43200 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:05am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma challenge - In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" wrote: > > Robert > > Here's one source that appears to support the notion that the > Abhidhamma was written down during the 3rd Council: > =========== Dear Joe, In my post I said that no evidence is presented to support the idea that the Abhidhamma was first invented and recited at the 3rd council (about 200 yeas after Buddha's parinibbana). The quote you gave from Mr John Bullit of accesstoinsight is his opinion and not-at least for me- evidence that what he says is true. I don't know what his source is but I see he uses the sanskrit word 'Sthaviravadin' instead of the pali Theravada - why? You know in the 19th century the western scholars ridiculed the idea that the pali texts that were being translated in Sri lanka could be a genuine record of the Buddha's words. That is until they uncovered the Asoka pillars and had hard evidence - insciptions matching word for word what the Theravada tradition had passed down all these millenia. The reason the mockers of Abhidhamma have allowed the ancestry of Abhidhmma back as close as 200 years from the Buddhas time is only becuase they have no choice- even non-buddhist scholars conceded the evidence is rock-solid. If they had any leeway they would love to be able to say it was all invented by Buddhaghosa a thousand years later. Imagine how many arahants were alive at this time (so close to when the Buddha was living), many attending the council. Does anyone think they got togther and said 'let's make up some new stuff and say it was originally the Buddhaword. It's a big lie but what the heck.' Knowing as they did such suttas as Anguttara Nikaya II.23 Abhasita Sutta "Monks, these two slander the Tathagata. Which two? He who explains what was not said or spoken by the Tathagata as said or spoken by the Tathagata. And he who explains what was said or spoken by the Tathagata as not said or spoken by the Tathagata." endquote Would they really want to do such a thing? Sure they would if they had no scruples and were fools of the highest degree - but I don't perceive that about the ancient Theravada. The Atthasalini says about the one who denies the Abhidhamma as the Buddha's word 'He who excludes the Abhidhamma (from the Buddha-Word) damages the Conqueror's Wheel of Dhamma (//jina-cakkam paharam deti//). He excludes thereby the Omniscience of the Tathagata and impoverishes the grounds of the Master's Knowledge of Self-confidence' (//vesarajja-nana// to which Omniscience belongs); he deceives an audience anxious to learn; he obstructs (progress to) the Noble Paths of Holiness; he makes all the eighteen causes of discord appear at once." And the one who listens to someone who disparages Abhidhamma will follow their teacher into a deep hole. It is a fearful thing to doubt the profound teaching of the Buddha; one should strive as if their head was on fire, to develop faith (and insight) in the nectar of Dhamma. Robertk > 1 -544/-480 > Parinibbana (Skt: Parinirvana; death and final release) of the Buddha, > at Kusinara (now Kusinagar, India) (age 80). {1,3} > > During the rains retreat following the Buddha's Parinibbana, the First > Council convenes at Rajagaha, India, during which 500 arahant > bhikkhus, led by Ven. Mahakassapa, gather to recite the entire body of > the Buddha's teachings. The recitation of the Vinaya by Ven. Upali > becomes accepted as the Vinaya Pitaka; the recitation of the Dhamma by > Ven. Ananda becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka. {1,4} > 100 -444/-380 > 100 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana the Second Council convenes > in Vesali to discuss controversial points of Vinaya. The first schism > of the Sangha occurs, in which the Mahasanghika school parts ways with > the traditionalist Sthaviravadins. At issue is the Mahasanghika's > reluctance to accept the Suttas and the Vinaya as the final authority > on the Buddha's teachings. This schism marks the first beginnings of > what would later evolve into Mahayana Buddhism, which would come to > dominate Buddhism in northern Asia (China, Tibet, Japan, Korea). {1} > 294 -250 > Third Council is convened by King Asoka at Pataliputra (India). > Disputes on points of doctrine lead to further schisms, spawning the > Sarvastivadin and Vibhajjavadin sects. The Abhidhamma Pitaka is > recited at the Council, along with additional sections of the Khuddaka > Nikaya. The modern Pali Tipitaka is now essentially complete, although > some scholars have suggested that at least two parts of the extant > Canon—the Parivara in the Vinaya, and the Apadana in the Sutta—may > date from a later period. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/history.html > > As I said before, for me it doesn't matter when the various books were > compiled. That the six councils approved of them is enough for a > non-arahant like myself! > > Joe > > > > {1, 4}--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > > > Dear Joe, > > I just take up a couple of points > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Cummings" > > wrote: > > > > > > heaven, and to the devas gathered there. > > > Sariputta, the Buddha's main disciple, asked that this teaching be > > > given to the human world too, and he accumulated the texts. The > > Buddha > > > was reluctant as only devas would have the capacity to understand > > it. > > ======== > > > > This is slightly wrong. No mention of sariputta requesting this. And > > the reason it was first taught in the deva world is that it took 3 > > earth months - for the deavs this was only one long sitting. > > Nothing about it being only suitable for devas > > ====== > > > > > > > > > Historically the Abhidhamma did not appear until the 3rd Buddhist > > > council 200 years after the Buddha passed away. The style and the > > > language of the Abhidhamma also point to it being a later work by > > > Buddhist philosophers. > > > > ========= > > I often see this said. But no evidence ever presented. Strange idea: > > how could the monks invent something and then say - 'ok we will now > > call this the Buddhavacca'. Anyone who believes this must think > > early Theravada were liars of the highest order. > > ================ > > > > > > > > > I have read the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 4 or 5 times, read a few of > > > Nina Van Gorkham's books, read a selection of about 10 sections > > > (suttas if you like) from each of the 7 texts as recommended by > > one of > > > my teachers, and plodded through some large sections of the > > > Katthavathu which was interesting (especially as many of the > > > 'herasies' in it are in fact modern abhidhamma stances). > > > > ======= > > I have the katthavathhu and commentaries, I7ve never seen anything > > in it that (for example) Nina van Gorkom contradicts. Who is he > > thinking of here? > > Robertk 43201 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Larry >Let's look at our experience. When your cheek touches your pillow at >night can you tell what part of that contact is tangible data (softness) >and what part is body-consciousness? We can make this distinction >conceptually, as you both have shown, but I don't think panna can know >rupa directly or can know consciousness "without an object", for the >reasons I have already stated. > > I'm afraid I still haven't understood what those reasons are. As I understand it, each dhamma retains at all times its general ans specific characteristics which are 'knowable' to panna. The reason that for us the distinction you mention remains one that is known conceptually only is because of the lack of developed panna. . >I put "without an object" in quotation marks because "object" means >different things in different contexts. Panna can know consciousness >rooted in greed without an object where the object of the greed is, say, >a tomato. But I don't think panna can know eye-consciousness without >visible object. > > Hmm, interesting. So what do you see as the difference, in the context of the present discussion, between citta rooted in greed with tomato as object and citta that is eye consciousness experiencing visible object? >Also, I don't think panna can know a cetasika as a cetasika separate >from consciousness. > > And ditto here. Thanks. Jon 43202 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Dhammanando Bhikkhu Many thanks for the update on your namesake at Wat Tha Ma O. I admire his work very much, and he is a very unassuming and likeable person as well, cheery in spite of (as I remember) almost constant health problems and very poor eyesight. It was good to see the photo. It is amazing that he is still actively teaching Pali. I remember staying over at the temple once or twice (it was there I first acquired a taste for early morning congee, a habit that continues to this day ;-)). With best wishes Jon Dhammanando Bhikkhu wrote: >Dear Sarah and everyone, > >I have just returned from a trip to the north of Thailand with some >Icelandic friends and am now catching up with the dsg digests. So far >I have noticed two posts addressed to me and will try to reply to them >tomorrow. > >While we were passing through Lampang I stopped to pay a visit to my >old Pali teacher, Sayadaw Dhammananda at Wat Tha Ma O. I recall that >some of you are acquainted with him. I had received a mistaken report >of his death some years ago, but in fact he is still alive and well, >and despite his 85 years still spends about four hours every >afternoon conducting the temple's Pali classes. My friends took some >photos of us and I have added two to the dsg photo section. > 43203 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:36am Subject: FW: [Pali] AN 6.11.08 sampajañña In the Pali list we discuss words used in the suttas. I give here an extract that may interest some people here. The subject was sampajannña. I explained that I prefer clear comprehension instead of full comprehension. ---------- Van: Nina van Gorkom Datum: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 09:38:18 +0100 Aan: Onderwerp: Re: [Pali] AN 6.11.08 N: Rob K's quotes have: clear comprehension. If we use the word 'full' it seems already accomplished, but I rather think of a development. It is different from intellectual understanding based on listening and study, it is already direct awareness and understanding. In Samatha the yogavacaara has to be aware of his cittas and he has to investigate when there is kusala citta with true calm and when there is attachment to calm. Sati sampajañña, clear comprehension of the different cittas when they occur is necessary in Samatha. In vipassana there is the development stage by stage of the understanding of different characteristics of nama and rupa. The three characteristics are not penetrated in the beginning. First there is more understanding of the visesa lakkhana of different namas and rupas. Gocara sampajañña, one has to know the gocara, the field or object: aggregates, elements and bases (aayatanas), one nama or rupa at a time. Sati sampajañña has to begin, and the quotes of Rob K. about standing, walking, etc. eating, speaking etc. are good examples. Quote from Rob: end Rob's quote. I continue the quote: These are the nama elements and rupa elements in daily life that are the objects of sati sampajañña. There is full understanding of the three characteristics shortly before enlightenment, when insight has been developed to that stage. Nina. 43204 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge, Asoka Pillars. Dear Rob K, This is very interesting. I am always impressed by the Asoka pillars. Do you have some details about these texts? That is, if you have time. I looked at the Pali of the one in Lumbini with Jim, but I had some difficulties with the language since it was Asoka's time. Jim helped me to decipher it. Nina. op 13-03-2005 10:05 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > You know in the 19th century the western scholars ridiculed the idea > that the pali texts that were being translated in Sri lanka could be > a genuine record of the Buddha's words. That is until they > uncovered the Asoka pillars and had hard evidence - insciptions > matching word for word what the Theravada tradition had passed down > all these millenia. 43205 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 2:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo Apologies for mis-spelling your name here and in the earlier post (I think it must have been something to do with the spell-checker ;-). Jon Jonothan Abbott wrote: >Hi, Too > > > > > 43206 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 2:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi, Chris Christine Forsyth wrote: >Hello Sarah, all, > >Presumably one believes the mind states or physicial actions that >one engages in during this lifetime, will have some determining >effect on one's future. i.e. you are responsible for your actions >and will suffer the consequences thereof. > >Mostly, despite the Teachngs, I don't think we really believe >mindstates are too important other although knowing they are the >intention for physical action. Maybe we don't commit gross breaches >of the moral standard - we don't go about stealing, raping, >murdering etc. - but we think these physical actions greatly >outweigh the fleeting mind moments of stinginess, anger, lust and >greed, self-pity etc that fill a proportion of each day. > > Well, there is some basis for the view that akusala that moves one to speech or action (for example, a sharp word, slamming the door as one leaves the room) is stronger than the akusala that results in mere disturbance of the mind (e.g., mild annoyance). Not that there aren't exceptions, of course. As you say, so much of our lives is akusala. But do you see this 'everyday' aksuala as having consequences of any particular kind? I would have thought that even strong akusala of this kind (attachment to food or aversion to certain individuals) cannot be compared to the akusala that accompanies such 'minor infractions' as taking something not given, lying, etc. which can condition rebirth. >Your post brings two thoughts to mind. Either murder, killing, >abortion are not such very great things ... just a flickering mind >moment - or we haven't the faintest idea of how dangerous all the >uncountable mind moments that flick by in any minute really are. > > Intention is all important. This means it is necessary to distinguish between doing something knowing a certain consequence is inevitable but not intending that consequence, and doing that thing for the purpose of bringing about that consequence. In my view, acts of akusala kamma patha are to be avoided as far as is possible, while everyday akusala tendencies are an inevitable part of life. Jon 43207 From: htootintnaing Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Dear Htoo > > Apologies for mis-spelling your name here and in the earlier post (I > think it must have been something to do with the spell-checker ;-). > > Jon > > Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > >Hi, Too ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Jon, :-). Actually I didnot notice that. Even if I saw it, it is not a problem. With respect, Htoo Naing 43208 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 3:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Howard One or two brief responses, mostly to comments where you refer to my view/position. >Howard: > Jon, I believe we share the view that there is only one object (e.g., hardness) that is experienced. The difference is in what we take that to be. You, as I understand it, take it to be some thing or event that arises and ceases on its own and that may or may not be experirnced by an arising act of consciousness. I, on the other hand, consider the dhamma to be an experiential phenomenon/event that occurs only as an element of experience. > Well, I think our difference is not in what we take the presently-experienced sense-door object to be, but as to whether or not it should be taken to be anything. To my understanding, the presently experienced sense-door object is not to be 'taken' as one thing or another; the development of insight is the seeing of that dhamma as it truly is. There should be no a priori assumptions. As to what it truly is, that would be, to my understanding, things like being a rupa (i.e., a dhamma that does not experience an object), as having whatever unique characteristic it has (hardness, visible object, etc.), as conditioned, and as annica, dukkha or anatta, depending on the level of understanding that arises (i.e., neither or the aspects that you mention above). But again, it is not to be 'taken as' any of those things, since our concept of what those things mean will be laden with wrong view anyway. >For you, the experirncing of the dhamma is a literal coming together of three separate phenomena: the dhamma (which can exist unexperienced), the sense door (which arises only in dependence on a waiting object), and the sense consciousness (which arises only in dependence on the other two being already in effect). > Not quite. To my understanding, the arisen sense-door object-to-be impinges on the sense-door/base, that base being a rupa conditioned by kamma. But yes, sense-door consciousness arises after such an impingement has occurred. > My main reason for my perspective, aside from aesthetic preference, is pragmatic, because I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved rupas. > > As I mentioned above, I do not see this issue (the existence of so-called unobserved rupas) as having any relevance in the context of the presently experienced sense-door object. It assumes importance only if one adopts a certain a priori assumption. > What I mean by an external rupa is a rupa that exists but may or may not be experienced. That is all I mean, and I do believe they are what you believe in. > > Not so (as already explained). If I 'believe in' anything, it is that the characteristic of any dhamma, including the present sense-door object, can be known by awareness and understanding, should those mental factors arise. Jon 43209 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/13/05 6:34:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Hi, Howard > > One or two brief responses, mostly to comments where you refer to my > view/position. > > >Howard: > > Jon, I believe we share the view that there is only one object (e.g., > hardness) that is experienced. The difference is in what we take that to be. > You, as I understand it, take it to be some thing or event that arises and > ceases on its own and that may or may not be experirnced by an arising act of > consciousness. I, on the other hand, consider the dhamma to be an experiential > phenomenon/event that occurs only as an element of experience. > > > > Well, I think our difference is not in what we take the > presently-experienced sense-door object to be, but as to whether or not > it should be taken to be anything. > > To my understanding, the presently experienced sense-door object is not > to be 'taken' as one thing or another; the development of insight is the > seeing of that dhamma as it truly is. There should be no a priori > assumptions. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Actually, I think we agree on this, Jon. I think that, in fact, each of us does have a bit if a hypothesis about this matter (and many others), but we hold these hypotheses tentatively and lightly, and we recognize that they are merely guesses. Reality is what it is, and all our assumptions, one way or the other, have no effect on that in the slightest. Indeed, on any matter, when wisdom reveals reality there will be knowing, and until then there is no certainty at all. --------------------------------------- > > As to what it truly is, that would be, to my understanding, things like > being a rupa (i.e., a dhamma that does not experience an object), as > having whatever unique characteristic it has (hardness, visible object, > etc.), as conditioned, and as annica, dukkha or anatta, depending on the > level of understanding that arises (i.e., neither or the aspects that > you mention above). But again, it is not to be 'taken as' any of those > things, since our concept of what those things mean will be laden with > wrong view anyway. -------------------------------------- Howard: You are right, Jon. When there is no knowing, our inclination to grasp after certainty leads us to "take" things to be a certain way; but the wise action is, as the Korean Son master, Seung Sahn, says is to say "Only don't know"!! ;-) --------------------------------------- > > >For you, the experirncing of the dhamma is a literal coming together of > three separate phenomena: the dhamma (which can exist unexperienced), the sense > door (which arises only in dependence on a waiting object), and the sense > consciousness (which arises only in dependence on the other two being already in > effect). > > > Not quite. To my understanding, the arisen sense-door object-to-be > impinges on the sense-door/base, that base being a rupa conditioned by > kamma. But yes, sense-door consciousness arises after such an > impingement has occurred. > > > My main reason for my perspective, aside from aesthetic preference, is > pragmatic, because I have no basis for knowing the existence of unobserved > rupas. > > > > > > As I mentioned above, I do not see this issue (the existence of > so-called unobserved rupas) as having any relevance in the context of > the presently experienced sense-door object. It assumes importance only > if one adopts a certain a priori assumption. > > > What I mean by an external rupa is a rupa that exists but may or may not > be experienced. That is all I mean, and I do believe they are what you > believe in. > > > > > > Not so (as already explained). If I 'believe in' anything, it is that > the characteristic of any dhamma, including the present sense-door > object, can be known by awareness and understanding, should those mental > factors arise. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Good! Your position of "no position" is better than mine. ------------------------------------ > > Jon > > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 43210 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 5:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Water, Life, and Death Dear Maya, here's my theory: Water is a calming element (even in the form of a storm). Many creatures meditate, using it to help calm the mind; so I am not surprised to read it brings you peace. One of the other things water causes us to feel is a sense of timeless-ness and lightness. Once the mind losses the idea of struggling, all tends to float away. Therefore, it is not uncommon for problems to feel as though they float away -- at least until the "realities of life" (i.e., the current situation) sucks us back into it-self. However, if you keep to the dynamic image of water, you can return to calm again. Then, like a dance, you will flow back and forth between the two. And Balance will be restored. Read the Tao Teh Ching Charles ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrew --- Illusion" wrote: Recently I have undergone a series of depression for reasons that are beyond me. ... I found that water was my only means of comfort-- ... Every time I look at a body of water, I feel at ease...I feel as if my whole being was floating with it taking me wherever it goes. ... Maybe if I could find the real meaning behind it or the real cause of my fascination with water...then maybe I'd be able to rediscover myself. "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43211 From: Joop Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:08am Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > Dear James, Joop, All, > > Nanavira's and BBodhi's articles will be at > http://www.intergate.com/~dhammapatha for awhile in case anyone's > interested in downloading them. Dear Connie, James, RobM and all I have read the articles of Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. Nanavira. Or tried to do; because, to be honest, neither of them mirror my sense of spirituality. Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one possiblility. I prefer another possiblility: compare it with our daily reality as an empirical test. "DEPENDENT ORIGINATION IN DAILY LIFE" is then the theme. For that reason I quote the first part of an article of Christina Feldman (IMS and Barre Center for Buddhist Studies) with which I feel more at home. It's also a (slow) reaction to RobM's message #42535; Subject: Re: Was "Introduction", Now "Paticcasamuppada by way of Patthana Conditions" Metta Joop Dependent Origination by Christina Feldman source: www.dharma.org/ij/archives/1999a/christina.htm In the Buddha's teachings, the second noble truth is not a theory about what happens to somebody else, but is a process which is going on over and over again in our own lives—through all our days, and countless times every single day. This process in Pali is called pañicca-samuppàda, sometimes translated as "dependent origination" or "co-dependent origination" or "causal interdependence." The process of dependent origination is sometimes said to be the heart or the essence of all Buddhist teaching. What is described in the process is the way in which suffering can arise in our lives, and the way in which it can end. That second part is actually quite important. Pañicca-samuppàda is said to be the heart of right view or right understanding. It is an understanding that is also the beginning of the eight-fold path, or an understanding that gives rise to a life of wisdom and freedom. The Buddha went on to say that when a noble disciple fully sees the arising and cessation of the world, he or she is said to be endowed with perfect view, with perfect vision—to have attained the true dharma, to possess the knowledge and skill, to have entered the stream of the dharma, to be a noble disciple replete with purifying understanding—one who is at the very door of the deathless. So, this is a challenge for us. What the pañicca-samuppàda actually describes is a vision of life or an understanding in which we see the way everything is interconnected— that there is nothing separate, nothing standing alone. Everything effects everything else. We are part of this system. We are part of this process of dependent origination—causal relationships effected by everything that happens around us and, in turn, effecting the kind of world that we all live in inwardly and outwardly. It is also important to understand that freedom is not found separate from this process. It is not a question of transcending this process to find some other dimension; freedom is found in this very process of which we are a part. And part of that process of understanding what it means to be free depends on understanding inter- connectedness, and using this very process, this very grist of our life, for awakening. Doctrinally, there are two ways in which this process of pañicca- samuppàda is approached. In one view it is held to be something taking place over three lifetimes, and this view goes into the issues of rebirth and karma. My own approach today is the second view, which I think is really very vital and alive, which looks at pañicca- samuppàda as a way of understanding what happens in our own world, inwardly and outwardly, on a moment-to-moment level. It's about what happens in our heart, what happens in our consciousness, and how the kind of world we experience and live in is actually created every moment. To me, the significance of this whole description is that if we understand the way our world is created, we also then become a conscious participant in that creation. It describes a process that is occurring over and over again very rapidly within our consciousness. By this time in the day, you have probably all gone throughout countless cycles of dependent origination already. Perhaps you had a moment of despair about what you had for breakfast or what happened on the drive out here, a mind-storm about something that happened yesterday, some sort of anticipation about what might happen today—countless moments that you have gone through where you have experienced an inner world arising: I like this; I don't like this; the world is like this; this is how it happened; I feel this; I think that. Already this early in the day, we could track down countless cycles of this process of pañicca-samuppàda—when we've been elated, when we've been sad, when we've been self-conscious, fearful—we've been spinning the wheel. And, it is important to understand this as a wheel, as a process. It is not something static or fixed, not something that stays the same. You need to visualize this as something alive and moving, and we'll get into how that happens. The basic principle of dependent origination is simplicity itself. The Buddha described it by saying: When there is this, that is. With the arising of this, that arises. When this is not, neither is that. With the cessation of this, that ceases. When all of these cycles of feeling, thought, bodily sensation, all of these cycles of mind and body, action, and movement, are taking place upon a foundation of ignorance—that's called samsara. That sense of wandering in confusion or blindly from one state of experience to another, one state of reaction to another, one state of contraction to another, without knowing what's going on, is called samsara. It's also helpful, I think, to see that this process of dependent origination happens not only within our individual consciousness, but also on a much bigger scale and on more collective levels—social, political, cultural. Through shared opinions, shared views, shared perceptions or reactions, groups or communities of people can spin the same wheel over extended periods of time. Examples of collective wheel spinning are racism or sexism, or the hierarchy between humans and nature, political systems that conflict, wars—the whole thing where communities or groups of people share in the same delusions. So understanding dependent origination can be transforming not only at an individual level, but it's an understanding about inter- connectedness that can be truly transforming on a global or universal level. It helps to undo delusion, and it helps to undo the sense of contractedness and the sense of separateness. In classical presentations, this process of dependent origination is comprised of twelve links. It is important to understand that this is not a linear, progressive, or sequential presentation. It's a process always in motion and not static at all. It's also not deterministic. I also don't think that one link determines the arising of the next link. But rather that the presence of certain factors or certain of these links together provide the conditions in which the other links can manifest, and this is going to become clearer as we use some analogies to describe how this interaction works. It's a little bit like a snowstorm—the coming together of a certain temperature, a certain amount of precipitation, a certain amount of wind co-creating a snow storm. Or it's like the writing of a book: one needs an idea, one needs pen, one needs paper, one needs the ability to write. It's not necessarily true that first I must have this and then I must have this in a certain sequential order, but rather that the coming together of certain causes and conditions allows this particular phenomena or this particular experience to be born. It is also helpful to consider some of the effects of understanding pañicca-samuppàda. One of the effects is that it helps us to understand that neither our inner world, nor our outer world is a series of aimless accidents. Things don't just happen. There is a combination of causes and conditions that is necessary for things to happen. This is really important in terms of our inner experience. It is not unusual to have the experience of ending up somewhere, and not knowing how we got there. And feeling quite powerless because of the confusion present in that situation. Understanding how things come together, how they interact, actually removes that sense of powerlessness or that sense of being a victim of life or helplessness. Because if we understand how things come together, we can also begin to understand the way out, how to find another way of being, and realize that life is not random chaos. Another effect of understanding causes and conditions means accepting the possibility of change. And with acceptance comes another understanding—that with wisdom, we have the capacity to create beneficial and wholesome conditions for beneficial and wholesome results. And that's the path—an understanding that we have the capacity to make choices in our lives that lead toward happiness, that lead toward freedom and well being, rather than feeling we're just pushed by the power of confusion or by the power of our own misunderstanding. This understanding helps to ease a sense of separateness and isolation, and it reduces delusion. A convenient place to start in order to gain some familiarity with the process of dependent origination is often with the first link of ignorance. This is not necessarily to say that ignorance is the first cause of everything but it's a convenient starting place: With ignorance as a causal condition, there are formations of volitional impulses. With the formations as a causal condition, there is the arising of consciousness. With consciousness as a condition, there is the arising of body and mind (nàma-rupa). With body and mind as a condition, there is the arising of the six sense doors. (In Buddhist teaching, the mind is also one of the sense doors as well as seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching.) With the six sense doors as a condition, there is the arising of contact. With contact as a condition, there is the arising of feeling. With feeling as a condition, there is the arising of craving. With craving as a condition, there's the arising of clinging. With clinging as a condition, there's the arising of birth. And, with birth as a condition, there's the arising of aging and death. That describes the links. This process, when reversed, is also described as a process of release or freedom. With the abandonment of ignorance, there is the cessation of karmic formations. With the cessation of karmic formations, there is the falling away of consciousness, and so on. …(snip) … 43212 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 8:31am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Connie (also, James, RobertK, Nina, Sarah, Howard, KenO) - Thank you so much for your long message (#43192) that is 'good to the last drop'. Before commenting on "that mind" (Bhavanga citta? ) I want to list your key points as follows, for ease of discussion on "this mind" versus "that mind". 1) Shakyamuni: "This mind ... is luminous, but it is defiled by taints that come from without; that mind ... is luminous, but it is cleansed of taints that come from without". 2) Connie: Mind, consciousness, citta, or 'thought moment', is not lasting -- because it is "quick to change". 3) Connie: "This mind" and "that mind" in Shin's quote are not the same types of mind. 4) Connie: To my understanding, the luminous mind here - "that mind" - is the bhavanga citta, the life-continuum or 'subconscious'. ... it is the bhavangas that maintain our being this person, this lifetime. Bhavangas are considered to be outside the process or vithi cittas. 5) Connie: If this bhavanga or deep sleep or between processes citta is what we need to develop, wouldn't we be well advised to spend our lives comatose? 6) Connie: If there is no ignorance, there is no rebirth [patisandhi citta], which is just another (bhavanga) mind moment. 7) Connie: The bhavangas are luminous in the sense that the defilements [not to mention any wholesomeness] arise in the process cittas - "this mind" - specifically, during the moments of javana cittas, when kamma is accumulated. 8) Connie: If the argument runs along the lines that we are born pure and just need to uncover &/or develop that, we're back to the same bramanic atta-Atta theories Buddha rejected. Shin tries to say this atta- Atta thing is not the case. There is still the problem of identifying anything as me or mine rather than impersonal elements (dhammas, dhatus) that arise and fall according to conditions. 9) Connie: I think Buddha's teachings point to knowing the true natures of all realities, always at each present moment, which requires awareness or sati. Understanding, right or wrong, dictates how we live and what we become. It is understanding that needs to be developed in order that skillful states can arise and the defilements be abandoned. Connie, I would like to comment on your comments as follows. Items 1) and 3) tell me that the objective for following the Teachings, which is described very well in 9), is to attain "that mind" which is cleansed of taints. The result is a luminous mind that no longer changes. The "no longer changes" description implies that "that mind" is unconditioned and lasting -- Nibbana. The mind in 2) must be "this mind", since it is not "that mind" which is lasting. Your understanding in 4) is contradicting to the nature of "that mind" which is luminous, unconditioned, and lasts. So, it must not be a bhavanga citta as you stated in 6). Your comment in 5) ignores or misunderstands the truth that the objective for following the Buddha's Teachings is to eradicate ignorance (avijja) in order to turn "this mind" into "that mind", which is luminous in the sense of having zero avijja. Since "that mind" is not a bhavanga citta, we should not worry about spending our "lives" in coma. [Is there a life after attainment of "that mind"?] Your comment in 7) is a good one; i.e. defilements arise outside the bhavangas. The comment in 8) also makes sense, that is, it does not make sense to argue that "we are born pure and just need to uncover &/or develop that". Kindest regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, All, > > Thus begins a section on The Origins of the Buddha Nature in an article I > was sent by one of my enchanting friends: > The Buddha nature concept is a characteristic teaching of Mahayana > Buddhism, but its origin can be traced back to early Buddhism. In an > early scripture, for example, Shakyamuni talks about the "luminous mind" > (Skt citta-prakrti) covered by the layers of delusion: "This mind ... is > luminous, but it is defiled by tainst that come from without; that mind > ... is luminous, but it is cleansed of taints that come from without". > Shakyamuni explains that since people are unaware of their innate > luminous mind, they do not eventry to cultivate their potential. So the > brilliance of this luminous mind remains obscured. > > > The following is part of my reply, mostly a rehashing of Luminous Mind > UPs, with the hope that if I have misunderstood anything, someone here > will correct me. > > Thanks for Shin's [Shin Yatomi] article on Buddha Nature, Paula. He > mentions the "luminous mind" (Skt citta-prakrti) [I do not know the > Sanskrit 'prakrti'. In Pali, the the word is 'pabhassaram'.], [...snip...] > > Mind, consciousness, citta ... same in Pali and Sanskrit... [I thought the > Skt was citra?]... anyway, 'thought moment'. Each lasting how long? > There is no continuous or lasting mind or other reality other than > nibbaana. The text before our quote reads, "Monks, I know not of any > other single thing so quick to change as the mind: insomuch that it is no > easy thing to illustrate how quick to change it is." > > "This mind" and "that mind" in Shin's quote are not the same types of mind. > > To my understanding, the luminous mind here - "that mind" - is the > bhavanga citta, the life-continuum or 'subconscious'. It is the same type > of citta as the rebirth linking consciousness and takes the same object > [mind always has an object] throughout our lives, but it is not really > from this lifetime. Whenever there is not a sense-door or mind-door > process citta with an object of this lifetime, there is bhavanga citta. > Between processes or when we are fast asleep and 'totally out of this > world', it is the bhavangas that maintain our being this person, this > lifetime. [If this bhavanga or deep sleep or between processes citta is > what we need to develop, wouldn't we be well advised to spend our lives > comatose? I won't go into why the bhavangas can't be developed, but it > has to do with them being vipaka or result of kamma.] It, "that mind", is > undefiled by any processing of the objects of this lifetime (the taints > that come from without); however, it is not luminous in the sense that > there are no latent defilements there. If there is no ignorance, there is > no rebirth [patisandhi citta], which is just another (bhavanga) mind > moment. [The other type of bhavanga is the cuti citta or dying > consciousness]. The bhavangas are luminous in the sense that the > defilements [not to mention any wholesomeness] arise in the process cittas > - "this mind" - specifically, during the moments of javana cittas, when > kamma is accumulated. Bhavangas are considered to be outside the process > or vithi cittas. > > If the argument runs along the lines that we are born pure and just need > to uncover &/or develop that, we're back to the same bramanic atta- Atta > theories Buddha rejected. Shin tries to say this atta-Atta thing is not > the case. There is still the problem of identifying anything as me or > mine rather than impersonal elements (dhammas, dhatus) that arise and fall > according to conditions. I am tempted to go into a consideration of > 'turning poisons to medicine'. As a figure of speech, it's not bad, but > in actuality, one thing cannot become another. I think Buddha's teachings > point to knowing the true natures of all realities, always at each present > moment, which requires awareness or sati. Understanding, right or wrong, > dictates how we live and what we become. It is understanding that needs > to be developed in order that skillful states can arise and the > defilements be abandoned, but now I'm veering off into the question of the > mutual possession of the 10 worlds. Back to Shin... > > [...snip...] > > If it's not the bhavanga citta that is BuddhaNature, what is it? > > If it IS some kind of mind, how can it be said that it's inherent in the > universe or our physical environment? > > This is rather long and I know you are busy. Just know I read the > article, I guess. > > thanks again, > connie 43213 From: Tep Sastri Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Dear Cosmique - I followed the Web link you had provided in the reply to Connie's message (Titled 'Buddha Nature') and found a few remarks which I hope you might be kind enough to give me some thoughts. -- "The culmination of the practice of paying attention to the cessation aspect of preparations is the realization of the cessation of existence". -- "More often than otherwise, commentarial interpretations of Nibbàna leaves room for some subtle craving for existence, bhavataõhà. It gives a vague idea of a place or a sphere, àyatana, which serves as a surrogate destination for the arahants after their demise". I do not understand much of the article. How does it "shed some light" into Connie's question(s) as you put it? Warm regards, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, cosmique wrote: > Dear Connie and all, > > Cosmique: Ven. Nyanananda touches on this issue in his sermons 7 and 8 on Nibbana. If you wish, click on http://www.beyondthenet.net/CALM/clm_main1.asp?content=nibbana > Perhaps, it will shed some light on your question. I presume that his interpretation is not traditional but it never hurts to look at the issue from a different angle. > > Metta, > > Cosmique 43214 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 0:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken, When you said: "... he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists.'" I would say, "he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists as an eternal (permanent and unchanging) soul, something uncompounded (the essence), some thing that you have complete control over. He also taught, how the self exist; and how thoughts, speech, and acts effect others (other selves). All I have been trying to say is that the Buddha actually taught how to view the self, and not to remain attached to it. The Buddha never taught that conventional wisdom or reality should be though of as non-existent or unreal. If he did then there would be no need for Morality (i.e., Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood). Actually there would be no need for the 8-Fold path because suffering would not exist either (since there is no-one to suffer). In reality the Buddha did dispel a myth about self, that myth was about the nature of its existence. After all, if he did teach that there are no-selves, no not even one, then the teachings about all those realms of existence that Abidharmmist like to talk about would be a lie, and most of the other teachings too ... ****** K: If we examine the five khandhas with right view, we will see each of them is devoid of self. And if we consider them collectively, it is the same. Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. ......... You would be completely right if you replace "self" with the following: attman (eternal soul), uncompounded-ness, permanence, something that can be controlled, ... swell as change "momentary existence" to relative existence. The concept of "Self" (that is devoid of these things and seen as a source of suffering) is a Right View. But like I said, I do know and understand your perspective; however, I attribute it to incomplete translations (the other concepts being summarized and thus called the self). *************************************** Hi Charles, ------------ I wrote: > Even on DSG, people have said, "Sure, there is no eternal self or atman, but there is a temporary self!" ------------- And you replied: ---------------- > YES! This is sutra teaching (what the Buddha dictated). The Buddha even rename his, temp self, to Taga... and the Buddha. ---------------- I agree that the Buddha taught the existence of the five khandhas. In his case they were conventionally called 'the Buddha' just as, in my case, they are conventionally called, Ken H. By teaching the existence of the five khandhas, the Buddha dispelled the wrong view, "Nothing exists," and he also dispelled the wrong view, "The self exists." If we examine the five khandhas with right view, we will see each of them is devoid of self. And if we consider them collectively, it is the same. Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. ************** C: > the Theravada Abhidhamma I learned it then move on. I have also looked at the Mahayana sutra and Abhidhamma. I have even look at Tibetan ..., and psychology and sociology. ------------------ K: I see. But that doesn't explain why you describe the 'Abhidhamma view' as representing the unconditioned reality. The Abhidhamma is the teaching of both kinds of absolute reality - the conditioned and the unconditioned. Also, it doesn't explain why you have not learnt the Pali terms (or the Sanskrit terms) for the individual dhammas. The Pali terms remind us of when we are talking about a reality as distinct from an illusion (a concept). For example, Htoo has just explained why the word 'birth' is inadequate for describing the reality, 'patisandhi.' 'Birth' involves the concept of a baby leaving the womb, whereas patisandhi is just one fleeting moment of consciousness. .......................... In reality, I stated that the 'Abhidhamma view' examines the "Conditioned reality." Showing its impermanent, compounded, lacking an essence, etc... I also state that your view, the view of nothing-ness is not the 'Abhidhamma view,' it is the view of the unconditioned. Therefore, you should not mix the two. Now, I have to admit I was wrong, one of the aims of the Abhidhamma is to bring one to the Ultimate / Absolute truth of reality. This is through the vehicle of knowledge leading into wisdom. And for some, morality and concentration are natural (i.e., already apart of their being); therefore, the Abhidhamma can bring one to enlightenment. However, wisdom without morality is dangerous, and wisdom without concentration is only a book one carries around in their head. Pali terms (or the Sanskrit terms): I have lived in Denmark for almost 10 years and I still can't speak Danish. Most of the time I can't even understand what my 3 year old is saying. In the US I took English comprehension (ENG101) in the university 3 times. Five years later I had to take it a forth time (really ENG99 -- grammar). Other then it being a weakness (languages), I have found that it is better to try and be as clear as possible. when using a foreign language (to the receiver) you always run the risk of the receiver translating the words differently, so to me it is always better if I give the receiver the translation I want them to know. Also, I believe you see how well someone really understands something when that can explain it in their own words. So If I was born in ... and spoke pali all my life then, of-course, I would love it if you could communicate in it now, but since the opposite is true, I really have no use for pali or Sanskrit, I will want for all to be translated by some one else. ***************** C: > Please remember, the Abhidhamma was not dictated by the Buddha, it was developed by learned monks, we like to believe they were Arhants, and they know all there is to know. ------------ According to the version I prefer, the Buddha taught Abhidhamma in full to the devas (in a deva realm) and then he taught it in brief to Sariputta. Sariputta, on hearing it in brief, understood it in full. He then taught it to his students and it became memorized in the same way as the suttas. .......................... This may be true, my point was to clarify that the Abhidhamma did-not develop the same way as the suttras and the vinya, and you are supporting that statement. ******************* C: > It is-not entirely consistent with the sutras. There are concepts in the adhidhamma that are not in the sutras (e.g., rebirth-consciousness). The Abhidhamma was an attempted to rival the Vedas (the science in Hinduism). ---------------------- K: I have not heard that before (about rebirth consciousness). Remember, the Buddha taught that conditioned reality was the five khandhas. So, when he said [in the suttas or elsewhere] that rebirth was real, he could only have been referring to a particular, momentary arising of the five khandhas. .......................... This makes me assume you do not believe in reincarnation, is that true? §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ C: > Some Buddhist believe the view of no-existing-self is dangerously misguided. It removes the need for the 8-fold path, especially morality. Historically there were too types of people that were enilist (1. criminals and the wealthy; 2. some groups of recluses that were waiting for the body to die -- they saw this place as "hell" i.e., samsara.) ----------------------------------------- K: May I suggest that you are not recognizing the absolute reality of conditioned dhammas? When you accept that dhammas really do exist, I think you will no longer equate "no self" with "no existence." ............................................... I really like this. This is a very good question/smart conclusion, because this is the risk that I face by emphasizing the relative. But don't worry, I do "try" and sometimes are forced to think both. And there are other teachings of Dhamma that can even bring a relative "existence" to full enlightenment and even Buddahood. §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ C: > I know the teachings on desire. I also studied what the Buddha went through to become "E." Also the basis of Mahayana Buddhism is Bodicita. Just because the universe is made up of conditioned dramas does not mean that nothing exist. Ask your self, "Do the conditions exist?" ------------- K: Do you see what I mean? You see a link between "only conditioned dhammas" and "nothing exists," but there is no such link. My answer would be, "Of course, the conditions exist! They exist because there are conditioned dhammas, and those conditioned dhammas are conditioning other dhammas to exist." I think (not sure) it was Nagarjuna who caused conditionality to be mistaken for non-existence. According to his heterodoxy, conditioned namas and rupas were just 'ideas' thought up by the Buddha to explain what was happening in [what Nagarjuna saw as] "a seamless flux" of experience. .................. It was the "Unconditionally" to be mistaken for non-existence, so often when people say no-self they mean no-self exists at all. This is what I assume you mean. This is wrong most of the time for most beings. BUT YES, "... the conditions exist! They exist because there are conditioned dhammas, and those conditioned dhammas are conditioning other dhammas to exist." This is what I call relative existence, not-no-existence. ******************* C: > To talk of emptiness is not the same as nothing. Emptiness implies that there must be a container, something. -------------- K: Exactly so! And there really are things that exist and that are mistaken for "containers of self." They are the namas and rupas of the five khandhas and Nibbana. ............................. I think you mistake the self for something uncompounded, having an essence, something unchanging, etc... so I assume that is why you dismiss it. Am I wrong? To me the self is a label I give to "my mind & form/flesh." And by "my mind & form/flesh," I mean something that is still subject to ... and is used to identify "this" being as opposed to another being. My view gives me the ability to dance through the relative and as the absolute. So, I exist when I exist, and don't exist when not existing. ************************** C: > MY TAKE ON NOT-self: There is no-self that exist on its own (requires nothing), that is unchanging, uncompounded, or permanent, no thing, not you, not me. Our existence is relative, the self is changing, compounded, and impermanent, and nothing can change that. ----------------------- K: I agree with that, but it is not quite watertight enough for my liking. It still allows for the idea of something that persists from moment to moment. Would you agree that there is no physical phenomenon (dhamma) that exists for more than (let's say by way of approximation) one billionth of a second? And that there is no mental phenomenon that lasts for more than one seventeen-billionth of a second? (As explained in the Abhidhamma, some rupas last seventeen times as long as consciousness.) ............... Objects can "persists" from moment to moment, but they are forever changing (the rates and amounts of change are relative), and as I stated before, objects can exist for up to eons (look at the teachings about the God Realm) or do you believe the God realm and gods do not exist? (the teachings are just fables) Charles PS: ok you got me, it is better to condense them in to one thread, however it maybe that I only have the weekends to reply. So if a reply does not come rightaway please understand that I have a 2-3 commute every day to work and the same to get home. And that is if nothing goes wrong -- here it usually does. 43215 From: robmoult Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 1:58pm Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Hi Joop, Connie, James & All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > I have read the articles of Bhikkhu Bodhi and Ven. Nanavira. Or tried > to do; because, to be honest, neither of them mirror my sense of > spirituality. > > Who of them is right? Because BB states DO is about three lifetimes > and Nanavira states that's about nothing else than one lifetime. So > it's not possible both are right. But how to prove ? > Analysis of the Sutta-texts, as both gentlemen do, is one > possiblility. > ===== Bhikkhu Bodhi follows the traditional intepretation of DO as exlained by Buddhaghosa. Nanavira (and Buddhadasa) have introduced radically new interpretations of DO. Both Nanavira and Buddhadas are "out of the box" thinkers. I feel that I am not yet conversant enough with the traditional intepretation to properly evaluate either Nanavira or Buddhadasa. I feel that I have to first properly and deeply understand the traditional interpretation before evaluating modern alternatives. Metta, Rob M :-) 43216 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hi Connie, I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses. However, I don't know if this is what Mahayana sutras have in mind as Buddha Nature. My first thought was that Buddha Nature is what Nyanaponika Thera refers to as "bare attention" (sati), but I believe I've read somewhere that Buddha Nature is impermanence for Dogen, the Zen master. What this means I don't know. Maybe it has to do with cessation. Others might say Buddha Nature is compassion. I think it is a matter of how one characterizes the Buddha. Its universal quality has to do with the accessibility of that characteristic, this being a favorite Mahayana theme. Larry 43217 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Larry : "I put "without an object" in quotation marks because "object" means different things in different contexts. Panna can know consciousness rooted in greed without an object where the object of the greed is, say, a tomato. But I don't think panna can know eye-consciousness without visible object." Jon: "Hmm, interesting. So what do you see as the difference, in the context of the present discussion, between citta rooted in greed with tomato as object and citta that is eye consciousness experiencing visible object?" Larry "Also, I don't think panna can know a cetasika as a cetasika separate from consciousness." Jon: "And ditto here." Hi Jon, I don't know. I've been thinking about this all day and haven't come to a conclusion. It has to do with what is an object of consciousness. One thought is that experience is only consciousness of an object. What this means is that when I experience desire for a tomato, that desire is an object of consciousness. If that is the case it would seem that desire for a tomato arose and ceased as unexperienced javana citta and then became an object of consciousness. But that unexperienced javana citta had an object too (the tomato), so we are still left with two kinds of object, experienced and unexperienced, and possibly a different kind of citta process called "experience". This doesn't seem like a very satisfactory solution but I can't think of anything else right now. Larry 43218 From: Christine Forsyth Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 6:51pm Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article Hello RobM, Joop, Connie, James, All, Bhikkhu Bodhi states in the introduction to "The Great Discourse on Causation" p. 4/5 that he regards distribution of the twelve factors into three lives as merely an expositiory device employed for the purpose of exhibiting the inner dynamics of the round. EXCERPT: In "The Great Discourse on Causation" Bhikkhu Bodhi states: 'The prevailing interpretation regards the series as spanning three successive lives, the twelve factors representing the causal and resultant phases of these lives alternated to show the round's inherent capacity for self-regeneration. Thus ignorance and volitional formations represent the causal phase of the previous life which brought about existence in the present; the five factors from consciousness through feeling are their fruit, the resultant phase of the present life. Craving, clinging, and existence represent renewed causal activity in the present life; birth and aging and death sum up the resultant phase of the future life. At the risk of oversimplification the sequence can be briefly explained as follows: Due to ignorance - formally defined as non- knowledge of the Four Noble Truths - a person engages in ethically motivated action, which may be wholesome or unwholesome, bodily, verbal, or mental. These actions, referred to here as volitional formations, constitute kamma. At the time of rebirth kamma conditions the re-arising of consciousness, which comes into being bringing along its psychophysical adjuncts, "mentality-materiality" (nama-rupa). In dependence on the psycho-physical adjuncts, the six sense bases develop - the five outer senses and the mind-base. Through these, contact takes place between consciousness and its objects, and contact in turn conditions feeling. In response to feeling craving springs up, and if it grows firm, leads into clinging. Driven by clinging actions are performed with the potency to generate new existence. These actions, kamma backed by craving, eventually bring a new existence: birth followed by aging and death. To prevent misunderstanding it has to be stressed that the distribution of the twelve factors into three lives is an expositiory device employed for the purpose of exhibiting the inner dynamics of the round. It should not be read as implying hard and fast divisions, for in lived experience the factors are always intertwined. The past causes include craving, clinging, and existence, the present ones ignorance and volitional formations; the present resultants begin with birth and end in death, and future birth and death will be incurred by the same resultants. Moreover, the present resultant and causal phases should not be seen as temporally segregated from each other, as if assigned to different periods of life. Rather, through the entire course of life, they succeed one another with incredible rapidity in an alternating sequence of result and response. A past kamma ripens in present results; these trigger off new action; the action is followed by more results. and these are again followed by still more action. So it has gone on through time withough beginning, and so it continues. From this it is clear that dependent arising does not describe a set of causes somehow underlying experience, mysteriously hidden out of view. What it describes is the fundamental pattern of experience as such when enveloped by ignorance as to the basic truths about itself. This pattern is always present, always potentially accessible to our awareness, only without the guidance of the Buddha's teaching it will not be properly attended to, and thus will not be seen for what it is. It takes a Buddha to point out the startling thruth that the basic pattern of experience is itself the source of our bondage, "the origin of this entire mass of suffering." metta and peace, Christine ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 43219 From: connie Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 7:10pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Tep, Cosmique, Rob, All, === 1) Shakyamuni: "This mind ... is luminous, but it is defiled by taints that come from without; that mind ... is luminous, but it is cleansed of taints that come from without". 