. > > Characterwise, they are not different. [ ?? More confusion? :-)] > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Exactly again. ‘Characterwise, they are not different’. At a moment of samatha or jhana, there is no knowledge of anatta, however finely developed the panna is. .... <...> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sarah: ..for example, but lets say the object -- say breath or > foulness of the body or kasina is the same. What would be the > difference in the cittas which take these as objects? What about the > panna which accompanies these cittas, how is it different? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: Every thing is different. But when summarised, characterwise > some fall into the same group. I have told you above. If anatta is > not taught, jhanas will not be the same as in jhanas of anattavadis. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: I believe foulness of the body may have been a bad example above. Let’s talk about kasina as object of samatha/jhana. How are the jhana cittas themselves different ? .... > Sarah: Of course, subsequent cittas will be very different, but we > were talking about the development of samatha and the understanding > required from the very beginning for anyone. > > Intentions or wishes to have jhanas, rooted in attachment, for > example, will be equally useless whether one calls oneself > a Buddhist or not, don't you think? > ***** > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I have included this in one of my message. As soon as > attachment arise, there is no jhana at all. Lobha never accompanies > pannindriya cetasika. > > 'somanassa sahagatam ditthi gata vippayutta asankharika citta' and > 'somanassa sahagatam nana sampayutta asankharika citta' are > completely different. But for those who do not have enough knowledge > and wisdom will not know the difference between these 2 cittas. > > Why? Both are somanassa. Both will be very happy. Both devoid ditthi > cetasika. Both are asankharika cittas. > > If the difference is not known, then miccha-samadhi arises and the > practitioner will attach his miccha-samadhi. Why? Ekaggata cetasika > can arise both in kusala and akusala citta. But miccha-samadhi is > never rupavacara jhana citta. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Exactly so and very well explained. This is why we have to clearly know all kinds of subtle lobha and other kilesa arising after sense experiences in order to develop samatha and why there cannot be any highly developed samatha, let alone jhana without a very highly developed and fine knowledge of these various mental states arising in daily life. .... Metta, Sarah ====== 36337 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 2:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) 2 Dear Htoo (& RobM), > Sarah: > In (03), you introduced the term `media' > to > replace his term `space'. I assume (but haven't checked) > he was > referring to aakaasa rupa, usu. translated as space. I didn't > quite > follow your reasoning, but I understand aakaasa to `delimit' > other > rupas. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: This can be tested. Sound does not pass the space where there > is no matter at all. In the water, we can hear sound. Solid brings > the loudest, liquid in the middle and air the softest. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Sorry, I’m lost. Maybe RobM can discuss these points better. I think you may be introducing science into the discussion of dhammas. How do you understand aakaasa rupa? ..... > Sarah:Also for water, you suggested aapo `means saliva'. > Again, this > would be a rather unusual translation. Aapo has the function of > cohesion of other rupas, surely. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: This saliva is the word that I taken from a Venerable. > > In catudhatuvavatthana kammatthana, there are Aapo such as urine, > tear, saliva, digestive secretions, enzymes etc etc. But only saliva > works for conduction of taste to taste buds which again will carry > along taste fibres of nerves to the brain. > > Urine does not work here which is Apo. .... S: Again I’m lost and think you are introducing modern science instead of looking at how aapo and other rupas are explained in the (Abhidhamma) texts. ..... > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sarah: Finally, for earth (pathavi), you suggested `nerve'. > You did > say it may not make sense to some learners;-). Again, earth is the > common translation, but it could be solidity or hardness perhaps. > > When we touch the keyboard or door, pathavi is experienced, but even > if we don't touch them, the kalapas of rupas making up the > keyboard > or door still contain these rupas. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: It is not simple pathavi. It is thaddha pathavi. Without which > pathavi-photthabba will not be realised. .... S: Well, it will depend on the vipaka at that moment what is experienced, but whether it’s hardness or softness from the gentlest touch, it’s still the reality of pathavi. Perhaps I miss your point about ‘thaddha’ (hard??) pathavi. .... > Can paraplegic people sense touch in their feet? There do exist > pathavi in their feet. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: As I say, it’ll depend on vipaka what body-consciousness arises and what element is experienced at any time. As you know well, there are eight inseperable rupas which arise and fall away in every kalapa regardless. .... > Sarah: On sanna, you particularly liked RobM's description > of `looking for distinguishing marks.....'. I'm not sure > we could say > that sanna looks for anything. It merely marks and then marks again. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: That is your sense. I totally agree with Rob M here. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Well, it maybe a matter of language, esp. if you mean ‘looking for’ in the sense of recognizing. I’d have to see this ‘looking for’ in a text or the Pali for it;-). Atthasalini: “perception has the...function of making marks as a condition for repeated perception (for recognizing or remembering), as when woodcutters ‘perceive’ logs and so forth.” Metta, Sarah ======= 36338 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) 3. Hi Htoo, this one will have to be a quick one --- htootintnaing wrote: > I refer to these because of our discussions before about whether all > kamma can bring results or whether only kamma-patha can. I understand > other kusala and akusala cetana to fall under these umbrellas. For > example, lobha cittas now as we write or read may act to 'support' > other results. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: Now, I understand that you understood. When we were discussing, > I felt a bit strange that you said not all akusala cittas give rise > to kamma and only kamma-patha actions will give rise to vipaka. Now > you got it clear. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ..... S: I believe it is correct that not all akusala cittas give or can give rise to results as I’ve stressed before and that quotes such as the one I gave from the commentary to the A-Sangaha stress this: “a wholesome or unwholesome kamma which, although unable to produce a result by itself, becomes the condition for ...”etc. All kusala and akusala cittas accumulate, but it takes many such accumulated cittas before there is any kama-patha which will bring a result. When RobM and many others suggest that each wholesome/unwholesome javana mental state brings or has the potential to bring about a result, I don’t think it’s correct. Otherwise why have natural decisive support condition rather than just kamma condition? Each moment there is a slight lobha when we look up at the computer screen, it accumulates, but it cannot bring a result as I understand. .... > Htoo: This is for Sammasambuddhas. Even great arahats may not know > what results ( vipaka ) follows from what actions ( kamma ). > > The story of Venerable Culapanthaka is a good example. <...> .... S: Well said and thank you for your clear way of discussing the story. We’ve discussed it in detail before here too, but I like and agree with your stress: .... > Here my aim is not to tell the story. But first Mahapanthaka drived > his brother out. Because he did not know what past actions that > Culapanthaka did, and he did not know that he would became an arahat > with jhana powers. But The Buddha knew everything with regard to > Culapanthaka. ... S: Yes, exactly. Only the Buddha can really understand all the accumulations. How can we think we have any idea about our own, let alone another’s? Well said. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I must also thank you in setting up DSG. ... S: Thanks, Htto. It’s always been very much a team effort and we’ve always been blessed with exceptional contributions from many different members (imho of course). Metta, Sarah p.s I had a few further comment/queeries I was going to add on some other posts of yours, but no time now. In any case, thank you for continuing with the Dhamma Thread series and also I'd like to encourage both you and Sukin to continue your discussions, so that I'm not the only one showing my appreciation of your contributions;-). ====== 36339 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:29am Subject: Re: CSC 4-Introduction(a) [Ken H: "none of the above"] Good evening, Dan (Phil and Sarah), You wrote: ------------- Good morning, Ken! I don't have any idea whether or not it's morning when you are reading this, but the sun is now up here. > ------------- It's funny you should mention that: I was going to make a similar comment to you and Phil. Our messages were crossing: no sooner would I post one than I'd find the two of you had rendered it obsolete. I was going to ask, "DON'T YOU PEOPLE EVER SLEEP?" but went to bed instead. :-) The "citta experiences an object" debate has run its course, I think. Any lingering doubts will be quashed by Sarah's answer to your definitive question. Sorry about the mix-up over grades. You have every right to whinge, but I wasn't expecting you to tick two boxes. :-) You, Phil, Bhikkhu Bodhi and myself, each get a B-. You are having a great discussion with Mike at the moment. I am tempted to put an oar in the water again, but no quizzes, I promise. Kind regards, Ken H 36340 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:36am Subject: Re: Theory and Practice _Sukin & Htoo Dear Sukin, Thank you very much for your full response. Your message makes me untired. It made me untired. After these three sentences you will see that I used 'makes' in the second sentence. I agree with you word by word. Here below, I reply your post as inline text response. I must apologise that I was busy since Thursday and I now see your post because of Sarah's reminder off-line. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "Sukinderpal Singh Narula" :-) You are welcome anytime to respond to any of my posts Htoo. I value your wisdom highly, so it can only be good for me to hear your comments. So thanks very much for responding here. Besides already it has been so many days that you wrote me off-list and I haven't found the time to respond to you yet, so this is good excuse to write something now. Now I go to other parts of your post. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I am glad that you responded. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: >I met a monk who was strongly believed to be an arahat. He was ...snip... just note want to look and then look at, and note all the present. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: I think it takes a long time through close association, for a serious putthujana to come to any correct estimation of another's level of understanding, namely in terms of Right View. I know that you have an excellent knowledge and understanding of the Teachings and so are equipped with the necessary tool to assess the monk. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Sukin, I was not assessing that monk. I was just retrospectively making comments. He passed away long time ago. And I was not as learned as I have been now. I just mentioned this because those who seem to attain higher nana ( I say seem to be because I do not know ) give their wisdom or share their experience in a subtle way. They will not say, 'I am an arahat, I am an anagam, listen to me, this is my experience and if you follow this you will see as I see'. I mean latter arahats. The Buddha did declare that He became a Sammasambuddha to pancavaggi, the first five disciples. I do not know much about vinaya, but I know that monks do not have to declare or announce that they are such and such attainers. The monk in my story did not mention anything like declaration or announcement. What I had heard was that he did not lie flat on his back in his final years ( more than 13 years not lying on bed ). He did that but not as a ritual. He was calm and he just preached some part of mahasatipatthana. You may like him, because I think he seemed to preach to practise mahasatipatthana in daily life. I remember that the Venerable preached that, 'When you are on board like a ship or boat or ferry, you have to note 'moving..moving, sitting..sitting'. He preached that for lay people. Whenever a person reaches a state they would suggest others to practise. Later on they move to higher level and this urge changes a bit. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: > Even though I did not know whether they were ariyas or arahats, they > were well calm and free of anything that you would accuse them of. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: Do you think it is possible that the conditions are such that some person will remain calm and peaceful for a long time, but the kilesas are in fact still quite intact? And when they expound the dhamma, it comes from sanna more than from panna? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Here I have to express in two different forms. One is my own response that comes from my wisdom. The second is from my learned knowledge. 1. I do not think it is possible that the conditions are such that some person will remain calm and so and so. I do not think they expound the dhamma coming from their sanna. 2. Pure jhana without development of any vipassana nana can calm down kilesa as long as jhana overwhelms. They will be calm and peaceful for a long time. But kilesa are still there as anusaya. Here exposition of the dhamma may well be sanna or may be partly from panna. I stick to 1 while 2 is still possible. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: It didn't come to my mind at that time about paccekabuddhas, thanks for reminding. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Actually Paccekabuddhas-to-be have learned a lot in their previous lives. But they do not have any teachers in their final life. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: Good to hear about those who encourage mahasatipatthana in daily life. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You will notice that I wrote in different styles. Some say that I am writing impossible practice. I do not think so. As soon as we wake up in the bed and as soon as consciousness orientates that we are still alive and come to know the world again after a long rest of sleep, mahasatipatthana can be started. This can go through out the day till we are back again in the bed just before going into sleep again. For me, I am not boasting, I sometimes do practise even when I am speaking to someone for some time. That is knowing of my thinking, my intension, my word searching, my lip movement and so on. Here I just include 'my' for communication otherwise Sarah may smile. Yes. Mahasatipatthana should be our part of life and it should be in daily life. But we should not abandon the formal practice. When I write this, I am thinking that you may disagree. Once I saw Sujin's writing regarding this. I noticed that Sujin was clear to express. But pupils took differently. Nina is straight forward. But cerain pupil is not. I would say mahasatipatthana should be in our daily life. On the other hand, formal practice should be practised. The Buddha stayed in phalasamapatti. Great arahats stayed in phalasamapatti. Many arahats stayed in phalasamapatti. Some arahats sometimes stayed in nirodha sapamatti. If someone is aversive to formal practice, I would feel pity for him or her. But clinging to formal practice without full understanding of implication may sound like rituals as Sujin said. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: Forget about `wrong view', but do these people even know > about >`avijja'!! They talk about experiencing the vipassana nanas, and yet > > when it comes to knowing seeing, hearing, smelling and so on, they do not find it important enough to consider these. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: The right view starts with understanding of avijja. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: Yes, only the Buddha taught about the danger of avijja, other religions can see the danger only in lobha, dosa and mana and the value of metta, karuna, dana, sila and so on. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is very true. Only The Buddha way is the way for liberation. There are some people of other religions that they love to learn Buddhism. But I am not persuading them as other do. What I do is that I talk with them and I just mention in a logical way. Most become happy. I do not say them to desert their original practice. Some agreed my discussions. But when I say about anatta, some become shocked especially those who believe to become mahabrahama is their goal. First they agreed because they agreed on purification of sins. But when I said mahabrahmas do have their lifespans and if their life span expired they have to be reborn in kama bhumi, they became a bit annoyed. But we did not quarrel as I knew the turn of their feeling at that time. This is because of avijja. If avijja is not cleared, purification will not be everlasting. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: But Avijja!! It is just darkness! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I agree. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: It is ignorance as in `ignoring' these very presently arising > > realities that causes them to cling to rites and rituals "formal > > meditation", and be deluded by illusory results. > Htoo: This is the site where there is obstruction and deters the progress. >Sukin: Glad that you agree. (-: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I agree. But please read more above regaring this issue. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: They are in fact encouraging ignorance though otherwise they >claim to practice in order to "know". >Htoo: How do you suggest here, Sukin? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: When someone points to the formal practice and does not give due importance to whatever dhammas that arise at other times, this means that those other moments are being conditioned by ignorance. And as you said above, "The right view starts with understanding of avijja", this would seem then that they would unlikely have Right Understanding even during formal practice. So I think we can conclude on the whole that whatever their view of practice is, it must on the whole condition more avijja and wrong view. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: I think one mistake many Buddhists make, is to think that the mind must first be calm or wholesome or one pointed before dhammas can be known to any degree. Many don't understand the significance of the relationship between, pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: i like this explanation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: In addition to this, there is the idea that the `deliberate looking'(intentional observation) actually leads to `seeing' (sati), or worse, that it *is* sati. All this it seems is failure at the level of pariyatti itself. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I agree. But I may come to this later. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: Because of this lack of pariyatti, here referring to the panna of this level, there is misunderstanding of what practice involves. Pariyatti is not the `verbal knowledge' but indeed the level of understanding which *knows* at least the value of developing satipatthana and that this very moment is conditioned and anatta. And though it may only be `thinking' in the beginning about just fallen away dhammas, it knows that what ever level of panna arises is just what is meant to be, and with this is already some detachment. And in this case, more understanding about conditionality and anatta is accumulating as sankhara. Which is why, without correct pariyatti and knowing conditioned realities in daily life, one will be deluded into thinking that *more* can be achieved through some deliberate effort on one's part via some formal practice or `deliberate looking'. And this is to go against the principal of anatta and conditionality. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You are so clear Sukin. Thanks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: This is how it seems to me Htoo, what do you think? Again, thank you for your response and giving me a chance to learn something of your understanding. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I have talked much above. Now it should be clear what is my view. With Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Thanks for you invitation to DSG about 18 months ago, if I remember truely. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Metta, > > Sukin 36341 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:54am Subject: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) >Htoo: Totally different. In what terms? Before The Buddha anatta was not recognised even in thinking. Characterwise, they are not different. [ ?? More confusion? :-)] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Exactly again. `Characterwise, they are not different'. At a moment of samatha or jhana, there is no knowledge of anatta, however finely developed the panna is. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If anatta is not known, citta on anatta will never arise. Panna of knowledge that there is anatta is only taught by The Buddha. With this knowledge when the practitioner attain jhana as he is well calm he can then clearly see dhamma as it is. After eradication, there is no more anusaya in jhana of arahats who are Buddhists. But jhanas attained before The Buddha there were full anusaya behind them. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: Every thing is different. But when summarised, characterwise some fall into the same group. I have told you above. If anatta is not taught, jhanas will not be the same as in jhanas of anattavadis. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: I believe foulness of the body may have been a bad example above. Let's talk about kasina as object of samatha/jhana. How are the jhana cittas themselves different ? .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: The question is not that clear. But I must say all rupa jhanas take the object panatta. They cannot take paramattha dhamma. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Exactly so and very well explained. This is why we have to clearly know all kinds of subtle lobha and other kilesa arising after sense experiences in order to develop samatha and why there cannot be any highly developed samatha, let alone jhana without a very highly developed and fine knowledge of these various mental states arising in daily life. .... >Metta, >Sarah ====== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Your last paragraph is not clear for me. If you could rephrase them, I may be able to discuss on your points. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36342 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:17am Subject: Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) > Htoo: This can be tested. Sound does not pass the space where there is no matter at all. In the water, we can hear sound. Solid brings the loudest, liquid in the middle and air the softest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Sorry, I'm lost. Maybe RobM can discuss these points better. I think you may be introducing science into the discussion of dhammas. How do you understand aakaasa rupa? ..... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If you are equipped with breathing apparatus and you are put in a thick glass vaccum, will you be able to hear sound producing outside of that thick glass vaccum where you are in side? Aakaasa as rupa is everywhere. Akasa is not included in rupa kalapa and they are not counted even though there are akasa among rupa kalapas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Urine does not work here which is Apo. .... S: Again I'm lost and think you are introducing modern science instead of looking at how aapo and other rupas are explained in the (Abhidhamma) texts. ..... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Once a venerable monk said aapa as a word which is saliva rather than water element. If all salivary glands are removed and just water is put, do you think this will bring a full sense as in case of normal people? This is not my word. This came from a learned Buddhist monk. Aapa means saliva. In Pali Apo may means 1.element water which is cohesion 2. drinking water. Another word for water is udaka. Do you know Pali words for 1. tear 2. saliva 3. urine 4. blood 5. fat 6. pus etc etc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: It is not simple pathavi. It is thaddha pathavi. Without which pathavi-photthabba will not be realised. .... S: Well, it will depend on the vipaka at that moment what is experienced,but whether it's hardness or softness from the gentlest touch, it's still the reality of pathavi. Perhaps I miss your point about `thaddha' (hard??) pathavi. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If you see a man in an operating theatre where one of his his nerves is exposed by minor operation and the nerve is connected to Galvanometre and ask the man whether he knows the touch he would say yes while his body part where that nerve supplies is repeatedly tapped. When the nerve is anaesthetised he would not say yes, because the conducting nerve is already blocked. The conditions are there. He has his body parts. He is conscious. There is touch object repeatedly tapping him. Again this word 'thaddha-pathavi is the word of one of well learned venerables. Not of mine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Can paraplegic people sense touch in their feet? There do exist pathavi in their feet. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: As I say, it'll depend on vipaka what body-consciousness arises and what element is experienced at any time. As you know well, there are eight inseperable rupas which arise and fall away in every kalapa regardless. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sarah: On sanna, you particularly liked RobM's description > > of `looking for distinguishing marks.....'. I'm not sure > > we could say > > that sanna looks for anything. It merely marks and then marks again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: That is your sense. I totally agree with Rob M here. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- .... S: Well, it maybe a matter of language, esp. if you mean `looking for' in the sense of recognizing. I'd have to see this `looking for' in a text or the Pali for it;-). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. sanna is not = looking for. But what Rob M demonstartes makes full sense. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Atthasalini: "perception has the...function of making marks as a condition for repeated perception (for recognizing or remembering), as when woodcutters `perceive' logs and so forth." > Metta, > Sarah ======= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Do you think sanna is memory? With Metta, Htoo Naing 36343 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:31am Subject: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) ..... S: I believe it is correct that not all akusala cittas give or can give rise to results as I've stressed before and that quotes such as the one I gave from the commentary to the A-Sangaha stress this: "a wholesome or unwholesome kamma which, although unable to produce a result by itself,becomes the condition for ..."etc. All kusala and akusala cittas accumulate, but it takes many such accumulated cittas before there is any kama-patha which will bring a result. When RobM and many others suggest that each wholesome/unwholesome javana mental state brings or has the potential to bring about a result, I don't think it's correct. Otherwise why have natural decisive support condition rather than just kamma condition? Each moment there is a slight lobha when we look up at the computer screen, it accumulates, but it cannot bring a result as Iunderstand. .... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Now you come back to kamma patha. It is fine if you understand both. There are many vipaka cittas in our daily sense door process. But kamma patha when give rise its full effect, it is a great event like storm, floods, great fire, earthquakes and many other disasters. But when you are now sitting and reading up my messages, in between your understanding through your mind-door process there are also 5- sense-door-processes. These are also vipaka cittas like cakkhuvinnana, sampaticchana, santirana, tadarammana, bhavanga etc etc. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: This is for Sammasambuddhas. Even great arahats may not know what results ( vipaka ) follows from what actions ( kamma ). The story of Venerable Culapanthaka is a good example. <...> .... S: Well said and thank you for your clear way of discussing the story. We've discussed it in detail before here too, but I like and agree with your stress: .... > Here my aim is not to tell the story. But first Mahapanthaka..snip..But The Buddha knew everything with regard to Culapanthaka. ... S: Yes, exactly. Only the Buddha can really understand all the accumulations. How can we think we have any idea about our own, let alone another's? Well said. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Even The Buddha did not follow all citta for all sattas. As Minlinda mentioned, Sabbannuta nana knows when it attends. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Htoo: I must also thank you in setting up DSG. ... S: Thanks, Htto. It's always been very much a team effort and we've always been blessed with exceptional contributions from many different members (imho of course). Metta, Sarah p.s I had a few further comment/queeries I was going to add on some other posts of yours, but no time now. In any case, thank you for continuing with the Dhamma Thread series and also I'd like to encourage both you and Sukin to continue your discussions, so that I'm not the only one showing my appreciation of your contributions;-). ====== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I have replied Sukin today. Thanks again. With Metta, Htoo Naing 36344 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:12am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 059 ) Kasina means 'wholeness'. There are 10 kasina kammatthana. 1. pathavi kasina ( earth-substance ) 2. tejo kasina ( fire-flame ) 3. vayo kasina ( wind-movement ) 4. apo kasina ( water-substance ) 5. nila kasina ( dark-coloured object like brown ) 6. pita kasina ( golden-yellow ) 7. lohita kasina ( red ) 8. odata kasina ( white ) 9. aloka kasina ( light ) 10.akasa kasina ( bounded space ) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Dhamma Friends, I think this topic has been discussed previously. Christine involved well. If not at DSG, it may be in dhamma-list. Regarding nila kasina, there are a lot of controversies. Western Buddhist monks translate it as 'blue'. I think, in A. Sujin notes say 'green'. In Myanmar, this kasina nila is known as brown. In religious robes, there are white, red, yellow, and brown in Myanmar. White is adorn by those who take 5 precepts permanently that is as long as they are in white robe, which is a kasina colour. Red and yellow robes are worn by Buddhist monks bhikkhus. They are also kasina colours. Brown robe is worn by some Buddhist monks bhikkhus. Non-Buddhist hermits wear brown robes as their robe, which seems to be a kasina colour. There is no blue robe in Myanmar Buddhists. I do not know western culture. I do not know why some wrote nila as 'green'. Here, I write as dark colour object to cover all. Actually nila kasina is used in abhinna when darkness is needed. Example can be seen in Yassa and his father. Yassa was sitting beside of his father who had been searching for Yassa. Yassa, a sotapam at that moment was listening to The Buddha preaching to his father. At that time, The Buddha used nila kasina so that the father of Yassa did not see Yassa. If the father saw his son, his attchement and tanha would not allow him developing of such higher nana. The Buddha just used nila kasina and the father did not see the son and so he could listen to The Buddha teaching without arising of attachment to his son. Anyone can assume as they like. But I think brown is much darker than blue. Green is even more lighter than blue and green is far away from brown. With Metta, Htoo Naing 36345 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:18am Subject: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Dear Howard, Good Point! Hardness is both completely dark and completely silent. Beyond that, I don't follow you. Dan > Dark is the absence of light. Silence is the absence of sound. We can > experience darkness, can we not? We also can experience silence. And they are > distinguishable!! So absences are realities. The question is: Where are they > experienced? I think the correct answer may be "via the mind door". (And yet, > doesn't it seem that one actually SEES darkness? I think so. So the matter is > unclear.) > > With metta, > Howard 36346 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:33am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 060 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, When in 5th rupa jhana of lohita kasina, the object is patibhaga nimitta. It is shining brightly red colour filling the whole universe as the practitioner has expanded it. It is boundless and limitless. Through the exercises, he becomes to realise that there is danger of rupa that he has based. As rupa are the source of kama arammana, it may at any time bring him down to 4th jhana, 3rd, 2nd, 1st and back to kamavacara cittas. The 5th rupa jhana is well calm but not free of rupa and this may bring him down to 4th jhana with sukha and down to kamavacara again. So he starts to dispassionate on rupa and he will try his 5th jhana again without rupa. The universe is filled with red. As rupa is dispassionated, it has to be voided. He will try harder and harder. At a time the whole universe will be void of any lohita kasina. As this lohita kasina is devoided, there left empty space. That space is boundless space and that space is limitless. His mind is at that boundless space. As the place where deva dwell is called deva ayatana, this space where his mind dwells is also called aayatana. As it is boundless space or akasa, it is called akasananca ayatana. This space is not the space as usual. But it is the idea and it is pannatta. This space, the idea has arisen from lohita kasina. So this object is also pannatta and not paramattha dhamma. When the practitioner attends that boundless space with ekaggata only as jhana factor and as there is no rupa involved, his is said to be in jhana again. This jhana which does not have any rupa is called arupa jhana. The object is akasanancayatana or boundless space. So the jhana is also called akasanancayatana arupa jhana. The citta that sees this object arises once and bhavanga cittas follow. After that the practitioner becomes an akasanancayatana jhanalabhi. This jhana citta is called akasanancayatana arupa jhana arupakusala citta. If such jhana citta arises in arahats, it is called akasanancayatana arupa jhana arupakiriya citta. Arahats will never be reborn. But other who attain akasanancayatana arupa jhana will be reborn in arupa bhumi called akasanancayatana arupa bhumi. When reborn in this bhumi, akasanancayatana arupa jhana arupavipaka citta arises. The 70th citta is akasanancayatana arupa jhana arupakusala citta. The 74th citta is akasanancayatana arupa jhana arupavipaka citta. And the 78th citta is akasanancayatana arupa jhana arupakiriya citta. All these three cittas take panatta as their object that is the idea of boundless space. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 36347 From: m. nease Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) Dear Sarah and Htoo, My problem with this in the past has simply been the meaning of the word 'result'. Reading in English I haven't always taken it to mean 'vipaaka', so future natural decisive support condition could've been 'a result'. So my question is, when we read ""a wholesome or unwholesome kamma which, although unable to produce a result by itself,", was the original Paali here 'vipaaka'? mike > becomes the condition for ..."etc. ----- Original Message ----- From: "sarah abbott" To: Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 3:03 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) > 3. > Hi Htoo, > > this one will have to be a quick one > > --- htootintnaing wrote: > > > I refer to these because of our discussions before about whether all > > kamma can bring results or whether only kamma-patha can. I understand > > other kusala and akusala cetana to fall under these umbrellas. For > > example, lobha cittas now as we write or read may act to 'support' > > other results. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Htoo: Now, I understand that you understood. When we were discussing, > > I felt a bit strange that you said not all akusala cittas give rise > > to kamma and only kamma-patha actions will give rise to vipaka. Now > > you got it clear. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ..... > S: I believe it is correct that not all akusala cittas give or can give > rise to results as I've stressed before and that quotes such as the one I > gave from the commentary to the A-Sangaha stress this: "a wholesome or > unwholesome kamma which, although unable to produce a result by itself, > becomes the condition for ..."etc. All kusala and akusala cittas > accumulate, but it takes many such accumulated cittas before there is any > kama-patha which will bring a result. When RobM and many others suggest > that each wholesome/unwholesome javana mental state brings or has the > potential to bring about a result, I don't think it's correct. Otherwise > why have natural decisive support condition rather than just kamma > condition? Each moment there is a slight lobha when we look up at the > computer screen, it accumulates, but it cannot bring a result as I > understand. 36348 From: Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 2:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Hi, Dan - In a message dated 9/13/04 8:19:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > Good Point! Hardness is both completely dark and completely silent. > Beyond that, I don't follow you. > > Dan > > > Dark is the absence of light. Silence is the absence of > sound. We can > >experience darkness, can we not? We also can experience silence. > And they are > >distinguishable!! So absences are realities. The question is: Where > are they > >experienced? I think the correct answer may be "via the mind door". > (And yet, > >doesn't it seem that one actually SEES darkness? I think so. So the > matter is > >unclear.) > > > >With metta, > >Howard ============================== I'm sorry that I'm being obscure. I'm afraid I don't know how to clarify the matter. so, I guess we'll just let it go. :-) 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) 36349 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:17am Subject: Re: CSC 4 [Mike: "conceptual right view" and a QUIZ] Interesting topic, Mike. Here's my take on it. The Buddha's formulation of mundane right view (The Great Forty, MN 117): "'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has fermentations, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions." SUre, you can interpret this as concept, but I don't think this would be proper. On a quick reading I find three compelling pieces of evidence against it. First, in 117:4 he says: "One understands wrong view as wrong view and right view as right view: this is one's right view." Wouldn't you agree that this formulation suggests "understanding reality" rather than "thinking about it and coming to accept a certain concept"? Then, in 117:6 he says: "Right view, I say, is twofold..." If the "There is what is given..." formulation is to be taken conceptually and the supramundane right view is noble path consciousness, there is no room for right view in mundane satipatthana! (Unless it is conceptual right view in satipatthana, but it surely is not.) Third, the commentaries suggest a cetasika interpretation rather than a concept interpretation. As BB writes in note 1100 (MLDB): "MA says that two kinds of right view are forerunners: the right view of insight, which investigates formations as impermanent, suffering and non-self; and the right view of the path, which arises as a consequence of insight and effects the radical destruction of the taints." And in 1101: "...in order to acquire right view about the nature of reality, one must first be able to distinguish between wrong and right teachings on the nature of reality [I'd say that this can't be done rationally or conceptually, but only through direct understanding in the opening stages of vipassana]. MA says that this is the right view of insight which understands wrong view as an object by penetrating its characteristics of impermanence, etc., and which understands right view by exercising the function of comprehension and by clearing away confusion." This sounds like pañña as cetasika rather than as a correct proliferation of theories. On your second point: > The way I see it, citta (in the abhidhamma sense) does indeed experience the > object. It 'views correctly' rather than 'is the correct view', in other > words, I guess I think of it more as a verb than a noun, rather than being > something a priori or presumptive. Well put. I agree. > > Neither formulation should be taken as a view because right view is an > understanding, not a conceptual framework. > > I think I've addressed this to the best of my