38000 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 4, 2004 11:53pm Subject: Re: Aloko ( wasRe: [dsg] Re: The indispensability of Pali) Hi Phil, I think Htoo and Suan clarified in detail, but just one more comment: --- plnao wrote: > \> > 'Cakkhu.m udapaadi, nana.m udapaadi, pannaa udapaadi, vijja udapaadi, > > aloko udapaadi.' > > > > Cakkhu or vision arises. > > Nana or knowledge arises. > > Panna or wisdom arises. > > Vijja or penetrative wisdom arises. > > Aloko or direct light arises. .... S: Here aloko is used as another synonym for wisdom or vision, not to be confused with the light of visible object. (cf the English expression, I saw the light at last). .... > > I have a question about aloko. I notice that it is one of the four > conditions for > an eye-door process to arise, but I don't see it in the compendium of > rupa. > What is it if it isn't rupa? .... S: It's an aspect of visible object. Funnily enough, I was asking a similar qu on the trip. In other references, only visible object is given. .... > We occasionally read in suttas reference to light, such as in the > Dhammapada > when the Buddha says "those whose minds are well-grounded in the seven > factors of awakening, who without clinging to anything rejoice in > freedom > from > attachment, whose appetities have been conquered, and who are full of > light > they win nibbana here in this world..." It is hard for me to know what > "full of light" .... S: Wisdom again. I appreciate the other more detailed replies. ***** Fatigue - experiences through the body-sense and then many, many mind door processes - lots of kilesa (defilements), always finding an object;-). When there's sati (awreness) no thought of fatigue or 'poor me' at these times. Usually, however, we look for someone/something/a situation to blame for the dosa. On the trip Nina often referred to the 'bitter medicine' we have to swallow when we hear the truth. Metta, Sarah ======= 38001 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 1:10am Subject: Phassa (Contact) continues;-) Dear DN, KenO, Suan, Howard, KenH & All, I think I've followed most of the discussion and I seem to agree with everyone at least in part. As I understand: 1. The 'coming together' IS phassa as I think Howard makes clear. It is the reality of phassa cetasika. As DN says (37604), it is not 'some additional factor...'. Any time we read 'phassa' in the suttas, it is phassa cetasika as defined in the Abhidhamma. 2. There is no conflict or distinction in meaning between the descriptions given in the suttas, the Abhidhamma and commentaries. Merely different ways of description as KenO suggests. 3. The cetasikas condition each other and the citta they arise with. Without phassa 'contacting', no experience or feeling etc. 4. In the suttas, phassa is defined by the 'coming together', the 'meeting', the 'concurrence' (DN's post:37692)which I understand to be the contacting of the object. No difference. The manifestation as given in the Atth definition ('coinciding'...as its manifestation) is how it is revealed or shows up, just as described in the suttas. 5. The Dhs definition given by Suan and discussed by DN (37727)- '...Anything which on that occasion is contact, contacting, way of contacting, the state of contacting: this on that occasion, is called contact' seems clear and in accord. Like DN, I take is as a definition of phassa(cetasika)itself, rather than of anything distinct from 'the coming together'. 6. DN, on a side note, in your discussion with Suan, you refer to how careful Kalupahana is to back up his arguments. I have no idea about this, but on the topic of 'phassa' I wrote a post to Howard before when it seemed this might not be the case. I'd be glad if you would take a look: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/27298 7. DN, I couldn't easily find your references in Kathavatthu (37727), I'd be glad for further assistance. Perhaps you can elaborate on the distinction as you see it between the Dhammasangani, the Atthasalini and the Kathavatthu definitions as you see it. I don't read any of the definitions to be 'in the nature of an agent' or 'an event', though our language use may suggest otherwise. Like KenH, when I read the common or conventional language used by the Buddha or commentators, I understand it to be referring to paramattha dhammas. What else is there as he says? Again, I've appreciated all the comments and look forward to any clarifications if I've missed the points. Suan, I hope you'll also continue to add your input - I know Nina will be glad to see you posting. Metta, Sarah ===== 38002 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 2:22am Subject: Re: Samyutta Nikaya threads --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: p.s James - great posts for the teens. Beautifully written. Thanks My only > suggestion would be to avoid the controversial translation terms of > 'stress' and 'unbinding' if possible. Thanks for the suggestion but I think those terms are fine. If Rob M. wishes to change anything later on, of course he can. (If he changes too much though and starts to describe the Eightfold Path as momentary mind moments…well, that will just be his karma ;-)) Metta, James 38003 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi Mike, I was beginning to feel disappointed since only Sarah had responded. But yours is equivalent to ten responses, especially because you seem to agree with me. :-)) > For an arahat, aren't dhammas empty and impermanent? Why shouldn't they > also be unsatisfactory? I think sometimes people confuse dukkha with > domanassa--and in some contexts maybe these are synonymous--but not in this > one, I think. > > mike This is what I had said and included dukkha vedana as possible cause for limited understanding of 'Dukkha'. And I even suggested that it is understandable that we all start with this limited understanding, but that we should not stop here. Thanks for responding Mike. With Metta, Sukin. 38004 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question ... which sutta?/Steve Hello Steve, Thanks for the welcome back - I arrived home to find my phone not working (and thence my computer), and spent the first day convinced I had not received a bill and had been unfairly treated - the proliferations were interesting. I could have gone to war against Telstra after I convinced myself that I had been unjustifiably disconnected, but it turned out to be a faulty handset which was very promptly and courteously replaced. Lucky I tried the softly, softly approach first. :-) I think it might be worth going back and reading and reflecting more on the rest of the Digha Nikaya - thanks for pointing out the patterns ... Looking forward to seeing you at Cooran in early December :-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "seisen_au" wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > Welcome Back.. When I first read your `A question' post, I too > thought of the first 10 Suttas in the Digha Nikaya (not including the > 1st and 7th Suttas). They all pretty much have the same list of > teachings as the Samanapala Sutta but in different settings. The list > is basically > Hearing the Dhamma, gains faith in the teachings, > leaves the home life, perfects morality, guards the sense doors, is > accomplished in mindfulness and clear awareness, contentedness, > abandoning the hindrances, Jhana, directs and inclines his mind > towards knowing and seeing, attainment of the super powers and the > cessation of the asavas.. Birth is finished, the holy life has been > led, done is what had to be done, there is nothing further here.. > > Take care > Steve > > ps. see you in about a months time :-) 38005 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question ... which sutta?/ TG Hello TG, all, Yes, I agree with you about different suttas being suitable for different people depending on their current level of understanding and need. I have just read the two suttas from the Majjhima Nikkaya that you mention. A lot to reflect on here. I wonder why Anaathapindika had never heard such a talk on the Dhamma before Sariputta spoke to him on his death bed? Weren't we told there was nothing kept in the closed fist of the Master? And having just seen the number of cows roaming free around India, it is easier to understand now how a few of the Bhikkhus, like Pukkusaati, were killed by them. MN 140 Dhaatu-vibhanga Sutta 'An Analysis of the Properties' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn140.html and MN 143 Anaathapindikovaada Sutta 'Instructions to Anaathapindika' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn143.html The Samyutta Nikaya Books 2-5 Auggh! So many suttas, so little time! :-) Thanks TG. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > Hi Christine > > First of all... its not likely any single discourse can present a > comprehensive view of the Buddha's teaching. I think all of (at least) the Four Great > Nikayas need regular attention to possibly get the correct sensibility and > meaning of his teachings. > > Second point... I don't believe it is possible to -- "grow to understand > only one of the Buddha's discourses." I think when one discourse is thoroughly > understood, they are all thoroughly understood. > > Third point... Whatever Sutta one currently likes the most is the one > impacting that mind at the level that does (that particular mind) the most good. So > one thousand different intellegent people could pick one thousand different > Suttas as their favorite because it was the one that had the most meaning to > them at their current understanding and moral standing. > > All that being said, the last time I read the Majjhima Nikaya the two Suttas > that stood out the most two me were #140 and #143. For a "hard core" insight > press, Samyutta Nikaya Books 2 -- 5 are excellent as well. > > Sorry, can't get down to one. :-) > > TG 38006 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Develop!"/Ajahn Jose Dear Bhante, :-) Thank you for this post. I am suffering a few withdrawal symptoms after having access to Dhamma instruction for the two weeks I was in India. How fortunate you are to have daily access to other monks! I hope you are continuing to be well, and that your work in the Cross is productive. With metta and respect, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ajahn Jose wrote: > > Dear Christine, when we the monks are instructed by other senior monks and we are studying the word develops means to try to achieve or complete a task. Your interpretation is correct and also the suttras that you mention the word develops is correct. It means we should try to do something. Metta. Ajahn Jose 38007 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:53am Subject: Re: "Develop!"/ RobM Hello Rob M, You say: "The mind cannot be "controlled", but it is "trainable"." I like that! and it does help :-) Makes me think of 'accumulations'. (And that's Politically Correct, eh KenH? ) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Christine, > I think I understand the issue. As you know, some DSG members are > against "formal meditation" as they feel that this reinforces the > idea of a self that has control. The Buddha's exhortations to "do > this" or "do not do that" can also be misinterpreted as suggesting > that there is a self that has control. > > Quite often, I recite the five precepts, the first of which > is "Panatipata veramani sikkhapadam samadiyami". This is not > translated as "Do not kill"; the literal translation of this precept > is "I undertake the training rule to abstain from the taking of > life." The precepts are "rules of training" (sikkhapada). > > The mind cannot be "controlled", but it is "trainable". > > Hope this helps. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 38008 From: plnao Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samyutta Nikaya threads Hi Sarah > Phil, please start posting any of the SN suttas you have in mind (or > extracts) with any comments or queries. None of them have been discussed > enough and I'll be delighted for one, to join further discussions. It's > probably easier to just go ahead rather than to look back for past > discussions. If anything particularly relevant comes to mind, I'll repost > it if I can or others may help. Yes, you're right. This would be best. Thank you kindly for those links. I think I'll wait until Nina is back and settled in. SN certainly is fascinating. These days the phrase "and what do you say, monks. Is form constant or inconstant?" keeps going through my head! I think "is form constant or inconstant?" (or the other khandas) reminds me of K Sujin's "is there seeing now?" We can ask ourselves these questions a hundred times a day, conditions permitting, or once in a lifetime. They are very good questions. Anyways, thanks again. More later on SN. Metta, Phil 38009 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Develop!"/ Phil Hello Phil, Thank you for the welcome back, and thanks for what you call your babbling ways - I don't find them without substance. :-) I agree that 'develop' is baffling and paradoxical ... and toss in exasperating for good measure. I like your last paragraph as well - 'we *should* develop our immunity system if we want to stay healthy, but how do we do that? We *should* love our parents, but what good does it do being told that if the love doesn't arise? It cannot be done by will power or intention.We *should* develop wisdom, but how do we do that in an intentional way?' Food for thought there. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: 38010 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:58am Subject: Re: "Develop!"/ KenH Hello KenH, Thank you for your welcome back - but why the relief? Is there something you aren't telling us? :-) Exasperating man! Before I knew about anatta I planned and performed actions. Now that 'I' know about anatta, 'I' still plan and perform actions. 'Who' was it that scrimped and saved, and planned, and went to India and back? So - why can't I 'develop reverence and suaveness' [never considered myself suave - what a funny translation];mindfulness of death; what is skilful; or concentration with directed thought and evaluation? Looking forward to Cooran -and seeing just who sets whom straight.:-) metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" SNIP > C: > And in sutta after sutta, he used just that phrasing - > Gulissaani Sutta 'A forest dwelling Bhikkhu living with the > Community should develop reverence and suaveness towards co- > associates in the holy life" > Maranassati Sutta "Therefore you should develop mindfulness of > death" AN. VI.19 > Kusala Sutta "Develop what is skillful" AN II.19 > Sankhitta Sutta "You should develop this concentration with directed > thought and eveluation" AN VIII.63 > > Any thoughts? > --------------------- > > I am tempted to say; "Wait until our Cooran meeting (3 to 5 > December), and we will set you straight," but that would be denying > the fact of anatta: There are only the paramattha dhammas of the > present moment. Accept that now or never! > > Kind regards, > Ken H 38011 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 3:59am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 106 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Saddha or confidence is a mental factor and it arises with any of sobhana cittas or beautiful consciousness. This mental factor is like a king in the kingdom of sobhana cittas and their associated cetasikas. When saddha arises with a citta, that citta is a sobhana citta. Saddha advises the great king citta to see things with unobstructed view. Saddha declouds the mind and it removes all cloud that makes citta dirty. That is why all cittas with saddha cetasika are sobhana cittas. Because saddha has already cleared away all akusala cetasikas and all dirt. In the presence of saddha, all the mental components of the mind are as clear as the sky without any cloud. Saddha clears away all dirts and dust and silts from water. It is said that saddha is like manijotira or a precious stone like ruby and when it is put in the muddy water, all mud sinks down and the water become clear. There are different translation and different interpretation on saddha. Some would say that saddha is connected with tiratana or triplegem that is The Buddha, The Dhamma, The Sangha. This is right. But I would say saddha is a mental factor which helps the king citta by clearing away all akusala dirts. Does saddha not arise in non-Buddhists? If no, they all will never have kusala and they could not have been queens, kings, presidents etc etc. Saddha is not copyright for just Buddhists. Saddha does arise in other people who are not Buddhists. But the existence and character of saddha is not fully known by people. That is why people used to say that all religions are equally good and they all help people in their own way. When saddha arises in anyone, they will be free of akusala dirts or sin and this will bring up good results. Even though liberation way has the exact characters and needs many many good mental qualities like samma-ditthi, people who do not have samma-ditthi may well develop saddha and may have good results of saddha. 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. 38012 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 4:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Develop!"/ Sarah Hello Sarah, I hope you are getting over your cough by now, and that Jon wasn't too exhausted by going straight back to work. It wasn't the smells of India that remained - I think Azita and I are in need of a little therapy - we thought Bangkok smelled wonderful and was in a pristine condition after leaving Bihar. :-) I'm going through my trip diary at the moment and am wishing I hadn't written it up in bed, in pencil, last thing at night - I should know I'm almost incoherent by then! But if I find anything that may be of interest, I'll post it. I tend to record the most unimportant things. e.g. I had two pages about my experience on the first day with a persistent young male beggar who cycled from site to site and was always waiting for me when the bus pulled up. He kept following me around and repeating, in front of others, about how I had been 'so nice to him the night before' and 'what had he done wrong that I was now ignoring him'. It did sound a little odd. :-( I can only assume that I must have said 'thank you' on the first night at the airport, if he was one of the luggage handlers. I was almost ready to desert and return to Oz until Shakti, with her wider experience of India, firmly sorted him out. However, he did state in an intimidating way that I would be born deaf and dumb in the next life. Can't think of the dhamma focus here, unless it was 'no -control' - the inability to make dosa go and metta rise. But 'control' is not the same as 'develop', is it? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 38013 From: Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 1:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner36-Feeli ng/Vedana (i) Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/5/04 1:56:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > S: I think you're on the right track and have raised good questions. Ear > door vedana is just like eye door vedana - must be neutral feeling, but > different sense door and mind door processes follow each other very > closely. Some people are particularly susceptible to bright lights or > sounds, so we can see that in addition to different accumulations of > defilements accompanying these experiences, there are also varying > body-sense experiences in between the eye door and ear door experiences > too. > ======================== So, then what constitutes tonal discord is a matter of mind, not ear, and what is discordant to most folks is still not discordant in itself? Discord depends on cognitional tendencies and not only on the nature of hearing and of sound per se? 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) 38014 From: Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 2:13am Subject: A Look at the Term 'Dukkha' (Re: [dsg] Re: Samyutta Nikaya threads) Hi, James (and Sarah) - In a message dated 11/5/04 5:37:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > My only > >suggestion would be to avoid the controversial translation terms of > >'stress' and 'unbinding' if possible. > > Thanks for the suggestion but I think those terms are fine. If Rob > M. wishes to change anything later on, of course he can. (If he > changes too much though and starts to describe the Eightfold Path as > momentary mind moments…well, that will just be his karma ;-)) > ========================= No English words capture the full range of meaning of 'dukkha' even in the affective sense, let alone the more subtle existential sense. The translation of "suffering" is good only for dukkha of a relatively strong sort. Other translations such as "discomfort" (or "uncomfortable"), and "stress" (or "stressed") tend to adequately describe only weak dukkha. However, "stress" casts a somewhat wider net, I think, than either "suffering" or "uncomfortable". Also, "stressful" serves not badly in the existential sense (i.e., in referring to dhammas), though it is also somewhat weak in connotation. Now "trouble" (and "troubled") tend slightly towards the weak end of the spectrum, but are, in my opinion, closest in range to 'dukkha', and I think these may be the best of all. Also "trouble" and "troublesome" serve not badly even in the existential sense, I think, and better than "stress" and "stressful". I have read more than once that 'dukkha' originally carried the meaning of "off kilter" in the sense of a cart with one wheel larger than the other. This seems to carry the same sense as the Yiddish (and, I presume, German) "nicht gut". (Note the closeness of "trouble", "troublesome", and "troubled" to "off kilter" and "nicht gut".) 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) 38015 From: Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi, Sukin (and Mike) - In a message dated 11/5/04 6:44:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@k... writes: > Hi Mike, > > I was beginning to feel disappointed since only Sarah had responded. > But yours is equivalent to ten responses, especially because you seem > to agree with me. :-)) > ======================= Just a thought, Sukin: Your position aand Mike's may well be perfect. Or. perhaps another person's is closer to the mark. But for you, and me, and all of us - when a dearly held position of ours gets shaken by statements of others, I think that is a wonderful opportunity to see how much we grasp onto a position as "ours", and how troubled we become at seeing it threatened. This is a great opportunity to see the dukkha of clinging, and, regardless of the degree of correctness of our opinions, to relax our grasp, to let be and let go, and to see the ease that comes to mind in doing so. I think this far surpasses in importance the matter of how "good" ones positions are. It involves a kind of understanding or insight that is at the interface of cognition and emotion, and pertains to the critical issue of relinquishment. 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) 38016 From: kenhowardau Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 0:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Help Requested - Noble Eightfold Path for Teens Dear Rob M, Even though we don't see eye to eye on certain issues, I am genuinely respectful and appreciative of your efforts to teach the Dhamma. The lecture you are planning to give to young people reminds me of the religious instruction I received at school. We were taught to be kind, generous and wise (just like poor, suffering Jesus) and when, inevitably, we were cruel, selfish and stupid, we were taught to feel guilty, sinful and unworthy. What a shame we didn't have a RobM on the teaching staff! Or, better still, . . . Well, you know who I think would be better still. :-) The Dhamma you will teach cannot prevent the guilt and frustration that accompanies all conventional morality. When you finally accept the Abhidhamma and the Commentaries - when you accept there are only conditioned namas and rupas - you will be able to teach a true (absolutely real) alternative. Kind regards, Ken H 38017 From: plnao Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 2:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Develop!"/ Phil Hi Christine, and all >I agree > that 'develop' is baffling and paradoxical ... and toss in > exasperating for good measure. Of course we are encouraged by the sutta in which the Buddha says that we should be baffled, or perplexed, or whatever the word is that is used - becuase the Dhamma is so deep, so difficult to reason one's way through. I find readily letting go of the parts I don't get yet is part and parcel of Dhamma study. As is knowing when it is the right time to bear down a bit on a difficult point. More middle way. At one point Nina posted about soemthing like this - the wholesomeness of postponing understanding. There was a Pali term for it, I think. Does anyone remember what I'm referring to? I'll never be able to find it now. I also wonder if the Perfection of renunciation doesn't involve renouncing our deep-rooted tendency to need to figure everything out through the power of the rational mind. As does the Perfection of patience, of course. Metta, Phil 38018 From: Htoo Naing Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 2:59pm Subject: Patthana Dhamma Page 47 & 48 Dear Dhamma Friends, Patthana Dhamma is discussed here at this site www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana1.html . So far there have been 48 pages. recently posted pages include page 47 which explains on ekaggata, jivitindriya, manasikara, vitakka, vicara, piti, viriya, chanda, and adhimokkha. This part can be viewed at www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana47.html . And most recently another page that is page 48 has been posted. It deals with akusala cetasikas and explains on 4 moha-rooted cetasikas. Page 48 can be viewed at www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana48.html . May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 38019 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 6:29pm Subject: Re: "Develop!" --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Conversation revolved around just how accepting the fact of anatta > could still allow some quality could be 'developed'. Our discussion > included - No-self, Conditionality, choice, no control, and the two > truths. ========== This is a letter I wrote to Bruce and old member of dsg. He wanted to know about develop and why Khun Sujin says 'develop understanding' so often: You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except nibbana > are > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > thinking one > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > micchaditthi.... _________________ Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. ____________________________ > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > lack of a > better f-word) "fate"? "" __________________ Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did this that or the other nothing would make a thread of difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. It is true that some are past conditions but there are also present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way and is neither. When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on the understanding of the listener. I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop them - but without wisdom. It was because I didn't understand anatta. Later, I understood that defilements can't be quickly got rid of. That when desire arises it is by conditions - that the uncontrollabilty of it demonstrates the truth of anatta. Now my focus is to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at all doing anything. This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima Nikaya 148 Chachakka Sutta The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known. The six external media should be known. The six classes of consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six classes of CRAVING should be known." Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the stage where all craving is gone but first it should be understood. If we are afraid of it then it is not possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true characteristic can be seen. Later the sutta says: "'The six classes of craving should be known.' Thus it was said. In reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three is contact. With contact as a requisite condition there is feeling. With feeling as a requisite condition there is craving." and it repeats for the other senses. "If anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of the eye are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self.' So the eye is not-self. ...... If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that wouldn't be tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned. And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self.' Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self. " robertk 38020 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 8:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi Howard, > > I was beginning to feel disappointed since only Sarah had responded. > > But yours is equivalent to ten responses, especially because you seem > > to agree with me. :-)) > > > ======================= > Just a thought, Sukin: Your position aand Mike's may well be perfect. > Or. perhaps another person's is closer to the mark. But for you, and me, and > all of us - when a dearly held position of ours gets shaken by statements of > others, I think that is a wonderful opportunity to see how much we grasp onto a > position as "ours", and how troubled we become at seeing it threatened. This > is a great opportunity to see the dukkha of clinging, and, regardless of the > degree of correctness of our opinions, to relax our grasp, to let be and let go, > and to see the ease that comes to mind in doing so. I think this far > surpasses in importance the matter of how "good" ones positions are. It involves a > kind of understanding or insight that is at the interface of cognition and > emotion, and pertains to the critical issue of relinquishment. ------------------------------------------------- Yes, good reminders. Every experience can be natural decisive support condition for akusala for most of us. There is not only the possibility of clinging, but also mana, dosa and almost any other akusala. And of course direct experience of any of these is worth more than any amount of theory gathered. However we must still differentiate between Right and Wrong view on the intellectual level. There may be clinging to a position and feeling aversion to opposing views expressed. And there can even be `doubt' with regard to one's position immediately following that. But if indeed one's position is associated with right view, then at least at that moment there is no clinging, but instead a degree of detachment, I think. So we do have to look out for akusala at any given moment, but we should not have an attitude toward Right View in a way that in our eagerness to `not cling' to anything at all, we end up throwing the baby out with the bath-water. What do you think? :-) Metta, Sukin. 38021 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 9:53pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 42-Feeling/Vedana (o) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.2 Feeling (Vedana) contd] ***** Domanassa, unhappy feeling, arises only with cittas of the jåti which is akusala; it always arises with dosa-múla-citta, it does not arise with lobha-múla-citta or with moha-múla-citta. It depends on one’s accumulations whether dosa-múla-cittas arise or not. When an unpleasant object such as a disagreeable flavour presents itself, dosa-múla-cittas are likely to arise. If there is, however, wise attention to the unpleasant object, kusala citta arises instead of akusala citta. Dosa-múla-citta can arise only in the sensuous planes of existence, it cannot arise in the higher planes of existence where those who cultivate jhåna can be reborn. In the sensuous planes there is clinging to the sense objects and this conditions dosa. When one does not obtain pleasant sense objects dosa is likely to arise. ****** [Feeling(Vedana) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 38022 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 10:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Causality & Impermanance - transcript of TV program Dear Suravira, Sorry for the delay. Just catching up. --- Suravira wrote: > > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks so much for taking the time to review the TV transcript and > to reply to it. <....> > [Suravira] Unfortunately, as a broker in charge of a real estate > firm, my current fiduciary responsibilities to my clients are such > that I am unable to take time off from work next week to attend the > 10 day retreat. The best laid plans of mice and men often go astray. > Fortunately, the benefits derived from the assigned research (in > preparation of the advanced teachers retreat) are very rewarding in > themselves (nonetheless not being able to attend the retreat and > spend more time with Venerable Bhante G does sadden me). .... Sarah: Feel free to share any of your research and reflections. Did you read B.Bodhi's long article I posted on the necessity or otherwise of jhanas? Did you have any comments? I have some comments I've been meaning to add inc a few more from points I raised for discussion in India. Maybe this week...maybe... .... > > > time. Time is a concept, it's not a reality to be known. See > Karunadasa's > > article on Time (but not Space). > [Suravira] I have tracked down Karunadasa's paper (Time and Space: > The Abhidhamma Perspective), and have read it. It is a really good > essay. I will get back to you on this paper. By appending the > phrase "(but not Space)" are you implying that you concur with > Karunadasa's presentation of Time, but not his presentation of Space? .... Sarah: Without looking at it now, I think that was the conclusion some of us came to. Space, akasa rupa is a reality, but he seemed to conclude it was a concept. Look forward to your further comments here as well. (Also see U.P. on 'Space' and 'time'.) .... > > > ignorance, no. By a Buddha's omniscience, yes. See `Niyama' > in `Useful > > Posts'. > [Suravira] I will try to locate Niyama's paper. .... Sarah: Niyama is not a person who writes papers but a Pali word referrring to the 'fixed law' or way that processes naturally unfold. You can look under the topic 'niyama' is what I meant. Niyama or natural law covers: a) utu-niyaama - seasons, temperature etc b) biija-niyaama - plant-life c) kaama-niyaama - kamma and vipaka d) citta-niyaama - functions and processes of cittas e) dhamma-niyaama - ways in which the Dhamma is taught and unfolds or I believe it also covers 'universals' in the lives and teachings of Buddhas. Htoo or someone will correct me if I'm wrong or maybe add more - I haven't checked the U.P. posts myself. Metta, Sarah ===== 38023 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 0:33am Subject: India reflections Hello again, All As with previous visits, the India trip was both a fascinating experience and an invaluable dhamma session. On the conventional level, the country certainly makes a big impact on the senses, and one comes away with many vivid, almost overwhelming, memories. Our group were all fun and easy to travel with, and I enjoyed the company of other DSG-ers and dhammas friends from Thailand and elsewhere. As regards the teachings, I learnt some bits and pieces of information that were new to me or that I had heard but forgotten about, such as that khanti (patience) is the mental factor viriya (energy, effort) about which there is so much said on this list. When I heard this I was reminded that effort has 4 aspects (described as the 4 padhaanas) including the forbearing from akusala that has not arisen and the non-persisting of akusala that has risen, and I see a connection here. Most of all, however, I valued the many useful reminders and reflection that occurred during the trip. This is the benefit that comes from being with good Dhamma friends. There is nothing particularly new in what I have in mind here, just the 'usual suspects' I suppose you could say, but I will mention some points anyway— - The need for, and value of, repeated listening to useful reminders about the basics such as nama and rupa, seeing and visible object, not-self, etc, and how just these are the present moment and the present moment is nothing more than just these. - The importance of awareness (at whatever weak or incipient level) of a presently arising dhamma, and the relative unimportance of the conventional 'situation' or the nature of the accompanying mindstate (and how trying to deal with the 'situation' misses the point of the Buddha's teaching). - The importance of there being *right* understanding, no matter how infrequent or weak it may be (rather than striving to have something that is not, and cannot be, right understanding). - The conditioned nature ('natural' arising) of all dhammas including in particular sati/panna (and accordingly why selecting an object for awareness to be aware of will mean that what arises cannot be awareness of a dhamma). - The relative unimportance of knowing whether the present mindstate is kusala or akusala. I know this is a very controversial point, but I can assure you it's well worth considering. To begin with, it's inevitable that there will be more kusala than akusala in our lives; secondly, what has arisen has arisen and has in fact fallen away again already; and most importantly, this kind of knowledge is not insight into the true nature of a presently arising dhamma. - The importance of remembering that the reason we study and discuss the dhamma is for the better understanding of presently arising dhammas, and for detachment from those dhammas (and not for any other reason). - The bearing in mind that our deeply ingrained craving for further becoming is ultimately a craving for just more of what is being experienced through the different sense-doors right now and for the feelings that arise on account of those experiences. - The value of confidence in the gradual accrual over a long period of all kinds of kusala and especially of panna, and of confidence in a moment of kusala as the best thing that could ever happen to a person (and the need for patience to accept that that's the way it is). In short, everything the aspiring practitioner needs to know!! ;-)) So it was a great trip. But it's always good to be 'home' again. Looking forward to taking part in the discussions again, which I found myself improperly equipped to do in India, despite having loads electronic stuff with me (some advice for anyone thinking of travelling around India: an old-fashioned floppy disk and drive is still much more useful for swapping data between your laptop and a local computer than a USB key drive!). Cheers Jon 38024 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 0:37am Subject: Kalyanamitta in India Dear All, After Shakti helped me with the persistent and intimidating beggar, she, Azita, Jill, Betty and Pinna decided to hire a car and go to see the cave in which the Buddha meditated with the five fellow ascetics before he decided self-torture was not the way, and accepted the milk from Suchada. I was in the vehicle initially, but suddenly felt drained and decided not to go on the couple of hours trip and left them to it. I went down to lunch and found Jon and Sarah at one of the tables. They were almost ready to leave, but, I think, sensed I needed company. I had a talk with them and ate a little, and then Jon tactfully left Sarah and I together. She probably doesn't remember the discussion as anything earthshaking, I was feeling in a little turmoil after my experience with the persistent and intimidating beggar. It complicated those feelings of discontent and lack of interest in the Dhamma and Abhidhamma that I had brought with me to India. I spoke of every single thing that had been contributing to my losing interest in the Dhamma in the past few months, problems with expectations of others, with teachers, with wanting to feel settled and confident, and wanting to know that understanding was growing. I only realised at this time that I had invested so much emotionally in the trip - it was to be the Cure, I was to be Refreshed and Reinvigorated, gain Understanding, and only have contented fulfilled feelings. It hadn't happened. I was with Dhamma friends, I was in India, I'd been to the Bodhi Tree briefly, and I felt increasingly disoriented, tired and irritable. I wasn't the kindly or even equanimous person I imagined myself to be. I felt sad at seeing the beggars, and upset that I couldn't help them, and disturbed at their unceasing persistance. (Whatever you do, don't have eye contact - so said the guide). I was angry at the explanation of conditions and kamma/vipaka. It seemed a cop-out. I felt shaken that I couldn't see myself as a 'good' person, I couldn't control anything, fix anything or refer people somewhere to someone who would fix things, and .. they.. wouldn't.. go.. away, and .. they .. wouldn't ... be .. quiet. What was the Indian Government doing anyway? what was the Bihar State doing? what were wealthy Indians or Hindus or even, for goodness sake, God doing? (How did He pop up again after all these years?) There was a slight feeling of rising panic. What was the problem and who owns it? I felt more confused and powerless than I had ever been, I couldn't think of what the Buddha's teachings would indicate in this muddle I was in. I felt like the village idiot - surely I should be calmer and more insightful after four or five years study and practice? I was semi-seriously thinking about going home to Australia. Except I didn't know how to do it, and didn't immediately have the energy. I actually don't recall what Sarah said exactly. She listened, and listened, and wasn't judgmental and didn't tell me how I should feel, and never made me feel she wanted to be somewhere else - there was all the time in the world. She talked Dhamma when appropriate and related it to my feelings and experiences. Things began to feel not so out of the ordinary after all. I think there was mention of concepts, realities, the present moment, conditions, and how natural it all was. Feeling good, feeling bad - each moment can be seen for what it is, just this moment. But mainly conversation came back to Attachment, how it blanketed everything in gross and subtle ways. A reminder of Achan Sujin's description of Attachment (lobha) as 'the Teacher that will not leave the Student'. This was the beginning of feeling better, but more importantly, that was the beginning of interest growing in the Dhamma again. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello Sarah, > > I hope you are getting over your cough by now, and that Jon wasn't > too exhausted by going straight back to work. > It wasn't the smells of India that remained - I think Azita and I > are in need of a little therapy - we thought Bangkok smelled > wonderful and was in a pristine condition after leaving Bihar. :-) > > I'm going through my trip diary at the moment and am wishing I > hadn't written it up in bed, in pencil, last thing at night - I > should know I'm almost incoherent by then! But if I find anything > that may be of interest, I'll post it. I tend to record the most > unimportant things. e.g. I had two pages about my experience on the > first day with a persistent young male beggar who cycled from site > to site and was always waiting for me when the bus pulled up. He > kept following me around and repeating, in front of others, about > how I had been 'so nice to him the night before' and 'what had he > done wrong that I was now ignoring him'. It did sound a little > odd. :-( I can only assume that I must have said 'thank you' on > the first night at the airport, if he was one of the luggage > handlers. I was almost ready to desert and return to Oz until > Shakti, with her wider experience of India, firmly sorted him out. > However, he did state in an intimidating way that I would be born > deaf and dumb in the next life. Can't think of the dhamma focus > here, unless it was 'no -control' - the inability to make dosa go > and metta rise. > But 'control' is not the same as 'develop', is it? > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott 38025 From: plnao Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 1:37am Subject: Khanti is viriya (was Re: [dsg] India reflections) Hi Jon, and all Welcome back, Jon. I enjoyed reading your post with its helpful reminders. I'll just take up one point and trust that others will bring up different points >khanti (patience) is the mental factor viriya (energy, effort) about which >there is so much said on this list. When I heard this I was reminded that >effort has 4 aspects (described as the 4 padhaanas) including the >forbearing from akusala that has not arisen and the non-persisting of >akusala that has risen, and I see a connection here. This is very interesting to me because I am keen on both the padhanas and the Perfections. This afternoon, I read the AN IV 14 description of the padhaana of abandoning akusala that has arisen: "There is a the case where a monk does not acquiesce to a thought of sensuality that has arisen (in him.) He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, wipes it out of existence...." Same for ill-will, etc. I have always wondered about the rather muscular language used in this translation. (And I guess in the original as well.) I assume that there is a progression from "does not acquiesce" to "wipes it out of existence" depending on the accumulations of the monk in question, or the degree of the akusala, or something. It seems to me that it would be preferable to be patient with the akusala, see it for what it is (not-self) and let it fall away on its own, as all cittas do. Be patient, but still having energy to investigate it without acquiescing to it, without welcoming it. Patient, energetic investigation of the dhamma involved. Patience not to flee from akusala into more akusala (For example, not fleeing from an unpleasant situation by escaping into fantasies about pleasures to come.) Patiently examining the akusala dhammas with right energy, seeing them as annica, anatta and dukkha to the degree that we are capable of. And then if they persist, there would be need for a more rigorous approach. A less patient approach. I have trouble seeing "wipes it out of existence" as patience! Interesting. Does anyone else have thoughts on "khanti is viriya?" Metta, Phil ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonothan Abbott" To: "dsg" Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 5:33 PM Subject: [dsg] India reflections > > Hello again, All > > As with previous visits, the India trip was both a fascinating experience > and an invaluable dhamma session. > > On the conventional level, the country certainly makes a big impact on the > senses, and one comes away with many vivid, almost overwhelming, memories. > Our group were all fun and easy to travel with, and I enjoyed the company > of other DSG-ers and dhammas friends from Thailand and elsewhere. > > As regards the teachings, I learnt some bits and pieces of information > that were new to me or that I had heard but forgotten about, such as that > khanti (patience) is the mental factor viriya (energy, effort) about which > there is so much said on this list. When I heard this I was reminded that > effort has 4 aspects (described as the 4 padhaanas) including the > forbearing from akusala that has not arisen and the non-persisting of > akusala that has risen, and I see a connection here. > > Most of all, however, I valued the many useful reminders and reflection > that occurred during the trip. This is the benefit that comes from being > with good Dhamma friends. There is nothing particularly new in what I > have in mind here, just the 'usual suspects' I suppose you could say, but > I will mention some points anyway- > > - The need for, and value of, repeated listening to useful reminders > about the basics such as nama and rupa, seeing and visible object, > not-self, etc, and how just these are the present moment and the present > moment is nothing more than just these. > - The importance of awareness (at whatever weak or incipient level) of a > presently arising dhamma, and the relative unimportance of the > conventional 'situation' or the nature of the accompanying mindstate (and > how trying to deal with the 'situation' misses the point of the Buddha's > teaching). > - The importance of there being *right* understanding, no matter how > infrequent or weak it may be (rather than striving to have something that > is not, and cannot be, right understanding). > - The conditioned nature ('natural' arising) of all dhammas including in > particular sati/panna (and accordingly why selecting an object for > awareness to be aware of will mean that what arises cannot be awareness of > a dhamma). > - The relative unimportance of knowing whether the present mindstate is > kusala or akusala. I know this is a very controversial point, but I can > assure you it's well worth considering. To begin with, it's inevitable > that there will be more kusala than akusala in our lives; secondly, what > has arisen has arisen and has in fact fallen away again already; and most > importantly, this kind of knowledge is not insight into the true nature of > a presently arising dhamma. > - The importance of remembering that the reason we study and discuss the > dhamma is for the better understanding of presently arising dhammas, and > for detachment from those dhammas (and not for any other reason). > - The bearing in mind that our deeply ingrained craving for further > becoming is ultimately a craving for just more of what is being > experienced through the different sense-doors right now and for the > feelings that arise on account of those experiences. > - The value of confidence in the gradual accrual over a long period of > all kinds of kusala and especially of panna, and of confidence in a moment > of kusala as the best thing that could ever happen to a person (and the > need for patience to accept that that's the way it is). > > In short, everything the aspiring practitioner needs to know!! ;-)) > > So it was a great trip. But it's always good to be 'home' again. Looking > forward to taking part in the discussions again, which I found myself > improperly equipped to do in India, despite having loads electronic stuff > with me (some advice for anyone thinking of travelling around India: an > old-fashioned floppy disk and drive is still much more useful for swapping > data between your laptop and a local computer than a USB key drive!). > > Cheers > Jon 38026 From: Date: Fri Nov 5, 2004 11:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi, Sukin In a message dated 11/5/04 11:42:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@k... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > >>I was b > Yes, good reminders. Every experience can be natural decisive support > condition for akusala for most of us. There is not only the possibility of > clinging, but also mana, dosa and almost any other akusala. And of > course direct experience of any of these is worth more than any amount > of theory gathered. > However we must still differentiate between Right and Wrong view on > the intellectual level. There may be clinging to a position and feeling > aversion to opposing views expressed. And there can even be `doubt' > with regard to one's position immediately following that. But if indeed > one's position is associated with right view, then at least at that moment > there is no clinging, but instead a degree of detachment, I think. > > So we do have to look out for akusala at any given moment, but we > should not have an attitude toward Right View in a way that in our > eagerness to `not cling' to anything at all, we end up throwing the baby > out with the bath-water. What do you think? > :-) > --------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm certainly not one to throw out babies! (Hey, and even bath water is good in the desert! ;-) Yes, distinguishing right from wrong view is very important. We must be wary, of course, at how easily our distinguishing capacity is influenced by our desires and inclinations even without our awareness of that influence. There are many things we cling to, and we "mind people" include views and theories prominently among the things we cling to most tightly. I think that part of what constitutes genuine wisdom is being able to see when we are clinging, for when we don't even realize we are holding tight, there is little chance of our letting go. Relinquishment is, I believe, the keystone of patapatti. --------------------------------------------- > > Metta, > Sukin. ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 38027 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:35am Subject: India reflections -- A correction Hi again I'd like to correct a typo in my earlier post. The 3rd sentence in the paragraph below should of course read: "To begin with, it's inevitable that there will be more *akusala* than *kusala* in our lives" Thanks Jon --- Jonothan Abbott wrote: ... > - The relative unimportance of knowing whether the present mindstate is > kusala or akusala. I know this is a very controversial point, but I can > assure you it's well worth considering. To begin with, it's inevitable > that there will be more kusala than akusala in our lives; secondly, what > has arisen has arisen and has in fact fallen away again already; and > most > importantly, this kind of knowledge is not insight into the true nature > of > a presently arising dhamma. 38028 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:48am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 107 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 25 constructive ministers of the king citta. Among them 19 cetasikas are universal to all sobhana cittas. These 19 cetasiks is led by saddha. If the followers counted there will be 18 cetasikas. These 18 cetasikas can be grouped into two. But as saddha is the leader, it involves in both groups and so there will be 2 groups of 10. In the first group ( army ) there are 10. General is saddha or faith or confidence. In this group, sati cetasika serves as a secretary. Actually all 19 cetasikas work together and they cannot be separated. This grouping is for easy remembrance. Sati is a cetasika and it arises with any of sobhana cittas or beautiful consciousness. If there is no sati cetasika in a citta, then that citta is not a beautiful consciousness including smiling mind of arahats. Sati is so important that The Buddha left a message as His last word. It is sati cetasika. Sati is mindfulness. Sati advises the king citta to remember things to do and because of his advice the king citta is always mindful whenever sati is along with him. Whenever there is sati cetasika, that citta is a beautiful consciousness and that state of mind is not akusala at least. There are some similar cetasikas that sati may be confused with. They are manasikara cetasika, ekaggata cetasika, sanna cetasika. These three do have their own character. But when translations were done, people of translated language may take wrongly on these cetasika. An example is attention or manasikara. This cetasika arises with any citta. It arises with akusala cittas, with kusala cittas, with abyakata cittas like vipaka cittas and kiriya cittas. But sati can never arise in akusala cittas. Once I found a wrong message at a site. It was written as miccha- sati. There is no MICCHA-SATI at all. There is no sati in akusala cittas. Sati will never do miccha dhamma or wrong things. So it is completely and entirely wrong to say miccha- sati. This shows that cetasikas are not fully understood by many people. The problem is translation. When sati is translated as mindfulness, this word 'mindfulness' may work in case of a thief mindfully unlocks the door and mindfully steals all he wants inside of the house. But this mindfulness is not sati. This is just an area where simple English does not work in Dhamma. Thieves may be mindful. But they when mindful are not developing sati cetasika. They may be mindful because they are attentive to what they should do not to be caught. This mindfulness is actually done by manasikara cetasika which is a universal cetasika and can arise with akusala cittas like when stealing. Sati is like memory. Someone who never forgets what he has been doing is said to have a good memory. This sort of memory always remind him not to forget things. But there are people who translate sanna cetasika as memory and this may confuse with sati. Sanna cetasika on the other hand always arises with each of cittas whatever akusala or kusala or abyakata like vipaka or kiriya cittas. But sati does not arise with each and every citta. This is quite different. But whenever sati cetasika arises, there also arise sanna cetasika. So these two cetasika may also be confused. There is another cetasika that may be confused with sati cetasika. It is ekaggata cetasika or one-pointedness. Characterwise, they are different. You may not think that these two may not be confused. When an acrobat is performing a special act, he has to be mindful not to fall over or not to mishap. Is he developing kusala? He may not be. Actually he has a good concentration at his muscles and balance. Because of this concentration or ekaggata, acrobats may be thought as mindful. In simple English, yes they are mindful. But they do not have sati cetasika. 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. 38029 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 8:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi Sukin > The question is, "Is Dukkha applied only to the Khandhas when they > are clung to, or is it regardless of this?" Hi Sukin I think I did post this extract before in DSG. Dukkha from Dispeller of Delusion para 446 446. Herein this is the list {maatikaa) for the purpose of expounding the Noble truth of suffering; for this suffering is manifold and of various kinds, that is to say ; the suffering as suffering, the suffering in change, the suffering in formations, concealed suffering, exposed suffering, figurative suffering (pariyaaya), literal suffering. 447. Herein bodily and mental painful feeling are called "suffering as suffering" because of their individual essence, because of their name and because of painfulness. [Bodily and mental] pleasant feeling are called "suffering in change" because of being the cause of the arising of pain through their change. Indifferent feeling and the remaining formations of the three planes are called “suffering in formations” because of being oppressed by rise and fall. But there is likewise oppression even in the paths and fruition, therefore these states should be understood to be called “suffering of the formations”, by their being included in the Truth of Suffering. 