3) Connie: "This mind" and "that mind" in Shin's quote are not the same types of mind. 9) Connie: I think Buddha's teachings point to knowing the true natures of all realities, always at each present moment, which requires awareness or sati. Understanding, right or wrong, dictates how we live and what we become. It is understanding that needs to be developed in order that skillful states can arise and the defilements be abandoned. Tep: Items 1) and 3) tell me that the objective for following the Teachings, which is described very well in 9), is to attain "that mind" which is cleansed of taints. The result is a luminous mind that no longer changes. The "no longer changes" description implies that "that mind" is unconditioned and lasting -- Nibbana. === Connie: If the 'clean' mind is bhavanga cittas, it's already attained as it/they are kusala vipaka cittas. Being kusala is it part of it's cleanliness; not taking on new dirt from the javanas or interacting with/knowing sense objects from this lifetime is the other. Insofar as all bhavangas of this lifetime are kusala vipaka and take the same object (from the last lifetime), we can say the bhavangas don't change, but the mind alternates between arising as bhavanga and vithi cittas. I think (no support) that the latent taints of the bhavangas may be eradicated as appropriate to the level of ariyan attainment if there are lokuttara cittas during the lifetime. Preceding the this (luminous & defiled) & that (luminous & cleansed) mind quote, is: "Monks, I know not of any other single thing so quick to change as the mind: insomuch that it is no easy thing to illustrate how quick to change it is." I don't equate any mind/citta with Nibbaana. A Buddha still has changing cittas or mind(stream). I don't know of anything to support saying "Buddha's citta has become Nibbaana." Is that what you are saying? Are you (also) saying that the quote is not talking about the bhavanga cittas? If so, you might be pleased with B.Bodhi's msg 16751. Also, not to answer for Cosmique, but in the article he linked to (which gives the DramaQueen's DO model - http://www.beyondthenet.net/CALM/clm_main1.asp?), we read: "This mind, monks, is luminous, but it is defiled by extraneous defilements. That, the uninstructed ordinary man does not understand as it is. Therefore, there is no mind development for the ordinary man, I declare. This mind, monks, is luminous, but it is released from extraneous defilements. That, the instructed noble disciple understands as it is. Therefore, there is mind development for the instructed noble disciple, I declare." It is sufficiently clear, then, that the allusion is to the luminous mind, the consciousness of the arahant, which is non-manifestative, infinite, and all lustrous. One of the other quotes Ven. Nyanananda ties this & his DO model in with is: "Consciousness, which is non-manifestative, Endless and lustrous on all sides, It is here that water, earth, Fire, and air no footing find." I deleted the rest of this because I'm not following you, Tep, and all the other comments I had kept coming back to the 1-3-9 group. I'm with you, Rob, as far as being "not yet conversant enough with the traditional intepretation to properly evaluate either Nanavira or Buddhadasa", but think we might add Nyanananda, too. peace, connie 43220 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 5:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear All, It's nice to join this group. Hallo to all who greet me. For Nina, I've a live that up and down. And I admit that sometime I can't except that yet. I try to walk in Buddha's way but I think my path still twisting. Lisa Herawati 43221 From: connie Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 8:52pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Larry, In the article my friend sent, "Buddha nature refers to the potential for attaining Buddhahood, a state of awakening filled with compassion and wisdom." A couple pages later: "To awaken to this greatest potential of life, one must challenge self-depreciation, arrogance, attachment to lesser ego, nihilism, and selfishness." Then, on the last page: "The Buddha nature that all these beings possess is called by the name Myoho-renge-kyo ... summoned forth and manifested by our chanting..." Larry: I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses. Connie: You don't think the commentaries and suttas talk about the same things? The luminous, pure, radiant, clear etc thing is a little confusing. There's been some discussion about pandara for all cittas and pabhassara only for kusala cittas. See Jaran's msg 10645. Maybe Suan's 10785 after. :) I have this idea of brightness or illumination and think, "pure citta is totally dark - no rupa". peace, connie 43222 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 10:10pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 145 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(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.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** When we consider the jhåna-factors vitakka and vicåra we may be able to understand that vitakka is more gross than vicåra. Vitakka is needed in the first stage of jhåna but it is abandoned in the second stage of jhåna which is more tranquil and more refined. Vicåra which is more subtle than vitakka still accompanies the jhånacitta of the second stage of jhåna. The person who has accumulated conditions to attain jhåna must be able to distinguish between different jhåna-factors such as vitakka and vicåra and this is most intricate. This shows us how difficult it is to develop calm to the degree of jhåna. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43223 From: cosmique Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 10:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hi Tep and all, Tep Sastri wrote: Dear Cosmique - I followed the Web link you had provided in the reply to Connie's message (Titled 'Buddha Nature') and found a few remarks which I hope you might be kind enough to give me some thoughts. -- "The culmination of the practice of paying attention to the cessation aspect of preparations is the realization of the cessation of existence". -- "More often than otherwise, commentarial interpretations of Nibbàna leaves room for some subtle craving for existence, bha­va­­taõhà. It gives a vague idea of a place or a sphere, àya­ta­na, which serves as a surrogate destination for the arahants after their demise". I do not understand much of the article. How does it "shed some light" into Connie's question(s) as you put it? Cosmique: I am not a close student of Ven. Nyanaanda; therefore I can not claim to be his infallible commentator. Nevertheless, having read all his 17 sermons on nibbana on that link, plus some other works by this author, I came to conclusion that he tends to interpret most of utterances on Nibbana psychologically rather than metaphysically. His main point is that Nibbana is not some mystical sphere out there, or beyond or the absolute, as some commentaries tend to interpret it. (It‘s regarding your second quote). In other words, if you state that nibbana is not complete cessation of being but some ultimate realm then it leaves room for some subtle craving for existence. According to him Nibbana is just a total cessation of existence foretaste of which the mind can experience through not attending to sankharas (preparations, in his version). I think that is what he means in the first quote. When you stop attending to sankharas, it is a foretaste of cessation of your existence for there is nothing left that “pulls” citta to a new state of being. I agree that his sermons are not the easiest reading I have ever had. His point becomes clearer as one rereads them. Let me summarize his approach. Firstly, he interprets the 12 link-formula in terms of one life, just like Ven. Nyanavira. Secondly, Nibbana is just a cessation of being with no reservations like “it is beyond being or not being” or it “a super-ultimate sphere”; thirdly, luminous mind discussed here is arahata-phala-samadhi. I still believe that his works can shed some light on the issue discussed here and are worthwhile reading. Metta Cosmique The heaviness of one's burden is due to one's grasping. 43224 From: Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 10:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, Connie: "In the article my friend sent, "Buddha nature refers to the potential for attaining Buddhahood, a state of awakening filled with compassion and wisdom." A couple pages later: "To awaken to this greatest potential of life, one must challenge self-depreciation, arrogance, attachment to lesser ego, nihilism, and selfishness." Then, on the last page: "The Buddha nature that all these beings possess is called by the name Myoho-renge-kyo ... summoned forth and manifested by our chanting..." L: This reminds me of the Buddha's words of encouragement to the bhikkhus. Buddha nature could mean simply "kusala citta". Do you know what "Myoho-renge-kyo" means? Larry: "I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses." Connie: "You don't think the commentaries and suttas talk about the same things?" L: From Jaran's and Suan's messages that you mention below I see that the commentaries do say luminous mind is either bhavanga or rebirth citta, but I couldn't find what sutta they referred to. Anyway, seems like a bit of a stretch for me. The Buddha didn't talk about things like that. Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to nirodha samapatti? Taking Jaran's advice to stick to what is within our capabilities I think we can look to bare attention as being luminous, pure, and totally empty. I know this doesn't fit the categories, but look and see for yourself. Does bare attention have any objective content at all? When you look at an emotional outburst, what is the nature of that looking? Connie: "The luminous, pure, radiant, clear etc thing is a little confusing. There's been some discussion about pandara for all cittas and pabhassara only for kusala cittas. See Jaran's msg 10645. Maybe Suan's 10785 after. :) I have this idea of brightness or illumination and think, "pure citta is totally dark - no rupa"." Larry 43225 From: rjkjp1 Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:17pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, cosmique wrote: > Hi Tep and all, > > Tep Sastri wrote: > > > > Dear Cosmique - > > I followed the Web link you had provided in the reply to Connie's > message (Titled 'Buddha Nature') and found a few remarks which I > hope you might be kind enough to give me some thoughts. > > -- "The culmination of the practice of paying attention to the cessation > aspect of preparations is the realization of the cessation of existence". > > -- "More often than otherwise, commentarial interpretations of Nibb àna > leaves room for some subtle craving for existence, bha­va­­taõh?E It > gives a vague idea of a place or a sphere, àya­ta­na, which serves as a > surrogate destination for the arahants after their demise". > > I do not understand much of the article. How does it "shed some light" > into Connie's question(s) as you put it? > > > Cosmique: > > I am not a close student of Ven. Nyanaanda;he tends to interpret most of utterances on Nibbana psychologically rather than metaphysically. His main point is that Nibbana is not some mystical sphere out there, or beyond or the absolute, as some commentaries tend to interpret it. ========= dear Cosmique, When we use the word 'commentaries' in Theravada it is usually refering to those edited by Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and the other ancient monks. Certainly none of these infer that Nibbana is out there anywhere or beyond.. Robertk 43226 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Mar 13, 2005 11:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 1 Hi Andrew L, I was very glad to see your detailed response, raising lots of excellent questions. As I’d like to respond to all of your points, I’ll probably break the post up. Let me just start here with the ‘top’ and ‘tail’ to get started: --- Andrew Levin wrote: > Forgive me for taking another four weeks to reply on the thread, I > sort of felt I couldn't hold my own or express my ideas and hold my > own ground, ... S: No need to apologise and certainly no need to wait til you feel you can hold your ground or express yourself as well as you’d like. To be honest, I do get a little concerned if I don’t hear from you for too long, so consider a brief holding reply to let us know how you’re doing from time to time as well. ... A:>(never mind the extreme mischief mode it seemed my posts > here were in) it is a continuing problem for me but the past few days > I think I've had some more well-being and clarity and so I think I > can get back into the swing of things. Let's see. ... S: that’s good to hear – the ‘well-being and clarity’. Of course, there will always be ups and downs for all of us. I don’t know if you saw a nice post that Andrew T wrote on this subject (7th March) to Maya recently? He wrote: ”For this reason, I think it is a mistake to believe that we *can* direct the waves and currents in the present moment and explain this supposed ability by saying "that's my cetana at work!" Wrong. That's conditions at work. Many times when we are happy and calm, it *looks like* "we" are practising mindfulness or metta or whatever. That we are directing the flow of our consciousness. But that's only an illusion. A water illusion? Our hope is to understand, not to direct.” Also, you may like to look at posts under ‘Discouraged, depressed.....’ in U.P. sometime if you’re having trouble.. ***** To get to the tail: > > S: Would you like to join in an ongoing study corner or start a new > one? > > Or just join in different threads? > A:> Well I kind of haven't been able to study CMA as I did earlier, and > there's no great understanding to be had by trying to force it to > work when it's not, ... S: Agreed – just use it as a reference manual from time to time, perhaps. ... A:> but I would be interested in continuing to > develop and understanding of Abhidhamma from Nina's ADL and post it > here. ... S: Please post any sections you like anytime. Maybe just a paragraph or two at a time with your comments/questions. That would be great and makes it easier for anyone to respond. ... A:>I've read up to the sections on moha and dosa myself, but am > having trouble distinguishing the two. What arises is some kind of > darkness in the mind, and I'm not able to recognize what exactly it > is, so I guess I can re-start posting about the book here for help on > that. It should help me develop understanding or awareness of cittas > or cetasikas that are present in my mind at one point or another, no? ... S: Yes, just start posting a little at a time as a separate thread, perhaps – even just a sentence—with your comments. I know what you mean about just ‘some kind of darkness..’. I think it is a mistake to try to distinguish states, rather than just be aware of what is appearing at that very moment of trying. Dosa is always averse to present dhammas or situations. It can be anything from the mildest irritation or discomfort to extreme anger. Whenever there is any unpleasant mental feeling, dosa is there for sure. Moha accompanies all unwholesome states, but when it appears, its characteristic of ignorance, just not knowing anything can be known. I think for most people, dosa is more obvious, but moha is so very common., for example, when there just seems to be ‘some kind of darkness’. I’ll look forward to any thread or passages you raise for discussion. I know Nina and others will be glad too. Metta, Sarah ===== 43227 From: cosmique Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 0:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hello Robert, rjkjp1 wrote: dear Cosmique, When we use the word 'commentaries' in Theravada it is usually refering to those edited by Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and the other ancient monks. Certainly none of these infer that Nibbana is out there anywhere or beyond.. Robertk Cosmique: My remark as to “the commentaries” is based on Ven. Nyananada’s statements. Since Tep asked me to explain some of the Bhikkhu’s complicated ideas I had to referrer to what Nyananada writes in his sermons on Nibbana. Here are some interesting statements by Nyananada’s from his 1st sermon for your consideration: “It seems that the deeper connotations of the word Nibbàna in the context of pañicca samuppàda were not fully appreciated by the commentators. And that is why they went in search of a new etymology. They were too shy of the implications of the word `extinction'. Probably to avoid the charge of nihilism they felt compelled to reinterpret certain key passages on Nibbàna. They conceived Nibbàna as something existing out there in its own right. They would not say where, but sometimes they would even say that it is everywhere. With an undue grammatical emphasis they would say that it is on coming to that Nibbàna that lust and other defilements are abandoned: Nibbànaü àgamma ràgàdayo khãõàti ekameva nibbànaü ràgakkhayo dosakkhayo mohakkhayo ti vuccati.[27]” “There seems to be some contradiction in the commentarial definitions of Nibbàna. On the one hand we have the definition of Nibbàna as the exit from craving, which is called a `weaving'. And on the other it is said that it is on seeing Nibbàna that craving is destroyed. To project Nibbàna into a distance and to hope that craving will be destroyed only on seeing it, is something like trying to build a stair­case to a palace one cannot yet see. In fact this is a simile which the Buddha had used in his criticism of the Brahmin's point of view.[30]” “According to the Buddha the cessation of existence is Nib­bàna and that means Nibbàna is the realization of the cessation of exis­tence. Existence is said to be an eleven-fold fire. So the entire ex­is­tence is a raging fire. Lust, hate, delusion - all these are fires. There­fore Nibbàna may be best rendered by the word `extinction'. When once the fires are extinguished, what more is needed? But unfortunately Venerable Buddhaghosa was not prepared to appreciate this point of view. In his Visuddhimagga as well as in the commentaries Sàratthappakàsinã and Sammohavinodanã, he gives a long discussion on Nibbàna in the form of an argu­ment with an imagi­nary heretic.[37] Some of his arguments are not in keeping with ei­ther the letter or the spirit of the Dhamma. First of all he gets the heretic to put forward the idea that the destruction of lust, hate and delusion is Nibbàna. Actually the heretic is simply quoting the Buddha word, for in the Nib­bàna­sutta of the Asaïkhata­saüyutta the destruction of lust, hate and delusion is called Nibbàna: Ràgakkhayo, dosakkhayo, mohak­khayo - idaü vuccati nib­bànaü.[38] The words ràgakkhaya, dosakkhaya and mohakkhaya together form a synonym of Nibbàna, but the commentator interprets it as three synonyms. Then he argues out with the imaginary heretic that if Nibbàna is the extinguishing of lust it is something common even to the animals, for they also extinguish their fires of lust through enjoyment of the corresponding objects of sense.[39] This argument ignores the deeper sense of the word extinction, as it is found in the Dhamma. I think when Ven. Nyananda uses the word “commentators” he means exactly those edited by Buddhaghosa, Dhammapala and the other ancient monks. I am not taking sides here for the only thing I can do is to base my opinion only on quotes from the original works made by other authors like Ven. Nyananada. Metta, Cosmique The heaviness of one's burden is due to one's grasping. 43228 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 Hi AndrewL, (Htoo at the end & All) <...> A:> Right, everything is indeed reliant on causes and conditions, but I > am thinking here that we don't have to be quite so passive in waiting > for them to arise. From what I am reading the way to know > defilements or nama and rupa is to be mindful of them, well, I am > asking now, what kinds of causes do you think can bring up sati? I > have said that intention for it along with a few other causes can be > sufficient, but see more below. .... S: The development of satipatthana is not passive at all, but it’s not ‘we’ that can wait or make them arise. Understanding of what sati is and what namas and rupas are is the way that sati will arise and develop. I think that asking the right questions and carefully considering and reflecting on the teachings as you’re doing here is the main condition or cause for direct awareness and understanding. I like this quote that’s Nina included recently from the commentary to the Cariyapitaka: “Energy devoid of wisdom does not accomplish the purpose desired since it is wrongly aroused, and it is better not to arouse energy at all than to arouse it in the wrong way. But when energy is conjoined with wisdom, there is nothing it cannot accomplish, if equippted with the proper means....” **** S: I think we could replace energy here with intention, wish, concentration and other states which can be wholesome or unwholesome. Any desire or intention of getting particular results with expectations is at best unhelpful and at worst, dangerous, in my view, as others are discussing in another thread about wishing for arahantship. ... A:> OK, so what type of wrong view are we looking at here? Certainly not > wrong view as described as one of the ten unwholesome action, but > still a wrong view holding us back from seeing the true nature of > present nama and rupa, right? Like a wrong view accompanying a > citta, yes? .... S: Just as right views or wisdom (pa~n~naa or samma di.t.thi) can be wholesome courses of action (kamma-patha) through the mind, so wrong views (micha di.t.thi) are likely to be unwholesome courses of action through the mind. In fact, we read that wisdom and the development of satipatthana is the highest kind of wholesome kamma-patha. Conversely, while we know about the dangers of unwholesome bodily actions and so on, we forget that wrong view is the grossest kind of attachment that has to be eradicated first. Without wrong view, we would not be susceptible to killing, stealing, lying and so on, for example. In the Atthasalini (translated as the Expositor), it says it has ‘unwise conviction as characteristic’ and ‘should be regarded as the highest fault’. Also, it says ‘in *wrong* intention, etc, only the term *wrong* is distinctive. The remainder should be understood in the same way as under the head of moral consciousness.’ So, I think wrong views about practice and about present namas and rupas, such as when we take them for ‘self,’ shouldn’t be underestimated. Of course, there are degrees as you suggest. The most serious kind of wrong view is apparently that which denies kamma and its result. Without a clear understanding of conditions and kamma, don’t we all have this kind of wrong view from time to time? Maybe a lot more often than we’d care to admit. For example, when we think others are responsible for our good and bad experiences in life or that world leaders are responsible for the suffering people endure, aren't we denying the results of kamma? By understanding more and more that any situation really is only citta, cetasika and rupa arising because of their own conditions including kamma, the easier it is to develop metta and other wholesome states instead of dosa (aversion), no matter how others behave, for example. Back to the subtleties of wrong views, I’d like to quote a couple of passages Ken H wrote recently which I thought were good and hopefully relevant here: K:“When we deliberately look out the window, pick up a cup or type a letter, we may not be aware that there are only conditioned dhammas (so we may not have right view), but nor are we *denying* there are only conditioned dhammas (so we don't have wrong view). However, when we deliberately try to practise the Buddha's teaching (deliberately try to have right view), we are denying his teaching that there are only conditioned dhammas - no self in control.” ...... K:“I doubt the decision to deliberately practice satipatthana can ever be kusala. Satipatthana involves direct knowledge of paramattha dhammas, which come and go in less than a billionth of a second. How could we ever expect to deliberately know paramattha dhammas?” ... S: It may not seem so harmful when we deliberately try to practice satipatthana and so on in this way and I’m certainly not suggesting that all fleeting moments of wrong view are akusala kamma patha, but the danger is in the accumulation and tendency to more and more of the same when we think it’s right. So instead of developing the right path, we are really developing the wrong path. RobertK, recently quoted the following: R:>Anguttara Nikaya Book of the tens XI (iii) 103 Wrongness "From wrong view proceeds wrong thinking; .. .. from that wrong effort. From wrong effort proceeds wrong mindfulness; from that wrong concentration. From wrong concentration proceeds wrong knowledge. From wrong knowledge proceeds wrong release......" ***** S: I think it's very easy to take wrong effort and wrong mindfulenss for 'right'. In the Atthasalini again under ‘Immoral Consciousness’, we read the following: ”Do men of false opinions not remember an act done by themselves? They do. But that is not mindfulness. The procedure of immoral consciousness is due to such mere mode of remembering. Therefore mindfulness has not been taken. Then why is it said, ‘wrong mindfulness’ in the Sutta [e.g D iii 254, 287 etc]? In the Sutta the discourse is made by the explanatory method so as to complete the ‘Wrong Path’ and the notion ‘wrongness’ because of the immoral aggregates being exempt from and opposed to mindfulness. But in the absolute method (of Abhidhamma) in immoral consciousness there is no mindfulness; therefore it has not been taken.” I think it's helpful for us all to reflect on these issues you've raised, so I thank you sincerely. Metta, Sarah p.s [S: the last part of this para was for Htoo’s benefit as it related to an earlier thread]. ======================= 43229 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 3 Hi Andrew L, > The Buddha described mindful awareness as one of the steps in the > gradual training, going along with guarding the sense doors, > morality, and contentment. ... S: yes, this is just how I see it too – they develop together. I wouldn’t separate them. The development of satipatthana is the guarding of the sense doors and this is the development of morality and contentment – learing to be satisfied or detached from whatever dhamma is conditioned to arise. As K.Sujin reminded us, when there is the development of satipatthana, we are not troubled by any situation. We understand there are only namas and rupas. .... >On my mindfulness walks (basically one > main aspect of my practise) it is just this mindfulness that is > supposed to see the true nature of things. How, now, does this > differ from the type of mindfulness of realities that you know, and > if it is the same, sati, would you be willing to accept that it has > come about through the causes of intention to be mindful, of reading > a book with instructions to be mindful, describing mindfulness? .... S: When we talk about ‘seeing the true nature of things’ we need to be clear about what we mean. Please elaborate. I think that the development of sati that we read about in the texts refers to the awareness of seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, attachment, aversion and so on. In other words, it’s awareness of dhammas appearing now, not of concepts or ideas. I think that mindfulness comes about by understanding what it is (at first in theory of course) and by understanding what the objects are, ie what namas and rupas are. I don’t think it ever comes about by intending to be mindful or by following instructions on how to be mindful. This is how I see it, Andrew. Others here will share the ideas you’ve expressed. .... > As for the three characteristics, I gained some direct vision of them > in physical realities from a 20 minute sitting meditation session, > not sati, as one would think.. Mysterious, huh? ..... S::-) Very mysterious! .... > From the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, mindfulness of posture is one of > the objects to be known with mindfulness. Certainly it is not an > ultimate reality but there must be some benefit from it for the > Buddha to instruct people to follow it. .... S: Please read the commentary notes carefully with the sutta. Also see posts under ‘posture’ and ‘Satipathana Sutta’ in U.P. Instead of being some benefit, as I read the texts, they suggest it is the idea of ‘posture’ and ‘wholeness’ that cover up those same three characteristics. When there is an idea of ‘body’, ‘sitting’ or ‘standing’, there is no awareness of hardness, motion, heat or cold appearing through the body or other elements. We can read many suttas about the elements or khandhas – the purpose is to help us understand these dhammas, not to cling more to an idea of awareness of ‘wholes’. There are so many similes given in the Satipatthana Sutta to stress the ‘parts’ or elements rather than the ‘postures’ or ‘wholes’. We can discuss them further if you like. .... >Of course, not too far after > mindfulness of posture comes mindfulness of the four elements, but > still, posture may.. ehh. as I've read, help one to see the selfless > nature of the mind/body complex especially if it is accompanied by > awareness of intention to walk (so you see for example there is > intention and going, no 'self' who is doing the walking, sounds > right, doesn't it?). .... S: From the commentary:“There can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body. Indeed the character of contemplating the collection of major and the minor corporeal members, is like the seeing of the constituents of a cart.” Primary and derived materiality refers to the 4 primary and 24 derived rupas of course. Whatever we read in the suttas when we read the conventional language, has to be understood in terms of cittas, cetasikas and rupas. When there’s an idea of ‘awareness of intention to walk’, it’s fine if we’re just talking conventionally. But if we really think that this is the development of satipatthana, we have to what the present dhammas – namas and rupas really are at such a moment. Andrew, I know you’re reading/listening to different ideas. In the end, the proof will be in the testing out of what is appearing right now at the present moment, not by trying to have a special experience of mindfulness. ... <...> > Fair, there are situations that have caused me to have compassion > spontaneously, however, I do believe in the idea of using loving- > kindness meditations or instructions to cultivate metta. For > example, one day going to the beach with my friends I continually > wished for each of them "May he be well, happy, and peaceful. May he > have no problems. May he have no pain." and so on. This was enough > to generate metta, .. <..> S: I’m glad to read that you’ve been out with your friends and have been feeling so friendly and kindly towards them. I’d just say it’s very easy to cling to metta and take it for ‘my metta’ or to any other of the Perfections for that matter. I think it helps to consider and reflect and develop it when there are opportunities. Most importantly, we need to understand it as a conditioned dhamma too, so that it doesn’t lead to more attachment to a self with metta. ... > Let me jump in here-- certainly trying to develop detachment is one > of the goals here, as being opposed to greed or attachment, (right > intention, focused on renunciation, detachment, or generosity instead > of lust for sensuality, if this makes sense)-- but are you saying we > should do it not by trying [intentionally]? I can't understand your > statement if so. ... S: My last sentence was: ‘Just develop more awareness, understanding and detachment, but not by trying to do anything.’ What I mean is let it happen however quickly or slowly conditions dictate. If *you* try to do something to induce awareness like walking in a particular way or focusing on posture, it will impede its development. It will lead to a stronger idea of self and control rather than to detachment of all those elements. ‘Develop...’ means that by reflecting and considering as we’re doing now, understanding can gradually develop when one sees the value and urgency of the Path, I believe. Excellent questions and comments. I’ll look forward to any of your responses or quotes/extracts for further consideration. I’m behind on a number of other threads, so I may not get back to any of your responses til next week, but others may contribute in the meantime. Metta, Sarah ======== 43230 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha. --- djmathi wrote: > > > Hi Nina, > > Does abhidhamma contain any instructions on practice techniques? I > have seen many lists there and it put me off reading the abhidhamma, > even though i do enjoy the suttas with its dialogue. I somehow feel > that my dharma knowledge is incomplete without knowing the > abhidhamma but at the same time i feel it is an needless > complication as well as much can be understood through practice > itself. ... S: Welcome to DSG. I believe this was your first letter here. You raised these good questions and Nina responded. I hope you'll continue the discussion with her and also introduce a little about yourself, such as where you live. You may like to look at some save posts under 'Abhidhamma- beginners' in 'useful posts' in the Files section. I think they'll help with these concerns. I don't think we have to use the word 'abhidhamma' even. Dhamma is dhamma whichever Pitaka it's in. It just depends what can be tested out and known at this moment and what we read which is relevant to this, I think. Anyway, please join in any threads of interest to you and leave aside any which aren't for now. I hope to hear more of your comments and good feedback as you gave here. Metta, Sarah ======== 43231 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Adinava e Nekkhamma Dear Enio, --- Enio César wrote: > > > Dear Sara and Nina, > > I sent an email to the Michael, telling him that his absence has being > felt in this list. I am sure he will answer you soon! ... S: thanks for that. I know he's busy with his website and travels a lot too. ... > I loved the idea to make public the topic-to-topic discussion about the > gradual teaching. However, I'm afraid that it will not be possible, > because all the texts are already in Portuguese and I would spend too > much time to translate them to English (and my translations are always > terrible!). ... S: You could just give your comments with the references and we could help to find them. Also, you may find the suttas on the English ATI site. I'm sure many people here will be happy to help with this. ... > I will talk about it with Michael. He's always very busy, but maybe he > would help me to translate the texts and make this public discussion > possible, in order to improve the texts and to correct my errors of > interpretation or translation. ... S: Anyway that works will be good. You could also just use a line or two at a time with your own translation and then we can discuss further. of most interest are your own comments, of course. I thought of you when I posted the following extract from Nina's book, 'Cetasikas' on nekkhama. Do you have any comments? "One may wonder whether nekkhamma, renunciation, is the same as retirement from worldly life and whether it therefore pertains in particular to monks. Although a monk’s life should be a life of contentment with little, he may not be cultivating nekkhamma. Whoever has not eradicated attachment to sense objects has still conditions for “thought of sense-pleasures”, no matter whether he is a monk or a layman. When a monk receives delicious almsfood, is attachment not likely to arise? There are many degrees of nekkhamma and not only monks should cultivate it, but laypeople as well. Actually, all kusala dhammas are nekkhamma 1. When we perform dåna, observe síla or apply ourselves to mental development, we are at such moments not absorbed in sense-pleasures, there is renunciation." **** Metta, Sarah ======== 43232 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:25am Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, I'm always glad to read your letters to Nina too. I remember you've been corresponding with her for a long time now (since the 70s if I recall correctly). It's great to hear about all your activities and the keen interest of your group. --- nanapalo wrote: <...> > By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. > She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and > discussing Abhidhamma with me. Now her eyes are not so good as before, > so mainly she doesn’t read books anymore. ... S:As she has such keen interest and has appreciated A.Sujin's and Nina's books, she might appreciate listening to recordings of discussions with A.Sujin, Nina and friends. Does she understand English? If so, you could either try downloading these recent recordings from our discussions in India to be found at this link: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Alternatively, we can send you an mp3 with the recording if she has an mp3 player available for use. You already gave your address - pls let if you'd like a copy. If anyone else wasn't following the list at the time I mentioned it before, the same offer applies. (Just let me know your address off-list if it's difficult for you to download and you'd like a copy). Metta, Sarah ========= 43233 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:45am Subject: Dependent origination in daily life (Was Re: To Connie: BB's Article --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Bhikkhu Bodhi follows the traditional intepretation of DO as > exlained by Buddhaghosa. > Nanavira (and Buddhadasa) have introduced radically new > interpretations of DO. Both Nanavira and Buddhadas are "out of the > box" thinkers. > I feel that I am not yet conversant enough with the traditional > intepretation to properly evaluate either Nanavira or Buddhadasa. I > feel that I have to first properly and deeply understand the > traditional interpretation before evaluating modern alternatives. > Metta, > Rob M :-) I do feel conversant enough with my own buddhistic path to prefer modern alternatives! I did't know Buddhadasa has talked about DO: I found some texts with google, thanks Rob Metta Joop 43234 From: nanapalo Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:09am Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Ms. Sarah, Anumodana for your kind attention. I wrote to Nina since 87s while my group asked her permission for translation of Buddhism in daily life. At that time Mrs Sujata and I just 1 year studied Abhidhamma in Jakarta from. She was 70 and I was 24 years old. Mrs Sujata understands both English and Netherland language. In the daily life, her concern regarding Philosophy, and psychology in relation to life is so deep. Of course she will be happy if she could hear recording of the discussions. I will try to download the file. I will inform you off the list if I fail downloading the file. Anumodana. Kind regards, selamat -----Original Message----- From: sarah abbott [mailto:sarahprocterabbott@y...] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 5:26 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, I'm always glad to read your letters to Nina too. I remember you've been corresponding with her for a long time now (since the 70s if I recall correctly). It's great to hear about all your activities and the keen interest of your group. --- nanapalo wrote: <...> > By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. > She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and > discussing Abhidhamma with me. Now her eyes are not so good as before, > so mainly she doesn’t read books anymore. ... S:As she has such keen interest and has appreciated A.Sujin's and Nina's books, she might appreciate listening to recordings of discussions with A.Sujin, Nina and friends. Does she understand English? If so, you could either try downloading these recent recordings from our discussions in India to be found at this link: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ Alternatively, we can send you an mp3 with the recording if she has an mp3 player available for use. You already gave your address - pls let if you'd like a copy. If anyone else wasn't following the list at the time I mentioned it before, the same offer applies. (Just let me know your address off-list if it's difficult for you to download and you'd like a copy). Metta, Sarah ========= 43235 From: nanapalo Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 5:30am Subject: RE: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Mrs Nina, I am sorry to hear your father condition. It is the reflection of Anatta, no one could hold him though we want him stay more time. Anumodana for your kind attention also. To share a brief info regarding our mood in a bank, below is my brief topic of discussion: In a bank there are activities to provide services to their customers, not only the external (real) customers, but to internal customers also which are other divisions such as the business group, the product group, the stakeholders, the audit group, the finance group, etc. The challenge of the employees is how to reach the customer fulfillment in many aspects with a certain service level. To achieve these challenges, they have to manage time, people, risk, reputation, service level, manage change in turbulent and variety needs with quite great pressure, and so on. We try to discuss and share some issues concerning managing people, managing change etc as above and to map them through the application of Abhidhamma, how to manage the bad habit / mood (akusala cetasikas and cittas) of ours and of others; and how to rise and improve our kusala cetasika and citta to face the bad conditions. Interesting enough to discuss but quite hard to apply the sobhana in daily life I will share the topics and result to this group after our discussion this Saturday. Anumodana. Kind regards, Selamat -----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom [mailto:vangorko@x...] Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 4:54 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, I am delighted with your letter and all the news. See below, op 12-03-2005 06:12 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@c...: > Recently Dhamma Study Group Bogor has additional classes for bringing > Abhidhamma at 7.30 am every Saturday, ... N:Just wonderful to see all your activities. > Selamat: Point 1 discussion members will extend the hour for discussing the > Application of Abhidhamma in Management soft skill, either in Bank, > Company etc. But we have no other references for this purpose other than > your books. Greatly appreciate if you could give me some information > regarding this. N: As I understand, people like to know how to apply Abhidhamma in their work? They must face now and then difficult situations, contrarious people. It is good if they can give some examples of these to me, so that I can say more on this subject. What helps most of all: seeing one's own lobha, dosa and moha. These are the source of all problems in life, not the other people, not the situation. We like to blame others for our problems, but then we have aversion, dosa, while doing so. We have to be very patient and learn more about our different cittas. They arise and fall away so fast. Often we delude ourselves and believe that cittas are kusala, but immediately after kusala citta there is bound to be akusala citta, such as attachment to our kusala. This is really hard to see. The Abhidhamma helps us to see our hidden defilements. Yes, the Abhidhamma is for application, otherwise it would not be very useful. Good to hear more input from those working in a Bank! > S: By the way, I would like to forward Mrs Sujata Tjiomas's regards to you. > She is more than 80 years old woman and is still active learning and > discussing Abhidhamma with me. N: Yes, I was thinking of her and meant to ask you. A wonderful person, anumodana for her interest. My husband and I are well, but I lost my father recently, age 104. This is dukkha to us. My warmest regards and anumodana to you and your group, Nina. 43236 From: Joop Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:36am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Connie (also, James, RobertK, Nina, Sarah, Howard, KenO) - > > Thank you so much for your long message (#43192) that is 'good to the > last drop'. ... Hallo Tep and all In my buddhistic intuition the concept 'Buddha-ature', as used by Mahayanists, is a perfect example of atta-belief. Perhaps belief in a high kind of atta, a Atta wit a capital, but still a concept not compatible with the anatta-doctrine. I the texts used by Mahayanists is never seen an explanation with the words of (one of the) Abhidharmas, so I doubt that the way Connie and Tep try to unite Theravada with this aspect of Mahayana, will have success. In the book 'Pruning the Bodhi Tree' some Japanase buddhologists (with Zen- and thus Mahayana-roots) adhere the socalled 'Critical Buddhism'. In the chapter 'The doctrine of Tathagata-garbha is not Buddhist' Matsumoto Shiro explains why the concept 'uddha-ature' (Tathagata-garbha) is an essentialist philosophy closely akin to the monism of the Upanisads. It's not compatible with the anti- essentialist principle of paticcasamuppada (I think both in the Buddhagosian as in the early and modern interpretation of DO). One strange aspect of the comparison Theravada - Mahayana. One of the quotes of the discussion in this book is from the socalled Mahaparinirvana Sutra: "all sentient beings possess Buddha-Nature". (the discussion is if this means the same as the standpoint from the Lotus Sutra: "all sentient beings will attain Buddhahood) I'm rather sure this can not be found in the Parinibbana Sutta of the Pali Canon but still they have the same name; I'm curious how this is possible. Metta Joop 43237 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Lisa, op 14-03-2005 02:33 schreef lisa_herawati@j... op lisa_herawati@j...: > For Nina, I've a live that up and down. And I admit that sometime I can't > except that yet. N: We can learn to accept this by being patient. There are many more akusala cittas in a day than kusala cittas, but if we had not come into contact with the Dhamma we would not even know this. It is a great gain to have more understanding of our life, understanding of the different cittas. Therefore, we should be very grateful to the Buddha who taught us the Dhamma. When we are grateful and appreciate the Dhamma the cittas are kusala. Understanding and kusala can be accumulated little by little. L:I try to walk in Buddha's way but I think my path still twisting. N: All of us, worldlings, are the same. We do not walk straight yet, but it can be learnt by the development of understanding. The Buddha taught us the way: satipatthana. Mindfulness of all dhammas appearing one at a time through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind-door. We can begin now to learn to walk straight. There is seeing and we think straightaway of I who is seeing. But it is only a citta that arises and falls away immediately. It does not belong to us. We believe that we see people, but seeing sees only visible object, a rupa that is experienced through the eyesense. We can learn the truth about our life. Nina. 43238 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddha Nature Hi Connie and Larry, op 14-03-2005 01:26 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I doubt if the sutta was talking about the bhavanga citta. That's not a > sutta thing. My guess is that the "luminous" characteristic applies to > all consciousnesses. N: As we discussed long ago, in one context in the sutta there was allusion to the bhavangacitta, but in other texts it is also said that the "luminous" characteristic applies to all consciousnesses, as Larry explained. Rob M also spoke about this. Citta merely cognizes an object, in this sense it is pure. The akusala cetasikas cause it to be defiled. Nina. 43239 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Larry, I am sorry you were thinking all day, that is rather tiring. I do not know whether I can be of any help. op 14-03-2005 01:49 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I don't know. I've been thinking about this all day and haven't come to > a conclusion. It has to do with what is an object of consciousness. One > thought is that experience is only consciousness of an object. N: Can we put it this way: citta cognizes an object. Also the accompanying cetasikas experience that object, but each in their own specific way with their own tasks. Citta is the chief in knowing. L: What this means is that when I experience desire for a tomato, that desire is an > object of consciousness. N: Right, citta knows that there was desire, cognizes desire. That desire has just fallen away and then another process, a mind-door process arises, with cittas that have desire as object. Desire is nama and nama can only be experienced through the mind-door. L: If that is the case it would seem that desire for a tomato arose and ceased as unexperienced javana citta and then became an object of consciousness. N: Right. The concept tomatoe, or perhaps the thought of that flavour was an object of citta with desire, and that citta was at that moment not experienced, not an object of another citta, since the concept tomatoe was the object. L: But that unexperienced javana citta had an object too (the tomato), N: Right. L: so we are still left with two kinds of object, experienced and unexperienced, N: Here is a tricky point. An object is object when it is experienced. The unexperienced javanacitta was not an object. This should solve your dilemma. L: and possibly a different kind of citta process called "experience". This doesn't seem like a very satisfactory solution but I can't think of anything else right now. N: It is not so complicated when you keep in mind that there are different processes of citta, that the cittas of one process all experience the same object, and that only one object at a time can be experienced during one process. A citta can be experienced by another citta, arising later on, and this arises in another process, a mind-door process. We also have to remember that processes pass so fast, what are in reality many cittas seem to be only one moment. We can be easily deluded. This is the way to entangle what seems complicated at first. Nina. 43240 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, Thank you for your letter and offering a summary of your discussions. Many here on this list will also be interested. How to face difficult situations at work, to face akusala cittas, develop kusala cittas. A good topic. We cannot control others' cittas, thus, the client's cittas, but we can do our work with metta and karuna. The Brahmaviharas practised in daily life can help much. How to practise them? In knowing our own cittas more. Not deluding ourselves and erroneously take for kusala what is in reality akusala. Subtle lobha we often do not notice. These are just a few thoughts. Best wishes, Nina. op 14-03-2005 14:30 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@c...: > We try to discuss and share some issues concerning managing people, > managing change etc as above and to map them through the application of > Abhidhamma, how to manage the bad habit / mood (akusala cetasikas and > cittas) of ours and of others; and how to rise and improve our kusala > cetasika and citta to face the bad conditions. Interesting enough to > discuss but quite hard to apply the sobhana in daily life > > I will share the topics and result to this group after our discussion > this Saturday. 43241 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:53am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Joop, J: One strange aspect of the comparison Theravada - Mahayana. One of the quotes of the discussion in this book is from the socalled Mahaparinirvana Sutra: "all sentient beings possess Buddha-Nature". (the discussion is if this means the same as the standpoint from the Lotus Sutra: "all sentient beings will attain Buddhahood) I'm rather sure this can not be found in the Parinibbana Sutta of the Pali Canon but still they have the same name; I'm curious how this is possible. C: I spent some time trying to find all of Nichiren's Nirvana quotes I could without success and have been told there is no English translation of the Mahayana Nirvana Sutra, but several versions in Chinese, translated from Sanskrit. I do still find myself looking for ways to reconcile the various traditions, but doubt it's going to happen. My thinking is that if it's not in the Pali texts, it's not Dhamma-Vinaya, but (and I don't really buy it) it's ok for people to call themselves 'Buddhist' anyway. Paula sent me the article out of concern because I have no wish to go to more meetings where I either sit in silent disapproval/disagreement or am disruptive and 'slanderous', but not heard. I prefer typing. My whole point to my enchanted friend was that, in my understanding, Buddha nature is not Buddhist but Atta. I just thought it was interesting that the author chose that quote to support the concept. I still think some (so-called) Thera Buddhists have an idea relating to Buddha Nature as Nibaana, but that's my interpretation. See what you think of the following quotes from Bhikkhu Khemavamsa's "CONTEMPLATION OF THE MIND: Practising Cittanupassana" [http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf]. peace, connie 43242 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 11:53am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Larry, C: last page: "The Buddha nature that all these beings possess is called by the name Myoho-renge-kyo ... summoned forth and manifested by our chanting..." L: This reminds me of the Buddha's words of encouragement to the bhikkhus. Buddha nature could mean simply "kusala citta". Do you know what "Myoho-renge-kyo" means? C: "Mystic Law". Japanese pronunciation of Chinese title for "Lotus Sutra" (Kumarajiva's translation). On and on go the explanations. Myoho - mystic; life/death. Renge - lotus; simultaneity of cause & effect; purity. Kyo - sound; sutra. [Nam - devotion; fusion] "The ultimate law or reality permeating all phenomena". Some Lotus schools' version of DO, I guess. As I understand my friends' world, plants, rocks and all are potential Buddhas. I think, maybe like Joop, that it's another All is One & Atta thing, but will save my ranting for another list. [...] L: From Jaran's and Suan's messages that you mention below I see that the commentaries do say luminous mind is either bhavanga or rebirth citta, but I couldn't find what sutta they referred to. Anyway, seems like a bit of a stretch for me. The Buddha didn't talk about things like that. Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to nirodha samapatti? C: Adding the pali to Uppalawanna's translation [www.bdcu.org.au/BDDR/bddr12no3/anguttara.html]: 48. “Naaha.m bhikkhave, a~n~na.m ekadhammampi samanupassaami ya.m eva.m lahuparivatta.m yathayida.m citta.m. Yaava~ncida.m, bhikkhave, upamaapi na sukaraa yaava lahuparivatta.m cittanâ€?ti. A.t.thama.m. 48. Bhikkhus, the mind changes quickly. There is no comparison to the quickly changing nature of the mind. It's the eighth. 49. “Pabhassaramida.m, bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi upakkili.t.thanâ€?ti. Navama.m. 49. Bhikkhus, the mind is effulgent, it is defiled by external defilement. 50. “Pabhassaramida.m, bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi vippamuttanâ€?ti. Dasama.m. 50. Bhikkhus, the mind is effulgent, when released from external defilement. 51. “Pabhassaramida.m bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi upakkili.t.tha.m. Ta.m assutavaa puthujjano yathaabhuuta.m nappajaanaati. Tasmaa ‘assutavato puthujjanassa cittabhaavanaa natthii’ti vadaamiiâ€?ti. Pa.thama.m. 51.Bhikkhus, the mind is effulgent, it is defiled by external defilement. The not learned ordinary man does not know this and he has no development of the mind. This is the first. 52. “Pabhassaramida.m bhikkhave, citta.m. Ta~nca kho aagantukehi upakkilesehi vippamutta.m. Ta.m sutavaa ariyasaavako yathaabhuuta.m pajaanaati. Tasmaa ‘sutavato ariyasaavakassa cittabhaavanaa atthii’ti vadaamiiâ€?ti. Dutiya.m. 52. Bhikkhus. the mind is effulgent, when released from external defilement. The learned noble disciple knows this and there is development of mind to him. This is the second. See dsg 10218 for comments on TB's thoughts [http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an01-049.html] about this pabhassara mind. Personally, I don't think the pabhassara is as important as the aagantukehi upakkilesehi / vippamuttan, so I'm agreeing with the commentarial: bhavanga. Maybe I should read some old guests and robbers posts. L: Taking Jaran's advice to stick to what is within our capabilities I think we can look to bare attention as being luminous, pure, and totally empty. I know this doesn't fit the categories, but look and see for yourself. Does bare attention have any objective content at all? When you look at an emotional outburst, what is the nature of that looking? C: I don't know what 'bare attention' means. 'Noting without labelling'? Manasikaara? Sati? "Consciousness without feature"? Likewise, 'empty': interdependent and impermanent? without an object? bare? of it's own distinct characteristics/functions/nature? Whenever I look at anything, there is always a story going on... no drama queen outside of that. Whenever a mindstate sees, it must attend to some thing, some object(ive). Yesterday at work, I looked up just before one of the housekeepers walked in & her manner said to me 'anger, sulking' and then I ignored her. No real outburst or words, but still drama. Thinking about what Christine said the other day about mindstates and physical actions, lobha and dosa just do what they do and don't care what they do it in relation to. Everything is good and sticky to lobha and repugnant to dosa. In the conventional version, I like dark chocolate, but I think what accumulates is just lobha and more tendency for it to attach to this or that flavour, color, texture in anything that arises. LOL... I think part of Buddha's warning the monks so much about women is because there is a word association between (sense) object/aarama.na and woman/rama.nii. But that's just me. peace, connie 43243 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:19pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: No need to apologise and certainly no need to wait til you feel you can > hold your ground or express yourself as well as you'd like. To be honest, > I do get a little concerned if I don't hear from you for too long, so > consider a brief holding reply to let us know how you're doing from time > to time as well. Fair enough. It is a pattern with me and things whether I get them done or not so I don't think this is too much to ask. > ... > A:>(never mind the extreme mischief mode it seemed my posts > > here were in) it is a continuing problem for me but the past few days > > I think I've had some more well-being and clarity and so I think I > > can get back into the swing of things. Let's see. > ... > S: that's good to hear – the `well-being and clarity'. Of course, there > will always be ups and downs for all of us. I don't know if you saw a nice > post that Andrew T wrote on this subject (7th March) to Maya recently? > > He wrote: > "For this reason, I think it is a mistake to believe that we *can* > direct the waves and currents in the present moment and explain this > supposed ability by saying "that's my cetana at work!" Wrong. > That's conditions at work. Many times when we are happy and calm, it > *looks like* "we" are practising mindfulness or metta or whatever. > That we are directing the flow of our consciousness. But that's only > an illusion. A water illusion? > > Our hope is to understand, not to direct." WELL can't metta be practised intentionally by one after reading a book on how to arouse metta?? (Incidentally, the conditions of other people 'being' should be enough to extend metta, whether they are within one's sight or not). This is reasonable, just as it is reasonable to say it might take a little bit more than that, more conditions, but I'd say it's all fair game. Finding Buddhism and studying meditation from a particular meditation manual that emphasized 'loving-friendliness' and the generous help of others towards my welfare were the conditions for generating metta. These days it seems like going through the motions, wishing each person metta through the same sentences 'May he be well, happy, and peaceful. May no harm come to him, ... etc' is a little dry and tiring, but I'm going to be looking to practise metta in the future. It's one root of virtuous action, as I am reading (one particular mode of non-hate). > > Also, you may like to look at posts under `Discouraged, depressed.....' in > U.P. sometime if you're having trouble.. KK. I get caught up in reading U.P. posts for long times sometimes. I think it could just be having to wait until I get out more for things to make sense, sitting online a lot doesn't conduce to the words of an exchange feel meaningful. > ***** > To get to the tail: > > > S: Would you like to join in an ongoing study corner or start a new > > one? > > > Or just join in different threads? > > > A:> Well I kind of haven't been able to study CMA as I did earlier, and > > there's no great understanding to be had by trying to force it to > > work when it's not, > ... > S: Agreed – just use it as a reference manual from time to time, perhaps. Well I will relay one experience, I should probably tell you, I am reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's "The Noble Eightfold Path" and I had some material printed out Friday from it, and it talked about delusion being a thick coat of insensitivity from reality, and I sort of noticed the reality of this. It got me thinking to the Buddha's saying of "Abandon delusion as one quality, monks, and I guarantee you non-return." I didn't go that far, but I think I gained an understanding of what delusion was about. Following that, and sitting in the hallway distressed and having a nurse check up on me, I was in the last group of the day sitting patiently and talking a little back & forth with the guy next to me about the computer field and IT market (this is the one time my treatment has really felt like treatment) and some clothes on the lady in front of me began to be apparent as absolute realities. I had wished I had done the contemplation of the body as the four great elements so I could then compare it to what had I saw outside of my body (as I have read is the one facet of this meditation that can really 'depersonalize' your experience of the body). It also got me wishing I knew the derived types of matter too but I knew the book was off-limits for studying at least for now. Sort of a point where you realize "have read so much of the books, still not completely there yet" and a "here is something ive been studying" realization, but you don't feel 1:1 correspondence because you can't predict (and thus study) what you're going to see. We go by chapters, not lines of what will become apparent in the day to come. Re: Abhidhamma and moha & dosa > S: Yes, just start posting a little at a time as a separate thread, > perhaps – even just a sentence—with your comments. I know what you mean > about just `some kind of darkness..'. I think it is a mistake to try to > distinguish states, rather than just be aware of what is appearing at that > very moment of trying. Well I have no good response for this Isn't being able to tell whether it's dosa or moha part of seeing the reality? And thus study to clear up the issue a legitimate pursuit? > > Dosa is always averse to present dhammas or situations. It can be anything > from the mildest irritation or discomfort to extreme anger. Whenever there > is any unpleasant mental feeling, dosa is there for sure. Moha accompanies > all unwholesome states, but when it appears, its characteristic of > ignorance, just not knowing anything can be known. I think for most > people, dosa is more obvious, but moha is so very common., for example, > when there just seems to be `some kind of darkness'. > > I'll look forward to any thread or passages you raise for discussion. I > know Nina and others will be glad too. > This makes me think.. what kind of ignorance are we talking about here? Can ignorance of the true nature of reality manifest as delusion, that is, a skewed view of some objects, instead of a proper one, or is that part of ignorance itself. When I feel that darkness is it ignorance built up of the true nature of realities, manifesting as just (dark) non-knowledge of the way things are? > Metta, > > Sarah > ===== peeace, A.L. 43244 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:47pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi AndrewL, (Htoo at the end & All) > > <...