ability. I guess I would say > that it seems to me that 'right view' can refer to (a) a correct idea of > what's wholesome vs. unwholesome and so on; (b) the mundane right view that > occurs with a moment of satipatthaana; or (c) Right View of the Noble > Eightfold Path, something that only occurs with the attainment of magga and > phala. If this is correct, then the meaning of 'right view' depends mainly > on context. Let's rephrase it as a multiple choice: "Right view" as a Dhamma term can refer to are: a. A correct idea of what's wholesome vs. unwholesome and so on (i.e., "conceptual right view"); b. The mundane right view that occurs with a moment of mundane satipatthaana; or c. Right View of the Noble Eightfold Path, something that only occurs with the attainment of magga and phala. d. All of the above e. (b) and (c) only f. Other (explain) I choose e. Dhamma is not about formulating and defining the "correct" concepts, but, rather, about understanding reality. Dan 36350 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Good morning, Herman. You write: "Citta in early Buddhism is the heart, or the intentional / feeling aspect of being....I agree with you, citta must have an object, but only in the Abhidhamma and beyond." Huh? Not sure what you mean by "intentional/feeling aspect of being" or "early Buddhism". Don't you see much of the second volume of SN writing about objects of citta? > Nobody doubted the substantiality of "the ether" when it was introduced > to prop up other beliefs, until it was looked for and couldn't be found. > It is good to come to understand what different schools of thought > propose, but reality is what it is, despite the theories. So, do you contend that 'citta' as used in Abhidhamma is along the lines of "the ether" and cannot be found, i.e., all this citta talk is mere speculation? Dan 36351 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:35am Subject: "conceptual right view" QUIZ "Right view" as a Dhamma term can refer to are: a. A correct idea of what's wholesome vs. unwholesome and so on (i.e., "conceptual right view"); b. The mundane right view that occurs with a moment of mundane satipatthaana; or c. Right View of the Noble Eightfold Path, something that only occurs with the attainment of magga and phala. d. All of the above e. (b) and (c) only f. Other (explain) I chose e, but it is interesting to note that Bhikkhu Bodhi apparently would choose c: "We may understand that the conceptual comprehension of the four truths falls under mundane right view, while the direct penetration of the truths by realising Nibbana with the path constitutes supramundane right view." [MLDB, n. 1103] However, elsewhere he acknowledges a place for the right view of mundane satipatthana as included with mundane right view [MLDB, n. 1100 and 1101]. Dan 36352 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:40am Subject: [dsg] Re: flippin off the moon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hello, Joop > I have nothing against anyone reading other texts if they feel so > inclined, but the question I think needs to be asked,and that I > asked Ben, is how one evaluates what one reads in the other texts. > There is no lack of writings by erudite scholars. But by what > standard do you measure the views expressed by these other > writers? Do you trust your own judgment in the matter? Joop: Yes, and sometime with the help of scolars I trust, for example David Kalupahana and Stephen Batchelor > > You better could have asked, and now I do, to Ben: > > What is the disadvantage of clinging to realities? > A question well worth considering and discussing. As Ben has not > responded, perhaps you would share with us your own thoughts on the > subject. Regards > Jon Joop: (1) To nothing clinging is good, also not to realities (2) The (paramattha) dhammas are realities, that is: they are not trancendental (perhaps 'Nibbana' is: we don't know) And because the dhammas are realities in the Abhidhamma we have to be critical on comments who make things sibtle and complex. Metta Joop 36353 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:25am Subject: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) Dear Sarah and Htoo, My problem with this in the past has simply been the meaning of the word 'result'. Reading in English I haven't always taken it to mean 'vipaaka', so future natural decisive support condition could've been 'a result'. So my question is, when we read ""a wholesome or unwholesome kamma which,although unable to produce a result by itself,", was the original Paali here'vipaaka'? mike ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Mike, Vipaka dhamma are dhamma when they arise as vipaka. You did something in your past. At that time a series of cittas arise. They were not free of cetana. Among them cetana embedded in javana cittas do give rise to kamma. That kamma is potential. As long as no result, there is no vipaka. Every day, and at every time, there are many cittas happening. Among them some are vipaka cittas. But we cannot know what is the source for that vipaka cittas. With Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Before you disappeared you said you have to ask something. I do not think this is your question as yet. 36354 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:38am Subject: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Dear Howard, I think it is more my ignorance than your lack of clarity. I do believe I don't rightly know what it's like to "experience darkness" as a reality. Dan > > > Dark is the absence of light. Silence is the absence of > > sound. We can > > >experience darkness, can we not? We also can experience silence. > > And they are > > >distinguishable!! So absences are realities. The question is: Where > > are they > > >experienced? I think the correct answer may be "via the mind door". > > (And yet, > > >doesn't it seem that one actually SEES darkness? I think so. So the > > matter is > > >unclear.) > > > > > >With metta, > > >Howard > ============================== > I'm sorry that I'm being obscure. I'm afraid I don't know how to > clarify the matter. so, I guess we'll just let it go. :-) 36355 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 7:48am Subject: Jhana Journey ( 17 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Now the jhana practitioner is in his third jhana. He must exercise this jhana as described in the previous posts. He must contemplate on the third jhana. Through contamplation he will know that his third jhana composes of piti, sukha and ekaggata. After contemplation, he has to try to access to his third jhana whenever he wants. After some practice, he will be able to do so as he wishes. He also have to practise that his third jhana has to stay for an hour or any period as he determines. When this works, then he will be able to stay in third jhana as long as he predetermines. He should also practise his third jhana in the way that he is able to emerge from third jhana as he wishes. If this happens there will not be any delay when he tries to emerge from third jhana. He also should scrutinise the jhana factors in his third jhana. He should check one after another whether they worked well or not. At a time, he will notice that one of the jhana factors in his third jhana is the weakest link in 3rd jhana. The weakest link is piti ( delightedness ) and it is a bit wavering and it is quite close to vitakka and vicara. So his third jhana will possibly be destroyed by vitakka and vicara. In contemplating so, he sees piti as enemy and he will continue to practice jhana and try to eliminate piti that is he will continue to practise jhana without piti. After an indefinite time, he manages to overcome practising jhana without piti. If other parts of jhana are working evidently then he is said to be in the fourth jhana. The fourth Jhana hold the object patibhaga ( counter image ) of WHITE. The practitioner must contemplate on his new catuttha or the fourth jhana. He must exercise this fourth jhana like other lower jhanas. In this 4th jhana, there are sukha and ekaggata as jhana factors. There is no more piti as it does not arise. As initial jhana citta, this 4th jhana citta arises only once. After that bhavanga cittas follow. Then the practitioner does the contemplation on jhana and he realises that he has attained the 4th jhana. This again has to be practised as usual so that he becomes proficient in his 4th jhana. May you all achieve fourth jhana to be more calm. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 36356 From: Htoo Naing Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:55am Subject: Patthana Dhamma Page 41 on Dhammarammana Cittas Dear Dhamma Friends, Patthana Dhamma is ongoing and currently there can be viewed the page 41 which describes dhammarammana about citta. This can be seen at www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana41.html and this page will be followed by explanation on more about other cittas. Patthana dhamma as an introduction can be viewed at www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana1.html Like mahasatipatthana dhamma, patthana dhamma can be applied in our daily life. This is true that our lives as we would think is actually made up of many dhamma. But we see them with illusion. Illusion is false interpretation of real image. There is a long rope. This is a rope. But weaken eyes, or normal eyes in a dim light or people intoxicated may falsely interprete this rope as a snake. This is illusion. Nama dhamma and rupa dhamma are working on their own accord and there is no one dictating this dhamma arise here and that dhamma arise there and this dhamma disappear now and that dhamma disappear there and so on. Unlike suttanta teachings, patthana dhamma do not involve any personal things or beings or sattas. But just dhamma arising in their own accord and interact and interconnected each other and one another. May you all feel confident on Dhamma learning. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing htootintnaing@y... 36357 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 11:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] conceit Hello Phil, op 12-09-2004 16:26 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > Ph: I can see conceit arising as a result of an associated citta > experiencing an object, but I can't yet > understand conceit experiencing the object on its own. "On account of the > object" doesn't really fill in that blank in my mind. N: There are actually many cittas with conceit in processes following closely upon each other. That makes it difficult to understand: why does conceit experience also visible object. When we explain it in conventional terms we could say: the appearance of my body is more beautiful then the body of the other person, the colour of my dress is nicer than the dress of that women, etc. Those are long sentences of thinking, but there was also a moment of experiencing colour by seeing, and then after that the determining consciousness to be followed by akusala javana cittas rooted in lobha with conceit, and then again javanacittas with conceit in a mind-door process, and after that javana-cittas in other mind-door processes which think about the whole event, about she and me. When there is direct awareness and understanding the characteristic of conceit can be known. Nina. 36358 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 11:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas' study corner9-Introduction(f) Hello Phil, I think Rob K answered before. I always carefully put . Once I said: bound to arise and Ven. Bodhi said to me not to say so. It would seem like a fate, he thinks. As if we are hopeless victims to a fate. but he approved of likely. Nina. op 13-09-2004 02:13 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: >> Shortly after it (the moment of seeing) has fallen away, cittas rooted in > attachment, >> aversion or ignorance may arise and these are of a different jati: the >> jati which is akusala. > > > I've asked Nina about a similar sentence to this before but I'm sorry > to say I can't remember her response. My apologies. > Is it a bit misleading to say that such cittas "may" arise? Isn't it all > but a certainty, > except for Arahants, when we consider the rarity of wholesome cittas? > Would it be more accurate to say "will probably" or "will almost surely" > arise? 36359 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 2:31pm Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" <. > > > ++++++++++++ > > Dear Andrew , > > I quote a sutta about the advantages of hearing/considering (and > > insighting) Dhamma: > > http://www.abhidhamma.org/anguttara_nikaya.%20(2)%2020htm.htm > > Anguttara Nikaya >> Robert, this looks somewhat dogmatic to me, to assume that one can be > reborn in the devas going on the mere recitation of the texts. > Careful consideration is again something not possible for me at this > point, I'm not well enough to read through and develop an > understanding, as I've said previously, and even pondering over would > be difficult for me at this stage. >++++++++ Dear Andrew, as I said before it takes time for understanding to accumulate. It is not only reciting of texts but it depends on the study conditioning kusala. Sukin wrote about pariyatti (the theory, the study):"Because of this lack of pariyatti, here referring to the panna of this level, there is misunderstanding of what practice involves. Pariyatti is not the `verbal knowledge' but indeed the level of understanding which *knows* at least the value of developing satipatthana and that this very moment is conditioned and anatta. And though it may only be `thinking' in the beginning about just fallen away dhammas, it knows that what ever level of panna arises is just what is meant to be, and with this is already some detachment. And in this case, more understanding about conditionality and anatta is accumulating as sankhara. Which is why, without correct pariyatti and knowing conditioned realities in daily life, one will be deluded into thinking that *more* can be achieved through some deliberate effort on one's part via some formal practice or `deliberate looking'. And this is to go against the principal of anatta and conditionality."" When we think it is 'me" who is trying to understand it may seem easy or hard, helpful or unhelpul. But when we know it is only conditioned phenomena arising (no me anywhere) the study is purely a reminder of what is real now. RobertK 36360 From: plnao Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 2:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasikas' study corner9-Introduction(f) Hello Nina > Hello Phil, > I think Rob K answered before. I always carefully put . Once I said: > bound to arise and Ven. Bodhi said to me not to say so. It would seem like a > fate, he thinks. As if we are hopeless victims to a fate. but he approved of > likely. > Nina. Very interesting. I can see "bound to" being too discouraging, but "may" seems a bit too lenient and inconsistent with much of your other writing. There are times for example that we read "there can not be many moments of sati", and since we also are taught that sati must accompany all kusala cittas, we are left to conclude that there can not be many moments of kusala cittas. And therefore we conclude that there will be almost entirely akusala cittas rising. Again, I don't find this discouraging. It keeps us on our toes- it brings about samvega, a sense of urgency which, if tempered by patience, leads to progress on the path. After all, we are worldlings. We are awash in akusala cittas, but the Buddha shows the way to stand on dry ground in kusala, so to speak. But it will take many lifetimes to clamber out of the flood of akusala and stand on dry ground. In my opinion, most Westerners are too optimistic about enlightenment in this lifetime. They forget that it took the Buddha aeons and that there is no express lane. This gives rise to practicng in wrong view - for example seeking jhanas when the conditions are clearly not there for such a practice, trying to force jhanas into one's life. As you often write, people don't have enough appreciation for the value of a moment of mindfulness. They want big results. The idea of akusala being very likely to rise tempers these unwise, self-driven expectations, in my opinion. Not a cause for hopelessness. Rather a cause for gratefulness to the Buddha who taught us the subtle (yes, it must be subtle, Joop) way out. I know that there are different levels of sati, and if I recall correctly the sati of satipatthana is the one you are say is very rare? So perhaps when we read that all kusala cittas must be accompanied by sati, it is a more mundane and commonly available degree of sati. I know we've talked about this before. It seems I need to hear things 3 or 4 times until I retain them. Sorry about that. But it is an important point, that's for sure, and worth repeating in case others haven't considered it. Metta, Phil p.s Hi to Sarah and Azita and thank you for your long, encouraging posts. No time to respond this morning, and I will be away for a couple of days as of tonight. I'll be back to you in a few days. 36361 From: plnao Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:28pm Subject: Deeds of Merit - paying respect depends on citta Hello all More from "Deeds of Merit" by By Sujin Boriharnwanaket available at http://www.zolag.co.uk/meri2.html Yesterday we learned about paying respect through speech. Today we consider the mental aspect of paying respect. K. S. : Kusala or akusala depends on the nature of the citta. There can be kusala citta with respect for a person or a place, even if one does not show respect by body or speech. This may happen when the person to whom we want to pay respect is too far away for us to approach him to pay respect. Or when we are in a temple in the midst of a crowd we cannot show respect by touching the floor with our head, hands and knees. But at such moments the citta can still be respectful when respect is due to a person or to a place; the citta can be respectful by abstaining from hurting or harming others through body, speech or mind. If someone pays respect occasionally through body or speech, just because it is his habit to do so, but he hurts or harms other people or causes damage to a place which should be respected by body, speech or mind, then he is not showing true respect. He folds his hands together and raises them towards his face [24 out of fear, or in order to gain something, to acquire things for himself, or he does so because the people he salutes are his relatives, or just because he conforms himself to the custom of society. K. S. : At the moment the citta is coarse it means that there is no happiness. Even though a person does not yet give expression to rudeness through body or speech, he is not able to make someone else whom he meets or who is close happy. This shows us that a person whose citta is coarse has no mettaa, loving kindness, for someone else. Because when the citta is coarse, a person cannot be intent on making someone else happy, or on giving assistance or helping him so that he is free from distress. If the citta has a high degree of coarseness there will be behaviour and speech which is not polite, not gentle, without thoughtfulness and kindness. He will cause unhappiness and distress to someone else who has to face such behaviour and speech. Ph: There are times I sign off with "metta" when there are cittas accompanied by hostility, irritation. I've seen the same thing in others' posts. A courteous sign-off when the tone has been harsh. Not a big deal, really. The coarse tone of the body of the letter is more important to consider than the incompatible use of "metta" etc. Metta, Phil 36362 From: m. nease Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) Hi Htoo, All understood, thanks--not sure what my question was--I'll try to remember. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "htootintnaing" To: Sent: Monday, September 13, 2004 7:25 AM Subject: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) > Dear Mike, > > Vipaka dhamma are dhamma when they arise as vipaka. You did something > in your past. At that time a series of cittas arise. They were not > free of cetana. Among them cetana embedded in javana cittas do give > rise to kamma. > > That kamma is potential. As long as no result, there is no vipaka. > Every day, and at every time, there are many cittas happening. Among > them some are vipaka cittas. > > But we cannot know what is the source for that vipaka cittas. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing > > PS: Before you disappeared you said you have to ask something. I do > not think this is your question as yet. 36363 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:43pm Subject: RE: [dsg] CSC4-Introduction(a) [Herman: "rules of language"] Hi Dan, May we all have a great morning/day/evening/night :-) ============= Good morning, Herman. You write: "Citta in early Buddhism is the heart, or the intentional / feeling aspect of being....I agree with you, citta must have an object, but only in the Abhidhamma and beyond." Huh? Not sure what you mean by "intentional/feeling aspect of being" or "early Buddhism". Don't you see much of the second volume of SN writing about objects of citta? ============= The Internet is my vademecum. If you do any number of searches on Pali canon chronology or the like you will find plenty of material that discusses the development and chronology of Buddhist thought. The PTS Pali - English dictionary as found at http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ (thanks, Christine :-)) sheds light on the etymology of just about any word in the canon. Thanks for your comments re SN. Looks like more entries in the list for possible reading :-). ================= > Nobody doubted the substantiality of "the ether" when it was introduced to prop up other beliefs, until it was looked for and couldn't be found. It is good to come to understand what different schools of thought propose, but reality is what it is, despite the theories. So, do you contend that 'citta' as used in Abhidhamma is along the lines of "the ether" and cannot be found, i.e., all this citta talk is mere speculation? ================ The Buddha was not foretelling the future when he taught that *ALL* dhammas fall under the anicca, anatta and dukkha umbrella. He knew that every dhamma that ever arose, and that every dhamma that will ever arise has these characteristics. He was not just extrapolating from some observations he made to all other possible future instances. He discovered the *STRUCTURE* of dhammas, and that is what he shared with us. When you know the structure of a process, then you can go beyond the sampling and evaluating of individual events. The structure is the key, and it does away with the need to compile an inventory. You see one, you've seen them all!! What is the structure of dhammas? Simply that only what changes is known. So every phenomenon is simply the reporting of difference. Now difference is not in time or in space, it is not here, it is not there. Difference has no substance. So what core essences and characteristics are we to ascribe to what has neither form nor content? The goal of the Buddha is Nibbana. This is what the PTS Pali-English dictionary has to say about what has happened to Nibbana over time. "It is the speculative, scholastic view and the dogmatising trend of later times, beginning with the Abhidhamma period, which has more and more developed the simple, spontaneous idea (of Nibbana) into an exaggerated form either to the positive (i. e. seeing in N. a definite state or sphere of existence) or the negative side (i. e. seeing in it a condition of utter annihilation). Yet its sentimental value to the (exuberant optimism of the) early Buddhists (Rh. Davids, Early Buddhism, p. 73) is one of peace and rest, perfect passionlessness, and thus supreme happiness. Writing a bookshelf-full on the theory of citta is like going out catching insects and pinning their lifeless forms into a lovely taxonomy marked "a study of life". There is absolutely no need to conceive of existence. Let alone speak with authority of cuti citta, patisandhi vinnana and paramattha dhammas. To conceive of existence is, in fact, to miss the Nibbana boat. My experience only, of course :-) Kind Regards Herman PS A quote from early Buddhism One who isn't inclined toward either side -- becoming or not-, here or beyond -- who has no entrenchment when considering what's grasped among doctrines, hasn't the least preconceived perception with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. By whom, with what, should he be pigeonholed here in the world? -- this brahman who hasn't adopted views. They don't conjure, don't yearn, don't adhere even to doctrines. A brahman not led by precepts or practices, gone to the beyond -- Such -- doesn't fall back. From http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/suttanipata/snp4-05. html 36364 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 4:58pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Hi Howard and Dan, Just my three cents worth to a very interesting discussion: =================== D > I think it is more my ignorance than your lack of clarity. I do believe I don't rightly know what it's like to "experience darkness" as a reality. =================== I think darkness is experienced in terms of light, and light is experienced in terms of darkness. All in an analog fashion, with many grades of distinction possible. There is no contextless experience ie absolute experience. Kind Regards Herman 36365 From: Andrew Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:09pm Subject: On Facts and Absolutisms Dear Joop & Herman Thanks for your responses which I have just read. Have been away and now a bit ill, so will be out of things for a while. Take care Andrew T 36366 From: Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 1:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Hi, Herman (and Dan) - In a message dated 9/13/04 7:58:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, hhofman@t... writes: > > I think darkness is experienced in terms of light, and light is > experienced in terms of darkness. All in an analog fashion, with many > grades of distinction possible. There is no contextless experience ie > absolute experience. > > ========================= Hmm, maybe. But do you really think they are on the same footing? Do you really think that light is the (relative) absence of darkness? Isn't light the positive, and darkness just the absence of it. (But may not. I'm really not sure. My mind seems to flip-flop on this one. ;-) A possibility, and this is what you may have in mind, is that light and darkness are not simple negations or absences of the other, but, instead, phenomenologically, light is an experience (or range of experiences), darkness is another (range of) experience(s), and they are experiences that are complementary in occurrence, with each dispelling the other to some extent. (One doesn't usually speak of darkness dispelling light, but there is no reason why one could not.) However, my inclination is to view (a degree of ) darkness as the mere (relative) absence of light, and ignorance as the mere (total or partial) absence of wisdom, where, by 'wisdom' I understand "clear, bright understanding". 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) 36367 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:16pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Cooran 13-15 August, 2004 Thanks Ken, It is much clearer now. Thanks and regards Herman ============== I won't post the reply I have prepared: it gives the same definitions of satipatthana you must have seen here a hundred times before. I should try instead to understand what you are asking me to explain - what part of my message seemed so surprising to you? If I remember correctly, you said `thinking is intention,' and I replied: ============ KH: >> That sounds right to me: whenever there is a concept (e.g., "a tree") then there is intention (cetana) and its associated sankharas. But they are not known at that precise moment. At the moment of "tree awareness" there is no awareness of cetana. So the paramattha dhammas known as `thinking' (cetana, vicara, vitakka, etc.) can be known with satipatthana but not so, "tree." > > ============= H: > Am I reading you correctly, are you sure you mean satipatthana? If so, can you explain that a bit? > ------------- KH: I'll reword it a bit. Whenever there is a concept, there is consciousness (citta) with its cetasikas (including cetana, intention). At that time, the object being experienced is the concept, not the citta nor any of its cetasikas. So there is no possibility of satipatthana at that precise moment. (Satipatthana has a dhamma, not a concept, as its object.) However, any of those dhammas that are present (experiencing the concept) can become the object of satipatthana in the next [mind-door] process of cittas. Is that any more intelligible? (I can see now that the original was not well worded.) Kind regards, Ken H 36368 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 6:38pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Hi Howard, Thanks for your comments. =============== > > I think darkness is experienced in terms of light, and light is > experienced in terms of darkness. All in an analog fashion, with many > grades of distinction possible. There is no contextless experience ie > absolute experience. > > ========================= Hmm, maybe. But do you really think they are on the same footing? Do you really think that light is the (relative) absence of darkness? Isn't light the positive, and darkness just the absence of it. (But may not. I'm really not sure. My mind seems to flip-flop on this one. ;-) ========== HH > I have that too :-) I'm hoping it's a good sign when thinking is not set in concrete :-) Kind Regards Herman 36369 From: Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 3:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Citta as experiencing, to Dan. Hi, Herman - In a message dated 9/13/04 10:20:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, hhofman@t... writes: > (But may not. > I'm really not sure. My mind seems to flip-flop on this one. ;-) > > ========== > > HH >I have that too :-) I'm hoping it's a good sign when thinking is > not set in concrete :-) > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Mmm, yeah. That's good. I'll buy that! (Or maybe the flip-flopping is just a sign of aging! ;-)) ====================== 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) 36370 From: Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 8:21pm Subject: Flip-flopping Hi Howard and Herman, In regard to whether light dispells dark or dark dispells light, the flip-flopping from one position to another is actually delusion (aka ignorance, bewilderment, doubt, moha). See below. The antidote is to look at sabhava, the actuality of what happens. Over a period of time various colors arise and cease. Dark is actually black, not to be confused with "no eye consciousness". Black also arises and ceases. Black neither dispells white nor white black. Furthermore eye-consciousness doesn't dispell no-eye-consciousness, or vice-versa. However, the end of kamma does dispell kamma result, one manifestation of which is eye-consciousness. Larry ----------------------------------- Vis. XIV, 93. That 'rooted in delusion' is of two kinds: (32)-(33) being 'accompanied-by-equanimity', it is either 'associated-with-uncertainty' or 'associated-with-agitation'. It should be understood to occur at the time of indecision or of distraction. So unprofitable consciousness is of twelve kinds. Intro to Vis. 93 and Tiika. There are two types of cittas rooted in ignorance, moha-muula-cittas. They have moha as their only root. They are: 1) accompanied by indifferent feeling, associated with doubt upekkhaasahagata.m vicikicchaasampayutta.m 2) accompanied by indifferent feeling, associated with restlessness upekkhaasahagata.m uddhaccasampayutta.m Vicikicchaa is doubt about ultimate realities, about naama and ruupa, about cause and result, the four noble Truths, the Dependent origination. It is doubt about the Triple Gem, doubt about it whether enlightenment can be attained. The Expositor (II, p. 344) states: There is a word association between vicikiccha, doubt, and kicchati, to be wearied. It is tiring to wonder: is it this, or is it that? Is this true or not? It arises only with citta rooted in moha; ignorance conditions doubt. It may seem that doubt arises with unpleasant feeling, but it can condition dosa with unpleasant feeling, and this arises later on. It merely seems that doubt and dosa arise at the same time because cittas succeed one another so fast. Doubt is exclusion from the cure of knowledge, but understanding can cure it. So long as we have not reached the first stage of insight which clearly discerns the difference between nama and rupa, we have doubt about their characteristics. Hearing, which is nama, and sound, which is rupa, are different dhammas and sati can be aware of only one dhamma at a time. When sati does not arise we are confused about nama and rupa and we have doubts. When there is direct understanding of realities there is no doubt, one can directly prove the truth. By insight doubt will wear out and the sotapanna has eradicated it completely. As to restlessness or agitation, this is a translation of uddhacca. Uddhacca is not what we mean by the conventional term agitation, or excitement. Restlessness arises with each akusala citta and at that moment there is forgetfulness of kusala, there is not the steadiness and calm of kusala. Unwise attention is its proximate cause. The Tiika explains that when uddhacca arises with the citta rooted in moha it is predominant among the associated dhammas. Therefore, the second type of citta rooted in ignorance is classified as associated with restlessness, and here restlessness is mentioned expressively. We read in the Expositor (II, p. 346) about restlessness that is translated here as distraction: <ŒDistraction¹ is the mode of mind when excited, flurried. ŒDisquietude¹ is unquiet. ŒAgitation¹ is a throwing about of mind...> When we read the conventional terms excitement or agitation that describe uddhacca, we should remember that when it arises with the second type of citta rooted in ignorance there is only indifferent feeling that accompanies it. It is said in the Tiika that both types of citta are extremely deluded. We read in the Co. to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (T.A. p. 18): They are always accompanied by indifferent feeling, there is no like and dislike with the two types of citta rooted in ignorance. It is difficult to know when there is the second type of citta rooted in ignorance, associated with restlessness and accompanied by indifferent feeling. However, it arises very often in between the cittas rooted in attachment and those rooted in aversion. When akusala kamma is committed motivated by attachment and aversion, there are also many moments of the second type of citta rooted in ignorance in between. The Tiika explains that this type of citta, although it cannot produce vipaaka in the form of an unhapppy rebirth, it does produce vipaaka in the course of life by way of unpleasant experiences through the senses. There are twelve types of akusala cittas in all: eight types of akusala cittas rooted in attachment, two types of akusala cittas rooted in aversion and two types of akusala cittas rooted in ignorance. The akusala cittas rooted in attachment have two roots: ignorance and attachment; those rooted in aversion also have two roots: ignorance and aversion; those rooted in ignorance have ignorance as their only root. ***** Nina. 36371 From: Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 5:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi, Larry - In a message dated 9/13/04 11:23:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard and Herman, > > In regard to whether light dispells dark or dark dispells light, the > flip-flopping from one position to another is actually delusion (aka > ignorance, bewilderment, doubt, moha). See below. > > The antidote is to look at sabhava, the actuality of what happens. Over > a period of time various colors arise and cease. Dark is actually black, > not to be confused with "no eye consciousness". Black also arises and > ceases. Black neither dispells white nor white black. Furthermore > eye-consciousness doesn't dispell no-eye-consciousness, or vice-versa. > However, the end of kamma does dispell kamma result, one manifestation > of which is eye-consciousness. > > Larry ========================== Indeed one sense of 'dark' is "black", and black is a color. But another sense is of dimming - from slight to complete. Darkness in that sense is absence of light. Certainly ignorance is absence or obscuration of wisdom. I don't think the matter is as simple as you present it. When a sighted person gets an eye illness or trauma to the eyes and s/he "descends into darkness," as it is said, does s/he end up seeing the color black? Perhaps. I don't know. Do you know? It would be interesting to hear the facts. 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) 36372 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:41pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi Larry, Thanks for your comments. =========== L > In regard to whether light dispells dark or dark dispells light, the flip-flopping from one position to another is actually delusion (aka ignorance, bewilderment, doubt, moha). See below. The antidote is to look at sabhava, the actuality of what happens. Over a period of time various colors arise and cease. Dark is actually black, not to be confused with "no eye consciousness". Black also arises and ceases. Black neither dispells white nor white black. Furthermore eye-consciousness doesn't dispell no-eye-consciousness, or vice-versa. However, the end of kamma does dispell kamma result, one manifestation of which is eye-consciousness. ============ H > I'm sure you'll agree that modern science also looks at the actuality of what happens, perhaps with more precision than introspection alone is capable of. It is no longer sufficient to consider seeing in terms of colour only, and the concept of luminance is vital. So we have chrominance and luminance, colour and brightness. There are eye receptors known as cones (sense bases for colour) and eye receptors for luminance known as rods (sense base for brightness). Darkness and lightness are not about colour but about brightness, in my opinion. Kind Regards Herman 36373 From: nina van gorkom Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 9:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner7-Introduction(d) Dear Azita, I like your posts, good reminders. Continue like that in India! Just one thing occurred to me: so long as we do not know the difference between nama and rupa, the first stage of insight, we cannot clearly know the difference between vipaka, such as seeing, and attachment which is akusala. But it is something that has to be investigated. It is not only Buddha knowledge. A. Sujin would say: what was otherwise the purpose of his teaching? We have to develop understanding of what he taught. This reminds me of an MP3 I have: explaining the difference between moments of citta with just universals, and citta with more cetasikas, arising later on. Nina. op 13-09-2004 10:13 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > An object impinges on a sense door/base and vipaka citta > experiences it - not me, not you. It is happening now and javana > cittas are arising now, either kusala or akusala. But are you able to > tell the difference? Cittas arise and fall sooooooo incredibly fast, > you can't 'catch' them - only a highly developed degree of wisdom and > understanding will know, and I'm not too sure of this myself, but I > think the knowledge of knowing vipaka from javana might just be > Buddha-only knowledge. 36374 From: Herman Hofman Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 10:32pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anapanasati Sutta Hi Jon, Thanks for the feedback. ================= J > As I see it, the person who develops insight renounces attachments and craving in the sense of *outgrowing* them, much like a child outgrows his or her toys. That is to say, it's not necessarily a case of a deliberate or conscious giving up. Furthermore, the sequence and timing will be different for each individual depending on a number of factors. To my understanding, it is not part of the teaching that a comfortable lay life is in any sense an obstacle to the development of insight, since it is the degree of attachment to one's surroundings that is the crucial factor. A general lessening attachment doesn't necessarily mean one will change one's lifestyle; and conversely a renunciate lifestyle is no proof of lack of clinging or wrong view. ================== I agree with you, with a few proviso's. Different people will have a different understanding of what is comfortable. And for some definitions of comfort, having a comfortable life entails a great deal of effort to maintain that. And effort expended in maintaining a comfortable lifestyle precludes the expending of more profitable effort. I refer to http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/suttanipata/snp1-12. html and especially It is not without reason that it is said that As the crested, blue-necked peacock, when flying, never matches the wild goose in speed: Even so the householder never keeps up with the monk, the sage secluded, doing jhana in the forest. ================= J > The homeless life is advantageous for those suited to (i.e., capable of) living it. It is not advantageous for everyone; in fact, it could well be disadvantageous for a person not suited to it (I think this is said in the suttas). ========== H > I don't disagree with you; but the following rephrasings could also apply. The homeless life is advantageous for those *ready* for living it. It could well be disadvantageous for a person not *ready* for it. I do not advocate a wholesale leaving of the householders life. But I am in no doubt as to which lifestyle was advocated by the Buddha for those truly aware of the nature of reality and truly seeking an end to dukkha. Kind Regards Herman 36375 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] "... as parasites a tree." ??? Dear Friend, --- dighanakha wrote: > What practical implications do passages like this have for those > committed to a > fundamentalist hermeneutic in which everything in the Commentaries is > treated as > infallible? .... S: To start with your last comment, let me set myself up here as the fall guy or rather fall bird for the ‘fundamentalist hermeneutics’ (whatever they are) and see if I can help at all in this regard;-) .... > In the Commentary to the Jataka Ananda the Vulture King says: <...