448. Such bodily and mental afflictions as earache, toothache, fever born of lust, fever born of hate, etc are called “concealed suffering” because they can only be known by questioning, and because the attack is not openly evident: they are also called “unevident suffering”. Afflictions produced by the 32 tortures and so on is called “exposed suffering”. Except for suffering as suffering, the rest come down in the Dukkhasaccavibha.nga (Vbh 99). Also all beginning birth are called “figurative suffering” because they are the basis of one or another kind of suffering, but it is “suffering as suffering” that is called “literal suffering” As what you have mentioned, I have also met this question in dukkha is that some claim that since Arahants have no clinging anymore, there should not be anymore dukkha. To me, they are only partially right because there is dukkha in formations (which means birth). As long as there is birth, there is death, this would mean there is suffering. (this can be seen by the 1st NT where Buddha spoke birth as dukkha...) Even though there is no longer suffering in mental for the Arahants, there is suffering in physical attributes and suffering born in this formations as these are all attributed to kamma. The Dart Sutta always show the difference in suffering in mental and physical dukkha and its shows clearly that Arahant only suffer physical dukkha. Then another question creep in, is impermenance is painful or clinging is the one that is painful. So someone said that since Arahant has got rid of clinging, so impermenance is not painful any more. The answer is still painful because of the reason above, the physcial dukkha is still impermenance. Furthermore, even for Arahant they still experience their ageing and Final Death as mention in 1st NT. So the proper understanding of 4NT is very important and people always emphasis on the craving part, that is true due to the start of lobha mula citta of dependent origination as show in (AN III, 61). But not looking at the 1st NT, we may at times miss the salient point Buddha is making that there is suffering in formations as show in 1st NT whether we like it or not. Just my thoughts Ken O 38030 From: Htoo Naing Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 8:52am Subject: Page 49 & Page 50 on Patthana Dhamma Dear Dhamma Friends, Another pages come here at www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana49.html and www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana50.html Introduction is started at the page www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana1.html . May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 38031 From: Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 8:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question ... which sutta?/ TG Hi Christine Your correct in that the Buddha did not teach with a closed fist. However, he did teach Suttas at a level appropriate to the listeners. I would suspect that in the Buddha's time most of the teachings people heard, especially lay people, were delivered by monks. (This is just because there were a lot more monks and only one Buddha.) There was probably a general agreement on what a suitable level a teaching should be delivered to lay people; and that was probably mostly on the morality and generosity type issues. Anaathapindika, though an advanced lay person and well acquainted with monks, was still unfamiliar with the more advanced types of Suttas. This seems to contradict the suggestion by some in this group that the Suttas are some sort of a lower level teaching. (Interesting that the "Abhidhamma Pitaka type teaching" is not even known of or referenced in the Suttas while the Vinaya as well as Vedas and many other non-Buddhist teachings are referenced often.) At any rate, many if not most of the Suttas that we take for granted were probably meant for advanced monks. This might explain why we have to struggle so hard to figure out a Sutta: that an advanced monk/nun was enlightened instantly by hearing it once. Take care, TG In a message dated 11/5/2004 3:53:45 AM Pacific Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: Hello TG, all, Yes, I agree with you about different suttas being suitable for different people depending on their current level of understanding and need. I have just read the two suttas from the Majjhima Nikkaya that you mention. A lot to reflect on here. I wonder why Anaathapindika had never heard such a talk on the Dhamma before Sariputta spoke to him on his death bed? Weren't we told there was nothing kept in the closed fist of the Master? And having just seen the number of cows roaming free around India, it is easier to understand now how a few of the Bhikkhus, like Pukkusaati, were killed by them. MN 140 Dhaatu-vibhanga Sutta 'An Analysis of the Properties' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn140.html and MN 143 Anaathapindikovaada Sutta 'Instructions to Anaathapindika' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn143.html The Samyutta Nikaya Books 2-5 Auggh! So many suttas, so little time! :-) Thanks TG. metta and peace, Christine 38032 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 2:24pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 108 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, In the army( constructive ministers cetasikas ) of the king citta, the leader is saddha cetasika and the secretary is sati cetasika.There are two deputies. They are lieutenant-generals and one is the right wing and another is the left wing. The right winglt- general is hiri cetasika and the left wing lt-general is ottappa cetasika. Hiri and ottappa cetasikas always works together and they are close friends. they both have similar charactersin that they are both a kind of inhibition. They inhibit the king citta in doing bad things so that theking citta not doing bad things maynot have later bad effects or bad results. Hiri and ottappa cetasikas are known as lokapala dhamma. Loka here means kama loka which comprises human realms and deva realms, rupa loka which comprises all rupa brahma realms and arupa loka which comprises arupa brahma realms. And pala means ' to guard'. So hiri and ottappa guard the world. Hiri is a cetasika. It is shamefulness. When hiri arises, it advises the king citta not to do bad thing bearing that doing may lead to possible results which might be shameful. Because of hiri's advice, the king citta does not do bad thing. So inhibition of hiri is related to shamefulness to the possible outcome. Ottappa on the other hand is fearfulness and it is also a kind of inhibition. When it arises, it advises the king citta not to do bad things bearing that there are possible bad results which might be dreadful. So inhibition of ottappa is related to fear or dread. Hiri and ottappa works together and they are close friends. They can never be separated from each other. These 2 cetasikas always arise with each of all beautiful consciousness. They are lokapala dhamma as I said above. In a family, there are father, mother, son and daughter. Apart from between father and mother who are in realationship, there is no sexual relationship between the family members. These are between the father and the daughter, between the mother and the son,and between the son and the daughter. Hiri and ottappa that arise in them guard them as decent family members. 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. 38033 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 2:43pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 109 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, In the navy ( constructive ministers cetasikas ) of the great king citta, the leader is saddha cetasika. The secretary of saddha cetasika who is admiral of this navy is tatramajjhattata cetasika. In this navy, there are two deputies for admiral saddha cetasika. They are rear-admiral alobha cetasika who is the right wing and rear- admiral adosa cetasika who is the left wing of the admiral saddha cetasika. Saddha is included in both of army and navy of the great king citta. This is for easy remembrance. Actually there is only one saddha cetasika and all 19 cetasikas work together. Saddha has been explained in the previous post. The secretary of the navy of the great king citta is tatramajjhattata cetasika. It is balance. Tatramajjhattata is like charioteer. It serves as an equalizer. When the charioteer is not working, then there will be no balancer who will control in balancing associated cetasikas. As soon as the charioteer stop working horses that draw the cart may deviate to one side or another depending on power in both sides. The charioteer balance them and make the journey successful. Tatramajjhattata cetasika always arises with each and every beautiful consciousness along with other 18 cetasikas among which saddha is the leader. 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. 38034 From: Tyler Sims Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 3:56pm Subject: New to Group Hi, I am new to your group here. I have been reading Buddhism for about a year now. I have read mostly Zen and Tibetan. I am currently reading "What the Buddha Taught" by Wapola Rahula. I decided that I should check out the Theravada school as well (online). I see terms like Pali Canon, Tipitaka, etc. Where should I start learning? Also, is Vispassana just another name for Theravada? How is Vispassana or meditation in Theravada different from following your breath in Zen? I don't have a local group to practice with so I pretty much do it on my own. Maybe one day I can get a group started here. For now, is there a way to practice? Reading? meditation? Day and night? etc. Most of all what I am interested in is...what did the Buddha teach(?). I don't much care for things I am not to sure about. The problem I have with some of the more esoteric stuff I have found on the Internet is that it requires you to "believe" something all over again. In reading Rahula's book, I like that it is about "seeing" and not "believing" or relying on mental concepts. Well all this to say hi and that i welcoome any guidance in my seeking. Tyler 38035 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 4:49pm Subject: Re: New to Group Hello Tyler, Welcome to DSG as a new member. You can start right now to see seeing rather than believing. Whenever you see, there is seeing. Whenever you hear, there is hearing. Whenever you get a smell, there is smelling. Whenever you taste something, there is tasting. Whenever you touch ( you are touched or you touch or you know when your body touch something ), there is touching. Whenever you think, there is thinking. First stop all theories right now and then try to be sharp all your sense-door. This is the very first step in pure Buddhism. That is just a part of moral conduct or siila. That means avoidance of doing immoral things or bad things or unwholesome things. If you observe your precept on 6 sense doors, you will soon see seeing that is understanding or realiztion or direct seeing of thinbgs as they are. In DSG there are a good sources of Theravada teachings. While you start observing your 6 sense doors, you can also learn from discussions and links at DSG. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Sims" wrote: > > > Hi, > > I am new to your group here. I have been reading Buddhism for about a > year now. I have read mostly Zen and Tibetan. I am currently reading > "What the Buddha Taught" by Wapola Rahula. I decided that I should > check out the Theravada school as well (online). > > I see terms like Pali Canon, Tipitaka, etc. Where should I start > learning? Also, is Vispassana just another name for Theravada? How is > Vispassana or meditation in Theravada different from following your > breath in Zen? > > I don't have a local group to practice with so I pretty much do it on > my own. Maybe one day I can get a group started here. For now, is > there a way to practice? Reading? meditation? Day and night? etc. > > Most of all what I am interested in is...what did the Buddha teach (?). > I don't much care for things I am not to sure about. The problem I > have with some of the more esoteric stuff I have found on the Internet > is that it requires you to "believe" something all over again. > > In reading Rahula's book, I like that it is about "seeing" and not > "believing" or relying on mental concepts. > > Well all this to say hi and that i welcoome any guidance in my seeking. > > Tyler 38036 From: htootintnaing Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:03pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 110 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, In the navy of the great king citta, there are 10 members cetasikas. The leader of that navy is admiral saddha cetasika. The secretary of the navy is tatramajjhattta cetasika. Admiral saddha has two great disciples. They are deputies to saddha cetasika. They are second to the leader saddha cetasika. They are the right wing and the left wing of the admiral saddha cetasika. The right wing is rear-admiral alobha cetasika and the left wing is rear- admiral adosa cetasika. Alobha cetasika and adosa cetasika are close frineds and they always arise together and work together. They are powerful mental factors in beautiful consciousness. They always arise with each and every sobhana citta. They also arise along with other universal sobhana cetasika including saddha cetasika. Alobha is a mental factor and when it arises this cetasika alobha advises the king citta to detach from sensuality. Alobha is non- attachment. Alobha is also known as dana. But it is odd to say dana cetasika. Alobha takes more general sense than dana. Because alobha cetasika also arises in cases when dana or offering is not being done. Adosa is a mental factor and he is a close friend of alobha cetasika. These two cetasikas always arise together and they are also accompanied by other universal sobhana cetasikas including saddha cetasika. Adosa is non-aversion. It is non-hatred. It is metta. When it arises itadvises the king citta to maintain loving kindness and to hold non-aversion. 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. 38037 From: Htoo Naing Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:24pm Subject: Page 51 on Patthana Dhamma about 6 pairs of cetasikas Dear Dhamma Friends, Another pages come here at www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana51.html . The Introductory part ofthe whole writing is started on the ultimate realities without which patthana dhamma will notbe understood. These introductory part can be viewed at the page www.geocities.com/htootintnaing/patthana1.html . May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 38038 From: gazita2002 Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 5:27pm Subject: Re: New to Group Hello Tyler, Welcome to dsg. You have raised a few issues here, and I am only going to address one, at the moment. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Sims" wrote: > > > Hi, > > I am new to your group here. I have been reading Buddhism for about a > year now. ....snip..... > Most of all what I am interested in is...what did the Buddha teach (?). Azita: It's my understanding that the Buddha taught about conventional realities and ultimate realities. That we worldlings live and believe in conventional realities eg. a self that was born and will die one day, world politics, our possessions etc. etc. However, in the ultimate sense, these things don't really exist and we can't see this bec. of much accummulated ignorance about the truth and much craving to these conventional realities. To cut thro these conventional realities to see the ultimate realities which are BTW, impermanent, not-self and therefore unsatisfactory, it requires a great deal of wisdom and understanding of these ultimate realities. Unfortunately, I now have to prepare to go to work, so cannot continue, but maybe I've given you some food for thought and I'm sure others here will answer you as well. > I don't much care for things I am not to sure about. The problem I > have with some of the more esoteric stuff I have found on the Internet > is that it requires you to "believe" something all over again. > > In reading Rahula's book, I like that it is about "seeing" and not > "believing" or relying on mental concepts. > > Well all this to say hi and that i welcoome any guidance in my seeking. > > Tyler Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 38039 From: m. nease Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] India reflections Hi Jon, And welcome back. When you wrote: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonothan Abbott" To: "dsg" Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 12:33 AM Subject: [dsg] India reflections "The importance of there being *right* understanding, no matter how infrequent or weak it may be (rather than striving to have something that is not, and cannot be, right understanding)." were you referring to sammaadi.t.thi in the sense exclusively either of satipa.t.thaana or of maggacitta with only paramattha dhammas as objects? Thanks, mike 38040 From: Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 2:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New to Group Hi, Tyler - Welcome to the group from another member! :-) In a message dated 11/6/04 7:19:14 PM Eastern Standard Time, tylersims@l... writes: > > Hi, > > I am new to your group here. I have been reading Buddhism for about a > year now. I have read mostly Zen and Tibetan. I am currently reading > "What the Buddha Taught" by Wapola Rahula. I decided that I should > check out the Theravada school as well (online). > > I see terms like Pali Canon, Tipitaka, etc. Where should I start > learning? Also, is Vispassana just another name for Theravada? How is > Vispassana or meditation in Theravada different from following your > breath in Zen? > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: One good place to begin to learn is with the incredibly rich web site http://www.accesstoinsight.org/index.html The so-called vipassana movement is an outgrowth of Theravada, but is not identical with it. It would not be completely wrong to consider it as a part of modern-day Theravada. Meditation on the breath, or with breath as an anchor for one's meditation, is a basic mode of Buddhist meditation that spans all Buddhist schools. ------------------------------------------------- > > I don't have a local group to practice with so I pretty much do it on > my own. Maybe one day I can get a group started here. For now, is > there a way to practice? Reading? meditation? Day and night? etc. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, reading, study, and contemplation; meditation - both formal sitting meditation and walking meditation, and also ongoing mindfulness of whatever arises at any time; and guarding the senses, i.e., applying ongoing mindfulness to detect wholesome and unwholesome inclinations as they arise, and acting accordingly. All this is Buddhist practice. BTW, where do you live? Perhaps there are some here who will have good suggestions of groups or centers or monasteries that will be of use to you in terms of study, guidance, and others to talk with and meditate with. ------------------------------------------------ > > Most of all what I am interested in is...what did the Buddha teach(?). > I don't much care for things I am not to sure about. The problem I > have with some of the more esoteric stuff I have found on the Internet > is that it requires you to "believe" something all over again. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: The web site I mentioned before is a very good source. There are loads of books that could be recommended, and they will be, but for starters I'd go with that site. ----------------------------------------------- > > In reading Rahula's book, I like that it is about "seeing" and not > "believing" or relying on mental concepts. > ----------------------------------------------- Howard: That is basic to Theravada. However, one should study the fundamental teachings as well, as given by the Buddha. Practice without "theory" could easily go off in the wrong direction. I, myself, observe a balance of study and practice [I read a lot and engage in group discussions a lot, but I also have two one-hour sitting meditations every day and I engage in ongoing mindfulness as best I can], and I think that both are indispensable. --------------------------------------------------- > > Well all this to say hi and that i welcoome any guidance in my seeking. > > Tyler > ----------------------------------------- Howard: BTW, my signature line at the bottom is from the Mahayana tradition, not the Theravadin tradition, but what it expresses is fully consistent with Theravada. ===================== With metta (unconditional friendship), 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) 38041 From: nori Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 8:06pm Subject: One Who Dwells in the Dhamma Hi all, I found this to be a valuable lesson. --- Anguttara Nikaya V.73 Dhamma-viharin Sutta (One Who Dwells in the Dhamma) Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "One who dwells in the Dhamma, one who dwells in the Dhamma': thus it is said, lord. To what extent is a bhikkhu one who dwells in the Dhamma?" "Monk, there is the case where a monk studies the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions [the earliest classifications of the Buddha's teachings]. He spends the day in Dhamma-study. He neglects seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquility of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on study, not one who dwells in the Dhamma." "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard & studied it and teaches it in full detail to others. He spends the day in Dhamma-description. He neglects seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquility of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on description, not one who dwells in the Dhamma." "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard & studied it and recites it in full detail. He spends the day in Dhamma-recitation. He neglects seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquility of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on recitation, not one who dwells in the Dhamma." "Then there is the case where a monk takes the Dhamma as he has heard & studied it and thinks about it, evaluates it, and examines it with his intellect. He spends the day in Dhamma-thinking. He neglects seclusion. He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquility of awareness. This is called a monk who is keen on thinking, not one who dwells in the Dhamma." "Then there is the case where a monk studies the Dhamma: dialogues, narratives of mixed prose and verse, explanations, verses, spontaneous exclamations, quotations, birth stories, amazing events, question & answer sessions [the earliest classifications of the Buddha's teachings]. He doesn't spend the day in Dhamma-study. He doesn't neglect seclusion. He commits himself to internal tranquility of awareness. This is called a monk who dwells in the Dhamma." "Now, monk, I have taught you the person who is keen on study, the one who is keen on description, the one who is keen on recitation, the one who is keen on thinking, and the one who dwells in the Dhamma. Whatever a teacher should do -- seeking the welfare of his disciples, out of sympathy for them -- that have I done for you. Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monk. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." --- metta, nori 38042 From: Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 8:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] New to Group Hi Tyler, Welcome to the group. A few thoughts on vipassana: vipassana is pali for insight. It is usually coupled with tranquility (samatha). One might say insight arises in an atmosphere of tranquility. As a practise insight amounts to recognizing in a simple straightforward way what is arising in present experience. The idea is that by simply observing what is happening insight will arise that this is impermanent, unsatisfactory, or not self and craving for and clinging to 'this' will fall away. All of our problems, dissatisfactions, and sufferings are a direct result of craving and clinging. It is said that insight is the only way to the end of craving and therefore suffering. Larry 38043 From: Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 3:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] One Who Dwells in the Dhamma Hi, Nori - In a message dated 11/6/04 11:07:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, nori_public@a... writes: > > Hi all, > > I found this to be a valuable lesson. > ========================== Indeed! This is wonderful, and I believe it should be heeded! 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) 38044 From: Tyler Sims Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:11pm Subject: Re: New to Group Htoo Naing, Thanks for the guidance. I never looked at my senses as "doors" to the world. That really helps. You said 6 doors. (Taste, Touch, Sight, Sound, Smell, ?). What I am missing? Tyler -- - In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Hello Tyler, > > Welcome to DSG as a new member. You can start right now to see seeing > rather than believing. > > Whenever you see, there is seeing. Whenever you hear, there is > hearing. Whenever you get a smell, there is smelling. Whenever you > taste something, there is tasting. Whenever you touch ( you are > touched or you touch or you know when your body touch something ), > there is touching. Whenever you think, there is thinking. > > First stop all theories right now and then try to be sharp all your > sense-door. This is the very first step in pure Buddhism. That is > just a part of moral conduct or siila. That means avoidance of doing > immoral things or bad things or unwholesome things. > > If you observe your precept on 6 sense doors, you will soon see > seeing that is understanding or realiztion or direct seeing of > thinbgs as they are. > > In DSG there are a good sources of Theravada teachings. While you > start observing your 6 sense doors, you can also learn from > discussions and links at DSG. 38045 From: Tyler Sims Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 6:22pm Subject: Re: New to Group I will need to think about the fact that we divide the world into two realities. What I hear you saying is that there is only one reality but we think there is two realities? I was more inclined to see all "thus" as reality and when we think that we run into problems. As in thinking that there is another world out there that we don't see. Tyler - In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Hello Tyler, > Welcome to dsg. > You have raised a few issues here, and I am only going to > address one, at the moment. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Sims" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I am new to your group here. I have been reading Buddhism for about > a > > year now. ....snip..... > > > Most of all what I am interested in is...what did the Buddha teach > (?). > > Azita: It's my understanding that the Buddha taught about > conventional realities and ultimate realities. That we worldlings > live and believe in conventional realities eg. a self that was born > and will die one day, world politics, our possessions etc. etc. > However, in the ultimate sense, these things don't really exist > and we can't see this bec. of much accummulated ignorance about the > truth and much craving to these conventional realities. > To cut thro these conventional realities to see the ultimate > realities which are BTW, impermanent, not-self and therefore > unsatisfactory, it requires a great deal of wisdom and understanding > of these ultimate realities. > Unfortunately, I now have to prepare to go to work, so cannot > continue, but maybe I've given you some food for thought and I'm sure > others here will answer you as well. > 38046 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 9:40pm Subject: Re: One Who Dwells in the Dhamma Hello Nori, Howard, all, Nori gives us the sutta Dhamma-viharin Sutta(One Who Dwells in the Dhamma)where the following line is repeated: "He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of awareness". Bhikkhu Bodhi says this line is stressing tranquillity meditation. So .... does this mean those who do insight meditation only are not ones who dwell in the Dhamma? metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 38047 From: nori Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 11:27pm Subject: Re: One Who Dwells in the Dhamma Hi Christine, It is my opinion that the distinct divisions of "insight" meditation and "samatha/tranquility" meditation are ideas that developed much later in monastic communities, as if they were two seperate exercises or practices. Through (among other factors) seclusion, calm and tranquility, the faculty of awareness arises. ... and with awareness (thus discernment) comes insight. Even the word 'meditation' is a later development. 'Samadhi' does not necessarily equate to the word 'meditation'. While there is definitely a distinguishing practice of sitting "meditation", In Satipatthana the practice is always: -seclusion (literally, as well as in guarding the senses.) -calm/tranquility/samatha (not just relaxing the body, but by putting away hankering and dejection (craving and aversion) with regard to the world.) -sati/awareness (of body (incl. breath), Four Frames of reference, sometimes Ten perceptions, etc.) -samadhi, I think arising as a result of the above. I think the practice is of one type and is exercised not just while sitting but as much as possible. This is the way I interpret it. I know I left much out but just making a point. metta, nori --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello Nori, Howard, all, > > Nori gives us the sutta Dhamma-viharin Sutta(One Who Dwells in the > Dhamma)where the following line is repeated: > "He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of > awareness". > > Bhikkhu Bodhi says this line is stressing tranquillity meditation. > > So .... does this mean those who do insight meditation only are not > ones who dwell in the Dhamma? > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 38048 From: nori Date: Sat Nov 6, 2004 11:38pm Subject: Re: New to Group Hi Tyler, My advice to you is that do not have confidence in something and believe in something just because people talk about it or you have read it somewhere. I think your reality should be based solely on your experience and nothing else. While it is OK to consider what you read and what others say, rely on your own experience for the truth. Buddhism is the practice of learning how to see the truth for yourself. Buddhism does not insist, or recommend in any way, believing in their scripture without your own experience of it. What are words anyway; they are not reality. with metta, nori --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Sims" wrote: > > I will need to think about the fact that we divide the world into two > realities. What I hear you saying is that there is only one reality > but we think there is two realities? I was more inclined to see all > "thus" as reality and when we think that we run into problems. As in > thinking that there is another world out there that we don't see. > > Tyler > > - In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" > wrote: > > > > Hello Tyler, > > Welcome to dsg. > > You have raised a few issues here, and I am only going to > > address one, at the moment. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tyler Sims" > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I am new to your group here. I have been reading Buddhism for about > > a > > > year now. ....snip..... > > > > > Most of all what I am interested in is...what did the Buddha teach > > (?). > > > > Azita: It's my understanding that the Buddha taught about > > conventional realities and ultimate realities. That we worldlings > > live and believe in conventional realities eg. a self that was born > > and will die one day, world politics, our possessions etc. etc. > > However, in the ultimate sense, these things don't really exist > > and we can't see this bec. of much accummulated ignorance about the > > truth and much craving to these conventional realities. > > To cut thro these conventional realities to see the ultimate > > realities which are BTW, impermanent, not-self and therefore > > unsatisfactory, it requires a great deal of wisdom and understanding > > of these ultimate realities. > > Unfortunately, I now have to prepare to go to work, so cannot > > continue, but maybe I've given you some food for thought and I'm sure > > others here will answer you as well. > > 38049 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 1:36am Subject: Re: "Develop!" Hello Robert, Thanks for your reply. I found it helpful when you said "Craving, as much as other dhammas, can be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true characteristic can be seen." (I included a link to your post in one of mine on Dhamma-List.) I understand that there is not complete free choice, and that outcomes are not pre-ordained. I understand that all things are conditioned. Intellectually I accept anatta, it seems perfectly logical. But day to day life shows that 'I' can make choices. There is no way that I can immediately remove (at least, at this point in time) the feeling of being the watcher, the do-er, and the knower. I have found with defilements that suppression doesn't have a high success rate, but noticing what is going on often robs them of energy, and they fade away fairly quickly. I don't think I can manufacture sati, but I wonder if I can't at least create, or set in place, the conditions that would be conducive for it to arise? And similarly with panna? Sometimes I feel we get caught in a sort of politically correct vocabulary - we change the structure of our sentences to say 'Panna' knows or 'Sati' sees, but nothing else has changed ... there is still the watcher, the do-er and the knower - but Hush! ... don't mention Me. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > > Conversation revolved around just how accepting the fact of > anatta > > could still allow some quality could be 'developed'. Our > discussion > > included - No-self, Conditionality, choice, no control, and the > two > > truths. > ========== > This is a letter I wrote to Bruce and old member of dsg. > He wanted to know about develop and why Khun Sujin says 'develop > understanding' so often: > > You wrote "that's where i get stuck...if all dhammas except > nibbana > > are > > conditioned (i'm going on saddha with this, of course), then > > thinking one > > can develop anything seems like an exercise in > > micchaditthi.... > > _________________ > Good point. I think it depends on the thinking. If we have the > idea of "I can do it", then we are likely to be caught in self > view. Or we think we can manufacture sati by effort or good > intention - self. But there can be wisdom - not us- that sees > the danger in samasara and thus there is naturally effort that > arises with that understanding. It is subtle: often we slip into > self view; either towards the freewill end of the continuum or > towrds the fatalistic end that thinks nothing can be done. > > ____________________________ > > > > > can the path be developed? or do we just leave it up to (for > > lack of a > > better f-word) "fate"? "" > __________________ > Fate implies a preordained outcome. In that case whether we did > this that or the other nothing would make a thread of > difference. We could go out and kill and pillage and nothing > would have any effect and we would all get enlightened or not > get enlightened depending on our "fate". This is not what the > Buddha taught. He explained in detail many different conditions. > It is true that some are past conditions but there are also > present ones thus it is not fatalism. Both the idea of fatalism > and the idea of freewill are bound up in self view - a self who > can control and a self who can't. The Dhamma is the middle way > and is neither. > When we hear a teacher like sujin say "develop it" this can be a > condition for either wrong effort or right effort. It depends on > the understanding of the listener. > I think we all have vastly different accumulations and so we > have to learn what is most suitable each for his own. For me > when I first saw the nature of the mind I realized > how powerful ignorance and desire were and I became > frightened by these powerful energies. I just wanted to stop > them - but without wisdom. > It was because I didn't understand > anatta. Later, I understood that defilements can't be > quickly got rid of. That when desire arises it is by > conditions - that the uncontrollabilty of it > demonstrates the truth of anatta. Now my focus > is to understand conditions and to see that there is nobody at > all doing anything. > This doesn't mean that nothing is being done. In the Majjhima > Nikaya 148 > Chachakka Sutta > The Blessed One said: "The six internal media should be known. > The six external media should be known. The six classes of > consciousness should be known. The six classes of contact should > be known. The six classes of feeling should be known. The six > classes of CRAVING should be known." > > Note that it says the six classes of craving should be known. I > think this is important. Most of us are very keen to get the > stage where all craving is gone but first it should be > understood. If we are afraid of it then it is not > possible to insight it. Craving, as much as other dhammas, can > be an object for understanding. if it is seen through the lens > of anatta it is not mistaken for "my" craving and so its true > characteristic can be seen. > > Later the sutta says: > > "'The six classes of craving should be known.' Thus it was said. > In reference to what was it said? Dependent on the eye & forms > there arises consciousness at the eye. The meeting of the three > is contact. With contact as a requisite condition there is > feeling. With feeling as a requisite condition there is > craving." and it repeats for the other senses. > > "If anyone were to say, 'The eye is the self,' that wouldn't be > tenable. The arising & falling away of the eye are discerned. > And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would > follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it > wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'The eye is the > self.' So the eye is not-self. ...... > If anyone were to say, 'Craving is the self,' that wouldn't be > tenable. The arising & falling away of craving are discerned. > And when its arising & falling away are discerned, it would > follow that 'My self arises & falls away.' That's why it > wouldn't be tenable if anyone were to say, 'Craving is the > self.' Thus the eye is not-self, forms are not-self, > consciousness at the eye is not-self, contact at the eye is > not-self, feeling is not self, craving is not-self. " > robertk 38050 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 1:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] A question ... which sutta?/ TG Hello TG, Thanks, this makes sense. I appreciate the clarification. One point though ... the feeling I've got from posts by the long time members of this List isn't that the suttas are some sort of lower level teaching. On the contrary - they've mostly indicated that the Abhidhamma should be the first thing one gains a basic understanding of. Next one should graduate to the suttas which are so densely packed with meaning, that they would be difficult to correctly understand except through the magnifying lens of the Abhidhamma. Yes, I did wonder why there wasn't more mention of the Abhidhamma in the suttas - though I usually liken it to the fact that the Abhidhamma is the basic building block, the primary school, of the Teachings - and the Suttas are the University level. Undergraduate courses don't continually mention nursery school lessons - they just assume this is known by everyone. i.e. the Bhikkhus. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > Hi Christine > > Your correct in that the Buddha did not teach with a closed fist. However, > he did teach Suttas at a level appropriate to the listeners. I would suspect > that in the Buddha's time most of the teachings people heard, especially lay > people, were delivered by monks. (This is just because there were a lot more > monks and only one Buddha.) There was probably a general agreement on what a > suitable level a teaching should be delivered to lay people; and that was > probably mostly on the morality and generosity type issues. > > Anaathapindika, though an advanced lay person and well acquainted with monks, > was still unfamiliar with the more advanced types of Suttas. This seems to > contradict the suggestion by some in this group that the Suttas are some sort > of a lower level teaching. (Interesting that the "Abhidhamma Pitaka type > teaching" is not even known of or referenced in the Suttas while the Vinaya as well > as Vedas and many other non-Buddhist teachings are referenced often.) At any > rate, many if not most of the Suttas that we take for granted were probably > meant for advanced monks. This might explain why we have to struggle so hard > to figure out a Sutta: that an advanced monk/nun was enlightened instantly by > hearing it once. > > Take care, > TG 38051 From: Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 0:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group Hi, Tyler - In a message dated 11/7/04 12:32:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, tylersims@l... writes: > I will need to think about the fact that we divide the world into two > realities. What I hear you saying is that there is only one reality > but we think there is two realities? I was more inclined to see all > "thus" as reality and when we think that we run into problems. As in > thinking that there is another world out there that we don't see. > > Tyler > ========================== If I may butt in: The ultimate vs conventional dichotomy is one which, in varying forms, exists throughout all schools of the Dhamma/Dharma. It is not so much one of internal world vs external world, though, in my opinion, that is part of it, but mostly a matter of what is directly knowable vs what is mind-constructed. I personally see the Dhamma in non-dualist terms that are not easily explainable, but others here see it somewhat differently from me. In any case, the topic of subject-object duality is not quite the same as the ultimate-conventional duality, which most of us are in agreement on, as is Buddhism in general. Our world of convention is a "world" created by a kind of mental imposition that provides a sort of shorthand manner of dealing with and communicating an (ultimately) indescribable reality. When we are "taken in" by our mental and verbal conventions, and take the merely conventional for actual, that is a fundamental form of ignorance. It is the practice of Dhamma that cultivates the mind and enables us to see through the realm of convention to reality, and that wisdom is freeing. 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) 38052 From: Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 1:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: One Who Dwells in the Dhamma Hi, Christine, Nori, and all - In a message dated 11/7/04 12:42:43 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > > Hello Nori, Howard, all, > > Nori gives us the sutta Dhamma-viharin Sutta(One Who Dwells in the > Dhamma)where the following line is repeated: > "He doesn't commit himself to internal tranquillity of > awareness". > > Bhikkhu Bodhi says this line is stressing tranquillity meditation. > > So .... does this mean those who do insight meditation only are not > ones who dwell in the Dhamma? > > metta and peace, > Christine =========================== I think that is an overly strict reading. All meditation involves tranquillity of awareness. I do think this sutta points to the need to include meditation as part of a complete practice, but it needn't be an exclusively samatha meditation. In fact, if one interprets this sutta in that fashion, it would imply that vipassana bhavana plays no role in Dhammic practice and that a complete practice consists only of study, thinking over, discussing, and samatha bhavana, a program ignoring investigation of dhammas and hardly distingishable from that of the Buddha's predecessors. 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) 38053 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Sarah, Insight comes first. Description of the insight comes later. Speculation about a particular "insight" before that insight has been experienced is merely speculation. It is not some sort of "conceptual right view" that is a forerunner of sammaditthi. Buddha makes it clear that the one path is not a path of speculation and that speculation does not help. You write: "On the other hand, as others have pointed out, it's essential to hear the teachings and to to develop pariyatti or a 'right' conceptual understanding in the first place." Yes, Buddha himself said hearing Dhamma is essential, and others -- KenO, Mike, KenH, Howard, Bhikkhu Bodhi, and yourself -- say it's essential to develop a conceptual right view *first*, as if insight is somehow dependent upon the "proper" piecing together of various speculations! To make the case, they've cited MN 117 and Sammaditthi Sutta, neither of which supports a notion of "conceptual right view" (as we both agree). The hypothetical reader who disagrees might be thinking: "My goodness, Dan. How you twist words! How can you turn '"right" conceptual understanding' into 'speculation'? You are just a contrarian, intent on sowing discord." No, no. Not at all. If a disciple who is given to heavy dependence on logic and reasoning uses that logic and reason to hammer out a line of thought or a view that is not derived from his own insight but that *sounds* like the description of some other, wiser person's insight, that view is merely speculation because the theorizer does not know what the words that the wise person is using really refer to. Even when the intellect is strong, subtle, and clever enough that the words of the disciple exquisitely match those of the wise person, it is still mere speculation. When someone with no insight into the matter says, "Nama and rupa are distinct," what he is referring to is quite different from what the wise person means when uttering the exact same words. That person's conceptual understanding or view is called "wrong" because that view does not reflect sammaditthi at all. It is merely speculation. Such speculation is not a forerunner of sammaditthi. But you go on to argue, "Otherwise, the Buddha wouldn't have bothered to teach." I don't follow you, here, Sarah. Buddha's words help disciples develop a conceptual framework around their insights. This consolidation helps set the stage for deeper insight later. To someone with no insight, Buddha's words sound strange and are quickly dismissed and may even be ridiculed. To someone who's had a little insight, the words hold an allure; they strike a chord. The words ring true in the ears of someone with a taste of insight not because the words are masterpieces of logical reasoning, but because they reflect the disciple's prior experience. There is wonderment and joy because they now hear their insights expressed so beautifully. A deepening of the disciple's insight comes after consolidation of the shallower insights. There are many things in Buddha's teachings that sound strange to me, e.g., much of the talk about Nibbana, past lives, miracles, devas, etc. No amount of speculation or theorizing or conceptualizing about these things will improve my understanding of them at all. Until my insight into these things is deep enough that my conceptualizing about them becomes a struggle to describe my direct experience, I am merely speculating. And it doesn't help. On the other hand, when I first heard the four Noble Truths over 20 years ago, they really did sound like Noble Truths to me. Why is that? Surely not because earlier that morning I'd been thinking, "Hmmm... You know what? I think suffering is ubiquitous; suffering is caused by desire; elimination of desire leads to elimination of suffering; the way to elimate desire is by following the eightfold path." Instead, I'd had previous insight into the 4NT. Granted, the insight was shallow. It was certainly not deep enough to be able to express clearly in words-- not even deep enough to even consider expressing it in words. However, it was at least deep enough for the Buddha's words to ring true in my ears. Back to an earlier comment of mine: D: Of course, it can be helpful to listen to others' descriptions of what reality looks like when it is understood directly, as it is. If we hear something that is verified by our experience and "strikes a chord", then the description can serve to help solidify our understanding. However, conceptual models about anything beyond our understanding we should just set aside rather than spin off into thinking, doubting, or blindly accepting. > .... > S:Agreed. I don't think there has been any other suggestion here. I think the idea of "conceptual right view" as a forerunner of sammaditthi is indeed another suggestion -- the suggestions that conceptual models beyond our understanding should not be set aside but should capture our thoughts and attention, the notion being that our theorizing will bloom into real understanding somehow as our conceptual understanding becomes more and more refined. This can only spin us off into thinking, doubting, or blindly accepting. Metta, Dan 38054 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 7:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Conceptual right view" is 'uncontestable' [Howard] Dear Howard, You write: > I agree with you about item 3. :-) Great! Now, isn't 3 just putting 4-6 into the proper context? I.e., 3 specifically sets the stage for thinking about 4-6 in terms of sammaditthi rather than "conventional right view". Dan P.S. 4-8 are discussed in your post #37509. > In a message dated 10/19/04 2:25:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > onco111@y... writes: > > > Dear Howard, > > I contest your uncontestable take on the Sammaditthi sutta as dealing > > with "conceptual right view" (and "supramundane right view") rather > > than "mundane right view" (and "supramundane right view"). For > > example, you take section 3 as uncontestably conceptual rather than > > direct: "When, friends, a noble disciple understands the unwholesome, > > the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome, and the root of the > > wholesome, in that way he is one of right view, whose view is > > straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma, and has arrived > > at this true Dhamma." Isn't the disciple with 'perfect confidence in > > the Dhamma' and the one who 'has arrived at this true Dhamma' > > referring to the Noble disciples, sotapanna through arahant? Surely > > you can't mean that intellectual acceptance of a conceptual > > formulation of the unwholesome, etc. is what defines enlightenment. > > Do you mean that 'perfect confidence in the Dhamma' and arriving 'at > > this true Dhamma' refer to intellectual acceptance of Buddha's > > teachings rather than direct understanding at deep levels? > > > > I see that you also refer to paragraphs 1, 2, 4, and 6 as > > uncontestably conceptual, but let's start with 3. > > > > Metta, > > > > Dan 38055 From: Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 3:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Conceptual right view" is 'uncontestable' [Howard] Hi, Dan - In a message dated 11/7/04 10:32:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, onco111@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > You write: > >I agree with you about item 3. :-) > > Great! Now, isn't 3 just putting 4-6 into the proper context? I.e., 3 > specifically sets the stage for thinking about 4-6 in terms of > sammaditthi rather than "conventional right view". > > Dan > ====================== Please forgive me in advance for not getting back to you on this. At least at the moment, I find myself resistant to going back and looking this business over. I haven't been feeling so hot the last few days - a bit tired and "not quite right", and I'm just going to let this pass, at least for the time being. My apologies. 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) 38056 From: Dan D. Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 8:08am Subject: Re: India reflections Dear Jon, You write of the important reminders discussed in India: "The importance of there being *right* understanding, no matter how infrequent or weak it may be (rather than striving to have something that is not, and cannot be, right understanding)." Bingo! Dan 38057 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 8:56am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 111 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Among 25 sobhana cetasikas, 19 cetasikas are called universal sobhana cetasikas or sobhana citta sadharana cetasikas. Because these 19 cetasikas always arise with each and every of sobhana cittas or beautiful consciousness. Among 19 cetasikas, saddha cetasika is like the leader. For easy remembrance or memory, I divide 19 cetasikas into 2 groups and repeat saddha cetasika as it is like the leader. Two groups are an army of the king citta and a navy of the king citta. In the army there are 10 cetasikas. The leader is saddha cetasika. 1. saddha cetasika ( general ) the leader 2. sati cetasika ( secretary ) 3. hiri cetasika (lieutinent-general ) the right wing 4. ottappa cetasika (lieutinent-general ) the left wing 5. cittapassaddhi cetasika } 6. cittalahuta cetasika } 7. cittamuduta cetasika } 8. cittakammannata cetasika } 9. cittapagunnata cetasika } 10.cittujjukata cetasika } 6 followers / 6 soldiers In the navy there are 10 cetasikas. The leader is saddha cetasika. 1. saddha cetasika ( admiral ) the leader 2. tatramajjhattata cetasika ( secretary ) 3. alobha cetasika ( rear-admiral ) the right wing 4. adosa cetasika ( rear-admiral ) the left wing 5. kayapassaddhi cetasika } 6. kayalahuta cetasika } 7. kayamuduta cetasika } 8. kayakammannata cetasika } 9. kayapagunnata cetasika } 10.kayujjukata cetasika } 6 followers Saddha, sati, hiri, ottappa, tatramajjhattata, alobha, and adosa altogether 7 cetasikas have been explained in the previous posts. In this post 6 followers of both groups army and navy altogether 12 cetasikas will be discussed together. There are 6 pairs of cetasikas that always arise in pair and in common with other universal sobhana cetasikas. When I mentioned them in two groups as an army and a navy of the king citta, 6 cetasikas that is from the side of citta-related cetasikas are included in the army of the king citta. other 6 cetasikas are included in the navy of the king citta. But actually there are no army, no navy but they all work together and arise at the same time. These 6 pairs or 12 cetasikas are a) cittapassaddhi and kayapassaddhi b) cittalahuta and kayalahuta c) cittamuduta and kayamuduta d) cittakammannata and kayakammannata e) cittapagunnata and kayapagunnata f) cittujjukata and kayujjukata a) cittapassaddhi and kayapassaddhi Cittapassaddhi is a cetasika. Cittapassaddhi is made up of citta and passaddhi. Citta is consciousness and passaddhi means calmness, tranquility, serenity. When this cetasika arises, the king citta is advised to be calm, to be cool, be tranquil. When you do offering like charity work, you may sense that there is some hints of tranquility in your mind. This is because of cittapassaddhi. This cetasika makes citta peaceful and tranquil. Kayapassaddhi is very similar to cittapassaddhi and it is very difficult to differentiate between these two, let alone trying to separate them out which again is totally impossible. But kayapassaddhi by its name comprises two Pali words. They are 'kaya' and 'passaddhi'. Kaya here means combination of cetasikas or aggregate of cetasikas or a body of cetasikas and passaddhi means 'tranquility' 'calmness'. As citta becomes tranquil because of cittapassaddhi, associated cetasikas are also become tranquil because of kayapassaddhi cetasika. These two cetasikas are twins brothers. b) cittalahuta and kayalahuta Cittalahuta is a cetasika and when it arises this cetasika advises the king citta to be quick, reactive, and light. Cittalahuta is buoyancy of citta. Because of this cetasika, citta becomes lighter than akusala cittas or ahetuka vipaka cittas or ahetuka kiriya cittas where all of these do not have cittalahuta as their accompanying cetasika. This is also like cittapassaddhi, arises when we do wholesome things like offering or dana, constructing moral conduct or sila, or cultivating mental wholesomeness or bhavana. Kayalahuta is twin-brother of cittalahuta. When cittalahuta works, citta becomes lighter while kayalahuta works, it causes cetasikas all become lighter. Kayalahuta is buoyancy of associated cetasikas. It is lightness of cetasikas. Cittalahuta and kayalahuta cetasikas always arise together and they work together. They cannot be separated out. And they cannot arise singly without other twin-brother. These 2 cetasikas also arise in common with other 5 pairs of cetasikas and along with universal sobha cetasikas including the leader saddha cetasika. c) cittamuduta and kayamuduta Cittamuduta is softness of citta. It is a cetasika. It is plasticity. It is pliability. It is resiliency. It is flexibility. It is impressibility. Cittamuduta easily moulds the king citta to becomes polite, soft, plastic, flexible. In the presence of cittamuduta the king citta is like a candle which is close to fire or heat and it can be moulded into any form. Kayamuduta is twin-brother of cittamuduta and it is softness of cetasikas or plasticity of cetasikas. Cetasikas all become flexible in the presence of this cetasika kayamuduta. These two twin-brothers work together in a citta and they also arise in common with other 5 pairs of cetasika and other universal sobhana cetasikas. d) cittakammannata and kayakammannata Cittakammannata is a cetasika. It is workableness. It is adaptability. It is readiness to respond or to work. When a sobhana citta arises, there also arises a cetasika called cittakammannata and this cetasika advises the king citta to be ready to work or to be ready to respond. This is a sort of alertness. It is workableness. Kayakammannata is twin-brother of cittakammannata cetasika. Kayakammannata is workableness of cetasikas.It is adapability of cetasikas. It is readiness of cetasikas. These two twin-brothers always arise together in common with other 5 pairs and other universal sobhana cetasikas. These two cetasikas are quick-responders or fast-responders. e) cittapagunnata and kayapagunnata Cittapagunnata is a cetasika and it advises the king citta to be familiar with the object. It is proficiency of citta. It is power of experience. When it arises, cittapagunnata works as proficient worker and advises the king citta in work to be proficient. Kayapagunnata is twin-brother of cittapagunnata cetasika. It is proficiency of cetasikas. It is familiarness of the associated cetasikas. These two twin-brothers also arises together and they arise with other 5 pairs and other universal sobhana cetasikas. f) cittujjukata and kayujjukata Cittujjukata is uprightness of citta. It is rectitude of citta. When cittujjukata cetasika arises, it advises the king citta and citta becomes upright and takes rectitude and behaves in a straight way. Citta in the presence of cittujjukata will not lie anything at all. It is uprightness of citta. Kayujjukata is twin-brother of cittujjukata and it is uprightness of associated cetasikas. It is rectitude of cetasikas. When it arises, it causes associated cetasikas to behave in a straight way. Again these two twin-brothers always arise together and they are also accompanied by other 5 pairs and other universal sobhana cetasikas including saddha cetasika. 