> > A:> Right, everything is indeed reliant on causes and conditions, but I > > am thinking here that we don't have to be quite so passive in waiting > > for them to arise. From what I am reading the way to know > > defilements or nama and rupa is to be mindful of them, well, I am > > asking now, what kinds of causes do you think can bring up sati? I > > have said that intention for it along with a few other causes can be > > sufficient, but see more below. > .... > S: The development of satipatthana is not passive at all, but it's not > `we' that can wait or make them arise. Understanding of what sati is and > what namas and rupas are is the way that sati will arise and develop. I > think that asking the right questions and carefully considering and > reflecting on the teachings as you're doing here is the main condition or > cause for direct awareness and understanding. OK so then let me ask: What is sati? And are you saying reflecting on a particular nama or rupa can condition sati for that bit? That holds pretty good implications for the course of practise. > S: I think we could replace energy here with intention, wish, > concentration and other states which can be wholesome or unwholesome. Any > desire or intention of getting particular results with expectations is at > best unhelpful and at worst, dangerous, in my view, as others are > discussing in another thread about wishing for arahantship. Well it's been helpful! I believe I've cultivated sati by following meditation techniques in the bestseller "Mindfulness in Plain English," with which I assume many readers here are familiar. > ... > A:> OK, so what type of wrong view are we looking at here? Certainly not > > wrong view as described as one of the ten unwholesome action, but > > still a wrong view holding us back from seeing the true nature of > > present nama and rupa, right? Like a wrong view accompanying a > > citta, yes? > .... > S: Just as right views or wisdom (pa~n~naa or samma di.t.thi) can be > wholesome courses of action (kamma-patha) through the mind, so wrong views > (micha di.t.thi) are likely to be unwholesome courses of action through > the mind. In fact, we read that wisdom and the development of satipatthana > is the highest kind of wholesome kamma-patha. Sarah I can't agree with you that wrong view based on self can be unwholesome kamma-patha. The Buddha really described wrong view as more of a general view of things, even conventionally using the term 'beings' numerous times in it. That the type of wrong view you describe is a hindrance to practise at all times, I am not decided on yet. I have seen a lot leading one to use the terms 'you' and 'being' suggesting a view of self to do some rudimentary practise tasks, and I really think the Buddha taught that there are some things we can consciously decide to do. > > For example, when we think others are responsible for our good and bad > experiences in life or that world leaders are responsible for the > suffering people endure, aren't we denying the results of kamma? By > understanding more and more that any situation really is only citta, > cetasika and rupa arising because of their own conditions including kamma, > the easier it is to develop metta and other wholesome states instead of > dosa (aversion), no matter how others behave, for example. > Aren't there greater forces at work than just kamma? I mean was it the kamma of 6 million Jews and 2 million others to be incinerated or have other methods of torture or persecutions put on them so much? Explain to me how karma can work if I, say, got an organization together to decrease penalties for marijuana laws and was later ticketed for using. Had I not done that, I might have been arrested and subjected to criminal charges. Was my activism good karma or destructive karma that ruined the kamma of being put in jail or did it merely put off when that karma will be experienced? There are so many things that could demonstrate this. I could do either idle chatter here hours on end day after day week after week and go outside and take a walk down the same stretch of road between 6 and 7 pm, or instead discuss dharma and do programming work. Assuming this karma can generate vipaka in this life, how can what I hear, see and feel in terms of pleasant or painful or neither-pleasant-nor-painful during that daily walk possibly be related to or a consequence of, what I did online at my computer hours earlier? > Back to the subtleties of wrong views, I'd like to quote a couple of > passages Ken H wrote recently which I thought were good and hopefully > relevant here: > > K:"When we deliberately look out the window, pick up a cup or type a > letter, we may not be aware that there are only conditioned dhammas > (so we may not have right view), but nor are we *denying* there are > only conditioned dhammas (so we don't have wrong view). However, > when we deliberately try to practise the Buddha's teaching > (deliberately try to have right view), we are denying his teaching > that there are only conditioned dhammas - no self in control." To which I would reply, there is the apsect of volition that a 'person' may execute or call upon during the course of his life due to different causes and conditions, such as reading a book, hearing a dharma talk, having personal inclinations and preferences, so seemingly a lot can be done from this heap of aggregates. > ...... > K:"I doubt the decision to deliberately practice satipatthana can ever > be kusala. Satipatthana involves direct knowledge of paramattha > dhammas, which come and go in less than a billionth of a second. How > could we ever expect to deliberately know paramattha dhammas?" How can we expect to non-deliberately know paramattha dhammas? We can see them when they are arising and passing away for what they are, maybe not in total clarity, registering every moment, but we can get a general picture. Why not? We take videos of actions happening in sequence, and we are able to extract enough information to make connections in our mind based on that, why not the same with the six senses? > S: It may not seem so harmful when we deliberately try to practice > satipatthana and so on in this way and I'm certainly not suggesting that > all fleeting moments of wrong view are akusala kamma patha, but the danger > is in the accumulation and tendency to more and more of the same when we > think it's right. So instead of developing the right path, we are really > developing the wrong path. > > RobertK, recently quoted the following: > > R:>Anguttara Nikaya Book of the tens XI (iii) 103 Wrongness > > "From wrong view proceeds wrong thinking; .. .. from that wrong > effort. From wrong effort proceeds wrong mindfulness; from that > wrong concentration. From wrong concentration proceeds wrong > knowledge. From wrong knowledge proceeds wrong release......" > ***** > S: I think it's very easy to take wrong effort and wrong mindfulenss for > 'right'. In the Atthasalini again under `Immoral Consciousness', we read > the following: > > "Do men of false opinions not remember an act done by themselves? They do. > But that is not mindfulness. The procedure of immoral consciousness is due > to such mere mode of remembering. Therefore mindfulness has not been > taken. Then why is it said, `wrong mindfulness' in the Sutta [e.g D iii > 254, 287 etc]? In the Sutta the discourse is made by the explanatory > method so as to complete the `Wrong Path' and the notion `wrongness' > because of the immoral aggregates being exempt from and opposed to > mindfulness. But in the absolute method (of Abhidhamma) in immoral > consciousness there is no mindfulness; therefore it has not been taken." > > I think it's helpful for us all to reflect on these issues you've raised, > so I thank you sincerely. > > Metta, > > Sarah > > p.s [S: the last part of this para was for Htoo's benefit as it related to > an earlier thread]. > ======================= Take care, Sarah, I think I'm going on that kamma-vipaka walk now. :-) 43245 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:57pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) > N: We have to know that sati cannot be directed to specific objects. > > M: Even when supported by jhaana? N: It is different in samatha, you are right. M quotes: N: That > sati cannot be induced. > > M: Not induced, but aroused? I'm thinking of "...[a bhikkhu] Nisidati > pallankam abhujitva ujum kayam panidhaya parimukham satim upatthapetva so > satova assasati sato passasati = "Sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on > his lap, keeps is body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of > meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him."* N: It is good you bring this up, this is a point for many people. The terms induced or aroused can create misunderstandings. For samatha and for vipassana paññaa which knows the right conditions for the right results is necessary. M: Right-- Thus, anapanasati is not just trying to induce concentration at will, paññaa is indispensable. Pañña and sati are necessary to know precisely when there is kusala citta with calm and when lobha. Understanding has to be emphasized all the time. M: Understood-- > M: Since the Buddha > plainly says here, "...a bhikkhu...arouses mindfulness...", aren't we just > talking about different modes of expression or different methods of > explanation? Let me add that I don't think this passage is meant as an > instruction to a present-day layperson or that there really is 'a bhikkhu' > except as a designation or formation. In other words, I think that > anattataa is implicit in this and all texts (where it isn't explicit). > N: Yes, he has to know the right conditions, otherwise nobody in the world can > arouse sati whenever he wants it. > N: The more one wants it the less chance for its > arising. > > M: Of course it can't arise with craving. This reminded me of an > interesting passage in PTS's Dispeller, from the Classification of the > Structure of Conditions (3) Profitable, Rooted in a Formation: > > "...994. Herein, because in a single conscious moment there is no ignorance > together with a profitable formation, therefore instead of saying that, > kusalamuula.m...("profitable root") is said because it is the root of > profitable states, as ignorance is of unprofitable states; and, because of > the absence of craving and clinging, in the place of craving, "trust" > (pasaada), which is engrossed in the object like craving is said; and in the > place of clinging, "determination", which has a strong impact is said." > > Do you think this is pertinent to the arousing of mindfulness without > craving or clinging? N: it is said of kusala citta. Passaada, this means purity and the footnote says: saddhaa, confidence. This reminds me of the passage on saddhaa in Vis. XIV, 140: Text Vis.: Its characteristic is having faith, or its characteristic is trusting. And also of the Tiika: ...the opposite of faithlessness is decision, resolution that is pure. The Tiika states that this is not the same as adhimokkha, determination, that is among the Owhat-so-evers¹ or supplementary factors, yevapannakas, mentioned in the list of dhammas in the Dhammasangani. M: Interesting, I had assumed that Cousins meant 'adhimokkha' as that's the translation for 'determination' in the glossary. N: Here, the term resolution (adhimutti) is used to describe the manifestation of faith or confidence in wholesomeness.> This refers to the first type of mahaakusala citta with paññaa, and thus it can also pertain to the development of satipatthana. M: So in the Dispeller excerpt, 'trust' and 'determination' are more or less synonymous? Thanks, Nina-- mike 43246 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 -Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 -Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. > M: By the way, is vicaara necessarily conditioned by > immediately previous vicaara? Since vitakka and vicaara each last only a > moment, their difference is hard to understand otherwise. I thought maybe, > disappearence and contiguity? N:Sampaticchanacitta which is accompanied by vitakka and vicaara follows upon one of the five sense-cognitions that are without them. The sampaticchanacitta conditions the following santiranacitta by way of anantara-paccaya, samanatarapaccaya, absence condition, disaoppearance-condition. When we say citta, we also include the accompanying cetasikas. But I do not see this as a means to know their difference. First the difference between nama and rupa has to be realized. M: Oh. It is not sure that everybody will know the difference between vitakka and vicaara. M: Guess that would be me... > N: In fact the Bodhisatta must have been aware of them, how otherwise > would he realize their presence? > > M: Of course--this awareness would have been after the fact though, I > think--in > reviewing. Or do you think these were cases of cittas with awareness taking > immediately fallen-away vitakkas as objects? > > N: I think both cases. Otherwise he could not acquire tender insight. M: Yes, that makes sense I think. N: I would like to add: one cannot count how immediate awareness of an object is. Its characteristic can appear to sati sampajañña, but this can be in a following process, processes of cittas follow upon each other very fast. Awareness in vipassanaa is not reviewing by thinking about a reality. M: I didn't think so. But in the texts, doesn't 'reviewing' (usually?) refer to thinking about past realities and also past thoughts? mike 43247 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga XIV, 143 and Tiika, part 1. > >>N: Adosa with regard to an object > >> that is not a living being can be described as patience. There can be > >> patience with regard to unpleasant objects such as heat, cold, or bodily > >> pain. > > M: Thanks, I hadn't heard this before. Is this synonymous with 'khanti'? I'd > > never made a connection between the root adosa and khanti. > N: Yes. There may be irritation or annoyance about any object, also a person > or concept such as the wheather. But instead of annoyance there can be > endurance of what is unpleasant, or patience. Kh. Sujin explained to us that > there is also patience when there is non-attachment to a pleasant object. M: Understood-- > N: When there is viriya for kusala there is also khanti. But khanti is not a > specific cetasika. M: I should've known that! Thanks again. mike 43248 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina Hi Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nina van Gorkom" To: Sent: Friday, March 11, 2005 12:32 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina > > M: Is nibbaana the object of the mundane path? Does this occur with insight > > prior to stream-entry? > N: It is not the object of the Path that is lokiya, but change-of-lineage, > gotrabhuu, that is still lokiya citta, has as object nibbaana. However, it > does not eradicate defilements. After that lokuttara cittas arise. > Gotrabhuu is intermediate between lokiya and lokuttara. See T.A. p. 356: > "After that, with nibbaana as its object, the change of lineage > consciousness occurs, overcoming the lineage of the ordinary person and > arriving at the lineage of the noble ones." > Gotta is the clan, lineage of the ancestry. Bhuu: he has become. He becomes > another person, as we could say in conventional language. M: Thanks, I had misunderstood a passage in the Dispeller. mike 43249 From: mnease Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina Hi Azita and Nina, ----- Original Message ----- From: "gazita2002" To: Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2005 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbaana Object, for Nina > Hello Mike and Nina, > This is very interesting. I had an idea that once nibbana was > experienced "one" became a sotapanna, but did not know so much detail. > > Maybe this clears up our discussion about the subject, Mike. Yes it does, my mistake! > thank you for all your detailed posts, Nina. I find them so > helpful. Agreed, I feel very fortunate to have such good friends. mike 43250 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:33pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Nina, I'm still confused about the experience of desire for a tomatoe. For one thing, what desire desires is to experience a tomatoe; so desire doesn't experience the object of its desire. [addendum: unless we say when desire experiences its object it doesn't experience itself, is that it?] I believe you said when desire for a tomatoe arises as javana citta, that javana citta is not experienced until it is an object of consciousness in another mind-door process. What kind of consciousness takes this desire as object? It seems like it would be another javana series, and this second javana series, itself, would not be experienced until it (the second javana series) became the object of another mind-door process. What would be the experience of the first javana series in which tomatoe (an idea let's say) is the object of desire? Would it be just the perception of the idea of tomatoe? It would seem that a lot of what we think of as present experience is actually experiencing of unexperienced elements (of all kinds) of past mental processes. To say that experience is the object of javana and not the javana itself (unless it is an object) is a new way of looking at citta process for me. I'm going to have to meditate on this for a while. Larry 43251 From: Andrew Levin Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 3 & a q Hi, Sarah, Reply to your post, a question pertaining to the previous post, and a comment. You wrote: I am familiar with this idea and how the Buddha spoke about it. He said a person with wrong view could go so far as to commit parricide. He could regard formations as permanent, as self. Whereas, someone with right view, could not commit parricide, it is an impossibility, Buddha said. It is also impossible that one of right view could treat any formation as permanent, or as self. So this gets me thinking, maybe wrong view of self is indeed a significant matter when it comes to wrong view, moreso than I thought. This makes me think right view is something more significant than I had thought. As I have told you in the last post, I am reading Bhikkhu Bodhi's "The Noble Eightfold Path." Since the work is too small to have a complete description of each path factor and what putting it into place entails, he gives a list of supplementary reading. I have read some of it, including "The Four Noble Truths" by Francis Story, and "Karma and Rebirth" by Byanatiloka Mahathera. It seemed right to be, however it didn't really get a lively reality-encompassing view of things into my mind. Bhikku Bodhi suggests that through reflection and recognition of certain principles such as that of a moral law of cause and effect, we can come to possess right view. This sort of gets me because, while it does seem that there is a 'view' to be had, it does say recognition of the principal of karma can constitute part of right view. I have to say I don't know how this can be the case because for all I know I have accepted the theory of karma for long, if nothing else but on faith, but I can't say it feels like it fits into what would comprise Right View (having known wrong view in my mind on one occasion and possibly seeing a projection of it unto reality), and even reflection on certain principals like how the four Noble Truths work in our lives, regardless that they constitute a 'right view' it still seems possible that one could engage in some of the ten unwholesome actions out of habit, circumstance, peer pressure, or any number of other things, that it does not constitute that solid and concrete sounding right view described by the Buddha that makes it an impossibility to commit the five heinous crimes, even to regard any formation as permanent. Especially the latter part seems like it should be supramundane right view, because if we start the path off with this, we are still far from seeing the three characteristics of reality in any number of cases, never mind absolutely everything. So I guess I mean to ask, how can we work with right view, to create it? Is there a specific model right view must follow, and if so, how can we bring it to its perfection? Or is having our views 'straightened out' to be generally in line with the dhamma good enough, all considered? How do we know, if reflecting on, and/or accepting certain ideas, if we have this 'unshakeable' right view? Your thoughts? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Andrew L, > > > The Buddha described mindful awareness as one of the steps in the > > gradual training, going along with guarding the sense doors, > > morality, and contentment. > ... > S: yes, this is just how I see it too – they develop together. I wouldn't > separate them. The development of satipatthana is the guarding of the > sense doors and this is the development of morality and contentment – > learing to be satisfied or detached from whatever dhamma is conditioned to > arise. As K.Sujin reminded us, when there is the development of > satipatthana, we are not troubled by any situation. We understand there > are only namas and rupas. Hmm.. guarding the sense doors as a cause of morality? I hadn't thought of that, but now I guess I can try it out. In the past, I have behaved with morality after reading how it is practised by those gone forth, emulating the behavior described, with regard to speech, keeping the precepts, and so forth (practising compassion for beings is another feat in and of itself but I got most of it). > .... > >On my mindfulness walks (basically one > > main aspect of my practise) it is just this mindfulness that is > > supposed to see the true nature of things. How, now, does this > > differ from the type of mindfulness of realities that you know, and > > if it is the same, sati, would you be willing to accept that it has > > come about through the causes of intention to be mindful, of reading > > a book with instructions to be mindful, describing mindfulness? > .... > S: When we talk about `seeing the true nature of things' we need to be > clear about what we mean. Please elaborate. I think that the development > of sati that we read about in the texts refers to the awareness of seeing, > visible object, hearing, sound, attachment, aversion and so on. In other > words, it's awareness of dhammas appearing now, not of concepts or ideas. > > I think that mindfulness comes about by understanding what it is (at first > in theory of course) and by understanding what the objects are, ie what > namas and rupas are. I don't think it ever comes about by intending to be > mindful or by following instructions on how to be mindful. This is how I > see it, Andrew. Others here will share the ideas you've expressed. Well there is not so much more to elaborate, I basically have gone on the street and practised some mindfulness of body and/or feelings 'walks' where I am only trying to be mindful of the realities described in the work on the four foundations of mindfulness I own. The book describes how we must be mindful of small deportments of posture, otherwise we may cling to them with craving or wrong views (wrong views of permanency and so forth). Mindfulness of dhammas includes a lot of what you mentioned, sense bases and their objects, fetters, so it is a lot of the same deal. ... If you base your understanding on the idea that all of these objects, nama and rupa, are impermanent, suffering, and not-self, and go on to be mindful, this is what I would be describing. However, I have not discerned the three characteristics of the aforementioned realities so much, but I have had a mindfulness of them, a knowing that they are there, a deep knowing, a sort of 'not forgetting' kind of thing which I read about... and in book I've tried practising of, the mindful awareness, which as part of the gradual training, was described in a few sentences, and I went on to thoroughly know my body, tried to apply clear comprehension of purpose, and so on. As the author suggested, mindfulness inside & outside (formal sitting) meditation go hand in hand. Another example of this would be where the author states if you're crossing a street, or for example answering a phone, you dont keep your mindfulness or attention on the body, but focus on what are you going to say, and the interaction. At one point I have shifted awareness to answering a phone call and there was a deep knowing of my faculties at that point, what I was doing, and expecting to say or hear. This is the type of mindfulness I have experienced. I ask how mindfulness as you know it is 'mindful of' certain realities, not just ones you study, but ones that appear prominent at any given time. I can say that this is a type of mindfulness, too, having seen realities come to the fore or become very apparent in and of themselves on occasion. And I don't know how to reconcile the two with each other or the term sati. > .... > > As for the three characteristics, I gained some direct vision of them > > in physical realities from a 20 minute sitting meditation session, > > not sati, as one would think.. Mysterious, huh? > ..... > S::-) Very mysterious! > .... > > From the (Maha-)Satipatthana sutta, mindfulness of posture is one of > > the objects to be known with mindfulness. Certainly it is not an > > ultimate reality but there must be some benefit from it for the > > Buddha to instruct people to follow it. > .... > S: Please read the commentary notes carefully with the sutta. Also see > posts under `posture' and `Satipathana Sutta' in U.P. Instead of being > some benefit, as I read the texts, they suggest it is the idea of > `posture' and `wholeness' that cover up those same three characteristics. > When there is an idea of `body', `sitting' or `standing', there is no > awareness of hardness, motion, heat or cold appearing through the body or > other elements. We can read many suttas about the elements or khandhas – > the purpose is to help us understand these dhammas, not to cling more to > an idea of awareness of `wholes'. There are so many similes given in the > Satipatthana Sutta to stress the `parts' or elements rather than the > `postures' or `wholes'. We can discuss them further if you like. Sarah, these are nearly interchangeable. I have read Bhikkhu Bodhi assert that mindfulness of posture illuminates the selfless nature of the body as it is in different positions- so whether or not this is the case, I could just as well be doing mindfulness of the four elements in my practise. In fact, sooner or later, I will be. I have read a little from the U.P. Satipatthana section, but I still think that the four foundations are to be practised sequentially, for long periods of time. Sati conditions more sati, but can't sati be cultivated? We can cultivate faith, to be honest I don't know if the mindfulness I describe using is sati or whether it is something different but mindfulness has the four foundations of mindfulness as its proximate cause, right? It seems that them being there, and beginning to be aware of them, is enough. To be fair, however, I remember one occasion a reality seemed extra-real, it was in my left arm, I think, the elements or just realityness became very viewable as satipatthana. Hence the subject. But then again, even the high monk at my local Vihara tells me how I can practise satipatthana, and he suggests one can 'do' the four foundations of mindfulness just as I do, to me (and has given me a little bit of advice on it at the same time). And back to the gradual training, how is most of it done but by 'doing' it? E.g. Contentment. One has to foster a sense of contentment at the instructor's words. Even in some of the UP Satipatthana 4 posts there is support for my notion of practise, as the Buddha describes how mindfulness of breathing is of great fruit when developed, and then goes on to give instructions for it. Heck, what about the Noble Eightfold Path? There's even a path factor called Right Intention. It would be hard to truthfully dispute that intentions need to be made on the path and practise has to be done. > .... > S: From the commentary:"There can be nothing apart from the qualities of > primary and derived materiality, in a body. > > Indeed the character of contemplating the collection of major and the > minor corporeal members, is like the seeing of the constituents of a > cart." > > Primary and derived materiality refers to the 4 primary and 24 derived > rupas of course. Whatever we read in the suttas when we read the > conventional language, has to be understood in terms of cittas, cetasikas > and rupas. When there's an idea of `awareness of intention to walk', it's > fine if we're just talking conventionally. But if we really think that > this is the development of satipatthana, we have to what the present > dhammas – namas and rupas really are at such a moment. > Sarah, you may be right on this. I have heard different ideas on how one can become a sotapanna and in at least one article seeing intention and going in their conventional terms are part of the picture. But it does make sense to know ultimate realities. Perhaps we can study Abhidhamma well and know these realities for what they really are. > Andrew, I know you're reading/listening to different ideas. In the end, > the proof will be in the testing out of what is appearing right now at the > present moment, not by trying to have a special experience of mindfulness. Sarah, or my successful, or unsuccessful practise of the Noble Eightfold Path, which includes the practise of the four foundations of mindfulness, the proximate cause of mindfulness, whether 'special' or of type A B or C (well actually it may be one and only one of these types, let's see if we can make some progress towards agreement or seeing if we can get any convergement on views. > ... > <...> > > Fair, there are situations that have caused me to have compassion > > spontaneously, however, I do believe in the idea of using loving- > > kindness meditations or instructions to cultivate metta. For > > example, one day going to the beach with my friends I continually > > wished for each of them "May he be well, happy, and peaceful. May he > > have no problems. May he have no pain." and so on. This was enough > > to generate metta, .. > <..> > S: I'm glad to read that you've been out with your friends and have been > feeling so friendly and kindly towards them. > > I'd just say it's very easy to cling to metta and take it for `my metta' > or to any other of the Perfections for that matter. I think it helps to > consider and reflect and develop it when there are opportunities. Most > importantly, we need to understand it as a conditioned dhamma too, so that > it doesn't lead to more attachment to a self with metta. I don't think I've taken it to be 'my' metta. It is just loving-kindness that can be given or applied to anyone. Metta and compassion are a hard task. Here's hoping that they can be successfully developed by us all. > ... > > Let me jump in here-- certainly trying to develop detachment is one > > of the goals here, as being opposed to greed or attachment, (right > > intention, focused on renunciation, detachment, or generosity instead > > of lust for sensuality, if this makes sense)-- but are you saying we > > should do it not by trying [intentionally]? I can't understand your > > statement if so. > ... > S: My last sentence was: `Just develop more awareness, understanding and > detachment, but not by trying to do anything.' What I mean is let it > happen however quickly or slowly conditions dictate. If *you* try to do > something to induce awareness like walking in a particular way or focusing > on posture, it will impede its development. It will lead to a stronger > idea of self and control rather than to detachment of all those elements. > `Develop...' means that by reflecting and considering as we're doing now, > understanding can gradually develop when one sees the value and urgency of > the Path, I believe. > Alright. Detachment has come before, I think I see its significance in relation to the path and so will allow it to achieve its peak when it comes next time. > Excellent questions and comments. I'll look forward to any of your > responses or quotes/extracts for further consideration. > > I'm behind on a number of other threads, so I may not get back to any of > your responses til next week, but others may contribute in the meantime. Yup! Have a good one, A.L. 43252 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, My view on religion in general is that it is a good idea (kusala citta), but there is usually a lot of clinging to views that goes along with it. So we have to separate the kusala from the ditthi, so to speak. Connie: "I don't know what 'bare attention' means. 'Noting without labelling'?" L: Yes. No need to label it manasikara or sati. What is interesting is that the noting isn't what is being noted, and also that this "bare attention" is a very subtle consciousness. When I notice the manifestation of an agitated state, the noticing itself isn't agitated, doesn't even have an opinion on the drama. It is difficult at first for noticing to become an object of consciousness but it can be cultivated with a little practice. Noticing noticing is somewhat similar to peripheral vision (out of the corner of your mind's eye). Larry 43253 From: matheesha Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, Yes, I can see the value of it from what you tell me. The idea of attachment to all sense objects is very interesting. I was under the impression that unpleasant stimuli gives rise to aversion, pleasant stimuli to attachment and equanimous stimuli contain delusion - these being the aspects which needed to be worked on. Would you say that there is attachment regardless? There is a lot going on in this list and no doubt many topics had been covered. But I am also under the impression that there are descrepancies between sutta and abhidhamma in a few rare places. I heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 in the suttas? There was also this idea in one of the suttas that aversion lasts a little time but the kamma vipaka is stronger, desire lasts a longer time and the kamma vipaka is less (comapared to each other) and that delusion lasts the longest and has the worst kamma vipaka. I would be interested in discussing some areas which could do with some abhidhamma input if that is alright with you. metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Djmathi, > op 12-03-2005 09:32 schreef djmathi op matheeshag@h...: > > Does abhidhamma contain any instructions on practice techniques? > N: I would not call it techniques, that sounds too much like a rule: you > have to do this or that. Whereas in reality citta, consciousness, arises > just for a moment because of its own conditions and then it falls away. > As I wrote to Selamat: are kusala, but immediately after kusala citta there is bound to be akusala > citta, such as attachment to our kusala.> > > D:I have seen many lists there and it put me off reading the abhidhamma, > even though i do enjoy the suttas with its dialogue. > N: You do not have to read all the Abhidhamma classifications, but you could > take just a few lines at a time. Moreover, there are not only lists in the > Abhidhamma, also descriptions. For example, we learn that citta rooted in > attachment can be accompanied by happy feeling. Here we have something to > consider. ... 43254 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: >Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think > luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to nirodha > samapatti? > > ======== Dear Larry, I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient monks whose works are recited at the Councils. I don't think I have said that luminous mind refers to nibbana. Robertk 43255 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:39pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hello,Connie Please note : "Soka Gakkai" is considered in Japan to be a very powerful well- established cult religion ,never to be authentic Maha-yana except by their followers. They have even their own political party which forms the current ruling coalition. One of the best merit(good kamma)-making ,they believe ,is to increase the number of the followers. So They approach anybody near and around ,often in disguise of a "enchanted friend " One of the worst demerit-making is ,they believe ,is to decrease the number.So they try evrery possible way to prevent their peer's withdrawal from membership, often very aggressively. You might have some idea about how they are regarded as on http://www.geocities.jp/mksutra/associationframe.html ----------------------------------------------------------- By the way, You can get some clew on "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam" in "The Teachings of Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatta Thera" on http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/released.html *excerpt* Section 10. The primal mind is radiant and clear by nature, but is darkened because of corruptions. //pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam tanca kho agantukehi upakkilesehi upakkilittham//: 'Monks, this mind is originally radiant and clear, but because passing corruptions and defilements come and obscure it, it doesn't show its radiance.' This has been compared to a tree in the poem that runs, A tall tree with 6,000 branches: Big chameleons swarm it each day by the hundreds, Small chameleons, each day by the thousands. If the owner doesn't watch out, They'll bring along more and more of their friends every day. This can be explained as follows: The tall tree with 6,000 branches -- if we cut off the three zeroes, this leaves us with six, which stands for the six sense doors, the entry way for the chameleons, i.e., things that are counterfeit, not things that are genuine. Defilements aren't genuine. They are simply things that come drifting in through the sense doors by the hundreds and thousands. Not only that, defilements that haven't yet arisen will arise more and more every day as long as we don't find a means for rectifying the nature of the mind. The mind is something more radiant than anything else can be, but because counterfeits -- passing defilements -- come and obscure it, it loses its radiance, like the sun when obscured by clouds. Don't go thinking that the sun goes after the clouds. Instead, the clouds come drifting along and obscure the sun. So meditators, when they know in this manner, should do away with these counterfeits by analyzing them shrewdly, as explained in the strategies of clear insight, Section 9. When they develop the mind to the stage of the primal mind, this will mean that all counterfeits are destroyed, or rather, counterfeit things won't be able to reach into the primal mind, because the bridge making the connection will have been destroyed. Even though the mind may then still have to come into contact with the preoccupations of the world, its contact will be like that of a bead of water rolling over a lotus leaf. **************** Section 6. The root instigator of the cycle of death and rebirth. //thitibhutam avijja-paccaya sankhara...upadanam...bhavo...jati...// Each and every one of us born as a human being has a birthplace: we have our parents as our birthplace. So why did the Buddha formulate the teaching on sustained conditions only from the factor of unawareness onwards? What unawareness comes from, he didn't say. Unawareness has to have a mother and father just as we do, and we learn from the above line that //thitibhutam// is its mother and father. //Thitibhutam// refers to the primal mind. When the primal mind is imbued with delusion, there is a sustaining factor: the condition of unawareness. Once there is unawareness, it acts as the sustenance for the fashioning of //sankhara//, mental fashionings, together with the act of clinging to them, which gives rise to states of becoming and birth. In other words, these things will have to keep on arising and giving rise to each other continually. They are thus called sustained or sustaining conditions because they support and sustain one another. Awareness and unawareness both come from //thitibhutam//. When //thitibhutam// is imbued with unawareness, it isn't wise to its conditions; but when it is imbued with awareness, it realizes its conditions for what they really are. This is how the matter appears when considered with the clear insight leading to emergence (//vutthana-gamini vipassana//). To summarize: //Thitibhutam// is the primal instigator of the cycle of death and rebirth. Thus it is called the root source of the three (see Section 12). When we are to cut the cycle of death and rebirth so that it disconnects and vanishes into nothingness, we have to train the primal instigator to develop awareness, alert to all conditions for what they really are. It will then recover from its delusion and never give rise to any conditions again. //Thitibhutam//, the root instigator, will stop spinning, and this will end our circling through the cycle of death and rebirth. ****************************** The following is from "Acariya Mun Bhuridatta - A Spiritual Biography" at http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_hist_art.htm Appendix II The following comments about the nature of the citta have been excerpted from several discourses given by Ãcariya Mahã Boowa. Of foremost importance is the citta, the mind's essential knowing nature. It consists of pure and simple awareness: the citta simply knows. Awareness of good and evil, and the critical judgements that result, are merely activities of the citta. At times, these activities may manifest as mindfulness; at other times, wisdom. But the true citta does not exhibit any activities or manifest any conditions at all. It only knows. Those activities that arise in the citta, such as awareness of good and evil, or happiness and suffering, or praise and blame, are all conditions of the consciousness that flows out from the citta. Since it represents activities and conditions of the citta that are, by their very nature, constantly arising and ceasing, this sort of consciousness is always unstable and unreliable. The conscious acknowledgement of phenomena as they arise and cease is called viññãõa. For instance, viññãõa acknowledges and registers the sense impressions that are produced when sights, sounds, smells, tastes, and tactile sensations contact the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and body respectively. Each such contact between an external sense sphere and its corresponding internal base gives rise to a specific consciousness that registers the moment at which each interaction takes place, and then promptly ceases at the same moment that the contact passes. Viññãõa, therefore, is consciousness as a condition of the citta. Sankhãra, or thoughts and imagination, is also a condition of the citta. Once the citta has given expression to these conditions, they tend to proliferate without limit. On the other hand, when no conditions arise at all, only the citta's inherent quality of knowing is apparent.Still, the essential knowing of the average person's mind is very different from the essential knowing of an Arahant. The average person's knowing nature is contaminated from within. Arahants, being khïõãsava, are free of all contamination. Their knowing is a pure and simple awareness without any adulteration. Pure awareness, devoid of all contaminants, is supreme awareness: a truly amazing quality of knowing that bestows perfect happiness, as befits the Arahant's state of absolute purity. This Supreme Happiness always remains constant. It never changes or varies like conditioned phenomena of the world, which are always burdened with anicca, dukkha, and anattã. Such mundane characteristics cannot possibly enter into the citta of someone who has cleansed it until it is absolutely pure.The citta forms the very foundation of saÿsãra; it is the essence of being that wanders from birth to birth. It is the instigator of the cycle of existence and the prime mover in the round of repeated birth and death. Saÿsãra is said to be a cycle because death and rebirth recur regularly according to the immutable law of kamma. The citta is governed by kamma, so it is obliged to revolve perpetually in this cycle following kamma's dictates. As long as the citta remains under the jurisdiction of kamma, this will always be the case. The citta of the Arahant is the sole exception, for his citta has completely transcended kamma's domain. Since he has also transcended all conventional connections, not a single aspect of relative, conventional reality can possibly become involved with the Arahant's citta. At the level of Arahant, the citta has absolutely no involvement with anything.Once the citta is totally pure, it simply knows according to its own inherent nature. It is here that the citta reaches it culmination; it attains perfection at the level of absolute purity. Here the continuous migration from one birth to the next finally comes to an end. Here the perpetual journey from the higher realms of existence to the lower ones and back again, through the repetitive cycle of birth, ageing, sickness, and death, totally ceases. Why does it cease here? Because those hidden, defiling elements that normally permeate the citta and cause it to spin around have been completely eliminated. All that remains is the pure citta, which will never again experience birth and death. Rebirth is inevitable, however, for the citta that has yet to reach that level of purity. One may be tempted to deny that rebirth follows death, or one may doggedly hold to the nihilistic viewpoint that rejects all possibility of life after death, but such convictions cannot alter the truth. One's essential knowing nature is not governed by speculation; nor is it influenced by people's views and opinions. Its preeminence within one's own being, coupled with the supreme authority of kamma, completely override all speculative considerations. As a consequence, all living beings are compelled to move from one life to the next, experiencing both gross incarnations, like the creatures of land, sea and air, and the more refined incarnations of ghosts, devas and brahmas. Although the later are so ethereal as to be invisible to the human eye, the citta has no difficulty taking birth in their realms. The appropriate kamma is all that is required. Kamma is the determining factor; it is the power that propels the citta on its ceaseless journey in saÿsãra. The citta is something so extremely subtle that it is difficult to comprehend what actually constitutes the citta. It is only when the citta attains a state of meditative calm that its true nature becomes apparent. Even experienced meditators who are intent on understanding the citta are unable to know its true nature until they have attained the meditative calm of samãdhi. Even though the citta resides within the body, we are nevertheless unable to detect it. That's how very subtle it is. Because it is dispersed throughout the physical body, we cannot tell which part or which aspect is actually the true citta. It is so subtle that only the practice of meditation can detect its presence and differentiate it from all the other aspects associated with the body. Through the practice of meditation we can separate them out, seeing that the body is one thing and the citta is another. This is one level of separation, the level of the citta that is experienced in samãdhi, but its duration is limited to the time spent practicing samãdhi. At the next level, the citta can totally separate itself from the physical body, but it cannot yet disengage from the mental components of personality: vedanã, saññã, sankhãra, and viññãõa. When the citta reaches this level, one can use wisdom to separate out the body and eventually become detached forever from the belief that one's body is oneself, but one is still unable to separate the mental factors of feeling, memory, thoughts, and consciousness from the citta. By using wisdom to investigate further, these mental factors can also be detached from the citta. We then see clearly for ourselves - sandiååhiko - that all five khandhas are realities separate from the citta. This is the third level of separation. At the final level, our attention turns to the original cause of all delusion, that extremely subtle pervasion of ignorance we call avijjã. We know avijjã's name, but we fail to realize that it is concealed there within the citta. In fact, it permeates the citta like an insidious poison. We cannot see it yet, but it's there. At this stage, we must rely on the superior strength of our mindfulness, wisdom, and perseverance to extract the poison. Eventually, by employing the full power of mindfulness and wisdom, even avijjã can be separated from the citta. When everything permeating the citta has finally been removed, we have reached the ultimate stage. Separation at this level is a permanent and total disengagement that requires no further effort to maintain. This is true freedom for the citta. When the body suffers illness, we know clearly that only the physical elements are affected, so we are not concerned or upset by the symptoms. Ordinarily, bodily discomfort causes mental stress. But once the citta is truly free, one remains supremely happy even amid intense physical suffering. The body and the pain are known to be phenomena separate from the citta, so the citta does not participate in the distress. Having relinquished them unequivocally, body and feelings can never again intermix with the citta. This is the citta's absolute freedom. Being intrinsically bright and clear, the citta is always ready to make contact with everything of every nature. Although all conditioned phenomena without exception are governed by the three universal laws of anicca, dukkha, and anattã, the citta's true nature is not subject to these laws. The citta is conditioned by anicca, dukkha, and anattã only because things that are subject to these laws come spinning in to become involved with the citta and so cause it to spin along with them. However, though it spins in unison with conditioned phenomena, the citta never disintegrates or falls apart. It spins following the influence of those forces which have the power to make it spin, but the true power of the citta's own nature is that it knows and does not die. This deathlessness is a quality that lies beyond disintegration. Being beyond disintegration, it also lies beyond the range of anicca, dukkha, and anattã and the universal laws of nature. But we remain unaware of this truth because the conventional realities that involve themselves with the citta have completely surrounded it, making the citta's nature thoroughly conform to theirs.Birth and death have always been conditions of the citta that is infected by kilesas. But, since kilesas themselves are the cause of our ignorance, we are unaware of this truth. Birth and death are problems arising from the kilesas. Our real problem, our one fundamental problem – which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own true self. Instead, we have always taken counterfeit things to be the essence of who we really are, so that the citta's behavior is never in harmony with its true nature. Rather, it expresses itself through the kilesas' cunning deceits, which cause it to feel anxious and frightened of virtually everything. It dreads living, and dreads dying. Whatever happens – slight pain, severe pain – it becomes afraid. It's perturbed by even the smallest disturbances. As a result, the citta is forever full of worries and fears. And although fear and worry are not intrinsic to the citta, they still manage to produce apprehension there.When the citta has been cleansed so that it is absolutely pure and free of all involvement, only then will we see a citta devoid of all fear. Then, neither fear nor courage appear, only the citta's true nature, existing naturally alone on its own, forever independent of time and space. Only that appears – nothing else. This is the genuine citta. The term "genuine citta" refers solely to the absolute purity, or the sa-upãdisesa- nibbãna, of the Arahant. Nothing else can wholeheartedly and without reservations be called the "genuine citta". I myself would be embarrassed to use the term in any other way. only because things that are subject to these laws come spinning in to become involved with the citta and so cause it to spin along with them. However, though it spins in unison with conditioned phenomena, the citta never disintegrates or falls apart. It spins following the influence of those forces which have the power to make it spin, but the true power of the citta's own nature is that it knows and does not die. This deathlessness is a quality that lies beyond disintegration. Being beyond disintegration, it also lies beyond the range of anicca, dukkha, and anattã and the universal laws of nature. But we remain unaware of this truth because the conventional realities that involve themselves with the citta have completely surrounded it, making the citta's nature thoroughly conform to theirs.Birth and death have always been conditions of the citta that is infected by kilesas. But, since kilesas themselves are the cause of our ignorance, we are unaware of this truth. Birth and death are problems arising from the kilesas. Our real problem, our one fundamental problem – which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own true self. Instead, we have always taken counterfeit things to be the essence of who we really are, so that the citta's behavior is never in harmony with its true nature. Rather, it expresses itself through the kilesas' cunning deceits, which cause it to feel anxious and frightened of virtually everything. It dreads living, and dreads dying. Whatever happens – slight pain, severe pain – it becomes afraid. It's perturbed by even the smallest disturbances. As a result, the citta is forever full of worries and fears. And although fear and worry are not intrinsic to the citta, they still manage to produce apprehension there.When the citta has been cleansed so that it is absolutely pure and free of all involvement, only then will we see a citta devoid of all fear. Then, neither fear nor courage appear, only the citta's true nature, existing naturally alone on its own, forever independent of time and space. Only that appears – nothing else. This is the genuine citta. The term "genuine citta" refers solely to the absolute purity, or the sa-upãdisesa- nibbãna, of the Arahant. Nothing else can wholeheartedly and without reservations be called the "genuine citta". I myself would be embarrassed to use the term in any other way. Seeming to exist independent of the physical body, this kind of extremely refined awareness stands out exclusively within the citta. Due to the subtle and pronounced nature of the citta at this stage, its knowing nature completely predominates. No images or visions appear there at all. It is an awareness that stands out exclusively on its own. This is one aspect of the citta.Another aspect is seen when this well-cleansed citta enters meditative calm, not thinking or imagining anything. Ceasing all activity, all movement, it simply rests for awhile. All thought and imagination within the citta come to a complete halt. This is called "the citta entering a state of total calm." Then, the citta's essential knowing nature is all that remains. Except for this very refined awareness – an awareness that seems to blanket the entire cosmos – absolutely nothing else appears. For unlike a beam of light, whose range is limited, reaching either near or far depending on the strength of the light, the flow of the citta has no limits, no "near" or "far". For instance, the brightness of an electric light depends on its wattage. If the wattage is high, it shines a long distance; if low, a short distance. But the flow of the citta is very different. Distance is not a factor. To be precise, the citta is beyond the conditions of time and space, which allows it to blanket everything. Far is like near, for concepts of space do not apply. All that appears is a very refined awareness suffusing everything throughout the entire universe. The whole world seems to be filled by this subtle quality of knowing, as though nothing else exists, though things still exist in the world as they always have. The all-encompassing flow of the citta that has been cleansed of the things that cloud and obscure it, this is the citta's true power.The citta that is absolutely pure is even more difficult to describe. Since it is something that defies definition, I don't know how I could characterize it. It cannot be expressed in the same way that conventional things in general can be, simply because it is not a conventional phenomenon. It is the sole province of those who have transcended all aspects of conventional reality, and thus realize within themselves that non-conventional nature. For this reason, words cannot describe it. Why do we speak of a "conventional" citta and an "absolutely pure" citta? Are they actually two different cittas? Not at all. It remains the same citta. When it is controlled by conventional realities, such as kilesas and ãsavas, that is one condition of the citta. But when the faculty of wisdom has scrubbed it clean until this condition has totally disintegrated, the true citta, the true Dhamma, the one that can stand the test, will not disintegrate and disappear along with it. Only the conditions of anicca, dukkha and anattã, which infiltrate the citta, actually disappear.No matter how subtle the kilesas may be, they are still conditioned by anicca, dukkha, and anattã, and therefore, must be conventional phenomena. Once these things have completely disintegrated, the true citta, the one that has transcended conventional reality, becomes fully apparent. This is called the citta's Absolute Freedom, or the citta' s Absolute Purity. All connections continuing from the citta's previous condition have been severed forever. Now utterly pure, the citta's essential knowing nature remains alone on its own.We cannot say where in the body this essential knowing nature is centered. Previously, with the conventional citta, it formed a prominent point that we could clearly see and know. For example, in samãdhi we knew that it was centered in the middle of the chest because the knowing quality of our awareness stood out prominently there. The calm, the brightness, and the radiance appeared to emanate conspicuously from that point. We could see this for ourselves. All meditators whose level of calm has reached the very base of samãdhi realize that the center of "what knows" stands out prominently in the region of the heart. They will not argue that it is centered in the brain, as those who have no experience in the practice of samãdhi are always claiming.But when the same citta has been cleansed until it is pure, that center then disappears. One can no longer say that the citta is located above or below, or that it is situated at any specific point in the body. It is now pure awareness, a knowing quality that is so subtle and refined that it transcends all conventional designations whatsoever. Still, in saying that it is "exceedingly refined", we are obliged to use a conventional figure of speech that cannot possibly express the truth; for, of course, the notion of extreme refinement is itself a convention. Since this refined awareness does not have a point or a center, it is impossible to specifically locate its position. There is only that essential knowing, with absolutely nothing infiltrating it. Although it still exists amid the same khandhas with which it used to intermix, it no longer shares any common characteristics with them. It is a world apart. Only then do we know clearly that the body, the khandhas, and the citta are all distinct and separate realities. 43256 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 6:53pm Subject: Thanks / Nibbanam-Vinnanam ? Dear Robert K, Nina and Suan Thanks a lot for all your kind posts They are very conductive to deepen my understanding of Buddhism However, I still wish Suan follow up the matter. from LK 43257 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:31pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, Thanks for your reply: I can see it is not easy to fit DSG posts into your busy schedule. One of the points you raised related to language and terminology. While neither of us is likely to learn Pali as a language we can still benefit by adopting some Pali terminology. As I was saying earlier, Pali terminology and phrasing can indicate that namas and rupas are being referred to. So, for example, if someone were to say 'I am enjoying this cup of coffee' we would know they were talking conventionally. But if they were to say, "Lobha experiences an object," then we would know they were talking about the Buddha's teaching, in which attachment is an absolute reality of the variety, cetasika. I might add that it is seldom helpful to mix the two terminologies except in a very informal way. So it is not very helpful to say, "I am experiencing lobha for a cup of coffee." Lobha is a conditioned dhamma: it is not 'mine' or 'yours' and it is misleading to claim direct awareness of any particular dhamma. By the time we can think we are aware of a dhamma, it has already fallen away and been replaced by a long series of other dhammas. You were also talking about various realities, and we agree there are more than one of them. There are two forms of absolute reality - the unconditioned and the conditioned - and then there is "conventional reality." Conventional reality is illusory and does not exist in absolute reality. Worldlings can mistake it for being a part of absolute reality, but arahants are never caught out by it. Arahants use conventional terms such as I, you, they, chariot etc., purely for practical purposes (e.g., for communication). ---------------------------- C: > When you said: "... he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists.'" I would say, "he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists as an eternal (permanent and unchanging) soul, something uncompounded (the essence), some thing that you have complete control over. He also taught, how the self exist; and how thoughts, speech, and acts effect others (other selves). All I have been trying to say is that the Buddha actually taught how to view the self, and not to remain attached to it. ----------------------------- If you are referring to the five khandhas when you say "the self" then we basically agree. However, you do give the impression that there is some absolute reality apart from the five khandhas and Nibbana. For example, you say: ------------------------------------------------- C: > The Buddha never taught that conventional wisdom or reality should be as though of non-existent or unreal. --------------------------------------------------- It is true that we should not mix our terminologies, and it is not helpful to say, "I do not exist," or, "That brick wall does not exist." But when we are talking about the reality taught by the Buddha, we can say, "There is no self here," or, "There are only dhammas." ----------------------------- C: > If he did then there would be no need for Morality ----------------------------- There is a need for morality, but there is no self who is in need. Even if the five khandhas were to continue to be conditioned for another billion lifetimes, there would be no self that suffered. ----------------------------------------------- C: > (i.e., Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood). Actually there would be no need for the 8-Fold path because suffering would not exist either (since there is no-one to suffer). ---------------------------------------------- As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveller on it is seen." ------------ C: > In reality the Buddha did dispel a myth about self, that myth was about the nature of its existence. After all, if he did teach that there are no-selves, no not even one, then the teachings about all those realms of existence that Abidharmmist like to talk about would be a lie, and most of the other teachings too ... ------------ No, they would not be a lie: those teachings describe the different sets of natural laws that can apply to the five khandhas. In a hell realm, for example, the laws of nature do not allow for the arising of pleasant sense objects. In a heaven realm, no unpleasant sense objects can arise, and in an arupa realm, the laws of nature do not allow for any physical phenomena at all. -------------------- KH: > > Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. > ......... C: > You would be completely right if you replace "self" with the following: attman (eternal soul), uncompounded-ness, permanence, something that can be controlled, ... swell as change "momentary existence" to relative existence. The concept of "Self" (that is devoid of these things and seen as a source of suffering) is a Right View. But like I said, I do know and understand your perspective; however, I attribute it to incomplete translations (the other concepts being summarized and thus called the self). > ---------------------- Sorry, but I don't understand what you are telling me here; nor at other places where you have tried to describe the self. E.g., where you wrote: -------- > I think you mistake the self for something uncompounded, having an essence, something unchanging, etc... so I assume that is why you dismiss it. Am I wrong? To me the self is a label I give to "my mind & form/flesh." And by "my mind & form/flesh," I mean something that is still subject to ... and is used to identify "this" being as opposed to another being. My view gives me the ability to dance through the relative and as the absolute. So, I exist when I exist, and don't exist when not existing. > -------- Please try again to describe this "self" that I am not aware of because of "incomplete translation." --------------------- KH: > > the Buddha taught that conditioned reality was the five khandhas. So, when he said [in the suttas or elsewhere] that rebirth was real, he could only have been referring to a particular, momentary arising of the five khandhas. >.......................... C: > This makes me assume you do not believe in reincarnation, is that true? ------------ Like all reality, reincarnation (better known as rebirth) is a momentary occurrence of the five khandhas. There is one moment of rebirth (patisandhi) and one moment of death (cuti) in every cycle of life. In between, there are untold trillions of momentary existences of the five khandhas, and they are known as seeing, hearing, touching, thinking and so on. Conditioned existence is always just the present, fleeting existence of the five khandhas. So you are not strictly correct when you say: -------------- > Objects can "persists" from moment to moment, but they are forever changing (the rates and amounts of change are relative), and as I stated before, objects can exist for up to eons (look at the teachings about the God Realm) or do you believe the God realm and gods do not exist? (the teachings are just fables) > -------- Conditioned existence is basically the same in all realms: there is a moment of birth and a moment of death and many moments in between. Gods have more moments in between than we do. Ken H 43258 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 7:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature RobertK: "Dear Larry, I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient monks whose works are recited at the Councils. I don't think I have said that luminous mind refers to nibbana." Hi Robert, This is what I was refering to. I'm not sure what sutta Connie was refering to but she was arguing that luminous mind is bhavanga citta. In this thread you, Howard, and TG all seem to agree that the Buddha is talking about nibbana and some word is being translated as "luminous-all-around". Don't know what sutta this is from either. Seems to me, if you make a comment, you are a commentator, but maybe not "ancient". Such is identity. Larry -------------------------------------- Message #41422 From: upasaka@a... Date: Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and Abhidhamma/ Hi, Robert (and TG) - In a message dated 1/27/05 8:19:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > Dear TG, > A couple of weeks ago you explained that you think Abhidhamma was > invented by later monks but that you do trust that the Nikayas are > really Buddha vacca. > I take these quotes from the Digha Nikaya: > The Digha Nikaya says Nibbana is > "Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabbam" - Section 499, > Kevatta Suttam, > Silakkhandhavagga, > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Robert, I never expected to see the day that you would be quoting that consciousness-unmanifestive-luminous-all-around material in defense of anything! ;-) I agree that nibbana might well be thought of as a mode of luminous, boundless experience with no manifestation of knowing subject. And that would be nama. ----------------------------------------- > If that is said in the suttas why would are you concerned about it > being classified under nama in Abhidhamma? > It is classfied as nama only in that sense that it is known by > citta, by vinnana, that is all. Just as in the sutta it is called > vinnanam for this same reason. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Here I disagree. Hardness and sights are known by citta as well, right? So they should also be classified as nama by that line of reasoning. ----------------------------------------- > Robert > ===================== With metta, Howard 43259 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 3:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi, Robert (and Larry) - In a message dated 3/14/05 9:28:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > >Our modern commentators (RobertK, Howard, and TG) seemed to think > >luminous mind referred to nibbana. Could it possibly refer to > nirodha > >samapatti? > > > >======== > Dear Larry, > I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient > monks whose works are recited at the Councils. > I don't think I have said that luminous mind refers to nibbana. > Robertk > ========================= Well, the "commentator" business was just being cute, I think! ;-) As to the other point, I also don't believe I said luminous mind refers to nibbana either, though I admit to having considered the possibility of so called "unmanifestive consciousness" referring to it. As regards "luminous mind", I consider it to be mind in its natural state, freed of all defilements - that is, the mind of an arahant. What makes luminous mind a possibility is that the defilements are adventitious and extrinsic. Were they intrinsic to mind, liberation would be impossible. The full and final realization of nibbana, or *freedom, results in the uprooting of all remnants of defilements, leaving the mind in its natural, luminous state. With metta, Howard *There is nothing whatsoever, anywhere, at any time, that is graspable even for a moment, and so our situation is one of straining to grasp ungraspable phantoms, terrified of the ground being swept out from under our feet. And the irony is that we are free to begin with, though we don't know it. There is no ground beneath our feet, nor was there ever! Nibbana is right here, but we don't see it. We are free of everything, there being nothing to be grasped, and no one to do the grasping. Our true circumstance is that of freedom, and true peace lies in realizing that and in letting go, letting go of everything. /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) 43260 From: connie Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:16pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature ...she was arguing that luminous mind is bhavanga citta. Hi, Larry, I should strive for more precision in my communications. I meant to be arguing that the clean and luminous mind is the bhavanga cittas; also the defiled by adventitious guests mind is luminous. I was looking at AN I 48-52, end of ch.v and beginning of vi. peace, connie 43261 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:32pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Dear Larry, If you think I'm a commentator who am I to disagree. Just note that I am very opposed to being labelled as such. Still mystified as to why you think I believe nibbana is a luminous mind? RobertK In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > RobertK: "Dear Larry, > I am not a commentator, that term should be reserved for the ancient > monks whose works are recited at the Councils. I don't think I have said > that luminous mind refers to nibbana." > > > Hi Robert, > > This is what I was refering to. I'm not sure what sutta Connie was > refering to but she was arguing that luminous mind is bhavanga citta. In > this thread you, Howard, and TG all seem to agree that the Buddha is > talking about nibbana and some word is being translated as > "luminous-all-around". Don't know what sutta this is from either. > > Seems to me, if you make a comment, you are a commentator, but maybe not > "ancient". Such is identity. > > Larry > -------------------------------------- > Message #41422 > > From: upasaka@a... > Date: Fri Jan 28, 2005 4:59 pm > Subject: Re: [dsg] Nibbana and Abhidhamma/ > > Hi, Robert (and TG) - > In a message dated 1/27/05 8:19:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@y... > writes: > > Dear TG, > > A couple of weeks ago you explained that you think Abhidhamma was > > invented by later monks but that you do trust that the Nikayas are > > really Buddha vacca. > > I take these quotes from the Digha Nikaya: > > The Digha Nikaya says Nibbana is > > "Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabbam" - Section 499, > > Kevatta Suttam, > > Silakkhandhavagga, > > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Robert, I never expected to see the day that you would be quoting that > consciousness-unmanifestive-luminous-all-around material in defense of > anything! ;-) > I agree that nibbana might well be thought of as a mode of luminous, > boundless experience with no manifestation of knowing subject. And that > would > be nama. > ----------------------------------------- > > If that is said in the suttas why would are you concerned about it > > being classified under nama in Abhidhamma? > > It is classfied as nama only in that sense that it is known by > > citta, by vinnana, that is all. Just as in the sutta it is called > > vinnanam for this same reason. > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Here I disagree. Hardness and sights are known by citta as well, > right? So they should also be classified as nama by that line of > reasoning. > ----------------------------------------- > > Robert > > ===================== > With metta, > Howard 43262 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Larry: "Seems to me, if you make a comment, you are a commentator" Hi again Robert, You are right, I misconceived the linguistics. One who makes a comment is a commenter. One who writes a commentary is a commentator. A commentary is a more formal document than a comment, or even many comments. In Theravada circles "commentary" refers to the ancient commentaries although it is conceivable there are some not so ancient commentaries. As far as I know, there are only a few commentaries that have been translated. Many more remain untranslated. I'm not calling Visuddhimagga or Abhidhammattha Sangaha commentaries because they don't explain a text line by line. What Nina is doing with the Vism. thread might be considered to be a commentary, but Nina isn't ancient, yet. Also, the role of translators is debatable. Some think a translation is practically a commentary. Larry 43263 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 9:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, Thanks for the clarification even though it was my oversight. Larry 43264 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Robert: "Still mystified as to why you think I believe nibbana is a luminous mind?" Hi Robert, you wrote, "The Digha Nikaya says Nibbana is "Vinnanam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabbam" - ". I put this together with "Robert, I never expected to see the day that you would be quoting that consciousness-unmanifestive-luminous-all-around material in defense of anything! ;-)" which Howard wrote. I don't know the Pali so maybe I'm misunderstanding. I didn't think DN explicitly said "Nibbana is...", so this was an interpretation, albeit reasonable. I was searching the archives for "luminous" and that is what came up. Larry 43265 From: Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 10:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Mrs. Nina, Brahmaviharas are good for all of us, we should try to develop them in our daily activities at work so we always have a positive thinking. What many employees experience is the negative mood regarding sloth and torpor (thina-middha) when they are under great pressure or other moods are not so good for them. Suggestion needed for how to rise and develop energy while the situations are not good enough for this. some of them said that many theoritical matters but this is the facts of the job. they know that this conditions are anicca intelectually, but they always fail to face the situations. with metta, selamat 43266 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 0:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Citta Hi Joop, (James & All), --- Joop wrote: >S: "When we read in the suttas and especially the oft-quoted Sutta > Nipata verses about the need to give up all views, it is the wrong > views we hold that are being referred to." > Joop:> An response to my message "Having no opinion" I send some hours after yours (43092) ! > I know this was not the first time and I admire your patient to > repeat some discussions year after year in this DSG. ... S: Not at all. I was glad to see your message and am always happy to return to topics, but unless posts are addressed to me specifically, I generally prefer to wait and see what others have to say first:-). (Also glad to see your discussions on D.O) ... Joop:>Still I want to > say I don't agree with you. The Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV- > 5) is about having no view at all (I hope you accept that I > use 'view' and 'opinion' as synomyms), not only socalled wrong ones. .... S: This sutta is quoted a lot and usually in support of the same ‘view’ about having no opinions which you hold. Let me share some of my reflections here. 1. I understand that the views referred to in the sutta are wrong views (micha ditthi). The Pali given is ‘di.t.thi’, translated as ‘dogmatic view’ by Saddhatissa. Unless di.t.thi is modified by samma, it nearly always refers to wrong views. For example, we read that “the Perfect One is free from any theory or view(ditthigata)”. Of course this refers to wrong views. (see dictionary notes below*). As it says in the dictionary “The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in A chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga.” This is the chapter of Eights which the Paramatthaka Sutta is from. 2. When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no speculation, conceit or greed involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths). 3. Of course, even when we are talking about right views or wisdom, attachment to these is unwholesome and to be eradicated, just like attachment to the raft that we read about so often. (see:http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/24878) In other words, it is not the right views or wisdom that is to be discarded, but the attachment to such. 4. I’d like to stress that samma ditthi (right view) is a synonym for panna (right understanding). In other words, right view is not a speculative opinion of any kind, but direct knowledge of dhammas. So, I agree with James when he said that the Buddha and his arahants didn’t have “views” -- if views are taken here as referring to wrong views or speculative views -- they had “direct knowledge”. Samma ditthi should be understood as such. Of course there are many degrees and kinds of panna or right view, not just direct insight. Reflecting wisely on kamma or on the Truths, even at a theoretical level can be with right view or panna. This is pariyatti (wise reflecting and consideration) which has to develop in order for patipatti(direct knowledge or understanding) to arise and develop. .... Joop: > I know it's easy for me to say so because this is what I experience > more and more as the effect of my vipassana- (insight-) > meditation. > insight, there is nobody who can have a view anymore! ... S: True, there's no one who can have a view, but both wrong view (di.t.thi) and right view (pa~n~naa) are mental factors which are real and arise. Hopefully the latter will be developing while the former will be reducing. .... Joop:> When I state this, I'm thinking of Nagarjuna words of course: "I have no opinion". ... S: And I’m thinking of the great emphasis placed on right view/wisdom in the suttas: “ Bhikkhus, just as the dawn is the forerunner and first indication of the rising of the sun, so is right view the forerunner and first indication of wholesome states. For one of right view, bhikkhus, right intention springs up. For one of right intention, right speech springs up. For one of right speech, right action springs up. For one of right action, right livelihood springs up. For one of right livelihood, right effort springs up. For one of right effort, right mindfulness springs up. For one of right mindfulness, right concentration springs up. For one of right concentration, right knowledge springs up. For one of right knowledge, right deliverance springs up." Anguttara Nikaya 10:121 I look forward to any further discussion. Metta, Sara ******************** *From Nyantiloka’s dictionary,the entry for *Di.t.thi*: ditthi (lit. 'sight'; Ö dis, to see): view, belief, speculative opinion, insight. If not qualified by sammá, 'right', it mostly refers to wrong and evil view or opinion, and only in a few instances to right view, understanding or insight (e.g. ditthi-ppatta, q.v.; ditthi-visuddhi, purification of insight; ditthi-sampanna, possessed of insight). Wrong or evil views (ditthi or micchá-ditthi) are declared as utterly rejectable for being a source of wrong and evil aspirations and conduct, and liable at times to lead man to the deepest abysses of depravity, as it is said in A. I, 22: "No other thing than evil views do I know, o monks, whereby to such an extent the unwholesome things not yet arisen arise, and the unwholesome things already arisen are brought to growth and fullness. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent the wholesome things not yet arisen are hindered in their arising, and the wholesome things already arisen disappear. No other thing than evil views do I know, whereby to such an extent human beings at the dissolution of the body, at death, are passing to a way of suffering, into a world of woe, into hell." <...> From the Abhidhamma (Dhs) it may be inferred that evil views, whenever They arise, are associated with greed (s. Tab. I. 22, 23, 26, 27). <...> "The Perfect One is free from any theory (ditthigata), for the Perfect One has seen what corporeality is, and how it arises and passes away. He has seen what feeling ... perception ... mental formations ... consciousness are, and how they arise and pass away. Therefore I say that the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection and casting out of all imaginings and conjectures, of all inclination to the 'vain-glory of 'I' and 'mine." (M. 72). ***The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in a chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga.*** <...> ====================================================== 43267 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 0:32am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 146 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(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.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** The more we study the realities which are taught in the Abhidhamma, the more we see that there are many different phenomena which each have their own characteristic. They appear one at a time, but when we try to name them there is thinking of a concept instead of mindfulness of a characteristic. Sometimes a reality which thinks may appear and then we may doubt whether it is vitakka or vicåra. It is useless to try to find out which reality appears because at such a moment there is no awareness. Thinking has a characteristic which can be realized when it appears and then there is no need to name it vitakka or vicåra. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43268 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Water, Life, and Death Dear Maya, Thanks for kindly responding further and considering all the comments. --- Waters Illusion wrote: > Thank you for your answer. I think you are right, it seems like my sati > is weak > and I am trying to strengthen it. Perhaps too much insight and not > enough > sati? I will however take a satipatthana course this june...hopefully > that'll help > me. .... S: I’m not sure there can be‘too much insight and not enough sati’. Perhaps you can elaborate a little. As I understand, satipatthana refers to the development of awareness and insight. In other words, there cannot be insight without awareness. This is why we read about sati-sampaja~n~na, where the latter term refers to the development of wisdom or insight. Often the insights we refer to normally, of course, have little to do with the insights into dhammas (realities). So I think the key here, is understanding more about what these dhammas are, so that sati can learn to be aware of them. What do you consider these terms refer to? Metta, p.s. What and where is the course you are taking? ======== 43269 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Dear Ven Dhammanando, Thank you for your helpful comments on the descriptions Htoo mentioned and which I queeried. I have the Jataka volumes out, but need some time to follow the references. I’m always grateful for your familiarity and help with all the texts. I’m also interested in the other book you mentioned, the translation of the Traibhuumikathaa and will look out for a copy. Thank you. --- Dhammanando Bhikkhu wrote: > > Dear Sarah and everyone, > > I have just returned from a trip to the north of Thailand with some > Icelandic friends and am now catching up with the dsg digests. So far > I have noticed two posts addressed to me and will try to reply to them > tomorrow. ... S: Any comments anytime it’s convenient are most welcome. Like Jon (Jonothan as he might be remembered), I was also glad to hear your good news about Sayadaw Dhammananda and also would like to thank you for putting the pictures in the album*. I’ve just pulled out a picture I must have been given from a visit to Wat Tha Ma O in 1979 I’d guess. He is little changed as far as I can see (my picture is not very clear). A small group of us are sitting in front of him and the other foreign monks (Dhammadharo and Jetanando)whom Jon was supporting. A.Sujin is also with us. Perhaps I’ll get the old pic scanned in sometime. I think I only visited the once, whereas Jon visited quite often I believe. Metta, Sarah p.s *I’ll probably move one or both pictures to the *significant others* album. =========================================================== 43270 From: htootintnaing Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 3:37am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: Hi, All, Thus begins a section on The Origins of the Buddha Nature in an article I was sent by one of my enchanting friends: The Buddha nature concept is a characteristic teaching of Mahayana Buddhism, but its origin can be traced back to early Buddhism. In an early scripture, for example, Shakyamuni talks about the "luminous mind" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Connie, Like you once I thought 'luminous mind' might be 'bhavanga citta'. Once I also asked you the word 'Buddha-nature' of Mahayana. Now you bring the topic of ''Buddha-nature''. It is citta who is luminous. I think Larry and Nina have already explained on the matter. This nature resides in all existing cittas. You may ask what about 'akusala cittas' ? It is citta who is luminous. Akusala is not luminous. It becomes akusala because of defiling cetasikas. So akusala cittas are also luminous. But this is hardly seen. But I do not think Mahayanists' thought would be like this. They might have the idea that Joop suggested. That is atta. This atta is totally opposite to anatta. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43271 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:47am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Dear Htoo Naing "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam " According to my recollection, Pa auk sayadaw says in 4th chapter of his book titled "The light of wisdom " that Buddha refers to Bhavanga citta in the verse and luminous is not Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga citta." I can not give you the accurate quotation because I do not have the book at hand. You might be able to get the original Myanmar version ,or to ask Pa auk sayadaw himself about it . Now He must be leading his Spring 2005 retreat there in the U.S. http://paauk.org/public/blogs/paupdate.html from LK >Once I also asked you the word 'Buddha-nature' of Mahayana. Now you > bring the topic of ''Buddha-nature''. > > It is citta who is luminous. I think Larry and Nina have already > explained on the matter. > > This nature resides in all existing cittas. You may ask what > about 'akusala cittas' ? > > It is citta who is luminous. Akusala is not luminous. It becomes > akusala because of defiling cetasikas. > > So akusala cittas are also luminous. But this is hardly seen. > > But I do not think Mahayanists' thought would be like this. They > might have the idea that Joop suggested. That is atta. This atta is > totally opposite to anatta. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing 43272 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 5:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Larry LBIDD@w... wrote: >I don't know. I've been thinking about this all day and haven't come to >a conclusion. It has to do with what is an object of consciousness. One >thought is that experience is only consciousness of an object. What this >means is that when I experience desire for a tomato, that desire is an >object of consciousness. > I'm not sure why you see desire as being the object of consciousness in that scenario. I would have thought that when there is desire for a tomato, there is consciousness accompanied by desire that has (concept of) tomato as its object. Besides, is there really any point in trying to conceptualise so much? There is consciousness with object occurring all the time, and we read in the suttas that understanding of the consciousnesses of the various doorways and their objects is key. Jon >If that is the case it would seem that desire >for a tomato arose and ceased as unexperienced javana citta and then >became an object of consciousness. But that unexperienced javana citta >had an object too (the tomato), so we are still left with two kinds of >object, experienced and unexperienced, and possibly a different kind of >citta process called "experience". This doesn't seem like a very >satisfactory solution but I can't think of anything else right now. > >Larry > > 43273 From: Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 1:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Jon (And Larry) - In a message dated 3/15/05 9:00:27 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > > I'm not sure why you see desire as being the object of consciousness in > that scenario. I would have thought that when there is desire for a > tomato, there is consciousness accompanied by desire that has (concept > of) tomato as its object. > > Besides, is there really any point in trying to conceptualise so much? > There is consciousness with object occurring all the time, and we read > in the suttas that understanding of the consciousnesses of the various > doorways and their objects is key. > > Jon > ========================== I agree that in mindstates in which there conventionally is desire for a tomato, it is certainly not the desiring that is the object (objective content). However I see it as only in a manner of speaking that "a tomato" is the object. It seems to me that "desiring a tomato" is a name we apply to a huge complex of mindstates, many of which involve desiring, though not all, and in which the actual objects in the states accompanied by desire are actual mind-door dhammas that typically, and for the most part, are recollections of particular tastes, smells, and sights. (These states are interspersed with other states which as a group carry out operations of naming and conceptual projection.) 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) 43274 From: buddhatrue Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:49am Subject: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi Connie, Just to pick up where I left off (I have been quite busy these last few days so there was some delay). The first argument that BB levies against Nanavira is this: "Repeatedly in the Suttas we see the Buddha teaching PS in order to lay bare the structure of conditions that underlies the origination and cessation of dukkha. However, in order to understand how pa.ticca-samuppaada fulfils this function, we should focus on the question: What is the meaning of the dukkha that the Buddha's Teaching is designed to liberate us from? Ven. ~Naa.naviira contends that this dukkha is the anxiety and stress that pervades our present existence, and hence he interprets all the terms of the standard PS formula in a way that lends support to this contention. But if we read the Suttas on their own terms, in their totality, we would find that Ven. ~Naa.naviira's understanding of dukkha falls far short of the vision of the first noble truth that the Buddha wishes to impart to us. Of course, dukkha does include "existential anxiety," and there are several suttas which define the conditions for the arising and removal of such dukkha. An unbiased and complete survey of the Nikaayas, however, would reveal that the problem of dukkha to which the Buddha's Teaching is addressed is not primarily existential anxiety, nor even the distorted sense of self of which such anxiety may be symptomatic. The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned, in its most comprehensive and fundamental dimensions, is the problem of our bondage to sa.msaara -- the round of repeated birth, aging, and death. And, as I will show presently, these terms are intended quite literally as signifying biological birth, aging, and death, not our anxiety over being born, growing old, and dying." James: I find this to be a rather unsatisfying argument against DO occurring within one lifetime. First, I find the statement "The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" to be odd. Dukkha is dukkha and the Buddha didn't invent dukkha nor did he have a specific `concern' having to do with it. The teaching of DO is supposed to be a fact of existence, not a method of argument to bring about a desired result. Therefore, the Buddha was describing something that was either related to one life or to several lives (or both)- that is the question and the issue. Secondly, if one looks at this issue objectively, I think it is fair to say that dukkha is predominately a problem on a personal level, moment to moment, or as Nanaivira puts it "existential anxiety", rather than a problem of repeating lifetimes at BB suggests. After all, repeated births wouldn't be a problem if they could all somehow be happy (not a logical possibility, but you should get my point). Not only that, when you consider why it is that humans are more prone to learn and follow the dhamma, as opposed to the higher and lower realms, it is because humans are more aware of their existential dukkha (due to the mixture of pleasure and pain) and thus able to do something about it. Devas, who experience birth and death, are not as concerned because their lives are so blissful and satisfying; and, ghosts, petas, and lower entities, who also experience birth and death, are suffering far too much to consider and practice the dhamma. Therefore, I think the problem of dukkha is more a `here and now' issue rather than a several lifetime issue as proposed by BB. Metta, James 43275 From: Joop Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 8:37am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, Joop, >.... Hallo Connie C: I spent some time trying to find all of Nichiren's Nirvana quotes I could without success and have been told there is no English translation of the Mahayana Nirvana Sutra, but several versions in Chinese, translated from Sanskrit. Joop: I found this one http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/books/NirvanaSutra12.html It has nothing to do with the (Pali) Parinibbana Sutta. C: I do still find myself looking for ways to reconcile the various traditions, but doubt it's going to happen. My thinking is that if it's not in the Pali texts, it's not Dhamma-Vinaya, but (and I don't really buy it) it's ok for people to call themselves 'Buddhist' anyway. Joop: So do I; "reconcile" is a big word, I like to have fruitful discussions with my Mahayana-friends. In the book I quoted yesterday (Pruning the Bodhi Tree) Sallie B. King has written a chapter "The doctrine of Buddha-Nature is Impeccably Buddhist". She tries to proof that by analysing the "Buddha-Nature Treatise" written by Vasubandhu or the Chinese 'translater' Paramartha. But nearly none of the arguments are based on Suttas. For example: "Why did the Buddha speak of Buddha-Nature? The tathagata said that All sentient beings universaly possess Buddha- nature in order to help people overcome five errors and give rise to five virtues …" But where did the Buddha speak on this way? That is not said. Another example is the use of paradoxes: "atmaparamita = anatmaparamita = the tue, essential nature of all things." I like paradoxes but not when they are used as arguments. Perhaps the strongest argument is that (according Sallie King) the author of the Treatise completely accepts pratityasamutpada teachings and build upon them to construct Buddha-nature thought. He examines the concept of an "own-nature", in order to distinguish the latter from Buddha-Nature. Sallie Kings states that it are pratityasamutpada- arguments: "a dynamic type of argument in which the emphasis is upon causation: this being the case, that follows. Note that it is precisely because the world is conceived as dynamic, as a series of processes, rather than constructed of entities, that life as we know it, is possible. … Note that Buddha-nature is being described solely in terms of its functions. Thus far, there is no conflict between pratityasamutpada and Buddha-nature thought." (p. 177) I'm afraid there is a big gap between this Mahayana way of looking at the functioning of pratityasamutpada and paticca samuppada of the Pali Canon (both as understood by Buddhaghosa or as understood by modern commentators as RobM and I discussed yesterday in #43211 and 215 en 233) C: My whole point to my enchanted friend was that, in my understanding, Buddha nature is not Buddhist but Atta. Joop: That seems correct C: I still think some (so-called) Thera Buddhists have an idea relating to Buddha Nature as Nibaana, but that's my interpretation. See what you think of the following quotes from Bhikkhu Khemavamsa's "CONTEMPLATION OF THE MIND: Practising Cittanupassana" [http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf]. … Joop: A beautiful contemplation but I think Nibbana as understood by Thera's and 'Buddha Nature' as understood by Mahayanists are different things. (I think, but I have not really studied till now what 'Nibbana' is or what it can mean to me, perhaps later in my life). Metta Joop 43276 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Mike, op 15-03-2005 00:57 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: quotes> Here, the term resolution (adhimutti) is used to describe the manifestation of faith or confidence in wholesomeness.> > This refers to the first type of mahaakusala citta with paññaa, and thus it > can also pertain to the development of satipatthana. > > M: So in the Dispeeller excerpt, 'trust' and 'determination' are more or less synonymous? N: Trust is a translation of saddhaa, confidence in wholesomeness. For determination or resolution, adhimutti, we have to look at the context. It is all in the context of saddhaa. We can look at glossaries, but for the right meaning we need the context. Nina. 43277 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, You cover quite a few points here. op 14-03-2005 23:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: The idea of > attachment to all sense objects is very interesting. I was under the > impression that unpleasant stimuli gives rise to aversion, pleasant > stimuli to attachment and equanimous stimuli contain delusion - > these being the aspects which needed to be worked on. Would you say > that there is attachment regardless? N: The above is treated also under the aspect of feelings that arise. When the object is unpleasant, unpleasant feeling accompanying citta with aversion arises. Aversion is conditioned by attachment and ignorance. When we do not get what we like, dislike tends to arise. When indifferent feeling arises, there is often ignorance. This feeling is not easy to know. M: . I > heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 in > the suttas? There are two systems of counting rupa-jhana. In the fivefold system (you find mostly in the Abhidhamma), applied thinking has been abandoned at the second stage, sustained thinking at the third stage, and the other jhanafactors at the following stages, and then there are five stages. In the fourfold system, applied thinking and sustained thinking have been abandoned at the second stage and then there are four stages. This we find in the suttas. There are four stages of immaterial jhana. This is not a contradiction, but a matter of classifying and emphasis. Evenso in the Abhidhamma you will also find six instead of five hindrances, ignorance being counted as a hindrance. In the suttas conceit is classified as three, in the Book of Analysis as nine. The Buddha knew endless methods of teaching Dhamma. In the Abhidhamma you will find more detailed classifications. But also in the suttas there are different classifications, for example of feelings: as three, as five, as eighteen, as thirtysix, as onehundred and eight. M: There was also this idea in one of the suttas that > aversion lasts a little time but the kamma vipaka is stronger, > desire lasts a longer time and the kamma vipaka is less (compared > to each other) and that delusion lasts the longest and has the worst > kamma vipaka. N: Aversion is eradicated at the third stage of enlightenment, desire at the fourth and last stage. Aversion can take the form of violence, harming others, and this brings a bad result, vipaaka. Ignorance is eradicated at the stage of the arahat. It is very dangerous, leads to many kinds of akusala. Perhaps you can find the sutta? M: I would be interested in discussing some areas which could do with > some abhidhamma input if that is alright with you. N: You are welcome, Nina. 43278 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] 'Cetasikas' study corner 135 -Appliedthinking/Vitakka,Jotipala. Hi Mike, op 15-03-2005 01:02 schreef mnease op mlnease@z...: quotes N: I would like to add: one cannot count how immediate awareness of an > object is. Its characteristic can appear to sati sampajañña, but this can be > in a following process, processes of cittas follow upon each other very > fast. Awareness in vipassanaa is not reviewing by thinking about a reality. > > M: I didn't think so. But in the texts, doesn't 'reviewing' (usually?) > refer to thinking about past realities and also past thoughts? N: retrospective knowledge, paccavekkha.na ñaa.na, is a kind of understanding, not thinking. It occurs after jhana and also after phalacitta. Understanding reviews in a mind-door process the path, fruition, abandoned defilements, remaining defilements and nibbaana. Nina. 43279 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie and Larry, just a quick note. I just see, Connie also posted this. The Sutta: A.N. I, 51-52. We worked so hard with Jim on the long co. Here is the beginning: 49. navame pabhassaranti pa.n.dara.m parisuddha.m. cittanti bhava"ngacitta.m. ki.m pana cittassa va.n.no naama atthiiti? natthi. N: As to the ninth (?),² luminous². Luminous is clear, pure. citta is the life-continuum. But how does there exist indeed a colour of citta? No, it does not. niilaadiina~nhi a~n~natarava.n.na.m vaa hotu ava.n.na.m vaa ya.mki~nci parisuddhataaya ``pabhassara''nti vuccati. N: For anything which may be a certain colour, beginning with blue, or without colour, is called luminous because of its purity. idampi nirupakkilesataaya parisuddhanti pabhassara.m. ta~nca khoti ta.m bhava"ngacitta.m. N: It is also pure, because it is unsoiled (by defilements); thus luminous. That indeed, meaning, that life-continuum. aagantukehiiti asahajaatehi pacchaa javanakkha.ne uppajjanakehi. N: ³ by oncoming ³(defilements). by those that are not conascent with it, but arise later at the moment of impulsion (javana). upakkilesehiiti raagaadiihi upakkili.t.thattaa upakkili.t.tha.m naamaati vuccati. N: ³by defilements². By being soiled by desire etc. it is indeed called defiled. Nina. op 14-03-2005 20:53 schreef connie op connieparker@i...: > L: From Jaran's and Suan's messages that you mention below I see that > the commentaries do say luminous mind is either bhavanga or rebirth > citta, but I couldn't find what sutta they referred to. Anyway, seems > like a bit of a stretch for me. 43280 From: nina Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Visuddhimagga XIV, 144 and Tiika. Visuddhimagga XIV, 144 and Tiika. Intro: In the following paragraphs, the Visuddhimagga deals with six pairs of sobhana cetasikas that arise with each sobhana citta. Of each pair one cetasika is a quality pertaining to the accompanying cetasikas (kaaya or the mental body), and one a quality pertaining to citta. They perform their functions so that kusala citta and cetasikas can apply themselves to daana, siila or bhaavana. They are indispensable for the performing of kusala, they support the kusala citta, each in their own way. The first pair is tranquillity of body, kaaya-passaddhi, and tranquillity of citta, citta-passaddhi. Tranquillity or calm is not only necessary for samatha, but it has to accompany each kusala citta. Calm is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca, which prevents the arising of kusala citta. When there are conditions for kusala citta, calm performs its function while it accompanies kusala citta. There is no need to aim for calm first as a condition for kusala citta. It arises already when kusala citta arises. The Commentary to the ŒAbhidhammattha Sangaha¹ (T.A. p 64) mentions that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: *** Text Vis. : (xvi)-(xvii) The tranquilizing of the body is 'tranquility of the body'. The tranquilizing of consciousness is 'tranquility of consciousness'. And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the calming of anxiety. It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a group, and it refers to the Dhammasangani which mentions the tranquillity of the khandhas of feeling, remembrance (saññaa) and the formations. With reference to these three khandhas that include the cetasikas, the word body, kaayo, is used. Text Vis.: But both tranquility of the body and of consciousness have, together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of the body and of consciousness. N: The Tiika refers here to anger or impetuosity (saarambho). This is a term for the defilements of restlessness etc. which are a condition for unpleasant feeling. Restlessness or agitation accompanies each akusala citta. Worry or regret, kukkucca, arises together with citta rooted in dosa, and this is accompanied by unpleasant feeling. At the moment of dosa-muulacitta one is disturbed and anxious, not calm. But tranquillity quiets such disturbances or anxieties. Text Vis.: Their function is to crush disturbance of the [mental] body and of consciousness. They are manifested as inactivity and coolness of the [mental] body and consciousness. N: Kaaya passadhi, calm of body, has the function of calming cetasikas, and citta passadhi has the function of calming citta. The Tiika explains that by crushing disturbance they are manifested as being unwavering, without agitation and as coolness. Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of agitation, etc., which cause unpeacefulness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: As to the expression the defilements of agitation, etc., the Tiika explains these as the defilements with agitation or restlessness (uddhacca) as the foremost, or, that all defilements to begin with restlessness are included. **** When one performs daana which also includes the appreciation of someone else¹s kusala, there are calm of citta and cetasikas. One is not disturbed by stinginess or jealousy, defilements that are accompanied by unpleasant feeling. When one observes siila, one is not disturbed by remorse, there is calm. In samatha calm is developed to a high degree so that jhaana can be attained. Calm suppresses the hindrances and it is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca. The aim of samatha is to be free from sense impressions that are bound up with defilements. Right understanding is necssary for the development of calm, there has to be precise understanding of the characteristic of calm so that it is known when kusala citta with calm arises and when there is attachment to calm. There is also calm in the development of insight. When there is right understanding of naama and ruupa, the six doors are guarded at that moment. One is not disturbed by unwholesome thoughts about persons and situations when right understanding of dhammas is developed, one begins to see them as impersonal elements devoid of self. Calm is one of the factors of enlightenment. As right understanding develops, the enlightenment factor of calm develops as well. Insight leads to the eradication of defilements. The arahat has reached the highest calm that cannot be disturbed anymore by defilements. **** Nina. 43281 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi Larry, op 15-03-2005 01:33 schreef LBIDD@w... op LBIDD@w...: > I'm still confused about the experience of desire for a tomatoe. For one > thing, what desire desires is to experience a tomatoe; so desire doesn't > experience the object of its desire. N: OK, but it thinks with desire of the concept tomatoe. L:[addendum: unless we say when > desire experiences its object it doesn't experience itself, is that it?] N: I think this is the clue. L: I believe you said when desire for a tomatoe arises as javana citta, > that javana citta is not experienced until it is an object of > consciousness in another mind-door process. N: There need not be any problem if we remember that each citta has only one object. The desire arises always with javanacitta. There is not any citta that experiences itself as an object. L:What kind of consciousness > takes this desire as object? It seems like it would be another javana > series, and this second javana series, itself, would not be experienced > until it (the second javana series) became the object of another > mind-door process. N: Yes, a citta in a javanaseries can only be taken as object in a following javana series. The citta which takes desire that previously arose as object: can reflect on it with irritation for example, or, there can be a citta with insight that realizes desire as only a kind of nama element. L: What would be the experience of the first javana > series in which tomatoe (an idea let's say) is the object of desire? > Would it be just the perception of the idea of tomatoe? N: that citta clings to tomatoe, it is lobha-muulacitta. L It would seem that a lot of what we think of as present experience is > actually experiencing of unexperienced elements (of all kinds) of past > mental processes. To say that experience is the object of javana and not > the javana itself (unless it is an object) is a new way of looking at > citta process for me. I'm going to have to meditate on this for a while. N: We cannot say that javanacitta itself is not en experience, it is. It is citta. But it can only be *object* of another citta arising afterwards. It all goes on as in a flash of lightning and therefore we take for one moment what are many moments. Only through insight there can be a clearer understanding of different cittas. But you can verify that there is not the experience of two objects at a time. Can you think at the same time of tomatoe and of desire? Nina. 43282 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Initial Hello Dear Selamat, by the way do not call me Mrs. , just Nina. op 15-03-2005 07:48 schreef nana_palo@c... op nana_palo@c...: > Dear Mrs. Nina, > Brahmaviharas are good for all of us, we should try to develop them in our > daily activities at work so we always have a positive thinking. > > What many employees experience is the negative mood regarding sloth and > torpor (thina-middha) when they are under great pressure or other moods > are not so good for them. N: What the employees experience is what we all have, at work or at home. It is natural that there are more akusala cittas than kusala cittas since we have accumulated akusala for aeons and aeons. How could it be otherwise? But we can learn to understand akusala citta, sloth and torpor etc. as not mine, only conditioned elements. S: Suggestion needed for how to rise and develop > energy while the situations are not good enough for this. N: Understanding should be emphasized above all, understanding is essential. When this arises, it is accompanied by energy already. Energy for kusala. We do not have to aim just for energy, than it may be the wrong energy with lobha, or with clinging to my energy. That is a great danger. S: some of them said that many theoritical matters but this is the facts of the job. they > know that this conditions are anicca intelectually, but they always fail > to face the situations. N: We may have intellectual understanding, but it is difficult to apply this in the situation of life. For all of us. Still, the intellectual understanding helps to clear up the situations of our life. It is a basis. It comes from listening, study and considering. When we study Dhamma there are conditions to think of Dhamma more often than of other matters which are not helpful. And then we can see that thinking of Dhamma is not ours, it also arises because of conditions, because of our study and listening. So everyone does his best to live according to the Dhamma and develop more understanding as far as he is able to and he should not overreach, trying to go beyond his capacities. That means, that one should not be distressed about distractions, lack of energy for kusala, unfavorable situations. Being in this or that situation has been conditioned. Often we cannot change the situation, certainly not at will. Most important is seeing the benefit of the Buddha's teaching. Nobody can take that away from us. Nina. 43283 From: matheesha Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:21pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hello Nina, N: Aversion is conditioned by attachment and ignorance. When > we do not get what we like, dislike tends to arise. M: Did you mean for the latter sentence to exaplain the former? I can understand how aversion would arise in the explanation you give above, but it can also arise on its own like you mentioned- ie as in eating something unpleasant you will have dislike. It's difficult to bring in the other two to explain its arising here I would think. One might say that desire and aversion are two sides of the same coin but at the point of desire arising or aversion arising I do not sense any involvement of the other. It would also make the staggered dissappearance of desire and aversion in the different stages improbable. However I can see how ignorance plays a part. Desire and aversion exists because the three characteristics pertaining to everything arent well grasped and integrated into thinking. N: When indifferent feeling > arises, there is often ignorance. This feeling is not easy to know. M: I think since we have always been in ignorance we do not know anything other than it -so it is difficult to know unless it falls away. A man who is enlightened is said to know it (a sutta says) like a man who has his leg cut off knows its not there anymore. If a person suppresses his sense of self for even a few minutes there will be some understanding of what this is all about I think. Its possibly also about not thinking in terms of permanence and satisfactoriness, but im just guessing here. > M: . I > > heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 in > > the suttas? >N: There are two systems of counting rupa-jhana. In the fivefold system (you > find mostly.... M:Classification is possible in many ways. It is fair to say for example that people can be classified in many ways acording to the charchteristics they do/do not possess. However the number of people inhabiting say a particalar area is constant at a given time. Similarly I would think that hindernaces, vedana etc can be classified in many ways as the categories are only concepts, jhana are not just concepts but actual states of consciousness. In my experience and those of others there are only 8. So i wonder if abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting on the actual. You mentioned that 6 hinderances are mentioned - interesting. > N: Aversion is eradicated at the third stage of enlightenment, desire at the > fourth and last stage. Aversion can take the form of violence, harming > others, and this brings a bad result, vipaaka. > Ignorance is eradicated at the stage of the arahat. It is very dangerous, > leads to many kinds of akusala. M: Yes, I do like your interpretation of it - I was thinking more in terms of how long the actual thought of aversion/desire lasts (delusion being the longest?). The sutta is in the AN. I will post it when i come across it but I have my doubts of finding it as I dont remember the name nor the general area in which I read it. metta matheesha 43284 From: Illusion Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 2:48pm Subject: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Copyright © 1997 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. The author gives permission to re-format and redistribute his work for use on computers and computer networks, provided that you charge no fees for its distribution or use. Otherwise, all rights reserved. The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada A life-affirming Buddhism that teaches us to find happiness by opening to the richness of our everyday lives. That's what we want -- or so we're told by the people who try to sell us a mainstreamlined Buddhism. But is it what we need? And is it Buddhism? Think back for a moment on the story of the young Prince Siddhartha and his first encounters with aging, illness, death, and a wandering contemplative. It's one of the most accessible chapters in the Buddhist tradition, largely because of the direct, true-to-the-heart quality of the young prince's emotions. He saw aging, illness, and death as an absolute terror, and pinned all his hopes on the contemplative forest life as his only escape. As Asvaghosa, the great Buddhist poet, depicts the story, the young prince had no lack of friends and family members who tried to talk him out of those perceptions, and Asvaghosa was wise enough to show their life-affirming advice in a very appealing light. Still, the prince realized that if he were to give in to their advice, he would be betraying his heart. Only by remaining true to his honest emotions was he able to embark on the path that led away from the ordinary values of his society and toward an unsurpassed Awakening into the Deathless. This is hardly a life-affirming story in the ordinary sense of the term, but it does affirm something more important than life: the truth of the heart when it aspires to a happiness absolutely pure. The power of this aspiration depends on two emotions, called in Pali samvega and pasada. Very few of us have heard of them, but they're the emotions most basic to the Buddhist tradition. Not only did they inspire the young prince in his quest for Awakening, but even after he became the Buddha he advised his followers to cultivate them on a daily basis. In fact, the way he handled these emotions is so distinctive that it may be one of the most important contributions his teachings have to offer to American culture today. Samvega was what the young Prince Siddhartha felt on his first exposure to aging, illness, and death. It's a hard word to translate because it covers such a complex range -- at least three clusters of feelings at once: the oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation that come with realizing the futility and meaninglessness of life as it's normally lived; a chastening sense of our own complacency and foolishness in having let ourselves live so blindly; and an anxious sense of urgency in trying to find a way out of the meaningless cycle. This is a cluster of feelings we've all experienced at one time or another in the process of growing up, but I don't know of a single English term that adequately covers all three. It would be useful to have such a term, and maybe that's reason enough for simply adopting the word samvega into our language. But more than providing a useful term, Buddhism also offers an effective strategy for dealing with the feelings behind it -- feelings that our own culture finds threatening and handles very poorly. Ours, of course, is not the only culture threatened by feelings of samvega. In the Siddhartha story, the father's reaction to the young prince's discovery stands for the way most cultures try to deal with these feelings: He tried to convince the prince that his standards for happiness were impossibly high, at the same time trying to distract him with relationships and every sensual pleasure imaginable. To put it simply, the strategy was to get the prince to lower his aims and to find satisfaction in a happiness that was less than absolute and not especially pure. If the young prince were living in America today, the father would have other tools for dealing with the prince's dissatisfaction, but the basic strategy would be essentially the same. We can easily imagine him taking the prince to a religious counselor who would teach him to believe that God's creation is basically good and not to focus on any aspects of life that would cast doubt on that belief. Or he might take him to a psychotherapist who would treat feelings of samvega as an inability to accept reality. If talking therapies didn't get results, the therapist would probably prescribe mood-altering drugs to dull the feeling out of the young man's system so that he could become a productive, well-adjusted member of society. If the father were really up on current trends, he might find a Dharma teacher who would counsel the prince to find happiness in life's little miraculous pleasures -- a cup of tea, a walk in the woods, social activism, easing another person's pain. Never mind that these forms of happiness would still be cut short by aging, illness, and death, he would be told. The present moment is all we have, so we should try to appreciate the bittersweet opportunity of relishing but not holding on to brief joys as they pass. It's unlikely that the lion-hearted prince we know from the story would take to any of this well-meant advice. He'd see it as propaganda for a life of quiet desperation, asking him to be a traitor to his heart. But if he found no solace from these sources, where in our society would he go? Unlike the India of his time, we don't have any well-established, socially accepted alternatives to being economically productive members of society. Even our contemplative religious orders are prized for their ability to provide bread, honey, and wine for the marketplace. So the prince would probably find no alternative but to join the drifters and dropouts, the radicals and revolutionaries, the subsistence hunters and survivalists consigned to the social fringe. He'd discover many fine minds and sensitive spirits in these groups, but no accumulated body of proven and profound alternative wisdom to draw on. Someone might give him a book by Thoreau or Muir, but their writings would offer him no satisfactory analysis of aging, illness, and death, and no recommendations for how to go beyond them. And because there's hardly any safety net for people on the fringe, he'd find himself putting an inordinate amount of his energy into issues of basic survival, with little time or energy left over to find his own solution to the problem of samvega. He would end up disappearing, his Buddhahood aborted -- perhaps in the Utah canyon country, perhaps in a Yukon forest -- without trace. Fortunately for us, however, the prince was born in a society that did provide support and respect for its dropouts. This was what gave him the opportunity to find a solution to the problem of samvega that did justice to the truths of his heart. The first step in that solution is symbolized in the Siddhartha story by the prince's reaction to the fourth person he saw on his travels outside of the palace: the wandering forest contemplative. The emotion he felt at this point is termed pasada, another complex set of feelings usually translated as "clarity and serene confidence." It's what keeps samvega from turning into despair. In the prince's case, he gained a clear sense of his predicament and of the way out of it, leading to something beyond aging, illness, and death, at the same time feeling confident that the way would work. As the early Buddhist teachings freely admit, the predicament is that the cycle of birth, aging, and death is meaningless. They don't try to deny this fact and so don't ask us to be dishonest with ourselves or to close our eyes to reality. As one teacher has put it, the Buddhist recognition of the reality of suffering -- so important that suffering is honored as the first noble truth -- is a gift, in that it confirms our most sensitive and direct experience of things, an experience that many other traditions try to deny. From there, the early teachings ask us to become even more sensitive, to the point where we see that the true cause of suffering is not out there -- in society or some outside being -- but in here, in the craving present in each individual mind. They then confirm that there is an end to suffering, a release from the cycle. And they show the way to that release, through developing noble qualities already latent in the mind to the point where they cast craving aside and open onto Deathlessness. Thus the predicament has a practical solution, a solution within the powers of every human being. It's also a solution open to critical scrutiny and testing -- an indication of how confident the Buddha was in the solution he found to the problem of samvega. This is one of the aspects of authentic Buddhism that most attracts people who are tired of being told that they should try to deny the insights that inspired their sense of samvega in the first place. In fact, early Buddhism is not only confident that it can handle feelings of samvega but it's also one of the few religions that actively cultivates them to a radical extent. Its solution to the problems of life demand so much dedicated effort that only strong samvega will keep the practicing Buddhist from slipping back into his or her old ways. Hence the recommendation that all Buddhists, both men and women, lay or ordained, should reflect daily on the facts of aging, illness, separation, and death -- to develop feelings of samvega -- and on the power of one's own actions, to take samvega one step further, to pasada. For people whose sense of samvega is so strong that they want to abandon any social ties that prevent them from following the path to the end of suffering, Buddhism offers both a long-proven body of wisdom for them to draw from, as well as a safety net: the monastic sangha, an institution that enables them to leave lay society without having to waste time worrying about basic survival. For those who can't leave their social ties, Buddhist teaching offers a way to live in the world without being overcome by the world, following a life of generosity, virtue, and meditation to strengthen the noble qualities of the mind that will lead to the end of suffering. The symbiotic relationship designed for these two branches of the Buddhist parisa, or community, guarantees that each will benefit from contact with the other. The support of the laity guarantees that the monastics will not need to be overly concerned about food, clothing, and shelter; the gratitude that the monastics inevitably feel for the freely-offered generosity of the laity helps to keep them from turning into misfits and misanthropes. At the same time, contact with the monastics helps the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy. So the Buddhist attitude toward life cultivates samvega -- a clear acceptance of the meaninglessness of the cycle of birth, aging, and death -- and develops it into pasada: a confident path to the Deathless. That path includes not only time-proven guidance, but also a social institution that nurtures it and keeps it alive. These are all things that our society desperately needs. It's a shame that, in our current efforts at mainstreaming Buddhism, they are aspects of the Buddhist tradition usually ignored. We keep forgetting that one source of Buddhism's strength is its ability to keep one foot out of the mainstream, and that the traditional metaphor for the practice is that it crosses over the stream to the further shore. My hope is that we will begin calling these things to mind and taking them to heart, so that in our drive to find a Buddhism that sells, we don't end up selling ourselves short. []\/[]aya []Dutra {ô_ô} "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43285 From: Matthew Miller Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 4:12pm Subject: Sweet & Salty Sounds Here's an article from last week's Economist magazine about a woman who can taste sounds (a synaesthete) -- "a major third sounds sweet. A minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an octave is tasteless." How would the abhidhamma explain this phenomenon? *** Musical Taste Mar 3rd 2005 From The Economist print edition IN THE long tradition of neurological research, she is known only by her initials, to protect her anonymity. But ES is not ill. Indeed, she is almost the opposite of ill. For she is a professional musician who is able, literally, to taste what she hears. Almost every musical interval provokes a gustatory sensation in her. A major third sounds sweet. A minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an octave is tasteless. Synaesthesia, as the stimulation of one sensory perception by another is known, is not that unusual. But the stimulated sensation is usually colour vision. Words or numbers, for example, take on reliable hues. In ES's case, that happens too. Individual tones have their own colours: C is red, F-sharp is violet. But her perception of intervals as flavours, reported in this week's Nature by Gian Beeli and his colleagues at the University of Zurich, is a phenomenon recorded only once before. In the previous case, the individual in question, known as S, had no musical training, and tended to experience what the researchers refer to as "blended gustatory sensations"—in other words, entire meals rather than particular flavours. Dr Beeli speculates that ES's musical training has helped her to focus her synaesthesia on particular flavours. Whether the musical training focused the synaesthesia, or the synaesthesia provoked the passion for music, it is definitely the case that ES makes specific use of her synaesthesia to assist her professional life. For her, music truly is the food of love. 43286 From: Tep Sastri Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:03pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature / Luminous Mind Hi, Connie - The following is from our earlier dialogue: Tep: Items 1) and 3) tell me that the objective for following the Teachings, which is described very well in 9), is to attain "that mind" which is cleansed of taints. The result is a luminous mind that no longer changes. The "no longer changes" description implies that "that mind" is