> > "It's not a case of love or hate with womenfolk you see, > It is for gold they hug a man, as parasites a tree." > - from the Kunala Jataka > > Is this true? .... S: Certainly it says this (and the other quotes you gave). The Buddha understood human nature and the extent of the kilesa (defilements) far better than us. Even in the Kunala Jataka verses themselves we read some pretty strong language. For a start: [419] “.....the Master said, “Surely, Brethren, even when I was in an animal form, I knew well the ingratitude, the wiles, the wickedness and immorality of women-folk, and at that time so far from being in their power I kept them under my control,” and when by these words he had removed the spiritual discontent of these Brethren, the Master held his peace.” So is this true? We can find a summary of the full story at this link: http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/ku/kunaala_jat_536.htm Kunála Játaka (No.536) Here is part of it: >Kunála, king of the Citrakokilas, though well served by his hen birds, always despised them and found fault with them. The king of the Phussakokilas, Punnamukha, on the other hand, always sang the praises of his escort. One day the two kings met, and Punnamukha asked Kunála why he was not more gracious to his ladies. "Because I know too much about women," was the answer; but Punnamakha was not in a mood to discuss the matter any more. Later, Punnamukha fell ill, and his hen birds deserted him and came to Kunála. He drove them away, ministered to Punnamukha, and cheered him. Some time after, Kunála, seated on the Manosilátala in Himavá (according to Buddhaghosa, D.ii.675, this was on the banks of the Kunáladaha), started to tell his friend of the wickedness of women. Hearing of this, many inhabitants of numerous worlds came to listen to him, among them Ananda, king of the vultures, and the ascetic Nárada. Many were the instances given by Kunála to illustrate the deceitfulness, ingratitude and immorality of women < <...> >Kunála's diatribe was followed by Ananda's, and his by Nárada's, each claiming to speak from facts within their knowledge. < <....> >In the stories related by Kunála, the bird-king is identified with one of the characters concerned in each story, so that he was able to speak with authority. This Játaka was related in order to destroy the discontent that rose in the hearts of the Sákiyan youths, kinsmen of the Buddha, who, having entered the Order, were troubled by the thought of the wives they had left behind. The Buddha therefore took them to the Himalaya, showed them the magnificent beauty of the region, particularly the miraculous splendours of the Kunáladaha, and there preached to them. At the end of the Játaka they all became arahants. We are told that that very day they became arahants (J.v.412-56; also DA.ii.674ff; AA.i.173). < .... S: I think it’s important to note: 1) the Jataka verses and introductions carry little or no meaning without the Jataka commentary stories to which they refer. 2) We need to read the stories in context and understand the compassionate reasons for telling them. So as summarised above, ‘This Játaka was related in order to destroy the discontent that rose in the hearts of the Sákiyan youths’ and by the end, the same bhikkhus had become arahants. It reminds me of other accounts of young discontent bhikkhus, infatuated with women who needed to be taught some pretty tough lessons in order to remain as bhikkhus, such as Nanda and the celestial nymphs or the bhikkhu who had to see Sirima, the courtesan’s rotting corpse. There are many accounts in the Vinaya too where the stories behind the laying down of the rules with regard to women are told. 3) The same Jataka is therefore at the same time in effect telling about the foolishness of men, ensnared by lobha. Read Connie’s translation of the sutta http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/35323 “Naaha.m, bhikkhave, a~n~na.m ekaruupampi samanupassaami ya.m eva.m purisassa citta.m pariyaadaaya ti.t.thati yathayida.m, bhikkhave, itthiruupa.m. Itthiruupa.m, bhikkhave, purisassa citta.m pariyaadaaya ti.t.thatii"ti. Pa.thama.m. "I do not say, bhikkhus, there is another single thing of form, the perception of which so persistently overwhelms and stays in a man's mind, bhikkhus, as the form of a woman. The form of a woman, bhikkhus, persistently overwhelms and stays in a man's mind." This is the first thing.” etc (Of course the same applies to women). 4) Indeed we don’t need to wait til Jataka 536 to read about the foolishness of men. We can just open the texts at the very first Jataka (no 1) to read about truly foolish men who were taken by Anathapindika to listen to the Buddha who in the ‘thunderous tones as of a young lion roaring......in a voice of eightfold perfection, the charm of which ravished the ear, he preached to them the Truth in a discourse full of sweetness and bright with varied beauty.” The men ‘rose up with hearts converted’, threw away their other doctrines, took refuge in the Buddha, kept sila and the precepts and so on. But as soon as the Buddha left Savatthi, they returned to their old ideas and teachers. There is little to match the foolishness of such acts in my view. In previous lives it was the same. Indeed the entire Tipitaka is full of tales about the foolishness and madness of wordlings -men and women. Nothing sexist about it, as Connie said. I got quite lost in all the details of the Kunala Jataka and commentaries (partly because I was watching the news while I looked at it;-), but I take these as good reminders of how dangerous and powerful anusaya (latent tendencies) are in both men and women and how precious is the opportunity to develop wisdom with detachment now. Otherwise we just continue endlessly in Samsara in our foolish ways, even if some of these tendencies are not so very obvious in this life. ***** > And was the cuckoo Kunala (the Bodhisatta) right in advising that we not > credit > anything a woman says? .... S: Certainly in this example;-): “Later, Punnamukha fell ill, and his hen birds deserted him and came to Kunála. He drove them away, ministered to Punnamukha, and cheered him.” I've found these reflections useful. Thank you. Metta, Sarah p.s Welcome to DSG too - I hope you find the posts useful. We ask all new members to read the Guidelines carefully;-) ============== 36376 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: CSC 4-[Sarah: "citta is..."] Hi Dan, Great to have all your contributions.....like Nina said, don’t over-tax yourself so you have to run away;-). --- "Dan D." wrote: > Dear Sarah (et al.), > Thanks for adding these excellent and pertinent elaborations. My > summary: Citta is citta, and three ways to talk about citta are as > agent, instrument, or activity. All involve object. ... S: Yes. In different contexts and with different people we use different language. If Jon and I are talking together, we don’t hesitate to say ‘I can see the moon’, because there’s no chance of misunderstanding. On DSG, I might well say and do say ‘Seeing consciousness sees visible object’, but it can still be misunderstood as you used to mention before, so then we stress there is ‘seeing, the experiencing of visible object’ and still it will be misunderstood. The problem is not the language, but the long accumulated wrong views with which we can read or hear or say anything. ... D: > Is there a way to read it as saying that the > agent/instrument/activity are really three ways > to "experience 'citta'" rather than describe it? ... S: No. When there is an understanding of the characteristic of citta, there isn’t any question or issue of different ways as I see it. Metta, Sarah p.s many kinds of right view/right understanding (see Vism,beg ch X1V), not just satipatthana, but you’re right about mundane and supramundane rt und. in MN117. Good comment of yours, whilst we remember the goal: D: “Clearly, direct insight has nothing to do with words or putting together any particular formulation of words or weaving together this theory or that theory. Discussion of insight or dhammas does require words, though, and it is good to try to find words that are helpful rather than words that are not helpful.” ====================== 36377 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Samatha, Vipassana, Anicca...Nibbana & Discussion ( 01 ) Hi Mike (& Htoo), Great to see the old gang around;-) I always appreciate your well-considered reflections. --- "m. nease" wrote: > Dear Sarah and Htoo, > > My problem with this in the past has simply been the meaning of the word > 'result'. Reading in English I haven't always taken it to mean > 'vipaaka', > so future natural decisive support condition could've been 'a result'. > So > my question is, when we read ""a wholesome or unwholesome kamma which, > although unable to produce a result by itself,", was the original Paali > here > 'vipaaka'? ..... S: I don’t have the Pali, but from the context of the previous paragraph, I think ‘result’ clearly refers to vipaka and kamma produced rupas. The previous para reads: “Therein, a wholesome or unwholesome volition that produces resultant [consciousness] (vipaka) and kamma-born materiality both at relinking and during activity is called a ‘generating’ kamma.” Then it continues with the para about ‘supporing’ kamma which I gave. (See also BB’s notes on p200 f in CMA, though of course the commentary itself is always the most precise as in the comments Dan and KenH were discussing). I’m pretty sure from the text that ‘future natural decisive support condition’ is not included in ‘result’ here. .... I liked your comment back to Phil about ‘one of the great values of abhidhamma’, ‘learning to tell kusala from akusala in a very, clear, specific way’. This is what I was trying to stress in part of my message to Htoo with regard to the development of any kind of bhavana - samatha as well as vipassana. While we continue to be fooled all the time by moha and lobha in particular, there will always be the taking for calm, what is really lobha most the time, I think. Metta, Sarah ======= 36378 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:58am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner11-Introduction(h) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== Introduction [contd] ***** Summarizing the cittas which perform their function in a sense door process and then in a the mind-door process when a rupa impinges on one of the sense-doors: -atita-bhavanga (past bhavanga) -bhavanga calana (vibrating bhavanga) -bhavangupaccheda (arrest bhavanga, the last bhavanga arising before the object is experienced through the sense door) -five-sense-door-adverting-consciousness (pancadvaravajjana citta) -sense-cognition (dvi-pancavinnana, seeing-consciousness, etc.) -receiving-consciousness (sampaticchana-citta) -investigating-consciousness (santirana-citta) -determining-consciousness (votthapana-citta) -7 javana-cittas (kusala cittas or akusala cittas in the case of non-arahats), -2 registering-consciousness (tadarammana-cittas which may or may not arise). Then there are bhavanga-cittas and the last two of these, arising before the object is experienced through the mind-door, are specifically designated by a name. The process runs as follows: -bhavanga calana (vibrating bhavanga) -bhavangupaccheda (which is in this case the mind-door through which the cittas of the mind-door process will experience the object) -mind-door-adverting-ccnsciousnes (mano-dvaravajjana-citta) -7 javanacitta -2 tadarammana-cittas (which may or may not arise) . After the mind-door process has been completed there are bhavanga-cittas again. ***** [Introduction to be continued] Metta, Sarah ====== 36379 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Mon Sep 13, 2004 11:52pm Subject: The Entrance... Friends: The Last Relinquishment: When ignorance of the 4 Noble Truths finally fully evaporates he no longer clings to sense pleasures, he no longer clings to views, he no longer clings to rules & rituals, he no longer clings to any identity... When he does not cling, he is not agitated !!! When he is not agitated, he personally attains Nibbana. He understands: Birth is ended, the Noble life has been lived, what had to be done is done, there is no more relapsing into any state of being... Majjhima Nikaya I 68: The shorter speech on the Lion's Roar. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=25072X PS: Today is the Buddhist Observance day (Uposatha): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/uposatha.html May many beings benefit from it's inherent advantage... All yours in the True Dhamma. Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. http://groups.msn.com/DirectDhamma/ http://uk.geocities.com/bhikkhu_samahita/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Buddha-Direct/ http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/TrueDhamma 36380 From: dighanakha Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 2:04am Subject: Re: flippin off the moon Jonothan Abbott wrote: Joop>> I for example like to study Nagarjuna and read in the book Joop>> of the (Sri Lankan born) Kalupahana that Nagarjuna is not a Joop>> Mahayanist. And Nagarjuna talks too about "two truths". Jon> There is no lack of writings by erudite scholars. But by Jon> what standard do you measure the views expressed by these Jon> other writers? Do you trust your own judgment in the matter? Hello Jon. If someone thinks "My own judgment is poor, so I'll trust the judgment of the ancient arahant theras as reported by Buddhaghosa" then it is by her own judgment that she has judged Buddhaghosa's judgment to be better than her own. And it is by her own judgment that she has judged the reportage of Buddhaghosa to be a faithful account of the understanding of the Buddha's arahant disciples (as the Theravada tradition claims) and not merely one competing sectarian interpretation among others (as modern scholars claim). So in a sense she is trusting her own judgment no less than a person who tries to read and understand the Tipitaka unaided by Buddhaghosa's exegesis, or aided by Buddhaghosa's exegesis but not treating it as absolutely authoritative. And when she reads the Commentaries she will either assume that the understanding to which her reading gives rise is correct (in which case she is trusting her own judgment), or she will turn to some guide outside herself (in which case she is STILL trusting her own judgment -- for the available guides are not of one mind as to what the Commentaries mean. So she is trusting that she is competent to judge which of the competing interpreters is the most reliable). So in choosing, say, K Sujin as a guide, she is trusting that it is Sujin's take on the Comms that is correct, and not that of, say, Mogok or Mahasi or any of the other Abhidhammists who start from the same premises as K Sujin but arrive at very different conclusions. It is only through her trust in her own judgment that she can make such a decision. So it seems that in the final analysis one is always -- and ineluctably -- trusting one's own judgment. Sartre remarks in a similar connection: "Il n'y a pas de signe dans le monde. Les catholiques rŽpondront: 'mais il y a des signes!' Admettons-le; c'est moi-m?me en tout cas qui choisis le sens qu'ils ont." (There are no signs in the world [as to what is right]. The Catholics will reply: 'Oh but there are signs!'. Fine, suppose we agree that there are; even so it is I myself who, in every case, must choose what they mean.) Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36381 From: dighanakha Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 2:23am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? C> Hello DN_N, all, Hello Christine, Thank you for responding. C> Gosh! Dighanaka Nutcracker (I got rhythm, I got music ...) C> you must have been typing away for hours and hours to bring C> us these obscure (though interestingly salacious and sexist) C> Jataka tales. No, I have Cowell's Jataka translation on a CD, so it only took a few keystrokes to copy and paste. I agree that they are interestingly salacious and sexist. But I don't think that they are obscure. At least they didn't used to be. If they seem so now it is probably because of the modern habit -- that Sarah recently referred to -- of people just picking the parts of the texts that confirm their prejudices. In fact there are several indications that "faults of women" texts like the Kunala Jataka once occupied a very prominent place in the Pali textual tradition. King Menandros was familiar with several of them and brought them up in his dialogues with Nagasena. In the case of the Kunala Jataka, its importance (in the eyes of the ancient commentators) can be seen from the elaborate Mahayana-style literary flourish with which it opens. These are normally only used to introduce very major texts like the Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta. "...the Great Being said, 'Well then, friend, I will tell you of the wickedness of womenfolk,' and he took Punnamukha and brought him to the Red Valley on a slope of the Himalayas and sat down on a rock of red arsenic at the foot of a sala tree, seven leagues in extent, while Punnamukha with his following sat on one side. Throughout all the Himalayas went a heavenly proclamation: 'Today Kunala, king of birds, seated on a rock of red arsenic in the Himalayas, with all the charm of a Buddha will preach the Dhamma: hearken to him.' By proclaiming it, one to another, the gods of the six Kamavacara worlds heard of it and for the most part assembled together: many deities too in the forest, nagas, garudas, and vultures proclaimed the fact. At that time Ananda, king of the vultures, with a following of ten thousand vultures dwelt upon Vulture Peak. And on hearing the commotion he thought, 'I will listen to the preaching of the Dhamma,' and came with his followers and sat apart. Narada too, the ascetic with the five Supernatural Faculties, dwelling in the Himalaya region, with his following of ten thousand ascetics, on hearing this heavenly proclamation, thought, 'My friend Kunala, they say, will speak of the faults of womenkind: I too must listen to this exposition,' and accompanied by a thousand ascetics he travelled thither by supernatural power and sat apart on one side. There was a great gathering like that which assembles to hear the teaching of Buddhas." That's some opening! We have 10,001 vultures, 11,002 ascetics, and an unspecified number of kamavacara devas, garudas and nagas, all gathered to listen to a cuckoo talk about how bad women are. Kunala then starts as he means to go on: "Verily, friend Punnamukha [another cuckoo], these creatures are not mere harlots, wenches or street-walkers, they are not so much strumpets as murderesses ... They are like unto robbers with braided locks, like a poisoned drink, like merchants that sing their own praises, crooked like a deer's horn, evil-tongued like snakes, like a pit that is covered over, insatiate as hell, as hard to satisfy as a she-ogre, like the all-rapacious Yama, all-devouring like a flame, sweeping all before it as a river, like the wind going where it lists, undiscriminating like Mount Neru, fruiting perenially like a poison tree." In the English translation the cuckoo twitters on in the same vein for another twenty pages. Then comes the closing flourish: "And the elves and the mighty nagas and the like in the Himalayas, and the devas standing in the air, all applauded, saying, 'Bravo! Spoken with all the charm of a Buddha!' " Besides the literary devices used to highlight the "faults of women" texts, it is also striking just how many of them there are. By my counting there are 17 Jatakas that are devoted exclusively to the subject of female depravity. Then there are an additional 126 in which the same subject forms either a minor theme in the main story, or the main theme in one of the sub-plots. Whichever of the ancient theras compiled this collection obviously thought that female depravity was something we need to be informed about. C> I'm still exhausted from the Vesantara Jataka controversy of C> last year (or was it the year before?). I have only been reading the dsg posts since July. I did look at some of the Vessantara posts in the files section, but I prefer Steve Collins' long discussion of it in his book Nirvana and other Buddhist Felicities. I think the Vessantara is much less problematic than the Kunala, provided one doesn't approach it literalistically. But I'll save further comments for another day. Dig >> "It's not a case of love or hate with womenfolk you see, Dig >> It is for gold they hug a man, as parasites a tree." Dig >> - from the Kunala Jataka Dig >> Is this true? C > It may be a case of trying to ask Ananda the Vulture King. C > Any Abhinnas - like knowledge of past lives? I was not asking if it's true that Ananda said it. I was asking if it's true. Do women hug a man for gold like parasites a tree? If it is true then of course we should be grateful to Ananda for warning us about it. If it isn't true, then why did the passage get passed by the ancient arahant elders? Is it possible that those who gave it the imprimatur weren't really arahant elders? Maybe they were just ordinary blokes who couldn't stand women and wrote some diatribes expressing their hate. And maybe the Mahavihara