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. 38058 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 9:12am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 112 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, After discussion on 19 cetasikas called universal sobhana cetasikas or sobhana citta sadharana cetasikas, there left 6 more sobhana cetasikas or beautiful cetasikas. They are 3 virati cetasikas, 2 appamanna cetasikas and 1 pannindriya cetasika. There are 3 virati cetasikas. Virati means 'avoidance'. It is particular avoidance when there are conditions that may lead to committing things which should be avoided. They are 1. kaya ducarita virati or samma-kammanta, 2. vaci ducarita virati or samma-vaca, and 3. dujiva virati or samma-ajiva. These cetasikas are also kind of inhibitions. But unlike hiri and ottappa, they are directed at the particular action rather than contemplating on possible future effects or results. When contemplate on the act which is kaya ducarita, this avoidance is samma-kammanta. If the act is vaci ducarita, then the cetasika becomes samma-vaca and when it is avoidance of dujiva act then it is samma-ajiva cetasika. With the exception of Noble Eightfold Path at the time of magga and phala, these three cetasikas never arise together and not even two cetasikas together. There are another 2 cetasikas which is called appamanna cetasikas. They are called appamanna because these two cetasikas take the objects which are limitless or boundless. These two cetasikas are karuna cetasika and mudita cetasika. Both cetasikas are directed to the object which are pannatti that is satta pannatti. This means that they take the objects which are not paramattha dhamma or ultimate realities. There are 2 separate cetasikas on satta pannatti. This is because the characters of the objects differ each other. While karuna takes the object of satta pannatti who are in defective conditions, mudita takes the object of sattas pannatti who are in prosperous conditions. There left a cetasika called pannindriya cetasika. This is the most important cetasika. Because this cetasika is the only cetasika that will lead us to attainment of arahatta magga nana. Without this cetasika, however good other cetasikas are, arahatta magga nana will never be attained. Pannindriya cetasika or panna is a cetasika. It is constructive minister of the king citta. But pannindriya cetasika itself is not a citta. It advises the king citta to see real things. It throws a good light on things. Panna casts a bright light on dhamma. Panna is the most powerful cetasika among other cetasikas. Panna cetasika serves at different thana or places of Bodhipakkhiya dhammas like iddhipada dhamma or base of success, bala dhamma or strength of power, indriya dhamma or faculties, bojjhanga dhamma or factor of enlightenment, and magga dhamma or path factor. Panna also involves as adipati dhamma among 4 adipati dhammas. Panna is also known as vijja. Sometimes it is also known as nana. 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. 38059 From: m. nease Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 0:03pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Hi Dan and Sarah, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan D." To: Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2004 7:18 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" > Dear Sarah, > Insight comes first. Dan, thanks for this unequivocal statement of your view of this matter. > Description of the insight comes later. If at all, I suppose--I don't think anyone has been promoting 'description of insight', though. > Speculation about a particular "insight" before that insight has been > experienced is merely speculation. Obviously, speculation about any subject is 'merely speculation'. I think we all understand this and I don't believe anyone here is promoting speculation as insight. > It is not some sort of "conceptual > right view" that is a forerunner of sammaditthi. Whether or not there is a 'some sort of' sammaadi.t.thi that can take a concept as an object is, for me, still an open question and one specifically of definition of the word 'sammaadi.t.thi'. We're all aware, I think, that sammaadi.t.thi can take paramattha dhammas as objects and that the latter exclusively are the bases of vipassanaa. I'm inclined to think that right view might view concept as concept as opposed to reality, for example--but this may be misuse of the term 'sammaadi.t.thi' where pa~n~naa in some other form might be more appropriate. I do feel fairly confident that pa~n~naa can take concepts--such as beings, the teachings, views and so on--as objects. > Buddha makes it > clear that the one path is not a path of speculation and that > speculation does not help. No one here has argued the contrary, to my knowledge. In my reading of the Dhammavinaya (and a little abhidhamma) texts, I've never known the Buddha to suggest that hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma 'does not help'--on the contrary. Of course this kind of advice is easily found in Mayahana and Theosophical literature. For example, Mumon's "Stop, stop. Do not speak. The ultimate truth is not even to think", is a fine example of the Zen idea that samadhi is enlightenment or that enlightenment is simply the stopping of conceptual, discriminating thought (cf. Hakuin's 'Song of Samadhi'). Difficult to support this view from the Paali Tipitaka, though, I think, without considerable manipulation. Or are we back to the "Mind is Pure" thread? > You write: "On the other hand, as others have pointed out, it's > essential to hear the teachings and to to develop pariyatti or > a 'right' conceptual understanding in the first place." > > Yes, Buddha himself said hearing Dhamma is essential, and others -- > KenO, Mike, KenH, Howard, Bhikkhu Bodhi, and yourself -- say it's > essential to develop a conceptual right view *first*, as if insight > is somehow dependent upon the "proper" piecing together of various > speculations! I don't believe that any of us has made the argument you present here, or would--I certainly wouldn't. > To make the case, they've cited MN 117 and Sammaditthi > Sutta, neither of which supports a notion of "conceptual right view" > (as we both agree). I believe I've conceded this point before--if there is a sammaadi.t.thi that can take a concept as an object it doesn't seem to me to be that explained in the Sammaadi.t.thisutta. > The hypothetical reader who disagrees might be thinking: "My > goodness, Dan. How you twist words! How can you turn '"right" > conceptual understanding' into 'speculation'? You are just a > contrarian, intent on sowing discord." Straw man number two... > No, no. Not at all. If a > disciple who is given to heavy dependence on logic and reasoning uses > that logic and reason to hammer out a line of thought or a view that > is not derived from his own insight but that *sounds* like the > description of some other, wiser person's insight, that view is > merely speculation because the theorizer does not know what the words > that the wise person is using really refer to. Even when the > intellect is strong, subtle, and clever enough that the words of the > disciple exquisitely match those of the wise person, it is still mere > speculation. I'm glad we agree that speculation is speculation, however strong, subtle or clever. > When someone with no insight into the matter says, "Nama > and rupa are distinct," what he is referring to is quite different > from what the wise person means when uttering the exact same words. > That person's conceptual understanding or view is called "wrong" > because that view does not reflect sammaditthi at all. It is merely > speculation. Such speculation is not a forerunner of sammaditthi. I'm also glad we agree that speculation is not the forerunner of sammaadi.t.thi or of anything else pertinent to Dhamma. > But you go on to argue, "Otherwise, the Buddha wouldn't have bothered > to teach." I don't follow you, here, Sarah. Buddha's words help > disciples develop a conceptual framework around their insights. This > consolidation helps set the stage for deeper insight later. An interesting speculation--can you support this from the texts? > To > someone with no insight, Buddha's words sound strange and are quickly > dismissed and may even be ridiculed. To someone who's had a little > insight, the words hold an allure; they strike a chord. The words > ring true in the ears of someone with a taste of insight not because > the words are masterpieces of logical reasoning, but because they > reflect the disciple's prior experience. There is wonderment and joy > because they now hear their insights expressed so beautifully. The Buddha's words (by my reading and hearing) were meant to have quite a variety of effects depending on (among other things) the ability of the audience to understand, the circumstances and so on. In many cases, they were meant to stimulate profound insight in the hearers, and they often did. The suttas offer a great many examples of people, lay and ordained, who attained the various paths immediately on hearing the Dhamma from the Buddha. To my knowledge, nowhere in the tipitaka is it suggested that these attainments were the result of insights that had occured BEFORE hearing the Dhamma--except in those cases in which hearing the Dhamma again resulted in attainments higher than previous attainments which had occured after hearing the Dhamma, I think. > A > deepening of the disciple's insight comes after consolidation of the > shallower insights. Sometimes. If you're suggesting that this is always the case, a supporting text would be helpful. There are numerous cases in the suttas of people attaining nibbaana on having heard the Dhamma once from the Buddha. If these are all examples of 'deepening of the disciple's insight...after consolidation of the shallower insights' then maybe the Buddha said so at some point--an example from the texts would be useful. > There are many things in Buddha's teachings that sound strange to me, > e.g., much of the talk about Nibbana, past lives, miracles, devas, > etc. No amount of speculation or theorizing or conceptualizing about > these things will improve my understanding of them at all. I don't think that anyone here has ever suggested that any 'amount of speculation or theorizing or conceptualizing' would do so. Certainly I haven't and wouldn't. > Until my > insight into these things is deep enough that my conceptualizing > about them becomes a struggle to describe my direct experience, I am > merely speculating. And it doesn't help. No one has suggested that it does. > On the other hand, when I first heard the four Noble Truths over 20 > years ago, they really did sound like Noble Truths to me. Why is > that? Surely not because earlier that morning I'd been > thinking, "Hmmm... You know what? I think suffering is ubiquitous; > suffering is caused by desire; elimination of desire leads to > elimination of suffering; the way to elimate desire is by following > the eightfold path." Instead, I'd had previous insight into the 4NT. I take it that your view is that insight prior to hearing the Dhamma is fairly commonplace, or at least not limited to paccekabuddhas. I wonder if you can support this idea from the Paali Tipitaka? If not, it seems like a curious omission to me. > Granted, the insight was shallow. It was certainly not deep enough to > be able to express clearly in words-- not even deep enough to even > consider expressing it in words. However, it was at least deep enough > for the Buddha's words to ring true in my ears. I think all of us have had the experience of having the Buddha's words 'ring true'--in some cases, there may have been moments of satipa.t.thaana occuring then--AFTER having read or heard the Buddha's words. Just speculation on my part, of course. > Back to an earlier comment of mine: > > D: Of course, it can be helpful to listen to others' descriptions > of what reality looks like when it is understood directly, as it is. > If we hear something that is verified by our experience and "strikes > a chord", then the description can serve to help solidify our > understanding. Conceptual or non-conceptual understanding? A description would be a concept, it seems to me... > However, conceptual models about anything beyond > our understanding we should just set aside rather than spin off into > thinking, doubting, or blindly accepting. >> .... >> S:Agreed. I don't think there has been any other suggestion here. > > I think the idea of "conceptual right view" as a forerunner of > sammaditthi is indeed another suggestion -- the suggestions that > conceptual models beyond our understanding should not be set aside > but should capture our thoughts and attention, the notion being that > our theorizing will bloom into real understanding somehow as our > conceptual understanding becomes more and more refined. This can only > spin us off into thinking, doubting, or blindly accepting. Once again, I don't think that any of us paraphrased above has made that argument--I certainly haven't. I find noteworthy in the context of this discussion your expression of your own views as facts and those of others (well, at least one other) as 'nonsense, to put it mildly'. The fact is that your views are yours and mine are mine. I hope we may both benefit from discussing them. mike 38060 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 2:35pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 113 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Dhamma Thread have been brought to you as simple messages. The thread starts with different classifications of consciousness or cittas. Cittas or consciousness are what we ourselves can test on our own. After different classifications, 89 cittas were explained with several dhamma thread posts. If magga cittas arise in the vicinity of jhanas, these magga cittas can be counted as if they are jhana cittas. If so, there will be 121 cittas. Anyone at any time will be in a state of mind that are counted as 89 or 121 cittas. These 89 cittas are different because of their associated cetasikas. So it is essential that cetasikas are understood. So, after explanation on different cittas, counting on cetasikas and explanation of 52 different cetasikas are done. Even though cetasikas always arise with cittas and cannot be separated out from cittas, characterwise they are not cittas and they do have their own characteristics. So they become separate ultimate realities. Actually there have to be 89 cittas because of arising of these 52 different cetasikas. Both citta and cetasikas are nama dhamma. Apart from arupa brahma of 4 arupa brahma realms, all sattas in other 27 bhumis do have both nama and rupa. That is they all have namakkhandhas and rupakkhandha. Among these 27 bhumis, asannisatta bhumi dwellers do not have any namakkhandha. When in pancavokara bhumis, that is when there are all 5 khandhas, all namakkhandhas have to depend on rupakkhandhas. After namakkhandhas, rupakkhandhas are also ultimate realities. Rupa and their implications will be explained in the following posts. 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. 38061 From: plnao Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 2:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Hi Dan, and all > Insight comes first. Description of the insight comes later. > Speculation about a particular "insight" before that insight has been > experienced is merely speculation. It is not some sort of "conceptual > right view" that is a forerunner of sammaditthi. Buddha makes it > clear that the one path is not a path of speculation and that > speculation does not help. To be honest, I haven't followed this debate but I'll just throw in my opinion, for what it's worth. If there weren't "conceptual right view", what on earth are we doing in a Dhamma discussion group? Anything we say here is conceptual. Saying "insight comes first" is conceptual, and in your case reflects your conceptual right view. You had direct insight into the Four Noble Truths before reading about it, or listening to a talk about it? I guess that could be. Sounds like a very rare case though, and I would hope that the average person who isn't capable of that kind of insight would still be able to benefit from the Buddha's teaching in the way that she or he is capable of - by reflecting on it conceptually and gradually confirming that theoretical udnerstanding through experience, confirming it in a way that conditions more direct insight to come. That must be the way for most people, I'm sure. Of course we understand the Buddha's teaching in theory before we understand it directly. Fortunately, even the theoretical understanding is liberating, to a certain degree. That's the beauty of the Buddha's teaching. Good in the beginning (in theory) good in the middle (in practice) good in the end. I've always assumed (since reading about it, not having a sudden insight into it out of the blue) that that's what "good in the beginning" was referring to. I could very well be wrong, but if you tell me in what way it will be your conceptual right view correcting/straightening my conceptual right view - a very helpful exercise which could condition deeper insight to come, or not come, according to this and other conditions, for both of us. Thus is the value of Dhamma discussion. The straightening of conceptual understanding in a way that conditions insight. Very grateful for that. Sorry if I've misunderstood you as a result of not reading enough of the threads. Metta, Phil 38062 From: plnao Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 3:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group Hello Tyler Welcome to the group > I never looked at my senses as "doors" to the > world. That really helps. You said 6 doors. (Taste, Touch, Sight, > Sound, Smell, ?). What I am missing? Htoo will anwer this question much better than I can, but as a beginner it's helpful for me to try to answer. In Dhamma, the mind is is the sixth sense door. This is a very liberating concept. We are so used to considering the mind to be something that has mastery over the other senses in some way, and that's what's gets us into trouble. We get caught up in so much mental suffering because of our inability to see that there are mind door processes that are underway, beyond our control, before we know it. As soon as a sense door process (seeing, for example, and many other cittas that come just before it and just after it in rapid succession) falls away, a mind door process follows. For example, when you see a tree, it is not the seeing process that we have come to assume it is, but a mind door process that puts together visual information and leads to the understanding "I see a tree." The actual seeing is just seeing a visible object and colour and other paramattha dhammas (ultimate realities, though this is disputed by some people here as you'll soon discover) - it's only through the mind door that there is a "tree." We gain understanding of how rapidly mind door processes run away with things and create suffering through "papanca", (usually translated as "proliferation.) There is a great sutta in which the Buddha uses the simile of darts. When we have a painful physical sensation, it is the first dart, but we don't stop there. We dwell on it, even if momentarily, and the second dart, mental suffering, follows. I suppose truly enlightened people stop at the painful feeling through the body sense door (ie touch) without beeing hit by that second dart which follows through the mind door. For us, we will still have the mental suffering that follows through the mind door, but by begining to understand even only in theory the complexity and rapidness of the processes that are going on we begin to be led towards a liberation from belief in a self that can control these processes. We begin to gain detachment. Detachment is the whole point of the Buddha's teaching, in my opinion. I hope that's not incorrect .(please correct if it is, someone.) Metta, Phil 38063 From: gazita2002 Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 6:41pm Subject: re: New to Group/Phil Hello Phil, and Tyler, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "plnao" wrote: > > Hello Tyler > > Welcome to the group ...snip..... > For us, > we will still have the mental suffering that follows through the mind door, > but by begining to understand > even only in theory the complexity and rapidness of the processes that are > going on we begin to > be led towards a liberation from belief in a self that can control these > processes. > We begin to gain detachment. Detachment is the whole point of the Buddha's > teaching, in my opinion. > > I hope that's not incorrect .(please correct if it is, someone.) > > Metta, > Phil Azita: So enjoying your posts Phil. This 'detachment' aspect of Buddha's teaching was stressed again and again in India. If our practice does not lead to detachment then it can only lead to more attachment and keep us in Samsara for a very long long time. IMO, if we don't at first, have a conceptual idea of what ultimate realities are, then I can't see how an understanding of them can arise. I know at first, that is only an intellectual understanding but I believe it is a forerunner for right understanding to gradually develop to eventually 'see thro' the concepts and know the ultimate realities for what they are: anicca, anatta and dukkha. To me, this IS insight meditation. Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 38064 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 7:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] One Who Dwells in the Dhamma --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Nori - > > In a message dated 11/6/04 11:07:39 PM Eastern Standard Time, > nori_public@a... writes: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > I found this to be a valuable lesson. > > > ========================== > Indeed! This is wonderful, and I believe it should be heeded! > > With metta, > Howard Dear Nori and Howard, I think you are trying to tell us something. :-) Namely, that some people at DSG are studying when they should be practising. That may be so, but I would like to point out that this sutta, like all suttas, should be read in the light of the Abhidhamma and Commentaries. The culminating lines contain the exhortation, "Practise jhana," but it is not as simple as it sounds. You should be aware of the different meanings of "jhana." Please see the Useful posts file under the heading, "Jhana - Two Meanings." Kind regards, Ken H 38065 From: Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 9:07pm Subject: detachment Hi all, I was looking for something on detachment and the closest I could get was non-greed (alobha) and maybe non-hate (adosa): Vism.XIV,144 ...non-greed has the characteristic of the mind's lack of desire for an object, or it has the characteristic of non-adherence, like a water drop on a lotus leaf. Its function is not to lay hold, like a liberated bhikkhu. It is manifested as a state of not treating as a shelter, like that of a man who has fallen into filth. Non-hate has the characteristic of lack of savagery, or the characteristic of non-opposing, like a gentle friend. Its function is to remove annoyance, or its function is to remove fever, as sandalwood does. It is manifested as agreeableness, like the full moon. L: Any other candidates? Larry 38066 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 10:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] detachment Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Hi all, > > I was looking for something on detachment and the closest I could get > was non-greed (alobha) and maybe non-hate (adosa): > > Vism.XIV,144 ...non-greed has the characteristic of the mind's lack of > desire for an object, or it has the characteristic of non-adherence, > like a water drop on a lotus leaf. Its function is not to lay hold, like > a liberated bhikkhu. It is manifested as a state of not treating as a > shelter, like that of a man who has fallen into filth. …. S: I think this description of alobha or detachment is perfect. It might be obvious as some level that unwholesome states are ‘filth’, but in an absolute sense, so are all conditioned dhammas including sense experiences and objects and even wholesome qualities including wisdom and awareness. They are all dukkha and detachment has to develop towards whatever has arisen now by conditions. They have to be understood as namas and rupas, not ‘my’ wholesome or unwholesome states or experiences, otherwise detachment cannot be developed. In Nina’s ‘Cetasikas’, she quotes further and discusses the simile above in more detail in chapter 28, Non-attachment,(alobha): ***** “The Atthasåliní (I, Book I, Part IV, Chapter I, 127) gives the following definition of alobha: ‘… absence of greed (alobha) has the characteristic of the mind being free from cupidity for an object of thought, or of its being detached, like a drop of water on a lotus leaf. It has the function of not appropriating, like an emancipated monk, and the manifestation of detachment, like a man fallen into a foul place…’ The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 143) gives a similar definition (2. When there is a moment of non-attachment there cannot be attachment at the same time. Non-attachment has the characteristic of non-adherence like a water drop on a lotus leaf. The lotus grows in the water but it is not wetted by the water, that is its nature. A drop of water glides off a lotus leaf without affecting it. So it is with non-attachment, alobha. It is not attached to the object which is experienced, it is unaffected by it. That is the nature of non-attachment. Sometimes there are conditions for non-attachment, but shortly afterwards we are affected again by objects. Through right understanding one will become less affected. We read in the Sutta Nipåta (Khuddaka Nikåya, The Group of Discourses, vs. 811-813,)(3): ‘… Not being dependent upon anything, a sage holds nothing as being pleasant or unpleasant. Lamentation and avarice do not cling to him, as water does not cling to a (lotus-)leaf. Just as a drop of water does not cling to a (lotus-)leaf, as water does not cling to a lotus, so a sage does not cling to what is seen or heard or thought. ‘Therefore a purified one does not think that purity is by means of what is seen, heard, or thought, nor does he wish for purity by anything else (4). He is neither impassioned nor dispassioned.’ The function of non-attachment is, as we have seen, “not appropriating, like an emancipated monk”. A monk who has attained arahatship does not hold on to any object which presents itself; he is not enslaved but completely detached and thus free, emancipated. The Atthasåliní states that non-attachment has the manifestation of detachment like someone who has fallen into a foul place. Someone who falls in0074o a cesspool does not consider that a place of shelter where he could stay. He sees it as a danger, as something to be abhorred, and therefore he would get out of it as soon as possible. It is the same with non-attachment, it does not take refuge in what is actually a danger. “ *** Footnotes to the above: 2) See also Dhammasangaùi, §32. 3) I am using the P.T.S. translation by K.R. Norman. 4) By any other way than the Noble Eightfold Path, according to the commentary. See the Discourse Collection, Wheel Publication no. 82, B.P.S. Kandy. ***** Metta, Sarah ===== 38067 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 10:42pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 43-Feeling/Vedana (p) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.2 Feeling (Vedana) contd] ***** Those who have cultivated rúpa-jhåna and arúpa-jhåna(1) have suppressed attachment to sense objects. They can be reborn in higher planes of existence, in rúpa-brahma-planes and in arúpabrahma planes and in these planes there are no conditions for dosa. However, when they are reborn in sensuous planes where there are conditions for dosa, dosa-múla-cittas accompanied by domanassa arise again so long as they have not been eradicated. We dislike domanassa and we would like to get rid of it, but we should understand that dosa can only be eradicated by the development of the wisdom which sees realities as they are. There is no other way. *** 1) See Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Chapter 22. In the development of samatha, tranquil meditation, stages of rúpa-jhåna and arúpa-jhåna can be attained by those who have accumulated the right conditions. Rúpa-jhåna, fine-material jhåna, is still dependent on materiality, whereas arúpa-jhåna, immaterial jhåna, is not dependant on materiality and thus more tranquil. ****** [Feeling(Vedana) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 38068 From: kenhowardau Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 10:46pm Subject: Re: New to Group Hi Tyler, Welcome to DSG. You wrote: ----------------------------------------- > I have been reading Buddhism for about a > year now. I have read mostly Zen and Tibetan. I am currently reading > "What the Buddha Taught" by Wapola Rahula. I decided that I should > check out the Theravada school as well (online). > > I see terms like Pali Canon, Tipitaka, etc. Where should I start > learning? ----------------------------------------- Having studied Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, you already know the conventional versions of Buddhist practice. So why don't you look into the practice found in the ancient Theravada texts? It is totally different from the conventional versions and totally consistent with anatta. In this practice, there is no self; there are only dhammas - conditioned mental and physical phenomena (nama and rupa). So, put aside everything you have learnt about formal meditation and about mindfulness techniques. Put aside thoughts of controlling the flow of dhammas and, instead, allow right understanding to arise. Dhammas arise by conditions at any of the six doors but only at one door at a time. Any moment in which an arisen nama or rupa is directly experienced (by other conditioned namas) with right understanding, is a moment of right practice (satipatthana). For us beginners, satipatthana isn't likely to occur. If we barely know namas and rupas at the intellectual level, how can we expect to know them directly? Even so, by studying and contemplating the Dhamma we soon understand that namas and rupas are arising in the present moment, and so there is the potential, here and now, for satipatthana to develop. Kind regards, Ken H 38069 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 10:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Dan, --- "Dan D." wrote: > > > Dear Sarah, > Insight comes first. Description of the insight comes later. .... S: Please would you explain what you mean by insight, especially any insight into the 4 Noble Truths which can occur before one has heard about them or read any description about realities as anatta. Would you suggest patipatti (or even pativedha) should precede pariyatti in the first place? I think that Mike in particular, but also Phil and Azita have addressed the other points in your letter to me very helpfully;-) Metta, Sarah ====== 38070 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 11:15pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner36-Feeli ng/Vedana (i) Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > ======================== > So, then what constitutes tonal discord is a matter of mind, not > ear, > and what is discordant to most folks is still not discordant in itself? > Discord depends on cognitional tendencies and not only on the nature of > hearing and > of sound per se? ..... S: This sounds right to me. Through the ear door, only sound is heard. Any idea of discord or comparison of sounds (however fleeting and not necessarily in words at all) is a result of thinking with sanna marking the various sounds heard. Of course, this doesn't mean the sounds heard for us are the same (or that any two sounds are ever the same for that matter). There will be many factors affecting what sound is heard at any given moment, including past kamma (as we discussed on the long topic of desirable/undesirable objects). Someone who has been mostly deaf since birth usually speaks in a strange way (to our ears) on account of the way sounds have been heard, for example. Whatever the sound heard, they can be the object of awareness right now, as can the thinking about it. The reality of sound is simply that which is heard as we both agree. When there's any clinging or trying to have awareness, then it shows the lack of detachment to what is conditioned again;-). I've appreciated your comments on this thread of vedana, Howard. Metta, Sarah p.s Sound as trouble (dukkha)? It's an interesting translation and better than stress which I think is most inaccurate. I prefer unsatisfactory/unsatisfactoriness or even worthless(ness) perhaps if we don't wish to use suffering or dukkha itself. ========================= 38071 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 11:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Develop!"/ Phil Hi Phil (& Tyler), You wrote an excellent letter to Tyler, I thought. Btw, Tyler, welcome from me too - I look forward to more of your reflections and discussions with all the members who've written to you so far. You may also like to look at some Useful Posts from the archives, scroll down to 'New to the List....' http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts --- plnao wrote: > Of course we are encouraged by the sutta in which the Buddha says > that we should be baffled, or perplexed, or whatever the word is that > is used - becuase the Dhamma is so deep, so difficult to reason one's > way > through. .... S: I think the Buddha says we may well be baffled or perplexed, meaning this is natural (but not a state to be developed;-)). .... >I find readily letting go of the parts I don't get yet is part > and > parcel > of Dhamma study. As is knowing when it is the right time to bear down > a bit on a difficult point. More middle way. .... S: Yes, I like your stress on this. .... > At one point Nina posted about soemthing like this - > the wholesomeness of postponing understanding. There was a Pali term for > it, > I think. > Does anyone remember what I'm referring to? I'll never be able to find > it > now. .... S: It doesn't ring a bell. Was it about patience? You'll have to ask Nina in a couple of days if she has any idea what you're referring to. .... > > I also wonder if the Perfection of renunciation doesn't involve > renouncing > our > deep-rooted tendency to need to figure everything out through the power > of the rational mind. As does the Perfection of patience, of course. ... S: Yes, renunciation of any akusala arising, including any present lobha as you suggest. Metta, Sarah ======= 38072 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 11:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Develop!"/ Sarah Hi Chris, Thanks for sharing your diary extracts from India. Very descriptive and beautifully told. Thank you also for your kind comments and reminders about a discussion that was useful for me as well. When we discuss dhammas like lobha, we begin to see how very universal the problems in life really are and again I'm reminded that when there is sati, there's no problem at all;-). .... --- christine_forsyth wrote: > > Can't think of the dhamma focus > here, unless it was 'no -control' - the inability to make dosa go > and metta rise. > But 'control' is not the same as 'develop', is it? .... No, it's not. No control doesn't mean no development. No self to decide or determine what will arise at any moment, but understanding, awareness, detachment, confidence and so on can and will arise when there are the right conditions such as when we have reflected on their qualities and the realities which can be their objects. You referred to a p.c. vocabulary we might use, but of course it's not a question of whether we say 'develop', 'you develop' or 'panna develops', it's simply a matter of whether there is any understanding of any reality for what it is, rather than for an idea of 'a self' that has been entrenched for so very looooong. It's good to read all your other contributions and renewed interest too. Please keep sharing from your diary....;-) Metta, Sarah ===== 38073 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 0:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi Howard (and Phil and Herman), > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'm certainly not one to throw out babies! (Hey, and even bath water > is good in the desert! ;-) Yes, distinguishing right from wrong view is very > important. We must be wary, of course, at how easily our distinguishing capacity > is influenced by our desires and inclinations even without our awareness of > that influence. There are many things we cling to, and we "mind people" include > views and theories prominently among the things we cling to most tightly. I > think that part of what constitutes genuine wisdom is being able to see when we > are clinging, for when we don't even realize we are holding tight, there is > little chance of our letting go. Relinquishment is, I believe, the keystone of > patapatti. > --------------------------------------------- I know you have brought something like this up before with Phil, about "panna knows" being used unreflectively and indiscriminatingly. And I mentioned in a post to Herman about Ehipassiko as being to the effect the same thing as "panna knows". I know it is very hard to tell and we can talk about `detachment' or the wearing away of `adze handle'. The problem in any case arises imo when we factor in `self'. This happens in cases when we `want' to understand the present moment, or when we identify with any experience or when we look back and think about what we might have learned. In all these cases I think the perception and thinking would be off the mark. So when we do refer to `panna' as being the only real judge, then we should look at this as an impersonal process, and that any attempt to identify or figure out will be the negative influence of self. Incidentally this Saturday, a dhamma friend mentioned some experience and how long after the incident, she learned something from it. I was somewhat doubtful but couldn't sort out my thoughts to express anything fruitful. But a little while later another friend talked about how he realized something in retrospect and thought "Wow". We started then to talk about "wow" and "aha" experiences. When I suggested that panna would never exclaim "aha" or "wow", this friend thought that it might happen only with `conceptual understanding', but not with `direct experience'. I objected to this saying that it was probably because the `self' came in immediately after, and at that time it wasn't panna anymore. And this could happen even after satipatthana. In the end, panna or no panna, there is always something which can be known now, so why hold on to or have doubt about what has already gone? Just wanted to add something ;-). Metta, Sukin 38074 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 0:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi Ken O, Thanks, very good material and good comments following. :-) Metta, Sukin. > Hi Sukin > > I think I did post this extract before in DSG. > > Dukkha from Dispeller of Delusion para 446 > > 446. Herein this is the list {maatikaa) for the purpose of > expounding the Noble truth of suffering; for this suffering is > manifold and of various kinds, that is to say ; the suffering as > suffering, the suffering in change, the suffering in formations, > concealed suffering, exposed suffering, figurative suffering > (pariyaaya), literal suffering. 38075 From: jwromeijn Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 3:05am Subject: Zen and Tibetan (..) conventional versions of Buddhist practice ? Dear Ken H, Sarah and all In message 38068 (Subject: Re: New to Group) kenhowardau stated to Tyler: > Having studied Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, you already > know the conventional versions of Buddhist practice. > So why don't you look into the practice found in the > ancient Theravada texts? It is totally different from > the conventional versions and totally > consistent with anatta. In this practice, there is no self; > there are only dhammas - conditioned mental and > physical phenomena (nama and rupa). So, put aside > everything you have learnt about formal > meditation and about mindfulness techniques. > Put aside thoughts of controlling the flow of > dhammas and, instead, allow right understanding to arise. Because I'm trying to start a fruitful discussiopn between the several buddhist traditions in my country I'm interested in comparing them. Do you really think Zen and Tibetan buddhism are only convential versions and Theravada is the really one, the only ultimate truth ? And do you think this way of stating helps the discussion between traditions? I don't: also in Zen and Tibetan there is the idea of the two realities, it's better to compare ultimate one of the traditions and not the ultimate of Theravada with the conventional of the others. It also was the reason of my question to Sarah about reflections of her pilgrimage to India where she could see a multi-religious and multi-buddhist culture. Sarah, your reaction (in # 37978) was: > To be honest, I don't think much about Buddhists and > non-Buddhists, about cultures, about Theravada and > Mahayana. If I can find ways to share > what I have learnt about the Buddha's teachings and > have great confidence in, then I will. I think it's the > understanding of realities that is important, not the > labels and definitely not the numbers. Like here on > DSG, we have our discussions in public, so anyone > can participate and we can all share our limited > knowledge, but we don't expect all Buddhist > groups to be interested in the scope of our discussions. Of course the DSG is a Theravada discussion group and joining it is good for my development. I should like it if a Tibetan or Zen buddhist joined this DSG; of course not for proselyting but for example for asking information starting from their frame of reference but I'm afraid they are also not interested. If somebody knows a really good multi-buddhist discussion-group, please give me the (internet)adress; 'good' is for me: not starting with opinions but with facts and arguments; not trying to proselyte and especially: not being arrogant, not feeling superior. And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand why the differentiation of Buddhism started. Metta Joop 38076 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 3:44am Subject: Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) conventional versions of Buddhist practice ? Hello Joop, all, Mostly people like to exchange ideas and discuss Dhamma with people from their own tradition - usually a tradition they have settled on after shopping around in the first place. You may like to have a look at E-Sanga which has 30 boards covering all traditions, and many interests, even a Games board and a Coffee Lounge. The List has 4,085 members as of a few minutes ago. Most users ever online at the same time was 142 on 29 September. There is usually something interesting to post a response to, and there is a chat room that is always open, plus the facility of personal messaging others. Everyone is welcome to post (after registering) on the individual Tradition boards, ask questions, express opinions - and each board usually has three to five moderators. Mostly the various Mahayana traditions and Theravada get on fine. Sect bashing is discouraged. There are innovative and user friendly editing functions for posts. All posts must be written and read at the website. Nothing is sent to your inbox. The understanding of the posters varies - some are new to Buddhism and some are forty year veterans. Eventually you realise who has shallow understanding and who has much deeper understanding. It may not be what you are looking for - but it is worth a look. http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > Dear Ken H, Sarah and all > > In message 38068 (Subject: Re: New to Group) kenhowardau stated to > Tyler: > > > Having studied Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, you already > > know the conventional versions of Buddhist practice. > > So why don't you look into the practice found in the > > ancient Theravada texts? It is totally different from > > the conventional versions and totally > > consistent with anatta. In this practice, there is no self; > > there are only dhammas - conditioned mental and > > physical phenomena (nama and rupa). So, put aside > > everything you have learnt about formal > > meditation and about mindfulness techniques. > > Put aside thoughts of controlling the flow of > > dhammas and, instead, allow right understanding to arise. > > Because I'm trying to start a fruitful discussiopn between the > several buddhist traditions in my country I'm interested in comparing > them. Do you really think Zen and Tibetan buddhism are only > convential versions and Theravada is the really one, the only > ultimate truth ? And do you think this way of stating helps the > discussion between traditions? I don't: also in Zen and Tibetan there > is the idea of the two realities, it's better to compare ultimate one > of the traditions and not the ultimate of Theravada with the > conventional of the others. > > It also was the reason of my question to Sarah about reflections of > her pilgrimage to India where she could see a multi-religious and > multi-buddhist culture. Sarah, your reaction (in # 37978) was: > > > To be honest, I don't think much about Buddhists and > > non-Buddhists, about cultures, about Theravada and > > Mahayana. If I can find ways to share > > what I have learnt about the Buddha's teachings and > > have great confidence in, then I will. I think it's the > > understanding of realities that is important, not the > > labels and definitely not the numbers. Like here on > > DSG, we have our discussions in public, so anyone > > can participate and we can all share our limited > > knowledge, but we don't expect all Buddhist > > groups to be interested in the scope of our discussions. > > Of course the DSG is a Theravada discussion group and joining it is > good for my development. > I should like it if a Tibetan or Zen buddhist joined this DSG; of > course not for proselyting but for example for asking information > starting from their frame of reference but I'm afraid they are also > not interested. > If somebody knows a really good multi-buddhist discussion-group, > please give me the (internet)adress; 'good' is for me: not starting > with opinions but with facts and arguments; not trying to proselyte > and especially: not being arrogant, not feeling superior. > And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this > DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the > Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand > why the differentiation of Buddhism started. > > Metta > Joop 38077 From: buddhatrue Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 4:01am Subject: Right Resolve- Eightfold Path for Teens Friend Rob M., And the talk continues.... Right Resolve is the second factor of the Noble Eightfold Path. The Buddha defined Right Resolve with these words, "And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve." In order to understand Right Resolve, it is important to understand the importance of the mind. The most important thing to a Buddhist is the mind. Buddhists understand that everything we experience in life is dependent on the mind. Before the Buddha became enlightened, he realized that he, in essence, had `two minds'. He had a mind that inclined toward good thoughts and a mind that inclined toward bad thoughts. He also discovered that the bad thoughts caused him to have a great deal of suffering while the good thoughts caused him to be peaceful and happy. Therefore, he resolved to only allow the good thoughts and to stop the bad thoughts. Imagine that you each have one angel and one devil sitting on each of your shoulders. Sometimes the angel speaks in your right ear and makes you have good thoughts; sometimes the devil speaks to your left ear and makes you have bad thoughts. What should you do? Should you listen to both the angel and the devil? Of course not! You should do what the Buddha did: only allow the good thoughts; only listen to the angel. Over time, the devil will start speaking less and less until, if you reach enlightenment, the devil will disappear completely. So, you should resolve to only listen to your angel, to only have good thoughts, and to never listen to your devil. This is Right Resolve. The angle and devil don't really exist, they are both your own mind, but it is good to understand that we all have the potential for both good and bad thoughts. Keeping this analogy of the devil and the angel, it is important to know about the devil whispering in your ear is that he is very tricky! He will try to convince you that you should listen to him. How does he do this? He disguises himself as an angel. If you want to have a billion dollars, eat like a pig, or only look at beautiful objects, the devil will convince you that these things are good. If you want to get angry at someone, seek revenge, and maybe beat someone up, the devil will also convince you that these things are good. The devil in your mind will convince you that you deserve to have and to do these things and they will bring you happiness. Thankfully, the Buddha saw the truth of what his devil was telling him and he decided to stop listening. He saw that pleasure from the senses, be it taste, touch, smell, sight, and sound, is not really a pleasure at all…it is a trap and suffering! He saw that he didn't have to have a big house, lots of money, or fancy clothes to be happy. His mind became bent on renunciation: getting rid of those things in his life that aren't important. And when his mind gave up craving those things that aren't important, he felt free and happy. He was like a bird soaring on the wind, with no attachments and no complications in his life. Additionally, he also began to see that hatred and anger, directed at anything, didn't do him any good either. Hatred was like a poison that killed him from the inside. So, he gave up thoughts of ill will and became bent on harmlessness. So, to have Right Resolve is to resolve to get rid of those things that aren't important to life and to get rid of thoughts of anger and hatred. Nothing will happen until a person resolves to make it happen. Do you want to get rid of those bad thoughts? If so, then you have to resolve to get rid of them. You have to resolve to get rid of that devil on your shoulder. But, let me warn you, he won't go away easily! It will take some time to accomplish the goal of renunciation and harmlessness. The way to do this will be explained more in detail with the remainder of the Noble Eightfold Path. Next I will speak to you about Right Speech. (To be continued…) Metta, James 38078 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 4:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Conceptual right view" is 'uncontestable' [Howard] Dear Howard, There is no need to apologize for not responding. I do wish you the best with your health. Metta, Dan > ====================== > Please forgive me in advance for not getting back to you on this. At > least at the moment, I find myself resistant to going back and looking this > business over. I haven't been feeling so hot the last few days - a bit tired and > "not quite right", and I'm just going to let this pass, at least for the time > being. My apologies. > > With metta, > Howard > 38079 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 5:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Zen and Tibetan (..) conventional versions of Buddhist practice ? Dear Joop, A couple more brief comments on the part to me- (I'll leave the first part to KenH:-)). --- jwromeijn wrote: > > Of course the DSG is a Theravada discussion group and joining it is > good for my development. .... S: Glad to hear it. I appreciate your approach and interest. .... > I should like it if a Tibetan or Zen buddhist joined this DSG; of > course not for proselyting but for example for asking information > starting from their frame of reference but I'm afraid they are also > not interested. .... S: You might be surprised to know that some of the long-term and active members have come from Tibetan and Zen backgrounds. Mike, for example, has a long background in Zen I believe. Howard, Larry and many others came with great familiarity of Mahayana texts. Everyone comes with their own 'frame of reference', but we share a common interest obviously in exploring the Theravadan teachings together as applied to the present moment. I think the criterion or value is in the discussion of realities, regardless of our backgrounds, as you hinted at too, but sometimes we have to just agree to differ on various understandings, just as those of us reading exactly the same materials have to do sometimes as well;-) ..... <...> > And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this > DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the > Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand > why the differentiation of Buddhism started. .... S: From time to time there have been discussions on the early Councils and these aspects. You're welcome to pursue it,(keeping the guidelines in mind of course;-)) and if you want any information from the Theravada commentaries, I'm happy to help. Others may contribute too, like DN who has a wealth of information on these matters. While I find these historical discussions interesting, I question whether they help us to know more about the present realities. What do you think? Do they actually help remove any doubts about the validity of the texts we're studying? I'd be glad to hear more of your ideas about the value or your particular interest. I knew you wouldn't be impressed by my last response. Metta, Sarah p.s Hope your leg is recovering well. In India, Nina taught us how to pronounce your name with a 'Y' sound rather than a 'J' sound;-). ======= 38080 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sun Nov 7, 2004 6:31pm Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 107 and Tiika. Visuddhimagga XIV, 107 and Tiika. 107. Herein, (70) the 'mind-element' has the characteristics of being the forerunner of eye-consciousness, etc., and of cognizing visible data, and so on. Its function is to advert. It is manifested as confrontation of visible data, and so on. Its proximate cause is the interruption of [the continued occurrence of consciousness as] life-continuum. It is associated with equanimity only. N: the mind-element, mano-dhaatu, is the five-door adverting consciousness. When a new object, visible object or sound, etc. has impinged on the relevant sense-base, there is not immediately seeing or one of the other sense-cognitions. There has to be first the citta which adverts to the object. Therefore, this citta is called the forerunner. The Tiika explains that this citta does not experience the flavour of the object completely, and that it occurs only once. No matter whether the object is desirable or undesirable, it is accompanied by indifferent feeling. Its proximate cause is the interruption of the stream of bhavanga-cittas (life-continuum). The bhavanga-cittas experience the same object as the pa.tisandhi-citta, they do not experience an object that impinges on one of the six doors. It is unpredictable which object impinges on one of the sense-bases and interrupts the stream of bhavanga-cittas. This helps us to understand the anattaness of realities. Only one sense-object at a time can impinge on the relevant sense-base. When visible object impinges on the eyesense, there cannot be sound impinging on the earsense at the same time. Neither can a person or a thing impinge on the eyesense. However, we join many different objects into a whole and believe that we see persons and things. Learning about the different cittas that arise in processes and experience one object through one ?oorway at a time, helps us to see that there is nobody in visible object, sound or the other sense-objects. ***** Nina. 38081 From: Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 2:06am Subject: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Hi, Ken (and Tyler) - In a message dated 11/8/04 1:47:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Having studied Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, you already know the > conventional versions of Buddhist practice. So why don't you look > into the practice found in the ancient Theravada texts? It is > totally different from the conventional versions and totally > consistent with anatta. > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I would be interested in reading what you believe that practice is, Ken. ----------------------------------------------- In this practice, there is no self; there > > are only dhammas - conditioned mental and physical phenomena (nama > and rupa). -------------------------------------------- Howard: But what exactly is the practice, Ken? --------------------------------------------- So, put aside everything you have learnt about formal > > meditation and about mindfulness techniques. Put aside thoughts of > controlling the flow of dhammas and, instead, allow right > understanding to arise. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: How should Tyler allow that to happen, Ken, in your opinion? Why should it arise? What new conditions will yield that? That is: What is the practice? ----------------------------------------------- > > Dhammas arise by conditions at any of the six doors but only at one > door at a time. Any moment in which an arisen nama or rupa is > directly experienced (by other conditioned namas) with right > understanding, is a moment of right practice (satipatthana). ------------------------------------------- Howard: Namas (mental phenomena) and rupas (physical phenomena) are observed all the time. What is it that enables the right understanding that should encounter them to arise? To expect new results without new conditions is ... odd. -------------------------------------------- > > For us beginners, satipatthana isn't likely to occur. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: The normal meaning for the word 'satipatthana' is "foundations (or stations) of mindfulness", and the literal meaning is "the setting forth, putting forth, or setting up of mindfulness". That is different from 'pa~n~na', which means "insight" or "wisdom", and is what you mean. Beginners certainly can make progress with the setting up of mindfulness. -------------------------------------------- If we barely > > know namas and rupas at the intellectual level, how can we expect to > know them directly? > ------------------------------------------- Howard: In the suttas, there is told how the Buddha instructed a mentally deficient man to meditate by attending to rubbing his hand on a rag! That man, certainly unable to grasp subtle theoretical concepts, attained a stage of awakening by that practice. ------------------------------------------- Even so, by studying and contemplating the > > Dhamma we soon understand that namas and rupas are arising in the > present moment, and so there is the potential, here and now, for > satipatthana to develop. -------------------------------------------- Howard: That sort of theoretical, intellectual "understanding" can advance forever, but, by itself, will not lead to awakening. The Buddha didn't teach a Noble One-Fold Path consisting of the single factor: Study my theory. -------------------------------------------- > > Kind regards, > Ken H > > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 38082 From: Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 2:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study co rner36-Feeli ng/Vedana (i) Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/8/04 2:17:15 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > Whatever the sound heard, they can be the object of awareness right now, > as can the thinking about it. The reality of sound is simply that which is > heard as we both agree. When there's any clinging or trying to have > awareness, then it shows the lack of detachment to what is conditioned > again ====================== I'm not clear on your point here, Sarah. Attempting to pay clear attention to whatever arises through any sense door is *good*. In fact, what I understand sati to be is not forgetting to be attentive to whatever arises. Clinging is another matter. We all know that is harmful. 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) 38083 From: Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 2:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi, Sukin - In a message dated 11/8/04 3:06:39 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@k... writes: > Incidentally this Saturday, a dhamma friend mentioned some experience > and how long after the incident, she learned something from it. I was > somewhat doubtful but couldn't sort out my thoughts to express > anything fruitful. But a little while later another friend talked about how > he realized something in retrospect and thought "Wow". > We started then to talk about "wow" and "aha" experiences. When I > suggested that panna would never exclaim "aha" or "wow", this friend > thought that it might happen only with `conceptual understanding', but > not with `direct experience'. I objected to this saying that it was > probably because the `self' came in immediately after, and at that time > it wasn't panna anymore. And this could happen even after > satipatthana. > In the end, panna or no panna, there is always something which can be > known now, so why hold on to or have doubt about what has already > gone? > > Just wanted to add something ;-). > > =========================== Actually, I think that, at times, because proper conditions are currently in place, while they were not previously, the recollection or review of certain past events may lead to insight, in rather much the same way as a word or two of Dhamma or the sound of a pebble striking a tree trunk can serve as trigger. If the fruit is ripe, even a slight breeze blowing in the right direction may be sufficient to make it fall from the tree. The "wow" or "aha" business may vary from case to case. Sometimes it is a natural, free flowing expression of joy and wonder. (Think of the paeons of joy uttered by bhikkhus and bhihhunis resulting from true awakenings, reported in the Theragatha and Therigatha.) At other times, however, it may just be an after-the-fact, summing up by still ego-defiled mind. 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) 38084 From: Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 3:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Conceptual right view" is 'uncontestable' [Howard] Hi, Dan - Thanks, Dan! I'm replying at the moment pretty much just to posts that I can respond to "off the top of my head", which rarely includes your pithy posts. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/8/04 7:46:45 AM Eastern Standard Time, onco111@y... writes: > Dear Howard, > There is no need to apologize for not responding. I do wish you the > best with your health. > > Metta, > > Dan > /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) 38085 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 8:23am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga XIV, 107 and Tiika. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: Visuddhimagga XIV, 107 and Tiika. 107. Herein, (70) the 'mind-element' has the characteristics of being the forerunner of eye-consciousness, etc., and of cognizing visible data, and so on. Its function is to advert. It is manifested as confrontation of visible data, and so on. Its proximate cause is the interruption of [the continued occurrence of consciousness as] life-continuum. It is associated with equanimity only. N: the mind-element, mano-dhaatu, is the five-door adverting consciousness. ..snip.. ***** Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, The five-door adverting consciousness is mano-dhaatu. There are other 2 mano-dhaatus. They are receiving-consciousness of wholesome resultant and unwholesome resultant consciousness. So before eye-consciousness mano-dhaatu arises. And after eye- consciousness mano-dhaatu also arises. Panca-dvara-avajjana citta or five-door adverting consciousness is not the only mano-dhaatu. With respect, Htoo Naing 38086 From: htootintnaing Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 8:37am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 114 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Apart from citta and cetasika which are ultimate realities, there is another reality. It is rupa. Rupa are the nature which are always influenced by one or more of four causes namely kamma, citta, utu, and ahara. Rupa are always changing as citta and cetasika are always changing even though they are relatively slower than nama dhamma. Unlike nama dhamma, rupa do not have the nature that can be aware of themselves and their surroundings. Rupa can never know anything. But rupa serve various functions in connection with nama dhamma 'citta and cetasika'. In terms of their intrinsic character, there are 28 separate paramattha rupas. 1. 4 mahabhuta rupas 2. 5 pasada rupas 3. 4 gocara rupas or visaya rupas ( or 7 gocara or 7 visaya rupas ) 4. 2 bhava rupas 5. 1 hadaya rupa 6. 1 jivita rupa 7. 1 ahara rupa or 1 oja rupa ( altogether these 18 rupas are nipphanna rupas ) 8. 1 pariccheda rupa or akasa rupa 9. 2 vinatti rupas 10. 3 lahutadi rupas ( together with 2 vinatti rupas, these 5 are 5 vikara rupas) 11. 4 lakkhana rupas ( these last 10 rupas are anipphanna rupas ) There are 28 paramattha rupas. In terms of their class there are 11 classes of rupa as shown in above. Among them, 4 mahabhuta rupas are rupa that are called upada rupas. All other 24 rupas have to depend on these 4 mahabhuta rupas. Mahabhuta rupas are the base for all rupas including themselves. These four rupas again are also associated with other four rupas all of which have to totally depend on these four mahabhuta rupas. Along with these, further four rupas namely 'vanna' or 'rupa', gandha, rasa, and oja or ahara, all eight constitue avinibbhaga rupa which means inseparable materials. Mahabhuta rupas are four great elements. They are pathavi or solidity, tejo or temperature, apo or liquidity, and vayo or movement or resistence or supportiveness. Pathavi is earth element. It is the nature that is firmness or hardness or softness which depends on density and organisation between and among atoms, molecules, compounds, and complexes of materials from science sense. Its nature can be sensed through kaya pasada rupa that exist in the body and pathavi will be perceived as hardness-softness of materials. Tejo is the nature that can be known by sensing through the body as warmness or coldness or anything like that which serves as temperature. While temperature is a word, the true nature of tejo can clearly be sensed by the body. Any matter in conventional sense has a temperature and this can be sensed by the body. Apo is the nature that unites the materials. It is cohesion. It is flowability, it is fluidity, it is spreadability, it is stickiness, it is driness-wetness state of materials in conventional sense. But the true nature of apo cannot be sensed through the body. It can only be sensed through mind sense door. Vayo is the nature that pushes or pulls materials together. It is compressibility-repressibility. It is supportiveness through pressure. It is movement. It is motion. It is resilience. The true nature of vayo can be sensed through the body. 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. 38087 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 9:53am Subject: Re: "One path" [Mike] Dear Mike, It's great to have you on board the thread! My impression is that you are coming from a different point of view from Sarah's -- and possibly different from mine too, but there are some language and cultural issues we need to work through before we the conversation can be fruitful. In my formulative years I was formally trained in "pure" math (as opposed to applied math). The writing style in math is governed by a theorem-proof format, wherein a hypothesis is presented as a simple, unapologetic statement and then an arguement for or discussion of the hypothesis follows. I still like that writing style: make a short, direct, simple statement of what I want to say, and then give details later. *Of course* all the hypotheses I make here are just my opinions! It's true of whatever I or anyone else here writes. Please understand that. At times, I've tried peppering my writing with phrases such as: "...at least that's what I think", "my opinion is...", "I think". These strike me as superfluous. OF COURSE the things I write are my opinion -- there's nothing else they could be! I do like your "working hypothesis" phrase, though, and I'll try to use it more when addressing you (because you like it too) and when addressing people who aren't as familiar with me (because it is softer than the unadorned "theorem-proof" style). With Sarah, though, I needn't worry because she has a long history of snapping even the most hardened-appearing views I've spouted. > > Insight comes first. > > Dan, thanks for this unequivocal statement of your view of this matter. > > > Description of the insight comes later. > > If at all, I suppose--I don't think anyone has been promoting 'description > of insight', though. My working hypothesis is that much of the Tipitaka is a description of reality as been directly seen by the speaker (or writer), rather than instructions for what to do or statements of what to think. The (apparently) extra-canonical notion of development of "conceptual right view" as a starting point (i.e., that progress must begin with an intellectual understanding) strikes me as mistaken. Sammaditthi is not conceptual. Sure, sammaditthi can arise with a concept as object (e.g., in jhana); but it is not the nature of the concept that puts the "samma" in "sammaditthi", it's the nature of the viewing. > > Speculation about a particular "insight" before that insight has been > > experienced is merely speculation. > > Obviously, speculation about any subject is 'merely speculation'. I think > we all understand this and I don't believe anyone here is promoting > speculation as insight. Oh, I think you are right about that. But I do believe many are promoting speculation as the way to begin the development of insight. Most explicit and eloquent on this issue is Bhikkhu Bodhi. He discusses it in his notes to MN 117 (in MLDB), in his introduction to the Sammaditthi sutta on ATI (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel377.html), and in his "The Noble Eightfold Path: The Way to the End of Suffering" (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/waytoend.html). For example, in "The N8fp:...", he writes "The Eightfold Path starts with a conceptual understanding of the Four Noble Truths apprehended only obscurely through the media of thought and reflection. It reaches its climax in a direct intuition of those same truths, penetrated with a clarity tantamount to enlightenment. Thus it can be said that the right view of the Four Noble Truths forms both the beginning and the culmination of the way to the end of suffering." It looks like he is saying that thought, reflection, and conceptual understanding of the noble truths without any direct insight are not only a part of the eightfold path, they are the START of the path. In his intro to sammaditthi sutta, he coins the term "conceptual right view" for this notion. I call an obscurely apprehended conceptual understanding "speculation" because isn't that type of "conceptual understanding" simply "conceptualization in the absense of direct experience (i.e., theorizing, i.e, 'speculation')"? If you read some wise person's reflection on what they directly experienced, their experience may have been with sammaditthi, but their WORDS are not sammaditthi and my conceptual understanding of their words is not sammaditthi either. It's always a temptation to view the "path" as a step-by-step recipe, either as a set of things-to-do or a set of things-to-think, and creating a third path -- a conventional eight- step path -- that consists of "conventional right effort", "conceptual right view", etc. The "conventional right effort" temptation lends itself very well to silabbataparamasa and the "conceptual right view" temptation lends itself very well to ditthi. [Have you ever noticed how the primary texts tend to use ditthi vs. sammaditthi rather than micchaditthi vs. sammaditthi? The latter makes sammaditthi look like a "right opinion" or speculation as opposed to a "wrong opinion", when the distinction is really between "formulation and holding to opinions (ditthi)" rather than "clear, unmuddied viewing". Translators frequently gloss "ditthi" as "(wrong) view". I think this is misleading because it paints the dichotomy as "right" vs. "wrong" instead of "opinion" vs. "sammaditthi", thereby muddying the critical distinction. To me, it seems that the notion of "conceptual right view" squarely puts speculation on the (conventional) path and muddies the nature of the critical distinction between ditthi and sammaditthi. Granted, it is comforting to have explicit instructions about how to proceed on the path: "First, develop a right conceptual understanding by reading and talking. Then, with that 'conceptual right view' firmly in place, direct understanding will later arise." However tempting it may be, a conventional, "instruction manual" approach is NOT the path because the path is one of *viewing*, not *views*. > > It is not some sort of "conceptual > > right view" that is a forerunner of sammaditthi. > > Whether or not there is a 'some sort of' sammaadi.t.thi that can take a > concept as an object is, for me, still an open question... I'm o.k. with the idea that sammaditthi can arise with concept as object; but it is not the nature of object that imparts the "samma", it is the nature of the viewing. However, "sammaditthi with a concept as object" is not what BB and Sarah seem to be referring to when they talk about "conceptual right view" as the first step in developing insight. > ... and one specifically > of definition of the word 'sammaadi.t.thi'. We're all aware, I think, that > sammaadi.t.thi can take paramattha dhammas as objects and that the latter > exclusively are the bases of vipassanaa. I'm inclined to think that right > view might view concept as concept as opposed to reality, for example--but > this may be misuse of the term 'sammaadi.t.thi' where pa~n~naa in some other > form might be more appropriate. I do feel fairly confident that pa~n~naa > can take concepts--such as beings, the teachings, views and so on-- as > objects. I'm certainly no Pali expert, but I agree with the gist of your take here. > > Buddha makes it > > clear that the one path is not a path of speculation and that > > speculation does not help. > > No one here has argued the contrary, to my knowledge. I think that Sarah is arguing to the contrary when she writes that there must be conceptual understanding in the first place, or that hammering out the intellectual, conceptual details is the first step in developing direct understanding. If there is no direct experience, no insight with which to work, then I'd call such conceptualization "speculation". Even when we use the same words as the wise speakers in the Tipitaka used, if we have no insight, no clear, samma understanding of their words, our spouting forth of theories is mere speculation. > In my reading of the > Dhammavinaya (and a little abhidhamma) texts, I've never known the Buddha to > suggest that hearing and reflecting on the Dhamma 'does not help'-- on the > contrary. Agreed. In fact, he says explicitly that hearing and reflecting DO help. Is that because it is necessary to build up a conceptual right view about things first? To my knowledge, he says nothing of the sort. In fact, doesn't he explicitly say (what looks to me like) the opposite, viz. that speculation is not helpful? Or, could it be that building up conceptual theories about things for which we have no insight to base them on is something more than speculation? > Of course this kind of advice is easily found in Mayahana and > Theosophical literature. For example, Mumon's "Stop, stop. Do not speak. > The ultimate truth is not even to think", is a fine example of the Zen idea > that samadhi is enlightenment or that enlightenment is simply the stopping > of conceptual, discriminating thought (cf. Hakuin's 'Song of Samadhi'). > Difficult to support this view from the Paali Tipitaka, though, I think, > without considerable manipulation. Or are we back to the "Mind is Pure" > thread? You lost me here. No matter. Let's stick with Theravada. > > You write: "On the other hand, as others have pointed out, it's > > essential to hear the teachings and to to develop pariyatti or > > a 'right' conceptual understanding in the first place." > > > > Yes, Buddha himself said hearing Dhamma is essential, and others - - > > KenO, Mike, KenH, Howard, Bhikkhu Bodhi, and yourself -- say it's > > essential to develop a conceptual right view *first*, as if insight > > is somehow dependent upon the "proper" piecing together of various > > speculations! > > I don't believe that any of us has made the argument you present here, or > would--I certainly wouldn't. I'm sorry I misunderstood you, Mike. I'm hoping Sarah will jump back in to explain how her apparent contention that intellectual understanding must come first differs from the way I put it, i.e., that insight is dependent on the the proper piecing together of various speculations. > > But you go on to argue, "Otherwise, the Buddha wouldn't have bothered > > to teach." I don't follow you, here, Sarah. Buddha's words help > > disciples develop a conceptual framework around their insights. This > > consolidation helps set the stage for deeper insight later. > > An interesting speculation--can you support this from the texts? Consider it my working hypothesis, but I do find support for it. To begin with, the notion that hammering out the details of a "conceptual right view" is the first step to developing insight, I believe, is rejected in the texts because that wholly conventional notion of development amounts to nothing more than speculation it seems. What I'm exploring is the idea that the discussion and listening is more along the lines of consolidation of prior insight. How is this any better than "conceptualization comes first"? I can think of several possibilites. First, conceptualization AFTER insight becomes a matter of description and expression of reality rather than speculation. This frees the arising of insight from dependence on speculation. Second, the distinction between ditthi and sammaditthi is less muddied. There is no question about whether a given conceptual formulation is sammaditthi or not, or "conceptual right view". It simply isn't because the samma in sammaditthi is in the viewing, not in the content. Third, there is less danger about having a hangup about the word "insight" as something mysterious and reserved only for those very advanced and wise few, exceptional, and almost mythical people. I think the "stages of insight" approach that Mahasi uses to great effect can be misleading (not to the level of "extreme miccha ditthi" :), but potentially misleading). The progress of insight is not one of "first there must be full and deep understanding of the distinction between nama and rupa before there can be any inkling of direct understanding of cause-and-effect, which must be fully developed and deep before any insight about the distinction between path and not path arises" and so on and so forth. I look at the "progress of insight" more along the lines of the insights (namarupapariccheda, sammasana, udayabbaya, bhanga, bhaya, etc.) getting progressively deeper and deeper, rather than going in order from "lower" to "higher" insights -- at least until the "stages" of magga and phala. I'd say that nearly everyone who hangs out with dsg has developed some level of direct understanding. Otherwise, there would be no attraction whatsoever to the discussions. That brings me to the third "better", viz. that holding fast to the idea that the intellectual details must be worked out before there can be any insight gets in the way of development because the mass of intellectual details available is enormous -- one can spend a lifetime (or two or three) trying to develop an intellectual right understanding and ignore the insights that do arise: "Oh, there CAN'T be any insight arising in me because I don't understand all those racks of Pali terms well enough and, besides, insight is something for wise people, not me." Insight arises; pay attention to it, rather than relying on speculations to some day, somehow give rise to insights. How to pay attention to it? It can help to listen, discuss, write, reflect because these are reminders of what reality looks like when viewed rightly, so the insights are deeper when they arise. This wouldn't work if the listening, discussing, and writing were of a speculative nature rather than descriptive. > The Buddha's words (by my reading and hearing) were meant to have quite a > variety of effects depending on (among other things) the ability of the > audience to understand, the circumstances and so on. In many cases, they > were meant to stimulate profound insight in the hearers, and they often did. > The suttas offer a great many examples of people, lay and ordained, who > attained the various paths immediately on hearing the Dhamma from the > Buddha. To my knowledge, nowhere in the tipitaka is it suggested that these > attainments were the result of insights that had occured BEFORE hearing the > Dhamma--except in those cases in which hearing the Dhamma again resulted in > attainments higher than previous attainments which had occured after hearing > the Dhamma, I think. So, what of those hearers who attain enlightenment after their first hearing of some of the Buddha's words? They were totally devoid of any insight at all because they were outside the dispensation, and then all of a sudden they have the profoundest insights at hearing the Buddha? I find that very hard to swallow. Much more plausible to me is that they had developed deep insight, bringing them to the threshold of enlightenment outside the dispensation. However, it took the words of the Buddha to bring them over the top. So, I think it is not controversial to say that sammaditthi arises with jhana and that jhana is (and was) taught (and attained) outside the dispensation. How is it controversial, then, to say that "right view" categorically CANNOT occur outside the dispensation? > > A > > deepening of the disciple's insight comes after consolidation of the > > shallower insights. > > Sometimes. If you're suggesting that this is always the case, a supporting > text would be helpful. There are numerous cases in the suttas of people > attaining nibbaana on having heard the Dhamma once from the Buddha. If > these are all examples of 'deepening of the disciple's insight...after > consolidation of the shallower insights' then maybe the Buddha said so at > some point--an example from the texts would be useful. The term "consolidation" is my coinage, and I don't think it appears in this context in the Tipitaka. Likewise, the "conceptual right view" that BB and Sarah (et al.) use also seems to be extra-canonical (much like the notion of "conventional right effort"). > > On the other hand, when I first heard the four Noble Truths over 20 > > years ago, they really did sound like Noble Truths to me. Why is > > that? Surely not because earlier that morning I'd been > > thinking, "Hmmm... You know what? I think suffering is ubiquitous; > > suffering is caused by desire; elimination of desire leads to > > elimination of suffering; the way to elimate desire is by following > > the eightfold path." Instead, I'd had previous insight into the 4NT. > > I take it that your view is that insight prior to hearing the Dhamma is > fairly commonplace, or at least not limited to paccekabuddhas. I wonder if > you can support this idea from the Paali Tipitaka? Do you think it possible to attain the deepest levels of insight without having had ANY prior, shallower insight? And, yes, I think anyone with any sense of spirituality as distinct from materiality has clearly developed some insight -- whether inside or outside the dispensation. However, I don't think that people outside the dispensation can develop insight to the depth necessary for full enlightenment. > If not, it seems like a curious omission to me. I don't know, Mike. I'm working on it. Don't you sometimes come up with working hypotheses to consider while reading? BB's "conceptual right view" and Sarah's "there must be intellectual understanding first" don't seem to have clear and explicit textual support either (but they do have much that appears to contradict). > > Granted, the insight was shallow. It was certainly not deep enough to > > be able to express clearly in words-- not even deep enough to even > > consider expressing it in words. However, it was at least deep enough > > for the Buddha's words to ring true in my ears. > > I think all of us have had the experience of having the Buddha's words 'ring > true'--in some cases, there may have been moments of satipa.t.thaana > occuring then--AFTER having read or heard the Buddha's words. Just > speculation on my part, of course. I think having new words of the Buddha "ring true" is evidence of insight -- whether the "ring true" is new insight or memory of an earlier unexpressed insight. And yes, I think all of us have had these kinds of insights, and, yes, these I'd call true insight -- usually shallow, sometimes deeper. I wouldn't reserve the use of "insight" to refer strictly to the deep, deep levels. Such restriction seems to me to reek of the version of the "progress of insight" that says: "first this, then this, then this..." rather than a deepening of insight into various aspects of existence, including bhanga, bhaya, etc. > > Back to an earlier comment of mine: > > > > D: Of course, it can be helpful to listen to others' descriptions > > of what reality looks like when it is understood directly, as it is. > > If we hear something that is verified by our experience and "strikes > > a chord", then the description can serve to help solidify our > > understanding. > > Conceptual or non-conceptual understanding? A description would be a > concept, it seems to me... Conceptual understanding to be sure. It is not so much the "conceptual" that I am addressing in the discussion as it is the "right". The description is certainly NOT sammaditthi, but it can be a description of sammaditthi. If, on the other hand, the conceptualization is speculation (i.e., "intellectual understanding" with no insight to base it on), then it is also NOT sammaditthi and is not even a description of sammaditthi -- even if the words are identical to the description in the previous case! I can see how a description of sammaditthi is could be thought of as "conceptual right view", but I still think the term is too subversive of the Dhamma (in particular, of the notion that "right opinion" is NOT what is meant by "sammaditthi"). > I find noteworthy in the context of this discussion your expression of your > own views as facts and those of others (well, at least one other) as > 'nonsense, to put it mildly'. The fact is that your views are yours and > mine are mine. I hope we may both benefit from discussing them. Please be patient with me, Mike. Sometimes I take pride in being direct. A few years back Robert rightly scolded me for it. To say someone else's ideas are 'nonsense, to put it mildly' is not very gentle language. I apologize. If I recall, I think I referring to the views of the proverbial "straw man" and thought most people on dsg would agree with me that shallower insights are not strictly reserved for those who study Buddha's words, but that fully liberating insights are. [By "shallower insights", I mean 'most any insight short of supramundane path consciousness.] Metta, Dan 38088 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 10:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Phil, Great to hear from you! Thanks for chiming in late in this thread. You write: "If there weren't 'conceptual right view', what on earth are we doing in a Dhamma discussion group? Anything we say here is conceptual. Saying 'insight comes first' is conceptual, and in your case reflects your conceptual right view." I don't have any problem at all with discussing concepts and using concepts and thinking about concepts. I do think Buddha's sammaditthi is quite a different matter from "right opinion" or "right conceptualization"; it is more of a "right viewing" -- no words, no theories. The "samma" comes not from the object taken up by the mind, but in the way that object is viewed. Thus, I'd wholly reject your characterization of my conceptualization as my "conceptual right view." You continue: "You had direct insight into the Four Noble Truths before reading about it, or listening to a talk about it? I guess that could be. Sounds like a very rare case though..." Phil, I'm certain that you have had many direct insights into reality. Otherwise, the Buddha's words would not sound pleasing to your ear. Do you remember the first Buddhist concepts that you heard or that caught your ear? Did they catch your ear because they sounded strange, bizarre, or perverted (as they do to many, many people)? Or did they catch your ear because they seemed to ring true? If so, did they ring true because you had thought about the concepts discussed in the same way? Or did you sense that they were true because they seemed to accord well with prior experience? Then, you say: "in the way that she or he is capable of - by reflecting on it conceptually and gradually confirming that theoretical understanding through experience, confirming it in a way that conditions more direct insight to come. That must be the way for most people, I'm sure." You're sure? And: "Of course we understand the Buddha's teaching in theory before we understand it directly." Of course? I don't see it. Is theoretical understanding a part of the path? Or is conceptualation the thing-to-do to develop the path? And: "That's the beauty of the Buddha's teaching. Good in the beginning (in theory) good in the middle (in practice) good in the end." I'd say "good in the beginning (shallow insight), good in the middle (description of insight), good in the end (liberation)." Finally: "if you tell me in what way it will be your conceptual right view correcting/straightening my conceptual right view - a very helpful exercise which could condition deeper insight to come, or not come, according to this and other conditions, for both of us. Thus is the value of Dhamma discussion. The straightening of conceptual understanding in a way that conditions insight. Very grateful for that." I look at the discussions not as "straighening conceptual understanding" but in terms of describing reality. The descriptions make it easier to distinguish ditthi from sammaditthi from moment to moment because the reminder is always there. If we are just speculating and theorizing, then we have no idea what to look for -- despite the words! The problem is that the words are incomprehensible EXCEPT in the light of experience. Metta, Dan 38089 From: Dan D. Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 10:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Sarah, Your question gets to the heart of the issue. Please see my note to Mike for a little more explanation. I'll get to your specific question about insight into 4NT as time permits. Metta, Dan 38090 From: plnao Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 6:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 43-Feeling/Vedana (p) Hello all > We dislike domanassa and we would like to get rid of it, but we > should understand that dosa can only be eradicated by the > development of the wisdom which sees realities as they are. There > is no other way. I think it's helfpul to remember that dosa is always accompanied by another akusala root - moha. (ignorance.) Always. Dosa cannot arise without ignorance. If there was no ignorance, there would be no dosa! Understanding even in theory that 1) the unpleasant experience that led to the dosa comes from my kamma and 2)the dosa couldn't arise without ignorance of realities might help me stop whining about things so much! Dosa can be understood, can be penetrated by panna in a way that leads to liberation from dosa. So perhaps at moments of dosa there will come to be moments of gratitude to the Buddha who showed us the way out. Metta, Phil 38091 From: plnao Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 2:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Hi Dan, and all >You continue: "You had direct insight into the Four Noble Truths >before reading about it, or listening to a talk about it? I guess >that could be. Sounds like a very rare case though..." >Phil, I'm certain that you have had many direct insights into >reality. Otherwise, the Buddha's words would not sound pleasing to >your ear. Do you remember the first Buddhist concepts that you heard >or that caught your ear? Did they catch your ear because they sounded >strange, bizarre, or perverted (as they do to many, many people)? Or >did they catch your ear because they seemed to ring true? If so, did >they ring true because you had thought about the concepts discussed >in the same way? Or did you sense that they were true because they >seemed to accord well with prior experience? This is a very interesting point, Dan. I've often wondered why my first contact with Abhidhamma felt so "right", so confidence building, like a revelation of great truth, when other people look at it and just see a bunch of Pali terms. One friend here told me that it was because of right understanding in a past life. Of course, it was also conditioned by having studied the Buddha's teaching and *not quite* feeling the pieces came together. (I can remember feeling that studying suttas and practicing brahma-viharas meditation might someday get me *close* to the other shore, but to take that final step on to dry land, if you will, there was something missing. I was close to turning to Zen to try to find that answer - that's when I came across Abhidhamma. But the first contact with Dhamma. That's very interesting to think about. I think like most people I had a preconceived notion of what Dhamma was about, based on wrong understanding in the media, etc. There was a craving to be a wise man, to impress women, to sound good at parties. That unskillful approach to Dhamma got me into the books, through pop Dhamma. No, there was not only conceit, there was also fear. So in a sense there *was* insight into the noble truths, shallow insight. There was suffering, that fear, that shallow insight into the First Truth, but there was no insight whatsoever into the Truth that that fear comes from clinging to the khandas, from clinging to wrong view of self. That kind of shallow insight into the Second Truth, can only arise after contact with the Buddha's teaching, in my opinion. His teaching of anatta is so unworldly, such a paradigm shift from other teachings, from conventional understanding of an eternal self, that atta that we find in all other religions. So I think we have to develop a conceptual right understanding of anatta before we can gain insight into it. That's another thing that I appreciate about Abhidhamma. I had read about anatta countless times but never really began to *get* it until I came across Abhidhamma. Ah, that might support your point. There *was* insight into anatta at that point, shallow insight, and only then did conceptual understanding of anatta have any value. But that doesn't apply to the path factors, methinks. It's easier to gain a theoretical appreciation of them that we can apply and test and deepen in daily life - not the case for anatta. Just thinking out loud here. It's an interesting point you've brought up. I'm sure I'll be reflecting more on it, as I follow this discussion with interest. (Which wasn't there before! Thank you for that.) Metta, Phil 38092 From: plnao Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 2:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right Resolve- Eightfold Path for Teens Hi James. Really enjoying your series. Just one comment >Therefore, he >resolved to only allow the good thoughts and to stop the bad >thoughts. Of course the bad thoughts *will* come whether we try to stop them or not. That's why the 4 efforts include abandoning unskillful thoughts that have arisen as well as preventing those that haven't arisen. I think teenagers are even more prone to guilt that adults so I'd be aware of setting up a fight against the devil through which kids would feel guilty about losing if they had bad thoughts. Sounds a bit too fundy Christian. Maybe something about gently removing bad thoughts that have arisen, through no fault of the person, but because of conditions/kamma whatever. I think of that great scene in Good Will Hunting in which the shrink comforts Matt Damon with "it's not your fault, it's not your fault." Of course in Dhamma we know in a sense that it *is* our fault, but it's also the fault of past kamma that "we" weren't involved in. Middle way between a sense of personal responsibility and a sense of things being beyond our control. I would get that across, somehow, so the kids don't get freaked out or feel they've lost the battle with the devil when they realize they're thinking the bad thoughts that people inevitably do. (I sure do) Metta, Phil 38093 From: plnao Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 2:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 43-Feeling/Vedana (p) Hello All > We dislike domanassa and we would like to get rid of it, but we > should understand that dosa can only be eradicated by the > development of the wisdom which sees realities as they are. There > is no other way. One of the most helpful, basic points that I've been reminded of lately is that dosa mula cittas are always accompanied by moha mula cittas. In other words, aversion is always accompanied by ignorance. Aversion cannot arise without ignorance being at the root of it. If we are not ignorant of the realities of the moment, we will not have aversion. That's a very liberating concept that can be confirmed in daily life. Metta, Phil 38094 From: Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 4:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 107 and Tiika. Hi Nina, Welcome back! Everyone else who went to India came back exhausted. How are you? Also one dhamma question: is there a general difference in characteristic between the various mind-elements (manodhaatu) and the various mind-consciousness-elements (manovi~n~naa.nadhaatu)? In other words, why aren't they all called mind-consciousness-elements? Larry 38095 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 8:58pm Subject: Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) conventional versions of Buddhist practice ? Dear Joop, You wrote: ------------------------ > Because I'm trying to start a fruitful discussion between the several buddhist traditions in my country I'm interested in comparing them. > ------------------------ That's interesting, although I don't really share your enthusiasm. My interest in comparing schools of Buddhism is limited to seeing how horribly wrong they can go. I am thinking, in particular, of Tibet in the days before the Chinese mercifully liberated it. The people were enslaved under a particularly brutal form of feudalism. At the top of the heap, dishing out the brutality, were the lamas, and, as a crowning abomination, the lamas called themselves Buddhist monks! I know that is all in the past and, today, Tibetan Buddhists are wonderful people. But are they any more wonderful than people of other religious and secular persuasions? No, of course they aren't, and nor are Theravadin Buddhists. ---------------------------- J: > Do you really think Zen and Tibetan buddhism are only convential versions and Theravada is the really one, the only ultimate truth ? > ---------------------------- I suspect that the texts of all Schools of Buddhism contain the true teaching. But there are many wrong interpretations of those texts. The Theravada school has ancient commentaries that address the common wrong interpretations. I don't know if the other schools are so fortunate. Are they? -------------------------------------- J: > And do you think this way of stating helps the discussion between traditions? I don't: > -------------------------------------- No, nor do I. I hope DSG members knew that I was referring to the conventional ideas of Buddhist practice that are typically associated with Zen and Tibetan Buddhism. Those ideas are that satipatthana can be controlled by sitting stoically and by performing ceremonies. ---------------------- J: > also in Zen and Tibetan there is the idea of the two realities, it's better to compare ultimate one of the traditions and not the ultimate of Theravada with the conventional of the others. > ---------------------- Good point: I was needlessly stereotyping. In a moment of satipatthana, panna (right understanding) arises to see that a conditioned dhamma is exactly as the Buddha described it. At that precise moment, the five khandhas can be called a bhikkhu (or a bhikkhuni). At other times, terms like bhikkhu, layperson, Zen, Tibetan and Theravada refer, only in a [conventional] manner of speaking, to followers and the teaching of the Buddha. Kind regards, Ken H 38096 From: Tyler Sims Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 6:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Develop!"/ Phil Thanks Sarah, I will look at those posts. I am reading the posts here and trying to absorb all this new stuff. :) Tyler --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Phil (& Tyler), > > You wrote an excellent letter to Tyler, I thought. > > Btw, Tyler, welcome from me too - I look forward to more of your > reflections and discussions with all the members who've written to you so > far. You may also like to look at some Useful Posts from the archives, > scroll down to 'New to the List....' > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > --- plnao wrote: > > Of course we are encouraged by the sutta in which the Buddha says > > that we should be baffled, or perplexed, or whatever the word is that > > is used - becuase the Dhamma is so deep, so difficult to reason one's > > way > > through. > .... > S: I think the Buddha says we may well be baffled or perplexed, meaning > this is natural (but not a state to be developed;-)). > .... > > >I find readily letting go of the parts I don't get yet is part > > and > > parcel > > of Dhamma study. As is knowing when it is the right time to bear down > > a bit on a difficult point. More middle way. > .... > S: Yes, I like your stress on this. > .... > > At one point Nina posted about soemthing like this - > > the wholesomeness of postponing understanding. There was a Pali term for > > it, > > I think. > > Does anyone remember what I'm referring to? I'll never be able to find > > it > > now. > .... > S: It doesn't ring a bell. Was it about patience? You'll have to ask Nina > in a couple of days if she has any idea what you're referring to. > .... > > > > I also wonder if the Perfection of renunciation doesn't involve > > renouncing > > our > > deep-rooted tendency to need to figure everything out through the power > > of the rational mind. As does the Perfection of patience, of course. > ... > S: Yes, renunciation of any akusala arising, including any present lobha > as you suggest. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= 38097 From: Tyler Sims Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 5:46pm Subject: Re: New to Group Hi Ken, Thanks for the welcome. {snip} "If we barely know namas and rupas at the intellectual level, how can we expect to know them directly?" I need further clarification here. What does it mean to know a nama and/or rupa intellectually? And what does it mean to know them directly? Also, what does it mean to say that things arise "conditionally"? On a general note, I will follow your advice and look into the anicent Theravada texts. Thanks, Tyler --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Tyler, > > Welcome to DSG. You wrote: > ----------------------------------------- > > I have been reading Buddhism for about a > > year now. I have read mostly Zen and Tibetan. I am currently > reading > > "What the Buddha Taught" by Wapola Rahula. I decided that I should > > check out the Theravada school as well (online). > > > > I see terms like Pali Canon, Tipitaka, etc. Where should I start > > learning? > ----------------------------------------- > > Having studied Zen and Tibetan Buddhism, you already know the > conventional versions of Buddhist practice. So why don't you look > into the practice found in the ancient Theravada texts? It is > totally different from the conventional versions and totally > consistent with anatta. In this practice, there is no self; there > are only dhammas - conditioned mental and physical phenomena (nama > and rupa). So, put aside everything you have learnt about formal > meditation and about mindfulness techniques. Put aside thoughts of > controlling the flow of dhammas and, instead, allow right > understanding to arise. > > Dhammas arise by conditions at any of the six doors but only at one > door at a time. Any moment in which an arisen nama or rupa is > directly experienced (by other conditioned namas) with right > understanding, is a moment of right practice (satipatthana). > > For us beginners, satipatthana isn't likely to occur. If we barely > know namas and rupas at the intellectual level, how can we expect to > know them directly? Even so, by studying and contemplating the > Dhamma we soon understand that namas and rupas are arising in the > present moment, and so there is the potential, here and now, for > satipatthana to develop. > > Kind regards, > Ken H 38098 From: Tyler Sims Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 6:49pm Subject: Various Buddhist Traditions Hi all, Thanks for the warm welcome. I just wanted to make a couple of comments. I hope I don't get myself into "trouble" here! I found the teaching by Walpola Rahula in his book "What the Buddha Taught" to be very concise and "easily" digested. So this insight got me to thinking "What did the Buddha really teach"? This inquiry is what led me to Theravada Buddhism and simultaneously this group. My question is: Does Zen and Tibetan "build" or "add to" to original teachings of the Buddha? My motive here is that I believe that TRUTH is naturally free of any/all cultural wrappings. I can understand and live by the Four Noble Truths and the EightFold Path. (Hopefully, at some point I will understand some of the new terms I have encountered here as well). I don't mind adding a few cultural things to my life but trying to track lineages, incarnations, gurus, etc is not my thing. I also was a but turned off by the argument about what the "highest/ultimate" teachings were, etc. PLEASE understand that I am saying that it was just not for me. I also understand and don't mind learning from others more "wiser" than me. I don't even mind following a trusted teacher as I would an academic teacher or a particular philosophy, etc. So back to my question....Does Zen and Tibetan "build on" Theravada or is it all apples and oranges? Back to reading the useful posts archives! :) Tyler 38099 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 11:13pm Subject: 'Cetasikas' study corner 44 - Feeling/Vedana (q) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.2 Feeling (Vedana) contd] ***** Only the ariyan, the noble person, who has attained the third stage of enlightenment which is the stage of the anågåmí (non-returner), has eradicated clinging to sense objects and thus he has no more conditions for dosa. The anågåmí and the arahat have eradicated dosa and thus they never have any more unpleasant feeling. Dosa and domanassa always arise together. It is difficult to distinguish between these two realities , but they are different cetasikas. Domanassa is feeling, it experiences the taste of the undesirable object. Dosa is not feeling, it has a different characteristic. Dosa does not like the object which is experienced. There are many degrees of dosa, it can be a slight aversion, anger or hate. But in any case dosa does not want the object and domanassa feels unhappy. We know so little about the different realities which arise. We may have a backache. Is it painful bodily feeling which appears, or is it the characteristic of domanassa which accompanies dosa-múla-citta? ****** [Feeling(Vedana) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 38100 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study co rner36-Feeli ng/Vedana (i) Hi Howard, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > ====================== > I'm not clear on your point here, Sarah. Attempting to pay clear > attention to whatever arises through any sense door is *good*. ..... S: When there is 'Attempting to pay clear attention to whatever arises', say now, what is the reality at that very moment? ...... >In fact, > what I > understand sati to be is not forgetting to be attentive to whatever > arises. ..... S: I think there is a difference between a) sati being mindful naturally of whatever arises by conditions after hearingreading about its quality and about the various realities such as visible object or sound, and b)any attempting to pay attention or have sati arise. .... > Clinging is another matter. We all know that is harmful. .... S: I think we all know a lot about grosser forms of clinging and even about subtler forms in theory. At moments of attempting to have sati or attending to whatever arises, I'd suggest that lobha is there too. I also think it's very important for panna (understanding) to learn to distinguish between moments with and without sati, otherwise we're likely to be fooled all the time. I hope this clarifies a little, Howard. Thank you for asking. As I said, I thought your comments on sounds were very good. This was just an extra point I was adding to stress the reality of sound that can be known now - just that which is heard, without any thought of tone, discord or special attention. Metta, Sarah ======== 38101 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 8, 2004 11:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Dan, --- "Dan D." wrote: > > > Dear Sarah, > Your question gets to the heart of the issue. Please see my note to > Mike for a little more explanation. I'll get to your specific > question about insight into 4NT as time permits. ..... When you get to this question, please also let me know who develops insight when it occurs outside the dispensation, whether in jhana development or in those 'with any sense of spirituality'. When the words of the Buddha 'rang true' with our prior 'true insights', who had had these insights? These 'shallower insights', defined by you as 'most any insight short of supramundane path consciousness' were into precisely what realities before we studied the 'Buddha's words'? Metta, Sarah p.s I'm hoping Mike will continue the other thread. And yes, no need to worry about any style issues when you write to me;-). Dan, I do hope we'll be able to make some recordings from Bkk and India available very soon - apologies for delays. Stay posted - you'll like them a lot, I think. ========================================== 38102 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 0:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dukkha- What is it? Hi Howard, > =========================== > Actually, I think that, at times, because proper conditions are > currently in place, while they were not previously, the recollection or review of > certain past events may lead to insight, in rather much the same way as a word > or two of Dhamma or the sound of a pebble striking a tree trunk can serve as > trigger. If the fruit is ripe, even a slight breeze blowing in the right > direction may be sufficient to make it fall from the tree. > The "wow" or "aha" business may vary from case to case. Sometimes it > is a natural, free flowing expression of joy and wonder. (Think of the paeons > of joy uttered by bhikkhus and bhihhunis resulting from true awakenings, > reported in the Theragatha and Therigatha.) At other times, however, it may just be > an after-the-fact, summing up by still ego-defiled mind. > > > With metta, > Howard ----------------------------------------- If the past can in anyway be a condition for insight, I think it must be only because it has conditioned the experience of a presently arisen dhamma. Concepts after all don't have any characteristic to be insighted. Thinking can of course be kusala, and may even help to increase understanding on the pariyatti level. However the object of satipatthana can only be a paramattha dhamma. My objection to the "aha" experience is the likelihood that the person who expresses it does not know this difference between reality and concept. The Thera and Theri who expressed joy and wonderment, very well knew this and the freedom it implied. :-) Metta, Sukin 38103 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 2:07am Subject: Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) conventional versions of Buddhist practice ? Dear Christine, Sarah, Ken and all Thank you Christine for mentioning E-Sangha, I already spent some hours on the fora of it yesterday. Sarah, you asked me: > While I find these historical discussions interesting, I question > Whether they help us to know more about the present realities. > What do you think? > Do they actually help remove any doubts about the validity of > the texts we're studying? I'd be glad to hear more of your ideas > about the value or your particular interest. I knew you > wouldn't be impressed by my last response. I have two special reasons for studying the history of early buddhism (and one general: like you going for pilgrimage to India to be where "it all started" I'm doing that on a more abstract way) (1) A personal reason. I defined myself a Theravadin some years ago after "shopping around" as Christine called it. But it's a Theravada à la carte, a buffet-buddhism. Of some parts of Theravada I think: I have no need to make that part of my system, I don't belief that. As far as I know it now I prefer the not-institutionalised, more vivid and less systemased early Buddhism as Kalupahana described it in his books. And some Mahayana-texts I like very much: Nagarjuna (who is in fact not a Mahayanist but a direct follower of the Buddha) and the Heart-sutra for example. And I want to understand why and how and where the differentiation of the early buddhism started, to find my place in the evolution of buddhism more exactly. (2) A social reason. In the Netherlands (and in most western countries) many buddhist traditions have followers. But that's all in very small sangha's, with hardly any contact with each others. To me it's important that people of different religions can discuss with each other (for example with Christianity and Islam). But Buddhists can't even discuss with other Buddhists ! So I'm trying to promote that inter-tradition-discussion in my country. And discussing in internet-fora is an exercise for me, for getting more social competence in that discussion. An example: I think the Mahayana- concept 'Budhha-Nature' is an atta-belief, is not compatible with the teachngs of the Buddha, but how to talk about that concept? Behind that need for discussion is my idea that on the long run a new kind of 'western buddhism' (or 'global buddhism') will appear and I will contribute to that future. My leg doing better again, the blood is circulating merry again so I can make long-distance-walks in some months (and perhaps next winter I will visit Thailand, maybe when there is a DSG-activity). Ken, thanks for your explanations. I'm not sure the Chinese are altruistic welldoers in Tibet. You stated: > The Theravada school has ancient commentaries that > address the common wrong interpretations. > I don't know if the other schools are > so fortunate. Are they? Nearly all belief-system in the world say all other belief-systems are wrong or only correct on a primitive level. Mahayana has the concept of 'skillful means': the idea that the Buddha not only made 'public teachings' (the Sutta Pitika) but also 'esoteric' ones, only known by advanced adepts. But is one of the stories of the Abhidhamma (spoken by the Buddha to His mother in one of the heavens) not nearly the same? Further you wrote: > … I was referring to the conventional ideas of Buddhist > practice that are typically associated with Zen and > Tibetan Buddhism. Those ideas are that > satipatthana can be controlled by sitting stoically > and by performing ceremonies. I recognize that in Zen, but Tibetan Buddhism I don't associate with sitting stoically, one of the reason I never joined a Tibetan group after some monts spending in it was to 'Dionysian', to extravert. And I'm afraid doing rituals, having faith and devotion is also part of (popular) ethnic Theravada. But most important: I agree with your conviction that vipassana (alo called insight-) meditation brings us further on our buddhistic path than samatha (jhanic-) meditation. Because it fits best with the three principles all buddhist accept: dukkha, anatta and anicca. Metta Joop 38104 From: abhidhammika Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 4:15am Subject: Buddhaghosa Created Theravada? (Was Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) Dear Joop and all How are you? Joop wrote: "And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand why the differentiation of Buddhism started." What do you mean by "(before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada)"? If it were not your original idea, where did you get that? With regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org PS-- Joop, if you wanted to join a multi-school Buddhist group, how about trying the following link? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BuddhistWellnessGroup/ Good luck! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: > > Dear Ken H, Sarah and all > ------------.. roselyte > and especially: not being arrogant, not feeling superior. > And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this > DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the > Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand > why the differentiation of Buddhism started. > > Metta > Joop 38105 From: abhidhammika Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 4:39am Subject: There is a Practice : To Howard Dear Howard, Ken H and all How are you? Howard, your responses to Ken's statements are sharply put and good overall. But, the following exchange between Ken's statement and your reply puzzled me, and needs your further clarification. "Ken H : Even so, by studying and contemplating the > > Dhamma we soon understand that namas and rupas are arising in the > present moment, and so there is the potential, here and now, for > satipatthana to develop. -------------------------------------------- Howard: That sort of theoretical, intellectual "understanding" can advance forever, but, by itself, will not lead to awakening. The Buddha didn't teach a Noble One-Fold Path consisting of the single factor: Study my theory." -------------------------------------------- To help you start somewhere, how can studying and contemplating Dhamma (namas and rupas) be regarded as a Noble One-fold Path? With regards, Suan 38106 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 6:28am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 115 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, 4 mahabhuta rupas are basic elements of all rupas and they are base for all rupa dhammas. All other 24 paramattha rupas have to depend on these 4 mahabhuta rupa. When 4 mahabhtu rupas are especially arranged in a specific collection as dictated by kamma, there arise 5 different rupas which are finally these 4 mahabhuta rupas. But as these new 5 rupas do have their specific characters and functions, they are worthy to become separate rupas. They are 5 pasada rupas. 1.cakkhuppasada or eye-sense-receptor 2.sotappasada or ear-sense-receptor 3.ghanappasada or nose-sense-receptor 4.jivhappasada or tongue-sense-receptor 5.kayappasada or body-sense-receptor These 5 rupas are called pasada rupas. They are collections of mahabhuta rupa but with extra qualities on their own. They each clearly do their jobs. Cakkhuppasada is eye. But eye in conventional sense is not cakkhuppasada. That is the physical eye that exist is not cakkhuppassada rupa. Cakkhu pasada is a rupa which is capable to receive the visual object. No other rupa can perceive visual object including mahabhuta rupa which is not cakkhu pasada. Cakkhu pasada cannot be seen by our eye and sensed by any of 5 physical senses. But it is a reality and it can only be sensed through manodvara. The same applies to other pasada rupas. These 5 rupas serve as pasada, serve as vatthus or bases, serve as dvaras or doors. There are 7 gocara rupas or visaya rupas. Gocara means 'arammana where mind enjoys'. Visaya means 'locality' 'pronvince'. So these 7 rupas are the province where mind enjoys. They are 1. rupa ( vanna ) or colour 2. sadda or sound 3. gandha or smell 4. rasa or taste 5. photthabba or touch sense 5. pathavi or hardness-softness 6. tejo or warmness-coldness 7. vayo or pressure or movement These 7 rupa serves as arammana or object. Pathavi, tejo, and vayo have been described in the previous post. Even though these three rupas are mahabhuta rupas, they also serve as gocara rupas or visaya rupas because they can be places where mind enjoys. But for the purpose of enumerating different rupas these three are excluded from 7 gocara rupas and so there left 4 gocara rupa. So far we have discussed on 4 mahabhuta rupas, 5 pasada rupas and 4 gocara rupas. 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. 38107 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 7:59pm Subject: Vis. XIV, 108 and Tiika Vis. XIV, 108 and Tiika. Vis text 108. But the 'mind-consciousness-element' is of two kinds, namely, shared by all and not shared by all. [457] Herein, (71) that 'shared by all' is the functional [mind-consciousness-element] accompanied by equanimity without root-cause. It has the characteristic of cognizing the six kinds of objects. Its function is to determine at the five doors and to advert at the mind door. N: The mano-dvaaraavajjana-citta, mind-door adverting consciousness, is an ahetuka kiriyacitta that performs the function of determining, vo.t.thappana, through the five sense-doors and it is called after its function vo.t.thappana-citta. The Tiika explains as to the vo.t.thappana-citta that, after it has taken the object from the santiira.nacitta (investigating-consciousness), it occurs as it were (viya) defining or fixing the object. The word viya, as it were, is meaningful; it shows that its function is different from what we call in conventional language determining or fixing. It is neither kusala nor akusala, it is kiriyacitta, inoperative citta. It is only one moment of citta and it is followed (in the case of non-arahats) by kusala cittas or akusala cittas and these arise because of accumulated conditions. This reminds us of the uncontrollability of cittas: there is no time to decide whether kusala cittas or akusala cittas will arise. Cittas succeed one another extremely rapidly. The mind-door adverting-consciousness performs the function of adverting, aavajjana, through the mind-door. It is the first citta of the mind-door process that arises after the bhavangacittas and after it has adverted to the object it is followed by kusala cittas or akusala cittas. Thus, the mano-dvaaraavajjana-citta performs the function of determining, vo.t.thappana, through the five sense-doors and it performs the function of adverting, aavajjana, through the mind-door. It is one type of citta that performs two functions. Vis. text: It is manifested as the states [of determining and adverting] corresponding to those [last-mentioned two functions]. Its proximate cause is the departure either of the resultant mind-consciousness-element without root-cause (40)-(41) [in the first case], or of one among the kinds of life-continuum [in the second]. (72) That 'not shared by all' is the functional [mind-consciousness-element] accompanied by joy without root-cause. It has the characteristic of cognizing the six kinds of objects. Its function is to cause smiling [41] in Arahants about things that are not sublime. It is manifested as the state corresponding to that [last-mentioned]. Its proximate cause is always the heart-basis. N: The Tiika explains as to the heart-base, that it arises in planes where there are five khandhas, naama and ruupa. When one smiles or laughs, there are ruupas originated from citta. This reminds us that we should not take laughing for self. There are only naama and ruupa. Vis. text: So the sense-sphere functional without root-cause is of three kinds. N: Namely: the five sense-door adverting-consciousness, the mind-door adverting-consciousness (performing two functions: determining, vo.t.thapana, through the five doors and adverting through the mind-door), and the smile producing consciousness of the arahat, the hasituppaada-citta. ---------------------- Note 41. 'With respect to such unsublime objects as the forms of skeletons or ghosts' (Pm. 476). See e.g. Vin.iii,104. ***** N: We read in the Expositor (II, p. 386) about the smiling-consciousness of the arahat which arises in the processes of cittas experiencing objects through the six doors: We read that evenso the Tathaagata smiles at the thought of the arising of Silent Buddhas in the future. N: First the Buddha directs his attention to the past or the future with mahaa-kiriyacittas, accompanied by wisdom, and after that he smiles with ahetuka kiriyacittas, which are hasituppaada cittas. It is explained in the Expositor (II, p. 388) that ordinary persons laugh with four types of citta: four kusala cittas accompanied by joy, and four lobha-muula-cittas accompanied by joy. When we laugh, there are usually lobha-muulacittas. Arahats smile with four mahaa-kiriyacittas accompanied by joy and with one type of ahetuka kiriyacitta accompanied by joy. The latter type of citta is ahetuka, it is without the hetus of alobha, adosa and paññaa. The cittas of the arahat are not always accompanied by paññaa. ***** Nina. 38108 From: Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 2:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Various Buddhist Traditions Hi, Tyler - In a message dated 11/9/04 12:29:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, tylersims@l... writes: > > Hi all, > > Thanks for the warm welcome. > > I just wanted to make a couple of comments. I hope I don't get myself > into "trouble" here! > > I found the teaching by Walpola Rahula in his book "What the Buddha > Taught" to be very concise and "easily" digested. So this insight got > me to thinking "What did the Buddha really teach"? This inquiry is > what led me to Theravada Buddhism and simultaneously this group. > > My question is: Does Zen and Tibetan "build" or "add to" to original > teachings of the Buddha? > > My motive here is that I believe that TRUTH is naturally free of > any/all cultural wrappings. I can understand and live by the Four > Noble Truths and the EightFold Path. (Hopefully, at some point I will > understand some of the new terms I have encountered here as well). > > I don't mind adding a few cultural things to my life but trying to > track lineages, incarnations, gurus, etc is not my thing. I also was a > but turned off by the argument about what the "highest/ultimate" > teachings were, etc. PLEASE understand that I am saying that it was > just not for me. > > I also understand and don't mind learning from others more "wiser" > than me. I don't even mind following a trusted teacher as I would an > academic teacher or a particular philosophy, etc. > > So back to my question....Does Zen and Tibetan "build on" Theravada or > is it all apples and oranges? > > Back to reading the useful posts archives! :) > > Tyler > =========================== I believe that Mahayana and Vajrayana do build on and add to the Dhamma. However, there is an essential core (Hah, "essential core" isn't good Buddhist language! ;-)) which is common to all the traditions. Moreover, as to what is additional, some of it is a superficial matter of differences in cultural and tradition-oriented practices and terminology, some of it is, in my opinion, a bit "off the mark" and contrary to the Dhamma (but that is true as well, I believe, for a small minority of sub-schools of Theravada), and some of it consists of differing emphases and deep understandings that can enhance and beneficially inform one's knowledge of the Buddha's teachings. Examples of this last are presentations within the "poetry" of Ch'an and Zen and within the philosophical writings of Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu, and their students so admired within all schools of Mahayana, but most especially the Tibetan schools. Ultimately, however, in my opinion, all that is of value in Mahayana and Vajrayana teaching, including the emphasis on emptiness, phenomenalism, and great compassion is present within the Tipitaka itself where the Buddhadhamma is to be found in a form as close to the word of the Buddha as we have available to us. There is, within Theravada, a vast commentarial tradition, both ancient and modern, such that if one includes within "Theravadin teachings", not only the Tipitaka itself, but also the ancient commentaries as reported by Buddhaghosa and the teachings within the various substreams of modern-day Theravada such as the Thai Forest Tradition, the "vipassana" traditions (of which there are several and varying), the movements which emphasize absorptive meditative states, those which emphasize "dry-insight" meditation, those which emphasize "mindulness at ordinary times", and those, with a number of representaves here, which de-emphasize meditation, but emphasize Abhidhamma, and stress the importance of studying and contemplating the word of the Buddha, one will find within Theravada much of the valuable "extras" of Mahayana and Vajrayana, and will also find the core teachings in their most pristine form. 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) 38109 From: jwromeijn Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 8:12am Subject: Buddhaghosa Created Theravada? (Was Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > Dear Joop and all > Joop wrote: > > "And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this > DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the > Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand > why the differentiation of Buddhism started." > What do you mean by "(before Buddhagosa made a system ofTheravada)"? > If it were not your original idea, where did you get that? > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > Hallo Abhidhammika Who made a system of Christianity? Not Christ or his direct disciples. But a Paulus (formerly Saulus) in his moralistic letters; and scholastics in the (western) middle ages; and reformers like Luther. Making a system is for exemple not accepting that there are lose ends or any internal contradictions. How did I get the idea that Buddhaghosa played the most important role in making a system of Theravada? By reading chapter XXI, "Buddhaghosa, the Harmonizer", in "A History of Buddhist Philosopy. Continuities and Discontinuities" by David Kalupahana (University of Hawai Press, 1992) Some quotes of this chapter: "It is almost impossible to summarize the doctrines discussed in the Visuddhimagga. Unlike the reatises compiled by previous Buddhist scholars like nagarjuna and Vasubandhu, in which attemps were made to resurrect the original teachings of the Buddha by adopting various approaches prompted by the nature of the prevalent metaphysical ideas, Buddhaghosa's treatise is no more than an encyclopedical treatment of the path of purification, with the profuse use of the early discourses, and whatever was available in the Sinhalese commentaries, along with a variety of doctrines with which he was familiar before he arrived in Sri lanka. These latter include ideas emphasized by the Sarvastivadins, Sautrantikas, Madhyamikas, and Yogacarins. It is a gigantic synthesis. (page 208) … "The fourfold definition [of morality] demonstrates Buddhaghosa' scapacity to harmonize several strands of thought that had by then emerged in the Buddhist tradition. The categories that created much controversy among Buddhists - namely, the particular or the unique (sabhava=svabhava) and the universal or the abstract (samanna=samanya) - are here introduced under the guise of characteristics (lakhana=laksana), and came to be identified as such in later manuals." (page 210/211) … "Quoting a passage from the Samyutta-nikaya, where the Buddha maintains that a person who perceives suffering also perceives its arising, its cessation, and the path leading to its cessation, Buddhaghosa insists that all these four different activities take place simultaneously 'during one moment' (ekakkhane): For this is said by the Ancients (porana): Just as a lamp performs four functions simultaneously in a single moment - it burns the wick, dispels darkness, makes light appear, and uses up the oil - so, too, path-knowlegde penetrates to the four truths simultaneously in a single moment - it penetrates to suffering by penetrating to it with full understanding (parinna), penetrates to arising by penetrating to it with relinquishing (pahana), penetrates to the path by penetrating to it with cultivating (bhavana), and penetrates to ceasing by penetrating to it with realizing (saccikirya). This is a ingenious way of harmonizing two different paths - the gradual path, with which he began the treatise, and sudden realization based on momentary concentration (khanika-samadhi). It is also an interesting way to reconcile two philosophical standpoints - the foundationalism or essentialism with which he began the work, and the anti-foundationalism or anti-essentialism embodied in the three gateways to freedom (animitta, appanihita, and sunna). It is indeed a work of highest erudition on the part of a great harmonizer." (page 215/216) Metta Joop 38110 From: Dan D. Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 8:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Sarah, Question 1: How can there be insight into the four noble truths before one has heard the Buddha's conceptual formulation of them? Answer: Realities are arising all the time. One of those realities that arrises very frequently is craving. This is a reality experienced by everyone, not just Buddhists. On occasion, there may be a clear comprehension that without craving, there is no suffering. There are many, many ways this could happen. An example: suppose craving for a certain sensation arises repeatedly over a period of time. The sequence of cravings is of course punctuated by the arising of other realities. One of these other realities may well be recognition that "there is no craving arising now." A fraction of a second later, there may well be the realization "craving has arisen." A fraction of a second later: "suffering". A fraction of a second later: "suffering is closely associated with craving." After a few repetitions of the realization, "suffering is inseparable from craving." Now, the insights occur in quick succession and are long gone before there can be any words put on them. Perhaps the insights are later conceptualized and verbalized or perhaps not. In either case, the impression they leave remains. Then, the words of the Buddha are heard: "Suffering is caused by desire." The words sound so true because they seem to describe so well some prior experience. The exact time, place, and context of the prior insights may are may not be recalled, but the words strike a chord because they accord with something really experienced. Others may hear the words and laugh at how silly they sound, but the one who had prior insight is drawn to the words. Questions: "...please also let me know who develops insight when it occurs outside the dispensation, whether in jhana development or in those 'with [a] sense of spirituality'." And, "When the words of the Buddha 'rang true' with our prior 'true insights', who had had these insights?" Answer: When insight arises, there is no idea of a "who" who has insight. Dan 38111 From: Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 3:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] There is a Practice : To Howard Hi, Suan (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/9/04 7:43:23 AM Eastern Standard Time, suanluzaw@b... writes: > Dear Howard, Ken H and all > > How are you? > > Howard, your responses to Ken's statements are sharply put and good > overall. > > But, the following exchange between Ken's statement and your reply > puzzled me, and needs your further clarification. > > > "Ken H : Even so, by studying and contemplating the > > >Dhamma we soon understand that namas and rupas are arising in the > >present moment, and so there is the potential, here and now, for > >satipatthana to develop. > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That sort of theoretical, intellectual "understanding" can advance > forever, but, by itself, will not lead to awakening. The Buddha > didn't teach a Noble One-Fold Path consisting of the single factor: > Study my theory." > -------------------------------------------- > > To help you start somewhere, how can studying and contemplating > Dhamma (namas and rupas) be regarded as a Noble One-fold Path? > > With regards, > > Suan > ======================== My point was that the "understand[ing] that namas and rupas are arising in the present moment" that comes about merely by "studying and contemplating the Dhamma," is an intellectual understanding that will not be sufficient for the direct knowing that pa~n~na is. As far as the "Noble One-Fold Path" business is concerned, what I see Ken as putting forward is a single-factor practice, with that factor being study. 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) 38112 From: Dan D. Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 9:18am Subject: "One path" [Phil] Dear Phil, My first contact with Abhidhamma literature was similar to yours. In particular, the bare description of cittas and cetasikas seemed so bare of confusing ornaments and to-the-point -- very alluring. Phil: "...Ah, that might support your point. There *was* insight into anatta at that point, shallow insight, and only then did conceptual understanding of anatta have any value." I don't think it makes much sense to conceive of development of insight as beginning with namarupaparicchedañana and progressing by stages to higher and higher levels only after the previous "level" of insight has developed to a very refined and profound level. Instead, the process of development is one of deepening the insight, rather than going to different categories or "levels", as might be the impression after a quick reading of Mahasi or Vism. XX and XXI. Glancing through Vism. this morning, I found a section that seems to affirm the process I'm describing. [In general, Vism. XXI: 47-52 appears to address the issue of description and conceptualization as consolidation of insight as setting the stage for deeper insight later. In particular, Vism XXI: 51 (Ps.ii, 63) is interesting. More on this later...] Phil: "But that doesn't apply to the path factors, methinks." I don't believe the supramundane path factors can be understood outside the dispensation. Phil: "It's easier to gain a theoretical appreciation of them that we can apply and test and deepen in daily life - not the case for anatta." How is it that we can apply a theoretical appreciation? I don't understand what you mean. Metta, Dan 38113 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 10:41pm Subject: Re: Letters for Nina Dear Sarah and friends, op 02-11-2004 07:57 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y...: > Nina stops her mail when she's away and asks me to f/w any posts likely to > be of special interest to her on return. N: Thank you, Sarah, for writing. I have a jet lag, and an enormous amount of dirty washing from India. But first I want to keep my promise to Larry, catching up on the missed Vis. within one week. So there is no hurry with the other mails. Soon I shall get broad band and then it is easier to catch up on messages. Azita, you made a lot of tapes and it is good to discuss them while you go over them. This is a way of sharing with others. I went through all my tapes, making notes, while in the mountains in Sikkim. Lodewijk helps me with suggestions. I use his speech in Sarnath to the monks as a frame. Lodewijk will also read Kh. Sujin's Perfections for the foundation web. I shall write about India, but I am a slow writer and I take my time, Nina. 38114 From: Larry Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 0:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] There is a Practice : To Howard --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > My point was that the "understand[ing] that namas and rupas are > arising in the > present moment" that comes about merely by "studying and contemplating the > Dhamma," is an intellectual understanding that will not be sufficient for the > direct knowing that pa~n~na is. As far as the "Noble One-Fold Path" business is > concerned, what I see Ken as putting forward is a single-factor practice, with > that factor being study. Hi Howard, This speaks to something I've been thinking about. Pa~n~na is either prompted or unprompted and the prompted variety is usually prompted with words. Prompted consciousness arises with less conviction than unprompted. Path or fruition consciousness is not prompted and is something different from what we usually mean by "understanding" or "pa~n~na". Nagarjuna didn't recognize a concept/reality distinction so the path he outlined was entirely intellectual. Perhaps we could say the abhidhamma of this group is avant-garde abhidhamma:-))) but I suspect Nina would say the study of abhidhamma is much more likely to condition the spontaneous arising of unprompted pa~n~na than sitting quietly and following one's breath or using directed attention to reason out one of the tilakkha.na from hardness, for example, and it is better to not hold out hope or strategy for path consciousness. Larry 38115 From: Larry Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 1:02pm Subject: Buddhaghosa Created Theravada? (Was Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) Hi Joop and Suan, I haven't read Kalupahana but I also think Buddhaghosa created Theravada. I know there are many who call themselves Theravadins but don't like Buddhaghosa or abhidhamma, Buddhadasa Bhikkhu, for example. Perhaps these people would be more properly classified as Sautrantikas, even though the Sautrantika tradition was a reaction to Sarvastivada, neither of which was aware of Theravada, as far as I know. I believe Sautrantika only recognized Sutta and Vinaya as authoritative (not sure?). Is there an official definition of who is and who isn't a Theravadin? "Thera" means elders; does that mean commentators? Also, Pali has something to do with 'being Theravada'. All the primary commentaries were compiled and translated into Pali by Buddhaghosa. These were originally in Indian Pali and translated into Sinhalese after they were brought to Sri Lanka with the Indian Pali Tipitaka by the arahant Mahinda in the 3rd century BC. What we know of the original Pali commentaries comes directly from Buddhaghosa. In that sense he is the founder of "modern" Theravada. Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > > > > Dear Joop and all > > How are you? > > > Joop wrote: > > "And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this > DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the > Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand > why the differentiation of Buddhism started." > > What do you mean by "(before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada)"? > > If it were not your original idea, where did you get that? > > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw 38116 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 3:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "One path" [Phil] Hi Dan >Phil: "It's easier to gain a theoretical appreciation of them that we >can apply and test and deepen in daily life - not the case for >anatta." >How is it that we can apply a theoretical appreciation? I don't >understand what you mean. Nothing fancy here. I just mean that we can read about what Right Speech is, and try to speak that way. This is what we do at first, until we understand that conditions are at work that give rise to wrong speech, and those conditions have to be understood (in general) before any progress will be made. But the time we do mistakenly try to follow the 8-fold path by a kind of will power at least sets up understanding of how futile it is to try to become enlightneed by will power. Our failures, seen with honesty, can condition right understanding that eventually rolls around. All the times I vowed not to slander others, not to use harsh words. All the times I failed. At least when I use wrong speech now I am sometimes aware of it and know it as conditioned, and that moment of understanding may condition an abstention from wrong speech to come. So the theoretical understanding deepens from that beginning stage - thinking that Right Speech, for example, refers to a rule that we should follow by will power. We come to understand, in theory, that Right Speech is descriptive, rather than prescriptive, to use a phrase that someone here used. (Ken H?) It is the way of behaviour that may arise more and more often due to kusala conditions doing their thing. To be honest, I hardly ever find myself thinking about the Eightfold Path, because it seems to me that it is the way that will arise naturally as I penetrate the Four Truths and deepen my understanding of Dhamma. I think more about the Four Truths. So there you go. Maybe I am supporting your view again. There can be theoretical appreciation of the Path including conceptual right view, but the Path of more importance is the one that arises on its own through deepening insight? I'll make that a rhetorical question, if you don't mind. I'll follow your continuing debate with others, but my lazy accumulations discourage me from participating in them! Thanks again for your feedback. Metta, Phil 38117 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 3:23pm Subject: postponing understanding Hi Nina Welcome back. It doesn't feel like you've been away, actually, because I've been re-reading so many of your posts. Just one quick question before I forget. About two months ago, maybe, you mentioned a Pali term that has something to do with accepting that there are some things we don't understand yet, something to do with the skillfulness of letting go of things we can't understand yet. Do you know what I'm talking about? I think there was a reference to the Vinaya (sp?), that this is something taught to monks. If that rings a bell, could you refresh my memory? Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil 38118 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 3:36pm Subject: Re: New to Group/ clarification Hi Tyler, --------------- T: > {snip} "If we barely know namas and rupas at the intellectual level, how can we expect to know them directly?" I need further clarification here. > --------------- At any given moment, the universe described by the Buddha is a small collection of namas and rupas. For example, in a moment of seeing there are the rupas known as eye base and visible object and there are the namas known as eye consciousness, eye contact, volition, vitality, concentration, advertence, perception and [neutral] feeling. That is a purely resultant (vipaka) moment of consciousness, but in succeeding, impulsive (kammicly active) moments, mind-door consciousness experiences that same, visible object. In these moments there is no longer seeing but there is [wholesome or unwholesome] reaction either with detachment or with attachment (or aversion or ignorance) and with pleasant, neutral or unpleasant feeling, and with several other mental factors (cetasikas (namas)). Furthermore, any of the namas that experience visible object can, themselves, become objects of consciousness. Even though namas fall away before the succeeding moment of consciousness, they resonate (as it were) and those resonations can be experienced (less than a billionth of a second later) at the mind door. In this way we can become aware, not only of the object of seeing, but also of a feeling or of an emotion or an intention (etc) that has arisen to experience that object. ---------------- T: > What does it mean to know a nama and/or rupa intellectually? > ---------------- The above is a simplistic explanation of namas and rupas and of the ways they are experienced. The Abhidhamma contains much more detailed (and more accurate) explanations. When we see the logic of those explanations, we have an intellectual understanding of nama and rupa. It should also be pointed out that, in moments when we are seeing the logic of explanations, we are not seeing nama or rupa, we are seeing ideas (illusions, concepts). Concepts are experienced at the mind-door in much the same way as namas and rupas are experienced. It is useful to experience concepts with wisdom, but this is not yet the practice taught by the Buddha. At best, it a preliminary practice (paryatti) that leads to actual practice (patipatti, satipatthana). ----------- T: > And what does it mean to know them directly? > ----------- Direct knowledge of namas and rupas is the practice taught by the Buddha. It is no different from any of the above-described kammicly active [wholesome] moments of consciousness except that it contains a nama known as panna (right understanding). Without panna, there would be no understanding of absolute reality (nama and rupa), and so we would be left with the impression that concepts are real. Were it not for the teaching of the Buddha, you and I would have to believe either that concepts (cars, trees, electrons, people and places) are real; or nothing is real. ---------------- T: > Also, what does it mean to say that things arise "conditionally"? ---------------- The namas and rupas that co-arise in a moment of consciousness condition (bring about, cause to arise) the namas and rupas of the immediately following moment of consciousness. Also, they condition each other. There are twenty-four forms of conditioning (paccaya). ----------- T: > On a general note, I will follow your advice and look into the anicent Theravada texts > ----------- It will be a major milestone in your life. To ease yourself into those difficult texts, you might begin with one of Nina's books such as 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life.' Kind regards, Ken H 38119 From: Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 4:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] postponing understanding Hi Phil, Nina is having Yahoo problems. She isn't receiving any email and I don't think she uses the web, so you might have to re-send this is a day or two when she gets it fixed. Larry ------------------------------ P: "Hi Nina Welcome back. It doesn't feel like you've been away, actually, because I've been re-reading so many of your posts. Just one quick question before I forget. About two months ago, maybe, you mentioned a Pali term that has something to do with accepting that there are some things we don't understand yet, something to do with the skillfulness of letting go of things we can't understand yet. Do you know what I'm talking about? I think there was a reference to the Vinaya (sp?), that this is something taught to monks. If that rings a bell, could you refresh my memory? Thanks in advance. Metta, Phil" 38120 From: plnao Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 5:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 43-Feeling/Vedana (p) > Hello All > Nina> > We dislike domanassa and we would like to get rid of it, but we > > should understand that dosa can only be eradicated by the > > development of the wisdom which sees realities as they are. There > > is no other way. > Phil > One of the most helpful, basic points that I've been reminded of lately is > that > dosa mula cittas are always accompanied by moha mula cittas. > In other words, aversion is always accompanied by ignorance. > Aversion cannot arise without ignorance being at the root of it. > If we are not ignorant of the realities of the moment, we will not > have aversion. That's a very liberating concept that can be > confirmed in daily life. I received a nice confirmation of this yesterday. I was on the train, enjoying the quiet time that the 30 minutes gives me to reflect on things in the morning. A man stood in front of me. There was a noise. He was sucking his teeth in the way that middle-aged and older Japanese men do quite often. (Often as a substitute for toothpicks, I guess.) That sound infuriates me! I sat there seething, glaring up at him once. But then, when the train stopped at a station, I realized that the teeth-sucking noise had stopped. Soon enough I realized that he wasn't sucking his teeth, it was the creaking sound made by the ring he was holding on to. (They dangle from train roofs for people to hold on to.) So all that aversion caused by ignorance of what was actually going on. Of course, when we say "ignorance of realities" it is ignorance much subtler than the ignorance involved in this incidence, but it still applies in a crude way. This incident reminded me of Rob K's anecdote (I heard via Nina) about the time he feelt something soft and puffy pressing against him in a crowded train, and assuming it was a woman, only to find out later that it was a man's down jacket. In his case there was lobha rather than dosa invovled. (I would hope!) But another reminder that akusala cittas are always rooted in ignorance. Metta, Phil p.s sorry for the double posting in this thread. I thought the first version had been erased. p.p.s Thanks Larry for the info about Nina's situation. 38121 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 10:49pm Subject: Re: "Develop!" --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: > > Hello Robert, > > Thanks for your reply. I found it helpful when you said "Craving, as > much as other dhammas, can > be an object for understanding. .... There > is no way that I can immediately remove (at least, at this point in > time) the feeling of being the watcher, the do-er, and the knower. I > have found with defilements that suppression doesn't have a high > success rate, but noticing what is going on often robs them of > energy, and they fade away fairly quickly. I don't think I can > manufacture sati, but I wonder if I can't at least create, or set in > place, the conditions that would be conducive for it to arise? And > similarly with panna? > > Sometimes I feel we get caught in a sort of politically correct > vocabulary - we change the structure of our sentences to say 'Panna' > knows or 'Sati' sees, but nothing else has changed ... there is > still the watcher, the do-er and the knower - but Hush! ... don't > mention Me. >============= Dear Christine, The reason we use language like 'panna know' is only as a rhetorical device to bring attention to the fact that it is in fact not my seeing but only an element. Of course one can speak like that and still believe and cling to self view. We can think 'there is no self' but still believe it is me who chose to think like that! When we are concerned with making the conditions for insight to arise, what is present? Only by seeing actaul relaities as they arise will any understanding develop. Certainly there are many conditions that are supportive of insight- hearing true Dhamma, pondering it...discusion with wise friends. Even keeping house and body clean are helpful. But if there isn't direct awareness , to some degree, of the present moment, in whatever situation, then insight will remain shallow. Also other mental factors such as saddha strenghthen insight, and of course insight strenghthes saddha too. Robertk 38122 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 9, 2004 11:49pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 45 - Feeling/Vedana (r) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.2 Feeling (Vedana) contd] ***** Upekkhå, indifferent feeling, is different from somanassa and from domanassa; it is neither happy nor unhappy. Upekkhå can arise with cittas of all four jåtis, but it does not arise with every citta. When there is no awareness many moments of feeling pass unnoticed. There is feeling with every citta and when we do not notice any feeling there is still feeling: at such moments there is indifferent feeling. We may not feel either glad or unhappy while we are busy with our work or while we are thinking. Then there is indifferent feeling. Indifferent feeling accompanies vipåkacittas such as seeing or hearing. It can accompany lobha-múla-citta; this type of citta can be accompanied either by pleasant feeling or by indifferent feeling. Do we notice clinging which is accompanied by upekkhå? When we walk or when we get hold of different things we use in our daily life, such as a pen or a book, there is bound to be clinging even when we do not feel particularly glad. ****** [Feeling(Vedana) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 38123 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 0:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Dan, --- "Dan D." wrote: >On occasion, there may > be a clear comprehension that without craving, there is no suffering. ….. S: Is this the deep penetrative insight into the characteristic of a reality or is it thinking about suffering – a kind of conceptual understanding? ….. >….A fraction of a > second later, there may well be the realization "craving has arisen." > A fraction of a second later: "suffering". A fraction of a second > later: "suffering is closely associated with craving." After a few > repetitions of the realization, "suffering is inseparable from > craving." ….. ….. S: Suffering as a characteristic of what? I’m still hoping you’ll answer my earlier question: S: “These ‘shallower insights’, defined by you as ‘most any insight short of supramundane path consciousness’, were into precisely what realities before we studied the ‘Buddha’s words’? What do you understand the First Noble Truth of suffering to refer to? ….. > Answer: When insight arises, there is no idea of a "who" who has > insight. ….. S: When we haven’t heard and really considered the Buddha’s words, who do we think has any insights, experiences, good or bad qualities, either before, lurking behind the experiences or afterwards? If there is no precise understanding of dhammas, of namas and rupas, is it possible to develop any detachment from an idea of self at all? Do you think there’s any chance you could be mistaken and that without realizing the first stage of insight – the clear knowledge and insight into namas and rupas – that higher levels of insight cannot be attained? ***** I understand the 4 Noble Truths to be extremely profound and subtle – so profound and subtle that the Buddha was inclined not to teach them and when he did so, many were not able to even attain to this first stage of insight. The Path is very gradual when there is the development of understanding which conditions detachment, not attachment when it’s right. For a clear description of the way that pariyatti leads to patipatti to pativedha as I understand it, please read KenH’s excellent description in his post to Tyler (38118). A brief extract: “Without panna, there would be no understanding of absolute reality (nama and rupa), and so we would be left with the impression that concepts are real. Were it not for the teaching of the Buddha, you and I would have to believe either that concepts (cars, trees, electrons, people and places) are real; or nothing is real.” From Sammohavinodani, ch2, Classification of the Bases, 242: “The characteristics of impermanence and pain are made known with or without the arising of the Tathagatas. The characteristic of no-self is not made known without the arising of the Enlightened Ones; it is made known only on the arising of the Enlightened Ones”. A little later: “The characteristic of no-self does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating the resolution into the various elements (naanaadhaatuvinibbhoga) owing to its being concealed by compactness.” Without any understanding of the elements as anatta, there cannot be any insight (vipassana) into realities or the attainment of even the first stage of insight as I understand. I think Phil and possibly Ken O in an earlier posts have stressed this aspect too. The Visuddhimagga also discusses sacca-~naa.na (knowledge of the truth) which it divides into ‘knowledge as idea and knowledge as penetration’ (XV1,84). Sacca nana is firm understanding of the 4 Noble Truths as I understand, even when it is right understanding conceptually about the Truths, such as the truth of Nibbana, not yet realized. Without knowledge based on hearing the Truths, there cannot be any sacca nana. “Herein knowledge as idea is mundane and *occurs through hearsay, etc,* about cessation and the path……….When this knowledge is mundane, then, occurring as the overcoming of obsessions, the knowledge of suffering then forestalls the [false] idea of individuality…….etc” “As long as a man is vague about the world, About its origin, about its ceasing, About the means that lead to its cessation, So long he cannot recognize the truths.” Looking forward to your answers to the questions above, Dan. Metta, Sarah ======= 38124 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:02pm Subject: Vis. XIV, 110 and Tiika. Text Vis. XIV, 110: So the 21 kinds of profitable, the 12 kinds of unprofitable, the 36 kinds of resultant, and the 20 kinds of functional, amount in all to 89 kinds of consciousness. N: The 21 kinds of kusala cittas are: 8 kusala cittas of the sense sphere (kaamaavacara), 12 kinds of akusala cittas (rooted in lobha, in dosa and in moha). As to the 36 kinds of vipaakacittas: these are 8 sahetuka vipaaka (kusala vipaaka with roots), 8 ahetuka kusala vipaaka, 7 ahetuka akusala vipaaka, 5 ruupaavacara (ruupajhaana) kusala vipaaka, 4 aruupaavacara (aruupajhaana) kusala vipaaka and 4 lokuttara vipaaka (phalacittas, fruition-consciousness). As to the 20 kiriyacittas, there are 3 ahetuka kiriyacittas, 8 mahaakiriyacittas (of the sense-sphere) of the arahat, 5 ruupaavacara kiriyacittas and 4 aruupaavacara kiriyacittas (of the arahat). This may seem to be a technical summing up, but all these 89 kinds of cittas are realities, each with their own characteristic. If the Buddha had not attained enlightenment and taught the Dhamma we would not know about the different kinds of cittas. We would take akusala citta rooted in attachment with pleasant feeling for kusala citta. We would take selfish affection for lovingkindness. The Buddha¹s teaching about the different cittas is of infinite value for our daily life. The kaamaavacara cittas which are kusala, akusala and avyaakata (vipaaka and kiriya) occur in daily life time and again. They are cittas, not a person. They each have their own characteristic. They arise at the appropriate base and experience the appropriate object. Seeing experiences only visible object, hearing experiences only sound. Cittas do not know each other¹s object. We should not merely know the names of the different cittas. When we consider their different characteristics there are conditions for the arising of sati and paññaa. Direct understanding can begin to penetrate the different characteristics of cittas. Text Vis: And these occur in the fourteen modes of (a) rebirth-linking, (b) life-continuum, (c) adverting, (d) seeing, (e) hearing, (f) smelling, (g) tasting, (h) touching, (i) receiving, (j) investigating, (k) determining, (l) impulsion, (m) registration, and (n) death. N: There are fourteen functions of citta. The Tiika states that there are no other functions except these fourteen. Each citta performs its own function. The cittas that arise in a process do so according to a fixed order. The javana-cittas (akusala cittas or kusala cittas) of the sense-door process arise after the determining-consciousness (vo.t.thappaana-citta) and the javana-cittas in a mind-door process arise after the mind-door adverting-consciousness. Nobody, not even the Buddha, can change the fixed order of cittas (citta niyama). ***** Nina. 38125 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:19am Subject: RobM - kamma-patha qus Hi RobM, I did probe that 'grey area' or 'fine line' a little more with K.Sujin on the trip and Nina was with me for at least one or two of the discussions. What I understand clarifies a few of the blurry edges around some of my earlier comments. I think it's still correct to say that when it's not kamma patha, it's just an accumulation, but here's a little more: In real brief, I think the answer is that there are: a)kamma as an accumulation only in the javana processes which of course supports other kamma etc, but doesn't in itself bring results. E.g simple likes and dislikes now as we talk, drink coffee, see an insect etc. b)kamma as kamma patha with all the factors fulfilled which can bring results in the way of rebirth consciousness and during life. E.g deliberately killing an insect. c)kamma as kamma patha 'grey area', with only *some* of the factors fulfilled, which cannot bring results in the way of rebirth consciousness, but can bring results during life. E.g hurting or intending to hurt an insect but not killing it perhaps. K.Sujin's advice to me: "Don't look for the fine line". Otherwise, it's clinging or trying to know again or speculating (as Dan might well say in this case, such as in my last example), instead of developing understanding and awareness of the present reality. Who can know the cause of the present seeing consciousness now? Hope this helps. Metta, Sarah ======= 38126 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:17am Subject: Htoo's Cetasikas Dear Htoo, I think your Dhamma Thread posts on the cetasikas were really excellent and I enjoy your descriptions which really show up these factors for me. They brought many a smile to my face as I read about the various kings, queens, ministers and other officials;-). I also enjoyed your repetitions and clarifications and lists and so on. I think it’s very useful material. Most importantly, I think the content was very solid and accurate for the most part (as far as I know;-)). A few extra comments: O90 Ahirika and Anottappa – you referred to 9 bala dhamma (#37526) (owers). I’m interested as I don’t remember reading about akusala bala dhamma. I’d be glad if you’d say more on these. I only know about the 5 included in the bodhipakkiya dhammas. ‘As bala dhamma, ahirika and anottapa always lead all akusala dhamma….’ Very good. No shame about akusala at these times. Your comments on sati and many other factors were particularly good. There were one or two points on a couple of others I meant to pick up on – I think Phil questioned one that was not quite so clear – but it’ll have to be later if and when I come across them again. I rather rushed to catch up after our holiday and I want to thank you now, rather than looking for the others. Anumodana….great work indeed! i hope the series continues to a 1000!!It's your best, I think. Metta, Sarah ====== 38127 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:59am Subject: Posts from India - links Dear Nina & other recent pilgrims to India, As you will have missed many of the posts written while we were in India and since our return, I’ll give the links here of them all to date (I hope) for anyone to read if they wish. Nina, I know it may be difficult for you to check the links before you have your computer problems sorted out. Perhaps you can just take a note of the message number and check them later (or ask someone to help you). India Oct 04 ============== Sarah to All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37541 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37579 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37874 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37876 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37770 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37877 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37848 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37900 Joop to Sarah and All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37775 Sarah to Joop http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37978 Jonothan to All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37678 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37708 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37833 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37873 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/38023 Nina to All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37849 Howard to Jon, Nina and All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37680 Philip to Sarah and All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37581 Philip to Nina and All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37850 Christine to All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37851 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37952 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/38024 Azita to All http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37898 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/37939 I know there will be further letters about the trip and discussions, but as everyone is back now, I won’t continue to list them. Metta, Sarah p.s. If anyone knows of any I’ve missed, pls add them. I haven’t included a couple of one-liner good wishes to all of us on our journey. ===== 38128 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 3:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 43-Feeling/Vedana (p) Hi Phil, I like all your comments and appreciate your interest in the Cetasika posts -- pls repeat them as often as you feel inclined!The second one was very good too. And yes, about the whining - I don't hear anyone whining about the lobha;-). Usually it's 'my' dosa and domanassa isn't it? No detachment from the realities at these times. I came across an excellent post of yours on visible object too - but not in front of me now. Metta, Sarah ======== --- plnao wrote: > Phil > One of the most helpful, basic points that I've been reminded of > lately is > > that > > dosa mula cittas are always accompanied by moha mula cittas. > > In other words, aversion is always accompanied by ignorance. > > Aversion cannot arise without ignorance being at the root of it. > > If we are not ignorant of the realities of the moment, we will not > > have aversion. That's a very liberating concept that can be > > confirmed in daily life. 38129 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:12am Subject: Oh Madam! Dear all, Communication is difficult even when you think two people are speaking the same language. On this particular morning in India, I realised that I had no rupee notes for the days' expenses. I approached the Hotel Front Desk, passport, credit card and American dollars at the ready, and the following conversation took place: CF: "I will be leaving the Hotel in half an hour on an all-day excursion and I need to change some money. Can you help please?" Concierge: "Oh Madam, certainly we can help. You will simply need to speak with the Cashier, who will be only too pleased to assist" Happy smile. CF: "Where will I find the Cashier?" Concierge: "Oh Madam, the Cashier will be available at this desk. If you speak to him you will be able to change whatever currency you like." Confident smile. CF: "Can you contact him please?" Concierge: "Oh Madam, the Cashier will be available at this desk - at 10.00 a.m." Tentative smile. CF: "But my party is leaving the Hotel at 7.30 a.m. and I won't be back until late this evening, and I need to change money now?" Concierge: "Oh Madam, we can certainly help you to change your money. Our Cashier will be only too pleased to assist" Kindly smile. CF: "Thank-you. Can you call him now please?" Concierge: "Oh Madam, the Cashier is not available until 10.00 a.m." Apologetic smile. CF: "Yes, but we are leaving the Hotel before that. 10.00 a.m. is too late for me as the bus leaves in half an hour, and I need the money now" Concierge: "Oh Madam, it is 10.00 a.m. that the Cashier will be available." Uncertain smile. CF: "But why can't the Cashier help me now? - - why isn't he available until 10.00 a.m.?" Concierge: "Oh Madam, I am truly sorry - that is The Rule - you can change whatever currency you like - at 10.00 a.m." Pitying smile. CF: "But I have to travel all day, and I have no Indian rupees" Concierge: "Oh Madam, that is certainly of concern, and we can help. You will simply need to speak with the Cashier, who will be only too pleased to assist." Patient smile. The thing that REALLY got to me .... guess who the Cashier was, chameleon smile and all? Circular conversations and pure frustration ... most of us experienced one or two of these. It was quite infuriating, but strangely fascinating. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 38130 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:27am Subject: Re: Vis. XIV, 110 and Tiika. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: Text Vis. XIV, 110: So the 21 kinds of profitable, the 12 kinds of unprofitable, the 36 kinds of resultant, and the 20 kinds of functional, amount in all to 89kinds of consciousness. N: The 21 kinds of kusala cittas are: 8 kusala cittas of the sense sphere(kaamaavacara), 12 kinds of akusala cittas (rooted in lobha, in dosa and in moha). As to the 36 kinds of vipaakacittas: these are 8 sahetuka vipaaka (kusala vipaaka with roots), 8 ahetuka kusala vipaaka, 7 ahetuka akusala vipaaka, 5 ruupaavacara (ruupajhaana) kusala vipaaka, 4 aruupaavacara(aruupajhaana) kusala vipaaka and 4 lokuttara vipaaka (phalacittas,fruition-consciousness). As to the 20 kiriyacittas, there are 3 ahetuka kiriyacittas, 8 mahaakiriyacittas (of the sense-sphere) of the arahat, 5 ruupaavacara kiriyacittas and 4 aruupaavacara kiriyacittas (of the arahat). ..snip..snip..snip... ***** Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Nina, I have 2 points to talk about. 