unconditioned and lasting -- Nibbana. Connie: ... .... "Monks, I know not of any other single thing so quick to change as the mind: insomuch that it is no easy thing to illustrate how quick to change it is." I don't equate any mind/citta with Nibbaana. A Buddha still has changing cittas or mind(stream). I don't know of anything to support saying "Buddha's citta has become Nibbaana." Is that what you are saying? --------------------------------------------- Yes, that is what I have said. The reason is that "the luminous mind that is no longer changing" means it lasts. > Connie: Are you (also) saying that the quote is not talking about the > bhavanga cittas? Yes, Connie, because it is "the consciousness of the arahant, which is non-manifestative, infinite, and all lustrous". Again, thank you for bringing up this topic. I am waiting for the right time to connect this discussion back to Acariya Mun's biography in order to try to answer some of your doubts. Kindest regards, Tep ============ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hi, Tep, Cosmique, Rob, All, > 43287 From: rjkjp1 Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:21pm Subject: Re: Sweet & Salty Sounds --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Matthew Miller" wrote: > > Here's an article from last week's Economist magazine about a woman > who can taste sounds (a synaesthete) -- "a major third sounds sweet. A > minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an > octave is tasteless." > > How would the abhidhamma explain this phenomenon? > ================= Dear Matthew Avijja. Robertk > 43288 From: Tep Sastri Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 6:51pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi LokuttaraCitta (and Connie) - Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as "this mind" or is it the same as "that mind" (as described in Connie's first message on "Buddha Nature")? In the Appendix 2 of your quoted article there is a description of the mind of the Arahant, called Supreme Happiness among other things: "Pure awareness, devoid of all contaminants, is supreme awareness: a truly amazing quality of knowing that bestows perfect happiness, as befits the Arahant's state of absolute purity. This Supreme Happiness always remains constant. It never changes or varies like conditioned phenomena of the world, which are always burdened with anicca, dukkha, and anatta". "But when the faculty of wisdom has scrubbed it clean until this condition has totally disintegrated, the true citta, the true Dhamma, the one that can stand the test, will not disintegrate and disappear along with it. Only the conditions of anicca, dukkha and anatta, which infiltrate the citta, actually disappear.No matter how subtle the kilesas may be, they are still conditioned by anicca, dukkha, and anatta, and therefore, must be conventional phenomena. "Once these things have completely disintegrated, the true citta, the one that has transcended conventional reality, becomes fully apparent. This is called the citta's Absolute Freedom, or the citta' s Absolute Purity. All connections continuing from the citta's previous condition have been severed forever. Now utterly pure, the citta's essential knowing nature remains alone on its own. [endquote] Is this permanent, never changing, mind of the Arahant same as "that mind" in Connie's message? Further, is it an Atta? Is it Nibbana? What do you think? Since both of us don't know this "citta", please feel free to guess. Kindest regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: > > Hello,Connie > > Please note : > > "Soka Gakkai" is considered in Japan to be a very powerful well- > established cult religion ,never to be authentic Maha-yana except by > their followers. They have even their own political party which forms > the current ruling coalition. > 43289 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:07pm Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi James, In the past, you have mentioned your experiences in school debating teams. I suspect you miss the old days, and this post of yours is more about debating than it is about getting to the truth. At the risk of being thrashed, I will join in: ------------ James: > I find this to be a rather unsatisfying argument against DO occurring within one lifetime. First, I find the statement "The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" to be odd. ------------- The word "odd" does cast BB's argument in a bad light. But, rather than being swayed by words, we should see if you substantiate your finding of oddity: ------------------------------- J: > Dukkha is dukkha and the Buddha didn't invent dukkha ------------------------------ That's true, and BB has not suggested otherwise (so there's no oddity so far). But does the beginning of your sentence support its conclusion? ------------------------------ J: > nor did he have a specific `concern' having to do with it. ------------------------------ No, there is no connection between those motherhood statements and your conclusion that the Buddha did not have a specific concern with dukkha. Having criticised BB for saying there was "a primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" you say, three sentences later, there actually is a predominant problem with dukkha: ------------------------------------------------ J: > if one looks at this issue objectively, I think it is fair to say that dukkha is predominately a problem on a personal level, moment to moment, or as Nanaivira puts it "existential anxiety", rather than a problem of repeating lifetimes at BB suggests. ------------------------------------------------ So there is no oddity, and we are back where we started: BB says D.O. is about successive lives, while you and Nanaivira say it is only about the present life. ----------------------------------- J: > After all, repeated births wouldn't be a problem if they could all somehow be happy (not a logical possibility, but you should get my point). ------------------------------------ If anything, I think the point proves BB's argument. Eternal happiness is not a possibility and so repeated births must be a problem. BB is saying it is the problem specifically addressed by the Buddha in his teaching of D.O. ---------------------------------------------------- J: > Not only that, when you consider why it is that humans are more prone to learn and follow the dhamma, as opposed to the higher and lower realms, it is because humans are more aware of their existential dukkha (due to the mixture of pleasure and pain) and thus able to do something about it. Devas, who experience birth and death, are not as concerned because their lives are so blissful and satisfying; and, ghosts, petas, and lower entities, who also experience birth and death, are suffering far too much to consider and practice the dhamma. Therefore, I think the problem of dukkha is more a `here and now' issue rather than a several lifetime issue as proposed by BB. ------------------------------------------------------ While I disagree with your conclusion, I agree with your arguments: dukkha is less of a problem in this life than it will be in some future (hell, heaven and ghost) lives. So, to use BB's words, "The primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned, in its most comprehensive and fundamental dimensions, is the problem of our bondage to sa.msaara -- the round of repeated birth, aging, and death." I hope I haven't been too argumentative (again). :-) Ken H 43290 From: connie Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 7:20pm Subject: Re: Buddha Nature Hi, LK, Tep, All Thanks for the link re SGI, LK. I think the Nichirenists consider his teachings on "the true Buddhism" to be an advancement over all earlier schools and separate from Mahayana, rather like the Vajrayana do. I'm more inclined to believe in the decline of the saasana than that Buddha with-held essential truths from the early disciples and intended his teachings to 'evolve' or be 'improved'. Maybe this will connect our other discussion back, Tep. A.Mun says, "All meditators whose level of calm has reached the very base of samaadhi realize that the center of 'what knows' stands out prominently in the region of the heart. They will not argue that it is centered in the brain, as those who have no experience in the practice of samaadhi are always claiming. But when the same citta has been cleansed until it is pure, that center then disappears." Bhikkhu Khemavamsa doesn't come right out and say he's "arrived", but describes going beyond this "moment when one for the first time enjoys total freedom from lobha, dosa and moha and that whole process of arising and ceasing of phenomena. And that gives rise to a totally unprecedented sensation to arise. Totally inexpressible, nameless and certainly not of this world. Felt in the beginning for an instant as the touch of a tiny dot in the middle of the abdomen and disappearing; then gradually expanding from that spot and taking over the whole body, a sensation appears which simply leaves one without any doubt that this is nothing else but a taste of Nibbaana!" I expected him to say "a taste of nausea" and the description offends my preconceived ideas of the lokuttara cittas, yet why? Words have their limits and we're forced to speak of namas using physically descriptive terms like 'luminous' so it does make a certain sense to see the eradication or final outflow of defilements as an upheaval of sickening poisons. Still, it seems to be pushing the idea that the teachings go against the flow and reminds me of heroin junkies speaking highly of the bliss of vomiting. I don't doubt that's their experience, I just don't share the appreciation. My distaste for this description is no grounds for doubting that these monks have had similar experiences, but I don't think it's "a taste of Nibbaana". Bhikkhu Khemavamsa seems to talk about Nibbaana as a creative, loving ground of being and Universal Intelligence underlying all phenomena, making it sound like it's just a matter of returning to our true home, the Deathless within, saying: "That Infinite, Eternal Creating, Unlimited Love And Intelligence Is Who You Really Are!" Reading A. Mun, the supposed arahat's bio, I got the impression that the citta (the primal mind?) somehow transforms into Nibbaana. When he says this purified "citta" that doesn't exhibit or manifest and activities has no involvement with any of the five khandhas nor any outflow of consciousness, I take it this means, in part, that with sa-upaadisesa nibbaana, there is no cetasika at all... not even amoha, adosa or alobha. BK's and A.Mun's Nibbaanas are, to my mind, just more variations on the atta or Buddha Nature theme. As LK quoted A.Mun: "Our real problem, our one fundamental problem – which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own true self. Instead, we have always taken counterfeit things to be the essence of who we really are, so that the citta's behavior is never in harmony with its true nature. " I may be reading things into the phrase 'our own true self', but he also says, "the true power of the citta's own nature is that it knows and does not die. This deathlessness is a quality that lies beyond disintegration. Being beyond disintegration, it also lies beyond the range of anicca, dukkha, and anattaa and the universal laws of nature." I'm not sure what this means. Even Nibbaana is said to be anattaa in the parts of the Tipitaka I've read. My distaste for these descriptions of Nibbaana makes me hesitant to swallow anything these men say. peace, connie 43291 From: Sarah and Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 9:36pm Subject: Reminder: GIVE LINKS where possible, TRIM, USE A NAME..... Dear All, Thanks to our many regular posters, this is a very active list! For the benefit of all, please keep in mind the list's Guidelines which are occasionally revised and which can be viewed at this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Note particularly the following from them: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 7. GIVE LINKS where possible rather than quoting large slabs of material..... [Note: ‘large slabs’ are more than a page or so of quoted material, especially if it is given without your comments. We suggest instead giving a short introduction plus a link for longer text passages. If the material is not available on line and cannot be accessed by a link, consider either posting it in installments (max one a day) or asking Connie or Jon for help. This is out of consideration for other members and also for reasons to do with the archives (limited storage space etc] Also: 5. TRIM your posts (including Yahoo footer material). Always assume that other members have read the post you are replying to, and remove anything that is not essential to understanding your reply. 6. USE A NAME, at the beginning of your post, to indicate who is (mainly) being addressed, and also at the end, to sign off (we encourage members to use a real name.......) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your cooperation. Any comments or requests for further clarification or assistance, *off-list only*. Jon and Sarah dsgmods@y... 43292 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 10:47pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 147 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(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.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** There is another aspect of vitakka I want to mention. Vitakka is one of the factors of the eightfold Path and as such it is called: sammå-sa"nkappa , right thinking. Sammå-sa"nkappa has to arise together with sammå-di.t.thi, right understanding, in order to be a factor of the eightfold Path (1). *** 1) The factors of the eightfold Path are: right understanding (see Chapter 34), right thinking, right speech, right action and right livelihood ( for the last three see Chapter 32), right effort (see Chapter 10), right mindfulness (see Chapter 26) and right concentration (see Chapter 6). These factors perform each their specific function so that the goal can be attained: the eradication of defilements. The reader will also come across the terms insight or vipassanå and satipaììhåna. The development of vipassanå, the development of satipaììhåna or the development of the eightfold Path, it all amounts to the development of right understanding of nåma and rúpa, of ultimate realities. When a reality appears through one of the six doors there can be a moment of investigation of its characteristic: it can be seen as a nåma or a rúpa, not a person, not a thing. That is the beginning of understanding of its true nature of non-self. At such a moment there is also mindfulness, non-forgetfulness of the reality appearing at the present moment. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43293 From: kenhowardau Date: Tue Mar 15, 2005 11:04pm Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hi Maya, May I ask why you posted this particular article by Bhikkhu Thanissaro? Checking our Useful Posts file, I see that Sarah has written on this exact topic (message 17922) and Nina has commented on samvega (32249). I would love to know your opinions on all three documents. I have written a few posts about the web site, Access To Insight and about the teachings of Thanissaro Bhikkhu. If you can find time to read 34543 and 34782, I would appreciate your opinions on them as well. While I am here, I should make a contribution to the discussion. First, I will quote from the above messages by Sarah and Nina. Sarah: ". . . I'd suggest the `sense of urgency' is a prompting of uplifting, wholesome states, not an "oppressive sense of shock, dismay, and alienation that comes with realizing the futility and meaningless of life as it's normally lived" as Thanissaro suggests. This sounds more like some kind of thinking with aversion and perhaps the misplaced idea as well that the development of understanding and insight is something separate or apart from life as we live it now, already by conditions." Nina: "This sutta can remind us that we should not delay the development of understanding of all realities arising at this moment. There is no need to go to a quiet place. We may die before we reach that place. Realities such as seeing, hearing and thinking are the same no matter where we are. All day long dhammas appear through the five sense-doors and through the mind-door, one at a time. Through the eyes visible object is experienced, through the ears sound, through the nose odour, through the tongue flavour, through the bodysense hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure.." You can see the difference the Abhidhamma makes. While BT, with his belief in self, can only teach the usual platitudes that anyone can teach, an acceptance of the Abhidhamma allows for an understanding that is unique and profoundly different. Ken H 43294 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 0:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Tep, --- Tep Sastri wrote: >My understanding is that practicing the > indriya-samvara-sila conditions satipatthana to be fulfilled later > on when the four foundations of mindfulness are practiced according > to the Maha-satipatthana Sutta. The fulfillment of indriya-samvara- > sila leads to fulfillment of samma-sati in the sequential manner. ... S: I partly agree with you. I believe that the guarding of the senses is only achieved by the development of sati. Of course, there are degrees and kinds of sati and restraint, but as mindfulness develops with understanding and the other path factors, the senses are guarded and this leads eventually to the ‘fulfillment’ or ‘establishment’ of satipatthana. In the context of ‘visuddhi’ or purity, I believe the ‘guarding’ or restraint always refers to satipatthana. .... > This is explained in SN 46.6 Kundaliya Sutta. A summary of this > sutta is available at http://www.saigon.com/~anson/ebud/guide- > tipitaka/guidetipitaka-06.htm > > "The Buddha advises him to cultivate and frequently practise > restraint of the five senses. This will establish the threefold good > conduct in deed, word and thought. When the threefold good conduct > is cultivated and frequently practised, the Four Foundations of > Mindfulness will be established. When the Four Foundations of > Mindfulness are well established, the Seven Factors of Enlightenment > will be developed. When the Seven Factors of Enlightenment are > developed and frequently applied, the. Fruits of the Path and > liberation by knowledge will be achieved". .... S: A good sutta and I appreciate and understand your comments. I believe that when it continues to describe the restraint of the sense faculties, beginning with the seeing of an agreeable form which one isn’t attached to, this has to be with the development of sati and I would suggest satipatthana. There are more quotes and posts which you may like to consider under ‘Guarding the Senses’ in UP – by Nina, Jon, Robert and James also. Here are a few extracts with references from the Visuddhimagga: ..... 1.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/40128 From ‘Cetasikas’: “The Visuddhimagga mentions in the section on síla (Chapter I, 53-60) the “guarding of the sense-doors”, because this can be considered as an aspect of síla. When there is mindfulness of, for example, visible object and visible object is not taken for a ‘thing’ or a person but is known as only a kind of rúpa appearing through the eyes, the eye-door is guarded. At that moment there is no attachment to visible object, no aversion towards it, no ignorance about it. Later on we may become absorbed in what we see and we may cling to it, but at the moment of mindfulness the doorways are guarded and there is restraint of the senses. Thus, mindfulness of nåma and rúpa, which is a form of bhåvanå (mental development), can also be considered as síla.” ***** 2.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/30605 Jon, quoting from the Vism: >Meanwhile, here is something further on restraint of sense faculties. In the section dealing with the different ways that virtue can be classified, there is a fourfold classification as 'Patimokkha [monks' rules] restraint, of restraint of sense faculties, of purification of livelihood, and that concerning requisites', and on 'restraint of sense faculties' there is this passage from MN 27 (Simile of the Elephant's Footprint (Shorter)): <> <...> Of particular interest I think are the following: 'He enters upon the way of its restraint': [the meaning is] he enters upon the way of *closing that eye faculty by the door-panel of mindfulness*. It is the same one of whom it is said 'he guards the eye faculty, undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty'. and: But when virtue, etc., [J: i.e., virtue, mindfulness, etc, the opposites of unvirtuousness or forgetfulness or unknowing or impatience or idleness] has arisen in it, then the door too is guarded. I think this confirms that guarding the sense doors is one of the functions performed by mindfulness whenever it arises.< ***** [S: read full message for Vism details and explanations] 3.http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/31015 Jon continues: >I think the passage that I quoted before from Visuddhi-Magga speaks to the power of mindfulness. I like the reference to mindfulness being like a door panel that has the effect of completely blocking the sense-door to any intrusion by defilements. Further on there is another reference to the role of mindfulness in the guarding of the sense doors: <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 100. (b) And ... restraint of the sense faculties should be undertaken with mindfulness. For that is accomplished by mindfulness, because when the sense faculties’ functions are founded on mindfulness, there is no liability to invasion by covetousness and the rest. <..> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The passage goes on to liken a mind without mindfulness as 'a crop not fenced in with branches' that is then 'raided by the robber defilements as a village with open gates is by thieves', with the result that 'lust leaks into his mind as rain does into a badly-roofed house'.< ***** Tep, I’d be glad if you’d read these and the other messages in full. Apologies for giving you homework again. Nina gives a lot of helpful detail in the first one, I think. I’ll look forward to any more of your comments or those of others. I think you raised good points which I’ll reflect on further. Metta, Sarah ======= 43295 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] 10 upekkhas Hi Htoo, --- htootintnaing wrote: > There are 10 upekkhas. > > 1. chalangupekkha or equanimity in 6 senses > 2. brahmaviharupekkha or equanimity in metta/karuna/mudita > 3. bojjhangupekkha or equanimity in vipassana cetasikas > 4. viriyupekkha or equanimity in equilibriating samadhi and viriya > 5. sankharupekkha or equanimity in sankhara dhamma > 6. vedanupekkha or equanimity in feeling > 7. vipassanupekkha or equanimity in vipassana dhamma > 8. tatramajjhattatupekkha or equanimity in accompanying cetasikas > 9. jhanupekkha or equanimity in tatiya-jhana > 10.parisuddhupekkha or equanimity in catuttha jhana .... S: I was waiting for you to write a 'series' with more detail or for others to ask for clarifications. Anyway, I was testing myself out and then looked for a little more detail from K.Sujin's text, (appendix section under sobhana cetasikas)which I'll add here in case anyone else was wondering. From memory, we can read about all the different meanings of upekkha in the Vism. in more detail: http://www.abhidhamma.org/survey6.pdf (Nina's translation- note some of the Pali diacriticals don't come out well, but we can refer to your 'names' above): >Equanimity, tatramajjhattatå cetasika, is mental balance, even mindedness, impartiality. It is neutrality (upekkhå) towards the object that is experienced. Ten kinds of Equanimity, Upekkhå* : Sixfold Upekkhå, chaîaòga upekkhå, which is tatramajjhattatå cetasika. This is the even mindedness or neutrality of the arahat towards the objects appearing through the six doors. The equanimity of one of the brahma-vihåras**, brahma-vihårupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika which is even mindedness towards beings. The equanimity that is one of the enlightenment factors, bhojjhangupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika, which is among the enlightenment factors leading to the realization of the four noble Truths. The equanimity of effort, viriyupekkhå. This is viriya cetasika, which is right effort, neither over strenuous nor lax in mental development. The equanimity as to conditioned realities, saòkhårupekkhå. This is paññå cetasika is neutral as it penetrates the three characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattå of conditioned realities, saòkhåra dhammas. The equanimity of feeling, vedanupekkhå. This is vedanå cetasika, which is indifferent feeling, feeling that is neither unhappy nor happy. Equanimity in vipassanå, vipassanupekkhå. This is paññå cetasika, which is neutral as it investigates the object that arises because of its appropriate conditions. The equanimity of tatramajjhattatå cetasika, tatramajjhattupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika, which effects mental balance, which is devoid of deficiency or excess. The equanimity of jhåna, jhånupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika in the development of jhåna, which abandons interest in the dhammas distracting from calm and mental steadiness. This kind of upekkhå arises with the jhånacitta of the third stage (of the fourfold system) and it abandons the jhåna-factor rapture, píti. Purifying equanimity, parisuddhupekkhå. This is tatramajjhattatå cetasika arising with the jhånacitta of the fourth stage (of the fourfold system). It is the condition for calm and purification of all that opposes calm. At this stage there are no more jhåna-factors to be abandoned. *** *Upekkhå can stand not only for tatramajjhattatå cetasika but also for indifferent feeling, upekkhå vedanå, for paññå cetasika or for viriya cetasika, and this depends on the context. See Visuddhimagga IV, 156-166, where the different aspects of equanimity have been explained. **The other three are mettå, loving-kindness, karuùå , compassion and muditå, sympathetic joy.< ..... Friends raised quite a few questions about upekkha on our recent trip to India. I think it helps to understand the different meanings so as not to confuse, say, indifferent or neutral feeling (upekkha) which can arise with kusala, akusala, vipaka or kiriya cittas with, say, the brahma-vihara of equanimity (upekkha) which of course is always wholesome. Metta, Sarah ======= 43296 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, op 15-03-2005 23:21 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > N: Aversion is conditioned by attachment and ignorance. When >> we do not get what we like, dislike tends to arise. > > M: Did you mean for the latter sentence to explain the former? I > can understand how aversion would arise in the explanation you give > above, but it can also arise on its own like you mentioned- ie as in > eating something unpleasant you will have dislike. N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. If there is right understanding an object may be unpleasant but aversion does not necessarily arise. Attachment to pleasant objects that has been accumulated for so long conditions aversion. The non-returner has eradicated attchment to sense objects and also aversion. We see the close connection here. M: It's difficult to > bring in the other two to explain its arising here I would think.... . If a > person suppresses his sense of self for even a few minutes there > will be some understanding of what this is all about I think. Its > possibly also about not thinking in terms of permanence and > satisfactoriness, but im just guessing here. N: A sense of self cannot be supressed. Understanding of realities, seeing them as they are, can be gradually developed. First nama has to be known as nama and rupa as rupa by being aware of them one at a time. Only later on the three characteristics can be penetrated. > M: . I >>> heard that the abhidhamma speaks of 9 jhanas, rather than the 8 > in >>> the suttas? >> N: There are two systems of counting rupa-jhana. In the fivefold > system (you >> find mostly.... > > M:Classification is possible in many ways. It is fair to say for > example that people can be classified in many ways acording to the > charchteristics they do/do not possess. However the number of people > inhabiting say a particalar area is constant at a given time. > Similarly I would think that hindernaces, vedana etc can be > classified in many ways as the categories are only concepts, jhana > are not just concepts but actual states of consciousness. N: Yes, jhana is not a concept. Evenso feeling, and the hindrances: these are realities. Like desire, aversion, and the other hindrances, they are defilements. All these dhammas are mental and the comparison with a number of people being constant does not seem to fit, as I see it. M: In my > experience and those of others there are only 8. So i wonder if > abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting > on the actual. You mentioned that 6 hinderances are mentioned - > interesting. N: As I see it the Abhidhamma is not theoretical, it only deals with realities: citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbaana. Jhanas as eight or nine: it seems very realistic that some people can abandon vitakka and vicaara together, and others still need vicaara at the second stage of jhana in order to be concentrated on the meditation subject. Some people are more keen, others slower. The Buddha knew endless methods of classifying dhammas. He had compassion on the listeners who had different capabilities. Nina. 43297 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Joe, I've been hoping you (and maybe the 'friend' you quoted) would continue the discussions on this topic. (I'm just hoping you'll stay around a little longer this time:-)). --- Joe Cummings wrote: > Here's one source that appears to support the notion that the > Abhidhamma was written down during the 3rd Council: > > 1 -544/-480 > Parinibbana (Skt: Parinirvana; death and final release) of the Buddha, > at Kusinara (now Kusinagar, India) (age 80). {1,3} > > During the rains retreat following the Buddha's Parinibbana, the First > Council convenes at Rajagaha, India, during which 500 arahant > bhikkhus, led by Ven. Mahakassapa, gather to recite the entire body of > the Buddha's teachings. The recitation of the Vinaya by Ven. Upali > becomes accepted as the Vinaya Pitaka; the recitation of the Dhamma by > Ven. Ananda becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka. {1,4} > 100 -444/-380 .... S: Leaving the rest for now, I think this is where the first error is: the statement that 'the Dhamma....becomes established as the Sutta Pitaka'. All the ancient Pali commentaries make it clear that dhamma-vinaya refers to ti-pitaka or three baskets. I wrote a series based on the commentary to the Vinaya with lots of quotes confirming this. Here's a short extract with some quotes and comments Nina and I gave more recently: S:>In both the Bahiranidana and the Atthasalini, detail is given of the explanation in detail of how the 84,000 units of dhamma-vinaya text is formed and this includes how: “Thus as rehearsed at the council, the Abhidhamma is Pitaka by Pitaka classification, Khuddaka-Nikaya by Nikaya classification, Veyyakarana by part classification and constitutes two or three thousand units of text by the classification of textual units and “In the Abhidhamma each trinal or dual classification, as well as each clasification of conscious intervals, forms one unit of text. > ..... Nina: The word of the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Vinaya as taught by him, consists of nine divisions which are: Sutta, Geyya, Veyyåkaraùa, Gåth å,Udåna, Itivuttaka, Jåtaka, Abbhuta and Vedalla. See the 'Expositor', Atthasåliní, Introductory Discourse, 26. The teachings as compiled (not yet written) literature are thus enumerated in the scriptures as nine divisions, for example in the 'Middle Length Sayings' I, no. 22. Sutta, geyya, etc. are nine divisions (angas) of the Tipitaka, and of these: Veyyåkaraùa or 'Exposition' includes the Abhidhamma Pi.taka, the suttas without verses, and the words of the Buddha which are not included in the other eight divisions.< ..... S: Anyway, I know this isn't your 'peeve', but you're merely passing on comments. of course, many people don't accept the commentaries and that's understandable. As Nina, said, it's good to see what the real objections or problems people have with the Abhidhamma are. Usually, I think it's because it seems academic, unrelated to daily life or they think it offers different meanings from the suttas.Personally, I don't find any of these, but then I feel fortunate to have had good friends and to have received good guidance. Hope to see you in Thailand sometime! Metta, Sarah ===== 43298 From: Joop Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 2:13am Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hallo Maya The 'Water" has gone, now your (nick)name is pure 'Illusion' ? I wonder - like Ken - why you did send this message; there must be something special in it that touches you. But what ? What interested me in it, was the quote: " For people whose sense of samvega is so strong that they want to abandon any social ties that prevent them from following the path to the end of suffering, Buddhism offers both a long-proven body of wisdom for them to draw from, as well as a safety net: the monastic sangha, an institution that enables them to leave lay society without having to waste time worrying about basic survival. For those who can't leave their social ties, Buddhist teaching offers a way to live in the world without being overcome by the world, following a life of generosity, virtue, and meditation to strengthen the noble qualities of the mind that will lead to the end of suffering. The symbiotic relationship designed for these two branches of the Buddhist parisa, or community, guarantees that each will benefit from contact with the other. The support of the laity guarantees that the monastics will not need to be overly concerned about food, clothing, and shelter; the gratitude that the monastics inevitably feel for the freely-offered generosity of the laity helps to keep them from turning into misfits and misanthropes. At the same time, contact with the monastics helps the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy." Joop: This is more a social than a spiritual fact. As far as it is a spiritual description, I don't agree totally agree. I cannot understand why it is good for monks that they don't "waste time worrying about basic survival", I think that worrying is good for maintaining the insight that life is dukkha. And not leaving social ties can give a deep and fruitful permanent experience of the absurdity of life (one of the translations of the pali-term samvega). I don't think the only or the main spiritual role of a laypeople is to give food to a monk (and got back gratitude); I think a laypeople can live also a spiritual life combined with a job or with taking care of othper people. I don't think monks abandon all social ties when they went monastic: they got new ties, new social relations, with other monks. I think there are three differences between monks and 'laypeople': - the percentage of time being devoted to get enlightened is higher with monks - young laypeople are sexual active - most of the laypeople had to worry (and work) about basic survival. As far as it is a social description (a culture of a society in which there is a division of labor in the religious dimension between monks and laypeople), I say: this phenomena can change and will change. Maybe in the future there is a group of people, or individual people, who are finding there own new way living detached as far as possible from. And who will in the future (and I think especially of the western world in which I live) "help the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy." ? Because that is an important function and will be more and more important because mainstream economy makes us more and more mad. I think it will not only be - and perhaps not be at all - monastic living people who have that function. Not because I don't want monastic live in the future (in the West); but because I observe buddhism in the West increasing and monastic life not increasing at all So we have to make a new social invention, to create a new structure for that old spiritual social function. I don't know how. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Maya, > > May I ask why you posted this particular article by Bhikkhu > Thanissaro? Checking our Useful Posts file, I see that Sarah has > written on this exact topic (message 17922) and Nina has commented > on samvega (32249). I would love to know your opinions on all three > documents. > > I have written a few posts about the web site, Access To Insight and > about the teachings of Thanissaro Bhikkhu. If you can find time to > read 34543 and 34782, I would appreciate your opinions on them as > well. > > While I am here, I should make a contribution to the discussion. > First, I will quote from the above messages by Sarah and Nina. > > Sarah: ". . . I'd suggest the `sense of urgency' is a prompting of > uplifting, wholesome states, not an "oppressive sense of shock, > dismay, and alienation that comes with realizing the futility and > meaningless of life as it's normally lived" as Thanissaro suggests. > This sounds more like some kind of thinking with aversion and > perhaps the misplaced idea as well that the development of > understanding and insight is something separate or apart from life > as we live it now, already by conditions." > > Nina: "This sutta can remind us that we should not delay the > development of understanding of all realities arising at this > moment. There is no need to go to a quiet place. We may die before > we reach that place. Realities such as seeing, hearing and thinking > are the same no matter where we are. All day long dhammas appear > through the five sense-doors and through the mind-door, one at a > time. Through the eyes visible object is experienced, through the > ears sound, through the nose odour, through the tongue flavour, > through the bodysense hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or > pressure.." > > > > You can see the difference the Abhidhamma makes. While BT, with > his belief in self, can only teach the usual platitudes that anyone > can teach, an acceptance of the Abhidhamma allows for an > understanding that is unique and profoundly different. > > Ken H 43299 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sweet & Salty Sounds Hi, Matthew Matthew Miller wrote: >Here's an article from last week's Economist magazine about a woman >who can taste sounds (a synaesthete) -- "a major third sounds sweet. A >minor third, salty. A fourth has the flavour of mown grass. Only an >octave is tasteless." > >How would the abhidhamma explain this phenomenon? > > There are probably a number of ways this situation could have come about, and we can only speculate, but the answer must lie in the past, for example, a deliberately cultivated association having been made in a previous lifetime, for what ever reason. As RobK says, there is no doubt a good deal of moha (ignorance) involved at this stage. The sound heard is real, but the taste sensation is likely to be remembered, that is to say, there is no actual experience of an object through the taste door at those moments. Any thoughts of your own on the subject? Jon 43300 From: buddhatrue Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 6:53am Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi Ken H, Ken H: In the past, you have mentioned your experiences in school debating teams. I suspect you miss the old days, and this post of yours is more about debating than it is about getting to the truth. James: Now, now…no reason to get personal. Sometimes I regret having revealed personal information in this group because it is occasionally used against me- to discredit my opinion somehow. If you want to tell me that my opinion is wrong, that's okay; but I don't think it is appropriate to tell me that I am a wrong because I am the wrong sort of person. Do you get it? (Sorry for the lecture, but I think you should learn this.) Ken H: At the risk of being thrashed, I will join in: James: Oh no, I am not going to thrash you over this issue. It is a tempest in a teacup, really. Ken H: The word "odd" does cast BB's argument in a bad light. But, rather than being swayed by words,… James: You mean like how you cast me in the bad light as being a `debator uninterested in the truth'? ;-)) Ken H: Having criticised BB for saying there was "a primary problem of dukkha with which the Buddha is concerned" you say, three sentences later, there actually is a predominant problem with dukkha: James: I wouldn't really say that I criticized BB, I just thought it was an odd statement. The oddity comes from the idea that the "Buddha is concerned" with a particular aspect of dukkha and therefore taught for that aspect. I don't think the Buddha was `concerned' about anything- concern means worry and the Buddha didn't worry; the Buddha had compassion but he didn't worry. Now do you understand what I was saying? Maybe I didn't express myself in the best way possible but I didn't want to go on and on about it- it is a very minor issue. Ken H: If anything, I think the point proves BB's argument. Eternal happiness is not a possibility and so repeated births must be a problem. James: I don't understand your reasoning- perhaps you would care to explain more? Metta, James 43301 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] 10 upekkhas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Htoo, > > --- htootintnaing wrote: > > There are 10 upekkhas. > > > > 1. chalangupekkha or equanimity in 6 senses > > 2. brahmaviharupekkha or equanimity in metta/karuna/mudita > > 3. bojjhangupekkha or equanimity in vipassana cetasikas > > 4. viriyupekkha or equanimity in equilibriating samadhi and viriya > > 5. sankharupekkha or equanimity in sankhara dhamma > > 6. vedanupekkha or equanimity in feeling > > 7. vipassanupekkha or equanimity in vipassana dhamma > > 8. tatramajjhattatupekkha or equanimity in accompanying cetasikas > > 9. jhanupekkha or equanimity in tatiya-jhana > > 10.parisuddhupekkha or equanimity in catuttha jhana > .... > S: I was waiting for you to write a 'series' with more detail or for > others to ask for clarifications. Anyway, I was testing myself out and > then looked for a little more detail from K.Sujin's text, (appendix > section under sobhana cetasikas)which I'll add here in case anyone else > was wondering. From memory, we can read about all the different meanings > of upekkha in the Vism. in more detail: ..snip...snip...> of equanimity (upekkha) which of course is always wholesome. > > Metta, > > Sarah ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah, Thanks for your interest in upekkha. These days I have been very busy. My aim in posting 10 upekkha is to explore about upekkha and then to move to '4 brahmavihaara'. With regards, Htoo Naing PS: Thanks for your 'Vism'. > ======= 43302 From: htootintnaing Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:43am Subject: Re: Buddha Nature --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "lokuttaracitta" wrote: Dear Htoo Naing "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam " According to my recollection, Pa auk sayadaw says in 4th chapter of his book titled "The light of wisdom " that Buddha refers to Bhavanga citta in the verse and luminous is not Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga citta." I can not give you the accurate quotation because I do not have the book at hand. You might be able to get the original Myanmar version ,or to ask Pa auk sayadaw himself about it . Now He must be leading his Spring 2005 retreat there in the U.S. http://paauk.org/public/blogs/paupdate.html from LK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Lokuttaracitta, Long time no hear. I still remember your question of a citta who arises right now and who is also taking itself as its object. Interesting question. Regarding 'Pabhassaramidam..' I am very grateful to you for your suggestion. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43303 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Hen It really is tough, time wise. One of the problems I have with using Pali is that you increase the possibility of misunderstanding. Even if I knew it there is no granti that we would share the same definition. Therefore, to me it is better to try and said what you mean as simply, clearly, and fully as possible. For example: when you say "namas and rupas " I think -- Mind and body/flesh. And Lobha ??? that does not mean Buddha's teachings, it means what ever you then me define it to be. When I read "'I am enjoying this cup of coffee'" I also think of the Buddha's teachings -- What is "I" ...., How does "I" enjoy ..., does coffee cause enjoyment, ... I could go own for a long while (i.e., in this analysis) To me, "Lobha experiences an object," is less precise then the actual translation of "lobha" that you want me known about. The same goes for cetasika. I am noticing you separate "the conditioned and conventional reality." Why? (This is a new approach to me) ***************** C: > When you said: "... he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists.'" I would say, "he also dispelled the wrong view, 'The self exists as an eternal (permanent and unchanging) soul, something uncompounded (the essence), some thing that you have complete control over. He also taught, how the self exist; and how thoughts, speech, and acts effect others (other selves). All I have been trying to say is that the Buddha actually taught how to view the self, and not to remain attached to it. ----------------------------- K: > If you are referring to the five khandhas when you say "the self" then we basically agree. However, you do give the impression that there is some absolute reality apart from the five khandhas and Nibbana. For example, you say: ................. To me "self" is a label that can refer to much more than the 5 aggregates, and it could refer to much less. e.g., when people go to a grave site they say, "Here lies John, may he rest in peace." here you have flash without mind. The self can also refer to the image one has in there mind. Conventionally speaking all these things can be seen as the self or a reflection there of. So when ever I use it (like most of what I say), it is out of conventional insight. ************************* C: > The Buddha never taught that conventional wisdom or reality should be as though of non-existent or unreal. --------------------------------------------------- K: > It is true that we should not mix our terminologies, and it is not helpful to say, "I do not exist," or, "That brick wall does not exist." But when we are talking about the reality taught by the Buddha, we can say, "There is no self here," or, "There are only dhammas." ........................... This is true. ************************* C: > If he did then there would be no need for Morality ----------------------------- k> There is a need for morality, but there is no self who is in need. Even if the five khandhas were to continue to be conditioned for another billion lifetimes, there would be no self that suffered. ----------------------------------------------- C: > (i.e., Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood). Actually there would be no need for the 8-Fold path because suffering would not exist either (since there is no-one to suffer). ---------------------------------------------- K >As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveler on it is seen." ............ If no-one suffers than it is silly to try and end suffering, it effects no-one. But then, are we in agreement that the five aggregates exist? ****************** C: > In reality the Buddha did dispel a myth about self, that myth was about the nature of its existence. After all, if he did teach that there are no-selves, no not even one, then the teachings about all those realms of existence that Abidharmmist like to talk about would be a lie, and most of the other teachings too ... ------------ K> No, they would not be a lie: those teachings describe the different sets of natural laws that can apply to the five khandhas. In a hell realm, for example, the laws of nature do not allow for the arising of pleasant sense objects. In a heaven realm, no unpleasant sense objects can arise, and in an arupa realm, the laws of nature do not allow for any physical phenomena at all. ..................... Are there beings in these realms, or not? ****************** KH: > Even though we refer to a particular set of five khandhas as you or me (etc.) there is no you or me outside of the momentary existence of those present five khandhas. > ......... There are some Buddhist who view the self as the five-aggregate-continuum. I know others who view it as the consciousness-continuum, or the feeling-continuum, etc.... And there are others still, who hold it to be an object of the mind, and/or body. I hold it to be all that. ********************************* C: > You would be completely right if you replace "self" with the following: attman (eternal soul), uncompounded-ness, permanence, something that can be controlled, ... swell as change "momentary existence" to relative existence. The concept of "Self" (that is devoid of these things and seen as a source of suffering) is a Right View. But like I said, I do know and understand your perspective; however, I attribute it to incomplete translations (the other concepts being summarized and thus called the self). > ---------------------- K> Sorry, but I don't understand what you are telling me here; nor at other places where you have tried to describe the self. E.g., where you wrote: ---------------------------------- c> I think you mistake the self for something uncompounded, having an essence, something unchanging, etc... so I assume that is why you dismiss it. Am I wrong? To me the self is a label I give to "my mind & form/flesh." And by "my mind & form/flesh," I mean something that is still subject to ... and is used to identify "this" being as opposed to another being. My view gives me the ability to dance through the relative and as the absolute. So, I exist when I exist, and don't exist when not existing. ----------------------- k> Please try again to describe this "self" that I am not aware of because of "incomplete translation." ................. In time you will understand this. But you will have to start digging into India belief systems around the time of the Buddha. And uncover exactly what were the issues the Buddha debated and why. NOW: It seems to you the self is something permanent or an essence, something we believe you can put your finger on. Therefore it does not exist. Where your problem is, you do not yet see/understand the relationship between the conventional/relative/absolute. They represent the three dimensions of the reality/world we live in. They are one (like a coin). Why do you think the sutras emphasizes detachment more than emptiness (non-existence, no-one to suffer)? *************** KH: > > the Buddha taught that conditioned reality was the five khandhas. So, when he said [in the suttas or elsewhere] that rebirth was real, he could only have been referring to a particular, momentary arising of the five khandhas. ------------------ C: > This makes me assume you do not believe in reincarnation, is that true? ------------ k> Like all reality, reincarnation (better known as rebirth) is a momentary occurrence of the five khandhas. There is one moment of rebirth (patisandhi) and one moment of death (cuti) in every cycle of life. In between, there are untold trillions of momentary existences of the five khandhas, and they are known as seeing, hearing, touching, thinking and so on. .............. So you don't ? *************** k> Conditioned existence is always just the present, fleeting existence of the five khandhas. So you are not strictly correct when you say: -------------- c> Objects can "persists" from moment to moment, but they are forever changing (the rates and amounts of change are relative), and as I stated before, objects can exist for up to eons (look at the teachings about the God Realm) or do you believe the God realm and gods do not exist? (the teachings are just fables) > -------- k> Conditioned existence is basically the same in all realms: there is a moment of birth and a moment of death and many moments in between. Gods have more moments in between than we do. ............ So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? CharlesD 43304 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 1:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concepts and Questions (II) Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: > I agree that in mindstates in which there conventionally is desire for >a tomato, it is certainly not the desiring that is the object (objective >content). However I see it as only in a manner of speaking that "a tomato" is the >object. > > I agree. The conventional object 'a tomato' can never be the object of consciousness, since what we take for that object is either perceived as an object experienced through a single sense-door or it is conceived of as 'a tomato' through the mind-door. In the latter case the object of the mind-door consciousness is a concept. > It seems to me that "desiring a tomato" is a name we apply to a huge >complex of mindstates, many of which involve desiring, though not all, and in >which the actual objects in the states accompanied by desire are actual >mind-door dhammas that typically, and for the most part, are recollections of >particular tastes, smells, and sights. (These states are interspersed with other >states which as a group carry out operations of naming and conceptual projection.) > > I agree also with what you say here, except that to my understanding when there is the recollecting of previously experienced tastes, smells and sights the object of the mind-door consciousness will be a concept; that is to say, at such moments there is no experience of just-fallen-away sense-door object, and at the mind-door there is only the recollecting of previous sense-door and mind-door experiences occurring. Jon 43305 From: gazita2002 Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 3:59pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Hello Nina, these entries are so helpful: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina wrote: > Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 and Tiika. > > Intro: Visuddhimagga XIV, 142, Hiri and Ottappa. ...snip.... > > As understanding develops we can see the disadvantages of all degrees of > akusala cittas. Hiri and ottappa can become more refined. We learn to see > the danger of ignorance of dhammas. When there is forgetfulness of the namas > and rupas that appear, hiri and ottappa may arise that see the danger of > accumulating ever more ignorance, one sees the danger of the continuation in > the cycle of birth and death. > When kusala citta with right understanding arises of the dhamma that appears > now, it is accompanied by confidence, saddhaa, sati, hiri and ottappa, and > many other sobhana cetasikas. These are all needed to support the citta with > right understanding. > *** > Nina. Azita: You say they bec more refined, so can we say in the beginning Hiri and Ottappa may manifest as 'our conscience' which stops us from gossiping about someone in an unfriendly way? "fear of blame" sounds like dosa, altho you say its not. It also sounds like mana, 'what will they think of me'. Maybe you have already explained it but I would like to understand a little more about this, and I can see from above that it arise with wholesome cittas. Its hard for me to 'match up' what I read and my everyday life, if you know what I mean? Patience, courage and good cheer, [altho I don't seem to be having much of any of the above lately] :-( Azita. 43306 From: Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 4:58pm Subject: Vism.XIV,145 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 145. (xviii)-(xix) The light (quick) state of the [mental] body is 'lightness of the body'. The light (quick) state of consciousness is 'lightness of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush heaviness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as nonsluggishness of the [mental] body and of consciousness. Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of stiffness and torpor, which cause heaviness in the {mental] body and in consciousness. 43307 From: connie Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:04pm Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hi, Joop, Maya, J: And who will in the future (and I think especially of the western world in which I live) "help the laity foster the proper perspective on life that nurtures the energy of samvega and pasada they need to keep from becoming dulled and numbed by the materialistic propaganda of the mainstream economy." ? Because that is an important function and will be more and more important because mainstream economy makes us more and more mad. C: Hopefully, there will still be dinosaurs intent on understanding, preserving & passing on whatever knowledge is still left of the original teachings. Things like 'mainstream economy' and 'propaganda' are great distractions taking attention away from the characteristics of whatever paramattha dhamma is actually present to experience now. The true bad guys behind our madness are and still will be lobha, dosa and moha. Still, I'd say if there's propaganda to fear, it's the promotion of atta, especially if it's disguised as Buddhist. But I guess that's my big hang-up this past week or so. peace, connie 43308 From: kenhowardau Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 8:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Charles, --------------- C: > So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? > --------------- Yes! It can be said that there are ultimately no beings, however, it is still possible to talk about them without contradicting the anatta doctrine. There are several places in the texts where we read, "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist. So too, when the five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) a living being is said to exist." (Or words to that effect. (I can find a reference if you want one.)) Beings have a lifespan of just one moment because there is only the present moment. This is logical when you consider that the past no longer exists and the future has never existed. But it is hard to accept, and so people conveniently put logic aside and say, "Yes, but, there is a continuum and, therefore, there is a sense in which we do continue to exist." An Abhidhamma student would tell them, "No buts! There is only the present moment." ------------------------ C: > when you say "namas and rupas " I think -- Mind and body/flesh. ------------------------ When you say, "Mind and body/flesh," an Abhidhamma student thinks nama and rupa. The difference is; only nama and rupa exist in the present moment. When the mind is thought of as a persistent thing receiving information, processing it and creating ideas, then that mind is a mere concept (which does not exist in ultimate reality). The same applies to flesh: a piece of meat - something that can be seen, touched, smelt and tasted - is a mere idea created by the mind. In the ultimate reality of the present moment, there can be only one object of consciousness. If it is a physical object, it can be a visible rupa, audible rupa, gustatory rupa, olfactory rupa, or one of the three kinds of tactile rupa. -------------------------- C: > And Lobha ??? that does not mean Buddha's teachings, it means what ever you then me define it to be. When I read "'I am enjoying this cup of coffee'" I also think of the Buddha's teachings -- What is "I" ...., How does "I" enjoy ..., does coffee cause enjoyment, -------------------------- When an Abhidhamma student reads, "I am enjoying this cup of coffee," he knows there have been momentary experiences of sense objects and mind objects (one at a time) and moments of thought creation (conceptualising). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobha has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. The person who believes he is enjoying a cup of coffee is not being aware of one of those moments of lobha. He is aware of a different (illusory) reality in which there is a human being enjoying a (simultaneously) delicious, hot, aromatic drink. ------------------------------ C: > I am noticing you separate "the conditioned and conventional reality." Why? (This is a new approach to me) ------------------------------- I hope it will be clear by now that conventional reality is illusory - the product of thinking. Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognising. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the vinnana-khandha is represented by eye consciousness, sankhara- khandha is represented by eye contact (and other mental factors), sanna-khandha by perception of visible object, vedana-khandha by feeling arising from eye contact and rupa-khandha by the eye base and visible object. (There might be one or two technical mistakes in that, but you'll get the general picture.) ---------------------------------------------- KH: > >As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > ............ C: > If no-one suffers than it is silly to try and end suffering, it effects no-one. ------------------ Exactly! When the anatta characteristic has been directly known (not just read about in books), concern for worldly existence and non- existence fades away. Consequently, there will be conditions for Nibbana to become the object of consciousness. When that happens, various causes of suffering will be permanently destroyed. So, trying doesn't enter into it. Suffering is ended by the conditioned dhammas of the Eight-fold Path. ------------------------------------ C: > But then, are we in agreement that the five aggregates exist? ------------------------------------ Of course we are: we have been talking about them for weeks. :-) (I have been calling them the five khandhas.) However, I have been trying to stress that they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form. Ken H 43309 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 9:25pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 148 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(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.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** When there is right understanding of a nåma or rúpa which appears, there are both vitakka and vicåra accompanying the citta, but vicåra is not a factor of the eightfold Path. Sammå-saòkappa has its specific function as path-factor. Sammå-saòkappa “touches” the nåma or rúpa which appears so that sammå-diììhi can investigate its characteristic in order to understand it as it is. Thus, sammå-diììhi needs the assistance of sammå-saòkappa in order to develop. In the beginning, when paññå has not been developed, there cannot yet be clear understanding of the difference between the characteristic of nåma and of rúpa. When, for example, sound appears, there is also hearing, the reality which experiences sound, but it is difficult to know the difference between the characteristic of sound and the characteristic of hearing, between rúpa and nåma. Only one reality at a time can be object of mindfulness and when they seem to “appear” together it is evident that there is not right mindfulness. Only when there is right mindfulness of one reality at a time right understanding can develop. At that moment sammå-saòkappa performs its function of “touching” the object of mindfulness. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43310 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 9:30pm Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada Hi Connie, > C: Still, I'd say if there's propaganda to fear, it's the promotion of atta, > especially if it's disguised as Buddhist. But I guess that's my big > hang-up this past week or so. From reading your posts for the past week, I can see it's a big issue for you. However, I don't see you giving the benefit of the doubt to the authors and quick to attribute things to atta. I can appreciate your point of sakkaya-ditthi as the thing puthujjanas should fear most as it will worm its way into teachings. I think you're reading BK's Cittanupassana part 2 too literally. He preface it saying it's hard to describe and it's only based on his experience. I can't find his expanded biography but I doubt he has a strong pariyatti background. So I don't think it's meant to be "technically" sound. I had the fortune of spending some time at Dhamma Tawya where he received the technique. As far as I understand it's very much consistent and falls within Burmese Theravada tradition and the value of the book mostly lies in part 1. The way I see the logic is as follows: 1) every tihetuka human is capable of enlightenment 2) every being has been a tihetuka at some point/life 3) every being has/had potential for enlightenment 1 AND 2 leads to 3 by implication. This "potential for enlightenment" can be thought of as "deathless within" every human. Seeing it as a permanent core or static potential is clearly wrong. It's a guarantee that every being has experienced all the 81 loki cittas at some point, just not lokuttara. Enlightenment can also be "buddha-nature", once the mind is pure (luminous) enough to take nibbana as the object. So to me, just depends on how literally someone takes certain words and definitions. For example, extending the enlightenment potential to mean every being will become a Buddha is a flawed implication resulting from imprecise useage of the word "Buddha". - kel 43311 From: matheesha Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, > N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is another area i would like to explore. metta matheesha 43312 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Larry, Howard, LK, Htoo, Suan and all, Just a couple more comments on pabhassaram (luminous). Sometime back I went through and checked quite a number of references to its use in the texts and if I recall correctly, sometimes it refers (as in the AN sutta being discussed) to the undefiled cittas, here specifically the bhavanga cittas, sometimes it refers to wholesome cittas as well or only and often it refers to the ‘luminous’ or pure quality of nibbana. (It never refers to akusala cittas, whereas pandara(clear) refers to all cittas as I understand, Htoo). There’s much more on all this in posts under ‘Luminous’ in U.P. as Connie said. When it comes to the phrase: "Viññaa.nam anidassanam anantam sabbato pabham", in MN49, a footnote in the Bodhi, Nanamoli translation gives: MA offers three explanations of the phrase subbato pabham: (1) completely possessed of splendour (pabha); (2) possessing being (pabhutam) everywhere; and (3) a ford (pahham) accessible from all sides, i.e. through any of the thirty-eight meditation objects. Only the first of these seems to have any linguistic legitimacy...” LK, while you’re waiting for Suan or others, I’d be grateful if you and anyone else look at this old post I wrote discussing this further . Please add any comments of your own: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16916 Also see Suan’s post which follows on: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/16922 In conclusion, when pabhassaram or pabham refer to nibbana as in these suttas or in the Udana verse, there is no suggestion of a citta or luminous mind being referred to. Also, any mind or citta is fleeting and impermanent, so Howard, I don’t see how in the AN sutta, it is the arahant’s mind that is being referred to. The cittas of the arahant are never defiled. Instead, I understand as the commentary suggests, that pahbhassaram is referring to the nature of the cittas before they are defiled. It shows it is the kilesa (defilements) that do this defiling as Htoo suggested, not the cittas themselves. So I think we need to look at the use of the terms in context. Often, like ‘vinnanam’ above, they have specific or unusual meanings. I look forward to further comments. Metta, Sarah p.s LK, when you said that Pa auk Sayadaw suggested that luminous refers not to ‘Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga citta’, do you mean the rupas produced by citta? This doesn’t make sense, but I’ll be glad for any clarification. ================= 43313 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi LK, It's good to see you around after your long break. --- lokuttaracitta wrote: > By the way, > > You can get some clew on "pabhassaramidam bhikkhave cittam" in "The > Teachings of Phra Ajaan Mun Bhuridatta Thera" on > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/released.html > > Section 6. > > The root instigator of the cycle of death and rebirth. > > > //thitibhutam avijja-paccaya > sankhara...upadanam...bhavo...jati...// > > Each and every one of us born as a human being has a birthplace: > we > have our parents as our birthplace. So why did the Buddha formulate > the teaching on sustained conditions only from the factor of > unawareness onwards? What unawareness comes from, he didn't say. > Unawareness has to have a mother and father just as we do, and we > learn from the above line that //thitibhutam// is its mother and > father. //Thitibhutam// refers to the primal mind. ..... S: I’m not familiar with this ‘thitibhutam’. Can anyone help me with the Pali? Is it from thi.ti-(basis) as citta thi.ti, basis of citta, i.e vatthu? Connie, any 'luminous' cittas? ... > Awareness and unawareness both come from //thitibhutam//. When > //thitibhutam// is imbued with unawareness, it isn't wise to its > conditions; but when it is imbued with awareness, it realizes its > conditions for what they really are. This is how the matter appears > when considered with the clear insight leading to emergence > (//vutthana-gamini vipassana//). > > To summarize: //Thitibhutam// is the primal instigator of the > cycle > of death and rebirth. Thus it is called the root source of the > three > (see Section 12). ... S: Can you give me a sutta reference which uses this phrase or helps me understand what he and you are talking about? *****..... > The following is from "Acariya Mun Bhuridatta - A Spiritual > Biography" at > > http://www.buddhanet.net/ebooks_hist_art.htm > > > Appendix II > The following comments about the nature of the citta have been > excerpted from several discourses given by Ãcariya Mahã Boowa. <...> > The conscious acknowledgement of phenomena as they arise and cease is > called viññãõa. For instance, viññãõa acknowledges and registers the > sense impressions that are produced when sights, sounds, smells, > tastes, and tactile sensations contact the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, > and body respectively. Each such contact between an external sense > sphere and its corresponding internal base gives rise to a specific > consciousness that registers the moment at which each interaction > takes place, and then promptly ceases at the same moment that the > contact passes. Viññãõa, therefore, is consciousness as a condition > of the citta. Sankhãra, or thoughts and imagination, is also a > condition of the citta. Once the citta has given expression to these > conditions, they tend to proliferate without limit. On the other > hand, when no conditions arise at all, only the citta's inherent > quality of knowing is apparent. .... S: In most contexts in the Tipitaka, citta and vinnana are synonyms. For example, when we refer to vinnana khandha, we re referring to all cittas. In the context of D.O, vinnana refers to vipaka cittas Sankhara khandha refers to all cetasikas except vedana and sanna. Sankhara or abhisankhara in D.O. refers to cetana (kamma) which may condition vipaka. ‘When no conditions arise at all’ makes little sense to me. Even lokuttara cittas are conditioned. Again, pls give any clarifications if you care to. Metta, Sarah ========== 43314 From: Illusion Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:14am Subject: Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada: Delayed Response Dear all, I have read your posts and I'm sorry I can't respond right now because I really need to finish this paper I'm working on, due Friday. I will respond on Friday, the day before the beginning of my spring break! :) Metta, []\/[]aya []Dutra {ô_ô} "I am nothing but the constituents of the clinging aggregates that is subject to change and unsatisfaction." 43315 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:58am Subject: Sarah /Re: Buddha Nature Dear Sarah I greatly appreciate your tireless energy put into DSG > p.s LK, when you said that Pa auk Sayadaw suggested that luminous refers > not to Bhavanga citta itself but cittaja kalapa produced by Bhavanga > citta?E do you mean the rupas produced by citta? This doesnt make sense, > but I'll be glad for any clarification. I am not sure what you imply by saying "do you mean the rupas produced by citta? This doesnt make sense" You might get some sense from Pa auk sadadaw's explainations on what the light of wisdom is. http://www.btinternet.com/~maunglwin/nibbanacom/l_of_w01.htm#lightofwi sdom *excerpt* ******************* But as to "light of wisdom", the questions arise: "Is there light in wisdom?", "Is there light in mental factors (Nama dhamma)?" This is explained in the subcommentary to Visuddhimagga, page 428, paragraph 733: Vipassanobhaso ti vipassana citta samuithitam, sasantatipatitam utu samutthananca bhasuram Rupam - What is the light of Vipassana insight? Two types of causes are mentioned. This bright light is caused by Vipassana Citta (mind) and also by the Tejo dhatu called utu which occur in one's own continuity process of Rupa. This explanation can be easily understood by the meditator who is meditating at the Rupa kammatthana stage: 1) For any person, any living beings who are composed of Nama and Rupa, every mind that arises dependent on hadaya vatthu (heart base) has the ability to produce Cittaja Rupa (matter cause by mind). These Cittaja Rupa arise as Cittaja Kalapa in the whole life. If one of these Kalapa is analysed, there are 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja (Earth, water, fire, wind, colour, smell, taste and nutritive essence). The colour of it is called Vanna dhatu. Every Samatha Bhavana Citta (mind) and Vipassana Bhavana Citta (mind) can produce Cittaja Rupa. So, in this case the Vipassana Bhavana Citta can produce Cittaja Rupa. Every Kalapa of Cittaja Rupa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. 2) Also if discerned further, every Cittaja Kalapa has the 4 element: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo. In these 4 elements, the Tejo dhatu is called utu. This Tejo dhatu called utu can produce new generations of Kalapa. Depending on how powerful the Samatha Bhavana Citta and Vipassana Bhavana Citta are, this production of new generations of Kalapa by Tejo datu has the ability to spread out, externally (bahiddha) from internal (ajjhata). If analysed, every Kalapa produced by Tejo dhatu has 8 kinds of Rupa factors: Pathavi, Apo, Tejo, Vayo, Vanna, Gandha, Rasa and Oja. Every Utuja Rupa Kalapa has the Ruparammana called Vanna dhatu. This Ruparammana is 'Bhasuram Rupam', a brilliantly bright Rupa. This explanation shows that both - 1) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Cittaja Rupa Kalapa caused by the Vipassana Citta and 2) the brightness of the Vanna dhatu of every Kalapa caused by the Tejo dhatu called utu which is present in the Cittaja Rupa Kalapa - are called Vipassanobhasa, the light of Vipassana nana. The explanation above is similar for the light that appears in Samatha Bhavana Citta. So, is this really the light of Vipassana nana? No, it is not. It is used in the Text as a metaphor only. Instead of saying that the effect (Rupa) has light which is caused by nana (insight), it is said that the cause in itself has light as a metaphor. It is actually the name of the Vanna dhatu, Ruparammana present in Cittaja Rupa and Utuja Rupa. ****************************** from LK 43316 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: killing a sentient being Hi Howard, Chris & All, --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi Sarah (and Ken O & Chris) - > > I'm trying to stay away from posting, but sometimes I find it a > bit > difficult. ;-) What you say in the following is literally correct, > Sarah, but > fraught with danger in my opinion. ... S: Yes, it's a sensitive topic, but I'm glad you joined in;-). I find it helpful to consider just a little more. Just a couple more comments on this thread. It’s true as you and Lodewijk said, that we live in a world with other people and have to take responsibility including the resisting of our own and others’ harmful deeds. With or without the Dhamma, we’ll continue to look for peaceful ways of resolving issues and will continue to perform good deeds according to our confidence in their value and ability to perform them. None of this is undermined in anyway by learning more about the Truths. On the contrary,as I see it, by understanding more about the dhammas appearing in a day, we learn to be more honest and sincere about our motives and intentions and of course, we learn to see what the real problems in our life are. We’re so used to hiding behind the black curtain of ignorance, that usually we’re not brave enough to face up to our present lobha, dosa and moha. As Nina just wrote to another friend: “These are the source of all problems in life, not the other people, not the situation. We like to blame others for our problems, but then we have aversion, dosa, while doing so. We have to be very patient and learn more about our different cittas, They arise and fall away so fast. Often we delude ourselves and believe that cittas are kusala, but immediately after kusala citta there is bound to be akusala citta, such as attachment to our kusala.” This is true whether we’re talking about a work or home situation, about our concerns to help various causes we’ve adopted or even now as we discuss the Dhamma, don't you think? We will think and plan about the future and consider past events anyway. We don’t need to consider the Dhamma to do this. What we need are the reminders that whilst dwelling on future outcomes or past causes, there really are only the presently arising dhammas in truth. We think we or our governments can play a major role in the results that others will experience, but this is because we have so little real appreciation of kamma and its results and of other complex conditions. As we know, not even a Buddha could prevent kamma from bringing its results when it was the right time, even for arahants such as MahaMoggallana. Of course, this doesn’t mean we don’t do our best to help others in whatever ways we can, but we know that we have very limited abilities to really affect outcomes and the greatest help we can offer when we have a chance is by understanding and sharing the Dhamma with anyone who might benefit. Finally, the point of the earlier comments was to suggest that our good and bad acts and the circumstances we find ourselves in really do depend on conditions rather than choices made by a self. Also, that present intentions and cittas cannot always (ever?) be judged by outward appearances. Whilst we dwell on others' unwholesome acts or intentions, the only dhamma that can be known relates to our present mental states. Yes, it’s quite wrong if we think it’s useless to do anything or if everything is predetermined. At the same time, we can learn that there is a) just a ‘flickering mind moment’ as Chris put it and as she also said b) ‘we haven’t the faintest idea of how dangerous all those uncountable mind moments that flick by in any minute really are’. Only an arahant truly appreciates the danger an unsatisfactoriness of all conditioned dhammas, I think, although all ariyans have appreciated this sufficiently to realize nibbana. I’ll be glad to hear any further comments. I know this is a topic you both feel strongly about. Metta, Sarah ======= 43317 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:05pm Subject: Re: Tep /Buddha Nature Dear Tep Let me start by wishing this comment never serve SGI's purposes. They are widely considered in Mahayana buddhist world to abuse Lotus Sutra and other Buddhist teachings just for their own selfish interest. Please remember I am not a students of "Acariya Mun's school" which seems to me much bolder in discribing his meditaional experiences than other conservative mainstream in Theravada . --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi LokuttaraCitta (and Connie) - > > Is the 'primal mind' according to Acariya Mun same as "this mind" or is > it the same as "that mind" (as described in Connie's first message > on "Buddha Nature")? I am not sure of his terminology . However, I guess Acariya Mun refers to Bhavanga citta as Primal mind . > Is this permanent, never changing, mind of the Arahant same as "that > mind" in Connie's message? I think so. >Further, is it an Atta? Is it Nibbana? Please reread Acariya Mun's articule quoted in my post before There he dare use a bit provocative terms like the true citta ,genuine citta and so on. He even says ,"Our real problem, our one fundamental problem - which is also the citta's fundamental problem – is that we lack the power needed to be our own TRUE SELF" Wow !! But I do not think he goes too far as a theravada monk by cleary saying "The true citta is Atta. The true citta is Nibbana". Nibbana is Anatta and Object of Lokuttaracittas in mainstream theravada as far as I know. This is very very delicate area which should be treat with utmost care.Otherwise ,I do believe, it comes only to fuel our Ego and Ego- clinging and bring Buddhist meditators to stop at one of mundane Jhanas. As you may know, Jhanic experiences are so blissful and wonderful that people without right understandings tend to regard them as Nibbana with pride and sometimes begin to damage other people by wrong Buddhist teachings. I believe that is one of the reasons why Mainstream Theravada is discreet in word about this area. from LK 43321 From: Joop Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hallo Jon, Sarah, James In # 43116 Jon said: "I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote [Paramatthaka Sutta, Sutta- Nipata, IV-5] really says what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For example, it talks about <>, <>, wrong view about becoming or not, etc. " Jon: "I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions is really attainable." Joop: I agree with that (psychological based) guess. All I can say is: I have no ideals; I only discovered that most opinions that are arsing in me, are FUTILE. So I try not to cling to them." In # 43266 Sarah (with Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Citta) said: "This sutta is quoted a lot and usually in support of the same `view' about having no opinions which you hold. Let me share some of my reflections here. 1. I understand that the views referred to in the sutta are wrong views (micha ditthi). The Pali given is `di.t.thi', translated as `dogmatic view' by Saddhatissa. Unless di.t.thi is modified by samma, it nearly always refers to wrong views. For example, we read that "the Perfect One is free from any theory or view(ditthigata)". Of course this refers to wrong views. (see dictionary notes below*). As it says in the dictionary "The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in A chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga." This is the chapter of Eights which the Paramatthaka Sutta is from." Joop: Nothing of course; 'of course' does not exist. Yes, the sutta is about rekecting speculative views and theories, but the text of it states more than that. More than is stated in some other Teachings of the Buddha. I accept the tension that exists between suttas and I know many people cannot handle this kind of inconstistencies. Sarah: "2. When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no speculation, conceit or greed involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths)." Joop: I agree, but I should stop this statement with "understanding)"; because one can think to easy about the lists of 89 cittas, 28 (or another number) rupas etc when you talk about 'paramatha dhammas'. Sarah: "4. I'd like to stress that samma ditthi (right view) is a synonym for panna (right understanding). In other words, right view is not a speculative opinion of any kind, but direct knowledge of dhammas." Joop: Yes, that's very important. But that's only true from the moment I experience any 'right view' from within. Till that moment they are, when I read about them in dsg or other texts, theories that may be correct. And I take this vague notion that thy are correct, with me in my meditation/comtemplations, with the open mind and the attitude that these - in essence still conventional theories - got right views in the highest sense TO ME. (I add that 'TO ME' to it because 'right views' don't exist as such - that essentialism - they can only exist in individuals) In fact that more or less the same as what you say: "Of course there are many degrees and kinds of panna or right view, not just direct insight. Reflecting wisely on kamma or on the Truths, even at a theoretical level can be with right view or panna. This is pariyatti (wise reflecting and consideration) which has to develop in order for patipatti(direct knowledge or understanding) to arise and develop." Joop: Perhaps there is another misunderstanding in our discussion about the terms 'view, opinion, theory" Sarah: There's no one who can have a view, but both wrong view (di.t.thi) and right view (pa~n~naa) are mental factors which are real and arise." Joop: You talk about wrong views and right views. That one dichotomy. But when I use in my brains the (dutch word for) view, I think many time more 'opinion' or 'theory' and than the dichotomy is: correct view versus incorrect view. And 'incorrect' is a theory when it's falsified (Popper). When I say that as an effect of my meditation I less and less have opinions, then a third dichotomy is playing a role: useful opinions and useless opinions. Let's for example take the opinion I had for years and still have not left behind me totally: 'George W. Bush is an dangerous idiot" I have arguments that this is a correct theory (his refusal to participate in the Kyoto-protocol for example; Irak) It was a useful opinion two years ago when I with others tried to prevent that the Netherlands participated in the Irak-war. But now I feel it's useless, because it's futile. That why it's a wrong view, because there is hate in me when I state this opinion. Another example, from Joseph Goldsteins book 'One Dhamma: the emerging Western Buddhism' (I only have a dutch translation so I had to translate it back to english) about attachment to opinions. It's about a Tibetan Rinpoche of whom was stated that he was an incarnation of Sariputta. He thought: that is not possible because Sariputta was (according the Pali Canon) an arahat so he is not reborn so nobody in this century can be an incarnation of him. So after some time thinking about that he concluded to have no opinion about this topic anymore. I still have problems with that, I think Goldstein is - partly without realizing that - converted from a Theravada to a Tibetan Buddhist. But maybe he is firther on his path than I am. Metta Joop 43322 From: lokuttaracitta Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:49am Subject: Sarah2Re: Buddha Nature Dear Sarah > ..... > S: I'm not familiar with this `thitibhutam?E Can anyone help me with the > Pali? Is it from thi.ti-(basis) as citta thi.ti, basis of citta, i.e > vatthu? Connie, any 'luminous' cittas? > > (see Section 12). > ... > S: Can you give me a sutta reference which uses this phrase or helps me > understand what he and you are talking about? > As my reply to Tep, I am not a student of Ven A Mun and am not sure of his terminology. I quoted his articles to Connie just as food for thought Is not it better for you to ask Thanissaro Bhikkhu about them , the translator of the article, A Heart Released, from Thai to English ? I hope the following quotation never confuse you further ! "Clarity of insight by Ajahn Chah" http://www.abhayagiri.org/dhamma/clarity.pdf That means you must become your own witness, able to confirm the results from within your own mind. It's like the example of the sour fruit. Imagine I told you that a certain fruit was sour tasting and invited you to try some of it. You would have to take a bite from it to taste the sourness. Some people would willingly if I told them the fruit was sour, but if they simply believed that it was sour without ever tasting it, that belief would be useless (mogha), it wouldn't have any real value or meaning. If you described the fruit as sour, it would be merely going by my perception of it. Only that. The Buddha didn't praise such belief. But then you shouldn't just dismiss it either: investigate it. You must try tasting the fruit for yourself, and by actually experiencing the sour taste, you become your own internal witness. Somebody says it's sour, so you take it away and, by eating it, find out that it really is sour. It's like you're making double sure - relying on your own experience as well as what other people say. This way you can really have confidence in the authenticity of its sour taste; you have a witness who attests to the truth. Venerable Ajahn Mun referred this internal witness that exists within the mind as thitibhutam. The authenticity of any knowledge acquired simply from other people remains unsubstantiated, it is only a truth proven to someone else --you only have someone else's word to go on that the fruit is sour-- you could say that it's a half-truth, or fifty per cent. But if you actually taste the fruit and find it sour, that is the one hundred per cent, whole truth: you have evidence from what other people say and also from your own direct experience. This is a fully one hundred per cent substantiated truth. This is thitibhutam: the internal witness has risen within you. *snip* What causes wisdom to arise? It comes from contemplating impermanence, suffering and not-self, and gaining insight into the truth of the way things are. You have to see the truth clearly and beyond doubt in your own mind; it has to be like that. There has to be continuous clear insight. All objects (arammana) that arise into consciousness are seen to pass away; that cessation is followed by more arising. After more arising there is further cessation. If you still have attachment and clinging suffering must arise from moment to moment, but if you are letting go, you won't create any suffering. Once the mind is clearly seeing the impermanence of phenomena, we call it thitibhutam - the internal witness. It is self-sustaining. Hence in the beginning, you should only accept as the truth about fifty per cent of the things other people tell you. On one occasion the Buddha gave a discourse *unquote* > > condition of the citta. Once the citta has given expression to these > > conditions, they tend to proliferate without limit. On the other > > hand, when no conditions arise at all, only the citta's inherent > > quality of knowing is apparent. > .... > When no conditions arise at all?Emakes little sense to me. Even lokuttara cittas > are conditioned. But I do not think that "Object" of Lokuttaracittas is conditioned. By the way, could you please explain me how can 33 to 36 cetasikas in lokuttaracittas be discerned ? with Metta from LK I deleted my posts to you two times because I found careless mistakes .Sorry ! 43323 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:25am Subject: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Ken (and Charles - and also Jon, Nina, and other "concept non-believers" ;-), In a message dated 3/16/05 11:24:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Hi Charles, > > --------------- > C: >So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? > > --------------- > > Yes! > > It can be said that there are ultimately no beings, however, it is > still possible to talk about them without contradicting the anatta > doctrine. There are several places in the texts where we > read, "When the various components that make up a chariot are > correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist. So too, when the > five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same > moment) a living being is said to exist." (Or words to that effect. > (I can find a reference if you want one.)) > > Beings have a lifespan of just one moment because there is only the > present moment. This is logical when you consider that the past no > longer exists and the future has never existed. But it is hard to > accept, and so people conveniently put logic aside and say, "Yes, > but, there is a continuum and, therefore, there is a sense in which > we do continue to exist." > > An Abhidhamma student would tell them, "No buts! There is only the > present moment." > > > -- > Ken H > ========================= Well done, Ken! I think this was an excellent presentation. Part of what you write is "When an Abhidhamma student reads, "I am enjoying this cup of coffee," he knows there have been momentary experiences of sense objects and mind objects (one at a time) and moments of thought creation (conceptualising)." As with 99% of what you wrote in this post (Exception: the *momentary* coming together of the chariot parts was not in the original, I believe), I think yours is a correct "take". It also happens to raise in my mind a loose-end Abhidhammic issue that troubles me yet, and that is the kinds of actual mind-door objects that are present during thought processes and conceptual projecting. I do not not believe that pa~n~natti are ever truly objects of consciousness. I believe that there is only imagining that there are such objects. However, I do believe that during mindstates of thinking processes and conceptual projection, there *are* actual (paramatthic) mind-door arammana. Now some of these are rupas, and some are namas in the form of "fresh memories" of just-passed namas and rupas. But those sorts of objects do not strike me as sufficient to account for our thinking processes and the sankharic processes of conceptual projection. It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the form of mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see any such things put forward in Abhidhamma. Sure there is sa~n~na mentioned, a bundle of operations that "mark", and compare and contrast marks, but there seems to be no mention of the nature of these "marks" or of their being passed along. Is this just a gap in the Abhidhamma (or our record of the Abhidhamma), or do recollection (remembering) and other such mental operations magically occur (via a form of Buddhist time travel! ;-) with no data passed along on which to operate? 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) 43324 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Hi, Joop Joop wrote: >Jon: "I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions >is really attainable." >Joop: I agree with that (psychological based) guess. All I can say >is: I have no ideals; I only discovered that most opinions that are >arsing in me, are FUTILE. So I try not to cling to them." > > Yes, that is my experience too. But just as opinions are not to be clung to, neither are they to be a cause for dosa! There is thinking all the time, and opinions are just an aspect of that. So no need to pay particular attention to them one way or the other ;-)). Jon 43325 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:32am Subject: An Article on Memory Hi, all - At the following site you will find an elementary article that discusses memory in a clear and easy fashion and which presents a standard information-storage perspective that I personally suspect is roughly correct. I would be interested in hearing what the Abhidhammic perspective on this would be. http://www.cc.gatech.edu/classes/cs6751_97_winter/Topics/human-cap/memory.html 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) 43326 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 0:46am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi again, Ken et al - In a message dated 3/17/05 8:28:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the > form of > mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the > > data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see > any > such things put forward in Abhidhamma. Sure there is sa~n~na mentioned, a > bundle of operations that "mark", and compare and contrast marks, but there > seems > to be no mention of the nature of these "marks" or of their being passed > along. Is this just a gap in the Abhidhamma (or our record of the > Abhidhamma), or > do recollection (remembering) and other such mental operations magically occu > r > (via a form of Buddhist time travel! ;-) with no data passed along on which > to > operate? > ========================== A thought that has occurred to me in regard to the nature of "marks" that are passed along is that they might in fact not be namas, but a category of mind-created rupas, knowable only through the mind door (as is the case with "the water element", i.e., liquidity/cohesion). [Such rupic nature of "marks", in fact, would not surprise me, as it harmonizes well with the modern, neurology-based theories of memory that presume "memory traces" of various sorts "stored" in the nervous system.] 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) 43327 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:45am Subject: Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi again, all - It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality provides another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the correct one. Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things from moment to oment. It is merely a matter of "When this is, that will be" and "When this is not, that will not be". When appropriate conditions have all occurred, then a resultant condition will occur. This allows for "action at a (temporal) distance" just as does quantum theory. Applying this to memory, there is the possibility that the "marking" done by sa~n~na is not the production of a substantial trace that is replicated in each subsequent mindstate, but is merely an operational event that serves as one condition for a future event of remembering. It may well be merely that several "marking operations" of sa~n~na, occurring at various times, serve, together with other conditions occurring at other times, as basis for a future operation of remembering, with nothing "passed along" at all. This would be a "very Buddhist" perspective. Moreover, from the Buddhist point of view, the passing along of rupic traces as replicated mindstate-objects, would also have to involve action-at-a-distance, because from the moment of a sa~n~nic marking until the moment of remembering, certainly not every intervening mindstate had a rupic trace as its object. Thus it seems to me that the "conditionality theory" put forward in this post may be the best way of understanding the matter. To put it simply: Sa~n~nic marking-events and other events serve as conditions for future acts of remembering, period. My apologies for "thinking aloud" about this matter on-list. 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) 43328 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:54am Subject: doubting BK (was Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada) Hi, Kel, I appreciate your thoughts on "buddha nature". Thank you. I think both halves of BK's article* aren't "meant to be 'technically' sound". Maybe "an ounce of practice is worth a ton of theory", but how do you know what he's talking about when he says "object", "rising and falling", "mind", "anchor" or that nama and rupa have to be known when there's no defining of terms? I guess this is all what some of my other friends keep calling 'intuitive' when I think they're disgusted with me, but I think if we don't know what we're doing, we're probably doing something wrong and I fail to appreciate 'intuition' as somehow inherently better than 'reason'. I guess BK's answer to me would be: "Why do you need more-so much knowledge? Then you don't really develop the emotional, spiritual, and psychological aspects", but if there is a right those things, I think they'll follow on right knowledge. If "whatever is happening right now is your object of meditation", what does it mean to say "If the 'worse person in the world' happens to be next to you doing the most unacceptable things and you start judging, disliking, comparing, hating, even trying to control, you have totally failed in your practice!" Why would I not still be successful recognizing these negative things? He says, "If there is wrong attitude there and you are able to see it clearly, acknowledge it, that 'seeing' by itself will change and turn in time that negative attitude into positive. Do not change object until your present object zeros." Or objects, as he also says "if you need to keep alert note two phenomena (objects)", but if "you are experiencing loss of clarity, then try to limit the objects. Stay with one or two only". Why would I not "Look straight into the thinking mind. That will cause it to disappear. Then turn [my] attention to rising and falling for three or four times and look right into the mind again" or remember that "To increase sati look continuously into sensation area persisting, increasing viriya"? To my reading, there is just too much self controlling things here. Which "mind needs to slow down, become stable" and how is the 'meditating mind', which can only arise "when the observing mind has no lobha, dosa nor soka (worry-anxiety) inside it" ever going to arise if "Every time you experience something new, anxiety comes into the practice"? I'd think every moment there would be some new object or experience. I hope I'm taking BK too literally when it sounds like he's saying multiple minds co-exist in the meditator. Also, it's one thing to describe your own experience but another to say something like "The Buddha said that the samaadhi you develop from walking meditation is much stronger than the samaadhi that you develop from sitting meditation". Maybe he did, but I don't remember reading anything like that anywhere else. peace, connie *Bhikkhu Khemavamsa's "Contemplation of the Mind: Practicing Cittanupassana": http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf 43329 From: rjkjp1 Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:03am Subject: doubting BK (was Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Hie "The Buddha said that the > samaadhi you develop from walking meditation is much stronger than the > samaadhi that you develop from sitting meditation". Maybe he did, but I > don't remember reading anything like that anywhere else. >======= Dear Connie, Thanks for all your helpful posts rcently. Just to note that the Visuddhimagga does have somewhere where they say the concentration gained while walking lasts long, plus one becomes fit for travel and a few other benefits. Robert 43330 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:34am Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi James, -------------------------- J: > If you want to tell me that my opinion is wrong, that's okay; but I don't think it is appropriate to tell me that I am a wrong because I am the wrong sort of person. Do you get it? (Sorry for the lecture, but I think you should learn this.) ---------------------------- Yes, I get it, and I don't mind the lecture at all. That's the sort of trouble I was intentionally stirring up. :-) ----------------------------------------------- Ken H: > > At the risk of being thrashed, I will join in: James:> Oh no, I am not going to thrash you over this issue. It is a tempest in a teacup, really. > ------------------------------------------------- Thanks. Actually, what I meant was; "At the risk of being thoroughly defeated by an experienced opponent, I will join in the debate." ----------------- Ken H: > > The word "odd" does cast BB's argument in a bad light. But, rather than being swayed by words,… James: > You mean like how you cast me in the bad light as being a `debator uninterested in the truth'? ;-)) ----------------- :-) Something like that, yes. My post was partly about techniques used in debate (and, to that extent, off-topic on this list). I thought you would appreciate it because you had already posted a similar message, some time ago. In that case, I entirely disagreed with the specific allegations you were making, but I agreed with the principle. That is, I agreed that we should be getting to the truth rather than using suspect means (like discrediting the messenger etc.) simply in order to win a debate. ----------------------- J: > I don't think the Buddha was `concerned' about anything- concern means worry and the Buddha didn't worry; the Buddha had compassion but he didn't worry. Now do you understand what I was saying? Maybe I didn't express myself in the best way possible but I didn't want to go on and on about it- it is a very minor issue. ----------------------- I see. That does make more sense. But I would add that Bhikkhu Bodhi would not have implied the Buddha was a worrier (and I think you know he wouldn't). To be "concerned" with a particular problem can mean to be directing one's attention to it. But, as you say, there's no need to go on about it. ------------------------- Ken H: > > If anything, I think the point proves BB's argument. Eternal happiness is not a possibility and so repeated births must be a problem. James: > I don't understand your reasoning- perhaps you would care to explain more? -------------------------- Gladly! Actually, I think it might be a fairly important topic. You will have noticed suttas in which the Buddha described his Middle Way as offering "final release from dukkha." The point was, I think, that some people had already found release from dukkha in their current lives. I am thinking, for example, of gods and jhana masters who could live for aeons in the perfect peace of the fine immaterial sphere. The trouble was that the wheel of samsara kept turning, and after all those aeons they would eventually be reborn in the lower planes of woe. Also, there are suttas in which the Buddha admits that other philosophies would be suitable if only the laws of nature were not the way the Buddha knew them to be. If rebirth was not made inevitable by the laws of kamma and vipaka, then a philosophy of, 'Eat, drink and be merry,' would be as good as any. But the point BB was making was that, without knowledge of the Buddha's teaching, even the greatest kusala kamma can only offer rebirth. And therein lies the problem. Ken H 43331 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things from moment to oment. Hi Howard. I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way the Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... “…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid aside the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are born of contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; with the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) “ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? (Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada Sutta, #146) “By reason of a cause it came to be By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? (Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) “Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? (The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) TG 43332 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Dear Azita and Matheesha, Azita wrote:'Its hard for me to 'match up' what I read and my everyday life, if you know what I mean?' Matheesha, this is also the point you touched on when you said: 'So i wonder if abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting on the actual'. This is something that cannot be explained in one post, but it is very useful for all of us if you bring up what seems theoretical, and also what you see as an inconsistency between sutta and abhidhamma. It is an opportunity to go deeper into the subject of Abhidhamma. It helps to go into details like hiri and ottappa Azita has a question about. op 17-03-2005 00:59 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > Azita: You say they bec more refined, so can we say in the beginning > Hiri and Ottappa may manifest as 'our conscience' which stops us from > gossiping about someone in an unfriendly way? N: Hiri and ottappa are, together with many other sobhana cetasikas indispensable for the arising of kusala citta. When there is an occasion for gossiping, but we abstain, there is also the sobhana cetasika that is abstention, virati cetasika. Abstention from bad speech. There are confidence in kusala, sati and many other sobhana cetasikas that perform their functions. You say 'in the beginning', but I want to be careful with this expression. It may be even now. It depends on conditions whether there are hiri and ottappa with regard to more coarse or more subtle akusala. Situations are different at different times. When we say in conventional language 'our conscience' this may cause misunderstandings. We may forget that there are many sobhana cetasikas necessary for one moment of kusala citta. A: "fear of blame" sounds like dosa, altho you say its not. It > also sounds like mana, 'what will they think of me'. Maybe you have > already explained it but I would like to understand a little more > about this, and I can see from above that it arise with wholesome > cittas. N: Shame and fear of blame: this is a way of explaining these two cetasikas. We have to understand them and then we do not fall over these words. But we cannot catch: this is hiri, this is ottappa, they arise together and both of them see the danger of akusala. We may think with mana, 'what will they think of me', and then it is not ottappa. But we can abstain from akusala with respect for the teacher, for the Buddha, with concern for the neighbours, and then it is a different matter. Matheesha, you see here that it is so important to know more about different types of kusala cittas and akusala cittas, otherwise we are all confused about what is going on within ourselves. When you read the Satipatthana sutta and its Co. (translated by Soma Thera, the Way of Mindfulness) you see that the Abhidhamma is of great support to understand what the objects of satipatthana are. It also helps us to entangle our different feelings, some kusala, some akusala. A: Patience, courage and good cheer, > [altho I don't seem to be having much of any of the above > lately] :-( N: These are the ups and downs of life, that is also Abhidhamma! I wish I could help you. But when you know that patience, courage and good cheer cannot come on command, only when there are the right conditions, you mind less. They are all fleeting moments, anyway, not something we possess. They are not yours, and that is Abhidhamma. Abhidhamma clearly explains anatta. Impatience, lack of courage, a bad mood, also these arise when there are conditions for them. But kusala can arise instead of akusala by good friendship, listening to the Dhamma, considering it, beginning to be aware, as you know. Don't you find that when you try to explain Dhamma you are concentrated only on that and you do not think of your own bad mood? Sarah often said that the Dhamma is the best medicine. Patience, courage and good cheer (but only momentary!), Nina. 43333 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] alleywalk Dear Connie and Rob K, Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. Nina. op 17-03-2005 17:03 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > Just to note that the > Visuddhimagga does have somewhere where they say the concentration > gained while walking lasts long, plus one becomes fit for travel and > a few other benefits. 43334 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 1:31:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > > In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things > from > moment to oment. > Hi Howard. > > I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way the > > Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... > > Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... > > “…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and > friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid > aside > the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are > born of > contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In > dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; > with > the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? > (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) > > “ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, > and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? > (Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle > Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada > Sutta, > #146) > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Those 2 quotes pertain to contact being a condition for feeling. That happens to be an immediate predecessor conditioning, but not all conditionng is of that sort. Also, contact is but one precondition for feeling, not the sole one, for in general mutiple conditions coming together are required. In addition, when condition A is immediate predecessor to resultant B, A may well not be present in the next moment when B arises, and so it still amounts to "action at a distance". ----------------------------------------- > > “By reason of a cause it came to be > By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? > (Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) > > “Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just > causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? > (The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) > --------------------------------------- Howard: These are unclear as to this issue. --------------------------------------- > > TG > ================== With metta, Howard P.S. I just came across the article at the following site: http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:gLuk_WLbdTIJ:www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/budfree.htm+conditio nality+kalupahana&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 I hadn't seen this article before, and I find it interesting that action at a distance is mentioned in the following part of the article: __________________________ The Buddha’s qualified determinism has led David Kalupahana to speak of Buddhist “conditionalityâ€? rather than causality.14 For him Buddhist conditionality represents a middle way between strict determinism and the destruction of freedom on the one hand, and an equally unacceptable indeterminism on the other. Because the Buddha rejected the both material and mental substances, Buddhist conditionality amounts to causality withOUT (HCW editorial correction) substance metaphysics. We should envision, as we have been forced to do in contemporary physics, all events conditioning one another rather than physical and mental causes pushing, pulling, or otherwise interacting with one another. Incredibly enough, action at a distance has now been confirmed between pairs of subatomic particles, although physicists still do not understand how this can happen. Therefore, Buddhist conditionality could possibly be used to explain the actions of subatomic particles, which are currently impossible to understand according to classical science’s view of causality.Buddhist conditionality is summarized by the following formulas: “When this is present, that comes to be; from the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does not come to be; on the cessation of this, that ceases.â€?15 Moving from facts to values, the principle of conditionality is summarized as a twelve-fold chain starting with ignorance, then unmindful action, a resultant distorted consciousness, and then nine other conditions that lead to rebirth. If anyone of these conditions is not present, then rebirth in a next life will not happen. One might see it in terms of Aristotle’s formal causation, as the following authors do: “As a theory of causation, this ‘dependent coarising’ concerns the formal concomitances among things rather than their material derivation from one another. It resembles a medical diagnosis in several ways. By showing that the ailment depends on a series of conditions, it indicates the point at which the series can be broken and so facilitates a cure.â€?16 ------------------------------------------------------------- /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) 43335 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: responsibilities in the world. Hi Sarah, Howard, Sarah, this is well expressed and I print it out. Tomorrow I have lunch with Lodewijk in a restaurant and this is such a good opportunity for a leisure Dhamma talk. Notebook on the table, in between the good food. Dhamma and pleasure, but pleasure is also Dhamma. Lodewijk needs a break, he feels the loss of my father and did a lot of work about his house. It gets you also physically, more than you would think. Nama and rupa and conditions. Nina. op 17-03-2005 10:41 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@y... > It’s true as you and Lodewijk said, that we live in a world with other > people and have to take responsibility including the resisting of our own > and others’ harmful deeds. ... > > On the contrary,as I see it, by understanding more about the dhammas > appearing in a day, we learn to be more honest and sincere about our > motives and intentions and of course, we learn to see what the real > problems in our life are. 43336 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Matheesha, op 17-03-2005 08:33 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: >> N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. > > M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas > refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they > must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? N: Each citta (viññaa.nakkhandha) falls away but since it is immediately succeeded by the next one there are conditions for accumulating good and bad inclinations (the formations khandha), all experiences, all we learnt, from moment to moment, from life to life. When we think of life as an uninterrupted series of cittas, the fact of accumulation becomes more understandable. Indeed, you can notice that habits are formed, what you experienced is remembered. Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. We can remember things that happened long ago. What has been accumulated is a condition for the arising again of akusala citta and cetasikas, and of kusala citta and sobhana cetasikas. Paññaa, a sobhana cetasika, is also accumulated and can develop from life to life. Kamma, good and evil deeds, are accumulated and can produce result, even in future lives. M: What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is > another area i would like to explore. N: When paññaa has been developed in stages of insight it can become accomplished to the degree that enlightenment can be attained. The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences nibbaana. Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, the stage of the arahat. However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path leading to enlightenment. Nina. 43337 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 6:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard In a message dated 3/17/2005 11:34:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 1:31:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > > In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things > from > moment to oment. > Hi Howard. > > I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way the > > Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... > > Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... > > “…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and > friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid > aside > the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are > born of > contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In > dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; > with > the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? > (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) > > “ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, > and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? > (Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle > Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada > Sutta, > #146) > ----------------------------------------- Howard: Those 2 quotes pertain to contact being a condition for feeling. That happens to be an immediate predecessor conditioning, but not all conditionng is of that sort. Also, contact is but one precondition for feeling, not the sole one, for in general mutiple conditions coming together are required. In addition, when condition A is immediate predecessor to resultant B, A may well not be present in the next moment when B arises, and so it still amounts to "action at a distance". ----------------------------------------- TG I don't know of any "conditioning" that is free of contact. > > “By reason of a cause it came to be > By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? > (Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) > > “Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just > causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? > (The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) > --------------------------------------- Howard: These are unclear as to this issue. --------------------------------------- TG I'm not sure why its not clear. These quotes are expressing the principle of DO, i.e., conditionality. These statements should be applicable at all times in regard to all conditioned phenomena. If they are not, then the Buddha was in error. I guess my point is that I disagree with the notion that you seem to be projecting that conditions can somehow be free of causal mechanisms. No doubt many causal events are beyond our current understanding. Because we may not understand or clearly see the mechanisms, I don't think that's enough grounds to believe they aren't there. > > TG > ================== With metta, Howard TG 43338 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:03pm Subject: doubting BK (was Re: The Buddhist Teachings on Samvega & Pasada) Hi Connie, A bit long message to warn you. > C: I think both halves of BK's article* aren't "meant to be 'technically' > sound". Maybe "an ounce of practice is worth a ton of theory" Kel: Perhaps so, it definitely isn't presented as a normal book. It's more like stream of consciousness writing. I agree that it's not technically sound in everything. The later saying comes from Shwe Oo Min Sayadaw and it's a common phrase in Burma. I think everyone would agree that actual practice is what gets you there. Of course as you pointed later, one needs a solid foundation of theory (cinta-maya panna). But I would also argue that the amount of details someone needs differ. From what I've seen, people do quite well with simple instructions and simple models. However, there's definitely people where simple isn't sufficient and hinder their progress. > C: but how do > you know what he's talking about when he says "object", "rising and > falling", "mind", "anchor" or that nama and rupa have to be known when > there's no defining of terms? Kel: I think he assumes certain familiarity and orthodox use of the terms. It's definitely not a safe assumption on DSG I find :) I didn't have any trouble catching his meaning or at least his drift. > C: I guess this is all what some of my other > friends keep calling 'intuitive' when I think they're disgusted with me, > but I think if we don't know what we're doing, we're probably doing > something wrong and I fail to appreciate 'intuition' as somehow inherently > better than 'reason'. Kel: I would think you need both equally. If intuition alone was enough, everyone would become Buddha. Or perhaps that's why they think everyone will be a Buddha? I think certain amount of trust in Dhamma leads to suta-maya panna. Then using that to drive intuition and arrive at cinta-maya panna through reasoning. Certain people have enough accumulated to become pacceka-buddhas and there intuition might lead. I definitely think it's a danger when people apply what is reserved for highest quality beings to general populus. But if they all aspire to be Buddha then let them rely on intuition. I for one cannot sacrifice myself to fulfill paramis up to that level. > C: I guess BK's answer to me would be: "Why do you > need more-so much knowledge? Then you don't really develop the emotional, > spiritual, and psychological aspects", but if there is a right those > things, I think they'll follow on right knowledge. Kel: I think this is mostly directed at Buddhist scholars who spend all their whole lives studying texts. They claim there's no time to practice because they can't spare the time. Plenty of those people in Burma and in general I assume. Kinda like one uncle I have who says all the studying he's doing now will carry over and he's just trying to achieve first jhana. Then he'll try for sotapanna as a brahma based on that knowledge, I told him good luck. > If "whatever is happening right now is your object of meditation" > does it mean to say "If the 'worse person in the world' happens to Kel: To me it's just a simple thing most people say about being in the present. > He says, "If there is wrong attitude there and you > are able to see it clearly, acknowledge it, that 'seeing' by itself will > change and turn in time that negative attitude into positive. Kel: This comes from idea of recognizing kilesas behind your actions. Once the true nature or motivations are clearly perceived then the attitude changes. The association with self is lessened. > Do not change object until your present object zeros." > "if you need to keep alert note two phenomena (objects)", > "you are experiencing loss of clarity, then try to limit the > objects. Stay with one or two only". Kel: Situational descriptions. Most beginners cannot remain on one object. For example one is aware of the breath but at the same time pain the in leg. The mind itself is ping-ponging but the meditator is unable to observe that and they appear to co-exist. The idea is the mind remains alert more when it's trying to be aware of so many things seemingly at once, doesn't fall under thina- middha. Having only one subtle object increases the likelyhood thina-middha can slip right in at momentary slackening of sati. > Why would I not "Look straight into the thinking > mind. That will cause it to disappear. Then turn [my] attention to > rising and falling for three or four times and look right into the mind > again" or remember that "To increase sati look continuously into sensation > area persisting, increasing viriya"? Kel: This is the same as Mahasi instructions of observing until something disappear. It's attempting to go from gross to subtle using one gross object as the vehicle. Ever able to pentrate through the thinking mind or observe it clearly and fully? Sometime when attempting to follow the thinking mind, one can get pulled in and get immersed in the story. So the breath or abdomen can be used as "anchor" to strengthen samadhi. At the least snap out of the story arc. The instructions to increase sati or viriya is in-line with balancing the indriyas. It's just a way to help the meditator realize what needs to be done. Of course doing it successfully depends on the conditions blah blah blah. > To my reading, there is just too much self controlling things here. Kel: If you're reading it on a surface and trying to equate it with atta then sure. I'm sure Sarah would agree with your position. However there's plenty of stuff BK says that goes to show how anatta can be clearly seen. Just laws of nature, cause and effect going on. > Which "mind needs to slow down, become stable" and how is the 'meditating > mind', which can only arise "when the observing mind has no lobha, dosa > nor soka (worry-anxiety) inside it" ever going to arise if "Every time you > experience something new, anxiety comes into the practice"? I'd think > every moment there would be some new object or experience. Kel: If you look at the mind-door process of being able to recognize something, it's repeated experience of the replicated object then the impression. Same principle here, it's all similar experiences which the mind recognizes. The mind slows down means it's experiencing almost identical objects. When he talks about something new, it's referring to scenarios like the following. One is experiencing subtle things, then something gross up, the reaction is mostly what happened? Did something go wrong etc? Or if one is experiencing gross things then it starts becomes subtle, reaction is joy followed right by fear of losing it. Then one starts to cautiously approach the objects, forgetting how it got there in the first place. He's calling that type of things anxiety when something *suddenly* changes (to an untrained mind). >C: I hope I'm taking BK too literally when it sounds like he's > saying multiple minds co-exist in the meditator. Kel: He didn't say co-exist at the same time exactly. It's about citta taking the previous citta as the object, a simple model for vithis. > samaadhi you develop from walking meditation is much stronger > samaadhi that you develop from sitting meditation". Kel: RobK pointed out it was in Vism. I'll also refer to Ashin Ananda's practice right before he came an arahat. He was doing walking meditation. - kel 43339 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 1:52pm Subject: To James: Re: To Connie: BB's Article 2 Hi Ken H., Ken H.: Gladly! Actually, I think it might be a fairly important topic... James: Yes, I think it is an important topic also; unfortunately, I don't really trust my opinion on this matter because I am not enlightened. The deeper I `think' about it the more confused I become. This is because I have not realized the Four Noble Truths for myself (not even the First Noble Truth of Suffering). So, what is dukkha *really*??? I am reminded of the time before the Buddha was enlightened, when he was Gotama, and he became very upset when he encountered three different types of people: old, sick, and dead. And he thought to himself `Since I am also subject to old age, sickness, and death it would not be fitting, it would not be proper, for me to pursue things which are also subject to old age, sickness, and death. That would be an ignoble quest. Therefore, since I am subject to old age, sickness, and death, I should pursue that which is not subject to those things. That would be a noble quest.' Compare this to what BB writes, "And, as I will show presently, these terms are intended quite literally as signifying biological birth, aging, and death, not our anxiety over being born, growing old, and dying." But what about the dukkha that made Gotama seek the truth? It seems to me that Gotama had a lot of anxiety over sickness, aging, and death and he hadn't experienced them directly (at least not aging and death- and he didn't recall his past lives). This is not a cut-and-dry issue; there seems to be some gray area. And, again, we have to get back to how this all relates to DO. Anyone have an Advil? ;-)) Metta, James 43340 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 3:01:09 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > In a message dated 3/17/2005 11:34:49 AM Pacific Standard Time, > upasaka@a... writes: > Hi, TG - > > In a message dated 3/17/05 1:31:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, > TGrand458@a... writes: > > > > >In a message dated 3/17/2005 6:49:20 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >upasaka@a... writes: > >Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things > > >from > >moment to oment. > >Hi Howard. > > > >I don't really know what you mean by the above, but by examining the way > the > > > >Suttas talk about DO, it sounds pretty "mechanistic" to me... > > > >Sutta Quotes demostrating the principle of DO... > > > >“…just as heat is generated and fire is produced from the conjunction and > >friction of two fire-sticks, but when the sticks are separated and laid > >aside > >the resultant heat ceases and subsides; so too, these three feelings are > >born of > >contact, rooted in contact, with contact as their source and condition. In > > >dependence on the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings arise; > >with > >the cessation of the appropriate contacts the corresponding feelings cease.