had to call them "arahant elders" in order to continue getting patronage from Sri Lankan kings. Who knows? Now it's common knowledge that *some* women (and some men too) are gold-diggers who just marry to get their hands on their partners' wealth. But the "faults of women" Jatakas are seldom talking about just some women. Their statements about women are given as universal propositions that apply to all of them. And I haven't found a single one where a man hugs a woman for her gold (which would actually be the likelier scenario, considering the Indian tradition of bride dowries). C > I'm just shattered - Ananda (i.e. The Buddha's Attendant Ananda) C > has always been my hero - just goes to show that one shouldn't C > cling to anyone. I prefer Ananda's antithesis Mahakassapa. And of course the perpetually displeased Dighanakha. Dig >> And was the cuckoo Kunala (the Bodhisatta) right in advising Dig >> that we not credit anything a woman says? C > Now this is trickier - I hesitate to practise Species-ism C > ... but, really, what would a cuckoo know? Can't even bring C > up their own children ... But the text presents the Buddha as quoting the cuckoo with approval! And the text has the approval of the ancient arahant elders and the imprimatur of its translator, the Great Commentator Buddhaghosa. ;-) So for dsg's hardcore members I would expect the cuckoo's words to be no less authoritative than the Abhidhammatthasangaha or the Dispeller of Delusion. We shouldn't be just picking and choosing the parts that support our previous views, as Sarah likes to remind us. And if this approach to the texts is going to be followed consistently, we should be seeing messages like this: "In the Kunala Jataka we learn that all women are actually different from how they conventionally appear to be. For deluded worldlings it is so hard to see clearly that women are a brood of evil vipers, but with suitable accumulations there will arise that aspect of panna called the wicked-female-detection cetasika. At that point we will know for ourselves that what is conventionally called a 'good wife' or a 'caring mother' is really nothing but a rapacious she-ogre bent on cutting her husband's throat and drinking his blood, or selling her children to a tribe of cannibals so that she can be left free to go and play the harlot with an elephant groom. It may be many lifetimes (and many cut throats) before we reach this point, but in the meantime our study of the Kunala Jataka and related texts will help us to investigate the women that we meet in our daily life. A theoretical understanding of women is a foundation for a direct understanding that will arise when the suitable causes and conditions are present." Dig >> What practical implications do passages like this have for Dig >> those committed to a fundamentalist hermeneutic in which Dig >> everything in the Commentaries is treated as infallible? C > I think it was established at that time of the Vesantara C > Controversy (at least, to MY satisfaction) that the Jataka C > verses, though a little incomprehensible at times, are part C > of the Tipitaka, but the Jataka tales aren't. Sure, the verses are considered to be in the Tipitaka and the stories are Commentary. I don't think there's any controversy about that. But as far as the sexist material goes this doesn't help us much because there is actually more misogyny in the verses than in the stories. In most Jatakas of this kind the stories just give examples of individual women behaving badly or showing flaws of one sort or another. But then come the verses informing us that we should expect this behaviour from ALL women, along with recommendations that ALL women should be despised, avoided, distrusted, and disbelieved. Worse still, they should be spoken to aggressively to keep them in their place. Or rather, the Bodhisatta's doing so is viewed as commendable. Kunala to his cuckoo hens (who are all graciously ministering to his every need): "Perish, ye vile creatures, yea, perish utterly, ye thievish, knavish creatures, heedless, flighty and ungrateful as ye are, like the wind going wheresoever ye list." "After these words the Master said, "Surely, Brethren, even when I was in an animal form, I knew well the ingratitude, the wiles, the wickedness and immorality of womenfolk, and at that time so far from being in their power I kept them under my control." The attitude displayed here is what I would expect to find in the uglier sort of rap song ("I live in da ghettoes an' I got so many hoes, an' I beat da bitches hard to keep'em on their toes, cause I'm da man that's in control..."). I doubt if even Steve Collins could salvage it. So the point of my question above is that this material, though supposedly approved by the ancient arahant theras and the Great Commentator Buddhaghosa, is seriously at odds with what is taught about women in the other Nikayas of the Sutta Pitaka, and seriously disconfirmed by reality (it only takes one exception to falsify a universal proposition, e.g. one woman who occasionally speaks the truth). How do those of you committed to the interpretive approach recommended by the hardcore dsg members deal with this problem? Sincerely, Dighanakha Nutcracker _____________________________ Truly, Master Gotama, I am of this persuasion, of this view: 'everything is not pleasing to me.' (Dighanakha Sutta) 36382 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 3:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perversions Dear Nina, (Phil at the end), --- nina van gorkom wrote: S:> >> There may not be any wrong view or idea of self. For example, when > there > > is atta-sa~n~naa, there is not necessarily any wrong view of self. It > is a > > vipallasa (perversion) of sa~n~naa, but not necessaily ditthi > vipallasa > > (perversion of view).< > > ***** > > S: In other words, there may be a distortion of perception in some > regard > > as there is with every unwholesome citta arising, but not necessarily > > wrong view. > > N: I still find it difficult to understand what atta-sa~n~naa is. What > kind > of atta? Perhaps just with clinging, and not necessarily wrong view? .... S: Yes. For example now, we may look at our hands as we type or look at our face in the mirror when we wash. We recognise the face and there’s bound to be clinging and ignorance and therefore perversion of sanna, but usually no wrong view or idea of a self existing at these times, I think. Only panna can know when there’s awareness what kind of kilesa it is appearing. .... N: >It is opposed to anattaa-sañña, and when hearing these in one context I just > wonder. Good for India? > In B. Dict. it says: the sotapanna eradicates the perversion of sañña, > citta > and ditthi that the impersonal is a personality. What do you think? .... S: I’ll start jotting down points for India. Good idea. Yes, this kind of perversion of sanna and citta accompanying ditthi is eradicated by a sotapanna, but still perversion of sanna and citta accompanying ignorance, attachment (without wrong view) and aversion such as when looking in the mirror or at our hands or the computer when there’s no dana, sila or bhavana. Like when a child plays for hours with his or her toys --lots of lobha and perversion of sanna, but not necessarily any wrong view. For a start, there’s usually no thought about anything relating to Truths or practice or right view. ***** --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Sarah and all, > I found more material, Patisambidhamagga, Ch VIII (p. 277). We also > talked > about it long ago. I have the Thai Co which I only partly understand. It > brings us back to the child, villager and money changer who see a coin, > as a > simile. But now it refers to the degree of ignorance. Sañña is the > weakest > perversion, citta is less weak and wrong view, ditthi is the strongest. .... S: Right. So back to the example of touching a table in ignorance of the hardness experienced, there isn’t necessarily any ditthi, the strongest perversion arising or appearing as object to be known. Now, if we try to touch it in a special way or try to experience hardness or think we should focus or label it, then maybe. Again, only sati can be aware of its characteristic when it appears as I see it. I hope I haven’t misunderstood any of your points. Btw, the letter you wrote on ‘space’ was very helpful. I may quote it back to Htoo and ask for any of his comments. Also your intro to Vis XIV.99 (36218) is excellent. I encourage everyone to print it out or read it carefully when they have time. So much good material elaborated on as this passage from the Vism: N: >The Vis. (XIV, 41) states about the bodysense: The great Elements are the support of the bodysense.< .... S: In appreciation and I encourage others to also jot down topics or questions for India too. (Phil, we will try to make recordings available - we’re working on this side of things as well as the searching of DSG archives. Hope to have something on both fronts before we go away at least). Metta, Sarah ======= 36383 From: matt roke Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 3:13am Subject: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi, Howard, Herman, Dan and Larry, Excuse me for butting in and giving my simplistic non-scientific view on this subject. ===================== Howard > Dark is the absence of light. Silence is the absence of sound. We can experience darkness, can we not? We also can experience silence. And they are distinguishable!! So absences are realities. The question is: Where are they experienced? I think the correct answer may be "via the mind door". (And yet, doesn't it seem that one actually SEES darkness? I think so. So the matter is unclear. Dan> I do believe I don't rightly know what it's like to "experience darkness" as a reality. Herman> I think darkness is experienced in terms of light, and light is experienced in terms of darkness. All in an analog fashion, with many grades of distinction possible. There is no contextless experience ie absolute experience. Howard> Hmm, maybe. But do you really think they are on the same footing? Do you really think that light is the (relative) absence of darkness? Isn't light the positive, and darkness just the absence of it. (But may not. I'm really not sure. My mind seems to flip-flop on this one. ;-) A possibility, and this is what you may have in mind, is that light and darkness are not simple negations or absences of the other, but, instead, phenomenologically, light is an experience (or range of experiences), darkness is another (range of) experience(s), and they are experiences that are complementary in occurrence, with each dispelling the other to some extent. (One doesn't usually speak of darkness dispelling light, but there is no reason why one could not.) However, my inclination is to view (a degree of ) darkness as the mere (relative) absence of light, and ignorance as the mere (total or partial) absence of wisdom, where, by 'wisdom' I understand "clear, bright understanding". Larry> In regard to whether light dispells dark or dark dispells light, the flip-flopping from one position to another is actually delusion (aka ignorance, bewilderment, doubt, moha). See below. The antidote is to look at sabhava, the actuality of what happens. Over a period of time various colors arise and cease. Dark is actually black, not to be confused with "no eye consciousness". Black also arises and ceases. Black neither dispells white nor white black. Furthermore eye-consciousness doesn't dispell no-eye-consciousness, or vice-versa. However, the end of kamma does dispell kamma result, one manifestation of which is eye-consciousness. Howard> Indeed one sense of 'dark' is "black", and black is a color. But another sense is of dimming -from slight to complete. Darkness in that sense is absence of light. Certainly ignorance is absence or obscuration of wisdom. I don't think the matter is as simple as you present it. When a sighted person gets an eye illness or trauma to the eyes and s/he "descends into darkness," as it is said, does s/he end up seeing the color black? Perhaps. I don't know. Do you know? It would be interesting to hear the facts. Herman> I'm sure you'll agree that modern science also looks at the actuality of what happens, perhaps with more precision than introspection alone is capable of. It is no longer sufficient to consider seeing in terms of colour only, and the concept of luminance is vital. So we have chrominance and luminance, colour and brightness. There are eye receptors known as cones (sense bases for colour) and eye receptors for luminance known as rods (sense base for brightness). Darkness and lightness are not about colour but about brightness, in my opinion. =========================== Whether we are in a place where things are clearly discernible, only slightly discernible or not discernible at all, the only realities are seeing and visible object. *Light*, *void of light* and *darkness*, along with black and colours, are concepts experienced in the mind door. If there is no seeing and visible object then there can’t be the concept that a place *void of light* is *dark*. MattR 36384 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 3:33am Subject: Re: "... as parasites a tree." ??? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dighanakha" wrote: > > > Sure, the verses are considered to be in the Tipitaka and the > stories are Commentary. I don't think there's any controversy > about that. But as far as the sexist material goes this > doesn't help us much because there is actually more misogyny in > the verses than in the stories. then come the verses > informing us that we should expect this behaviour from ALL women, > along with recommendations that ALL women should be despised, > avoided, distrusted, and disbelieved. > So the point of my question above is that this material, though > supposedly approved by the ancient arahant theras and the Great > Commentator Buddhaghosa, is seriously at odds with what is taught > about women in the other Nikayas of the Sutta Pitaka, and > seriously disconfirmed by reality (it only takes one exception to > falsify a universal proposition, e.g. one woman who occasionally > speaks the truth). > ++++++ Dear Dighanaka, Does Buddhaghosa say absolutely that all women are to be thought of in this way? It seems strange that he would, because in several passages he praises arahant Bhikkhuni, or talks of the benefits of showing worship to ones mother. I think we occasionally see sentiments making observations about women in other nikayas that may seem harsh: From the Anguttara Nikaya (II Chapter VI) "What is the reason, Lord, what is the cause that womenfolk do not preside ina court of justice,' nor engage in an occupation, nor go to a foreign country ?" "Ananda, a woman is given to anger. Ananda, woman is envious. Ananda, a women is greedy. Ananda, woman is poor in wisdom. This is the reason, Ananda, this is the cause, why women- folk do not preside in a court of justice, nor engage in an occupation, nor go to a foreign country." RobertK 36385 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:15am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 061 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Akasanancayatana jhana is the 1st arupa jhana. In that jhana, there arise akasanancayatana arupavacara arupakusala cittas if non-arahats are developing these cittas and akasanancayatana arupavacara arupakiriya cittas if arahats are developing these cittas. The viewer is citta. The viewee here is panatta, boundless space. This space is not a real. This arises from after leaving lohita patibhaga nimitta which has been filled the whole universe endlessly. The 1st arupa jhana citta takes the object panatta as all other 15 rupavacara cittas take pannatta as their object. Now the arupa jhanalabhi has to practise his arupa jhana to become proficient. This again has to go through all five exercises. Avajjana vasi contemplates on jhana factors and the object. There are only ekaggata and upekkha vedana and the object is boundless space. Samapajjana vasi helps him to access to his arupa jhana whenever he wants to stay in arupa jhana. Adhitthana vasi helps him to prescribe a predetermined for staying in arupa jhana exactly. Vutthana vasi helps him to be able to emerge from his arupa jhana at his will. Paccavakkhana vasi helps him to scrutinise on his arupa jhana. Through these five exercises, he become to see the weakness in his 1st arupa jhana. That weakness is the object which is akasa, boundless space that arises from leaving of lohita patibhaga nimitta. At any time, if this lohita patibhaga nimitta arises, he will fall back to rupa jhanas and finally back to kama. Through repeated contemplation, he realises that he must leave boundless space in order to avoid falling back to rupa jhana. When he contemplates on this matter, he starts to notice that there is akasa or boundless space. That space is viewed by akasanancayatana arupa jhana arupakusala citta. Citta actually has 1 cittakkhana or 3 submoments called uppada, thi, and bhanga. After bhanga citta falls away. Even though citta is impermanent, they arise in succession and as the object is boundless, the citta which views that boundless space is also boundless. Now, the practitioner just see his 1st arupa jhana arupakusala cittas which is boundless and countless and endless and limitless. At a time, while ekaggata arise in succession and well calm and upekkha vedana continues to work well with ekaggata and as he is totally free of any hindrances, the 2nd arupa jhana arise. This citta 71st citta is called 'vinnanancayatana arupavacara arupakusala citta'. The citta is 2nd arupa jhana citta. The object is the 1st arupa jhana citta. This is paramattha dhamma as cittas are paramattha dhamma. When this kind of arupa jhana citta arises in arahats, they are called 'vinnanancayatana arupavacara arupakiriya citta, which is 79th citta of 89 cittas. If the practitioner is not an arahat and when he dies, he will be reborn in 2nd arupa brahma bhumi with patisandhi citta called 'vinnanancayatana arupavacara arupavipaka citta'. This is 75th citta of 89 cittas in total. This citta is also bhavanga cittas and cuti citta in that 2nd arupa brahma bhumi. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome and they will be valuable. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts. 36386 From: Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi, Herman (and Larry) - In a message dated 9/14/04 12:41:09 AM Eastern Daylight Time, hhofman@t... writes: > Darkness and lightness are not about colour but about brightness, in my > opinion. > ========================= Herman, that's the way I take it also, but there *is* an interesting relationship between (phenomenological) darkness and shades-of-black color that I don't properly understand. 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) 36387 From: Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 2:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hi, Sarah - I disagree with you on this matter, Sarah. I believe that the anti-feminism quoted in your post copied below (and that's what I read there) is good evidence for not considering the Jataka Tales, stories, and commentaries - or much of them, at least - to be Buddha word, but instead reworkings in the Buddhist context of traditional morality tales expressing prejudices existing in the extant culture of the time. I really don't think that anti-feminist speech should be accepted as skillful means of the Buddha and apologetics be offered up for it. What you quote from suttas in which the Buddha points out the preeminance of the attraction women hold for men is, as you point out, balanced by mention of the corresponding impact that men have on women. I suspect that the anti-feminism expressed in the Jataka quotes, were it really the perspective of the Buddha, would have been enough to preclude the Buddha's originating the sangha of nuns. With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/14/04 4:13:50 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Dear Friend, > > --- dighanakha wrote: > >What practical implications do passages like this have for those > >committed to a > >fundamentalist hermeneutic in which everything in the Commentaries is > >treated as > >infallible? > .... > S: To start with your last comment, let me set myself up here as the fall > guy or rather fall bird for the ‘fundamentalist hermeneutics’ (whatever > they are) and see if I can help at all in this regard;-) > .... > >In the Commentary to the Jataka Ananda the Vulture King says: > <...> > >"It's not a case of love or hate with womenfolk you see, > >It is for gold they hug a man, as parasites a tree." > >- from the Kunala Jataka > > > >Is this true? > .... > S: Certainly it says this (and the other quotes you gave). The Buddha > understood human nature and the extent of the kilesa (defilements) far > better than us. Even in the Kunala Jataka verses themselves we read some > pretty strong language. For a start: > > [419] “.....the Master said, “Surely, Brethren, even when I was in an > animal form, I knew well the ingratitude, the wiles, the wickedness and > immorality of women-folk, and at that time so far from being in their > power I kept them under my control,â€? and when by these words he had > removed the spiritual discontent of these Brethren, the Master held his > peace.