1st: 21 kusala cittas are 8 kamavacara mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, 4 arupakusala cittas, and 4 lokuttara kusala cittas ( 8 + 5 + 4 + 4 = 21 cittas ) 2nd: Once you advised me about 'vipaka and kusala' should not mix. I agreed. I agree. This time you include 'kusala' adjective in rupavipaka and arupavipaka. I would prefer not to add 'kusala' here in cases of rupavipaka cittas and arupavipaka cittas. They are just enough. When I mixed 'kusala' and 'vipaka', I just added as adjective to ahetuka vipaka cittas. They are 8 kusala vipaka cittas and 7 akusala vipaka cittas. In this case, 'adjective' 'akusala' and 'kusala' do need to be added. Otherwise both 8 and 7 are all vipaka cittas and they both are ahetuka vipaka cittas. With respect, Htoo Naing 38131 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:48am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 116 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, So far we have discussed on 4 mahabhuta rupas, 5 pasada rupas and 7 gocara rupas or 7 visaya rupas ( after exclusion of three rupas which are pathavi, tejo, and vayo there are 4 gocara rupa left out of 7 ) totalling 13 paramattha rupas. There are 2 bhava rupas. They are itthatta bhava rupa and purisatta bhava rupa. They are femaleness and maleness. Itthi means 'feminine' 'female', purisa means 'musculine' 'male', atta means 'being' 'body' 'hood', bhava means 'existence'. These rupas are realities. But they are known just only through manodvara not through panca dvara. They both are kammaja ekam rupa. That is they are caused only by kamma and no other causes raise their arising. So up to this point there have been 15 rupas. There is a rupa called hadaya rupa. It serves as hadaya vatthu. It is the base for all vinnana cittas except pancavinnana citta while satta concerned is in pancavokara bhumi or where all five aggregates are there. This rupa is also caused by kamma only. So far there have been discussed on 16 rupas. There are a rupa which supports all co-existing rupas. This rupa is called jivita rupa. Without this rupa jivita all other rupas will not exist as rupas of living beings. It is also generated by kamma only. Till now there have been 17 rupas. There is a rupa called ahara rupa. It supports other rupa while they are co-existing in an aggregate of rupa called rupa kalapa. It is also called oja. So far 18 rupas have been described. All these 18 rupas are called nipphanna rupa. They are under the influence of one or more of 4 causes called kamma, citta, utu, and ahara. Nipphanna means 'being accomplished' 'perfected' 'conditioned' 'determined'. Nipphanna rupas are conditioned rupas and they all are under the influences of one or more of the 4 great causes namely kamma, utu or temperature, citta or consciousness, and ahara or nutriment. There are 10 paramattha rupas. They all are not perfected. They are not conditioned. They are not determined. They are rupas that are not being accomplished. But they stand on their own and they do have their own characteristics. They are 1 pariccheda rupa, 2 vinatti rupas, 3 lahutadi rupas, and 4 lakkhana rupas. Pariccheda rupa is rupa that separates mahabhuta rupa so that mahabhuta rupa in kalapas are not mixed each other. It limits the boundry of rupa kalapas. It is not a component of rupa kalapa. It is like a space. It is like an empty interval. It is sometimes called akasa. It is a rupa but it is not influenced by any outside causes. 2 vinatti rupas are the gesture or kayavinatti rupa and the speech or vacivinatti rupa. Kayavinatti rupa is the gesture or the act of a living being that carries some exact meaning while vacivinatti is a rupa which is a sound that bears some exact meaning in it which is generated by a living being. It is not just a speech but any sound that is produced through consciousness. Both kayavinatti and vacivinatti are called cittaja rupa and they are purely generated by citta alone. To further on these 2 vinatti rupas, those gestures and sounds that appear on any films, movies, television, DVDs, VCDs, computers, etc etc are not vinatti rupas even though these may carry meanings in them. Even sound that appear from speakers or sound-boxes are not vinatti rupas. Still there are sounds that are produced by a speaking man which are not vinatti rupas. That man does not have voice-box in his throat. It is removed by operation for a disease like cancer. He uses a sound producer proding at his throat whenever he speaks. It is not vinatti rupa even though it is understandable. There are 3 lahutadi rupa. They are rupalahuta, rupamuduta, and rupakammannata rupa. They are lightness of rupa, tenderness or pliability of rupa and adaptability of rupa. They can be caused by citta, utu, and ahara. They are never caused by kamma. When these three rupa are there in rupa kalapa, all rupa that co-exist with them become lighter, more tender or pliable and more adaptable. There are 4 lakkhana rupa. They are upacaya rupa or rupa in initial formation, santati rupa or rupa in continueing formation and jarata or rupa in decay and aniccata or rupa just disappears. All these 4 lakkhana rupa are the characteristics of other rupa and they all are not influenced by kamma, citta, utu, and ahara as their causes. All together these 10 rupas are called anipphana rupas while former 18 rupas are called nipphana rupas. Therefore, there are in total 28 paramattha rupa which are all realities and can be sensed by one of our 6 senses. Rupa or vanna is sensed only by eyes, sadda or sound is sensed only by ear, gandha or smell is sensed only by nose, rasa or taste is sensed only by tongue. And pathavi, tejo, vayo-three of mahabhuta rupa are sensed by body only. All other rupas that is 5 pasada rupas and 16 sukhuma rupas or subtle materials are all sensed by mind only; that is 5 pasada rupas and 16 sukhuma rupa can never be sensed by any of eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body. 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. 38132 From: Dan D. Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 5:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] "One path" [Phil] > But the time we > do mistakenly try to follow the 8-fold path by a kind of will power > at least sets up understanding of how futile it is to try to become > enlightneed by will power. Our failures, seen with honesty, > can condition right understanding that eventually rolls around. I think you're right about this. Dan 38133 From: Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 2:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Oh Madam! Hi, Christine - In a message dated 11/10/04 7:15:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > The thing that REALLY got to me .... guess who the Cashier was, > chameleon smile and all? > > ====================== Omigod! ;-)) Hmm, reminds me, though, of some conversations I've had with bureaucrats in the U.S and with occasional posters on email lists! (Not here, of course! ;-) 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) 38134 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 7:44am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 117 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, All rupas do not have any root dhamma called hetu like lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, and amoha and they( rupas )all are called ahetuka. Rupas are all arise along with their causes or paccayas and they are called sappaccaya. Rupas are the objects of 4 asava dhamma and they are called sasava. Asava means 'spirit' 'intoxicant extracted from a tree or flower' 'dischage from a sore' 'intoxicating idea' 'to flow'. There are 4 asava dhammas namely kamasava ( kama ), bhavasava ( bhava ), ditthasava ( ditthi ) and avijjasava ( avijja or moha ). All rupas are assoiacted with these dhamma and they intoxicate. So all rupa dhammas are sasava dhamma. Kamma, citta, utu, and ahara all influence arising of rupa and so rupas are called sankhata. Sankhata means 'brought about' 'created ' 'conditioned'. Rupas are part of sankhara loka and they are the objects of upadana or clinging. So all rupas are called lokiya. Rupas are where kama tanha always visits and attaches and they are called kamavacara. Rupas are just objects and they cannot take any object and they cannot know object. They are called anarammana. Rupas cannot be removed or cannot be deleted and they are called appahatabba. Even though there is one in terms of character still there are many different kinds of rupas ( 28 ). 5 pasada rupas stay inside of beings and they are called ajjattika rupa. Ajjhattika means 'inside' 'intrinsic'. Other 23 rupas are called bahira rupas. Bahira means 'outside' extrinsic'. 5 pasada rupas are panca vatthus and hadaya rupa is hadaya vatthu. These 6 rupas are vatthu rupas. Other 22 rupas are avatthu rupas. Vatthu means 'real things' 'substance' 'object' 'property' 'ground'. 5 pasada rupas are door way for objects or arammanas and so do 2 vinatti rupa and these 7 rupas are called dvara rupas. Other 21 rupas are called advara rupas. Dvara means 'door'. They serve as doorway for information. 5 pasada rupas are indriya rupas. 2 bhava rupas are also indriya rupas and jivita rupa is also indriya rupas. These 8 rupas are called indriya rupas and other 20 rupas are called anindriya rupas. Indriya means 'governing' 'controlling' 'ruling' 'faculty'. 5 pasada rupas and 7 visaya rupas or 7 gocara rupas are rough rupas and they are called olarika (rough) rupas. They are almost understandable and close to understanding. They are also called santike(close) rupas. These 12 rupas are associated with touching and they are called sappatigha(touching, hitting) rupas. Other 16 rupas are called sukhuma rupas or subtle materials. They are also called dure(far) rupas as they are far from easy understandability. And they are called appatigha(non-touched) rupas as they are not touched. Rupas caused by kamma such as 4 mahabhuta rupas, 5 pasada rupas, 4 (7) gocara rupas, 2 bhava rupas, 1 jivita rupa, 1 hadaya rupa, and 1 ahara rupa are called upadinna rupas. Other 10 rupas are not caused by kamma and they are called anupadinna rupas. Only ruparammana or vanna/rupa is the only rupa that can be seen and it is called sanidassana(with-seeing) rupa and other 27 rupas are called anidassana rupas. 5 pasada rupas are called gocaraggahika( object- bearing) rupas as they can convey arammana. Other 23 rupas are called agocaraggahika rupas. Vanna, gandha, rasa, oja or ahara, pathavi, tejo, vayo and apo always co-exist and they are called avinibbhoga or inseparable rupas and other 20 rupas are called vinibbhoga rupas. There are kamma that can cause kammaja rupas. These kamma are 12 akusala kamma, 8 kamavacara kusala kamma, and 5 rupavacara kusala kamma altogether 25 kamma can cause kammaja rupas or rupas generated by kamma. Among 89 cittas, 10 pancavinnana cittas and 4 arupa vipaka cittas do not cause rupas. There are 75 cittas left, which can cause rupas. Patisandhi cittas in all sattas and cuticitta in all arahats do not cause rupas. Other 75 cittas cause cittaja rupas. Some cittas cause rupas that support iriyapatha or body positions. Some cittas cause vinatti rupas and some cause smiling. There is ajjattika utu which are sita(cold) tejo and unnha(hot/warm) tejo arise with patisandhi. These utu or tejo when they are in contact with bahiddhaka(outside) tejo can cause arising of utuja rupas starting from thikhana of patisandhi or linking consciousness. There are rupa kalapas. The simplest form is suddhattha rupa kalapa. These are collections of inseparable rupas or avinibbhoga rupa. Ahara or oja in that kalapa is the main cause for arising of aharaja rupas. This ajjattika ahara has to combine with bahiddhika ahara and they both cause arising of aharaja rupas. 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. 38135 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 8:03am Subject: Re: Vis. XIV, 108 and Tiika --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: Vis. XIV, 108 and Tiika. ..snip..snip..snip.. It is explained in the Expositor (II, p. 388) that ordinary persons laugh with four types of citta: four kusala cittas accompanied by joy, and four lobha-muula-cittas accompanied by joy. When we laugh, there are usually lobha-muulacittas. Arahats smile with four mahaa-kiriyacittas accompanied by joy and with one type of ahetuka kiriyacitta accompanied by joy. The latter type of citta is ahetuka, it is without the hetus of alobha, adosa and paññaa. The cittas of the arahat are not always accompanied by paññaa. ***** Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your explanation on VM regarding 3 ahetuka cittas. As you said, the cittas of the arahats are not ALWAYS accompanied by panna. When we look into javana cittas, arahats can have 1. 1 arahatta phala citta 2. 4 arupakiriya cittas 3. 5 rupakiriya cittas 4. 4 kamavacara nana sampayutta cittas 5. 4 kamavacara nana vippayutta cittas 6. 1 hasituppada citta ( ahetuka citta ) ----------------------- 19 cittas as arahatta's javanas The first 4 kinds are always accompanied by panna. But the last 2 kinds do not have panna. To the worst the last which is hasituppada citta do not have both panna and sati. As soon as sati disappears Even The Buddha has to smile. With Metta, Htoo Naing 38136 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 8:20am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 118 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, Among 28 rupas, 1.cakkhu (eye), 2.sota (ear), 3.ghana (nose), 4.jivha(tongue), 5.kaya (body), 6.itthattabhava ( femaleness), 7.punbhava (maleness), 8.hadaya (heart or seat of mind/ not physical heart organ), and 9.jivita rupa(life-continuum) altogether 9 rupas are only caused by kamma. No other dhammas cause arising of these 9 rupas. Kayavinatti(gesture) and vacivinatti(speech) rupas are solely caused by citta(mind). Sadda(sound) can be caused by utu(temperature or weather) or citta. Rupalahuta, rupamuduta, and rupakammannata are not caused by kamma. These three can be caused by citta, utu and ahara. 1.Pathavi(solidity), 2.tejo(temperature), 3.vayo (motion/movement/compressibility), 4.apo(fluidity), 5.vanna(colour), 6.gandha(smell), 7.rasa(taste), 8.ahara(nutriment), and 9.pariccheda (akasa or space) can be caused by any of kamma, citta, utu or ahara. 4 lakkhana rupas are not caused by any of kamma, citta, utu, and ahara. These four rupas are called na kutoci rupas. They do not have any causes because they themselves are the 4 main characteristics of all other 24 rupas. Even though there are 28 paramattha rupas, they do not arise in isolation. At least some arise together. And they vanish together. They have to arise on mahabhuta rupas and they co-exist in a form called rupa kalapa. There are 21 rupa kalapas. 9 kalapas are kammaja rupa kalapas or congregation of rupa caused by kamma, 6 are cittaja, 4 are utuja and 2 are aharaja rupa kalapas. Kammaja rupa kalapas are cakkhudassaka, sotadassaka, ghanadassaka, jivhadassaka, kayadassaka,ithibhavadassaka, punbhavadassaka, vatthudassaka, and jivitanava kalapa. In cakkhudassaka kalapa, there are 8 avinibbhoga rupas, jivita rupa and cakkhu pasada rupa altogether 10 rupas arise together. Other kammaja kalapas are the same and just to replace cakkhu with their correspondent rupa. Jivitanava kalapa is a combination of 8 avinibbhoga rupas and jivita rupa itself. 6 cittaja rupa kalapas are 1.suddhattha kalapa which comprises 8 avinibbhoga rupas only, 2. kayavinattinava kalapa which comprises 8 rupas and kayavinatti rupa, 3. vacivinatti saddadassaka kalapa which is compsed of 8 rupas, vacivinatti and sadda, 4. lahutadi ekadassaka kalapa which is combination of 8 rupas and 3 lahutadi rupas, 5. kayavinatti lahutadi dvadassa kalapa which comprises 8 rupas, 3 lahutadi and kayavinatti rupa, and 6. vacivinatti sadda lahutadi terasaka kalapa which includes 8 rupas, 3 lahutadi, vacivinatti and sadda rupa. 4 utuja kalapas are 1.suddhattha kalapa, 2. saddanava kalapa, 3. lahutadiekadassaka kalapa which comprises 8 rupas and 3 lahutadi rupas, and 4. sadda lahutadi dvadassaka kalapa which comprises 8 rupas, 3 lahutadi rupa, and sadda rupa. 2 aharaja rupa kalapas are suddhattha rupa lakapa and lahutadiekadassaka rupa kalapa which comprises 8 inseparable rupas and 3 lahutadi rupas. From the 4 utuja rupa kalapas, suddhattha rupa kalapa and saddanava rupa kalapa can arise outside of beings or sattas. All other rupa kalapas only arise as ajjattika. So life-less materials in this universe are all collections of 8 inseparable rupas and 1 rupa which is sadda. All scientific materials are finally these 9 paramattha rupas when they are viewed with paramattha scope while other 19 paramattha rupas can never be seen by microscopes or nanoscopes or electron microscope or electron nanoscope. 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. 38137 From: Dan D. Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 8:42am Subject: Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Sarah, Thanks for the great questions! > >D: On occasion, there may > > be a clear comprehension that without craving, there is no suffering. > ….. > S: Is this the deep penetrative insight into the characteristic of a > reality or is it thinking about suffering – a kind of conceptual > understanding? Penetrative insight. Deep? Yes, deep. There is a substantial difference in the degree of development of understanding of reality between someone who has had such insight and one who has not. This understanding may have only a subtle outward manifestation in subsequent living -- a nagging sense of dissatisfaction with the cycle of craving-attaining-"satisfaction"- craving, etc. [I write the "satisfaction" in quotes because it is realized that the appeasement of the craving is really not satisfying because it is both superficial and temporary.] (Please keep in mind that this is only an example, and that there are many, many, MANY variations that make it *impossible* to judge the depth of development in another by any simple "test".) At the same time, the insight is quite shallow. It may not be deep enough even to inspire the construction of an explicit conceptual formulation for the insight, in which case it would not be discussed, thought about very much, or consolidated in any meaningful way. Without consolidation, deeper insight may not have occasion to arise for a long, long time. Shallow also in the sense that the 4NT are extremely deep, and insight into them is developed gradually, over long periods of time. > >….A fraction of a > > second later, there may well be the realization "craving has arisen." > > A fraction of a second later: "suffering". A fraction of a second > > later: "suffering is closely associated with craving." After a few > > repetitions of the realization, "suffering is inseparable from > > craving." ….. > ….. > S: Suffering as a characteristic of what? The presently arising moment. > I'm still hoping you'll answer my earlier question: > > S: "These `shallower insights', defined by you as `most any insight short > of supramundane path consciousness', were into precisely what realities > before we studied the `Buddha's words'? Namas & rupas, their characteristics, and their relations. Obviously, though, before studying the Buddha's words we wouldn't describe them in that way. > What do you understand the First Noble Truth of suffering to refer to? The first noble truth of suffering refers to conditioned mind states, all of which have the characteristics of anicca, anatta, and dukkha. > > Answer: When insight arises, there is no idea of a "who" who has > > insight. > ….. > S: When we haven't heard and really considered the Buddha's words, who do > we think has any insights, experiences, good or bad qualities, either > before, lurking behind the experiences or afterwards? At moments of insight, there is no idea or sense of "who". Afterwards, the insight can easily be mangled by constructing a conceptual scheme that includes an idea of a "who" that has insights. In fact, the tendency for the mind to conceptualize a Self is staggeringly strong. This is true for the Buddhist as well as for the Buddhist. The difference is that EVENTUALLY, the Buddhist may eradicate this tendency and attain enlightenment. > If there is no precise understanding of dhammas, of namas and rupas, is it > possible to develop any detachment from an idea of self at all? I believe not -- unless when you say "precise understanding", you really mean being able to fluently rattle off racks of Pali terms and logically piece together their definitions and relations. I'm not at all convinced that conceptualization about things that are not truly understood (i.e., speculation) is not helpful. > Do you think there's any chance you could be mistaken and that without > realizing the first stage of insight – the clear knowledge and insight > into namas and rupas – that higher levels of insight cannot be attained? That's an oddly worded question, Sarah. The "higher levels" surely cannot be attained without attaining the lower levels first. But that is beside the point. Insight begins shallow and gradually deepens. If you like to look at the "levels of insight" through a hierarchy of: 1. Namarupaparicchedañana; 2. Paccayapariggahañana; 3. Sammasanañana; 4. Udayabbayañana; 5. Bhangañana; etc., that's fine. Then, with only a relatively shallow (but direct and penetrative) insight at level 1, the other insights are possible (and do arise) but only at a similar degree of depth. These insights are gradually developed to greater and greater depth in concert, going "up and down" the list repeatedly. The notion that a thorough and very deep understanding of namarupapariccheda is prerequisite for even relatively shallow insight into the other characteristics CAN slow the development of insight by hindering the conceptualization and consolidation of the other insights. It doesn't NECESSARILY slow the development, though, because these several aspects of insight that you call "levels" are closely related. Some people may benefit more from dwelling on the language of namarupaparicchedañana, while others may benefit more from hearing different kinds of language and different aspects of insight. > I understand the 4 Noble Truths to be extremely profound and subtle – so > profound and subtle that the Buddha was inclined not to teach them and > when he did so, many were not able to even attain to this first stage of > insight. The Path is very gradual when there is the development of > understanding which conditions detachment, not attachment when it's > right. Right. > For a clear description of the way that pariyatti leads to patipatti to > pativedha as I understand it, please read KenH's excellent description in > his post to Tyler (38118). > > A brief extract: > > "Without panna, there would be no understanding of absolute reality (nama > and rupa), and so we would be left with the impression that concepts are > real. Were it not for the teaching of the Buddha, you and I would have to > believe either that concepts (cars, trees, electrons, people and places) > are real; or nothing is real." "Belief" is quite different from insight. "Belief" is an allegiance to a concept, but insight is seeing directly the nature of reality. After insight arises and passes away, it is conceptualized in terms of our beliefs. Some beliefs are not at all conducive to development of deeper insight, some beliefs are great aids to the development of insight but only to a limited depth, while some belief structures (viz., various Buddhist formulations) can facilitate insight to the highest levels. Believing in the reality of concepts such as cars, trees, Self, etc. puts a limit on the depth of insight that can be attained; but at a moment of insight, there is no "car", "tree", "Self", "belief". > From Sammohavinodani, ch2, Classification of the Bases, 242: > > "The characteristics of impermanence and pain are made known with or > without the arising of the Tathagatas. The characteristic of no- self is > not made known without the arising of the Enlightened Ones; it is made > known only on the arising of the Enlightened Ones". Right. I'd add that with sufficiently deep insight into any one of three characteristics, the other two are known as well. Other teachings may facilitate insight into anicca and dukkha, but not to the depth required to understand anatta and see the union of the three in enlightenment. > Without any understanding of the elements as anatta, there cannot be any > insight (vipassana) into realities or the attainment of even the first > stage of insight as I understand. I think Phil and possibly Ken O in an > earlier posts have stressed this aspect too. With the arising of insight, there is no notion of "self". After an insight, there is still a tendency for Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike to conceptualize a self. The difference? Buddhists (including myself and even "especially" myself) often bend over backwards trying to use words that won't betray their conceptualizations of a self. But despite the fancy words, that conceptualization is still there until the insight is developed to the depth of magga and phala. > The Visuddhimagga also discusses sacca-~naa.na (knowledge of the truth) > which it divides into `knowledge as idea and knowledge as penetration' > (XV1,84). Sacca nana is firm understanding of the 4 Noble Truths as I > understand, even when it is right understanding conceptually about the > Truths, such as the truth of Nibbana, not yet realized. Without knowledge > based on hearing the Truths, there cannot be any sacca nana. "Herein > knowledge as idea is mundane and *occurs through hearsay, etc,* about > cessation and the path……….When this knowledge is mundane, then, occurring > as the overcoming of obsessions, the knowledge of suffering then > forestalls the [false] idea of individuality…….etc" Hmmm... I don't see any indication in that paragraph or surrounding paragraphs in Vism. that "conceptual right view" is the necessary forerunner of insight. It says there's a difference between `knowledge as idea and knowledge as penetration' and that we should not confuse the two. Also, in the following paragraph it says (in the abstract) that "this idea precludes that idea". The section is basically discussing the fact that supramundane insight does not occur outside the dispensation. I'm inclined to agree with that! Not discussed is the notion that mundane insight requires learning a Buddhist-sounding speculative theory. (NOTE: when the Buddha or an enlightened person uses the words, they are describing reality; when unenlightened people use the words, they are just speculating because their conceptions of "nama", "rupa", "anatta", etc. are wrong. > Looking forward to your answers to the questions above, Dan. I hope I addressed your questions adequately. If not, I'm sure you'll let me know. I'd love to hear your take on my comments and questions to Mike, when and if you're inclined... Metta, Dan 38138 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 110 and Tiika. Dear Htoo, op 10-11-2004 13:27 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: 1st: 21 kusala cittas are 8 kamavacara mahakusala cittas, 5 rupakusala cittas, 4 arupakusala cittas, and 4 lokuttara kusala cittas ( 8 + 5 + 4 + 4 = 21 cittas ) N: Thank you very much, I left some out. This must be corrected! H: This time you include 'kusala' adjective in > rupavipaka and arupavipaka. I would prefer not to add 'kusala' here > in cases of rupavipaka cittas and arupavipaka cittas. They are just > enough. N: You are right that it is superfluous to add kusala to rupaavacara and arupaavacara vipaakacittas, they are always kusala vipaaka. Thank you. By the way, I would rather call them rupaavacara and arupaavacara vipaakacittas, not rupavipaka and arupavipaka, I have not seen this in the Pali texts. Nina. 38139 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 108 and Tiika Dear Htoo, I agree, but I want to add to your last remark: op 10-11-2004 17:03 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > To the worst the last which is hasituppada citta do not have both > panna and sati. > > As soon as sati disappears Even The Buddha has to smile. N: It is said in the commentary that the hasituppadacitta may arise just after cittas with omniscience. That is when he direct the citta with omniscience to the past or the future. But anyway, this is very hard for us worldlings to understand. Beyond our scope. Nina. 38140 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 117 ) Dear Htoo, op 10-11-2004 16:44 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > 5 pasada > rupas are panca vatthus and hadaya rupa is hadaya vatthu. These 6 > rupas are vatthu rupas. Other 22 rupas are avatthu rupas. Vatthu > means 'real things' 'substance' 'object' 'property' 'ground'. N: Do you like the translation base for vatthu? I am used to this English word. Nina. 38141 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:43am Subject: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 110 and Tiika. Dear Htoo, By the way, I would rather call them rupaavacara and arupaavacara vipaakacittas, not rupavipaka and arupavipaka, I have not seen this in the Pali texts. Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, Thanks for your reply. In Dhamma Thread, I use their full names. They are 5 rupavacara rupavipaka cittas and 4 arupavacara arupavipaka cittas. As we all know in sobhana cittas there are three classes of cittas called kusala citta, vipaka cittas, and kiriya cittas with the exception of lokuttara cittas where there is no kiriya cittas. This is explained that because all magga cittas arise only once while all other kusala cittas arise repeatedly. Repeatedly arising cittas do have root dhamma and when these roots are no more kusala or akusala, then cittas become kiriya cittas. Kiriya cittas are inoperational and there will not be any resultant cittas while kusala cittas do give rise to vipaka cittas. In case of lokuttara cittas, as magga cittas which are kusala cittas arise only once and they are immediately followed by phala cittas and since then magga cittas no more arise and only phala cittas can arise. That is why there is no lokuttara kiriya cittas. In kama, rupa and arupa loka there are always 3 kinds of cittas. Kamavacara mahakusala cittas are kusala cittas in kama bhumis (mostly) and rupavacara rupakusala cittas are kusala cittas in rupa bhumis (mostly) and arupavacara arupakusala cittas are kusala cittas in arupa bhumis(mostly). I use these three words 'mahakusala' 'rupakusala' 'arupakusala' as adjective to modify 'cittas' in different realms. When these three kinds of kusala cittas are talked in short, I drop the word 'citta'. So I would say mahakusala, rupakusala, and arupakusala. For vipaka cittas, I would say mahavipaka, rupavipaka, and arupavipaka. That is why text does not show 'mahavipaka' 'rupavipaka' and 'arupavipaka'. By the same token, kiriya cittas are mahakiriya cittas, rupakiriya cittas and arupakiriya cittas. Again, here 'maha' seems a superfluous word. But it is not. Because there are three kinds of kusala that is kama, rupa and arupa depending on bhumi base, it is called 'mahakusala' to differentiate if from rupakusala cittas and arupakusala cittas. With respect, Htoo Naing 38142 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 117 ) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo, > op 10-11-2004 16:44 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > 5 pasada > > rupas are panca vatthus and hadaya rupa is hadaya vatthu. These 6 > > rupas are vatthu rupas. Other 22 rupas are avatthu rupas. Vatthu > > means 'real things' 'substance' 'object' 'property' 'ground'. > N: Do you like the translation base for vatthu? I am used to this English > word. > Nina. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, Vatthu and ayatana sometimes need to be cleared. In that case translation may become hard job. With respect, Htoo Naing 38143 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:32pm Subject: Re: Oh Madam! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" wrote: The thing that REALLY got to me .... guess who the Cashier was, > chameleon smile and all? > > Circular conversations and pure frustration ... most of us > experienced one or two of these. It was quite infuriating, but > strangely fascinating. > > metta and peace, > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- Friend Christine, Gosh, that's terrible! I have traveled to many countries, and want to travel to many more, but I have no desire to EVER go to India. It is probably the only country worse than Egypt! LOL! It's too bad because I would like to see all of those Buddhist historical places, but I wouldn't dare step one foot into India. Glad that you survived the trip. I don't blame you for any of the meltdowns you experienced. ;-)) Metta, James 38144 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 1:44pm Subject: Re: Oh Madam! Hello James, (RobM at bottom) all, Just caught your post as I was about to dash out the door to work. I know how the posts sound :-) but, maybe there is something seriously wrong with me, after going through 16 days of wildly differing experiences - literally from the sublime to the ridiculous - I have to say I am an India Addict and hopefully intend to return again and again. To India (in this life), that is. :-) Maybe it is genetic. I had an email from my son yesterday who has spent the last three months backpacking in India and Nepal. A remark he made after going back into India from Nepal was: "But even though the above doesn't sound that great [after recounting story of accommodation and travel difficulties], I love india and am glad to be back. The chaos, filth, confusion, recalcitrance are excellent.". And I understand exactly how he feels! Great posts on the Noble Eightfold Path for Teenagers - (amumodana to both you and RobM - enjoying them immensely). metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > The thing that REALLY got to me .... guess who the Cashier > was, > > chameleon smile and all? > > > > Circular conversations and pure frustration ... most of us > > experienced one or two of these. It was quite infuriating, but > > strangely fascinating. > > > > metta and peace, > > Christine > > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > > Friend Christine, > > Gosh, that's terrible! I have traveled to many countries, and want > to travel to many more, but I have no desire to EVER go to India. > It is probably the only country worse than Egypt! LOL! It's too bad > because I would like to see all of those Buddhist historical places, > but I wouldn't dare step one foot into India. Glad that you > survived the trip. I don't blame you for any of the meltdowns you > experienced. ;-)) > > Metta, James 38145 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 3:09pm Subject: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Dear Howard and Tyler, I was suggesting that Tyler, having learnt the conventional interpretation of Buddhist practice, might like to read about the true (paramattha) interpretation. -------------------------- H: > I would be interested in reading what you believe that practice is, Ken. > -------------------------- It's pretty much the same as all the other times I have tried to explain it to you. For Tyler's benefit, I believe: In a moment when panna arises to know an arisen dhamma, there is right understanding, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. In other words, there is right practice, satipatthana. -------------- KH: > > In this practice, there is no self; there > > are only dhammas - conditioned mental and physical phenomena (nama > and rupa). > > > ------------------------ > Howard: But what exactly is the practice, Ken? > ------------- I think you are (unwillingly) insisting on an element of self. ------------- KH: > > So, put aside everything you have learnt about formal > > meditation and about mindfulness techniques. Put aside thoughts of > controlling the flow of dhammas and, instead, allow right > understanding to arise. > > > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: How should Tyler allow that to happen, Ken, in your opinion? Why should it arise? What new conditions will yield that? That is: What is the practice? > ------------- If Tyler has been associating with good friends who have helped her to hear the true Dhamma, and if she has wisely considered that true Dhamma, then the conditions are in place for a degree of panna to arise here and now. The question is, does she understand that, or is she clinging to the idea of a controlling self? (Sorry for all the third tense, Tyler.) :-) ------------------------- H: > Namas (mental phenomena) and rupas (physical phenomena) are observed all the time. What is it that enables the right understanding that should encounter them to arise? To expect new results without new conditions is ... odd. > ------------------------- I agree: we should be wary of thinking of panna as vipaka. It is not a sense object that is experienced by virtue of past kamma: it is a volitional sankhara. ------------------------- KH: > > > For us beginners, satipatthana isn't likely to occur. > > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: The normal meaning for the word 'satipatthana' is "foundations (or stations) of mindfulness", and the literal meaning is "the setting forth, putting forth, or setting up of mindfulness". That is different from 'pa~n~na', which means "insight" or "wisdom", and is what you mean. Beginners certainly can make progress with the setting up of mindfulness. ------------------------- As is implied in my opening definition of the practice, right understanding comes first: the rest of the practice follows immediately, in the same moment. ----------------- KH: > > If we barely > > know namas and rupas at the intellectual level, how can we expect to > know them directly? > > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: In the suttas, there is told how the Buddha instructed a mentally deficient man to meditate by attending to rubbing his hand on a rag! That man, certainly unable to grasp subtle theoretical concepts, attained a stage of awakening by that practice. > ----------------- What understanding do you derive from that? Is cloth-rubbing the Middle Way? Surely not, but a wise man can incur a defective brain. The impression I get from the sutta is that panna had been accumulated (I think the story was that he had directly known anicca in a former lifetime.), but there was difficulty in formulating it in conventional language. -------------------- KH: > > Even so, by studying and contemplating the > > Dhamma we soon understand that namas and rupas are arising in the > present moment, and so there is the potential, here and now, for > satipatthana to develop. > > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: That sort of theoretical, intellectual "understanding" can advance forever, but, by itself, will not lead to awakening. > --------------------- Which sort of theoretical understanding are you referring to? If it is the sort that arises with akusala consciousness then, sure, it will never get us out of samsara. But kusala consciousness of the Buddha's teaching is the intellectual [indirect] way that leads to the mundane [direct] way that leads to the supramundane way. ------------------------------------------- H: > The Buddha didn't teach a Noble One-Fold Path consisting of the single factor: Study my theory. > -------------------------------------------- There are eight Path factors, none of which is study. When those factors and the conditions for their arising (including study) have been taught to us, and when we have set the conditions in motion (studied Dhamma and practised satipatthana), then the Path Factors can arise. Ken H 38146 From: plnao Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:08pm Subject: Re: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Hi Ken, and all > In a moment when > panna arises to know an arisen dhamma, there is right understanding, > right thought, right effort, right mindfulness and right > concentration. In other words, there is right practice, satipatthana. Do you believe that such moments are rare moments, so called "path moments" that are akin to enlightenment, or can they be experienced in a more common, everyday way? Since you've defined them as right practice, I guess you would see them as moments that we will experience *not* only at rare moments. As we know, K Sujin's teaching of Abhidhamma stresses the rarity of the arising of understanding of realities. I think that approach is helpful for conditioning patience. On the other hand, it seems to this beginner that understanding can arise in a more shallow and yet still helpful way day in day out, perhaps many times during a busy day. There are degrees of panna. And degrees of "practice?" Metta, Phil 38147 From: Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:58am Subject: Re: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Hi, Ken (and Tyler) - In a message dated 11/10/04 6:15:51 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > > Dear Howard and Tyler, > > I was suggesting that Tyler, having learnt the conventional > interpretation of Buddhist practice, might like to read about the > true (paramattha) interpretation. > > -------------------------- > H: >I would be interested in reading what you believe that practice > is, Ken. > > -------------------------- > > It's pretty much the same as all the other times I have tried to > explain it to you. For Tyler's benefit, I believe: In a moment when > panna arises to know an arisen dhamma, there is right understanding, > right thought, right effort, right mindfulness and right > concentration. In other words, there is right practice, satipatthana. > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Ken, you say that the practice consists of "In a moment when panna arises to know an arisen dhamma, there is right understanding, right thought, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration. In other words, there is right practice, satipatthana." What you have described is an event, something happening, namely pa~n~na arising. What makes that practice? That's like saying that practicing toplay a violin is "At the time one tucks a violin under one's chin and applies the bow, music arises". What actions lead to the arising of the pa~n~na? The setting up of conditions that lead to the arising of wisdom is what constitutes practice, Ken. The arising of wisdom is the *result* of practice. It seems to me that the *only* practice you countenance is study. ------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------- > KH: >>In this practice, there is no self; there > > >are only dhammas - conditioned mental and physical phenomena (nama > >and rupa). > >> > >------------------------ > >Howard: > But what exactly is the practice, Ken? > > ------------- > > I think you are (unwillingly) insisting on an element of self. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: You think wrong. I insist on no such thing. What I insist on is that practice consists of volitional action. If there is no such thing, then there is no practice and no Dhamma. There is nothing but good or bad luck, requiring nothing of us, for volition is non-existent. You appear to be a devote' of randomness, it seems to me. ------------------------------------------ > > ------------- > KH: >>So, put aside everything you have learnt about formal > > >meditation and about mindfulness techniques. Put aside thoughts of > >controlling the flow of dhammas and, instead, allow right > >understanding to arise. >> > >----------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > How should Tyler allow that to happen, Ken, in your opinion? Why > should it arise? What new conditions will yield that? That is: What > is the practice? > > ------------- > > If Tyler has been associating with good friends who have helped her > to hear the true Dhamma, and if she has wisely considered that true > Dhamma, then the conditions are in place for a degree of panna to > arise here and now. The question is, does she understand that, or is > she clinging to the idea of a controlling self? ----------------------------------------- Howard: So I'm right. Practice as you see it is just study. ----------------------------------------- > > (Sorry for all the third tense, Tyler.) :-) > > ------------------------- > > H: >Namas (mental phenomena) and rupas (physical phenomena) are > observed all the time. What is it that enables the right > understanding that should encounter them to arise? To expect new > results without new conditions is ... odd. > > ------------------------- > > I agree: we should be wary of thinking of panna as vipaka. It is not > a sense object that is experienced by virtue of past kamma: it is a > volitional sankhara. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Fascinating! So you claim that pa~n~na is unconditioned. It does not arise from causes. It is another nibbana! (Or, calling it a "volitional sankhara", you think that pa~n~na can be directly willed, an opposite sort of extreme view, giving too much power to cetana.) ------------------------------------------- > > ------------------------- > KH: >> > >For us beginners, satipatthana isn't likely to occur. > >> > >-------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > The normal meaning for the word 'satipatthana' is "foundations (or > stations) of mindfulness", and the literal meaning is "the setting > forth, putting forth, or setting up of mindfulness". That is > different from 'pa~n~na', which means "insight" or "wisdom", and is > what you mean. Beginners certainly can make progress with the > setting up of mindfulness. > ------------------------- > > As is implied in my opening definition of the practice, right > understanding comes first: the rest of the practice follows > immediately, in the same moment. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: What is that initial right understanding? Intellectual understanding obtained by study? Certainly one doesn't begin with pa~n~na. So, we are back to what I said before. Practice is nothing but study in your view. You must really like studying, because you make it the alpha and omega. ------------------------------------------- > > ----------------- > KH: >>If we barely > > >know namas and rupas at the intellectual level, how can we expect > to > >know them directly? > >> > >------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > In the suttas, there is told how the Buddha instructed a mentally > deficient man to meditate by attending to rubbing his hand on a rag! > That man, certainly unable to grasp subtle theoretical concepts, > attained a stage of awakening by that practice. > > ----------------- > > What understanding do you derive from that? Is cloth-rubbing the > Middle Way? Surely not, but a wise man can incur a defective brain. > The impression I get from the sutta is that panna had been > accumulated (I think the story was that he had directly known anicca > in a former lifetime.), but there was difficulty in formulating it > in conventional language. ------------------------------------------ Howard: What I infer from that is not what you say, though potential is always there to some degree. What I infer is that this was a man who actually had somewhat of an advantage in lacking the intellectual baggage and clinging that we are afflicted with, and without that obfuscation was able to benefit from the absorption induced by the samatha practice the Buddha so brilliantly gave him [THAT was a practice, BTW!]. And with the calm, concentration, and clarity induced by that meditation, and being free, to begin with, of conceptual filters, in seeing the originally clean rag slowly become dirtied by the rubbing of his hand,he suddenly had direct, non-conceptual insight into conditionality and impermanence, and attained path and fruit. ---------------------------------------------- > > -------------------- > KH: >>Even so, by studying and contemplating the > > >Dhamma we soon understand that namas and rupas are arising in the > >present moment, and so there is the potential, here and now, for > >satipatthana to develop. >> > >-------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > That sort of theoretical, intellectual "understanding" can advance > forever, but, by itself, will not lead to awakening. > > --------------------- > > Which sort of theoretical understanding are you referring to? If it > is the sort that arises with akusala consciousness then, sure, it > will never get us out of samsara. But kusala consciousness of the > Buddha's teaching is the intellectual [indirect] way that leads to > the mundane [direct] way that leads to the supramundane way. > > ------------------------------------------- > H: >The Buddha didn't teach a Noble One-Fold Path consisting of the > single factor: Study my theory. > > -------------------------------------------- > > There are eight Path factors, none of which is study. When those > factors and the conditions for their arising (including study) have > been taught to us, and when we have set the conditions in motion > (studied Dhamma and practised satipatthana), then the Path Factors > can arise. > > 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) 38148 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Dan, I'll get to the rest of your post later. It's a good discussion and I appreciate your answers. Just on the earlier thread: --- "Dan D." wrote: > > > I'd love to hear your take on my comments and questions to Mike, when > and if you're inclined... .... S: I think I did take up the first point 'insight comes first' which I disagreed with. Please would you raise again any questions or comments you'd particularly like my take on. Like Howard, I have a little reluctance at the moment to go back, as I'm still in catch-up mode from the trip. I was interested to see that your approach fell under a pure math umbrella. I was always very fond of pure maths in school. For me, the discussion was rather more like one of those old-fashioned long distance calls when one started to wonder whether one was having the same conversation. It was interesting, nonetheless. To put it in my basic math terms: Mike, I or someone else would say 'x' equals 'y', You'd then say 'Sarah, Mike and others say 'x' equals 'z', and build your next argument or hypothesis on this basis. We'd then have to go back to explain that in our book, 'y' doesn't equal 'z' and we never implied it did......;-). No problem, but at a certain point, people tend to drop out (maybe our math is too basic;-)) or like those old calls,try another line or way of contact. This was what I did and I think the connection's better. If you'd still like to pursue the first one, that's fine. Anyway, pls let me know if you'd like any clarifications on anything I said (as opposed to the strawman paraphrases)or for any comments you made which you'd like me to discuss further. Oops, no dhamma here - I'd better get straight to the rest of your recent letter. Metta, Sarah ====== 38149 From: Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 4:55pm Subject: Re: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Hi again, Ken - In a message dated 11/10/04 7:59:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > That's like saying that practicing > toplay a violin is "At the time one tucks a violin under one's chin and > applies the > bow, music arises". > ======================== I didn't put this properly to make my point. I should have said the following: That's like saying that practicing to play a violin is "A violin is under one's chin, the bow is moving, and a lovely melody is issuing forth." What is described, of course, is not violin practice - it is the end result of such practice, where practicing the violin is a specfic sort of volitional activity, typically repeated often and for a long time. Likewise, as I said, the setting up of conditions that lead to the arising of wisdom is what constitutes Buddhist practice, and the arising of wisdom is the *result* of that practice, and not the practice itself. 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) 38150 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Dan, --- "Dan D." wrote: > > >D: On occasion, there may > > > be a clear comprehension that without craving, there is no > suffering. > > ….. > > S: Is this the deep penetrative insight into the characteristic of a > > reality or is it thinking about suffering – a kind of conceptual > > understanding? > > Penetrative insight. ….. S: Penetrative insight into what reality? ….. > (Please keep in mind that this is only an example, and that there are > many, many, MANY variations that make it *impossible* to judge the > depth of development in another by any simple "test".) ….. S: The only way to have any idea about another’s understanding is by discussion (and then of course it’s subject to one’s limited understanding). For example, if someone has had insights, but knows nothing about the realities of seeing and visible object now at this moment, these insights are not those as taught by the Buddha. ….. > At the same time, the insight is quite shallow. It may not be deep > enough even to inspire the construction of an explicit conceptual > formulation for the insight, in which case it would not be discussed, > thought about very much, or consolidated in any meaningful way. … ….. S: OK, but then I’d say it’s not the development of satipatthana or the insights that may arise from a firm development of such. ….. > Without consolidation, deeper insight may not have occasion to arise > for a long, long time. Shallow also in the sense that the 4NT are > extremely deep, and insight into them is developed gradually, over > long periods of time. …. S: By the development of satipatthana which begins with repeated awareness and understanding into presently arising namas and rupas. While there are doubts about the path and ideas of self, I’m not sure I’d refer to moments of satipatthana as suggesting even a shallow insight of any kind into the 4NT. …. > > S: Suffering as a characteristic of what? > > The presently arising moment. …. S: This sounds like thinking about suffering along with your first comment, ‘On occasion, there may be a clear comprehension that without craving, there is no suffering.’ Surely ‘the present arising moment’ is a concept, not a reality with any characteristic at all. ….. > > S: "These `shallower insights', defined by you as `most any insight > short > > of supramundane path consciousness', were into precisely what > realities > > before we studied the `Buddha's words'? > > Namas & rupas, their characteristics, and their relations. Obviously, > though, before studying the Buddha's words we wouldn't describe them > in that way. …. S: Before studying the Buddha’s words, was there really any understanding at all about namas and rupas in any language or non-language at all? Didn’t we take seeing and hearing for being ‘my seeing and hearing’, wasn’t it my body experienced rather than heat, hardness and so on? Was there any clear understanding of the distinction between hearing and sound. Is there now, even after hearing and studying a lot? Wasn’t it all taken for self and other beings and things? There can’t be complete ignorance and wrong view with occasional deep insights arising from highly developed satipatthana in between without any doubts about self or the path. ….. > > What do you understand the First Noble Truth of suffering to refer > to? > > The first noble truth of suffering refers to conditioned mind states, > all of which have the characteristics of anicca, anatta, and dukkha. …. S: Only mind states? Are you sure? ….. > At moments of insight, there is no idea or sense of "who". > Afterwards, the insight can easily be mangled by constructing a > conceptual scheme that includes an idea of a "who" that has insights. …. S: We have a different use of the word insight here. If we’re talking about the insights starting with namarupa pariccheda nana, there will be no question or doubt or idea about who has had such insights. I agree that in the beginning when satipatthana is weak, there are bound to be such doubts and views in between the occasional moments of awareness. ….. > > If there is no precise understanding of dhammas, of namas and > rupas, is it > > possible to develop any detachment from an idea of self at all? > > I believe not -- unless when you say "precise understanding", you > really mean being able to fluently rattle off racks of Pali terms and > logically piece together their definitions and relations. …. S: That’s one of those strawman arguments again ;-) ….. > Insight begins shallow and gradually deepens. If you like to look at > the "levels of insight" through a hierarchy of: > 1. Namarupaparicchedañana; > 2. Paccayapariggahañana; > 3. Sammasanañana; > 4. Udayabbayañana; > 5. Bhangañana; > etc., that's fine. …. S: It’s not a question of what I’d like to look at. It’s a question of what we read in the texts and which I personally have no reason to doubt. …. >Then, with only a relatively shallow (but direct > and penetrative) insight at level 1, … S: an oxymoron;-) …. >the other insights are possible > (and do arise) but only at a similar degree of depth. These insights > are gradually developed to greater and greater depth in concert, > going "up and down" the list repeatedly. … S: Show me the text!! …. > The notion that a thorough and very deep understanding of > namarupapariccheda is prerequisite for even relatively shallow > insight into the other characteristics CAN slow the development of > insight by hindering the conceptualization and consolidation of the > other insights. … S: Again, show me the text. Also what do you mean by ‘the other characteristics’? I’m not clear here at all. From Vism XV111,36 “The correct vision of mentality and materiality, which after defining mentality-materiality by these various methods, has been established on the plane of non-confusion by overcoming the perception of a being, is what should be understood as purification of view.” … >It doesn't NECESSARILY slow the development, though, > because these several aspects of insight that you call "levels" are > closely related. …. S: Stages or levels, but not aspects. In MN24, Rathaviniita Sutta, we read about the simile of the relay chariots to refer to the 7 Visuddhi or stages of insight. ‘Then King Pasenadi of Kosala, leaving Saavatthii through the inner palace door, would mount the first relay chariot, and by means of the first relay chariot he would arrive at the second relay chariot…….seventh chariot, and by means of the seventh chariot he would arrive at the inner palace door in Saaketa…..” In the same way, the 7 purifications are described. ….. >Some people may benefit more from dwelling on the > language of namarupaparicchedañana, while others may benefit more > from hearing different kinds of language and different aspects of > insight. …. S: Isn’t this just thinking about it? Is there any getting away from the direct understanding of namas and rupas? …. >. Believing in the reality of concepts such as cars, > trees, Self, etc. puts a limit on the depth of insight that can be > attained; but at a moment of insight, there is > no "car", "tree", "Self", "belief". … S: I would put it the other way round and say that while there is still any believing in the reality of concepts such as cars etc, there won’t be any development of satipatthana, let alone any insights. ….. > Right. I'd add that with sufficiently deep insight into any one of > three characteristics, the other two are known as well. …. S: This doesn’t mean that by having deep insight into the characteristic of suffering with no insight into the other characteristics that they well suddently be known or penetrated too. The development of understanding of realities means the development of understanding of the characteristics of realities from the start. If a practice or development starts on the basis of ‘Self’ doing or having insights, that’s how it will proceed. There’s a wrong path and a right path, remember. ….. > With the arising of insight, there is no notion of "self". After an > insight, there is still a tendency for Buddhists and non-Buddhists > alike to conceptualize a self. The difference? Buddhists (including > myself and even "especially" myself) often bend over backwards trying > to use words that won't betray their conceptualizations of a self. > But despite the fancy words, that conceptualization is still there > until the insight is developed to the depth of magga and phala. …. S: However, the wrong view of self has to be gradually worn away so that by the time of enlightenment, there is no wrong view left at all and even the anusaya (latent tendency) of wrong view is eliminated. It’s not like we have the same wrong views as now when the stages of insight have been attained. ….. "Herein > > knowledge as idea is mundane and *occurs through hearsay, etc,* > about > > cessation and the path……….When this knowledge is mundane, then, > occurring > > as the overcoming of obsessions, the knowledge of suffering then > > forestalls the [false] idea of individuality…….etc" … S: Sacca-nana – firm knowledge of the Truths which has developed after listening, reading, considering very carefully and developing satipatthana. Only then can there be any insights. …. >Not > discussed is the notion that mundane insight requires learning a > Buddhist-sounding speculative theory. …. S: Straw-man argument no2! …. >(NOTE: when the Buddha or an > enlightened person uses the words, they are describing reality; when > unenlightened people use the words, they are just speculating because > their conceptions of "nama", "rupa", "anatta", etc. are wrong. …. S: It depends. There may be wholesome thinking and reflection about realities not based on direct understanding or based on direct understanding or a combination. If the speech is wholesome and the view is right, it’s certainly not wrong! Of course there may also be unwholesome thinking and reflection based on either of the above and in this case whether or not the view is right, it’s wrong, because of being unwholesome. As Nina said once, I think, ‘let’s mind our own cittas’! …. > I hope I addressed your questions adequately. If not, I'm sure you'll > let me know. …. S: Great effort….I’ll look forward to a few more answers;-). You always help me to consider carefully, Dan. I hope I’ve also addressed the points you wish to have addressed here. Metta, Sarah ======= 38151 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:37pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 46 - Feeling/Vedana (s) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.2 Feeling (Vedana) contd] ***** We cling to life and we want to go on living and receiving sense impressions. We are attached to sense-impressions such as seeing and hearing. There are many moments of seeing and hearing and shortly after they have fallen away there are bound to be lobhamúla- cittas even when we do not have happy feeling. After seeing has fallen away there is a mind-door process of cittas which experience visible object through the mind-door and then there can be other mind-door processes of cittas which think of concepts. We may think of a person, a car or a tree. We like to notice a person, a car or a tree, these are concepts we are familiar with. We like to think and even when we do not feel glad there can be clinging with indifferent feeling, but we do not notice this. It is useful to know that lobha can be accompanied by upekkhå. Through the Abhidhamma we can come to know our many defilements. It is better to know realities than to mislead ourselves with regard to them. ****** [Feeling(Vedana) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 38152 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Day 28.10.04 Dear Htoo (& DN) --- htootintnaing wrote: > 28.10.04 is full moon day. The Buddha Gotama preached Abhidhamma at > Tavatimsa started from full moon day of the 4th month of solar > calendar of 12 signs starts with Aries. ..... S: I was glad you mentioned this. We were in Rajghir in the Bamboo Grove and as we looked at the full moon, I mentioned to someone that I thought this was also when the Abhidhamma was preached but was shaky on the facts. .... > The start of Abhidhamma preaching is called Dhammacakkappavattana > Day. From the 4th month till the 7th month, The Buddha preached > Abhidhamma for 3 successive months without any interruption. .... S: It's interesting that it's called Dhammacakkappavattana Day as we kept reciting this sutta. I didn't know. .... > Tomorrow (28.10.04) is the full moon day when The Buddha finished > preaching Abhidhamma at Deva realm and came down to manussa bhumi or > human realm. ... S: I also liked your account of the 'origin of Pawa rana' in #37856 and yes, I've heard the account of the wrong view of the monks before who thought that unity and happiness between them could be achieved by silence, rather than by pointing out their errors and asking forgiveness. I also liked your description of the respect shown to elders and teachers in Myanmar on this day. A few of us followed a similar showing of respect a couple of days later in Sikkhim. Metta, Sarah p.s If you, DN or anyone else wishes to post a very long article (more than a couple of pages), pls give a link if at all possible. If it's not possible for any reason,you may like to consider posting it in installments like your series. DN, there were a few points in the Mahasi Sayadaw article I was considering discussing, but I'll wait til I know you're still around first. I hope you saw my other posts to you. =========================================== 38153 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:23pm Subject: correction Vis. XIV, 110, 111 Dear Sarah, at the beginning of Vis. 110, I like to correct: Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:23pm Subject: Vis. XIV, 111, and Tiika, corrected. Vis. XIV, 111, and Tiika, corrected. Intro Vis. 111: Kamma conditions the last javana-cittas (kusala cittas or akusala cittas) that arise before the dying-consciousness. Whatever object these cittas experience, that is also the object of the next rebirth-consciousness. The dying-consciousness that follows upon these last javana-cittas has the same object as the rebirth-consciousness and life-continuum of the life that is about to end. There are three classes of object of rebirth-consciousness: kamma, sign of kamma and sign of destiny. We read in the ŒConditional Relations¹ by U Narada (p. 140): <1. when a past faultless or faulty volition is taken as object it is kamma object. 