â€? > > >(The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 2, pg. 1270) > > > >“ . . . each feeling arises in dependence upon its corresponding condition, > > >and with the cessation of its corresponding condition, the feeling ceases.â€? > >(Ven. Nandaka instructing nuns at the request of the Buddha . . . Middle > >Length Discourse of the Buddha, pg. 1122, Advice from Nandaka, Nandakovada > >Sutta, > >#146) > > > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Those 2 quotes pertain to contact being a condition for feeling. That > happens to be an immediate predecessor conditioning, but not all conditionng > > is of that sort. Also, contact is but one precondition for feeling, not the > sole one, for in general mutiple conditions coming together are required. In > > addition, when condition A is immediate predecessor to resultant B, A may > well not > be present in the next moment when B arises, and so it still amounts to > "action at a distance". > ----------------------------------------- > > TG I don't know of any "conditioning" that is free of contact. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't get your point. My meaning was that feeling is conditioned by contact as its immediate predecessor, but not all conditioning occurs by immediate precedence. For example, birth is a condition for death, but not consistently by immediate precedence. The initiation of consciousness in a lifetime is a requisite condition for the last. -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > >“By reason of a cause it came to be > >By rupture of a cause it dies awayâ€? > >(Ven. Sela . . . Kindred Sayings, vol. 1, pg. 169) > > > >“Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just > >causes the fulfillment of another state…â€? > >(The Buddha . . . Gradual Sayings, vol. 5, pg. 4) > > > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > These are unclear as to this issue. > --------------------------------------- > > TG I'm not sure why its not clear. These quotes are expressing the > principle of DO, i.e., conditionality. These statements should be > applicable at all > times in regard to all conditioned phenomena. If they are not, then the > Buddha > was in error. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I'm saying that these quotes do not unambiguously say that all conditioning proceeds by immediate precedence. -------------------------------------- > > I guess my point is that I disagree with the notion that you seem to be > projecting that conditions can somehow be free of causal mechanisms. No > doubt many > causal events are beyond our current understanding. Because we may not > understand or clearly see the mechanisms, I don't think that's enough > grounds to > believe they aren't there. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: I'm saying that the Dhamma doesn't countenance "causal forces", but merely this/that conditionality. ------------------------------------------- > > > > > >TG > > > ================== > With metta, > Howard > TG > ======================== TG, I've said all I can in expressing my understanding of this matter, and I fear that anything further I would add would just amount to repetition. So I think I'll give this matter a rest. ;-) 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) 43341 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi again, TG - I found one more thing, by Ven. Ajahn Brahamvamso, on the net that is relevant. It is at the following url: http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:vv7PYsWVytsJ:www.bswa.org/publications/HTML/PaticcaSamuppada_Dependent_Origination .html+idappaccayata&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 Included there you will see the following: <> I send this to you not to prove my point, but merely to show that the idea is not novel to me. 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) 43342 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 4:02pm Subject: Vism.XIV,146 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 146. (xx)-(xxi) The malleable state of the [mental] body is 'malleability of the body'. The malleable state of consciousness is 'malleability of consciousness'. They have the characteristic of quieting rigidity in the [mental] body and in consciousness. Their function is to crush stiffening in the [mental] body and in consciousness. They are manifested as nonresistance. Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of views, conceit (pride), etc., which cause stiffening of the [mental] body and of consciousness. 43343 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:20pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Dear Nina, Robert, Kel, Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. 9. Ca"nkamasutta.m 29. “Pa~ncime, bhikkhave, ca"nkame aanisa.msaa. Katame pa~nca? Addhaanakkhamo hoti, padhaanakkhamo hoti, appaabaadho hoti, asita.m piita.m khaayita.m saayita.m sammaa pari.naama.m gacchati, ca"nkamaadhigato samaadhi cira.t.thitiko hoti. Ime kho, bhikkhave, pa~nca ca"nkame aanisa.msaaâ€?ti. Navama.m. "There are five benefits of walking, monks. What five? Endurance for a long journey; endurance for striving; smallness of obstacles; thorough digestion of food and drink taken; samaadhi obtained from walking lasts a long time. These, indeed, monks, are five benefits of walking." This is the ninth. No doubt, my translation could use some help, but there it is. I didn't spend much time looking in the Vsm, but didn't see anything particularly relevant. thank you, connie 43344 From: connie Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:21pm Subject: Re: doubting BK Thank you for your explanations, Kel. I still don't appreciate BK's writing, especially that second half where I think he sounds like a mystic, but there's not much point in our going around in circles over it. Laughing at myself... I'm still not ready to say samaadhi from walking meditation is stronger than from sitting, but I can see where the idea might come from reading the sutta Nina gave. I hope your uncle makes it, too. I don't suppose we'd ever know. In all fairness, BK did make some comments in the first part that probably are worth repeating: -If you hear something, just know there is hearing. If you know what sound it is you are hearing, this is not meditation. -You must know ruupa and you must also know naama — only then you will have an all-rounded view and knowledge. -If you have expectations to see arising and passing away you won’t see arising and passing away. -Trying to create something is lobha (greed). Rejecting what is happening is dosa (aversion). Not knowing if something is happening or has stopped happening is moha (delusion). -Real paramattha has only its characteristics, when you see the object you see only its characteristics, the characteristics are changing, are impermanent. When you get to real paramattha you don’t know this is heat, cold, tension, fear, agitation, craving. You just know that this is the changing nature of the object. -We cannot directly experience concepts. Only by experiencing the quality — hard, soft, cold, heat, stiffness, pressure, heaviness, tension, pain, fear, craving, doubt — we are experiencing directly without thinking about it. peace, connie ps... to you, James, if you see this, that's con-descending from her high horse ;) 43345 From: mnease Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 7:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature Hi Connie, ----- Original Message ----- From: "connie" To: "dsg" Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2005 7:20 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha Nature > I think the Nichirenists consider his > teachings on "the true Buddhism" to be an advancement over all earlier > schools and separate from Mahayana, rather like the Vajrayana do. Seems that way to me, too. The test, to me, is the extent to which their views are consistent with the suttapi.taka on a gross level. Very few even theravadins pass this test. mike 43346 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory In a message dated 3/17/2005 2:15:17 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Howard: I'm saying that the Dhamma doesn't countenance "causal forces", but merely this/that conditionality. Hi Howard I completely disagree with the above assessment but that's no shock is it? ;-) The suttas are replete with the Buddha demonstrating causal forces at work both physically and mentally. TG 43347 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:02pm Subject: Re: Sila Visuddhi (purity of sila) Hi Sarah, Thanks for this information on sila visuddhi. At the risk of sounding obstinate, I still don't see the dangers of "personlessness" that Suan warned against. I think if someone seems to be taking anatta too far he is actually not taking it far enough. We have another weekend of Dhamma discussion at Cooran starting tomorrow (or tonight for some people). The topic is "Right Understanding," and I'm just on my way to the Useful Posts file to plagiarise a contribution. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi KenH ,Tep & All, > > When I was checking the reference on citta visuddhi and ditthi which Htoo > referred me to, I came across the following quote on sila visuddhi. > > [Firstly, as I understand, there are 9 different kinds of visuddhi > (purity), which develop with satipatthana as stages of vipassana are > reached. 43348 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 3:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi Howard Wait a minute...I thought you rested your case. I need a ruling from the judge. In a message dated 3/17/2005 2:41:06 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi again, TG - I found one more thing, by Ven. Ajahn Brahamvamso, on the net that is relevant. It is at the following url: http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:vv7PYsWVytsJ:www.bswa.org/publications/HT ML/PaticcaSamuppada_Dependent_Origination .html+idappaccayata&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 Included there you will see the following: <> I send this to you not to prove my point, but merely to show that the idea is not novel to me. With metta, Howard TG Causal changes occur continuously and sequentially and unfold in accordance to the relative momentum of forces at hand. "Separating" cause and effect is just a manner of thinking about something being separate, it isn't an actuality. TG 43349 From: kenhowardau Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:11pm Subject: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Howard, Thank you for your generous remarks: -------------------- H: > Well done, Ken! I think this was an excellent presentation. As with 99% of what you wrote in this post (Exception: the *momentary* coming together of the chariot parts was not in the original, I believe), I think yours is a correct "take". -------------------- Not that I am complaining about my mark :-) but I would like some clarification on the chariot question. I wrote: "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist: So too, when the five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) a living being is said to exist." So I didn't say there was a momentary coming together of the chariot parts. If anything, I would have said the opposite. Chariots and their parts are not anicca: they lie around gathering dust for years. You probably meant to say that the coming together of the five khandhas was not explicitly momentary (as described in the suttas). Maybe not, but in the context of the Dhamma as a whole, that interpretation is unavoidable. Various suttas tell us that nothing changes faster than consciousness, and that it is almost impossible to describe how fast that is. Then there are suttas describing the six worlds, which make it clear that when consciousness changes so do all the cetasikas (and associated rupas). (As Htoo might say, when the king goes, his retinue goes with him.) Considering those suttas together, we can only conclude that an assembly of the five khandhas lasts only one moment. ----------------------------- H: > It also happens to raise in my mind a loose-end Abhidhammic issue that troubles me yet, and that is the kinds of actual mind- door objects that are present during thought processes and conceptual projecting. I do not not believe that pa~n~natti are ever truly objects of consciousness. ----------------------------- You must envy me sometimes for my unquestioning acceptance of the texts. :-) I know some people object to the idea of "parroting" but it's not so bad when you try it. I must sound like some kind of pusher! :-) Ken H 43350 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 8:42pm Subject: Remember those days.....? Hi All, Remember those days when we used to receive hand-written dhamma letters by snail-mail with corrections and lots of personal touches? Well, I know some will. I just got home, picked up the mail and glanced at a brown envelope from Japan with an address that meant nothing to me. Nothing very surprising --I have a lot of ex-students living in Japan who occasionally send me a card or note. When I took out the hand-written pages, it took me a while to recognise who it was from, even when I saw Phil's name at the end. Somehow, one no longer expects friends here to write letters and I didn't know he had our address, but I suppose it was on the back of a package I sent before. Anyway, I'll sepatately type in his letter to the Group. If there are any replies (and I hope there are, of course), I'll happily print them out and post them back to him. I know he'll be very pleased. If anyone can think of any posts they've written recently (or someone else has written for that matter) that they think Phil would like to see, pls let me know the numbers and I'll include them at the same time. I'll wait just a few days, but will send a second package if there's anything later. In a note to me at the top, he adds: >Hi Sarah! How's it going? Hope you and Jon are well. I think I'll be back at DSG in a few more weeks, but in the meantime could I ask you to pass this along to the Group? I would have typed it but our computer screen has gone black again! Doesn't help that I'm scrawling this on my lap on the balcony!< S: Actually, it's very easy to write and a pleasure to type for the list. I'm sure any typos in the following are mine. Metta, Sarah ========== 43351 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:14pm Subject: Phil's letter from Japan Hello Group! We've finally settled in to our new place. Both very happy about it. Many opportunities to reflect on lobha related to this move, because there are so many aspects to this neighbourhood/area, and the apartment itself is nicer. Now when I walk home from the station, instead of going by discount stores and fast food restaurants along a traffic-clogged thoroughfare, there is a posh shopping area with European brand goods, and then quiet, affluent streets, and a lovely little river and a park with huge trees, and vegetable gardens everywhere. I often think of what Rob K said, that it is the same wherever he is, and I believe that that is true for him. For me, there is such clinging to variations in conceptual beauty. I intentionally take a short cut right through the perfume and bag departments of the posh department store, drinking in the fragrances and glancing with delight at the beautiful women in elegant suits working at Chanel, Vuiton, Cartier etc. I take pride in telling students and friends where we live. And yet we can’t afford and don’t really want to buy those brand goods. Peculiar. At least I have an intellectual understanding that all this lobha is arising due to conditions. A moment or many moments of strong desire and ignorance is nothing to fret about – there will be many of them in this lifetime. The important thing is to gradually come to see them for what they are. I found this from Sarah in one of the past posts I’ve been studying: “There is more and more confidence that nothing other than the understanding of the present reality really matters at all.” I am also feeling confident about that. I am also aware that in addition to all the times that there is sensual greed and gross ignorance arising, there is a kind of reluctance, a kind of suspicion with respect to the khandhas. Yesterday morning was lovely, with sunlit dew drops in the cherry trees (just starting to bloom), ducks in the pond in the park, mild soft air, but as I walked to the station I found that a kind of mistrust, disgust, unease was arising – there was reluctance to lie lost in comforting concerts of spring loveliness. On other days, there will be delighting, like the other morning when it snowed, and children were wearing pink and yellow boots and using pink umbrellas, and were all so thrilled by the rare snow. And it is not all delighting, or all disgust. On the snowy day there was a moment of irritation when a child blocked my way, on the lovely bust disgusting morning there was appreciation for Naomi when I saw two fo the ducks seemingly bow to each other. I often think of Nina’s post about the shattered oven door – how she found so much going on in one mundane experience. Daily life is so full of moments in which understanding can arise. We learn to let go of trying to make them arise, appreciate them when they do. I am itching to bubble on, but since our computer is dead again I have to write by hand and ask Sarah to decipher and pass it on to the group. One question I’d like to ask. This is Nina, writing to Howard: “It only makes sense that I need to listen and read dhamma and on and on. With so much avijja and craving what would I find when I seek to practice? The feeling of urgency points to the present moment, and if there is no sati and panna what can be done? Nothing can accelerate the process of development except when sati and panna does arise.” I think this is very important. When I see how gross my lobha is at times, should there not be samvega, should there not be an arousing of a sense of urgency? If there is, there is, but even when there is, when there is so much ignorance, what will be gained from urgency? If the man with his turban on fire strikes out at the fire, hurries to put it out, the flames might just spread deeper, fanned by his flailing! Better to ever so patiently remove the turban, which has to be unwound, not just torn off, maybe. Something to think about, but these days I find even samvega can lead to a further deepening of patience, paradoxically. Ah, the question. It comes from the next part of the same post: Nina: “It seems that it is precisely because there is not enough panna, that at this point I can only appreciate the concept of Satipatthana and how this is different from pariyatti. I expect that when the panna has been accumulated enough, then there would be no need to be reminded about ‘practice’. Pariyatti is a dhamma and is anatta, and so is patipatti, and pativedha.” I am now rereading the CMA, but am wondering where pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha fall in as dhammas? I won’t be able to read the answer for now, but I hope the question will lead to a little fruitful discussion. It sounds like a very important point! :-) Metta, Phil P.S. many thanks to Ken H for sending me copies of the Burma talks on tape. Great stuff! ==================== S: As I said, I’ll forward anything on the thread or addressed to Phil. Phil, hope you get your computer working again soon. Meanwhile, if you send any more letters (preferably short ones for decoding!!), I’m happy to help. 43352 From: buddhatrue Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:35pm Subject: Re: doubting BK Hi Connie, Connie: to you, James, if you see this, that's con-descending from her high horse ;) James: Hehehe…clever. Really, I rarely find you to be on a high horse; however, if you could teach Sarah a thing or two about the value of looking at both sides, that would be a noble accomplishment. ;-) Metta, James 43353 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 10:36pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 149 - Applied thinking/Vitakka, Sustained thinking/Vicaara(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.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)contd] *** When there is sammå-saòkappa there is no akusala vitakka, wrong thinking; there is no “thought of sense-pleasures”, no “thought of malice”, no “thought of harming”. When the eightfold Path is being developed the four noble Truths will be known and “unprofitable thoughts” will eventually be eradicated. We read in the “Kindred Sayings” (V, Mahå-vagga, Book XII, Chapter I, §7, thoughts) that the Buddha, while he was at Såvatthí, said to the monks: * "Monks, think not evil, unprofitable thoughts, such as: thoughts of lust, thoughts of hatred, thoughts of delusion. Why do I say so? Because, monks, these thoughts are not concerned with profit, they are not the rudiments of the holy life, they conduce not to revulsion, to dispassion, to cessation, to tranquillity, to full understanding, to the perfect wisdom, they conduce not to nibbåna. When you do think, monks, you should think thus: This is dukkha. This is the arising of dukkha. This is the ceasing of dukkha. This is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha. Why do I say this? Because, monks, these thoughts are concerned with profit, they are rudiments of the holy life… they conduce to nibbåna. Wherefore an effort must be made to realize: This is dukkha. This is the arising of dukkha. This is the ceasing of dukkha. This is the practice that leads to the ceasing of dukkha." * The “thinking” referred to in this sutta is not thinking about the four noble Truths. It refers to the direct realization of the four noble Truths which are: dukkha, which is suffering, its origin, which is craving, its cessation, which is nibbåna, and the way leading to its cessation, which is the eightfold Path. When there is right mindfulness of a reality which appears, sammå-saòkappa “touches” it and then paññå can investigate its characteristic in order to know it as it is. This is the way to eventually realize the four noble Truths. At the moment of enlightenment the four noble Truths are penetrated. When the citta is lokuttara citta, sammåsaòkappa is also lokuttara. It “touches” nibbåna. ***** [Ch.8 Applied thinking(Vitakka),Sustained thinking(Vicaara)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 43354 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: doubting BK Hi James,(Connie & Cooranites) --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Connie, > > Connie: to you, James, if you see this, that's con-descending from > her high horse ;) > > James: Hehehe…clever. Really, I rarely find you to be on a high > horse; however, if you could teach Sarah a thing or two about the > value of looking at both sides, that would be a noble > accomplishment. ;-) .... S: Trust me, she tries her very best to educate me both on-list and off-list too occasionally (though I always try to encourage her to share her talents with the more open-minded members here, rather than wasting it just on my myopic eyes:-). Here’s one example I just fished out of her recent best efforts to enlighten me about both sides: *** C signing off:>>> con-de-scender *** S:signing off>> From one con-de-scender to another, *** C: o dear, when you write, it's from sarah-de-scender and I am con-de-ceiver, but i suppose it's all con-sceptual... from sceptre, those con-juring skep-sticks the magician waves to keep our judgements of the comings and goings con-fused, leading to believing 'all is one'. Actually, just writing to thank you for doing my buddanature homework - luminous mind UPs. Not really different assignments after all: a quote from The End of my "Hugo's Next Life", his "Current Practice" article [http://www.buddhanet.net/pdf_file/cittanupassana5.pdf]: That Infinite, Eternal Creating, Unlimited Love And Intelligence Is Who You Really Are !< **** S: So now I know! I’ll try not to get back on that high horse for a while;-). Thanks for thinking of me too and glad to see you corresponding with Connie, Ken H and others meanwhile. I know Phil would be glad to hear from you, if you think I can be trusted with the courier role, that is;-). Metta, Sarah p.s Cooranites, if you managed to get through this nonsense, have a good weekend of discussion and we’ll look forward to any reports of discussions/further questions/ background descriptions/whatever ====== 43355 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo Hi Htoo (& Nina), I know you are busy these days and we’ll have to wait for more. I think all our threads are pretty well tied up neatly. Just a couple of brief comments: N:> I remember an example, given by Kh Sujin, of weak akusala citta that > is not akusala kamma: just putting sugar in one's tea. We also should > think of samalobha, ordinary lobha, and visama lobha, lobha that is > more harmful. I have seen this in a commentary. Sama means even, > visama: uneven, contrary. ... S: Yes, thank you for adding this – it was just what I was thinking of, sama and visama lobha. ... H: > It is better if we can detect akusala citta at its earliest points > soon after the base happen [arise & pass away]. I like the > explanation of 'sama' and 'visama' lobha. Kamma has different > classifications. Some have potentiative power and some have reductive > power and some have destructive power etc etc. > > Ordinary akusala may or may reveal its effect. My belief is that all > akusala cittas do have kamma. And all kamma each do carry their full > power till the last moment of arahatta-cuti-citta. > > Kamma without results may well be such ones. ... S: Yes. We should remember the four functions of kamma – generating,supporting, obstructive and destructive. To repeat what I quoted from the commentary (Abhidhammatthavibhavini) before on supporting kamma: “A wholesome or unwholesome kamma which, although unable to produce a result by itself, becomes the condition for prolonging the result of another kamma or, in keeping with the capacity of the generating kamma, becomes the condition for prolonging the activity of a result that is pleasant or unpleasant by not giving rise to the conditions which cut it off and giving rise to the conditions which enhance it, is called supporting.” .... > But unhealthy control of smile is not Dhamma even though laughing may > have akusala base. ... Yes, we all agree:-) Metta, Sarah ==== 43356 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Htoo, --- htootintnaing wrote: > Htoo: There are 2 alternatives in 'kama javana cittas' if not in > arahats. They are akusala and kusala. ... S: Yes ... > If you focus on kusala or if you deviate to kusala then you will deny > that cittas that are not at the objects of dana, siila, bhavana are > kusala cittas. This means 'sincerely purely learning mind' is > performed by one of eight mahakusala cittas. ... S: IF, 'sincerely purely learning mind' really is kusala. For example, often we may be sincerely studying various subjects, including some Dhamma studies, but with ignorance. I believe the kusala moments are far and few between compared to the akusala. How about when we’re studying and there are the usual experiences through the sense doors occurring. Is there any awareness or guarding of the sense doors? Usually not. ... > If you focus on akusala then you may agree the proposal. That is > cittas that are not in killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating > are not akusala. Then you might accept 'sincerely purely learning > mind' is not akusala. If not akusala then it is one of 8 mahakusala > cittas. ... S: Definitely we cannot say this – that if it is not some kind of breaking of precepts or akusala kamma patha that it is mahakusala. ... > Htoo: I have told you above. If not alobha, adosa, amoha then they > must be with lobha, dosa, moha. This is logical inferrence. ... S: Yes, agreed!! ... <...> > Htoo: Generally akusala are much more abundant than kusala. Learing > non-religious things will invlove many javana cittas. > > Lobha is most common one when learning. Dosa may also arise when > learning. Pure moha may also arise without lobha and dosa when > learning. > > But what cittas are they when learning mind do not have lobha, dosa > and moha? ... S: Kusala – no disagreement, just a difference in emphasis, perhaps. ... <...> > Htoo: True. I try to meditate when reading. It is much more difficult > than sitting with eyes closed. I drop big attachment at its early > life and I drop big aversion at its early life. ... S: Sounds a bit too much like ‘I’ trying and dropping this and that. You’ll tell me this is just conventional language and yet it’s very easy for that idea of ‘me’ doing something to creep in all the time when we want particular results. Instead I’d encourage just understanding what is appearing at that moment, even if it’s some difficulty, frustration or idea of self doing something or trying. ... <...> > Htoo: Karuna and mudita are occasional cetasika in kusala cittas. > Metta or non-aversion is universal to all beautiful consciousness. ... S: I think we’ve discussed before how adosa (non-aversion) is ‘universal to all beautiful consciousness’ as you put it and is of many kinds and degrees. However metta is one kind of adosa which is always towards other people and doesn’t arise by any means with all beautiful consciousness. <...> > 'Right now' if it is not satipatthana, then it is not bhavana kusala > cittas. But 'right now' if javana cittas are simless that is there is > no lobha, no dosa, and no moha then they are not akusala cittas. ... S: Bhavana kusala can of course also be samatha bhavana, not just satipatthana. .... > > :-) if not akusala javana they are kusala javana cittas. But these > kusala javana cittas are not kamma patha. So they are not dana, sila, > and bhavana. They are ordinary ones. ... S: Yes, they are ordinary ones, but I believe each moment of kusala can be included in dana and sila in a wider sense. At each moment of kusala, there is renunciation from akusala. It might be good to explore this further if you have any comments sometime or Nina, Tep or others may add more. Metta, Sarah ======= 43357 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: New view on satipatthana 1 Hi AndrewL, Both Jon and I appreciated your posts a lot. I’ll just respond to the first one now and leave the others til later (probably Monday). --- Andrew Levin wrote: S:> > Our hope is to understand, not to direct." > A: > WELL can't metta be practised intentionally by one after reading a > book on how to arouse metta?? (Incidentally, the conditions of other > people 'being' should be enough to extend metta, whether they are > within one's sight or not). ... S: I think the conditions are other people, but also an understanding of the characteristic of metta. It’s true that for some people it’s very natural to be friendly and helpful whenever one has an opportunity. For others, it helps to hear and read reminders. When one thinks of others’ needs instead of one’s own, then metta arises naturally. .... >This is reasonable, just as it is > reasonable to say it might take a little bit more than that, more > conditions, but I'd say it's all fair game. Finding Buddhism and > studying meditation from a particular meditation manual that > emphasized 'loving-friendliness' and the generous help of others > towards my welfare were the conditions for generating metta. These > days it seems like going through the motions, wishing each person > metta through the same sentences 'May he be well, happy, and peaceful. > May no harm come to him, ... etc' is a little dry and tiring, but I'm > going to be looking to practise metta in the future. It's one root of > virtuous action, as I am reading (one particular mode of non-hate). ... S: I’m glad to hear it and I sense you genuinely are more concerned for others’ welfare these days, Andrew. And yes, I think there’s a big difference between reciting sentences and showing loving-kindness or friendliness when we have the chance. I also appreciate that you are grateful for the generous help of others towards your welfare. Reflecting on others’ kindness can be a kind of generosity or good will too. ... > KK. I get caught up in reading U.P. posts for long times sometimes. > I think it could just be having to wait until I get out more for > things to make sense, sitting online a lot doesn't conduce to the > words of an exchange feel meaningful. ... S: I’m not sure what ‘KK’ means here? Just be patient as we all have to remind ourselves:-) Glad you’ve been reading and reflecting so much. ... > body). It also got me wishing I knew the derived types of matter too > but I knew the book was off-limits for studying at least for now. ... S: Nina’s book on ‘Rupas’ is very helpful and readable, if only for reference. But no hurry. ... > Re: Abhidhamma and moha & dosa <...> > Isn't being able to tell whether it's dosa or moha part of seeing the > reality? And thus study to clear up the issue a legitimate pursuit? ... S: Good question. Of course it’s very legitimate and it helps to consider more about the different characteristics. But in the end, the ‘study’ is of the present dhamma (reality) and if that reality is trying to distinguish states, then that thinking is what should be known. After I wrote to you, I posted this extract from ‘Cetasikas’ which touches on the same point, but here to knowing vitakka vs vicara: “The more we study the realities which are taught in the Abhidhamma, the more we see that there are many different phenomena which each have their own characteristic. They appear one at a time, but when we try to name them there is thinking of a concept instead of mindfulness of a characteristic. Sometimes a reality which thinks may appear and then we may doubt whether it is vitakka or vicåra. It is useless to try to find out which reality appears because at such a moment there is no awareness. Thinking has a characteristic which can be realized when it appears and then there is no need to name it vitakka or vicåra.” S: In other words, we need to distinguish between being aware of just what is appearing and trying to put it in a pigeon-hole, I think. We read similes about the ingredients in a curry, for example, to show that only a Buddha can really distinguish all the various ingredients exactly as they arise and appear. .... <...> > This makes me think.. what kind of ignorance are we talking about > here? Can ignorance of the true nature of reality manifest as > delusion, that is, a skewed view of some objects, instead of a proper > one, or is that part of ignorance itself. When I feel that darkness > is it ignorance built up of the true nature of realities, manifesting > as just (dark) non-knowledge of the way things are? .... S: Yes, it’s not knowing. Whenever the javana cittas are not rooted in non-attachment, non-aversion and possibly wisdom, they are rooted in ignorance. There is no awareness of any kind at such times. On our recent trip to India, we talked about the ‘black curtain of ignorance’ and this is similar to the darkness you mention. Most of the time we are living in darkness and the true nature of realities are hidden from view by the black curtain. The task of wisdom is to shed light or pull aside that curtain. Beginning to recognise this darkness or non-knowledge of the way things are is a kind of wisdom in itself, I believe. Great points and discussion. I’ll look forward to more later. Meantime, keep writing! Metta, Sarah ======== 43358 From: Joop Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:15am Subject: Re: Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi again, all - > > It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality provides > another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the correct one. Hallo Howard Your alternative theory deserves a reward for originality, and still sounds theravadin to me. Maybe it can help describing the dynamics of the memory-process, but how about the statics, memory as a dhamma ? As an Appendix to his book 'Abhidhamma studies' Nyanaponika has added an essay with the title 'The omission of memory from the list of dhammas'. The book can be found on the internet, but no the appendix. I will try to abstract the 5 pages, but I'm not sure I understand them enough. Nyanaponika start with the information that 'sati' means 'mindfulness', and that the way it's used in the Dhammasangani, but also means 'memory'. But that meaning pays only a role in the bachground in the list of dhammas. Than he asked if it's possible that 'memory' is forgotten when the list of dhammas were composed, and he rejects that possiblility: "The list is undoubttedly the result of careful investtigation supported by introspective intuition". "… we can understand how 'remembering', that is connecting to the past, is a function of perception in general. We can now formulate the following definition: sanna is cognition as well as recognition, both being by way of selected marks. We can summarzie our findings as follows: 1 Memory, as we usuaaly understand it, is not mentioned as a separate component of a moment of consciousness because it is not a single mental factor but a complex process. 2 The mental factor that is most important for the arising of memory, is perception (sanna=sanjanana), being that kind of elementary cognition (janana) that proceeds by way of taking up, making, and remembering (i.e., identifying) marks. 3 …" etc I hope this will help you a little. Two short remarks that will not be helpful: - Memory has to do with the dimension of 'time' and that is as such a difficult aspect of the Abhidhamma, as Nyanaponika also mentions. - Memory has is - in modern thinking - also a dynamic function of the brains. So it has a rupa-aspect; perhaps one can say 'memory' is made of 'water', that's also only a hypothesis. Metta Joop 43359 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: NEW dialogue with Htoo --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Htoo (& Nina), > > I know you are busy these days and we'll have to wait for more. I think > all our threads are pretty well tied up neatly. Just a couple of brief > comments: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Sarah and Nina, Kamma is a complicated topic. I agree with what you said in your reply post. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43360 From: htootintnaing Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:43am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dialogue with Htoo 2 Dear Sarah, I just cleared off all and re-include what is to be responded from your reply-post. All other points are agreed. Here I think you have caught the point I made. ^^^ <...> > Htoo: Generally akusala are much more abundant than kusala. Learing > non-religious things will invlove many javana cittas. > > Lobha is most common one when learning. Dosa may also arise when > learning. Pure moha may also arise without lobha and dosa when > learning. > > But what cittas are they when learning mind do not have lobha, dosa > and moha? ... S: Kusala – no disagreement, just a difference in emphasis, perhaps. ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: If not uddhacca-citta and if not vicikiccha-citta, a citta is not moha-citta. I am talking on moha-citta and not on moha cetasika. These 2 new sentences open a new front. But I am trying to relate this to the above topic. So when a child is learning there are many cittas. That is a mixture of vithi cittas and bhavanga cittas. Among vithi cittas the most prominent cittas are javana cittas. The largest number of vithi cittas can be found in 'ati-mahantarammana'. There are 14 vithi cittas. Half of these vithi cittas are javana cittas. That is why I told javana cittas are the most prominent. When a child is learning there is a mixture of vithi cittas and bhavanga cittas. Among vithi cittas, the most abundant cittas are javana cittas. His learning is not daana, siila, bhavanaa. No one will say 'that child is doing daana or siila or bhavanaa when he is reading or learning'. But there are javana cittas. These cittas are not kiriya cittas. So they have to be akusala cittas or kusala cittas. He is not doing daana, siila, bhavana. So what will you say? Again he is not killing, stealing, sexing, lying, intoxicating. Does he do any akusala? What will you say? He is clearly learning. He is following the meaning of things what he has been studying. Apparaently he is not in vicikicchaa, which is moha-cittas. I mean his javana cittas when learning are not vicikicchaa cittas. Uddhacca cittas may happen. But not all the time. So mostly he is not in moha-javana. As he is learning, there is no dosa except the time when he is angry with his power of understandability. So apparent there are 2 alternatives. 1. mahakusala cittas as javana cittas 2. lobha muula akusala cittas as javana cittas Mahakusala cittas are 8 and 4 cittas are not accompanied by pannindriya cetasikas. Then 4 cittas left and they are called dvihetuka cittas. That is they have alobha and adosa as 2 root cetasikas. Lobha muula akusala cittas are also dvihetuka cittas. Their roots are lobha and moha cetasika. So the child is learning. There are javana cittas. These javana have 2 roots whatever they are kusala or akusala if there is no panna in hamakusala cittas. 2 alternatives are now 1. lobha and moha 2. alobha and adosa If there is NO ADOSA all javana cittas are not akusala citta. Because ADOSA cetasika always accompanies all kusala cittas. Sometimes, lobha is so subtle to be detected. The differentiating point here is adosa cetasika. I like the assumption that 'purely learning mind' is not akusala cittas. With Metta, Htoo Naing 43361 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/17/05 10:54:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Howard: > I'm saying that the Dhamma doesn't countenance "causal forces", but > merely this/that conditionality. > > Hi Howard > > I completely disagree with the above assessment but that's no shock is it? > ;-) The suttas are replete with the Buddha demonstrating causal forces at > work > both physically and mentally. > > TG > ======================== Life would turn shockingly dull were we to start agreeing on too much!! ;-)) 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) 43362 From: Date: Thu Mar 17, 2005 11:50pm Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Ken - In a message dated 3/17/05 11:12:26 PM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@y... writes: > Not that I am complaining about my mark :-) but I would like some > clarification on the chariot question. I wrote: > > "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly > assembled, a chariot is said to exist: So too, when the five > khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) > a living being is said to exist." > > So I didn't say there was a momentary coming together of the chariot > parts. If anything, I would have said the opposite. Chariots and > their parts are not anicca: they lie around gathering dust for > years. > > You probably meant to say that the coming together of the five > khandhas was not explicitly momentary (as described in the suttas). > Maybe not, but in the context of the Dhamma as a whole, that > interpretation is unavoidable. > > ========================= I agree that there is repeated, momentary coming-together of khandhic elements, but that the chariot simile doesn't make that point. You added it on about the khandhas, and I think it is quite valid, but just isn't pointed to by that simile. 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) 43363 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Joop - Thanks for your reply. The "rupa" ideas you introduce at the end of your post are interesting. As regards Ven Nyanaponika's remarks on memory - and I own his book - I think he is primarily concerned with why memory is not explicitly mentioned in the Abhidhamma rather than what its exact nature is. My "alternative" perspective really comes down to there being occurrences of remembering (i.e., particular cognitive events) but not memories - i.e., memory is a category of operation (possibly several, as the venerable points out) conditioned by the occurrence of earlier (some *way* earlier) cognitive events in much the same way as kamma vipaka can occur even lifetimes after the conditioning kamma, when, finally, other supporting conditions have come to pass required for the kammic promissory note to be paid. So, my tentative position is that your question "... but how about the statics, memory as a dhamma?" would be answered by this alternative theory to the effect that there are no statics in this matter, only dynamics. Your post follows below in its entirety [It's not overly long] without further comment by me. With metta, Howard In a message dated 3/18/05 6:16:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@y... writes: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi again, all - > > > > It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality > provides > >another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the > correct one. > > Hallo Howard > > Your alternative theory deserves a reward for originality, and still > sounds theravadin to me. Maybe it can help describing the dynamics of > the memory-process, but how about the statics, memory as a dhamma ? > As an Appendix to his book 'Abhidhamma studies' Nyanaponika has added > an essay with the title 'The omission of memory from the list of > dhammas'. > The book can be found on the internet, but no the appendix. I will > try to abstract the 5 pages, but I'm not sure I understand them > enough. > > Nyanaponika start with the information that 'sati' > means 'mindfulness', and that the way it's used in the Dhammasangani, > but also means 'memory'. But that meaning pays only a role in the > bachground in the list of dhammas. > Than he asked if it's possible that 'memory' is forgotten when the > list of dhammas were composed, and he rejects that possiblility: "The > list is undoubttedly the result of careful investtigation supported > by introspective intuition". > "… we can understand how 'remembering', that is connecting to the > past, is a function of perception in general. We can now formulate > the following definition: sanna is cognition as well as recognition, > both being by way of selected marks. We can summarzie our findings as > follows: > 1 Memory, as we usuaaly understand it, is not mentioned as a separate > component of a moment of consciousness because it is not a single > mental factor but a complex process. > 2 The mental factor that is most important for the arising of memory, > is perception (sanna=sanjanana), being that kind of elementary > cognition (janana) that proceeds by way of taking up, making, and > remembering (i.e., identifying) marks. > 3 …" etc > > I hope this will help you a little. Two short remarks that will not > be helpful: > - Memory has to do with the dimension of 'time' and that is as such a > difficult aspect of the Abhidhamma, as Nyanaponika also mentions. > - Memory has is - in modern thinking - also a dynamic function of the > brains. So it has a rupa-aspect; perhaps one can say 'memory' is made > of 'water', that's also only a hypothesis. > > Metta > > Joop > /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) 43364 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma in the restaurant Hi Sarah, Howard, Matheesh, Larry and all, Before the soup I read Sarah's post to Lodewijk which he found very good and sympathetic. I quote (with snips) what we found very helpful: > It’s true as you and Lodewijk said, that we live in a world with other > people and have to take responsibility including the resisting of our own > and others’ harmful deeds.... > On the contrary,as I see it, by understanding more about the dhammas > appearing in a day, we learn to be more honest and sincere about our > motives and intentions and of course, we learn to see what the real > problems in our life are. We’re so used to hiding behind the black curtain > of ignorance, that usually we’re not brave enough to face up to our > present lobha, dosa and moha. N: Lodewijk agreed with the black curtain. And so important that the Abhidhamma helps us to be more sincere as to what our cittas are. Lodewijk exclaimed: the perfection of truthfulness (he is reading this on the disc right now). Sarah: As Nina just wrote to another friend: “These > are the source of all problems in life, not the other people, not the > situation. ... > We think we or our governments can play a major role in the results that > others will experience, but this is because we have so little real > appreciation of kamma and its results and of other complex conditions...... Of > course, this doesn’t mean we don’t do our best to help others in whatever > ways we can, but we know that we have very limited abilities to really > affect outcomes and the greatest help we can offer when we have a chance > is by understanding and sharing the Dhamma with anyone who might benefit. >.... Whilst we dwell on others' unwholesome acts or intentions, > the only dhamma that can be known relates to our present mental states. > Yes, it’s quite wrong if we think it’s useless to do anything or if > everything is predetermined. .. L: Lodewijk remarked that if we say: just conditions that it can be misinterpreted as fatalism. But Sarah explained this clearly. We also talked about Howard's recent posts on concepts. He said: end quote. Citta can know or cognize anything: what is real and what is imagined, an illusion. whatever citta cognizes is at that moment object-condition for citta. The Abhidhamma is sparse in it explanation of concepts. In the Patthana concept is only mentioned under object condition, not under strong dependence of object. And under natural strong dependence-condition, such as climate and friends. Elsewhere: concept is under dhammaarammana, experienced only through the mind-door. Of course names, concepts and similes are used, but merely to explain realities. That is all. Why this scarcity? Our usual way of life is with concepts, we are thinking of them the whole day. The Tipitaka stresses: the development of understanding of the khandhas, the elements, the aayatanas, sensefields. It is hight time we learn about these, life is too short. This kind of understanding leads to detachment, to liberation. Investigation of thinking of concepts and how the citta operates in doing that does not lead to the goal. Not the concepts, but the citta which thinks should be investigated, is it kusala or akusala, even now? Life is the present moment, the present moment should be understood as it is. If citta is not intent on dana, sila or bhavana citta thinks in an akusala way, even now. The meditation subject of samatha is a concept, but then citta thinks in the wholesome way. In vipassana, the object is not a concept but a nama or rupa. The citta which thinks is nama, not self, and eventually it can be realized as such. The three characteristics of *realities* should be penetrated. *** We then talked about the six pairs, sobhana cetasikas that have to support each kusala citta. We just study these with Larry. At first Lodewijk looked somewhat incredulous when I talked about lightness crushing the sluggishness of sloth and torpor and malleability crushing the rigidity of wrong view and conceit. I explained how necessary all these sobhana cetasikas are for the functioning of kusala citta. They are all in the Dhammasangani, the first Book of the Abhidhamma. One can be so rigid and stubborn in one's views, or because of conceit. Then one does not want to listen to true Dhamma, too conceited. Lightness makes citta alert and quick to react when there is an opportunity for kusala. I gave an example of the quick reactions of Kh. Sujin and other friends whenever there is an opportunity to help here or over there. No hesitation. There are always opportunities for sila, refraining from complaining, when at the table near us someone smokes, or keeps on using his mobile phone. Or for patience, like we did during many years, having dinner with my father each Sunday, also when we found it heavy to do this. Lodewijk agreed: these six pairs seem to be theoretical but upon further reflection they can be led back to each moment of daily life, and this is true for the whole Abhidhamma he said. He wondered whether it is right to enjoy such nice food as we did in the restaurant, whether we do not accumulate more and more attachment. The Dhamma might wear away and attachment will increase. I said, no, understanding all such moments will lead to detachment. We cannot force ourselves to lead a monk's life, but understanding should be developed naturally, also of attachment. And, as I said before, the Commentary said that each good deed is nekhamma, renunciation. You renounce your own comfort. You do not seek yourself. **** Nina. 43365 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:00am Subject: Re: BB's art Hi, James, Sarah, Just to say, we're always giving things meaning in the context of our own understanding. I don't think we ever really do see things from anyone else's p.o.v. so all the sides we think we're looking at are our own and any arguments are with ourselves. How can I say "I take your meaning" when it's something I've imposed on mere visual objects? Basically, I ignore the larger background, pull out the black squiggles punctuating it & 'make sense' (or not) of them. I don't stop at just a literal meaning we might conventionally agree on, but take the gift of your words and form up a mental image of you, pretending that 'you' are not just my own figure of speech. I guess since I've just gotten off one horse, I'm fence sitting now. BB's article's about PS, but the following portion reminds me of a Sarah-RobM-Htoo and others' thread about kamma -vs- accumulations. When I first read it, VN's "vipaakacetanaa ... is a plain self-contradiction" made sense to me, but BB convinced me otherwise. [Smiling... this is good... a barrel race (a certain rodeo event & a barrel racer being the last 'real horse' I remember riding) needs three barrels... but enough of my nonsense]. peace, connie ...Ven. ~Naa.naviira derides the commentarial notion that naamaruupa in the PS formulation is vipaaka. He points out that naama includes cetanaa, volition or intention, and this leads the Commentary to speak of vipaakacetanaa: "But the Buddha has said (AN 6:63/iii,415) that kamma is cetanaa (action is intention), and the notion of vipaakacetanaa, consequently, is a plain self-contradiction." Here again the commentarial position can easily be defended. The Buddha's full statement should be considered first: "It is volition, monks, that I call kamma. Having willed (or intended), one does kamma by body, speech, or mind." The Buddha's utterance does not establish a mathematical equivalence between cetanaa and kamma, such that every instance of volition must be considered kamma. As the second part of his statement shows, his words mean that cetanaa is the decisive factor in action, that which motivates action and confers upon action the ethical significance intrinsic to the idea of kamma. This implies that the ethical evaluation of a deed is to be based on the cetanaa from which it springs, so that a deed has no kammic efficacy apart from the cetanaa to which it gives expression. The statement does not imply that cetanaa (in the non-arahant) is always and invariably kamma. In order to see that the notion of vipaakacetanaa is not self-contradictory nor even unintelligible, we need only consider the statements occasionally found in the Suttas about naamaruupa descending into the womb or taking shape in the womb (e.g. DN 15/ii,63; also #17 above). It is undeniable that the naamaruupa that "descends" into the womb is the result of past kamma, hence vipaaka. Yet this naama includes cetanaa, and hence that cetanaa too must be vipaaka. Further, the Suttas establish that cetanaa, as the chief factor in the fourth aggregate (the sa"nkhaarakkhandha), is present on every occasion of experience. A significant portion of experience is vipaaka, and thus the cetanaa intrinsic to this experience must be vipaaka. When one experiences feeling as the result of past kamma, the cetanaa coexisting with that feeling must be vipaaka too. The Commentaries squarely confront the problem of cetanaa in resultant states of consciousness and explain how this cetanaa can perform the distinct function of cetanaa without constituting kamma in the common sense of that word. (See Atthasaalinii, pp. 87-88; The Expositor (PTS trans.), pp. 116-17.) 43366 From: Andrew Levin Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:23am Subject: Re: New view on satipatthana 1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi AndrewL, > > Both Jon and I appreciated your posts a lot. I'll just respond to the > first one now and leave the others til later (probably Monday). > > --- Andrew Levin wrote: > S:> > Our hope is to understand, not to direct." > > > A: > WELL can't metta be practised intentionally by one after reading a > > book on how to arouse metta?? (Incidentally, the conditions of other > > people 'being' should be enough to extend metta, whether they are > > within one's sight or not). > ... > S: I think the conditions are other people, but also an understanding of > the characteristic of metta. It's true that for some people it's very > natural to be friendly and helpful whenever one has an opportunity. For > others, it helps to hear and read reminders. When one thinks of others?> needs instead of one's own, then metta arises naturally. Possibly. Let me tell you, though the first sprinkles of metta I gave to my friends were small, and the result of numerous wishes for their welfare, once I had loving-kindness going, it seemed love took on a mind of its own and everyone in sight I had love for. I don't know if it was metta specifically, but it was definitely non-hate. Creating more metta will still be a challenge, as will maintaining it, but reading about metta and harmlessness has helped. I have sent out thoughts of harmlessness to my ex's, over a mile past my house from my bedroom when I was first being introduced to dharma. Less rigid thought patterns, and getting metta to flow, was how it was done. This brings me to a point I should have made earlier. I still want you to know that I think people can follow the instructions from a book, from an online PDF, and create metta, and do contemplations and meditations as found in Vism. and countless other, modern, and ancient texts. In the Vism, do we not have the statement that for repulsiveness of the body meditation one should go to a good friend, and learn the skills? One has to recite the names of the body parts orally and mentally for just under a year and learn other skills as well. Then one goes to a secluded place and begins contemplating on each of the body parts until one becomes clearest. I brought up the additional example of having read a PDF where the instructor recommended one find a characteristic or manifestation of each element in a specific part of the body, say, the mouth, and go on to try to detect similar qualities throughout the body to eventually be mindful of the elements throughuot the entire body. This, too, is sort of done by a person intentionally, a deliberate practise. However this is not just waiting for conditions to come up. Additionally, you can look at the nine charnel contemplations as an example of something we must deliberately do (if we choose to do it, that is), not just fit into daily life. And even if we do do Abhidhamma in 'daily life' I read in Nina's book that we are to be mindful of realities appearing in the moment. Isn't this similar to what I proposed, being mindful in the present moment, only making my practise the focus of my life, not having my practise be recognizing something here and there in a completely diferent life. I have given you the example of sati, of how I have established mindfulness of the entire body, which transfers over to mindfulness in sitting meditation. Nina proposes to counter ignorance or aversion we need mindfulness. Again, what do you see this mindfulness as. And how would you distinguish the kind of mindfulness I talk about, being aroused intentionally, vs the kind of mindfulness that you speak about that is for one nama or rupa, but does not have the four foundations of mindfulness as its proximate cause (instead discussing the teachings?)? Please forgive me if I addressed this in one of the other two posts on this thread, I just feel it's an essesntial point. If you can, please go back to where I described this originally and think about it. We should be able to reconcile these two views, don't you think? > .... > >This is reasonable, just as it is > > reasonable to say it might take a little bit more than that, more > > conditions, but I'd say it's all fair game. Finding Buddhism and > > studying meditation from a particular meditation manual that > > emphasized 'loving-friendliness' and the generous help of others > > towards my welfare were the conditions for generating metta. These > > days it seems like going through the motions, wishing each person > > metta through the same sentences 'May he be well, happy, and peaceful. > > May no harm come to him, ... etc' is a little dry and tiring, but I'm > > going to be looking to practise metta in the future. It's one root of > > virtuous action, as I am reading (one particular mode of non-hate). > ... > S: I'm glad to hear it and I sense you genuinely are more concerned for > others?welfare these days, Andrew. And yes, I think there's a big > difference between reciting sentences and showing loving-kindness or > friendliness when we have the chance. I also appreciate that you are > grateful for the generous help of others towards your welfare. Reflecting > on others?kindness can be a kind of generosity or good will too. > ... No, no. These are days of yore. I am acting very often out of greed, and this is something I would like to work on, developing generosity and detachment, and to strengthen my renunciation. Similarly with non-hate and loving-kindness, or just plain kindness and harmlessness. > > KK. I get caught up in reading U.P. posts for long times sometimes. > > I think it could just be having to wait until I get out more for > > things to make sense, sitting online a lot doesn't conduce to the > > words of an exchange feel meaningful. > ... > S: I'm not sure what `KK?means here? > Just be patient as we all have to remind ourselves:-) Glad you've been > reading and reflecting so much. > ... KK is K is OK. Whence reflection? > > > body). It also got me wishing I knew the derived types of matter too > > but I knew the book was off-limits for studying at least for now. > ... > S: Nina's book on `Rupas?is very helpful and readable, if only for > reference. But no hurry. > ... > > Re: Abhidhamma and moha & dosa > <...