â€? > > So is this true? > > We can find a summary of the full story at this link: > http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/ku/kunaala_jat_536.htm > Kunála Játaka (No.536) > > Here is part of it: > > >Kunála, king of the Citrakokilas, though well served by his hen birds, > always despised them and found fault with them. The king of the > Phussakokilas, Punnamukha, on the other hand, always sang the praises of > his escort. One day the two kings met, and Punnamukha asked Kunála why he > was not more gracious to his ladies. "Because I know too much about > women," was the answer; but Punnamakha was not in a mood to discuss the > matter any more. > > Later, Punnamukha fell ill, and his hen birds deserted him and came to > Kunála. He drove them away, ministered to Punnamukha, and cheered him. > Some time after, Kunála, seated on the Manosilátala in Himavá (according > to Buddhaghosa, D.ii.675, this was on the banks of the Kunáladaha), > started to tell his friend of the wickedness of women. Hearing of this, > many inhabitants of numerous worlds came to listen to him, among them > Ananda, king of the vultures, and the ascetic Nárada. Many were the > instances given by Kunála to illustrate the deceitfulness, ingratitude and > immorality of women < > <...> > >Kunála's diatribe was followed by Ananda's, and his by Nárada's, each > claiming to speak from facts within their knowledge. < > <....> > >In the stories related by Kunála, the bird-king is identified with one of > the characters concerned in each story, so that he was able to speak with > authority. This Játaka was related in order to destroy the discontent that > rose in the hearts of the Sákiyan youths, kinsmen of the Buddha, who, > having entered the Order, were troubled by the thought of the wives they > had left behind. The Buddha therefore took them to the Himalaya, showed > them the magnificent beauty of the region, particularly the miraculous > splendours of the Kunáladaha, and there preached to them. At the end of > the Játaka they all became arahants. We are told that that very day they > became arahants (J.v.412-56; also DA.ii.674ff; AA.i.173). < > .... > S: I think it’s important to note: > > 1) the Jataka verses and introductions carry little or no meaning without > the Jataka commentary stories to which they refer. > > 2) We need to read the stories in context and understand the compassionate > reasons for telling them. So as summarised above, ‘This Játaka was related > in order to destroy the discontent that rose in the hearts of the Sákiyan > youths’ and by the end, the same bhikkhus had become arahants. It reminds > me of other accounts of young discontent bhikkhus, infatuated with women > who needed to be taught some pretty tough lessons in order to remain as > bhikkhus, such as Nanda and the celestial nymphs or the bhikkhu who had to > see Sirima, the courtesan’s rotting corpse. There are many accounts in the > Vinaya too where the stories behind the laying down of the rules with > regard to women are told. > > 3) The same Jataka is therefore at the same time in effect telling about > the foolishness of men, ensnared by lobha. Read Connie’s translation of > the sutta > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/35323 > > “Naaha.m, bhikkhave, a~n~na.m ekaruupampi samanupassaami ya.m eva.m > purisassa citta.m pariyaadaaya ti.t.thati yathayida.m, bhikkhave, > itthiruupa.m. Itthiruupa.m, bhikkhave, purisassa citta.m pariyaadaaya > ti.t.thatii"ti. Pa.thama.m. > > "I do not say, bhikkhus, there is another single thing of form, the > perception of which so persistently overwhelms and stays in a man's mind, > bhikkhus, as the form of a woman. The form of a woman, bhikkhus, > persistently overwhelms and stays in a man's mind." This is the first > thing.â€? > etc > (Of course the same applies to women). > > 4) Indeed we don’t need to wait til Jataka 536 to read about the > foolishness of men. We can just open the texts at the very first Jataka > (no 1) to read about truly foolish men who were taken by Anathapindika to > listen to the Buddha who in the ‘thunderous tones as of a young lion > roaring......in a voice of eightfold perfection, the charm of which > ravished the ear, he preached to them the Truth in a discourse full of > sweetness and bright with varied beauty.â€? The men ‘rose up with hearts > converted’, threw away their other doctrines, took refuge in the Buddha, > kept sila and the precepts and so on. But as soon as the Buddha left > Savatthi, they returned to their old ideas and teachers. There is little > to match the foolishness of such acts in my view. In previous lives it was > the same. > > Indeed the entire Tipitaka is full of tales about the foolishness and > madness of wordlings -men and women. Nothing sexist about it, as Connie > said. > > I got quite lost in all the details of the Kunala Jataka and commentaries > (partly because I was watching the news while I looked at it;-), but I > take these as good reminders of how dangerous and powerful anusaya > (latent tendencies) are in both men and women and how precious is the > opportunity to develop wisdom with detachment now. Otherwise we just > continue endlessly in Samsara in our foolish ways, even if some of these > tendencies are not so very obvious in this life. > ***** > >And was the cuckoo Kunala (the Bodhisatta) right in advising that we not > >credit > >anything a woman says? > .... > S: Certainly in this example;-): > “Later, Punnamukha fell ill, and his hen birds deserted him and came to > Kunála. He drove them away, ministered to Punnamukha, and cheered him.â€? > > I've found these reflections useful. Thank you. > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s Welcome to DSG too - I hope you find the posts useful. We ask all new > members to read the Guidelines carefully;-) /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) 36388 From: Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 2:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi, Matt - In a message dated 9/14/04 6:19:27 AM Eastern Daylight Time, mattroke@h... writes: > Whether we are in a place where things are clearly discernible, only > slightly discernible or not discernible at all, the only realities are > seeing and visible object. > > *Light*, *void of light* and *darkness*, along with black and colours, are > concepts experienced in the mind door. > > If there is no seeing and visible object then there can’t be the concept > that a place *void of light* is *dark*. > ========================= I get your point, and I think there is some correctness in it. Yet ... . The "yet" is the factthatf the concept of (relative) darkness or (degees of) dimness appears to be well based in directly observed phenomena. So I find that I remain less than fully convinced on the matter. It may well be the case, and probably *is* the case, that absences in general are known only through the mind door, but that in itself does not make them concept only. There certainly are things that are not mere concept but are known only through the mind door. According to Abhidhamma, for example, the paramattha dhamma of "water" is known only through the mind door, and the paramattha dhamma of nibbana, the "ultimate emptiness," is known only through the mind door. 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) 36389 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi Howard and Larry, op 14-09-2004 06:15 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: Howard quotes Larry. >> >> In regard to whether light dispells dark or dark dispells light, the >> flip-flopping from one position to another is actually delusion (aka >> ignorance, bewilderment, doubt, moha). See below. >> >> The antidote is to look at sabhava, the actuality of what happens... N: I like Larry's way of describing delusion. We may use different names for what appears through eyes, colour, light, black, but how can we find out what it is? By being aware now. That is the actuality of what happens, as Larry says. L: Over >> a period of time various colors arise and cease. Dark is actually black, >> not to be confused with "no eye consciousness". N: We cannot imagine what it means to be without eye-consciousness. Because when we close our eyes, there is still something appearing and we can notice the difference between dark and light. It is certainly not the complete darkness of blind beings. L: Black also arises and >> ceases. Black neither dispells white nor white black. Furthermore >> eye-consciousness doesn't dispell no-eye-consciousness, or vice-versa. >> However, the end of kamma does dispell kamma result, one manifestation >> of which is eye-consciousness. N: The arahat still receives vipaaka, but that is the result of former kamma, before he was an arahat. But he does not as an arahat commit kamma that can bring result. When he passes away there will not be rebirth, no eye and seeing anymore. > ========================== H: Indeed one sense of 'dark' is "black", and black is a color. But > another sense is of dimming - from slight to complete. Darkness in that sense > is > absence of light. N: See above, Howard, what is the reality now, its characteristic? The only way to understand seeing, colour, etc. H: Certainly ignorance is absence or obscuration of wisdom. I > don't think the matter is as simple as you present it. When a sighted person > gets > an eye illness or trauma to the eyes and s/he "descends into darkness," as it > is said, does s/he end up seeing the color black? N: See above. Nina. 36390 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:08am Subject: Vis. XIV, 100 and Tiika. Vis. XIV, 100 and Tiika. Text Vis. XIV,100: But that 'with root-cause' is (42)-(49) that associated with non-greed, etc., as the cause of the result. It is of eight kinds because it is classed according to joy, etc., like the profitable of the sense sphere (1)-(8). But it does not occur with respect to the six objects through giving, etc., as the profitable does; for it occurs only with respect to the six objects that are included among limited states, as rebirth-linking, life-continuum, death, and registration. But the prompted and unprompted states should be understood here as due to the source it has come from, and so on. And while there is no difference in the associated states, the resultant should be understood as passive like the reflection of a face in a looking-glass while the profitable is active like the face. ========================= Intro Vis. XIV, 100. Kusala kamma can produce eight types of ahetuka (rootless) kusala vipaakacittas and eight types of sahetuka (with roots) kusala vipaakacittas. In this section the Vis. deals with the eight types of sahetuka kusala vipaakacittas. ========================================= Vis. text: But that 'with root-cause' is (42)-(49) that associated with non-greed, etc., as the cause of the result. It is of eight kinds because it is classed according to joy, etc., like the profitable of the sense sphere. ========================================= N: They are results of kusala kamma. As we have seen, of the eight types of kusala citta of the sense-sphere four types are accompanied by wisdom, four are without wisdom, four types are accompanied by pleasant feeling, four types are accompanied by indifferent feeling, four types are unprompted and four types are prompted. The sahetuka vipaakacittas that are the results of kusala kamma are classified in the same way, but they do not perform wholesome deeds like giving, etc. ========================================== Vis text: But it does not occur with respect to the six objects through giving, etc., as the profitable does; for it occurs only with respect to the six objects that are included among limited states, as rebirth-linking, life-continuum, death, and registration. ========================================== N: The Tiika explains that the sahetuka vipaakacittas can be accompanied by the same three roots as the kusala cittas, but that these three roots are vipaaka, result. The sahetuka vipaakacittas have been taught as eightfold, in a similar way as the kusala cittas, they are kamaavacara cittas (of the sense-sphere) and they experience objects. Kaamaavacara cittas experience sense objects and these are limited (paritta, meaning inferior) or low (hiina); they are different from the jhaanacittas that do not experience sense objects but and lokuttara cittas that experience nibbaana. Thus, the sahetuka vipaakacittas that are the results of kusala kamma of the sense sphere also experience sense objects. They can perform the functions of rebirth-linking, life-continuum, death, and registration. The function of registration only occurs in the case of cittas of the sense sphere and in the sensuous planes of existence. Thus, its object is inferior, a sense object. The vipaakacittas that are rebirth-consciousness, bhavanga-citta (arising throughout life in between the processes of citta) and dying-consciousness do not experience objects that impinge on the six doorways, but they experience the same object as the last javanacittas of the previous life. The Tiika uses the term mahaa-vipaaka, and this term denotes the sahetuka vipaakacittas of the sense-sphere (with wholesome roots, sobhana hetus). Mahaa means great. They experience six classes of objects, thus, many kinds of objects. Kusala citta of the sense-sphere is called mahaa-kusala citta, it is accompanied by alobha and adosa and it may be accompanied by amoha or paññaa. The Tiika explains that though the sahetuka vipaakacittas are similar to the mahaa-kusala cittas because of the accompanying cetasikas, their way of occurring (pavatti-aakaara) is different. The kusala citta performs kusala through the doors kamma [N: of body, speech or mind], but the vipaakacitta does not. The vipaakacitta does not produce bodily intimation or speech intimation. N: The vipaakacittas do not perform deeds of generosity, etc. Bodily intimation and speech intimation are ruupas produced by citta which intends to convey a meaning through body or speech. Cittas can convey a meaning or intention in an unwholesome way or in a wholesome way. Speech can be wrong speech or right speech. ========================================== Vis text: But the prompted and unprompted states should be understood here as due to the source it has come from, and so on. ========================================== N: In a footnote the Tiika text is rendered by the translator of the Vis. : N: Kusala kamma that is unprompted, not induced, is stronger than kusala kamma that is induced, performed by a citta that has some hesitation. As we have seen in the section on kusala citta: But it is not so that unprompted kusala kamma must necessarily produce sahetuka vipaakacitta that is unprompted. We read in the Commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (Topics of Abhidhamma, p. 193, 194) that excellent kusala kamma with three roots produces rebirth with three roots and that inferior kusala kamma with three roots and excellent kusala kamma with two roots produces rebirth with two roots. Different opinions of teachers are quoted by Buddhaghosa (Expositor (II, p. 358 and following). ========================================== Vis. text: And while there is no difference in the associated states, the resultant should be understood as passive like the reflection of a face in a looking-glass while the profitable is active like the face. ========================================== N: The Tiika explains the difference between active (ussaaha or with effort) and passive (nirussaaha, without effort). We read: The Tiika states that also because kusala cittas are powerful while they occur, they have the meaning of being active. The arahat has completely eradicated ignorance, clinging and conceit which were present in the succession of cittas as latent tendencies. For him there are no more cittas which can cause the arising of vipaakacittas. He has no more rebirth. Kusala kamma can condition rebirth in seven sensuous planes of existence: one human plane and six classes of deva planes. These are the seven happy sensuous planes of existence. So long as defilements have not been eradicated completely, we run the risk of an unhappy rebirth after our life term has come to an end. This should not discourage us, it can encourage us to develop right understanding at this moment, so that ignorance, the first link in the Dependent Origination can weaken and eventually be eradicated. ********* Nina. 36391 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg]space, approach to rupa. Hi Howard, op 12-09-2004 17:48 schreef upasaka@a... op upasaka@a...: > Thank you for the following. I see that I misunderstood what you meant > by "inward space." All that you mean by it is space within the body. (As far > as I view this matter, this is concept only.) N: It is one of the 28 kinds of rupa, thus, a dhamma, not a concept. Also rupas outside the body do not arise in isolation, like sound. It is accompanied by hardness and seven more inseparable rupas. They arise in groups. I do not know much about groups of rupa. I understand that in a body there are octads, nonads, decads, etc. and I find it understandable that these groups do not permeate each other and here inward space has a function. I have quoted some passages on rupakkhandha and I know that you find those hard to accept. But, Howard, should we reject what we do not understand yet? You can always ask about what you do not find understandable. I have read your posts on the D.O. The Visuddhimagga does not deal yet with it, it first deals with all dhammas as the soil in which understanding grows. Also the D.O. is that soil and after that the Vis. deals with the stages of insight. The soil has to be right, otherwise there is no basis for the growth of understanding. We read many details, such as about rupas, but these can help to correct wrong views we all have (including myself!), they correct on the level of intellectual understanding. If we do not carefully study rupa, citta and cetasika we are bound to have wrong interpretations of the D.O. We read Vis. XVII, 304: [Kinds of profundity:] now the Blessed One's word, The penetration is by developed insight. You are still wondering about . But the understanding of the fact that there are four conditions for different types of rupa can help. There is not merely citta as a condition for rupa. I agree that when a sense object impinges on a sensedoor, we do not have to think is this outside or inside. There can be attention to just the characteristic that appears. But some background info can help, also about rupa arising before it can be an object, and sense-base rupa arising before it becomes a doorway. Then you see how intricate conditions are, beyond control. All such details help. I like Htoo's straightforward and direct way of speaking about conditions: > Htoo: Nama dhamma and rupa dhamma are working on their own accord and there is > no one dictating this dhamma arise here and that dhamma arise there and this > dhamma disappear now and that dhamma disappear there and so on. > > Unlike suttanta teachings, patthana dhamma do not involve any personal things > or beings or sattas. But just dhamma arising in their own accord and interact > and interconnected each other and one another.. End quote. Howard, I know that you hace confidence in conditions, but I think that in order to understand D.O. we have to study the different types of condition, also with regard to D.O. Which reality conditions which other reality by which specific condition. Details are necessary so that we do not give our own interpretation to D.O. Nina. 36392 From: Andrew Levin Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:27am Subject: Re: Bagels, Forest & Happy Walks --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Levin" <. > > > > ++++++++++++ > > > Dear Andrew , > > > I quote a sutta about the advantages of hearing/considering (and > > > insighting) Dhamma: > > > http://www.abhidhamma.org/anguttara_nikaya.%20(2)%2020htm.htm > > > Anguttara Nikaya > >> Robert, this looks somewhat dogmatic to me, to assume that one > can be > > reborn in the devas going on the mere recitation of the texts. > > Careful consideration is again something not possible for me at > this > > point, I'm not well enough to read through and develop an > > understanding, as I've said previously, and even pondering over > would > > be difficult for me at this stage. > >++++++++ > Dear Andrew, > as I said before it takes time for understanding to accumulate. It > is not only reciting of texts but it depends on the study > conditioning kusala. Robert, the point I am trying to get across is that I can't even study. When I open the book up, there is no studying, no ability to correlate one concept with another, there is only reading, as if it were a novel. So I'm not currently able to put together an understanding. I'm afraid I'm just making things worse by accumulating blocks upon blocks of knowledge. > > Sukin wrote about pariyatti (the theory, the study):"Because of this > lack of pariyatti, here referring to the panna of > this level, there is misunderstanding of what practice involves. > Pariyatti is not the `verbal knowledge' but indeed the level of > understanding which *knows* at least the value of developing > satipatthana and that this very moment is conditioned and anatta. And > though it may only be `thinking' in the beginning about just fallen > away dhammas, it knows that what ever level of panna arises is just > what is meant to be, and with this is already some detachment. > > And in this case, more understanding about conditionality and anatta > is accumulating as sankhara. Which is why, without correct pariyatti > and knowing conditioned realities in daily life, one will be deluded > into thinking that *more* can be achieved through some deliberate > effort on one's part via some formal practice or `deliberate > looking'. And this is to go against the principal of anatta > and conditionality."" > > When we think it is 'me" who is trying to understand it may seem > easy or hard, helpful or unhelpul. But when we know it is only > conditioned phenomena arising (no me anywhere) the study is purely > a reminder of what is real now. > RobertK 36393 From: Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 7:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi, Nina - In a message dated 9/14/04 2:08:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nilo@e... writes: > N: I like Larry's way of describing delusion. ======================== That position, as I understand it, is that the flip-flopping from one position to another is delusion. I would agree that such flip-flopping amounts to confusion, which is an instance of ignorance. However, holding to a wrong position is an even stronger form of delusion. Sometimes the recognition of being unsure about a matter and holding off on decision is a first glimmering of wisdom! Part of what I think you have pointed out, Nina, and that you indicate is part of Larry's point as well - and I paraphrase here - is that the best approach to wisdom is to not to cling to views, but, instead, to carefully examine "... what appears through eyes, colour, light, black, ..." and to determine "how can we find out what it is? By being aware now." I certainly agree with this. 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) 36394 From: ericlonline Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 1:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anapanasati/ Jon II Hey Jon, J> I've been through your various posts to me in which you refer to SN 54:13,and I think you make two main points. I hope you won't mind if I try to summarise them and give a response to all together. No Problem J> Eric, I read you as saying: A. The teaching on anapanasati given in SN 54:13 (and in the other anapanasati suttas) is not specifically directed to monks who are leading a certain lifestyle and who are already practising anapanasati. Yep J> B. Anapanasati is prescribed by the Buddha for all as the single factor that if developed will lead to the development of satipatthana. I was just pointing out how important the Buddha considered it is all. J > On the first point, I'd just like to draw your attention to the following passage from SN 54:13, namely: "Now how is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination? "There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore.Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. "[1] Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; ... J> I see the monk described here as necessarily being a person of well developed samatha and satipatthana. In this case the Buddha was talking to monks. But check out in the Samyuta 41.8 & 41.9. Here the householder Citta is talking with two ascetics from other traditions. Citta, a householder like you and me, says he has attained the 4th Jhana and is reputed to be a non-returner. Wonder how he attained to the 4th Jhana? Since he is a non-returner, and had jhanic capabilites, I am sure he must of practised some sort of samatha meditation. Do you think it possibly was Anapanasati? J > On the second point, I think you may be giving too much emphasis to the reference to a single factor. Consider for example the following 'single factor' sutta from AN I (Ch XVI, 1-10; PTS Gradual Sayings Vol I p.27): "Monks, there is one thing which, if practised and made much of, conduces to downright revulsion and disgust, to ending, tranquillity, full comprehension, to perfect enlightenment, to Nibbaana. What is that one thing? It is calling to mind the Buddha. "[The same for] ... Dhamma ... the Order ... the moralities ... giving up ... the devas ... in-breathing and out-breathing ... death ... the bodily constituents ... tranquillity. This one thing conduces to Nibbaana." J> Note that here mindfulness of breathing is put on a par with 9 other subjects of samatha development. Well you seem to be agreeing with me then. If in another Sutta he says it is One Factor and here groups it with 9 other factors then it seems that he held it in high regard. Not to mention, Anapanasati was what he was doing on the eve of his Enlightenment! Which one of the 9 do you use to cultivate Right Concentration (i.e. jhana) Jon? Or are you following an abbreviated version of the 8 fold path? J> What I think the Buddha is saying in SN 54:13 and the other 'anapanasati' suttas is that a person who develops anapanasati can, by pursuing that same practice in a particular way (to be described in the sutta), also bring to perfection the development of satipatthana. I have said this already Jon. And now you are saying person and not just monk. A change of mind maybe? Sure takes awhile for your ship to turn around! Well, no wonder, with all those books aboard, it must be a pretty large ship! Consider me a tug boat of sorts. :-) Also, to bolster my position. In the Samyuta just beyond the 41.9 mentioned above, the Buddha is talking to Headmen. Here he talks about teaching the SAME dhamma to 3 types of people e.g. Bhikkhus, lay followers of his and people of other sects. So, if he says he taught the same dhamma to all, then Anapanasati was taught for the benefit of all! PEACE E 36395 From: ericlonline Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 2:04pm Subject: Re: Hearing the Dhamma Hey Christine, Thanks for the article. Ven. Bodhi is doing his best to accomodate many types of practitioners and that is quite a wholesome endeavor. But you did not address what I said in my post. No problem! #4 of Stream Entry is Practice in accordance with the Dhamma. This is the 8 fold path. Right Concentration is defined as jhana. It seems there is no way around this in my eyes. Now Ven. Bodhi has presented a nice article to help dry insight meditators maybe feel better about what they do but I just dont know if it will bear fruit. Dont get me wrong, I hope it will, I just have my doubts. And if it does not, then well, you said it best... ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- PEACE E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Hello Eric, all, > > The emphasis on Hearing the True Dhamma on this list follows from > what the Buddha taught were the factors of Stream Entry. > If one believes in rebirth then one knows how extremely rare human > birth is. And that even if one is fortunate enough to obtain a > human rebirth, it is much rarer still for the teachings of a Buddha > to be available at that time. Samsara is endless. Liberation as > taught by the Buddha, involves attaining four stages of Holiness - > the first, the one that ensures no further rebirths in the woeful > planes - is that of Sotapanna. Then the being is said to > have 'entered the Stream' which will carry to 'unbinding' in no more > than seven further rebirths. > Until one has attained Stream Entry there is no place of assured > safety from the worst dangers of rebirth. > > The Sotaapattisa.myutta has 74 suttas in 'Connected Discourses on > Stream-Entry'. > The four factors of Stream Entry are: > 1.Association with superior persons 2. Hearing the true Dhamma 3. > Careful attention, and 4. Practice in accordance with the Dhamma. > SN 55:6 > > Have you read Bhikkhu Bodhi's "The Jhânas and the Lay Disciple > According to the Pâli Suttas"? > http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/ebdha267.htm > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ericlonline" 36396 From: ericlonline Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 2:40pm Subject: Theory and Practice - Eric Re: Anapanasati/ Sukin Hey Sukin, > S> I am not sure why you admire all those other people and > philosophies; I do like what some of them have said too. However > when it comes to judging whether they have Right View, I don't think any of them do. This means that none of them are enlightened and therefore them "finding meaning in their lives", really means > nothing as far as I am concerned. > Eric: As you see fit. But if you had the chance to listen > to a stream enterer, would you hesitate? Sukin: If for example Nina were to approach me and say that such and such a person was enlightened, I would definitely be very excited and would wish to meet and talk with that person. There have been claims that certain monks are/was enlightened, even to the point of being arahats. However now when I read what they have said, I have no reason to think that they were so, in fact, I consider some of them quite misguided even. So yes, in those cases where the claim comes from an unreliable source, I would surely hesitate. Ok let me ask you in this way. Would you listen to or be interested in the Buddha before his enlightenment? If you had the chance to talk with him while he was a mere Bodhisatta, would you? S> People may be able to enter Samadhi in an instant and experience fascinating states of mind. Some might talk with seemingly great authority about levels of consciousness and create elaborate theories about human experience and nature of reality. For me the test as to whether that person is really wise is in how much importance he gives to presently arising realities. This is for each to know and no descriptive signifier will allow another to realize the present arising realities no matter how much the benevolent intent. S> It is after all I believe, often the case that one does *not know* present conditions, that one ends up speculating about it. And what others may think to be impressive explanations, to me is more a product of mental proliferation rooted in one wrong view or the other. The Four Noble Truths, if a teaching is consistent with this, then it would qualify as Right View, otherwise not. Which is another way of saying that only the Buddha and his followers were/can be enlightened. I dont agree. The 4NT's were discovered by the Buddha not invented by him. S> It seems odd that people, including monks, have meditated (in some cases on the breath) for 20, 30 or 40 years and all they can talk about at the end of it, is `calm', `happiness', `peace' and so on. And when they advice anyone on `understanding' dhamma, they point to the `formal practice'. Forget about `wrong view', but do these people even know about `avijja'!! They talk about experiencing the vipassana nanas, and yet when it comes to knowing seeing, hearing, smelling and so on, they do not find it important enough to consider these. It is ignorance as in `ignoring' these very presently arising realities that causes them to cling to rites and rituals "formal meditation", and be deluded by illusory results. They are in fact encouraging ignorance though otherwise they claim to practice in order to "know". Maybe they are just pointing you in a direction that they know you will eventually realize the present arisen dhammas. What was the Buddha doing on the eve of his Enlightenment? He was doing a formal practice of meditation which he taught as Anapanasati. S> You often point to the Kalama Sutta. What I have written above will give you an idea as to how according to me, the Buddha's teachings can be verified. It is true that the level of understanding is only `intellectual' and doubt is still far from being eradicated. But is there a better way than to study the Teachings in order to get an increasingly better idea of what the Buddha meant? Sukin, please, I am saying it is both. Study and practice. I am not saying that contemplation is not needed or secondary for that matter. But when push comes to shove, you are going to have to leave all of this theorizing behind. Either you will intend to do it via meditation or death will force you! S> I am not saying that direct experience should not be taken into consideration, if the experience is indeed consistent with the Teachings, then there is no need to refer to it in retrospect in order to condition Saddha. Yes but the raft is not made of books! Why dont you see this? And where the raft meets the water, that has nothing to do with books! Now the books may have helped to build the raft but surely they must be left behind on the other shore. S> Meditators like to refer to the practice when advising others, but if indeed there was genuine satipatthana, one will know at the same time that it has arisen due to causes and conditions unrelated to any intention to have it. This is I believe why some members of DSG don't like to talk about their subjective experiences ;-). What is there after all to talk about when the moments of sati are so rare and of little strength and these are not tied to any particular conventional activity!? Tis a shame in my eyes. All this book knowledge and a fatalistic attitude of doing nothing is better than doing something. The Buddhas teaching was a doctrine of action not inaction! I guess it has followed the way of the west. Only things described in books matter and are considered important. S> You seem to object to `theory', but do you really believe we can get away from any theory? I think we start with some kind of conclusion, dwell on them and reinforce them all the time. And if we have had any experiences and do not check if this is consistent with the Buddha's teachings, then I believe that it becomes increasingly hard to get on the right track. Again, I am not objecting to theory! But it just has lost its taste in my mouth. I want the fruit and no longer pale anemic descriptions of it! PEACE E 36397 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 3:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "... as parasites a tree." ??? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: I disagree with you on this matter, Sarah. I believe that the > anti-feminism quoted in your post copied below (and that's what I read there) is good > evidence for not considering the Jataka Tales, stories, and commentaries - or > much of them, at least - to be Buddha word, but instead reworkings in the Buddhist context of traditional morality tales expressing prejudices existing in > the extant culture of the time. I really don't think that anti- feminist speech > should be accepted as skillful means of the Buddha and apologetics be offered up for it. I suspect that the > anti-feminism expressed in the Jataka quotes, were it really the perspective of > the Buddha, would have been enough to preclude the Buddha's originating the > sangha of nuns. > > +++++++++++++++++ Dear Howard, When the Buddha allowed the ordination of women he said in the anguttara Nikaya (and also the vinya pitaka cullavagga, if I remember rightly): http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara5/8-atthakanipata/006-gotamivaggo-e.htm "Ananda, if women did not obtain the going forth from the household as homeless, in the dispensation of the Thus Gone One, the dispensation would have lasted longer a thousand years Ananda, as women have obtined the going forth from the household to become homeless, it will not last long, the good Teaching will last only five hundred years Ananda, just as in an accomplished rice field, there falls an illness named white seeds and it does not last long. In the same manner in a dispensation in which there is the going forth for women, the holy life does not last long. Ananda, just as in an accomplished cane field, there comes an illness named turning red and it does not last long. In the same manner in a dispensation in which there is the going forth for women, the holy life does not last long."" ."" Thus according to this the Buddha saw dangers in women ordaining but this did not preclude him from originating the order of Bhikhunis. RobertK ___ 36398 From: Herman Hofman Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:09pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Flip-flopping Hi Nina, I hope you and your family are well. ============== >> The antidote is to look at sabhava, the actuality of what happens... N: I like Larry's way of describing delusion. We may use different names for what appears through eyes, colour, light, black, but how can we find out what it is? By being aware now. That is the actuality of what happens, as Larry says. ============== HH > It is very interesting, this discussion. Such different viewpoints about the same material. How do we find out what something is? We all agree that citta knows. Even in English this is so. Conscious is from the Latin "with knowing". We are all conscious, but yet we differ. How can this be? Knowing isn't insight, and we all know that too :-) ============= L: Over >> a period of time various colors arise and cease. Dark is actually black, >> not to be confused with "no eye consciousness". N: We cannot imagine what it means to be without eye-consciousness. Because when we close our eyes, there is still something appearing and we can notice the difference between dark and light. It is certainly not the complete darkness of blind beings. ============= HH > We always need to check whether we are just conscious, or whether we are thinking or just plain deluded. It is so easy to be fooled. It is very easy to discover how fooled we are. In the vision of both our eyes, there is a spot where we are blind. See http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/blindspot1.html. Do the test and one can see what rupas without eye-base look like. All day long we are seeing how the mind presents blindness. It turns out that blindness is seeing. But we don't see that, and never will if introspection is the only means at our disposal. ============= H: Indeed one sense of 'dark' is "black", and black is a color. But > another sense is of dimming - from slight to complete. Darkness in that sense is absence of light. N: See above, Howard, what is the reality now, its characteristic? The only way to understand seeing, colour, etc. ================= HH > If we limit ourselves to consciousness as the only means of knowing we may well assume that at night colours disappear, and that they return in the morning. Or that the moon shrinks and grows, or that it is a luminous body. It is in drawing together multiple observations with correct understanding of the relations between them, that insight gets a chance to develop. Colour and brightness are concepts based in reality. The experience of what appears now is just what it is, concepts or not. But the after-the-fact rigid imposition of a wrong or incomplete concept on what is observed will prevent any insight from arising. This is the grave error of the pariyatti camp. It should not surprise anyone that the unquestioning acceptance and rote learning of a doctrine, followed by its rigid imposition on every thing that is observed can only lead to, surprise, surprise, seeing the doctrine everywhere. There is no discovery of reality in this at all. Kind Regards Herman 36399 From: Herman Hofman Date: Tue Sep 14, 2004 4:19pm Subject: RE: [dsg] "... as parasites a tree." ??? Hi Robert, Interesting discussions. ============ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: I disagree with you on this matter, Sarah. I believe that the > anti-feminism quoted in your post copied below (and that's what I read there) is good > evidence for not considering the Jataka Tales, stories, and commentaries - or > much of them, at least - to be Buddha word, but instead reworkings in the Buddhist context of traditional morality tales expressing prejudices existing in > the extant culture of the time. I really don't think that anti- feminist speech > should be accepted as skillful means of the Buddha and apologetics be offered up for it. I suspect that the > anti-feminism expressed in the Jataka quotes, were it really the perspective of > the Buddha, would have been enough to preclude the Buddha's originating the > sangha of nuns. > > +++++++++++++++++ Dear Howard, When the Buddha allowed the ordination of women he said in the anguttara Nikaya (and also the vinya pitaka cullavagga, if I remember rightly): http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara5/8-atthakanipata/006-gotamivaggo-e.htm "Ananda, if women did not obtain the going forth from the household as homeless, in the dispensation of the Thus Gone One, the dispensation would have lasted longer a thousand years Ananda, as women have obtined the going forth from the household to become homeless, it will not last long, the good Teaching will last only five hundred years Ananda, just as in an accomplished rice field, there falls an illness named white seeds and it does not last long. In the same manner in a dispensation in which there is the going forth for women, the holy life does not last long. Ananda, just as in an accomplished cane field, there comes an illness named turning red and it does not last long. In the same manner in a dispensation in which there is the going forth for women, the holy life does not last long."" ."" Thus according to this the Buddha saw dangers in women ordaining but this did not preclude him from originating the order of Bhikhunis. ========== Perhaps we can also conclude, then, that it was less important in the eyes of the Buddha for there to be a long-lasting dispensation than to exclude women ? Kind Regards Herman