2. when a thing involved in the performance of a kamma is taken as object it is a sign of kamma object... 3. when an image indicates the existence in which one will be reborn after death is the object, it is the sign of destiny object... One of the three objects above, which is taken in the dying process, is also the object taken at rebirth-consciousness.> The Co to the ŒBook of Analysis¹, the ŒDispeller of Delusion¹ (I, p. 190 etc.) gives different examples. When kusala kamma such as the building of a Pagoda is the object of the last javanacittas just before the dying-consciousness, the image of a Pagoda may appear to the last javana-cittas and that is the sign of kamma which is the object of kusala cittas. It is the means by which kusala kamma was accumulated and this can condition rebirth in a happy plane, such as a deva plane. We read about the example of someone who is in a happy plane (like the human plane) who takes rebirth in an unhappy plane. When he is near death he remembers his evil deeds, or a sign of it, and then he will have rebirth in an unhappy plane. When someone is in a happy plane he will have rebirth in a happy plane. We read: <...in another¹s case, relatives present (objects to him) at the five sense-doors, such as visible datum as object, perhaps flowers, garlands, flags, banners, etc., saying ŒThis is being offered to the Blessed One for your sake, set your mind at rest¹; or a sound as object, perhaps preaching of the Dhamma, offering of music, etc....> N: Any object appearing through one of the six doorways can be the object of the last javana-cittas before dying. That object is conditioned by kamma. When kusala kamma will produce rebirth-consciousness, kamma conditions the object experienced by the last javana-cittas to be pleasant, and the javana-cittas which experience it to be kusala cittas. When akusala kamma will produce rebirth-consciousness, kamma conditions the object experienced by the last javana-cittas to be unpleasant, and the javana-cittas which experience it to be akusala cittas. These objects are past, present or not so classifiable. The last javana-cittas of a life that is about to end may experience a sense object which is a present object. These javana-cittas are five in number, . These are followed by two moments of retention and one moment of dying-consciousness. The dying-consciousness experiences another object which is the same as the pa.tisandhi-citta and all bhavanga-cittas of the life that is about to end. The pa.tisandhi-citta, rebirth-consciousness, experiences as it were a seal-imprint or copy of the object experienced by the last javana-cittas of the preceding life. We should remember that the rebirth-consciousness, the bhavanga-citta and the dying-consciousness are cittas which are door-freed (dvara-vimutta) and process-freed (viithi-vimutta). They do not experience an object that impinges on one of the six doors like the cittas arising in processes. They merely experience a copy or echo of the object experienced by the last javana-cittas of the preceding life. We are unable to know what kind of object this is. The "Dispeller of Delusion" states that the rebirth-consciousness can experience a present object, but this means that the last javana-cittas of the preceding life directly experienced a present object. However, the rebirth-consciousness does not experience it in the same way as those javana-cittas, it merely experiences a copy of it. The next life follows upon this present life very rapidly, it all occurs in one flash. Seeing at this moment may be followed by kusala javana-cittas or akusala javana-cittas and then the dying-consciousness may arise to be followed immediately by the rebirth-consciousness. When kamma committed in the past is remembered during the last javana-cittas, the object is a past object. When the object of the last javana-cittas is a sign of destiny, the place of one¹s next rebirth, one may see a heavenly mansion or a picture of the flames of hell, for example. ******** Text Vis. 111. How so? (a) When, through the influence of the eight kinds of sense-sphere profitable [consciousness] (1)-(8), beings come to be reborn among deities and human beings, then the eight kinds of sense-sphere resultant with root-cause (42)-(49) occur, N: The eight mahaa-kusala cittas (of the sense-sphere) with two roots (alobha and adosa) or with three roots, that is, accompanied by paññaa as well, produces rebirth in the human plane or in the six lower deva planes. Vis. text: ..and also the resultant mind-consciousness-element without root-cause associated with equanimity (41), which is the weak profitable result with two root-causes in those who are entering upon the state of eunuchs, etc., among human beings-- N: Those reborn with a santira.na-citta (investigating-consciousness) which is ahetuka kusala vipaaka, are handicapped from birth. It is the result of weak kusala kamma. The Tiika explains that someone reborn with this type of citta may be stammering, dumb or an eunuch. As we have seen, the santiira.na-citta which is ahetuka kusala vipaaka can in this case perform the function of rebirth. It is the same type of citta as the santiira.na-citta which performs in a sense-door process the function of investigating a sense-object. Vis. text: thus nine kinds of resultant consciousness in all occur as 'rebirth-linking'; and they do so making their object whichever among the kamma, sign of kamma, or sign of destiny has appeared at the time of dying (see also Ch. XVII, par.120).[42] ---------------------------- Note 42. See also MA.iv,124f. 'Here "kamma" is stored-up profitable kamma of the sense sphere that has got an opportunity to ripen; hence he said "that has appeared". "Sign of kamma" is the gift to be given that was a condition for the volition at the moment of accumulating the kamma. "Sign of destiny" is the visible-data base located in the destiny in which he is about to be reborn' (Pm. 477). See Ch. XVII, pr.136ff. ****** 38155 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:23pm Subject: Re: There is a Practice Hello Phil, Ken H, Tyler, Howard and friends. A belated wellcome to Tyler. Your discussions gave me food for thought. op 11-11-2004 01:08 schreef plnao op plnao@j...: > As we know, K Sujin's teaching of Abhidhamma stresses the rarity of the > arising > of understanding of realities. I think that approach is helpful for > conditioning > patience. N: Patience was stressed very often in India. Not expecting a result soon, beware of lobha coming in time and again. Ph: On the other hand, it seems to this beginner that understanding > can arise in a more shallow and yet > still helpful way day in day out, perhaps many times during a busy day. > There are degrees of panna. And degrees of "practice?" N: Yes, it has to begin. I find it very helpful to consider the six doors and the fact that only one dhamma is experienced at a time through one doorway. The suttas remind us time and again of this. That is very daily, dhammas are experienced one at a time, no matter there is awareness of them or not. When there is understanding of visible object as a dhamma experienced through eyesense, there can be correct thinking of it. No attention to the image of a whole or the details. But we have to get used to this, it has to sink in. We always thought that we see people and things. There can be just a moment of correct understanding and this is the condition for higher understanding. It has to begin with correct thinking, correct intellectual understanding. The purpose is not more awareness but more understanding. How we cling to the idea of my practice. Detachment was stressed in India all the time. Pañña leads to detachment. But lobha comes in all the time. When we are sitting, we think of ourselves as sitting. We cling to postures. We cling to awareness and this hinders. Even though we know that this hinders, we still cling. Only understanding of such moments can lead to detachment. When I was lying on the bed I remembered that there should not be any selection of objects of awareness. There is sound, but there is also thinking of events, and we should not try to avoid thinking of concepts, it arises naturally. But again, I was clinging to the idea of myself not doing anything to induce sati. Lobha is so subtle. It is fortunate to have good friends in Dhamma who remind me of this. Otherwise I would not know this at all. Nina. 38156 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Day 28.10.04 .... S: It's interesting that it's called Dhammacakkappavattana Day as we kept reciting this sutta. I didn't know. .... Htoo: In Myanmar, Dhammacakkappavattana Day is a bank holiday and all offices, municipal markets and most private shops close. Dhamma is The Buddha' Dhamma. Cakka means 'wheel'. Vatta means 'rotating' 'moving around'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Tomorrow (28.10.04) is the full moon day when The Buddha finished > > preaching Abhidhamma at Deva realm and came down to manussa bhumi or > > human realm. ... S: I also liked your account of the 'origin of Pawa rana' in #37856 and yes, I've heard the account of the wrong view of the monks before who thought that unity and happiness between them could be achieved by silence, rather than by pointing out their errors and asking forgiveness. I also liked your description of the respect shown to elders and teachers in Myanmar on this day. A few of us followed a similar showing of respect a couple of days later in Sikkhim. Metta, Sarah ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: That was not my post. I included the original writer's email address and name. Please see at the top. It is said 'fruitsandcream' and email is 'no_reply@y..'. Anyway, all his writing reflect Myanmar people culture which is mixed with Buddhism. That is why I forwarded the massage to this list. When we were children, we wander around elderly with lobha because when we paid homage or worship them they gave us pocket-money. We brought an earthern saucer which is used to fill oil and used for light. In the small saucer we put a candle and lit it. Then brought along wherever we go. We had to frequently re-light it. That was when we were toddlers and we followed with older children and behaved like them. When we attended primary school, each year around that day that is the day before fullmoon day if it was on Saturday and if on Monday 3 days before fullmoon day, we gave homage to our school teachers with our donation making things like body- soap, facial-soap, face towel, towel, candles for teachers to offer The Buddha or as they wish, cakes, coconut in tact that is uncracked or undone which is essential component and bananas 3 to 5 bunches which again is also essential,medicine etc etc. This tradition is carried up to university level and postgraduate level and even doctorate level. This is relationship between teachers and students. At work, all employees do the same to their superiors as tradition. At home householder like grandfathers, fathers are given homage. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > p.s If you, DN or anyone else wishes to post a very long article (more > than a couple of pages), pls give a link if at all possible. If it's not > possible for any reason,you may like to consider posting it in > installments like your series. > > DN, there were a few points in the Mahasi Sayadaw article I was > considering discussing, but I'll wait til I know you're still around > first. I hope you saw my other posts to you. > =========================================== 38157 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:14am Subject: Wrong Speech- Noble Eightfold Path for Teens Friend Rob M., And the talk continues... We are all aware of the increasing pollution of our planet. We know that cars put out exhaust, factories put out smoke, and trash pollutes our water and land. But there is also another type of pollution which is increasing that is polluting our planet, a pollution that is difficult to control and sometimes difficult to see, and that is the pollution of wrong speech. Evil words, false words, abusive words, hurtful words, they pollute our world just as significantly as physical pollution, and unfortunately this type of pollution is increasing. There are now radio shows, television shows, newspapers, magazines and Internet sites which spew out hateful words and false words which are just as hurtful as the world's physical pollution. But instead of putting a hole in the Ozone Layer, like physical pollution, these words are putting a hole in each of our hearts. Imagine that each time you use wrong speech it is as if a thick black smoke spews from your mouth and chokes all of those who surround you. Actually, in Buddhism it is said that those who use wrong speech, especially lying, will be reborn with bad breath. Well, no one wants to have bad breath! And we probably don't want to pollute our world with wrong speech either, so what can we do? We have to be aware of what is Right Speech. This is how the Buddha defined Right Speech, "And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, abstaining from divisive speech, abstaining from abusive speech, abstaining from idle chatter: This, monks, is called right speech." Lying is the worst type of wrong speech because of the intent to deceive. You see, some other types of wrong speech, like using profanity and hurtful words, usually happen spontaneously and come from the hatred and anger in the mind, but lying requires planning and premeditation to say something which is false. We should all be dedicated to the truth- to speaking that which is true and to knowing what is true. Truth is the supreme value. Lying shouldn't be done, even if it is for someone else's benefit. Divisive speech is speech which divides people. Repeating something that someone else said, when there is the possibility that those words will cause bad feelings and broken friendships, should not be done. Even if those words are true and it was actually said, it should not be repeated if it could divide people. We should all be dedicated to creating harmony between people, not dividing them. Harsh speech is speech which tries to harm the listener. This type of speech can be abusive, insulting, or sarcastic and it arises from anger within the mind. Some people may feel that hurting someone with words is not as bad as physically hurting him or her, but harsh words do actually hurt; sometimes they hurt even more than physical blows. We should all try to restrain ourselves from lashing out at others with harsh speech. We need to develop patience so that anger doesn't make us hurt others with our speech. The last type of wrong speech that the Buddha described is idle chatter. Idle chatter is speech that has no reason to be spoken. All speech should be for a reason and the best reason for speaking is to help others develop wisdom. But some people like to talk as a form of entertainment or to kill time. It seems that some people just like to talk to hear the sound of their own voice-this is idle chatter. The problem with idle chatter is that it clouds the mind and turns people away from wisdom. We should all avoid idle chatter. As the saying goes, often times, `Silence is Golden'. We face a serious problem in today's world with the wrong speech of others. It is a pollution that clouds our hearts and minds from the beauty of wisdom. The way to solve this problem is to start at the individual level. We need to each do our part to ensure that we don't use wrong speech, and thus the world with be just a little bit cleaner for wisdom to grow. As far as the harsh speech of others, we should have the wisdom and patience to forbear it, to not let it affect the purity of our minds, and to not take part or participate. The outer world reflects the inner world. Let us make the outer world beautiful to reflect the beauty that is possible in each of us. Next I will talk to you about Right Action. (To be continued…) Metta, James 38158 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:16am Subject: Right Speech (was Re: Wrong Speech- Noble Eightfold Path for Teens --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: Oops...typed the wrong title. 38159 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:35am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 119 ) Dear Dhamma Friends, There are citta, cetasika, rupa, and nibbana as ultimate realities. No other things are realities. Only these four are real in their ultimate sense and they are always true at any given time and at anywhere. Dhamma Thread have explained on different classifications on cittas and then different kinds of citta, followed by different cetasikas and finally rupa matters are explained. There is a fourth ultimate realities. It is nibbana. Nibbana the term derives from 'nivana' or 'nirvana'. 'Ni' means 'nikkhanta' or liberated from 'vana' or binding. Vana is the dhamma that bind various different lives in the samsara. So nibbana means liberated from binding in the samsara. This binding is tanha. Even though there is a single nibbana as its nature, nibbana is talked to have two different forms, saupadisesa nibbana and anupadisesa nibbana. Saupadisesa nibbana is nibbana when sattas are still in the samsara are when they are alive. This nibbana is only present in arahats or anagams while they are in nirodha samapatti. Nirodha means disappearance and samapatti means to be in a state of. Anupadisesa nibbana is the state immediately after cuti citta of arahats. Immediately after cuti citta of arahats, there is no more kammaja rupa, cittaja rupa and aharaja rupa. That state from the sattas just gone to nibbana is said to be the state of nibbana called anupadisesa nibbana as there is no trace of so called satta that is no citta, no cetasika, no kammaja rupa, no citta rupa, and no aharaja rupa. Utuja rupa just left is like other bahiddhika rupa and not attached to any satta. So such nibbana is a complete and absolute peace. This is the state all Buddhists are trying to attain after their paccima bhava or final life . From view point of contemplation, there are three kinds of nibbana. They are sunnata nibbana, animitta nibbana, and appanihita nibbana. Sunnata nibbana means nibbana is free of arammana for tanha to arise. There is no atta or ego in ultimate sense. Nibbana is free of attajiva or any self or any life. So as there is free of such life, self or anything, the nibbana is called sunnata nibbana or voided emptiness of peace. When ariya-to-be was contemplating on dhamma as anatta, then the nibbana that he saw when magga citta arose is called sunnata nibbana. Because as he was viewing as anatta, and as there is no atta and free of atta, then the nibbana that he saw is called sunnata nibbana. Animitta nibbana means nibbana is free of raga, kilesa and it is free of bases and causal things. When ariya-to-be was viewing dhamma at magga citta, if he saw dhamma as anicca, then the nibbana that he saw is called animitta nibbana. Because there is no nicca or permanent nimitta in dhamma. So his nibbana is animitta nibbana. Appanihita nibbana means nibbana is not to be craving for as in cases of tanha, raga, kilesa, etc etc. When ariya-to-be was viewing dhamma at magga citta, if he saw dhamma as dukkha or suffering then the nibbana that he saw is called appanihita nibbana. Because nibbana is free of tanha, raga, and any defilements. Even though these are contemplated, there is only a single nibbana in terms of its character and in ultimate sense. Nibbana is an absolute peace. This peace can be understood by viewing absence of any fire or any suffering. When not in nibbana or not in the state of nibbana, then sattas will be in the domain of sankhata dhamma. This means that they all will be in loka that includes kama loka or kama realms or sensual sphere, rupa loka or rupa brahma realms or fine material sphere and arupa loka or arupa brahma realms or immaterial sphere. As long as satta are in these realms that is 31 realms, then they all will be in their samsara and they will be suffering from different kinds of suffering. These sufferings are called fires. When fires are all totally extinguished, the absence of fires in the presence of which are hot and disagreeable, will make complete peace and free of suffering. By comparison its absence can be realised as absolute peace while its presence is hot, making restless and peaceless. Nibbana is not rupa dhamma. It is nama dhamma. Nibbana is not a khandha or aggregate. But nibbana can be arammana or object of mind. Nibbana is dhammarammana. Nibbana can be ayatana. It is dhammayatana. Ayatana are dhamma or nature that are the cause of arising of citta by being arammana or object or by being dvara or door. Citta, cetasika, and rupa are constituted in 18 kinds of dhatu or dhamma elements. Nibbana can be dhamma dhatu. But nibbana is not sankhata dhatu as in cases of citta, cetasika, and rupa. Nibbana is asankhata dhatu. Sankhata dhatu are those whose arising and existence are influenced by one of four causes namely kamma, citta, utu, and ahara. Nibbana cannot be influenced by these four causes. Nibbana is asankhata dhatu. It is absolute peace and free of any suffering and any fire. So nibbana is what all Buddhists are intended as their destination. 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. 38160 From: abhidhammika Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:31am Subject: Buddhaghosa Never Created Theravada. (Was Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) Dear Joop and all How are you? So you got your idea from David Kalupahana? Do you know that Kalupahana is a Sanskritist and merely a paid- academic? As such, Kalupahana's opinions about Acariya Buddhaghosa or Theravada Buddhism are speculative in nature and should not be taken as facts. To whomever it may concern, when I describe someone's opinions as speculative, I merely mean that their opinions cannot be treated as though they were truth-facts produced by repeated and repeatable scientific experiments. How can we know that Kalupahana is not a man of science? He got his PhD from a religious studies department and works in a department of philosophy. He is a man of arts. In short, whatever he wrote about Acariya Buddhaghosa and Theravada Buddhism are merely his own personal opinions, not the outcomes of scientific experiments. Moreover, Kalupahana's Pali scholarship is very questionable, and as such it is very doubtful that he had, extensively and deeply, read Standard Pali Commentaries translated and edited by Acariya Buddhaghosa. Thus, his opinions about Acariya Buddhaghosa cannot be regarded as reliable sources of information. Therefore, Joop, when you wrote (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada), you should not have asserted it as a fact. You should have mentioned your source such as Kalupahana. Of course, you could agree with his personal opinions by all means. In future, please be careful not to accuse Acariya Buddhaghosa of committing the crime he never did. Nikaayantaraladdhiihi, asammissam anaakulam; mahaavihaaravaasiinam, diipayanto vinicchayam. Attham pakaasayissaami, aagama.t.thakathaasupi; gahetabbam gahetvaana, tosayanto vicakkha.ne. From Acariya Buddhaghosa's A.t.thasaalinii Ganthaarambhakathaa. With regards, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jwromeijn" wrote: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > Dear Joop and all > Joop wrote: > > "And regarding Theravada, I think it's good to study (also in this > DSG) the history of the first centuries after the parinibbana of the > Buddha (before Buddhagosa made a system of Theravada) to understand > why the differentiation of Buddhism started." > What do you mean by "(before Buddhagosa made a system ofTheravada)"? > If it were not your original idea, where did you get that? > With regards, > > Suan Lu Zaw > Hallo Abhidhammika Who made a system of Christianity? Not Christ or his direct disciples. But a Paulus (formerly Saulus) in his moralistic letters; and scholastics in the (western) middle ages; and reformers like Luther. Making a system is for exemple not accepting that there are lose ends or any internal contradictions. How did I get the idea that Buddhaghosa played the most important role in making a system of Theravada? By reading chapter XXI, "Buddhaghosa, the Harmonizer", in "A History of Buddhist Philosopy. Continuities and Discontinuities" by David Kalupahana (University of Hawai Press, 1992) Metta Joop 38161 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:40am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Sarah, I'm sorry that it sounds to you like I'm constructing straw men to argue with. I must be misunderstanding where you are coming from. I have been directing my thoughts to the following straw Sarahs: Straw Sarah 1: "For insight to arise, there must first be right conceptual understanding. That right conceptual understanding comes from hearing, reading, considering, discussing the words of the Buddha." Straw Sarah 2: "Those outside the dispensation cannot have right view." Do these sound like you? There are others too, I'm sure, but these two are prominent. Metta, Dan 38162 From: Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi, Sarah (and Dan) - In a message dated 11/11/04 1:57:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > S: Before studying the Buddha’s words, was there really any understanding > at all about namas and rupas in any language or non-language at all? > Didn’t we take seeing and hearing for being ‘my seeing and hearing’, > wasn’t it my body experienced rather than heat, hardness and so on? Was > there any clear understanding of the distinction between hearing and > sound. Is there now, even after hearing and studying a lot? Wasn’t it all > taken for self and other beings and things? > > There can’t be complete ignorance and wrong view with occasional deep > insights arising from highly developed satipatthana in between without any > doubts about self or the path. > ======================= If I may butt in: I do think it is possible for one who has not heard the Dhamma, but who has the tendency and habit, perhaps even starting as a child*, to just "look" at the world of experience as it arises and from a state of quiet musing and attention, to get a glimpse of the vast impersonal, uncontrollable and ungraspable reality that is rolling on, momentarily losing sense of self or of solidity and separateness to things, and, unaccompanied by word or thought, to just stare in wonder at "that". But then the moment passes, and, not having heard the Dhamma, one is unable to characterize what one has seen. The immediacy of the experience then slips away, leaving no conceptual understanding or adequate recollection, but still leaving, however, traces and effects that condition the mind, pushing it in the right direction, inclining it towards the long search for freedom. With metta, Howard *I recall experiences of my own as a young child in which this ordinary world of experience took on a new, magical appearance, not seen before yet strikingly familiar. I also recall that subsequent to that, I read some writing by Tennyson of "mystical" experiences of his that were similar. I haven't been able to find this writing of his. However, I have been able to find the following little piece that, in its own way, expresses several features compatible with the Dhamma, including the centrality of change, the fact that we all live in a dream world of our own making, a world in which we have faith, but a world actually without essence, without pause, which is not statically self-existent, but is "made". > All thoughts, all creeds, all dreams are true, >    All visions wild and strange; > Man is the measure of all truth >    Unto himself. All truth is change. > All men do walk in sleep, and all >    Have faith in that they dream: > For all things arc as they seem to all, >    And all things flow like a stream. > > There is no rest, no calm, no pause, >    Nor good nor ill, nor light nor shade, > Nor essence nor eternal laws: >    For nothing is, but all is made. > But if I dream that all these are, >    They are to me for that I dream; > For all,things are as they seem to all, >    And all things flow like a stream. /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) 38163 From: Larry Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:17am Subject: Re: Vis. XIV, 111, and Tiika, corrected. Hi Nina, I've snipped a few sections for comment: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Vis. XIV, 111, and Tiika, corrected. > > Intro Vis. 111: > > Kamma conditions the last javana-cittas (kusala cittas or akusala cittas) > that arise before the dying-consciousness. Whatever object these cittas > experience, that is also the object of the next rebirth- consciousness. L: Does this make these javana cittas kamma vipaka? Later you say the javana cittas correspond to the ethical value of the object (kusala or akusala); what if the object is unpleasant, a corpse for example, couldn't the javana be kusala or akusala? Do these javana cittas directly affect the next life or is it just the object that points the way? Can these javanas be jhana cittas or lokuttara? > We should remember that the rebirth-consciousness, the > bhavanga-citta and the dying-consciousness are cittas which are door-freed > (dvara-vimutta) and process-freed (viithi-vimutta). They do not experience > an object that impinges on one of the six doors like the cittas arising in > processes. They merely experience a copy or echo of the object experienced > by the last javana-cittas of the preceding life. We are unable to know what > kind of object this is. L: Whatever it is the object of bhavanga citta in this life is a sign of the general nature of this life, correct? Welcome back. I hope all is well. Larry 38164 From: Larry Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:11am Subject: two viewings of anatta Hi all, Here are a couple of ideas for your consideration. In order to penetrate ignorance and directly see the anatta (not self) characteristic of an object it is necessary to see either the relational nature or the non-relational nature of the object. The relational nature of an object is its identity. Identity is conceptual (name and meaning) and is defined _in_ relationship to other and _as_ relationship of parts. Identity is anatta because it cannot be found with logic. The non-relational nature is the opposite, i.e., nameless and meaningless. The non-relational nature has no identity and is anatta because "self" (atta) is identity. The non-relational nature is non-conceptual experience similar to the mindfulness of "thus he lives contemplating the body in the body," etc. as found in the Satipatthana Sutta. The relational nature can be seen directly as a result of the ultimate analysis of Madhyamaka which is the same as the analysis of the chariot and the person. For example, if an unpleasant feeling arises and one wants to see its relational nature one could look at the conceptual whole of consciousness and feeling, or feeling and object of feeling, or "me" and feeling with the idea "feeling _is_ consciousness and feeling" etc. Here one cannot put ones finger on the relationship which is identity, so we can actually "see" or experience that this "whole" phenomenon is empty of self or core but is nevertheless capable of performing a function. If one wanted to see its non-relational nature one could simply contemplate the feeling in the feeling. Non- relational understanding is mindfulness of ultimate realities (paramattha dhamma). Here "anatta" means "not a concept". Feeling is just feeling. This can be extremely vivid but non-threatening because there is no one to threaten. These two approaches show the anatta characteristic of concept (relational) and reality (non-relational). We can easily see the emptiness of emails and views in general by looking for their relational nature. Comments? Larry 38165 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Thread ( 117 ) Dear Htoo, op 10-11-2004 20:46 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > Vatthu and ayatana sometimes need to be cleared. In that case > translation may become hard job. N: Very hard, because in English also for ayaatana sensebase is used. We need the Pali. Thanks also for answering about rupavipaka, it is clear what you mean. you write: Again, here 'maha' seems a superfluous word. But it is not. Because there are three kinds of kusala that is kama, rupa and arupa depending on bhumi base, it is called 'mahakusala' to differentiate if from rupakusala cittas and arupakusala cittas. N: I heard about maha, great, in maha-kusala, that it has many kinds of objects. Nina. 38166 From: htootintnaing Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 11:34am Subject: Re: Htoo's Cetasikas Sarah: A few extra comments: O90 Ahirika and Anottappa – you referred to 9 bala dhamma (#37526) (owers). I'm interested as I don't remember reading about akusala bala dhamma. I'd be glad if you'd say more on these. I only know about the 5 included in the bodhipakkiya dhammas. `As bala dhamma, ahirika and anottapa always lead all akusala dhamma….' Very good. No shame about akusala at these times. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Sarah, There are 9 bala dhammas. They are 1. saddha 2. viriya 3. sati 4. samadhi 5. panna These 5 bala dhammas also appear as 5 indriya dhammas. In suddavasa 5 bhmuis, there are anagams and arahats. Their realms are according to the strength of these 5 indriya in serial order. If saddha is very strong anagams will be reborn in aviha, vyriya to atappa, sati to sudassa, samadhi to sudassi and panna to akanittha brahma bhumi. There are other 4 bala dhammas. They are 6. hiri bala 7. otappa bala 8. ahirika bala and 9. anottappa bala. Hiri and otappa are kusala dhamma. But even though they are leading dhamma ( bala- the leader of a troop ), they do not serve as Bodhipakkhiya dhamma. But in kusala dhamma when these 2 friends work well, they are worthy of bala dhamma. By the same token ahirika and anottappa are akusala dhamma and when they prevail, any akusala can be committed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sarah: Your comments on sati and many other factors were particularly good. There were one or two points on a couple of others I meant to pick up on – I think Phil questioned one that was not quite so clear – but it'll have to be later if and when I come across them again. I rather rushed to catch up after our holiday and I want to thank you now, rather than looking for the others. Anumodana….great work indeed! i hope the series continues to a 1000!! It's your best, I think. Metta, Sarah ====== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Thanks for your support. With Metta, Htoo Naing 38167 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 2:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Dan, --- "Dan D." wrote: > Straw Sarah 1: "For insight to arise, there must first be right > conceptual understanding. That right conceptual understanding comes > from hearing, reading, considering, discussing the words of the > Buddha." > > Straw Sarah 2: "Those outside the dispensation cannot have right > view." > > Do these sound like you? There are others too, I'm sure, but these > two are prominent. ... S: It's not my idea that counts at all. It's what the Buddha taught to be proved by us that matters. The first sounds correct, depending on what you mean by 'right conceptual understanding'. The second would need clarification as to what right view is being referred to here. Is it satipatthana? Better to quote the 'Real Sarah' quoting from the texts in context, so here goes - this is what I just found when I searched for 'dispensation' under my name: ***** From: "sarah abbott" Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:07:01 +0100 (BST) Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More on "Conceptual right view" [Sarah and Ken] Oh Dan (& Ken H), Originally as you know, I joined in the discussion because you were asserting something to the effect that there could not be right view with concepts as objects. I pointed out that there were many kinds of right view, including those kinds accompanying moments of samatha bhavana. There can be reflection on any aspect of the Dhamma under this umbrella with right view, but no one here has suggested or is suggesting that reflection on kamma or on namas and rupas or any other aspect of the Dhamma is necessarily even kusala, let alone with right view. It depends on the cittas as usual, not on any terms or labels. In brief, I think you have something of a straw man argument going on here as you pick out one line here or there;-). No one is suggesting that (wise) reflection about kamma or any other aspects of the Teachings is the same as satipatthana. Of course if we take mere thinking for right understanding of realities, it’s wrong. Also, neither Ken H or I would ever suggest that a practice of intellectualizing or book study could equate with any development of satipatthana. In fact we both go to lengths on DSG to say the opposite as I said before. On the other hand, if there is no hearing, considering and reflecting on namas and rupas, on conditions including kamma or other aspects of the Teachings, especially anatta, there cannot and will not be any development of satipatthana, no matter how much kusala there is of other kinds. So yes, someome who has never heard the Dhamma may have much more kusala in a day than someone with a lot of book knowledge of the Teachings. But, the first person has no chance of developing the Eightfold or fivefold path and thereby finding an ‘escape’ from samsara. --- "Dan D." wrote: > Can you help jog my memory? Is it in the commentaries to the > Satipatthana sutta that pariyatti is discussed? Or where? …. Here are just a few brief quotes from ‘Dispeller’, Vbg-A, which I have handy: 1.1954 “For which reasons do they (Discriminations) become manifest? (1) Through attainment (adhigama), (2) through competency [in scriptures] (pariyatti), (3) through hearing (sa.vana), (4) through being questioned, (5) through previous work (yoga). “Herein, ……(2) ‘Competency [in scriptures]’ (pariyatti) is the Buddha’s word; for the Discriminations become manifest as one is learning that… 2. 2169 “For there are threee kinds of disappearance (antaradhaana) [S: of the Buddha sasana]: 1) disappearance of competency (pariyatti), 2) disappearance of penetration (pa.tivedha) and 3) disappearance of practice (pa.tipatti). Herein, 1) competency is the three Pi.takas; 2) the ‘penetration’ is the penetration of the Truths; 3) the ‘practice’ is the way….. 3.2350 “And one who is without understanding sits in the midst of his supporters and makes a show of his great understanding by speaking thus: ‘As I was looking up in the Majjhima Nikaaya the three kinds of proliferation, I came to the path with the miraculous powers. Competency in the scriptures is not difficult for us. But one who gets involved in scriptural competency is not released from suffering, so we gave up scriptural competency.’ And so on. But one who speaks thus strikes a blow at the dispensation. There is no greater rogue (mahaacora) than this. For it is not a fact that an expert in the scriptures is *not* released from suffering.” So we all agree that expertise in the scriptures does not in itself lead to satipatthana and whilst reciting, reading or considering, the cittas may be kusala or akusala. Ken and I would say in addition, I think, that there may or may not be a measure of right understanding with the kusala cittas, though no one is suggesting that this would be satipatthana when there are merely concepts about dhammas as objects of course. In addition, we all agree that wrong view can slip in anytime, especially if one has an idea that by reading the text at any time will of itself lead to satipatthana. In the latter case, there is definitely a view with ‘conventional right effort’ based on an idea of ‘self’ as you suggest. I hope this clarifies and hope I can extricate myself from this thread til my return;-) ****** S: And I see that was written before our trip away and it was KenH who neatly side-stepped. Dan, I'm looking forward to your answers to any of the further questions in my second post to you yesterday. I apologise for the first frivolous math one, even though it was sent in friendship. Metta, Sarah ===== 38168 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 2:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi Howard (& Dan), Thanks for joining in. I hope others do as well. --- upasaka@a... wrote: > If I may butt in: I do think it is possible for one who has not > heard > the Dhamma, but who has the tendency and habit, perhaps even starting as > a > child*, to just "look" at the world of experience as it arises and from > a state > of quiet musing and attention, to get a glimpse of the vast impersonal, > uncontrollable and ungraspable reality that is rolling on, momentarily > losing sense > of self or of solidity and separateness to things, and, unaccompanied by > word > or thought, to just stare in wonder at "that". ..... S: There are definitely resons and conditions why for some of us, when we hear the Dhamma, it immediately has some impact and rings true and it's most unlikely that we haven't heard it in previous life-times I'd think. Still, in order for satipatthana to develop, we have to hear it again in this life and it is only by this gradual development that insights can be attained. So those glimpses and quiet musings while we were children may have helped put us on the track and reflect some deeply accumulated right views of some kind or other, but unless we're a Buddha, we still have to hear the Teachings again before there can be any chance of insight (vipassana) arising. .... >But then the moment > passes, and, > not having heard the Dhamma, one is unable to characterize what one has > seen. > The immediacy of the experience then slips away, leaving no conceptual > understanding or adequate recollection, but still leaving, however, > traces and > effects that condition the mind, pushing it in the right direction, > inclining it > towards the long search for freedom. .... S: I have no problem with this, Howard, as long as one doesn't cling to it or consider it as 'insight' or vipassana nana. I'm sure these experiences ring a bell with many of us. Thanks for sharing. Again I stress, that those who have never heard or considered the Buddha's teachings may be very great, wonderful people. But without hearing about and developing an understanding of realities as anatta, there will be no growth of detachment from self and no release from samsara as I understand. Look forward to any more comments you or Dan or others may have. Metta, Sarah ======= 38169 From: plnao Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 2:43pm Subject: Red hat revisited ( was Re: [dsg] Re: There is a Practice) Hello Nina, and all >>>>N: Yes, it has to begin. I find it very helpful to consider the six doors and the fact that only one dhamma is experienced at a time through one doorway. The suttas remind us time and again of this. That is very daily, dhammas are experienced one at a time, no matter there is awareness of them or not. When there is understanding of visible object as a dhamma experienced through eyesense, there can be correct thinking of it. No attention to the image of a whole or the details. But we have to get used to this, it has to sink in. We always thought that we see people and things. There can be just a moment of correct understanding and this is the condition for higher understanding. It has to begin with correct thinking, correct intellectual understanding. The purpose is not more awareness but more understanding. Phil: Nina, I wanted to tell you about an experience I had while you were away. I've already posted about it once, but I don't think I explained it clearly at that time. It realtes to "dhammas are experienced one at a time, not matter there is awareness of them", and to the questions K Sujin asks so often - "is there seeing now?" I was cycling by the beach and as I tend to do at times, trying too consciously to see if I could "see." To test that "is there seeing now?" Of course that's not the way we're supposed to go about it. But at least I learned that the answer is "no" for me. This came when I saw a man's red cap, and I had insight into how quickly the mind leaps ahead to process the visual object and colour and make it into a "cap." And I sensed at that moment that I might never be able to answer "yes" to "is there seeing now?" but at least I had gained a kind of clear insight into how fast the mind leaps to form concepts. So even being able to answser "no" to that question is liberating, I think. We have gained insight into how fast processes are, how there is no self that can control them. N >>>"There can be just a moment of correct understanding and this is the condition for higher understanding. It has to begin with correct thinking, corret intellectual understanding." Phil: I think this applies to what was going on that day by the beach. I was thinking about K Sujin's teaching, albeit in an overly intent way, and it seemed to condition a moment of correct understanding when I saw that I *didn't* see when I saw that cap. Who knows what deeper understanding was or wasn't conditioned in that moment? Saddha says well done and keep at it! Metta, Phil 38170 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:09am Subject: Re: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Dhamma Greetings to everyone, I am new to this list and would like to have some definitions given so I can further understand what is actually being said. I have practiced meditation for a long time with the Mahasi method and was very successful in that practice, but was not satisfied by the end results, mostly because they don't agree with what the suttas tell us. I do know the list of insights that you refer to very intimately and through direct knowledge but I was still not satisfied. So I began a search on my own. I ran across a senior monk who gave me some advice that was very helpful. I know by saying this it will cause some here to not agree with me but he said to put down the Visuddhi Magga and other commentaries and just go to the suttas for my information. The reason he told me to do this is the information given in the Visuddhi Magga doesn't agree 100% with the teachings in the suttas. When I did that the understanding of the suttas became very clear to me. Why? Because I was not clouded by what the commentaries said. Enough of this, I see the word "insight" used very often and wonder what meaning it has for you. "Insight" into what? I know the answer that you will give and that is "insight" into the true nature of all existence. But what does that really mean according to the suttas? To me the "insight" that arises from truly seeing and understanding the impersonal process of dependent origination, is the "insight" we should be looking at. Not some surface "insight" into nama/rupa alone. Another word that is used very often is "pan~n~a". I know the literal meaning is "wisdom" but this seems to me to be a word like "god" everyone knows that word but what does it mean? In the eight fold path the first link is called "sammaditthi" or as the current translation says "Right View or Understanding" but I think this translation may lack real meaning. If you would use the words "harmonious perspective" maybe they would help in clear communication. "Wisdom" has "Harmonious Perspective" in it. But "Harmonious Perspective" of what? To me it is the clear seeing, knowing, and understanding of the impersonal process of how dependent origination actually arises in every moment. Another word that seems to be used a lot is the Pali word "anatta". This word has come to mean "no-self" but maybe a better word to use is "impersonal". The "Impersonal" nature of all phenomena as opposed to the 'no-self ' nature of all phenomena changes ones perspective of what is being said. There seems to be on this site a real worry about what is "not-self" so the use of "impersonal" can help to clear up what the Buddha meant. Because I came from a background of meditation practice I always refer to everything I say back to the practice of what can be seen directly and not what can be understood through concepts. This constantly analyzing of different ideas seems to be a "western disease" that hinders true understanding of one's direct experience. I have been teaching meditation for over 20 years all over the world and when someone comes to me who is interested in meditation I tell them to put any and all books that they have read or are reading away and just meditate for at least one year. Why? Because the concepts and thinking are so slow that it gets in the way of seeing the Dhamma for oneself. When I was practicing meditation in Burma, one of my teachers who was an abhidhamma scholar (by the name of Sayadaw U Janakabhivamsa) told me that when he went to the Mahasi Meditation center, the first thing his teacher told him was to put away all that he had learned about abhidhamma and just do the practice of meditation. He told me that this was a very hard thing to do for him. He had spent years memorizing books about abhidhamma (there are about 15 books that have to be memorized and then he had to take very comprehensive test in order to get the title bhivamsa added to his name). Anyway, he had trouble with his mind always trying to analyze what arose when he had a meditation experience. The thinking about ones experience takes one out of the present moment. The conceptual and analytical thinking stopped him from the real practice of meditation, until he learned to let it go. Only then did he begin to see exactly how the descriptions of dhamma were true. What is the true definition of the word Sati? I know the common answer is "mindfulness", Right? This is another word like "god" I know the general meaning of this word but what does it actually mean, according to the Buddha-Dhamma? Please let me give a definition that may be useful "Sati" means the 'direct observation of watching the movements of mind', By this I mean seeing directly with a calm mind "HOW" mind changes from one object to another. I hope this has been helpful in making the definitions of some of these words more clear. Maha-Metta always, Bhante Vimalaramsi 38171 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:03pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Sarah, > > > S: Is this the deep penetrative insight into the characteristic of a > > > reality or is it thinking about suffering – a kind of conceptual > > > understanding? > > > > Penetrative insight. > ….. > S: Penetrative insight into what reality? Gosh, pick one. Let's say, "dukkha as one of the tilakkhana." > S: The only way to have any idea about another's understanding is by > discussion (and then of course it's subject to one's limited > understanding). According to what the Buddha taught, I don't think this is correct. It isn't a frequent topic of discussion in the suttas, but didn't he say something along the lines that you cannot have a fair assessment of a person's understanding unless you have lived with them for a long period of time, known them very well, and been able to observe their actions in a variety of situations? > For example, if someone has had insights, but knows nothing about the > realities of seeing and visible object now at this moment, these insights > are not those as taught by the Buddha. "...these insights are not those as taught by the Buddha"?! Buddha didn't teach insights, Sarah. He taught concepts. Words are inherently abstract and conceptual. To be sure, Buddha's abstractions and conceptualizations are good descriptions of reality but are not reality itself nor are they insights. There's a clear and stark distinction between insight into reality and the language with which one describes it. Buddha's words are in no sense the "one path", but they do describe the one path well. A description of a deep, penetrating, mundane insight that could well be made by someone who hadn't heard a whisper of Buddha's teachings might run like this: "Ultimately, pleasure does not lead to happiness." A more Buddhist description might run like this: "Dukkha is characteristic of vedana." If someone who has never heard Buddha's words doesn't understand what meaning you attach to them or is unable to use them fluently in conversation, it is no indication whatsoever that they have zero insight into reality. Instead, it is simply testimony that they are not familiar with his words. > > At the same time, the insight is quite shallow. It may not be deep > > enough even to inspire the construction of an explicit conceptual > > formulation for the insight, in which case it would not be discussed, > > thought about very much, or consolidated in any meaningful way. … > ….. > S: OK, but then I'd say it's not the development of satipatthana or the > insights that may arise from a firm development of such. Not a firm development, no. It's tender. > > Without consolidation, deeper insight may not have occasion to arise > > for a long, long time. Shallow also in the sense that the 4NT are > > extremely deep, and insight into them is developed gradually, over > > long periods of time. > …. > S: By the development of satipatthana which begins with repeated awareness > and understanding into presently arising namas and rupas. While there are > doubts about the path and ideas of self, I'm not sure I'd refer to moments > of satipatthana as suggesting even a shallow insight of any kind into the > 4NT. That's fine, Sarah, as long as I know how you are using terms... Do you have any textual support for your notion that there is not even a shallow insight of any kind into the 4NT before enlightenment (sotapanna+)? > > > S: Suffering as a characteristic of what? > > > > The presently arising moment. > …. > S: This sounds like thinking about suffering along with your first > comment, `On occasion, there may be a clear comprehension that without > craving, there is no > suffering.' Surely `the present arising moment' is a concept, not a > reality with any characteristic at all. No. I'm using "moment" as a gloss for nama. > > > S: "These `shallower insights', defined by you as `most any insight > > short > > > of supramundane path consciousness', were into precisely what > > realities > > > before we studied the `Buddha's words'? > > > > Namas & rupas, their characteristics, and their relations. Obviously, > > though, before studying the Buddha's words we wouldn't describe them > > in that way. > …. > S: Before studying the Buddha's words, was there really any understanding > at all about namas and rupas in any language or non-language at all? > Didn't we take seeing and hearing for being `my seeing and hearing', > wasn't it my body experienced rather than heat, hardness and so on? Was > there any clear understanding of the distinction between hearing and > sound. Is there now, even after hearing and studying a lot? Wasn't it all > taken for self and other beings and things? Sure. Almost always we took hearing and seeing as "my seeing and hearing". But not always. If pressed to describe it, a non-Buddhist would use non-Buddhist words to describe it and might even reach for the concept of Self. (I can't help but think there'd be a deep-seated nagging doubt about the description, though.) > There can't be complete ignorance and wrong view with occasional deep > insights arising from highly developed satipatthana in between without any > doubts about self or the path. > ….. I'm sorry, Sarah, I read that sentence several times, but I still can't figure out what you mean. If doubt still arises, the texts are clear that satipatthana has not developed to the point of stream-entry. I don't have any problem with that. But are you saying that mundane insight also eradicates a subsequent tendency to doubt? I don't buy that... > > > What do you understand the First Noble Truth of suffering to refer > > to? > > > > The first noble truth of suffering refers to conditioned mind states, > > all of which have the characteristics of anicca, anatta, and dukkha. > …. > S: Only mind states? Are you sure? > > At moments of insight, there is no idea or sense of "who". > > Afterwards, the insight can easily be mangled by constructing a > > conceptual scheme that includes an idea of a "who" that has insights. > …. > S: We have a different use of the word insight here. If we're talking > about the insights starting with namarupa pariccheda nana, there will be > no question or doubt or idea about who has had such insights. I agree that > in the beginning when satipatthana is weak, there are bound to be such > doubts and views in between the occasional moments of awareness. > > > If there is no precise understanding of dhammas, of namas and > > rupas, is it > > > possible to develop any detachment from an idea of self at all? > > > > I believe not -- unless when you say "precise understanding", you > > really mean being able to fluently rattle off racks of Pali terms and > > logically piece together their definitions and relations. > …. > S: That's one of those strawman arguments again ;-) When you say things like "precise understanding of dhammas", you seem to be referring to precise conceptual descriptions of dhammas. A precise description of an understanding is quite different from the understanding itself. Is it possible for a wise person to have a clumsy tongue, to not be able to communicate clearly? > > Insight begins shallow and gradually deepens. If you like to look at > > the "levels of insight" through a hierarchy of: > > 1. Namarupaparicchedañana; > > 2. Paccayapariggahañana; > > 3. Sammasanañana; > > 4. Udayabbayañana; > > 5. Bhangañana; > > etc., that's fine. > …. > S: It's not a question of what I'd like to look at. It's a question of > what we read in the texts and which I personally have no reason to doubt. I read in the texts about patisankhañana -- knowledge of reflection (Vism XXI, 47+). "He sees all formations as impermanent for the following reasons: because they are non-continuous, temporary, limited by rise and fall, disintegrating, [etc.]. He sees them as painful for the following reasons: because they are continously oppressed, hard to bear, [etc.]. ... why does he discern them in this way? In order to contrive the means of deliverance." That sounds to me like the "lower" insights are revisited over and over again, deepening the understanding in a search for deliverance. In the midst of this revisiting, udayabbayañana is not necessarily "lower" than bhangañana. > >Then, with only a relatively shallow (but direct > > and penetrative) insight at level 1, > … > S: an oxymoron;-) I don't see it. You are saying that there are not varying degrees of depth of insight? Not even a distinction between tender insight, mundane vipassana, and supramundane insight? > >the other insights are possible > > (and do arise) but only at a similar degree of depth. These insights > > are gradually developed to greater and greater depth in concert, > > going "up and down" the list repeatedly. > … > S: Show me the text!! See above. > > The notion that a thorough and very deep understanding of > > namarupapariccheda is prerequisite for even relatively shallow > > insight into the other characteristics CAN slow the development of > > insight by hindering the conceptualization and consolidation of the > > other insights. > … > S: Again, show me the text. Also what do you mean by `the other > characteristics'? I'm not clear here at all. If there's a kink in the way the namarupapariccheda words hit the ear and get translated into concept so that the hearer stumbles on the words but doesn't realize he or she is stumbling, lingering on that language could well be a hindrance. > From Vism XV111,36 > > "The correct vision of mentality and materiality, which after defining > mentality-materiality by these various methods, has been established on > the plane of non-confusion by overcoming the perception of a being, is > what should be understood as purification of view." > … > >It doesn't NECESSARILY slow the development, though, > > because these several aspects of insight that you call "levels" are > > closely related. > …. > S: Stages or levels, but not aspects. "Aspects" isn't the greatest, but ultimately, the "insights" are just different manifestations of understanding the tilakkhana in sankhara. In MN24, Rathaviniita Sutta, we read > about the simile of the relay chariots to refer to the 7 Visuddhi or > stages of insight. `Then King Pasenadi of Kosala, leaving Saavatthii > through the inner palace door, would mount the first relay chariot, and by > means of the first relay chariot he would arrive at the second relay > chariot…….seventh chariot, and by means of the seventh chariot he would > arrive at the inner palace door in Saaketa….." In the same way, the 7 > purifications are described. Right. But later there may arise this insight or that insight. > >. Believing in the reality of concepts such as cars, > > trees, Self, etc. puts a limit on the depth of insight that can be > > attained; but at a moment of insight, there is > > no "car", "tree", "Self", "belief". > … > S: I would put it the other way round and say that while there is still > any believing in the reality of concepts such as cars etc, there won't be > any development of satipatthana, let alone any insights. Heh-heh! :) This sounds very much like "no satipatthana or insights until stream- entry." How can I say that? Because "believing in the reality of concepts" sounds a lot like ditthi, which is not eradicated until stream-entry. It's easy to say, "I don't believe in the reality of concepts such as cars, etc." and actually believe what you say; but it's quite another thing to really eradicate the view. Uff da! I'm running out of time. Just one more quick comment... > > NOTE: when the Buddha or an > > enlightened person uses the words, they are describing reality; when > > unenlightened people use the words, they are just speculating because > > their conceptions of "nama", "rupa", "anatta", etc. are wrong. > …. > S: It depends. There may be wholesome thinking and reflection about > realities not based on direct understanding or based on direct > understanding or a combination. If the speech is wholesome and the view is > right, it's certainly not wrong! > > Of course there may also be unwholesome thinking and reflection based on > either of the above and in this case whether or not the view is right, > it's wrong, because of being unwholesome. As Nina said once, I think, > `let's mind our own cittas'! > …. Oh, Sarah! I'm using "wrong" to mean "incorrect", not akusala! There is nothing inherently wrong with being wrong. And the conceptions are incorrect because the referents of the conceptions are not known -- how could they be correct? > S: Great effort….I'll look forward to a few more answers;-). You always > help me to consider carefully, Dan. I hope I've also addressed the points > you wish to have addressed here. You entirely missed the points I was hoping you'd address, maybe we'll get to that later. Metta, Dan 38172 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 3:42pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" > S: Again I stress, that those who have never heard or considered the Buddha's > teachings may be very great, wonderful people. But without hearing about > and developing an understanding of realities as anatta, there will be no > growth of detachment from self and no release from samsara as I > understand. Sarah, some of the most selfless, "detached from self" people in the world know nothing about the Buddha or his teachings -- they have no conception of "anatta" per se, but they have such a strong sense of detachment from self that I can't help but think their understanding of the characteristic of anatta is deeper than many Buddhists who could talk circles around them. 38173 From: Dan D. Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:12pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Sarah, There are two questions that I was hoping you would address regarding the two straw Sarahs. > > Straw Sarah 1: "For insight to arise, there must first be right > > conceptual understanding. That right conceptual understanding comes > > from hearing, reading, considering, discussing the words of the > > Buddha." If there is conceptual understanding about, say, namarupapariccheda with no direct understanding on which to base it, how is that anything other than speculation? > > Straw Sarah 2: "Those outside the dispensation cannot have right > > view." In the suttas, there are occasions in which people attain stream- entry on first hearing the Buddha. How did they go from having absolutely no insight and not even conceptual right view (being outside the dispensation) to having very deep levels of insight in an instant? Doesn't there have to be some time for development? Metta, Dan 38174 From: Bhante Vimalaramsi Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dhamma Greetings Phil, In your post you said, "I can remember feeling that studying suttas and practicing brahma-viharas meditation might someday get me *close* to the other shore, but to take that final step on to dry land, if you will, there was something missing." I am new to this list and have been teaching the Brahma Viharas for over 25 years. The approach that I use may be a little different than what you are used to hearing. And the way I teach it is in agreement with the suttas as you will see below. I teach metta for beginners until they can get to the 4th jhana, then when their mind has become quiet, they will automatically experience compassion and attain the realm of infinite space. Next as they progress deeper into their meditation they will experience sympathetic joy and the realm of infinite consciousness. Again as they go deeper into their meditation they will again experience strong equanimity and the realm of nothingness. (This "does" agree with the suttas, by the way. See in the Samyutta Nikaya, Mahavagga, Bojjhangasamyutta number 46 - Accompanied by Lovingkindness). As their meditation deepens and their mind experiences the realm of neither-perception-nor-non-perception the brahma viharas fade away and the meditator uses choiceless awareness as their object of meditation. They begin to go deeper and will experience the cessation of perception and feeling (Nirodha Samapatti). Then when the meditator comes out of Nirodha Samapatti their mind is able to then see and experience directly the links of dependent origination, only then does nibbana arise. This method of attaining nibbana was used often during the time of the Buddha. As it says in the Samyutta Nikaya - the Book of Causation - Niddaansmayutta - "#14 [4] Ascetics and Brahmins" the way to experience nibbana is by seeing through direct knowledge the links of dependent origination. Then this understanding carries one to the direct experience of nibbana. So as you can see the Brahma Viharas can lead one to the experience of nibbana but they don't take the meditator all of the way. The reason that I have chosen to take this method of teaching is that the Satipatthana (or 4 foundations) can be used at the same time while the meditator is practicing the Brahma Viharas and the meditator can have deep insights while they experience the jhanas (this agrees with the explanations given in the Anupada Sutta - One by One as They Occurred in the Majjhima Nikaya (sutta # 111). Also, it seems to be true that meditators progress faster when they practice the Brahma Viharas. Their insights into the workings of the mind are much more easily recognizable and understood. I sincerely hope that this gives you some hope with your meditation practice. Maha-Metta always, Bhante Vimalaramsi 38175 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 111, and Tiika, corrected. Hi Larry, op 11-11-2004 17:17 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: >> Intro Vis. 111: >> >> Kamma conditions the last javana-cittas (kusala cittas or akusala > cittas) >> that arise before the dying-consciousness. Whatever object these > cittas >> experience, that is also the object of the next rebirth- > consciousness. > > L: Does this make these javana cittas kamma vipaka? N: No. Kamma conditions them by way of natural strong dependence-condition, pakatupanissaya paccaya. To be sure, I like to check this type of paccaya with Htoo. Javanacittas are never vipaka, they are active, kusala or akusala cittas. L:Later you say the > javana cittas correspond to the ethical value of the object (kusala > or akusala); what if the object is unpleasant, a corpse for example, > couldn't the javana be kusala or akusala? N: The object itself is not kusala or akusala, but it is either pleasant or unpleasant. This is a special case. If the object is pleasant the last javana-cittas that experience it will be kusala, not akusala citta rooted in attachment. If the object is unpleasant these cittas will be akusala cittas. L:Do these javana cittas > directly affect the next life or is it just the object that points > the way? N: the javanacittas themselves. Actually the kamma that conditions them produces the next rebirth. L:Can these javanas be jhana cittas or lokuttara? N: Jhanacittas yes. If jhana has not declined this conditions rebirth in a rupa brahmaplane or arupabrahma plane. Lokuttara cittas; never! These never condition rebirth, they lead to the end of birth. > L: Whatever it is the object of bhavanga citta in this life is a sign > of the general nature of this life, correct? N: Not clear what you mean. You mean: it influences our life? The object is fitting for the rebirth-consciousness we are born with, and all bhavangacittas have the same object. I think that the type of bhavangacitta influences our life: with two hetus or three hetus and that is with pañña. We are born with certain capacities. If we are born with three hetus jhana or enlightenment can be attained in that life if the proper conditions are developed. L: Welcome back. I hope all is well. N: Thank you, we are so enthusiastic that we signed up for a following trip after one and a half year! It was so good for Lodewijk's health, amazing. Inspite of the tiring bustrips. Nina. 38176 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhaghosa Never Created Theravada. Dear Suan, Please, could you translate this? Nina op 11-11-2004 14:31 schreef abhidhammika op suanluzaw@b...: > Nikaayantaraladdhiihi, asammissam anaakulam; > mahaavihaaravaasiinam, diipayanto vinicchayam. > Attham pakaasayissaami, aagama.t.thakathaasupi; > gahetabbam gahetvaana, tosayanto vicakkha.ne. 38177 From: Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 9:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. XIV, 111, and Tiika, corrected. Hi Nina, Why can't the final javanacitta be a sotaapanna lokuttara citta? By saying the object of bhavanga citta in this life is a sign of this life I didn't mean that this sign influences this life, only that this sign represents this life, just as the kamma, sign of kamma, or sign of destiny which is the object of the final javana gives us an indication of the next life. So, if we want to know what the object of bhavanga is in this life we just have to look at this life. The kammavipaka of this life is the object of bhavanga, in a way, generally speaking. Correct? Larry 38178 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:28pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 47 - Feeling/Vedana (t) Dear Friends, Cetasikas by Nina van Gorkom. http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch.2 Feeling (Vedana) contd] ***** Upekkhå can accompany mahå-kusala cittas, kusala cittas of the sense-sphere. We may help others, observe síla or study Dhamma with upekkhå. Feeling is a conditioned reality, we cannot force ourselves to have pleasant feeling while we apply ourselves to kusala. Upekkhå arises with kåmåvacara cittas (cittas of the sense-sphere), rúpåvacara cittas (rúpa-jhånacittas), arúpåvacara cittas (arúpa-jhånacittas) and lokuttara cittas. As regards rúpajhånacittas, only the cittas of the fifth and highest stage of rúpajhåna are accompanied by upekkhå. At that stage there is a higher degree of calm than at the lower stages; the upekkhå which accompanies that type of jhånacitta is very subtle. All the arúpajhånacittas are accompanied by upekkhå. ****** [Feeling(Vedana) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 38179 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:20am Subject: Re: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Dear Bhante, Welcome to DSG and thank you for the detailed introduction. I’m sure you can contribute a lot to the discussions. May I ask where you reside? --- Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > > > Dhamma Greetings to everyone, > > I am new to this list and would like to have some definitions given so I > can further understand what is actually being said. I have practiced > meditation for a long time with the Mahasi method and was very > successful > in that practice, but was not satisfied by the end results, mostly > because they don't agree with what the suttas tell us. …. S: I can relate to this. …. <…> > said to put down the Visuddhi Magga and other commentaries and just go > to > the suttas for my information. The reason he told me to do this is the > information given in the Visuddhi Magga doesn't agree 100% with the > teachings in the suttas. When I did that the understanding of the suttas > became very clear to me. Why? Because I was not clouded by what the > commentaries said. … S: I believe that there is complete consistency, but like you, perhaps, when I first studied the Visuddhimagga, especially as a Mahasi student with his yellow book on the stages of insight at hand to be followed, the wonderful text was completely misunderstood. Our attachment for results means that we’re likely to read any text in the wrong way, coloured by ignorance, attachment and wrong view in my case. Thank you for your discussion of terms. I’m leaving it for now because I’m already in deep water discussing the meaning of ‘insight’ with Dan. Please join in or help us anytime. ….. > Because I came from a background of meditation practice I always refer > When I was practicing meditation in Burma, one of my teachers who was an > abhidhamma scholar (by the name of Sayadaw U Janakabhivamsa) told me > that > when he went to the Mahasi Meditation center, the first thing his > teacher > told him was to put away all that he had learned about abhidhamma and > just do the practice of meditation. He told me that this was a very hard > thing to do for him. He had spent years memorizing books about > abhidhamma … S: I’d liked your story very much. As I see it, the practice is not a matter of going to a meditation centre or of memorizing books about abhidhamma. …. >Please let me give a definition that may be useful "Sati" > means the 'direct observation of watching the movements of mind', By > this > I mean seeing directly with a calm mind "HOW" mind changes from one > object to another. …. S: I can see there will be plenty of scope for discussion here…..I look forward to your participation. Metta and welcome again, Sarah ======= 38180 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Help with clarification of "control" Hi TG & DaveK (& Nina), Dave, I'd also like to give you a belated welcome to the list and to thank you for introducing yourself while we were away. [For Nina's benefit, I'd like to just mention that I found out from #37643 that Dave has been reading one of your books and wished to have clarification on the difficult points about control over the body and mind. I also found out that Dave comes from WindsorCT, USA.] TG, we don't always agree, but here I thought you made some very good comments, especially the last one: --- TGrand458@a... wrote: <...> > The point is, all of these things arise due to conditions. The only > reason > that "you" can do them, is because the conditional circumstances are > currently > supporting those abilities. If the conditions will allow it, an effort > can be > made. A human is on this planet because the conditions arose for that. > Our > bodies are sustained by conditions and our thoughts, ideas, plans, etc., > are > as well. An effort can be made to work within those conditions. But > the > belief in "control" is ultimately the belief in a "self" that is outside > of > conditions. > > TG ..... Dave, pls also look in Useful Posts and scroll down to 'Anatta & Control'. You'll find that the difficulty you find with the descriptions of namas and rupas is a common one. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts I won't say more as KenH and TG have already given you helpful answers. I'd be glad if you would look at the posts or ask further questions. You might even like to raise your initial one again for Nina to see. Metta, Sarah ======= 38181 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:39am Subject: Buddhaghosa Never Created Theravada. (Was Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: ... >> In future, please be careful not to accuse Acariya Buddhaghosa of > committing the crime he never did. Dear Suan Lu Zaw Creating Theravada is not a crime, is my opinion. And is your opinion that only natural science is real science, that all other, like the books of Kalupahana (on Nagarjuna for example) is not science? Joop 38182 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi Dan, I'll look at the short ones first- --- "Dan D." wrote: > Sarah, some of the most selfless, "detached from self" people in the > world know nothing about the Buddha or his teachings -- they have no > conception of "anatta" per se, but they have such a strong sense of > detachment from self that I can't help but think their understanding > of the characteristic of anatta is deeper than many Buddhists who > could talk circles around them. .... S: Of course I know just what you're saying. I think there's a big difference between selflessness or unselfishness as we might see in a Mother Theresa and detachment from the idea of self or understanding of anatta. In the first case of the 'good' person who has never heard the Buddha's teachings, there is no wearing away of the wrong view of self at all, no matter how much good is done. Now it may be that like the child playing with sandcastles discussed before, that there isn't much idea of self appearing in a day at all. However, the latent tendency (anusaya) is there and unless its characteristic is known, it can never be seen for what it is. All realities, namas and rupas have to be known and undestood. Those reborn in the arupa brahma planes as a result of very high kusala indeed, experience no dosa at all and no attachment to sense experiences, but it's impossible for them to develop the stages of insight to become a sotapanna, because rupas cannot be experienced or known for a start. All the anusaya are still there, dormant, waiting for opportunities to arise again when they have an opportunity. So the not so 'good' worldling who hears the Buddha's teachings and who experiences plenty of wrong view and attachment to sense pleasures has the opportunity to develop awareness and to understand these conditioned realities for what they are when they are apparent at the present moment. So we see that it is wrong view that has to be eradicated first and all dhammas, including great kusala, have to be understood with detachment for what they are - merely conditioned namas and rupas that don't belong to any self. Metta, Sarah ======= 38183 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:59am Subject: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: > > Dhamma Greetings to everyone, > > I am new to this list and would like to have some definitions given so I > can further understand what is actually being said. I have practiced > meditation for a long time with the Mahasi method and was very successful > in that practice, but was not satisfied by the end results, mostly > because they don't agree with what the suttas tell us. Bhante Vimalaramsi, Venerable Sir, welcome to DSG! I normally don't approve of monks participating in these types of discussion boards with laypeople, but I think that in your case an exception should be made to my mindset! I hope that you will post, and post often. ;-) Yours is a voice of reason and experience in this turbulent discussion board. I 100% agree with everything you have to say. I believe that there are some members of DSG who have a distorted view of the dhamma because of the commentaries and the additional writing of Buddhaghosa. What he presents often doesn't agree with the content or spirit of the suttas. (I was told off-list by Jon that I wasn't allowed to say this so I haven't been participating in this group for a very long time. But now others are beginning to speak up so I feel I have the right also. ;-) Thank you also for pointing out that the recognition of nama/rupa in conditioned reality is a superficial insight at best. True!! One needs to have insight into Dependent Origination, as the Buddha taught. I believe that the emphasis should be on understanding the feeling (phassa) which arises from contact, not simply understanding the instruments of the contact. I also agree with your definition of anatta. Anatta does mean impersonal (or uncontrollable) not, as many in this group believe, `doesn't exist'. Anyway, thank you for giving voice to many of the issues which I have been arguing in this group for a long time. As a layman I don't think I am taken very seriously, usually; hopefully, the members will take what you have to say to heart. Metta, James 38184 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Dan, the other short one for now- good questions: --- "Dan D." wrote: > If there is conceptual understanding about, say, namarupapariccheda > with no direct understanding on which to base it, how is that > anything other than speculation? .... S: It may well be pure speculation of little or no benefit at all. We can question our motives for wishing to find out about higher stages of insight or enlightenment at all. However, when there is firmer and firmer direct understanding of namas and rupas appearing at this moment, I think there is more and more confidence in what we read in the texts as being true, even aspects not directly understood in anyway. As to when it is wholesome(kusala) right conceptual or direct understanding and when it is unwholesome (akusala)speculation, regardless of whether the facts are right or wrong, only panna can tell by being aware of the realities whilst thinking or speculating. Lobha is real, thinking is real, ditthi is real, metta is real etc. We may find someone a reference or respond to a question with metta, even though the subject matter is purely conceptual and not based on direct experience. This doesn't make it wrong as you suggest. It always comes back to the cittas and of course these change all the time. Only panna can know.....;-) ..... > In the suttas, there are occasions in which people attain stream- > entry on first hearing the Buddha. How did they go from having > absolutely no insight and not even conceptual right view (being > outside the dispensation) to having very deep levels of insight in an > instant? Doesn't there have to be some time for development? .... S: It depends. Citta processes are very fast and those like Sariputta who had listened to countless previous Buddhas and had performed deeds of such merit that he was born in the Buddha's lifetime and place etc, was able to penetrate the truths and develop insights as he first listened to become a sotapanna. (Btw, I wouldn't say there had been no conceptual right view of any kind of course, but the key ingredients were missing). But how many Sariputtas were there and how many listeners who didn't attain even to the first insight when they first heard the Buddha? And who are we today to think we may hear (or not even hear) a few words from the teachings and reach higher stages of insight? Metta, Sarah ======= 38185 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:15am Subject: Re: Sarah: "One path" Dear Bhante Vimalaramsi, Venerable Sir, you wrote, "Also, it seems to be true that meditators progress faster when they practice the Brahma Viharas. Their insights into the workings of the mind are much more easily recognizable and understood." I 100% agree with this assessment! I have been a meditator for several years and began with the method of vipassana as taught by S.N. Goenka. I took that method as far as I could before realizing that I didn't have a foundation of calm to progress farther with the practice. From experimentation, and listening to my heart, about one year ago I began to practice the Brahma Viharas in order to attain the jhanas. I have found this practice to be much more successful than all the years of my previous practice!! If any question arise during my practice, may I contact you on or off-list with my questions? It is impossible to find a meditation monk where I am currently living (Egypt). Thank you for your consideration. Yours in the Dhamma, James 38186 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:19am Subject: India - Appropos of nothing Hello all, I was sharing a room during the trip, and, one evening, in a particular Hotel in Bhairawa - we were each sitting on our beds chatting just prior to turning the lights out. Suddenly, with no seeming cause, the large heavy wooden eight foot long bedhead that stretched across the top of the two single beds and their associated bedside tables, slipped gracefully down the wall at an angle on one side. Not wishing to call a service person in at such a late hour, my roomie and I propped the bed head back and it balanced precariously on a loose screw. The next morning it had slipped down the wall again. Housekeeping was duly notified. During the day we went off on our excursion and joined in Dhamma discussions, the recalcitrant bedhead forgotten. Upon our return, the bedhead appeared to have been repaired. That evening, the Dhobi-wallah was returning our Laundry and he and I were counting the pieces and inspecting the quality of the work done on each piece of lingerie (not my decision, but if I wished to Retain his Respect, it was evident that I had to Perform My Role. I continue to be amazed at how many articles like perfectly clean nightdresses which only need refreshing and rinsing, came back with new and impressive stains never seen before. I learned it was best to be slightly blind to these imperfections - otherwise one would find oneself involved in a Circular Conversation.) As we were finalising the Laundry Inspection to the satisfaction of the Dhobi-wallah, the bedhead fell completely off the wall with a clatter and thump. The Dhobi-wallah looked at me, and I looked back at him, and he said "Oh Madam - the top of the bed has just fallen off". I nodded slowly looking at the offending furniture, and said "Hmm..Hmmmm ... yes, it did that last night as well". He nodded slowly looking at the same thing and said wisely "Ohhhh .... " Clearly 'Not His Job'. Attitudes are infectious. Then we finished counting/inspecting the Laundry, settled the account and tip, and he departed "May I wish you a good evening Madam" he said with a smile and a slight bow - "And you also" I said with a Wei and a matching smile. The bedhead said nothing. My roomie, being barely 5 foot nothing, looked rather horrified when I suggested we lift the bedhead completely off the bed and lie it along one wall, rather than propping it up and risking decapitation during the night. So - I called one of the american ladies from the next room for assistance - mission accomplished. For all I know the bed head is still lying there along the windows, under the curtains, on the second floor of that hotel in India. It is possible that many guests have had Circular Conversations with Housekeeping about how it got there, and what should be done about it. They'll learn. metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 38187 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhaghosa Never Created Theravada. (Was Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) Dear Suan (& Joop), I appreciated your discussions with DN while we were away and especially the quotes you provided on phassa (contact). you may like to repost any of the discussion for Nina to see sometime. Thank you for these contributions. As you know, I'm also not a fan of Prof Kalupahana's writings -- at least of the extracts that have been quoted here, which may be unfair on my part -- and I also share your great respect and feeling of indebtedness to Buddhaghosa and the commentaries. However I'm curious to know whether you really see a knowledge of Sanskrit and employment as an academic as being obstacles in anyway to developing an understanding of the teachings and whether you see a background in science and Pali expertise as really being essential pre-requisites. Obviously most of us would fail here on the latter criteria. I think we've all come across (directly or in writings) examples of scientists and Pali experts with little or no understanding or appreciation of the commentaries and we've all come across friends with no scientific knowledge and little Pali expertise who've helped us appreciate the gems to be found in these sources. Of course, I appreciate your expertise in both areas, Suan. Btw, what did you think of the posts on Science which Sukin and Andrew T wrote recently (37364 and 37472)? I thought they were very helpful. I'd also be glad if you would look over and comment on others in Useful Posts under 'Science' if you have time. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts Thank you again for all your useful references and support of the texts found and so carefully preserved in the Theravada tradition. Metta, Sarah p.s Joop, thank you for your honest and interesting reply to my questions to you on traditions. I appreciate your efforts for harmony amongst the various groups in Holland and elsewhere. I used to visit a Tibetan monastery in England years ago and have very interesting discussions on the Abhidhamma with the visiting lamas. With many Theravada groups, especially some vipassana meditators, I was unable to have much discussion at all! Sometimes those with no label on their backs prove to be the most open-minded to hearing about present moment realities;-). ====================== 38188 From: christine_forsyth Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 1:50am Subject: Re: Sarah: "One path"// James Hello James, all, You may be interested in Bhante Vimalaramsi's website and discussion list. There are many resources for the meditator there. http://www.dhammasukha.org/ metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Dear Bhante Vimalaramsi, > > Venerable Sir, you wrote, "Also, it seems to be true that meditators > progress faster when they practice the Brahma Viharas. Their > insights into the workings of the mind are much more easily > recognizable and understood." > > I 100% agree with this assessment! I have been a meditator for > several years and began with the method of vipassana as taught by > S.N. Goenka. I took that method as far as I could before realizing > that I didn't have a foundation of calm to progress farther with the > practice. From experimentation, and listening to my heart, about > one year ago I began to practice the Brahma Viharas in order to > attain the jhanas. I have found this practice to be much more > successful than all the years of my previous practice!! If any > question arise during my practice, may I contact you on or off- list > with my questions? It is impossible to find a meditation monk where > I am currently living (Egypt). Thank you for your consideration. > > Yours in the Dhamma, > James 38189 From: plnao Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 3:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] two viewings of anatta Hi Larry, and all > Here are a couple of ideas for your consideration. > > In order to penetrate ignorance and directly see the anatta (not > self) characteristic of an object it is necessary to see either the > relational nature or the non-relational nature of the object. Rather than penetrating ignorance, I wonder if the answer to anatta doesn't lie in penetrating dhammas in a way that leads to detachment. Maybe when we get deeper into understanding the process (if that's the right word) of detachment, an understanding of anatta will be a result? When through whatever means we find helpful we come to be able to say re the khandas "this does not belong to me, this I am not, this is not my self", when we have deepened our sense of detachment from the khandas, anatta will lie revealed? You were asking the other day about detachment, but the thread just died there. I was a bit surprised by that. I think detachment is a topic that can be discussed/analyzed/understood intellectually in a much more fruitful way than anatta. Whatever it is that we find useful for becoming more detached, whether it is in meditation, in the Suttanta, in Abhidhamma, in the commentaries, even in an Elvis Presley song, if that works, it will help us towards understanding the Buddha's supreme teaching of anatta. Thus I don't understand the need to defend Buddhaghosa, for example. If his commentaries help us become detached, they are good Dhamma. If not, the discerning mind will know soon enough. If the mind isn't discerning enough to see if detachment is being fostered through a certain teaching, the word of Buddha Himself whispered in the ear wouldn't do it. Meandering off topic. Sorry I didn't address your theory directly. It seems a bit too complex to me, that's all I can say. (I seem to be unwilling to try to wrap my mind around tough paragraphs most of the time!) Metta, Phil 38190 From: plnao Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" Dear Bhante Vimalaramsi Thank you sincerely for your feedback. > In your post you said, "I can remember feeling that studying suttas and > practicing > brahma-viharas meditation might someday get me *close* to the other > shore, but to take that final step on to dry land, if you will, there was > something missing." > > I am new to this list and have been teaching the Brahma Viharas for over > 25 years. The approach that I use may be a little different than what you > are used to hearing. And the way I teach it is in agreement with the > suttas as you will see below. I am not seeking jhanas at this time, though I will eagerly do so if conditions arise that lead me in that direction. What is your teaching on Brahma Viharas as they arise in daily life? I am appreciating the Abhidhamma approach as taught by K Sujin. I'm seeing loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy and equanimity arise (or not arise) in daily life, sometimes in close proximity to unwholesome states of mind. (For example, I find myself irritated with one person one moment, and moments later, a more friendly feeling arises.) This isn't something that I seek to control, but I hope that by better understanding defilements, I will condition a more free arising of Brahma-Viharas as those defilements as other obstacles to Brahma-Viharas are ever so gradually eradicated. This is still my highest goal as a human being - to become more loving, more compassionate, more joyful, more equanimitous and free from knee-jerk reactions. I used to practice metta meditation (very basic, using the metta sutta) but I became uncomfortable with the notion of projecting loving-kindness. It stopped making sense to me. How can one project something that arises one moment and is gone the next? How can one generate loving-kindness? It is there, or it isn't, and to generate it feels artificial and a bit desperate to me. It came to feel like a cheapening of loving-kindness. But I am a beginner, and I am sure my understanding will take many unexpected twists and turns in this and many lifetimes to come. Thank you again. Metta, Phil p.s now when I type metta, I do feel loving-kindness present. It is not always there when I type the word. Usually there is only restlessness. There can be not metta when there is restlessness. 38191 From: Sukinderpal Singh Narula Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 3:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi Dan and Sarah, I've wanted to jump into this thread and almost did with Dan's last reply to Mike. But other things started taking my time away. Hope you don't mind me butting in here. I'll respond to one question you asked Sarah, Dan, and perhaps comment on other points made elsewhere. > Dan: In the suttas, there are occasions in which people attain stream- > entry on first hearing the Buddha. How did they go from having > absolutely no insight and not even conceptual right view (being > outside the dispensation) to having very deep levels of insight in an > instant? Doesn't there have to be some time for development? As Sarah and Phil have said, I think the major influence is the accumulated wisdom from countless past lives. Many of these were well developed also in the Jhanas. The implication of this as I see is that those that could readily reach high levels of jhana, had extremely developed wisdom with regard to recognizing akusala, particularly Lobha. Also the increased ability to detect more and more subtle lobha implied that the sati was very keen and dhammas could be seen to the most subtle level. So that were they to consider `impermanence' their understanding of this would be quite close to `anicca' as taught by the Buddha. And being told about conditionality, they could realize immediately and profoundly, the meaning of "Dhamma". However, no matter how much panna is developed with regard to the matter of jhana, I don't think that this would bend towards considering `anatta' without being told about it. For someone to develop kusala on the level of samatha, becoming increasingly alert to subtle akusala, does not mean that he will be in a better position to understand anatta. As you know many wrong views comes as a consequence of meditation practices. The object of one being the eradication of lobha (and hence dosa) is quite different from the object of the other who sees the danger of moha and wrong view. For all, even the Bodhisatta, it is quite natural to react to lobha and dosa and finding a solution in ways that would deal only with this. The question of whether ignorance is to be dealt with does not come to mind. But because of the accumulated parami, the Bodhisatta did finally come to see the role of ignorance (in D.O.?). For the rest of us, we need to be told about all this. And if we see a sense in it, it is because we were convinced about all this earlier in past lives, perhaps informed by much patipatti. It doesn't make sense to me that we would have had any insight into anatta without first hearing about the Teachings. As indicated above, understanding other aspects of the mind is not beyond most ordinary worldlings and surely we may learn many things from just observing our own mind in reaction. But this wouldn't be satipatthana as in the understanding that whatever appears through the six doorways, are conditioned namas and rupas. You could ask your "selfless friends" who have not heard the Buddha's teachings, what they thought about anatta. I am quite certain that they would not readily accept it. And this would indicate that indeed their experiences were *not* satipatthana. With `beings' as object, your friends may have conditions for metta, karuna, mudita and so on much more than any of us. But this may not reflect their understanding on the conditioned nature of mind and matter and wrong view does not have to lead to akusala immediately. So elsewhere when you said that `sammaditthi arises with jhana', I don't think this is right. Jhana practice does require deep wisdom, but this wisdom is of quite a different kind to vipassana panna. The former may support the latter, but does not lead to it. I remember when Nina wrote about the Four Discriminative wisdom, I asked her if there was any corresponding level on the putthujana side. I felt that I could relate to some of what was being explained. She said that it only applied to ariyans and very special ones at that. So Dan I think what you might think to be `insight' may be just thinking, perhaps with some level of understanding. But to think it more than just this, may be in fact a result of a degree of speculation. On the other hand, if someone has pariyatti understanding but does not mistake this for any insight, I think then that he may not be speculating at all. Had other things in mind, but don't remember what. Maybe later. ;-) Metta, Sukin. Ps: I saw that Sarah has responded, but will send this off anyway. 38192 From: jwromeijn Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah: "One path" --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhante Vimalaramsi wrote: >have been teaching the Brahma Viharas for over > 25 years. The approach that I use may be a little different than what you > are used to hearing. And the way I teach it is in agreement with the > suttas as you will see below. I teach metta for beginners until they can > get to the 4th jhana, then when their mind has become quiet, they will > automatically experience compassion and attain the realm of infinite > space. Next as they progress deeper into their meditation they will > experience sympathetic joy and the realm of infinite consciousness. Bhante, I did many most you wrote, you must have an open mind. Only what you wrote about using the Brhama Viharas in meditation surprised me a little bit. I got the idea developping metta, karuna and mudita for myself and other living beings in only a means in your system. Getting jhanas and attaing nibbana are the only goals. Is that correct ? I combine insight meditation (a la Mahasi) with concentration- meditation, for example metta-meditation. And for me developing metta and karuna for other living beings is good against the greed and hate I feel many times in myself. Getting enlightened is not my goal, it is a possible result. You speak about agreement with the suttas. In my meditation-group (in the Netherlands) the Maha Satipatthana Sutta is playing a central role. In this Sutta the Buddha is not taling about jhanic meditation; is that correct? The (three first) Brahma Viharas are the few social elements is the for the rest rather solipsistic Theravada; Do you recognize that social dimension in the way you practise meditation ? With metta Joop 38193 From: ashkenn2k Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" Hi Dan and Sarah > Sarah, some of the most selfless, "detached from self" people in the world know nothing about the Buddha or his teachings -- they have no conception of "anatta" per se, but they have such a strong sense of detachment from self that I can't help but think their understanding of the characteristic of anatta is deeper than many Buddhists who could talk circles around them. k: You are not wrong to say that they may unconscoiusnessly known what is the meaning of selfless acts. That is how why some disciples of other traditions or people like Ven Sariputta could understand Buddha teachings very fast. Such unknown accumulations of selflessness is also panna just that they do not known it is panna at all. To me, their panna is not penetrative enough to break into the maggacitta realm or in other words, their panna cannot see the underlying tendencies. Just like Buddha when he was still a Bodhisattvas, in his many lives he may not come across the dhamma but he will act selflessly because of panna that have accumulated. Just like Ven Mahakassapa who even before seeing Buddha already intuitively behave like a monk. So when panna or the knowledge of anatta is taught to them, they have this exclamation of Eureka!. That is why it is said without a Buddha dispensation there will be salvation. Ken O 38194 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:37am Subject: Re: Vis. XIV, 111, and Tiika, corrected. Hello Nina and Larry, Did you enjoy your stay in Pelling, Nina? I was envious of you and Lodewijk staying behind in Sikkim, it was lovely there. So fresh and cool compared to where I am now in the beginning of a hot tropical summer. I don't have aircon. just ceiling fans. I have just read the Dhatuvibhanga Sutta, where the Buddha is talking to Pukkusati. According to notes on this Sutta, Pukkusati had already achieved 4th jhana and had a strong attachment to it. It says that if he attains the base of infinite space and should pass away while still attached to it, he would be reborn in the plane of infinite space and would live there for the full lifespan of 20,000 aeons specified for that plane. It goes on to point out the danger of the immaterial jhanas, apparently by the phrase "this would be conditioned". Meaning ' even though the lifespan there is 20,000 aeons, that is conditioned, fashioned, built up. It is thus impermanent, unstable, not lasting, transient. It is subject to perishing, breaking up and dissolution; it is involved with birth, aging and death, grounded upon suffering. It is not a shelter, a place of safety, a refuge. Having passed away there as a worlding, one can still be reborn in the four states of deprivation'. Earlier in the notes, it says that Pukkusati had already purified the preliminary practice of the path ....what does this mean?........and was able to attain the 4th jhana thro mindfulness of breathing. Then the Buddha began to talk on insight meditation, expounding the ultimate voidness that is the foundation for arahantship. "That which you perceive as a person consists of 6 elements. Ultimately ther is no person here. 'Person' is a mere concept". --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Larry, > op 11-11-2004 17:17 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > .......snip...... > L:Do these javana cittas > > directly affect the next life or is it just the object that points > > the way? > N: the javanacittas themselves. Actually the kamma that conditions them > produces the next rebirth. > L:Can these javanas be jhana cittas or lokuttara? > N: Jhanacittas yes. If jhana has not declined this conditions rebirth in a > rupa brahmaplane or arupabrahma plane. .....Snip....... > L: Welcome back. I hope all is well. > N: Thank you, we are so enthusiastic that we signed up for a following trip > after one and a half year! It was so good for Lodewijk's health, amazing. > Inspite of the tiring bustrips. > Nina. Azita: I never thought of the jhanas as being 'dangerous', but can see in what sense they might be. If no insight into the ultimate truth of realities, one may take jhana for self and spend literally aeons and aeons in planes where no dhamma is able to be heard; no ears for listening!!!!!! Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita. 38195 From: rjkjp1 Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 4:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sarah: "One path" --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ashkenn2k" wrote: > > > k: You are not wrong to say that they may unconscoiusnessly known > what is the meaning of selfless acts. That is how why some disciples > of other traditions or people like Ven Sariputta could understand > Buddha teachings very fast. Such unknown accumulations of > selflessness is also panna just that they do not known it is panna at > all. To me, their panna is not penetrative enough to break into the > maggacitta realm or in other words, their panna cannot see the > underlying tendencies. Just like Buddha when he was still a > Bodhisattvas, in his many lives he may not come across the dhamma but > he will act selflessly because of panna that have accumulated. Just > like Ven Mahakassapa who even before seeing Buddha already > intuitively behave like a monk. So when panna or the knowledge of > anatta is taught to them, they have this exclamation of Eureka!. >=========== DearKen Your theory is quite popular I think. It is however at odds with the Theravada account. For example Mahakassapa: He had many encounters with Buddha sasanas of the past. In the time of padumuttara Buddha he was named vedeha and devoted to the Buddha. He aspired to be like the monk Nisabha (who at that tine was noted for sustere living). He continued to develop parami. Later, in the time of Vipassin Buddha he was again devoted to that buddha. Later as a disciple of Kassapa Buddha he gave costly robes and flowers to the cetiya. There are other accounts of when he paid respect to Paccekka Buddhas. He accumulated wisdom by listening to these Buddhas. The buddha of this era also had many contacts with past Buddhas. Robertk 38196 From: Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:05am Subject: Re: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Hi, Bhante and Sarah - In a message dated 11/12/04 3:22:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > S: I can see there will be plenty of scope for discussion here…..I look > forward to your participation. > ====================== Sarah, I am watching with interest the conversation between Ven Vimalaramsi and you. I greatly look forward to a continuation, as I hope to learn much from it. 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) 38197 From: Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:30am Subject: Re: There is a Practice (Re: [dsg] Re: New to Group) Hi, James (and Bhante) - In a message dated 11/12/04 4:01:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@y... writes: > I also agree with your definition of anatta. Anatta does mean > impersonal (or uncontrollable) not, as many in this group > believe, `doesn't exist'. > ======================= I think that what you say here is slightly misleading. There *are* a number of folks here, including me, who believe that conventional existents such as trees, houses, and people have, indeed, only conventional existence, which means, not that such percepts are without basis, but that they are mental constructs, and have no existence independent of such construction (and of the phenomena that are their basis). But the term 'anatta' doesn't literally or directly apply to them to them, as I see it. It applies only derivatively, and "in a manner of speaking" - that is, again, conventionally. The phenomena to which 'anatta' directly applies are the interrelated physical and mental dhammas that are the basis for conventional existents, that underly them - phenomena directly apprehended through the six sense doors, unmediated by conceptual construction. It is these that, while not being nihilistically nonexistent, do lack SELF-existence. They do lack atta. It is these that truly arise, but are fleeting, dependent, inseparable (but distinguishable) aspects of the phenomenal flow. 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) 38198 From: Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] India - Appropos of nothing Hi, Christine - In a message dated 11/12/04 4:22:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, cforsyth1@b... writes: > So - I called one of the american ladies from the next room for > assistance - mission accomplished. For all I know the bed head is > still lying there along the windows, under the curtains, on the > second floor of that hotel in India. It is possible that many > guests have had Circular Conversations with Housekeeping about how > it got there, and what should be done about it. > > They'll learn. > ========================= From the sound of things, it seem that the "they" who will learn are the guests, and not the staff! ;-)) Your descriptions, BTW, are wonderful - and hilarious! 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) 38199 From: Date: Fri Nov 12, 2004 0:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhaghosa Never Created Theravada. (Was Re: Zen and Tibetan (..) Hi, Sarah (and Suan and Joop) - In a message dated 11/12/04 4:41:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@y... writes: > As you know, I'm also not a fan of Prof Kalupahana's writings -- at least > of the extracts that have been quoted here, which may be unfair on my part > -- and I also share your great respect and feeling of indebtedness to > Buddhaghosa and the commentaries. > > However I'm curious to know whether you really see a knowledge of Sanskrit > and employment as an academic as being obstacles in anyway to developing > an understanding of the teachings and whether you see a background in > science and Pali expertise as really being essential pre-requisites. > Obviously most of us would fail here on the latter criteria. > > I think we've all come across (directly or in writings) examples of > scientists and Pali experts with little or no understanding or > appreciation of the commentaries and we've all come across friends with no > scientific knowledge and little Pali expertise who've helped us appreciate > the gems to be found in these sources. > > Of course, I appreciate your expertise in both areas, Suan. > ========================== What wonderfully balanced comments, Sarah! Sadhu X 3. :-) 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)