> > > Isn't being able to tell whether it's dosa or moha part of seeing the > > reality? And thus study to clear up the issue a legitimate pursuit? > ... > S: Good question. Of course it's very legitimate and it helps to consider > more about the different characteristics. But in the end, the `study?is > of the present dhamma (reality) and if that reality is trying to > distinguish states, then that thinking is what should be known. > Right but can't we endeavor to learn about different realities by way of thinking ourselves into learning about them, say, by reading about the characteristics of dosa, moha, and lobha, in Nina's 'Abhidhamma in Daily Life?' > After I wrote to you, I posted this extract from `Cetasikas?which touches > on the same point, but here to knowing vitakka vs vicara: > > "The more we study the realities which are taught in the Abhidhamma, the > more we see that there are many different phenomena which each have their > own characteristic. They appear one at a time, but when we try to name > them there is thinking of a concept instead of mindfulness of a > characteristic. > :-/ I'm with you for non-conceptual awareness, but would you believe me if a noble one told me to note 'aversion, aversion' where it appears? > Sometimes a reality which thinks may appear and then we may doubt whether > it is vitakka or vicåra. It is useless to try to find out which reality > appears because at such a moment there is no awareness. Thinking has a > characteristic which can be realized when it appears and then there is no > need to name it vitakka or vicåra.?> > S: In other words, we need to distinguish between being aware of just what > is appearing and trying to put it in a pigeon-hole, I think. We read > similes about the ingredients in a curry, for example, to show that only a > Buddha can really distinguish all the various ingredients exactly as they > arise and appear. > .... No pigeon hole. Just know it for what it is. By studying nama and rupa and how they can appear, function, and manifestation. > <...> > > This makes me think.. what kind of ignorance are we talking about > > here? Can ignorance of the true nature of reality manifest as > > delusion, that is, a skewed view of some objects, instead of a proper > > one, or is that part of ignorance itself. When I feel that darkness > > is it ignorance built up of the true nature of realities, manifesting > > as just (dark) non-knowledge of the way things are? > .... > S: Yes, it's not knowing. Whenever the javana cittas are not rooted in > non-attachment, non-aversion and possibly wisdom, they are rooted in > ignorance. There is no awareness of any kind at such times. On our recent > trip to India, we talked about the `black curtain of ignorance?and this > is similar to the darkness you mention. Most of the time we are living in > darkness and the true nature of realities are hidden from view by the > black curtain. The task of wisdom is to shed light or pull aside that > curtain. > > Beginning to recognise this darkness or non-knowledge of the way things > are is a kind of wisdom in itself, I believe. > Eh. It feels way more 'dark' darkness than 'wisdom' darkness. But maybe it's a start. > Great points and discussion. I'll look forward to more later. Meantime, > keep writing! > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== Sorry if this one's a little messy, I had to rush to get the post in. 45-50 minutes for computer group. Bye A.L. 43367 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:38am Subject: Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi all - In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? If there were mindstates with sa~n~na present but not vedana, yet in every state with vedana also there were sa~n~na, then the asymmetrical dependence would be clear. But this not being the case, the matter is unclear. I would like a clarification of this if possible. 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) 43368 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 11:51am Subject: Re: BB's art Hi Connie, Thanks for the post, which you addressed to me, but I am not quite sure how to respond. It seems as if you are maybe just thinking out loud? Not sure. Anyway, I will throw in a few comments to express my appreciation for your efforts. No need to respond if you don't feel like it: Connie: Just to say, we're always giving things meaning in the context of our own understanding. I don't think we ever really do see things from anyone else's p.o.v. so all the sides we think we're looking at are our own and any arguments are with ourselves. James: Yes, I agree with you…but we have to try. What else can we do? Maybe all of us should just shut up and close down this group? Maybe so, but then Sarah would have nothing to do in her spare time! ;-)) (Just kidding). Connie: When I first read it, VN's "vipaakacetanaa ... is a plain self-contradiction" made sense to me, but BB convinced me otherwise. James: I know what you mean! For some reason, I find myself agreeing with both of them. It is very confusing. Really, I have lost interest in the two articles and I don't think I will post any more about it. Ultimately, it comes down to an interpretation of Pali words and both sides find sufficient sutta quotes to defend their particular position. Are they both right? Hmmm…I don't know. I just wish someone had asked the Buddha to more thoroughly explain DO before he entered parinibbana- but you know where wishing gets ya! ;-) Metta, James PS. BTW, I found BK's book `Contemplation of the Mind' to be incredibly boring and confusing. Honestly, I got halfway through and couldn't finish reading it. Please, don't judge the value and skill of meditation based on that book. In my experience, it is the worst book on meditation I have ever read. :( 43369 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na In a message dated 3/18/2005 9:45:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: Hi all - In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? If there were mindstates with sa~n~na present but not vedana, yet in every state with vedana also there were sa~n~na, then the asymmetrical dependence would be clear. But this not being the case, the matter is unclear. I would like a clarification of this if possible. With metta, Howard Hi Howard Check out Connected Discourses of the Buddha pages 1531 - 1532. The two Suttas on Dwelling. Reading these suttas one has to wonder if perception is a "universal." At any rate, I think feeling is the bare experience while perception and thinking are progressively more complex mental operations. Feeling is the "base" IMO, and for all practical purposes, perceptions are conjoined with it because they are so closely linked. But perceptions are still outgrowths from feelings as I understand it. However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there is feeling with perception as condition." In my way of thinking about that...an initial feeling instigated the perception and the perception, in turn, is a condition instigating feelings based on that. TG 43370 From: Frank Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 0:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, the Buddha says something to the effect of: 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant and a worldling in that instant is no different according to my understanding. upasaka@a... wrote: Hi all - In the Honeyball Sutta the Buddha says that what one feels one perceives (or recognizes); that is, sa~n~na depends on vedana. Nowhere, I believe, is it said that vedana depends on sa~n~na. Now according to Abhidhamma, vedana and sa~n~na are universals that *co-occur* in every mindstate. Given that this is so, I wonder in what what sense there holds the asymmetrical dependence of sa~n~na on vedana. In what sense is vedana requisite for sa~n~na but not vice-versa? If there were mindstates with sa~n~na present but not vedana, yet in every state with vedana also there were sa~n~na, then the asymmetrical dependence would be clear. But this not being the case, the matter is unclear. I would like a clarification of this if possible. 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) 43371 From: matheesha Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 1:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma challenge Hi Nina, N:>Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. M: Yes, memory is a phenomena which the suttas dont seem to elaborate on. I would like to think that the dhamma is ultimately experiential. If the sanna of every pancaskanda which arises contains past memories (have I understood it wrongly?) then one must be give rise to all memories each time sanna comes into being (maybe not?). Nevertheless it is good to have an abhidhammic explanation for it. I also wondered about how memories form. Does it have an element of attachment (upadana) do you think? (ie - is it an act of attachment?). N:The maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences > nibbaana. M: Few questions here. How can an unconditioned element be experienced? Shouldnt there be no experience of it? (ie- identified by not having felt anything ..sort of like sleep?) Does the lokuttara vipaka citta mean that phala is arising as an Effect of the magga citta, (which is the Cause)? Does abhidhamma explain why defilements are eradicated with magga citta? Is it possible for say ..a sothapanna to experience phala citta again on a later date at will? I have heard this mentioned in some schools of theravada meditation. N:> Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent > stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, > the stage of the arahat. M: Interestingly i wonder if it is possible for there to be more than just the 4 x 2 magga-phala citta depending on the maturity of the mental faculties of the practitioner. But I would suspect that the answer is no :) The suttas seem to suggest that there maybe other ways of getting rid of defilements as well. Would the abhidhamma support this? The suttas also seem to suggest that nibbana is possible by just using void/emptiness/letting go as an object of meditation. Would abhidhamma insist on udaya-vya nana/insight knowledge of impermenence to give rise to magga-phala citta? N:> However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path > leading to enlightenment. M: Yes, but I feel my needs are met in that department :) I'm trying to find out what abidhamma provides as explanation for things we experience while on the path. Thank you, Metta matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Matheesha, > op 17-03-2005 08:33 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@h...: > >> N: We have accumulated so much attachment and ignorance. > > > > M:This idea of accumilation is interesting. Does the word skandas > > refer to the fact that certain things can accumilate? If they do they > > must be the same as thinking habits/memory is it not? > N: Each citta (viññaa.nakkhandha) falls away but since it is immediately > succeeded by the next one there are conditions for accumulating good and bad > inclinations (the formations khandha), all experiences, all we learnt, from > moment to moment, from life to life. > When we think of life as an uninterrupted series of cittas, the fact of > accumulation becomes more understandable. > Indeed, you can notice that habits are formed, what you experienced is > remembered. Saññaa that accompanies each citta remembers. We can remember > things that happened long ago. What has been accumulated is a condition for > the arising again of akusala citta and cetasikas, and of kusala citta and > sobhana cetasikas. Paññaa, a sobhana cetasika, is also accumulated and can > develop from life to life. > Kamma, good and evil deeds, are accumulated and can produce result, even in > future lives. > M: What does abhidhamma state about magga and phala citta. This is > > another area i would like to explore. > N: When paññaa has been developed in stages of insight it can become > accomplished to the degree that enlightenment can be attained. The > maggacitta eradicates defilements and experiences the unconditioned element, > nibbaana. The phala citta is the lokuttara vipaakacitta that succeeds the > maggacitta immediately in the same process, and this also experiences > nibbaana. > Since defilements are deeply rooted, they are eradicated in the subsequent > stages of enlightenment, until they are all eradicated at the fourth stage, > the stage of the arahat. > However, for us now it is more important to understand the right Path > leading to enlightenment. > Nina. 43372 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:16:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > Check out Connected Discourses of the Buddha pages 1531 - 1532. The two > Suttas on Dwelling. Reading these suttas one has to wonder if perception is > a > "universal." > ------------------------------- Howard: Thanks. I'll check them. ------------------------------ > > At any rate, I think feeling is the bare experience while perception and > thinking are progressively more complex mental operations. > ----------------------------- Howard: What you describe here sounds more like vi~n~nana to me. Vedana is experiencing as pleasant, unpleasant, or affectively neutral, I believe. ------------------------------ Feeling is the "base" > > IMO, and for all practical purposes, perceptions are conjoined with it > because > they are so closely linked. But perceptions are still outgrowths from > feelings as I understand it. > > However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there is > feeling with perception as condition." > ------------------------------- Howard: Interesting! I'll definitely ck those suttas. -------------------------------- In my way of thinking about that...an > > initial feeling instigated the perception and the perception, in turn, is a > condition instigating feelings based on that. > > TG > > ======================= 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) 43373 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 8:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Frank - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:56:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, frank@4... writes: > > I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, > the Buddha says something to the effect of: > > 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. > 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) > 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) > ------------------------------------ Howard: (1) Occurs in the Honeyball Sutta, and (2) is transitively implied in that same sutta. As to (3), I'm not so sure. Certainly in dependent origination, the reverse dependency holds. Of course, treating the scheme as a wheel every link depends on every other, but the primary dependency seems to be sankhara --> phassa. Can you possibly find the sutta source for (3)? ------------------------------------- > > To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, > feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. > ------------------------------------ Howard: It makes it possible that they occur simultaneously, but not necessary. This isn't a logical implication. That condition A is needed for conditions B, C, and D doen't imply that B, C, and D be simultaneous. ------------------------------------ > > The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so > frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), > > So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of > the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one > has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its > siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that > instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant > and a worldling in that instant is no different according to my understanding. > > > ====================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 43374 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:06pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Dear Connie, Nina, Rob, Kel & others, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > Dear Nina, Robert, Kel, > > Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. > "There are five benefits of walking, monks. What five? Endurance for a > long journey; endurance for striving; smallness of obstacles; thorough > digestion of food and drink taken; samaadhi obtained from walking lasts a > long time. These, indeed, monks, are five benefits of walking." This is > the ninth. > > thank you, > connie Azita: Can anyone tell me what is meant by 'smallness of obstacles' in the context of the above? It seems to me to be the odd one out. Maybe when the monks walked, they used a special path, one with no fallen trees to climb over or creeks to cross, as is the situation when I go bushwalking. 43375 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi again, TG - In a message dated 3/18/05 3:16:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > However, in the same suttas mentioned above, the Buddha does say "there is > feeling with perception as condition." =================== I have read the suttas. I'm not so sure that the "conditioning" is quite what we mean by that. The commentary given there says that feeling conditioned by thinking pertains to the 1st jhana, and feeling conditioned by perception pertains to jhanas 2 through 7. Now, the 1st jhana is strongly characterized by vitakka and vicara, and the 8th jhana is that of "neither perception nor not perception". So, I think that "with condition" in these suttas may carry a meaning more along the lines of "associated with". As to not all mindstates involving sa~n~na, well, I suppose that 8th-jhana states might fall into that category. But I doubt it. Sa~n~na is not a one-dimensional operation. It seems to be a two-mode operation. At times, sa~n~na does "marking". At other times it does recognition. Now it seems to me that sa~n~na must be operative as a marking operation during the 8th jhana, because upon withdrawal from the jhana, a review of the states in the 8th jhana is possible (as spelled out in the Anupada Sutta). 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) 43376 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 9:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na In a message dated 3/18/2005 2:39:52 PM Pacific Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: I have read the suttas. I'm not so sure that the "conditioning" is quite what we mean by that. The commentary given there says that feeling conditioned by thinking pertains to the 1st jhana, and feeling conditioned by perception pertains to jhanas 2 through 7. Now, the 1st jhana is strongly characterized by vitakka and vicara, and the 8th jhana is that of "neither perception nor not perception". So, I think that "with condition" in these suttas may carry a meaning more along the lines of "associated with". As to not all mindstates involving sa~n~na, well, I suppose that 8th-jhana states might fall into that category. But I doubt it. Sa~n~na is not a one-dimensional operation. It seems to be a two-mode operation. At times, sa~n~na does "marking". At other times it does recognition. Now it seems to me that sa~n~na must be operative as a marking operation during the 8th jhana, because upon withdrawal from the jhana, a review of the states in the 8th jhana is possible (as spelled out in the Anupada Sutta). With metta, Howard Hi Howard That all sounds reasonable to me. I don't necessarily follow the notes as gospel or limit an interpretation to the notes, but the notes sounded reasonable too. Regarding the 8th jhana, the notes don't help because its ambiguous. The Sutta says no perception, whereas the 8th jhana is sort of a fuzzy one. TG 43377 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Frank In a message dated 3/18/2005 12:56:48 PM Pacific Standard Time, frank@4... writes: I don't know what the abidhamma says, but in either M or S nikaya, the Buddha says something to the effect of: 1) with contact (phassa) as a requisite condition, there is feeling. 2) with contact as a requisite condition, there is perception (sanna) 3) with contact as a requisite condition, there is volition (sankhara) To me, this implies that once there is contact/phassa/sensory impingement, feeling+perception+volition occur simultaneously. The critical part of the dependent origination formula referenced so frequently (with feeling as requisite condition, there is craving), So my take on this is that when phassa/contact occurs, you get a cocktail of the 3 aggregates feeling+volition+perception that arise as a result. If one has deluded perception+volition, then the result would be craving or its siamese twin aversion. If one has correct perception + correct volition in that instant, then the dukkha chain breaks down. Feeling aggregate in an arahant and a worldling in that instant is no different according to my understanding. TG I like this exposition and I really like the way you described it as a "cocktail" of aggregates. Very funny for a teaching that doesn't look to favorably at drinking. Anyway, you're probably right with all you wrote but I have one other idea to consider. Although "contact" is indeed the condition for feeling, perception, and mental formations ... perhaps its not "the same contact." Perhaps its a series of very quick cascading contacts. And perhaps its both depending on the states in question. I.E., some arise simultaneously and some arise in rapid sequence yet both because of contact. TG 43378 From: gazita2002 Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:09pm Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina Dear Nina and Matheesha, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Dear Azita and Matheesha, > Azita wrote:'Its hard for me to 'match up' what I read and my everyday life, > if you know what I mean?' > Matheesha, this is also the point you touched on when you said: 'So i wonder > if > abhidhamma is an predominantly theoretical body of work commenting > on the actual'. > This is something that cannot be explained in one post, but it is very > useful for all of us if you bring up what seems theoretical, and also what > you see as an inconsistency between sutta and abhidhamma. It is an > opportunity to go deeper into the subject of Abhidhamma. Azita: I feel like I make no progress :-( even going backwards. For example, I'm reading dhamma books, listening to tapes and finding it all very interesting and understandable. Sometimes after reading/listening there arises a depressed feeling, a flat feeling, a frustration that I can't take that understanding with me into doing the everyday things that one has to do to survive - shopping for food, cleaning, working - all the things I don't really want to do. Despite telling myself these things have to be done, the impatience and bad feeling just seems to grow and last longer, Now that I've started my whinge, I'll keep going and get it off my chest. I find trying to communicate via internet so frustrating, I actually feel physically ill if I spend much time sitting here in front of the computor. I can call you my friends but I don't even know what half of you look like. Maybe this is what is meant by conditions, for example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma. There doesn't feel like much kusala in my life, those moments are very short-lived, if they arise at all. Patience [I have none], courage [what's that?], good cheer [never heard of it] Azita 43379 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 3:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi Ken, --------------- C: > So beings, only exist for a billionth of a second? > --------------- K > Yes! It can be said that there are ultimately no beings, however, it is still possible to talk about them without contradicting the anatta doctrine. There are several places in the texts where we read, "When the various components that make up a chariot are correctly assembled, a chariot is said to exist. So too, when the five khandhas are correctly assembled (arise together in the same moment) a living being is said to exist." (Or words to that effect. (I can find a reference if you want one.)) Beings have a lifespan of just one moment because there is only the present moment. This is logical when you consider that the past no longer exists and the future has never existed. But it is hard to accept, and so people conveniently put logic aside and say, "Yes, but, there is a continuum and, therefore, there is a sense in which we do continue to exist." An Abhidhamma student would tell them, "No buts! There is only the present moment." ............... So beings can't have existed in the past? And, the future doesn't exit? Have you experience this, or do you not experience? When you look in the mirror in the morning, do your image disappear after a billionth of a second, or a moment? ************************** ------------------------ C: > when you say "namas and rupas " I think -- Mind and body/flesh. ------------------------ K > When you say, "Mind and body/flesh," an Abhidhamma student thinks nama and rupa. The difference is; only nama and rupa exist in the present moment. When the mind is thought of as a persistent thing receiving information, processing it and creating ideas, then that mind is a mere concept (which does not exist in ultimate reality). The same applies to flesh: a piece of meat - something that can be seen, touched, smelt and tasted - is a mere idea created by the mind. In the ultimate reality of the present moment, there can be only one object of consciousness. If it is a physical object, it can be a visible rupa, audible rupa, gustatory rupa, olfactory rupa, or one of the three kinds of tactile rupa. .............................. In ultimate reality there is space, emptiness, but you may not find it, unless you search for the essence. -------------------------- C: > And Lobha ??? that does not mean Buddha's teachings, it means what ever you then me define it to be. When I read "'I am enjoying this cup of coffee'" I also think of the Buddha's teachings -- What is "I" ...., How does "I" enjoy ..., does coffee cause enjoyment, -------------------------- When an Abhidhamma student reads, "I am enjoying this cup of coffee," he knows there have been momentary experiences of sense objects and mind objects (one at a time) and moments of thought creation (conceptualizing). In many of those moments, the mental factor known as lobar has arisen, performed its function (of attachment to its object) and fallen away. The person who believes he is enjoying a cup of coffee is not being aware of one of those moments of lobar. He is aware of a different (illusory) reality in which there is a human being enjoying a (simultaneously) delicious, hot, aromatic drink. ------------------------------ C: > I am noticing you separate "the conditioned and conventional reality." Why? (This is a new approach to me) ------------------------------- k> I hope it will be clear by now that conventional reality is illusory - the product of thinking. Conditioned reality is the five khandhas as they arise in this present, fleeting moment. They can arise in one of six ways, or, as the Buddha said, "as one of the six worlds." There is one world for each of the six kinds of consciousness - seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and mentally cognising. In a moment of seeing (the eye world) the vinnana-khandha is represented by eye consciousness, sankhara- khandha is represented by eye contact (and other mental factors), sanna-khandha by perception of visible object, vedana-khandha by feeling arising from eye contact and rupa-khandha by the eye base and visible object. (There might be one or two technical mistakes in that, but you'll get the general picture.) ........................ Have you experienced this, and how would you describe that experience? ********************************* KH: > >As the ancient commentaries say: "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found; The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there; Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it; The Path is, but no traveler on it is seen." > ............ C: > If no-one suffers than it is silly to try and end suffering, it effects no-one. ------------------ Exactly! When the anatta characteristic has been directly known (not just read about in books), concern for worldly existence and non- existence fades away. Consequently, there will be conditions for Nibbana to become the object of consciousness. When that happens, various causes of suffering will be permanently destroyed. So, trying doesn't enter into it. Suffering is ended by the conditioned dhammas of the Eight-fold Path. ................................ It is true that having no concern for worldly existence and non-existence, the various causes of suffering will (change "will" to "can") be permanently destroyed. (add: however, this is only in the individual, not necessarily in all that comes in contact with the individual). §§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§ ------------------------------------ C: > But then, are we in agreement that the five aggregates exist? ------------------------------------ k> Of course we are: we have been talking about them for weeks. :-) (I have been calling them the five khandhas.) However, I have been trying to stress that they exist for only the briefest possible moment. Even the Eight-fold Path is just a fleeting moment in which the five khandhas exist in their supramundane form. ...................... how have you experienced these briefest possible moments? How have you experience the ending of your existence? CharlesD 43380 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, TG - In a message dated 3/18/05 5:55:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@a... writes: > Hi Howard > > That all sounds reasonable to me. I don't necessarily follow the notes as > gospel or limit an interpretation to the notes, but the notes sounded > reasonable > too. Regarding the 8th jhana, the notes don't help because its ambiguous. > The Sutta says no perception, whereas the 8th jhana is sort of a fuzzy one. > > TG > ================ Yep. We see this the same way. 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) 43381 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions In reality, the point of the sutras is to not cling. Clinging to the Right View is clinging none the less. I have always interpreted paradoxes, like the one mentioned below, as alluding to a graded path where things (ideas) change as you progress along the path. Also in this case, the real issue is not so much clinging, it is clinging to knowledge will give rise to feeling "you" have/are "inferior or superlative" .... ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop Sent: Wednesday, 09 March, 2005 13:53 Subject: [dsg] Having no opinions Not clinging to views is one of the central topics of the Teachings, especially not clinging to any doctrine of a self. Of course one should not keep 'false' views; but in some suttas the Buddha states that one should not keep any view, any opinion at all. For example verse 5 of the Atthaka Vagga, part of the Sutta-Nipata, called 'Supreme' (see below) doesn't give much room (or no room at all) for the positive value for having a 'right view', as stated in other parts of the Teachings of the Buddha. In the explanation to the translation I have read that some comments to this paradox state that this text should be taken at face value; other readers say these verses of the Atthaka Vagga should be further interpreted. I'm afraid that 'further interpreted' means : render harmless I like this Vagga: this suttas make having any orthodoxy impossible. ... Supreme - Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV-5) When dwelling on views as "supreme," a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, &, from that, calls all others inferior and so he's not free from disputes. When he sees his advantage in what's seen, heard, sensed, or in precepts & practices, seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. That, too, say the skilled, is a binding knot: that in dependence on which you regard another as inferior. So a monk shouldn't be dependent on what's seen, heard, or sensed, or on precepts & practices; nor should he conjure a view in the world in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; shouldn't think himself inferior or superlative. Abandoning what he had embraced, abandoning self, not clinging, he doesn't make himself dependent even in connection with knowledge; doesn't follow a faction among those who are split; doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. One's who isn't inclined toward either side -becoming or not-, here or beyond- who has no entrenchment when considering what's grasped among doctrines, hasn't the least preconceived perception with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. By whom, with what, should he be pigeonholed here in the world? -this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. They don't conjure, don't yearn, don't adhere even to doctrines. A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, gone to the beyond -Such- doesn't fall back. 43382 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Jon, All you have to do is die. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jonothan Abbott Sent: Thursday, 10 March, 2005 14:05 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions Jon Wrote: While I agree generally with James' reply about the important difference between holding opinions about things and the knowledge that comes from direct experience, I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote really says what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For example, it talks about <>, <>, wrong view about becoming or not, etc. I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions is really attainable. Joop wrote: >Not clinging to views is one of the central topics of the Teachings, >especially not clinging to any doctrine of a self. >Of course one should not keep 'false' views; but in some suttas the >Buddha states that one should not keep any view, any opinion at all. ... > > >Supreme - Paramatthaka Sutta (Sutta-Nipata, IV-5) > >When dwelling on views as "supreme," >a person makes them the utmost thing in the world, >&, from that, calls all others inferior >and so he's not free from disputes. >When he sees his advantage >in what's seen, heard, sensed, >or in precepts & practices, >seizing it there he sees all else as inferior. > >That, too, say the skilled, >is a binding knot: that in dependence on which >you regard another as inferior. >So a monk shouldn't be dependent >on what's seen, heard, or sensed, >or on precepts & practices; >nor should he conjure a view in the world >in connection with knowledge or precepts & practices; >shouldn't take himself to be "equal"; >shouldn't think himself >inferior or superlative. > >Abandoning what he had embraced, >abandoning self, not clinging, >he doesn't make himself dependent >even in connection with knowledge; >doesn't follow a faction >among those who are split; >doesn't fall back on any view whatsoever. > >One's who isn't inclined toward either side >—becoming or not-, here or beyond— >who has no entrenchment >when considering what's grasped among doctrines, >hasn't the least preconceived perception >with regard to what's seen, heard, or sensed. >By whom, with what, >should he be pigeonholed here in the world? >—this brahmin who hasn't adopted views. > >They don't conjure, don't yearn, >don't adhere even to doctrines. >A brahmin not led by precepts or practices, >gone to the beyond >—Such— doesn't fall back. 43383 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions The point of the suttra is clinging, clinging to even what you know is true. Personally, I think the Buddha said this to remind us of the relatives of even views, the possibility that a new view may come along and be more correct for the current situation, and how all views can also lead one into suffering (causing it or feeling it). CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: Joop To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 17 March, 2005 11:36 Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions In # 43116 Jon said: "I'm not so sure that the sutta you quote [Paramatthaka Sutta, Sutta- Nipata, IV-5] really says what you say it does ('no opinions'). I think it's more about the danger of clinging to opinions or ideas, having preconceived notions, etc. For example, it talks about <>, <>, wrong view about becoming or not, etc. " Jon: "I have my doubts as to whether the ideal of having no opinions is really attainable." Joop: I agree with that (psychological based) guess. All I can say is: I have no ideals; I only discovered that most opinions that are arsing in me, are FUTILE. So I try not to cling to them." In # 43266 Sarah (with Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Citta) said: "This sutta is quoted a lot and usually in support of the same `view' about having no opinions which you hold. Let me share some of my reflections here. 1. I understand that the views referred to in the sutta are wrong views (micha ditthi). The Pali given is `di.t.thi', translated as `dogmatic view' by Saddhatissa. Unless di.t.thi is modified by samma, it nearly always refers to wrong views. For example, we read that "the Perfect One is free from any theory or view(ditthigata)". Of course this refers to wrong views. (see dictionary notes below*). As it says in the dictionary "The rejection of speculative views and theories is a prominent feature in A chapter of the Sutta-Nipáta, the Atthaka-Vagga." This is the chapter of Eights which the Paramatthaka Sutta is from." Joop: Nothing of course; 'of course' does not exist. Yes, the sutta is about rekecting speculative views and theories, but the text of it states more than that. More than is stated in some other Teachings of the Buddha. I accept the tension that exists between suttas and I know many people cannot handle this kind of inconstistencies. Sarah: "2. When there is samma ditthi (right view), there is of course no speculation, conceit or greed involved, but instead the direct knowledge (or panna, understanding) of paramatha dhammas (highest truths)." Joop: I agree, but I should stop this statement with "understanding)"; because one can think to easy about the lists of 89 cittas, 28 (or another number) rupas etc when you talk about 'paramatha dhammas'. Sarah: "4. I'd like to stress that samma ditthi (right view) is a synonym for panna (right understanding). In other words, right view is not a speculative opinion of any kind, but direct knowledge of dhammas." Joop: Yes, that's very important. But that's only true from the moment I experience any 'right view' from within. Till that moment they are, when I read about them in dsg or other texts, theories that may be correct. And I take this vague notion that thy are correct, with me in my meditation/comtemplations, with the open mind and the attitude that these - in essence still conventional theories - got right views in the highest sense TO ME. (I add that 'TO ME' to it because 'right views' don't exist as such - that essentialism - they can only exist in individuals) In fact that more or less the same as what you say: "Of course there are many degrees and kinds of panna or right view, not just direct insight. Reflecting wisely on kamma or on the Truths, even at a theoretical level can be with right view or panna. This is pariyatti (wise reflecting and consideration) which has to develop in order for patipatti(direct knowledge or understanding) to arise and develop." Joop: Perhaps there is another misunderstanding in our discussion about the terms 'view, opinion, theory" Sarah: There's no one who can have a view, but both wrong view (di.t.thi) and right view (pa~n~naa) are mental factors which are real and arise." Joop: You talk about wrong views and right views. That one dichotomy. But when I use in my brains the (dutch word for) view, I think many time more 'opinion' or 'theory' and than the dichotomy is: correct view versus incorrect view. And 'incorrect' is a theory when it's falsified (Popper). When I say that as an effect of my meditation I less and less have opinions, then a third dichotomy is playing a role: useful opinions and useless opinions. Let's for example take the opinion I had for years and still have not left behind me totally: 'George W. Bush is an dangerous idiot" I have arguments that this is a correct theory (his refusal to participate in the Kyoto-protocol for example; Irak) It was a useful opinion two years ago when I with others tried to prevent that the Netherlands participated in the Irak-war. But now I feel it's useless, because it's futile. That why it's a wrong view, because there is hate in me when I state this opinion. Another example, from Joseph Goldsteins book 'One Dhamma: the emerging Western Buddhism' (I only have a dutch translation so I had to translate it back to english) about attachment to opinions. It's about a Tibetan Rinpoche of whom was stated that he was an incarnation of Sariputta. He thought: that is not possible because Sariputta was (according the Pali Canon) an arahat so he is not reborn so nobody in this century can be an incarnation of him. So after some time thinking about that he concluded to have no opinion about this topic anymore. I still have problems with that, I think Goldstein is - partly without realizing that - converted from a Theravada to a Tibetan Buddhist. But maybe he is firther on his path than I am. Joop 43384 From: Charles DaCosta Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 4:35pm Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Is this question about what psychologist call the subconsciousness. If it is, check the Tibetan version of the Abhidhamma. Trumpa (a Lama) called it the mental gossip, one of the things that meditation should quite. CharlesD ----- Original Message ----- From: upasaka@a... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, 17 March, 2005 14:46 Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi again, Ken et al - 3/17/05 8:28:54 AM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... writes: > It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the > form of > mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the > > data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see > any > such things put forward in Abhidhamma. Sure there is sa~n~na mentioned, a > bundle of operations that "mark", and compare and contrast marks, but there > seems > to be no mention of the nature of these "marks" or of their being passed > along. Is this just a gap in the Abhidhamma (or our record of the > Abhidhamma), or > do recollection (remembering) and other such mental operations magically occu > r > (via a form of Buddhist time travel! ;-) with no data passed along on which > to > operate? ========================== A thought that has occurred to me in regard to the nature of "marks" that are passed along is that they might in fact not be namas, but a category of mind-created rupas, knowable only through the mind door (as is the case with "the water element", i.e., liquidity/cohesion). [Such rupic nature of "marks", in fact, would not surprise me, as it harmonizes well with the modern, neurology-based theories of memory that presume "memory traces" of various sorts "stored" in the nervous system.] Howard 43385 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi Howard, What would you say is the message of the Honeyball Sutta? My interpretation is that perception is the root of conflict. There seems to be the implication that a perception is the object of desire. Seeing that perception opens the door to underlying tendencies of lust, aversion, views, and ultimately conflict, "then nothing is found there to delight in, welcome and hold to", and consequently "these evil, unwholesome states cease without remainder". Larry 43386 From: connie Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:41pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Hi, Azita, > Gradual Sayings, V, III, 29 (Book of the Fives). The alley-walk. > "There are five benefits of walking, monks. What five? Endurance for a > long journey; endurance for striving; smallness of obstacles; thorough > digestion of food and drink taken; samaadhi obtained from walking lasts a > long time. These, indeed, monks, are five benefits of walking." This is > the ninth. Azita: Can anyone tell me what is meant by 'smallness of obstacles' in the context of the above? It seems to me to be the odd one out. Connie: My apologies. I wasn't sure how to translate appaabaadho. I think it should be something more like "little affliction" or "few illnesses". Say, that 'endurance for a long journey' thing, isn't that patience, courage and good cheer? Hope you're feeling better. 43387 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma in the restaurant Nina: "Investigation of thinking of concepts and how the citta operates in doing that does not lead to the goal." Hi Nina, I think it is important to recognize concepts. So much of my life is involved with trying to grasp concept as though it were a solid reality that it is always a surprise to notice this, that concept is concept. Larry 43388 From: Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 2:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Vedana and Sa~n~na Hi, Larry - In a message dated 3/18/05 8:40:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... writes: > Hi Howard, > > What would you say is the message of the Honeyball Sutta? > > My interpretation is that perception is the root of conflict. There > seems to be the implication that a perception is the object of desire. > Seeing that perception opens the door to underlying tendencies of lust, > aversion, views, and ultimately conflict, "then nothing is found there > to delight in, welcome and hold to", and consequently "these evil, > unwholesome states cease without remainder". > > Larry > ========================= I would say the message is as follows: It is our cognitive and emotional proliferating that leads to our distress, that papa~nca comes about by a process of dependent origination with sa~n~na as most immediate condition but with the most fundamental condition being ignorance, and when that is uprooted wisdom SEES that "with regard to the cause whereby the perceptions & categories of complication assail a person, THERE IS NOTHING TO RELISH (emphasis mine) ... [and] that is where these evil, unskillful things cease without remainder." 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) 43389 From: kelvin_lwin Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:16pm Subject: Re: alleywalk Hi, Azita & Connie > Connie: My apologies. I wasn't sure how to translate appaabaadho. I > think it should be something more like "little affliction" or "few > illnesses". kel: I think walking makes one healthy, I remember it in Burmese vaguely. - kel 43390 From: buddhatrue Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:52pm Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga XIV, 142 - Nina --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Dear Nina and Matheesha, > Azita: I feel like I make no progress :-( even going backwards. > For example, I'm reading dhamma books, listening to tapes and > finding it all very interesting and understandable. Sometimes after > reading/listening there arises a depressed feeling, a flat feeling, a > frustration that I can't take that understanding with me into doing > the everyday things that one has to do to survive - shopping for > food, cleaning, working - all the things I don't really want to do. > Despite telling myself these things have to be done, the impatience > and bad feeling just seems to grow and last longer, > Now that I've started my whinge, I'll keep going and get it > off my chest. I find trying to communicate via internet so > frustrating, I actually feel physically ill if I spend much time > sitting here in front of the computor. > I can call you my friends but I don't even know what half of > you look like. Maybe this is what is meant by conditions, for > example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm > unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma. > There doesn't feel like much kusala in my life, those moments > are very short-lived, if they arise at all. > > Patience [I have none], courage [what's that?], good cheer > [never heard of it] > Azita Hi Azita, Your post isn't addressed to me, but I feel your suffering and frustration and thought I might give you some words of encouragement. After reading so much dhamma material, or practicing so much meditation/mindfulness, it is natural to look at those who have walked the path before you and have a feeling of defeat. Again, like all the suffering in life, this comes from craving: craving to be enlightened, craving to be wise, craving to be happy, craving to be peaceful, craving to be respected, and craving to be satisfied. The thing is to not judge yourself for this craving ("Oh, I shouldn't be craving like this! I know better! I am such a failure as a Buddhist!") because craving is natural. The thing is to just be mindful of the craving, over and over again, until it eventually becomes less and less powerful. The Buddha taught that as a water jug is filled drop by drop with water as is the purification of people's minds: drop by drop. I know what you mean by the banality of everyday life; it can become very frustrating. Who wants to do the laundry when there is so much Buddhist practice to be done?? Though the `Mary Poppins Buddhist' ;- ) will tell you that doing the laundry should be a part of the Buddhist practice, that is usually easier said than done. To be more realistic, I think you should just establish good habits and a daily schedule of Buddhist study, mundane work, and meditation- and try to have as much mindfulness as possible throughout all. Most importantly, don't compare yourself to others and realize that progress comes little by little. You write, "for example, so much good dhamma discussion on this forum but i'm unable/unwilling to access it due to my past kamma" and I don't think you are correct in this assumption. Just remember, people can talk dhamma a lot easier than they can practice it. In other words, there are many here who can `Talk the talk, but don't always walk the walk'. Try not to compare yourself to others or judge yourself. Good luck and I hope you start feeling better real soon. :-) Metta, James 43391 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: alleywalk Dear Walkers, Just finished teaching and needing to ‘run’ off through the Wanchai alleys to the Rugby Sevens for some fun (trust me, James, I do have just a little life outside DSG:-). Meanwhile,there may be more here of relevance or food for further discussion. I happened by chance to come across one of these posts the other day by chance, so I’ll quote from it below while I’m at it. Will catch up later. (LK, I’m very interested in yr luminous quote –more next week, many thx). Metta, Sarah ====== Walking & Walking meditation 14172, 14223, 31223, 33542, 35473, 35864, 41831, 41931, 42182 Jon: >As Nina commented in her post, 'walking meditation' here is probably a translation of the Pali 'cankamana'/'cankamati'. According to the dictionaries, this means simply walking up and down/to walk up and down (as given in both PED and CPED). If cankamana is the original, then the 'meditation' part is very much the translator's own gloss. This is perhaps based on the fact that this form of walking often took place on a prepared walkway as relief from periods of seated contemplation (which the translator would no doubt see as 'sitting meditation'). I was interested to read the 5 benefits of cankamana as summarised by Goggy in a recent post. In Goggy's words (I have yet to find the original) they are: 1) good stamina for long journeys (good for health too, isn't it?) 2) strengthen the mental effort for overall practice 3) balancing between sitting and walking 4) assist digestion (to overcome drowsiness) 5) builds durable concentration. There is no indication here that the walking necessarily involves 'meditation', or that it is regarded as being of any particular benefit as far as the development of understanding is concerned. (Actually, these remind me somewhat of the benefits given somewhere for eating congee.) The problem with using 'meditation' in translations is that it has no precise meaning in English, but can be read as implying any number of things.< 43392 From: Bhikkhu Samahita Date: Fri Mar 18, 2005 10:46pm Subject: The 4 Ways to Force...!!! Friends: The four Ways to Force (iddhi-pada): 1: The Concentration of Will joined with the effort of Determination. 2: The Concentration of Energy fused with the effort of Determination. 3: The Concentration of Thought linked with the effort of Determination. 4: The Concentration of Investigation coupled with the effort of Determination. Which forces ? The force of perfect determination. The force of making many copies of oneself. The force of transformation i.e. adopting whatever form. The force of mind-made creation of another mentally produced body. The force of penetrating knowledge e.g. to remain unhurt in any danger. The force of penetrating concentration producing whatever wished result. The force of experiencing whatever is repulsive as attractive & agreeable. The force of experiencing whatever is attractive as repulsive & disagreeable. The force of freely accepting or rejecting whatever whether attractive or repulsive. The force of remaining in equanimity faced with either the attractive or the repulsive. Details see: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn51-020.html Friendship is the Greatest ! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 43393 From: buddhatrue Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:18am Subject: [dsg] Re: alleywalk Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Dear Walkers, > > Just finished teaching and needing to `run' off through the Wanchai alleys > to the Rugby Sevens for some fun (trust me, James, I do have just a little > life outside DSG:-). :-) I just love to tease you! Metta, James 43394 From: Joop Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Having no opinions --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > In reality, the point of the sutras is to not cling. Clinging to the Right View is clinging none the less. I have always interpreted paradoxes, like the one mentioned below, as alluding to a graded path where things (ideas) change as you progress along the path. > > Also in this case, the real issue is not so much clinging, it is clinging to knowledge will give rise to feeling "you" have/are "inferior or superlative" .... Hallo Charles, I think I agree with you. But what exactly is "things (ideas) change as you progress..." Where do they change? In my brains or somewhere outsinde the brains of sentient beings? In the last case I don't agree: ideas exist only in my (or somebody else) mind; things are only perceived in my mind Metta Joop 43395 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:47am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Howard I see the time you spent not posting has been put to good use in doing some considering ;-)). I am just going to comment on one or two points that come up in your posts, rather than fully discuss the various issues you raise. >Hi, Ken (and Charles - and also Jon, Nina, and other "concept non-believers" >;-), > > I'm not sure what a 'concept non-believer' is, or why I qualify, but perhaps I'll find out as we go along ;-)) >It also happens to raise in my mind a loose-end Abhidhammic >issue that troubles me yet, and that is the kinds of actual mind-door objects >that are present during thought processes and conceptual projecting. I do not >not believe that pa~n~natti are ever truly objects of consciousness. > From what you say here, I perceive a difference in what we each mean by 'pannatti'. As I understand the term, it refers to those mind-objects that are not dhammas -- that is, to names and meanings (or thoughts). So by definition, it refers only to certain objects of consciousness. In other words, it's not a case of there being something called pannatti and the question then being whether these ever become objects of consciousness. (If you were to say that all objects of consciousness are dhammas, then that would be consistent with the usage of pannatti as I understand it, but I don't think that's what you're saying.) >I believe >that there is only imagining that there are such objects. However, I do >believe that during mindstates of thinking processes and conceptual projection, >there *are* actual (paramatthic) mind-door arammana. Now some of these are rupas, >and some are namas in the form of "fresh memories" of just-passed namas and >rupas. But those sorts of objects do not strike me as sufficient to account for >our thinking processes and the sankharic processes of conceptual projection. >It seems to me that there must be additional mind-door phenomena in the form of >mental traces that are passed on from state to state and that constitute the >data/raw material upon which thinking processes operate. But I do not see any >such things put forward in Abhidhamma. > I think the only 'data/raw material', in the sense that I take you to mean those things, is the various objects presently being experienced through the sense-doors. The rest is recollections of previous sense-door and mind-door experiences. In other words, there are indeed no mind-door phenomena in the form of traces referred to in the texts. But from reading your later posts I think you move away from the idea of traces, so I'll snip the rest of your post at this point ;-)). Jon 43396 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Howard The way you explain things in this post seems to me to be more in line with the way things are stated in the texts, especially where you say: "there is the possibility that the "marking" done by sa~n~na is not the production of a substantial trace that is replicated in each subsequent mindstate, but is merely an operational event that serves as one condition for a future event of remembering. It may well be merely that several "marking operations" of sa~n~na, occurring at various times, serve, together with other conditions occurring at other times, as basis for a future operation of remembering, with nothing "passed along" at all." So when that 'operation of remembering' occurs some time later, there is simply the accessing of that earlier marking. And at such moments the object of consciousness is not a presently arising (or just fallen away) dhamma. One further comment. You call this hypothesis a "conditionality theory". I think it could also be seen as an "accumulation theory" in the sense that previous experiences are not 'lost' but are accumulated and passed on from moment to moment. In other words, I don't think we need to invoke the teaching "When this is, that comes to be" in order to explain the act of remembering as described here. Jon upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi again, all - > > It occurs to me that the Buddhist notion of conditionality provides >another possible perspective on memory, and quite possibly the correct one. >Buddhist conditionality does not require a mechanistic passing on of things from >moment to oment. It is merely a matter of "When this is, that will be" and >"When this is not, that will not be". When appropriate conditions have all >occurred, then a resultant condition will occur. This allows for "action at a >(temporal) distance" just as does quantum theory. ... > 43397 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Howard upasaka@a... wrote: >Hi, TG - >... >Buddhist conditionality is >summarized by the following formulas: “When this is present, that comes to >be; from the arising of this, that arises. When this is absent, that does not >come to be; on the cessation of this, that ceases.â€?15 Moving from facts to >values, the principle of conditionality is summarized as a twelve-fold chain >starting with ignorance, then unmindful action, a resultant distorted >consciousness, and then nine other conditions that lead to rebirth. If anyone of these conditions is not present, then rebirth in a next life will not happen. > I just question this last statement about the effect of paticca-samuppada. If I'm not mistaken, it reflects the view that the links of PS can be 'broken' at any point, thereby leading to release from samsara. To my reading of PS, continued existence in samsara is all attributable to, and flows from, ignorance and that alone, and the only way out given is the development of panna, which 'reverses' the sequence of conditioned events. I do not recall reading anything in the suttas that supports the view stated just above. This is important because there are certain 'practices' that are based on the idea of cutting off the chain at one of the links. People are always having ideas about short-cuts that the Buddha himself seems to have overlooked ;-)) Jon 43398 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:44am Subject: Re: A Question Re: [dsg] Re: Ken--ultimate (Abhidhamma) view part 2 Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/19/05 8:57:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > But from reading your later posts I think you move away from the idea of > traces, so I'll snip the rest of your post at this point ================== Yes, I have moved away from the idea of traces. As regards "objects", if one means by "object" either an actual phenomenon (paramattha dhamma) that is objective content of consciousness OR what merely *seems* to be such, like a tree or house or memory, but does not actually exist, then I would agree to saying that there is always an object of consciousness. As I see it, when we are "remembering something" or "seeing a tree", there is no actual thing/event remembered or cognized, and my preference in speaking literally/ultimately would be to say that there really is no object present, but conventionally there is - that is, it is a covention to say that there is an object of consciousness present. And, as you know, I have no problem with figurative speech so long as one is aware that this is what one is using. With regard to my posting again, well, yes, I am, but I still have in mind to moderate it, and, especially, to not continue to extend a conversation interminably beyond a few posts, but to cease and desist before tiresome and tiring repetition sets in! ;-)) 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) 43399 From: Date: Sat Mar 19, 2005 2:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another Alternative for a Buddhist Theory of Memory Hi, Jon - In a message dated 3/19/05 9:00:46 AM Eastern Standard Time, jsabbott@n... writes: > Hi, Howard > > The way you explain things in this post seems to me to be more in line > with the way things are stated in the texts, especially where you say: > "there is the possibility that the "marking" done by sa~n~na is not the > production of a substantial trace that is replicated in each subsequent > mindstate, but is merely an operational event that serves as one > condition for a future event of remembering. It may well be merely that > several "marking operations" of sa~n~na, occurring at various times, > serve, together with other conditions occurring at other times, as basis > for a future operation of remembering, with nothing "passed along" at all." > > So when that 'operation of remembering' occurs some time later, there is > simply the accessing of that earlier marking. And at such moments the > object of consciousness is not a presently arising (or just fallen away) > dhamma. > > One further comment. You call this hypothesis a "conditionality > theory". I think it could also be seen as an "accumulation theory" in > the sense that previous experiences are not 'lost' but are accumulated > and passed on from moment to moment. In other words, I don't think we > need to invoke the teaching "When this is, that comes to be" in order to > explain the act of remembering as described here. > ----------------------------------- Howard: No, the last 2 paragraphs don't quite properly represent this alternative "conditionality position" I'm discussing. This position does not depend on anything being passed along or accumulated, or on "accessing" something in the past that is now nonexistent. It is just a matter of processing occurring now due to earlier processing and other events having occurred. By the time all the fundamental and supportive conditions have occurred, a specific remembering occurs. There is no presumption of a line-of-billiard-balls, store-and-forward scheme. To make an analogy, in Newtonian mechanics a linear contiguity picture was how event-transmission was viewed as working, but not so in the revolutionary quantum mechanics, and, likewise, in pre-Buddhist substantialist theories that is how things were viewed as working, but not in a Buddhist "conditionality theory." ------------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra)