50200 From: nina Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:35am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 2, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:48am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo (and Steve) - It is not easy to have correct understanding about the Dhamma all the time, even for a serious and very intelligent student of Buddhism. Sooner or later we will make a silly mistake, either because we extend beyond our domains of knowledge or when we think we are smart (over confident). Therefore, I have made a rule for myself that I will not dwell for too long on any given discussion topic (even if it is within my confident domain of knowledge that is inconstant), or try to answer too many questions(acting smart)! Htoo: Dear Tep, well, 1st through 4th jhaana do not arise when magga citta is arising. While 4 jhaanas are 4 separate states they never can arise when sotapatti or sakadaagaami or anaagaami or arahatta magga citta arises. When magga citta arises its object is nibbana and not any of jhaana's object. All 4 ruupa jhaanas have pannatti as their object. Panatti does not have any anicca, dukkha, anatta. 1st and 3rd aruupa jhaanas have pannatti as their object while 2nd and 4th aruupa jhaana have citta as their object. The object of 2nd aruupa jhaana is 1st aruupa jhaana citta. The object of 4th aruupa jhaana is 3rd aruupa jhaana citta. Apart from 2nd and 4th aruupa jhaanas, all other jhaanas have pannatti as their object. ............................................ Tep: Aren't you surprised at all why our Great Sage, the Blessed One, never mentioned the "arising of magga citta" when he was teaching his disciples samma-samadhi? Haven't you ever wondered why the Lord Buddha never mentioned the object of sammasamadhi in any of his discourses on right concentration? Lastly, haven't you ever wondered why our Greatest Teacher never mentioned "pannatti" when he gave a talk on right concentration ? Even the great Arahant Sariputta in his "Breathing Treatise" never talked about these issues that you have raised. Why? My answer is: it is simply because these issues are nonsense -- they are not useful for the attainment of samma-nana and samma-vimutti. Sincerely, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: (snipped) > > > Htoo: > > > Dear Tep, the context already says that there are many. They are > 1st jhaana, 2nd jhaana and so on. > > > > > Htoo: > > > > > > Dear Tep, personal belief is up to you. In both translation there > > > describe many. 1st jhaana, 2nd jhaana, 3rd jhaana etc. You can > say that sammaa-samaadhi is just one. If this is the case it is > ekaggataa cetasika and it is right to say that there is only one. > > > Tep: The 1st through the 4th jhanas together are considered as a > single thing called samma-samaadhi. Same way as an automobile > that consists of 4 tyres, 1 engine, 1 steering wheel, etc. > > Regards, > > Tep > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- (snipped) 50202 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 0:10pm Subject: [dsg] Buddhaghosa [was Re: Metta Examples (Re: e-card from north of coff's Harbour...)] buddhistmedi... Hi James and Sarah - I think your dialgue was amusing. If you keep on dropping the issues, then what is left for discussion? Void? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > > ... > > S: We've had a very long discussion on metta. In my google account it says there have been 70 posts in the thread, I think (not just us of course). > > So, I'm leaving the rest for now. > > James: That's fine. Let's drop it. > > > > > On `real', I'd just like to refer you to B.Samahita's post #49268 > with his computer simile and also #50090 with the quote about the illusion of a body being a `beguiler of fools' and `similar to a serial killer' etc.. If (snipped) > > James: I'm not sure what 'real' you are referring to, but let's drop > that too. > (snipped) > > > > Sarah (aka Dr Spock:) > > ==================== > > Metta, > James (aka Dr. Bones ;-) .................................. Sincerely, Tep (aka Mr. Bonehead) 50203 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 0:51pm Subject: Re: Time flies by and the danger in death. A question of language. buddhatrue Hi Nina, Nina: Are you kidding? James: :-))) I find it very amusing to see you using slang. I have a feeling that you are really asking me "Are you joking?" rather than the slang meaning of "Are you kidding" which in this context would be "Are you really so stupid as to believe that?" LOL! Well, to answer the first question, no I wasn't joking but my comment was just a light observation, not a definite position. Nothing to get too worked up over (slang for "It's not worth getting excited about" ;-). Now that I have given you a slang lesson, let's examine your Pali lesson to me. Nina: In Pali the negation does not always designate something negative, on the contrary. Take nibbaana: ni is a negation. nibbaana is also called nirodha and viraga, vi is also a negation. James: I was speaking from the English perspective, not the Pali perspective. What if in English we didn't have the words: love, intelligence, or generosity- we only had the words non-hate, non- stupidity, and non-greed? The emphasis of these terms is negative, even though the meaning is not, because the root of the word is a negative term. Now, I can't speak for Pali because I don't know Pali hardly at all and so cannot address the connotative meanings of Pali words. Nina: You looked up: lobha: attachment. Alobha is detachment. I teach you (but I know that you are familiar with some terms) one other term: dosa, aversion or anger. adosa is non-anger or mettaa. Lobha and dosa are unwholesome roots. Adding a: alobha and adosa, and you have the contrary to them, thus very positive. These are beautiful roots. James: Yes, I'm sure they are the beautiful roots. Why Pali doesn't have separate words for these terms I don't know. Maybe you can answer this question for me: What is the difference between adosa and mettaa? Is there a connotative difference or not really? Nina: Lodewijk was also worried about Amr's accidents. James: Tell Lodewijk thanks a lot. Amr was going to write a post to you thanking you for your kind words in your other post but he has had to rest from the last accident. His right foot is in a cast. He may write tomorrow- I will remind him. Metta, James 50204 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:17pm Subject: [dsg] Buddhaghosa [was Re: Metta Examples (Re: e-card from north of coff's Harbour...)] buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi James and Sarah - > > I think your dialgue was amusing. If you keep on dropping the issues, > then what is left for discussion? Void? Glad you caught that. I was trying to make a point to Sarah. She wrote that because there were 70 posts on the metta thread she wasn't going to discuss it anymore. Okay, then why discuss anything anymore? Why not just drop it all? Personally, I wouldn't care if there were 7 million posts on the metta thread! I would still want to discuss it some more if an understanding hadn't been reached. But, I guess that's just me. Metta, James 50205 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:25pm Subject: [dsg] Buddhaghosa [was Re: Metta Examples ..] Me Too ! buddhistmedi... Hi, James - James: > Personally, I wouldn't care if there were 7 million posts on the metta >thread! I would still want to discuss it some more if an >understanding hadn't been reached. > But, I guess that's just me. > Tep: That's me too ! Best wishes, Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Tep, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" > wrote: > > > > Hi James and Sarah - > > > > I think your dialgue was amusing. If you keep on dropping the > issues, > > then what is left for discussion? Void? > 50206 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:09pm Subject: Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) buddhistmedi... Hi James (and other members) - I am curious about your accusation that Khun Sujin is contradicting the Sutta commentary. > > James: I do not agree. Sujin is directly contradicting the commentary to the Satipattha Sutta, and yet she doesn't provide any textual > support. Does she think she knows better than the commentary? Why would she directly contradict the commentary? Ask her for me when you see her next- a simple and direct answer with no beating around the bush would be best. > If you don't mind, can you be specific about such contradiction and why it is considered unacceptable? Thanks. Regards, Tep ===== 50207 From: Frank Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:15pm Subject: anatta? search for self called off dhamma_service from this week's onion: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/40520 frank@... 50208 From: "colette" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 9:30am Subject: Re: No Igor not eye of Newt. ksheri3 Good Morning Joop, Now it seems that our dialogue, conversation, chit chat, etc, is in the proper plane to continue. I mean that we, you and I, have problems with our terminology, our interpretations, etc, and this causes stress for you and myself, although I immediately find sanctuary in "the humor" of our Miss Understandings and Miss Interpretations. In this post we have both agreed upon a common denominator therefor we are on the same plane of consciousness. What will hurt our conversation will probably be the cultural differences, and my lack of formal university education. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" > wrote: > > Hi Group, > > > > ... > > > toodles, > > colette > > Hallo Colette > > We have had some DSG-communication before and now again it surprises > me that you seem to be interested in the same topic as me, in the > same texts, and still I hardly could understand anything of what you > mean. colette: this is what I was refering to in the Introduction of this post in that it is cultural differences and meanings/implications/etc, etc,. Just as I do not understand a lot of things that does not mean that I will not or can not understand the things I currently don't. You to have this same quality, characteristic, in fact we all have this characteristic. Here I would like to use the concept of Chakras and the lotus: the objective is to enliven the chakra represented through the lotus. The lotus is not open and displaying it's beauty always and needs some help just as cold-blooded animals need to sit in the sun to raise their body temperature before starting their day. You and I need to dwell on these concepts between ourselves and in this way we will reach common meanings, definitions, etc, which will facilitate our discusion. ---------------------------- > You write some days ago you had an enormous event. Later you write > about a Near-Death Experience you had. Perhaps some days ago you had > an 'Near Life Experience' (NLE) ? colette: that is SO VERY CUTE! THANK YOU. You are using, applying, a trick of reality I've always known and used but never had a need to define for others. I'm affraid that in the long run I'll find out that what I'm doing has already been diasected by professors since Nagarjuna, or Aristotle or Nyaya, etc. and it deals with "negative syllogisms" which is a characteristic of both Bhavaviveka and Nagarjuna. -------------------- > > " The concept of Emptiness, Sunyata, Shunyata, is a condition that > must be achieved before one can experience Nirvana or Nibanna." This > must be you own text, and that I think serious, is great. colette: Thank You! Yes, it is my own theory. It somehow comes together for me when I'm meditating. The theory creates tremendous problems for myself when learning Nagarjuna's system since I'm suggesting that an individual has, possesses and is possessed by, a Self, this automatically reasons Svabhava, or intrinsic nature, and that there is a path or procedure for an individual to enter into, achieve, Sunayata, Shunyata, which manifests the Nihsvabahava, void of intrinsic nature, state, condition. This blatantly is not possible using the Madhyamika system. A new theory would be that this is a personalized condition or a state of consciousness only there, as in "being", for the individual to grasp. Big problems huh? ---------------------------- > > Now about "Bhavavikeka's Svatantra-anumana and Its Soteriological > Implications" I had downloaded it some months ago and I start reading > it again after trying to understand your message. > And again it seems to difficult, I get irrirated: what has this kind > of logical reasoning to do with my getting enlightened? colette: I am lost. Lets take the "Given"s: 1) you have the same text of Toshi's; 2) you run into difficulty; 3) you get irritated -- ah, but this is "Stress" unfortunately I've left all of my Dhammapada material at home since I am now in the mode of consciousness to study these scholarly papers. A) is there are problem with the logical reasoning that obstructs or/and obscures your GOAL ORIENTATION of enlightenment; B) what is enlightenment? ------------------------ But still > it's fascinating, don't you think so? colette: I think it is a beautiful thing that we have found a "Real Thing" that interests us both since we are so divergent and distant from eachother. It is this type of thing which binds all sentient beings together in the same boat. It is for ourselves to recognize our similarities and use them to our advantage. That is a tremendous problem for a lot of people to do. -------------------- > Perhaps we can better read Nagarjuna himself, for example the 'easy' > translation Stephen Batchelor made of the Karika: > http://www.stephenbatchelor.org/verses2.htm colette: most gracious of you. Thank You for the site. Maybe we can discuss our problems with Nargajuna who has problems with ourselves. I look forward to reading the site later. toodles, colette 50209 From: "colette" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 1:24pm Subject: Re: No Igor not eye of Newt. ksheri3 Hi Joop, Last night I had set up a lot of positions on paper and was going to synthesize them together today. As is a "bad habit" of mine I went into the groups sectiion first so as to not have any interference in my goal but instead of going straight to Post I went to msgs. where I got sidetracked. Ah, but as I walked home to get a bite of food and walked back I kept thinking about your msg. to me and realized that: MY, AREN'T WE THE KRAFTY ONE! With that said: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" > You write some days ago you had an enormous event. Later you write > about a Near-Death Experience you had. Perhaps some days ago you had > an 'Near Life Experience' (NLE) ? colette: about a yr. ago I was asked by a young girl and her boyfriend if I'd like to live with them. This is very special to me since I only have people, acquaintences, that I typically only have people that KNOW EXACTLY WHERE I SHOULD NOT LIVE, but, as in your discovery of one of my tricks, I interpret what they say to me as an oposite so when I ask "where should I live" they RECIEVE the message and decode it as "where should I die" so they know and tell me EXACTLY WHERE I SHOULD NOT LIVE, typically in their neighborhood or in a better neighborhood. Another astounding aspect is that I get to live there and they have children, which I do not, have no idea how I ever could have children, and don't need wasting my time pondering about things society, in a general terminology usage, will not permit me to have. Now for some fun! Last nite I saw some cable television for maybe the 30th or 40th time since I moved to Chicago in 1986 or 87. I saw on the History channel something like The History of Hell. On it was a daughter of Billy Graham (wheaton college, baptist type of thing) and I lived in wheaton a few blocks from the college for quite some time. In this show this daughter made the case that in the Bible they give a lot of info. about Hell but next to nothing about Heaven but then she went on to explain why all this negative advertising. All this negative advertising and the disquasition about WHY THE NEGATIVE ADVERTISING IS ADVANTAGOUS (means to an end) showed me why those scum in DuPage County IL have always treated me with such contempt: My near death exp. NDE, April 1978, was very real since I rolled "daddy's caddy" end over end 3 times and did die but was brought back by the work of the EMTs. For our Naperville friend go to College Of DuPage and find the road they now call 22nd St. The curvey part where there are now condos in that Raintree subdivision is where it happened. <...> What I'm getting at is that they interpret my death as just that: a death and thus the need, the requirement, to be baptised by them, otherwise I am going to hell and therefore they must be free to do as hell would do to me. And so, in an attempt to escape responsibility for their actions they now say "well you're going to hell anyway so I have the right to make you into the Devil, at least our devil." Mental illness in the Graham family, not surprising at all. <...> Hmmm, we are playing with Bodhichitta are we not? The rule of thumb seems to be "this is the way it has always been done so this is the way we do it" simply put it's just tired old bs. Since I am not part of that "beaten path" clique, fraternity, sorrority, mob, group, herd, then I must ask: What is the Rule of Thumb? a) if looking at the trees then the forest is not there or existant. or b) if looking at the forest then the trees are not there or existant. any help? toodles, colette 50210 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Short Post: Conditions, No Control, Conventional Truth, and Ultimate Truth lbidd2 Hi Sarah and Nina, Thanks for all the material on ottappa (fear of wrongdoing). And Sarah, I sent along your invitation to Icaro. Larry 50211 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:17pm Subject: Re: anatta? search for self called off buddhistmedi... Hi, frank- Frank : from this week's onion: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/40520 [an excerpt] "The longtime search for self conducted by area man Andrew Speth was called off this week, the 38-year-old said Monday. "I always thought that if I kept searching and exploring, I'd discover who I truly was," said Speth from his Wrigleyville efficiency. "Well, I looked deep into the innermost recesses of my soul, I plumbed the depths of my subconscious, and you know what I found? An empty, windowless room the size of an aircraft hangar. From now on, if anybody needs me, I'll be sprawled out on this couch drinking black-cherry soda and watching Law & Order like everybody else." "Trust me—there's nothing out there for you to find," Speth said. "You're wasting your life. The sooner you realize you have no self to discover, the sooner you can get on with what's truly important: celebrity magazines, snack foods, and Internet porn." Tep: This guy Speth is confused. What does 'self' mean to him, Frank? Why did he look for himself "out there"? He is a man with low intelligence and burried deep in sensualities. Why are you interested in him? Sincerely, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Frank wrote: 50212 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:38pm Subject: Re: Perceiving Transience ... !!! How Does It Happen? buddhistmedi... Hi, Ven. Samahita (and all) - Bhikkhu Samahita: > Bhikkhus, when the perception of impermanence is developed and >cultivated, then it eliminates all sense desire, it also eliminates all >lust for becoming something else, it also eliminates all ignorance > and it finally uproots this deep conceit that 'I Am'... Tep: So, did the Buddha say that the "developed and cultivated" perception of impermanence alone was enough for total release, Nibbana ? If so, how does it happen? [For example, how does it eliminate all ignorance?] Respectfully, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > Friends: > > The Experience of the Change can Uproot both Ignorance & Egoism! > 50214 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:43pm Subject: Re: anatta? search for self called off christine_fo... [deleted the last post because I included the wrong link] Hello Tep, Frank, all, :-) :-) Such strong opinions and views Tep! I wonder what you think of the Lead story of this edition? http://www.theonion.com/content/index Tep - it is a 'spoof' magazine. Nothing is factual in it. It exists to laugh at pomposity ('take the mickey out of'), and those who take themselves too seriously. Look at the stories on the right hand side ... metta and peace, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, frank- > > Frank : from this week's onion: > http://www.theonion.com/content/node/40520 > > [an excerpt] > "The longtime search for self conducted by area man Andrew Speth > was called off this week, the 38-year-old said Monday. > "I always thought that if I kept searching and exploring, I'd discover who > I truly was," said Speth from his Wrigleyville efficiency. "Well, I looked > deep into the innermost recesses of my soul, I plumbed the depths of > my subconscious, and you know what I found? An empty, windowless > room the size of an aircraft hangar. From now on, if anybody needs me, > I'll be sprawled out on this couch drinking black-cherry soda and > watching Law & Order like everybody else." > > "Trust me—there's nothing out there for you to find," Speth said. "You're > wasting your life. The sooner you realize you have no self to discover, > the sooner you can get on with what's truly important: celebrity > magazines, snack foods, and Internet porn." > > Tep: This guy Speth is confused. What does 'self' mean to him, Frank? > Why did he look for himself "out there"? > > He is a man with low intelligence and burried deep in sensualities. > Why are you interested in him? > > > Sincerely, > > > Tep > > ========= > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Frank > wrote: 50215 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 5:18pm Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues nidive Hi Tep, You raised one interesting question for me! > Haven't you ever wondered why the Lord Buddha never mentioned the > object of sammasamadhi in any of his discourses on right > concentration? That's very true! I often wonder why the Buddha simply said that one enters and remains in the rupa jhanas without specifying the object of meditation. Regards, Swee Boon 50216 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Short Post: Conditions, No Control, Conventional Truth, and Ultim... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Joop, Larry, and Ven Samahita) - In a message dated 9/16/05 4:55:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (Joop, Larry, Ven Samahita), --- upasaka@... wrote: >> > Howard: "It is said "It's all just conditions," and "There is no > > control." So, when we do something hurtful, why should we apologize? > > ;-))" > ... > S: this sounds dangerously close to a kind of wrong view, the same as > why > develop wholesome states or perform kusala kamma at all. > -------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes indeed it sounds like wrong view. It certainly *is* wrong view! > ------------------------------- ... S: Let's start from this agreement. The wrong view is similar to the one which says everything is conditioned or predetermined rather, so there's no use in developing kusala or in kusala kamma.....the results will be the same. ... >S: Does a such a reflection or an apology have to be with remorse? Doesn't > it > just depend on the citta at the time as we've been discussing? Can't > there > be kind wishes for the other's welfare? > ----------------------------- > Howard: > Ah, but there is my point! The welfare of WHAT other? There are no > beings, no selves, no > persons. So, "whose" welfare should we properly wish for? For the > welfare of "whom" did the Buddha > teach the Dhamma for 45 years? For worldlings and lesser ariyans, I > believe that conventional, > conceptual truth must play a part in our understanding. A worldling who > perversely allows his/her > purely intellectual, meager understanding of paramattha-sacca to > overwhelm ordinary conventional truth to > to the extent that s/he lives ruled by the *belief* in "no beings" is in > danger of immorality. > ------------------------------------------ ... S: I think you know all the answers here, Howard:). They are Joop's questions too. Hope you don't mind the following in note form: 1. Yes, if one merely uses one's theoretical knowledge of paramattha dhammas as a shield or a curtain to escape from any real development of purity and instead of developing more metta and so on is merely developing more conceit and attachment, it's quite wrong and not any kind of real understanding. 2. There are in the ultimate sense truly only namas and rupas. That's it. No Howard, Sarah, Joop or anyone else. When someone becomes interested at all in the Buddha's teachings, the sooner they hear about namas and rupas the better, I think. I know others disagree. It was the great compassion of the Buddha to teach about dhammas, to teach the Noble Truths, to teach about the 3 characteristics of all conditioned dhammas, of all paramattha dhammas only. --------------------------------------------- Howard: I agree with the foregoing, Sarah, but I see a need for balance as well. What I maintain is the following: One with perfect, or even very advanced wisdom, directly observes not only paramattha dhammas and their tilakkhanic (to coin a term) nature, but also - and I think this is critical, their multiform interrelatedness. Such complex interdependency is not something directly observable in its complete fullness except by arahants. However, the multiform interdependencies among dhammas are the basis for our well grounded conceptualizing. Sentient beings don't truly exist - there are no such things ultimately. However, there are complex streams of dhammas in patterned interdependent relationships that are the basis for the concept "sentient being", and suffering arises within such experiential streams, for which we can, do, and should feel compassion. Worldlings, and even lesser ariyans, cannot apprehend the realities-in-relation except to a very limited extent, but instead they "see" so-called people, animals, and perhaps other beings, cognitive substitutes for the realities available to arahants. If, without seeing reality in its fullness, they also accorded, due to slavish adherence to theory, no sort of reality to sentient beings, then that would leave them no target at all for compassion. ------------------------------------------------------ 3. Test it out for yourself! When there's metta, the object is another being, but there's no wrong view of 'being' at such a time. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Are you so sure?! There may not be a *view* of a being in the sense that one is theorizing about there being a being, but there is very likely the *sense* of a being to whom the good will is directed. Worldlings *do* live in a world of concept for the most part. -------------------------------------------- There's also no understanding of paramattha dhammas at such a time. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I think you've got *that* right! ;-)) ------------------------------------------- But it's very wholesome. There cannot be satipatthana all the time! ------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, metta is very wholesome :-) ------------------------------------------- 4. Views about poeple actually existing, only ever arises with attachment and in error. You know this. 5. When we start to think about it intellectually, it may seem that there's some kind of conundrum. But in practise, there isn't at all. Only paramattha dhammas exist and yet, and yet, develop all kinds of wholesome states, including the brahma viharas towards others!! ------------------------------------------------- Howard: The Buddha himself spoke of people who theorized that there are no actual bodies of people, and that there is thus no problem running one of these through with a sword. People are prone to take good doctrine and pervert it, and care must be taken in what is taught and how it is taught. The Buddha himself refrained from teaching anatta to some people, lest they misunderstand! He was even questioned about this! --------------------------------------------- You know all this, Howard:) I think you're just having some doubts which of course can be known as such when they arise!. -------------------------------------------- Howard: No, Sarah. I have no doubts about anatta at all. -------------------------------------------- You explain nicely about paramattha dhammas to others. ------------------------------------------ Howard: :-) ----------------------------------------- To quote Larry in a recent post: L:"A concept such as a self or any other concept is not included in the khandhas, is therefore not real, and is therefore not impermanent." ------------------------------------------------ Howard: By "concepts", most people mean elements of thinking. I believe that thinking is an ongoing process of a certain type which is, indeed, impermanent. As for alleged selves that are thought about, there just ain't no such things! ------------------------------------------------ (btw, Larry, when we talk now about realities or groups, they are concepts. When the realities making up a group, such as a kalapa or rupas arises, all those rupas are real). To quote Joop's sutta: J:"...The one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others is, for that reason, to be praised." S: Isn't this what we are all doing here -- developing our understanding and sharing the teachings with each other?. [Btw, Joop, with regard to your comment in a message to me about Theravada being dead in fifty years without more creativity....etc, see 'Decline of the Sasana' in U.P. According to the Buddha, it is some of the imaginative renderings and alterations to the teachings from within that leads to the decline. When the teachings are not carefully read in detail and so on. Also see especially Jon's fairly recent post #48619 with the quote from AN about the 5 factors which lead to the disappearance of the true dhamma: not hearing the dhamma, learning the dhamma, retaining the dhamma, investigating and knowing what is significant and practising... Of course, a day may come when Theravada seems to be flourishing, but actually has little or no resemblance to the Buddha's teachings. Also, see Connie's fairly recent post on 'The Sasana's Capacity for being Recast' with just this point having been discussed in the Kathavatthu #48029.] Lots of sidetracks here...Howard, did you read B.Samahita's post #49827? It includes the simile of the drop of honey on the edge of a blade...Ven Samahita, I didn't see any textual reference in this post??? ------------------------------------------- Howard: Ah, thanks for pointing it out! Very interesting. The piece seems to consist of a number of wonderful excerpts from the Buddha's teachings. Bhante, I would love to see a reference for the razor's edge simile! ------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ========== ========================= 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) 50217 From: "Dan D." Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 7:09pm Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ onco111 Dear Hal, Your question about the failure of the tilakkana to apply to paññati is a good one -- it strikes at the heart of the distinction between paramattha dhamma and concept. I found the Ledi Sayadaw reference -- an essay entitled "On the philosophy of relations" in Journal of the Pali Text Society, vol. VII (1915-1916), pp. 21-53. On page 25, he writes: "Now, the Real, with the sole exception of Nibbana, is impermanent because it is subject to a ceaseless flux of change involved in becoming. But even as space is regarded as permanent, general concepts and ideas may be said to be also permanent, in the sense of exemption from the phenomena of becoming (i.e., arising and ceasing). How? Although the name 'jar' is no longer applicable to a particular jar when it is broken into pieces, yet the general concepts or notion of jar still remains in our mind to denote other individual members of that class of vessels. Relations, however, are not permanent, as are general concepts of relations." You ask: "However, aren't the three universals characteristics themselves are pannati?" This is an interesting question. From my heart, I'd have to say: No. The characteristics themselves are not paññati. They can be realized and understood directly as characteristics of citta or cetasika or rupa. From the book, I'd have to say: Yes. The only Real are the paramattha dhamma, and those are listed in Abhidhammatha sangaha. I don't see anicca/annatta/dukkha on the list! Therefore, tilakkhana are concept. The difference in the two answers lies somewhere in the problem of connecting language to reality -- an extremely difficult task. You continue: "A universal characteristic is a concept, and because ti-lakkhana are conditions found in all universes, in all periods of time, aren't they _pannatti_ in the very sense that the Venerable Sayadaws hold?" The concept of "tilakkhana" is surely a concept, if you think about it (but don't you get started thinking about it, because once you do, you've left paramattha and entered paññati). But as characteristics of paramattha dhamma, the characteristics are not concept. And a quibble -- ti-lakkhana are spoken of as characteristics of paramattha dhamma. Wouldn't you think that if there is such a thing as a universe bereft of sentient beings, there would be no paramattha dhammas and no tilakkhana there? Metta, Dan 50218 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:16pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. icarofranca Hi Howard! ======================================================================= > Short answer: No, I do not believe that wisdom is some "thing" that accumulates. I believe > that under appropriate conditions wisdom may arise at higher & higher levels, but there is nothing > literally accumulating. I don't know whether this is the *sort* of answer you were looking for. If > not, please say more. ======================================================================== It´s a matter of choosing out a good definition. It seems to me (just an opinion, folks!) that "Accumulation" is a genus that encompasses the idea of "Karma" (Genus -> Species) - All Karma is a kind of Accumulation, but not all Accumulation is Karma - nothing to do with accumulation of Gold, Money, Stocks or Basketball cards, you see... Again, all is grounded on a good and proper definition of "Accumulation" - an issue that sometimes is very obscure on Abhidhamma! Best Regards, pal! Ícaro 50219 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:30pm Subject: Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) buddhatrue Hi Tep, Nina, Sarah, and all, Tep: I am curious about your accusation that Khun Sujin is contradicting the Sutta commentary. If you don't mind, can you be specific about such contradiction and why it is considered unacceptable? Thanks. James: Sure, it would be my pleasure (But I warn you, this is going to be a rather long post). To review, this is what K. Sujin said in the Cambodian Lecture: ""Someone may guess about his temperament and he may believe that he should develop a particular object among the four Applications of Mindfulness. He hopes to obtain a result by this way of practice. However, this is not the right condition for knowing the truth of non-self of realities; it is not the way to know all realities thoroughly. Someone may select an object and fix his attention on that object since he believes that he has such or such temperament and that he should therefore develop this particular Application of Mindfulness. At that moment he neglects awareness of all the objects he is used to taking for self...." James: The commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta, compiled by Buddhaghosa from the original texts in Sri Lanka, states that although the Four Foundations must eventually be known in their entirety, the practitioner MUST focus on one of the Four Foundations initially in order to develop satipatthana properly. Obviously, K. Sujin is contradicting this directive from the commentary, which is a very important and crucial directive because if it isn't followed then the Four Foundations cannot be properly developed. Unfortunately, I only have access to DN presently so I will have to quote from the treatise by Soma Thera "The Way of Mindfulness; The Satipatthana Sutta and its Commentary": "All the four different objects of mindfulness: body, feeling, consciousness and mental objects, have to be understood before one reaches sanctitude. According to character, temperament and cognizing slant, one can make however only one of these the preliminary object of contemplation. It is often the case that owing to a lack of proper understanding of oneself one has to try all objects before one gets to know what suits one best for the preliminary work. The choice is made more difficult by the fact that most of us have no clear-cut natures and are a mixture of a little of every possible human characteristic. In these circumstances there is no alternative to the method of trial and error. But the earnest ones will find their way with persistence and sustained effort. By character there are two types determined by the excess of sensuous qualities of craving, or of the asensuous qualities of abstract beliefs that make up their personality. The craving type is generally extrovert; the other is generally introvert. According to temperament there are those whose mental functioning is slow, those who are languid mentally and those who are mentally keen, the nervous type. But here it must be understood that the terms languid and nervous have no necessary connection with calm and excitement. The nervous often keep cool when the languid fluster. The nervous type is sensitive, but strong and vigorous and keen. The nervous think forcefully and clearly. The languid are sluggish, inert, and weak, unclear, discursive, and often mixed-up in thought. Cognizing slant is either intuitive or intellective. According to character and temperament the body-object is recommended for the languid extravert and the feeling-object for the nervous extrovert. For the languid introvert the consciousness- object is recommended, and for the nervous introvert, mental objects. According to cognizing slant and temperament the body-object is pointed out for the mentally slow who belong to the intuitive kind which makes concentration its vehicle for progress, and for the mentally keen of this kind the feeling-object. For the mentally slow who belong to the intellective kind which makes insight its vehicle the consciousness-object is recommended, and to the mentally keen of this kind the mental object." http://accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html James: I think that there can be no doubt whatsoever that K. Sujin is contradicting this commentary. It is very specific and leaves no room for doubt about what must be done. However, not only does K. Sujin contradict this commentary, she belittles it by using such phrases as "Someone may GUESS about his temperament" and "He HOPES to obtain a result by this way of practice." (Emphasis mine). So, why is this so important to me? Why of all the questions I could ask K. Sujin have I decided to ask her this one and only this one? Because the philosophy of K. Sujin is a very fragile house of cards balancing on interpretations of the commentaries. K. Sujin was instrumental in finding and translating the commentaries into the Thai language and making them more available in Thailand. She didn't form her philosophy from the suttas primarily, she formed her philosophy from the commentaries. And yet, here she is, directly contradicting one of the most important elements of the commentary to the sutta which is the flagship of her entire philosophy, The Satipatthana Sutta! If she cannot adequately answer this question in a straightforward manner (unlike the convoluted answer I recently got from Nina) then everything she says is suspect. Metta, James ps. Nina and Sarah, please print out this message and give it to K. Sujin when you see her next. Please read it outloud if her eyes are bothering her. Thanks 50220 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 0:18am Subject: How to be a Real Buddhist on Observance Day ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: How to be a Real True Buddhist through Observance? Any Lay Buddhist simply joins the Three Refuges and undertakes the Five Precepts like this: Newly bathed, shaved, white-clothed, with clean bare feet, one kneels at a shrine with a Buddha-statue, and bows first three times, so that feet, hands, elbows, knees and head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms in front of the heart, one recite these memorized lines in a loud, calm & steady voice: As long as this life lasts: I hereby take refuge in the Buddha. I hereby take refuge in the Dhamma. I hereby take refuge in the Sangha. I hereby seek shelter in the Buddha for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Dhamma for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Sangha for the 2nd time. I hereby request protection from the Buddha for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Dhamma for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Sangha for the 3rd time. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Killing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Stealing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Sexual Abuse. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Dishonesty. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Alcohol & Drugs. As long as this life lasts... Then, one keeps and protects these sacred vows better than one's own eyes & children(!), since they protect you & all other beings much better than any army! They are the highest offer one can give in & to this world! This is the very start on the path towards Nibbana -the Deathless Element- This is the Noble Way to Peace, to Freedom, to Bliss, initiated by Morality, developed further by Dhamma-Study and fulfilled by training Meditation... Today indeed is Pooya or uposatha or observance day, where any lay Buddhist normally keeps the Eight Precepts from sunrise until the next dawn... If any wish an official recognition by the Bhikkhu-Sangha, they may simply forward the lines starting with "I..." signed with name, date, town & country to me. I have put up a public list of this newly born Saddhamma Sangha here! http://www.What-Buddha-Said.org/sangha/Saddhamma_Sangha.htm May your journey hereby be eased, light, swift and sweet. Never give up !!! Bhikkhu Samahita: what.buddha.said@... For Details on Uposatha Observance Days: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/uposatha.html ________________________________________________________ PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm Free Bliss !!! <...> 50221 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 0:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Short Post: Conditions, substantialism, to Howard. nilovg Hi Howard, I am just wondering whether this is a misunderstanding as to substantialism that could easily be ironed out. As I understand the Abh and Commentaries, there is not such teaching in them, and if I can do anything to clear misunderstandings I will gladly make an effort. Just recently I found an impressive text in U Narada (which you have), p. 54: Sorry I misunderstood as to your appreciation of paramattha dhammas. You made that clear. Another point: I like it that the Tiika to the Visuddhimagga explains: this is suttanta method, this is Abhidhamma method. Both methods are useful. No contradictions. We worldlings need both so much. I appreciate what you wrote about that. Now to your post: op 13-09-2005 15:14 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > As to the Theravadin > position, to the extent that the Theravadin Abhidhamma and commentaries take > dhammas to be substantial entitities with self-nature, that is an extent to > which I > am not a Theravadin. I'm not hung up on categorizing myself as Theravadin or > anything else for that matter. But I understand 'sabhava' in Theravada not to > mean "substance" but merely "characteristic". ------ You remember the long discussions we had with Michael. Sabhava merely is: its own characteristic or nature. But it does not last! Unfortunately Nyanamoli translates it as individual essence. It is a matter of translation, that is all. I quote from his translation of the the Visuddhimagga (XV, 15): < ...here, however, all formed bases (aayatanas) should be regarded as having no provenance and no destination.For they do not come from anywhere previous to their rise, nor do they go anywhere after their fall. On the contrary, before thgeir rise they had no individual essence (sabhaava, own characteristic), and after their fall their individual essences are completely dissolved. And they occur without mastery [being exercisable over them] since they exist in dependence on conditions and in between the past and the future. > See here, no misunderstanding, they are dependent on conditions, do not last. We do not have to label ourselves as Theravadin, or call ourselves anything. We are just studying the Buddha's teachings. Nina. P.S. I hope you had good walking in Vermont. 50222 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 0:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Time flies by and the danger in death. mettaa and adosa. nilovg Hi James, op 16-09-2005 21:51 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: Now that I have given you a slang lesson, let's examine > your Pali lesson to me. N: You are a good teacher in English, thanks for your patience. ------ J: Nina: In Pali the negation does not always designate something > negative... What if in English we didn't have the words: love, > intelligence, or generosity- we only had the words non-hate, non- > stupidity, and non-greed? N: Quite right. Let us compensate this with examples from daily life. --------- > James: Yes, I'm sure they are the beautiful roots. Why Pali doesn't > have separate words for these terms I don't know. Maybe you can > answer this question for me: What is the difference between adosa > and mettaa? Is there a connotative difference or not really? ---------- N: I want to speak first about dosa: this has many shades and subjects: fear, anxiety, annoyance, aversion, anger, hate. It arises whenever something is disliked. The accompanying feeling is unpleasant, and this feeling may be very slight or strong. The subject of dosa can be an object experienced through one of the senses, or the mind, it can be a concept we are thinking of. You stub your toe, or the wind blows too hard, this is an occasion for dosa. Someone has to undergo an unpleasant medical test, or the doctor tells one that there is a negative result, or one has to lose a dear person through death. These are occasions for fear, anxiety, sadness. Or one finds another person not sympathetic, and dislike can arise. Adosa: this is the absence of all those negative qualities. Thus, its object includes sense impressions, concepts and events one thinks of, and also persons. Thus, at first there may be fear and anxiety, or sadness when there are the unpleasant wordly conditions of loss, blame, dishonour or bodily misery. But then one may consider that whatever happens in life does take its course anyway because it is conditioned. The worldly condiitons change all the time. The next day there may be gain, praise, honour, bodily wellbeing. We see here that understanding of ultimates, conditioned dhammas, helps us to react more positively in daily life. When adosa arises instead of dosa, there is patience and calm. It helps to face difficult circumstances. (Not so easy for me!!I wish I had more, I need it.) Mettaa: this is actually the quality of adosa, but we use the word mettaa when it is directed towards people. In the context of the Brahmavihaaras mettaa is used. I think of mettaa that motivates action and speech. I agree with you, never enough discussions about mettaa. Sometimes we (we in general sense, I do not think of you) are lazy or tired and do not bother to help others. Clear that we also need energy or effort to apply mettaa. Otherwise we do not make a move. Or we think: what is the use of mettaa, why should I. Then we lack confidence in kusala. We need the good quality of confidence as well. Or we are just forgetful: there is an opportunity to help, but we are forgetful and let it go by, waste it. Thus, we need mindfulness or non-forgetfulness. Or we are partial, we like to help this person but not that person we hardly know. We need equanimity so that we are impartial. This shows that many other good qualities are needed, even for the arising of one short moment of mettaa. This helps us to see that mettaa is dependent on many conditions and that we cannot make it arise at will, whenever we want to. --------- > James: Tell Lodewijk thanks a lot. Amr was going to write a post to > you thanking you for your kind words in your other post but he has > had to rest from the last accident. His right foot is in a cast. > He may write tomorrow- I will remind him. ------ N: That is very kind. He need not trouble writing. Nina. 50223 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 0:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perceiving Transience ... !!! How Does It Happen? bhikkhu_ekamuni Dear friend Tep Sastri asked: >how does perception of impermanence eliminate all ignorance? 1: What is ignorance? Ignorance is not knowing Suffering, it's cause, it's end and the Way to end Suffering. Ignorance is Not Knowing These 4 Noble Truths... 2: Perception of impermanence gradually: A: Induce direct knowledge of the lack of stability of all. B: Induce direct knowledge of the dissatisfaction inherent in all. C: Induce direct knowledge of the ego & ownerlessness of all. ABC: Gives direct experience of what Suffering is! B: Points out that the cause of Suffering is Craving what is painful! B: Thereby also points to the ending Suffering by ending Craving! ABC: All pushes one further into the only possible alternative to becoming: By initiation, cultivation & completion of the Noble Way to reach Release! In this way do perception of impermanence gradually induce direct knowledge of the the 4 Noble Truths... When these are fully understood, is ignorance eradicated!!! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 50224 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:00am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 550 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 4 different stocks of dhamma; namely a) akusala sangaha or the stock of unwholesome dhamma, b) missaka sangaha or the stock of dhamma with similarity, c) bodhipakkhiya sangaha or the stock of dhamma that are the companions of bodhi-naana or enlightenment-wisdom, d) sabba sangaha or general stock of dhamma not in the previous categories. d) sabba sangaha or general stock of dhamma 1. khandha or aggregates 2. upadaana-kkhandha or clinging aggregates 3. aayatana or sense-bases 4. dhaatu or elements 5. saccaa or Noble Truths There are 5 khandhas or 5 aggregates. 1. ruupa-kkhandhaa or aggregates of materials 2. vedana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of feeling 3. sanna-kkhandhaa or aggregates of perception 4. sankhaara-kkhandhaa or aggregates of formation 5. vi~n~naana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of consciousness 3. sanna-kkhandhaa or aggregates of perception Sannaa has well been discussed in the previous post. Among many different groups of sannaa it is worthy to re-explain sannaa as six- fold dhamma. Because as sanna is a khandhaa or an aggregates we all need to know where does it arise. Where does sannaa arise? Sannaa arises at ruupa [forms, shape, colours, light]. Sannaa arises at sadda or sounds. Sannaa arises at gandha or smell. Sannaa arises at rasa or taste. Sannaa arises at photthabbaa or touches. Sannaa arises at dhammaa or mind-objects. That is why sannaa is talked as six-fold dhamma. a) sannaa arises at ruupa (visual object). Let us assume that someone opens his eyes. There is an object of visual nature right in front of him. There is enough light in and around. But there is no seeing. Why? There is no attention. So there is no seeing of that visual object. If so, where is the attention or manasikaara? The attention is at the object of life-continuum or bhavanga citta. There is also sannaa or perception in that citta called life- continuum or bhavanga citta. It arises and passes away. Another life- continuum arises and again passes away. But when life-continuum stops to arise as there is a current object there arise the first citta-in- procession or 1st vithi citta. It is 5-door-adverting consciousness or pancadvaraavajjana citta. In that consciousness there does arise sannaa or perception. Next arises is cakkhuvinnaana citta or eye-consciousness. There also arises sannaa or perception. That perception cognizes the ruupa or visual object. That sannaa is called ruupa-sannaa. That sannaa helps following sannaa in cognition assimilating into a senseful or meaningful picture when javana cittas or mental impulsions arise. b) sannaa arises at sadda (sadda-sannaa) c) sannaa arises at gandha(gandha-sannaa) d) sannaa arises at rasa (rasa-sannaa) e) sannaa arises at photthabbaa (photthabbaa-sannaa) f) sannaa arises at dhammaa (dhamma-sannaa) The same applies to b), c), d) as in case of a) where cakkhuvinnaana citta arises along with ruupa-sannaa. The only differences are in b) sotavinnaana citta arises along with sadda-sannaa, in c) ghaanavinnaana citta arises along with gandha-sannaa and in d) jivhaavinnaana citta arises along with rasa-sannaa. In e) kaayavinnaana citta arises along with photthabbaa-sanna. Here photthabbaa are objects. They serve as the objects for kaayavinnaana cittas. They include pathavii or solidity or hardness, tejo or temperature or spectrum-of-cold-hot, and vayo or pressure or supportiveness. These 3 are mahaabhuuta ruupas or 3 of 4 basic elements. They serve as the objects for kaayavinnaana cittas or body-consciousness. When kaayavinnaana cittas arise they cognize those 3 ruupas as object. This cognition is helped by sannaa and this sannaa is called photthabbaa-sannaa. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 50225 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:20am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi Tep, > > You raised one interesting question for me! > > > Haven't you ever wondered why the Lord Buddha never mentioned the > > object of sammasamadhi in any of his discourses on right > > concentration? > > That's very true! I often wonder why the Buddha simply said that one > enters and remains in the rupa jhanas without specifying the object of > meditation. > > Regards, > Swee Boon -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Tep and Swee Boon, The Buddha might not specify this because there is no specification for ruupa jhaana object. Because all are pannatti. With Metta, Htoo Naing 50226 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:37am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: Dear Htoo (and Steve) - It is not easy to have correct understanding about the Dhamma all the time, even for a serious and very intelligent student of Buddhism. Sooner or later we will make a silly mistake, either because we extend beyond our domains of knowledge or when we think we are smart (over confident). Therefore, I have made a rule for myself that I will not dwell for too long on any given discussion topic (even if it is within my confident domain of knowledge that is inconstant), or try to answer too many questions(acting smart)! > Htoo: Tep: Aren't you surprised at all why our Great Sage, the Blessed One, never mentioned the "arising of magga citta" when he was teaching his disciples samma-samadhi? Haven't you ever wondered why the Lord Buddha never mentioned the object of sammasamadhi in any of his discourses on right concentration? Lastly, haven't you ever wondered why our Greatest Teacher never mentioned "pannatti" when he gave a talk on right concentration ? Even the great Arahant Sariputta in his "Breathing Treatise" never talked about these issues that you have raised. Why? My answer is: it is simply because these issues are nonsense -- they are not useful for the attainment of samma-nana and samma-vimutti. Sincerely, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep (Steve and all), It is better to close earlier. If you think it is nonsense just close it. I am not a smart one. I am still learning and still studying. Among many modes of my study the discussion exchanging thoughts is just one. 1. I sit in meditation and study and learn what arise. 2. I listen to Dhamma talks and reflect the talks that I have heard. 3. I read Dhamma texts and reflect on them. 4. I speak to people of different background and study and learn what arise from those exchange of words. 5. I write Dhamma things at the risk of making errors and then re- read at a later time and study and learn for myself 6. I discuss Dhamma whenever possible and correct things that have been wrongly put in my mind. and there are many other studying modes. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: I am really just a beginner of Dhamma study. So I may make non- sense issues. This is not attacking anyone including you. That is why I include adding, correction, support etc etc. My posts are discussion-intended posts and not teaching posts. Again opinions may differ and this again is the rights of all individuals. Are there not arahats who never attained any ruupa jhaana? With Metta, Htoo Naing 50227 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:41am Subject: Re: (Sukinder & Htoo)Long Discussion 3 (2nd session) 1 htootintnaing Dear Sukin (and all), It is OK. Now this is 2nd session of long discussion 3. With respect, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: Dear Htoo, I don't know how long our discussion is going to continue. ============================ Sukin: > I am not saying that all outward conditions are the same; the hell > plane after all is in direct contrast to the heavenly plane. And the human plane is said to be best for the development of satipatthana. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: ??? I am thinking this is almost the same implication of 'good place' 'good time'. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukinder: Same perhaps, if we look at both with conventional understanding. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Sukin. Please remember that people around us including DSG members all live in the conventional world. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: The hell plane is the result of akusala kamma, so little or no possibility of panna arising. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Brothal workers also have little possibility of pannaa arising. Ambapaali, Siirimaa etc were just rare examples and do not generalize them as general application. Otherwise loose girls would be happy to stay in brothals because there is possibility of satipatthaana arising according to you. But the case is opposite. Sex workers do have full of lust. Maybe positive or negative. When negative they are in the mood of angriness. Unsatifactoriness in their livelihood. I do not think sex workers are happy and satisfied with their job and developing satipatthaana. Moreover, those who utilize those sex services are also full of lust. There is no possibilities of arising of satipatthaana in those users. If they had a good mind or kusala mind they would not have gone there to destroy the morality of those sex workers. So avoiding some places is not ditthi. Are you using those places like boxing, discos, pubs, fishing, hunting while you intend to do satipatthaana? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: In the heaven plane, life is too good and too long to arouse any sense of urgency. The human plane is the result of kusala kamma so there can be panna, and no one experiences too many kusala vipaka continuously. Yes, today we are in the human plane and the Teachings are available, extremely rare chance to happen. Thinking this can arouse a sense of urgency. But can this be independent of panna? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dhamma is dhamma. They cannot be pushed or influenced. We are in human realm. This is rare event. We have to finish arahatship right now. No. This is not the way. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: And if panna does arise, is it not just that, i.e. a momentary arising? Does panna condition an idea of `doing' something about it? Whatever follows from this realization, is not the `worth' of that dependent on whether or not it is with panna, whether of vipassana or samatha kind? Is there any bhavana when there is no understanding? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You are just holding 'the word understanding'. Bhavanaa is kusala. Kusala is associated with beautiful cetasikas. Among kusala cittas there are 4 cittas that do not have any pannaa. Apart from that all kusala cittas DO have pannaa as a cetasika. When bhavanaa are rightly done there is no reason that panna does not arise. Panna has to arise. But there may be kusala which do not have pannaa. They are called naana-vippayutta cittas. They are dvihetuka cittas. There are 22 dvihetuka cittas. 10 dvihetuka cittas are akusala and they are 8 lobha muula cittas and 2 dosa muula cittas. 12 cittas are dviuhetuka sobhana cittas. They are 4 naana-vippayutta cittas of kusala, vipaaka, and kiriyaa. Bhavanaa is a form of kusala in action. Daana is kusala in action. Siila is kusala in action. Bhavanaa is kusala in action. Bhavanaa mainly arise at mind door. As it is kusala it may be performed by 8 mahaakusala cittas. Among 8 mahaakusala cittas, 4 cittas are naana- vippayutta cittas. That is they do not have any understanding. This does not mean there is ditthi. But just lack of panna. But these 4 kusala cittas condition future arising of 4 tihetuka kusala cittas. Is *understanding* (which you think it as *pannaa*) very important in kusala? With Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Apology for not snipping in the previous post. 50228 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:55am Subject: [dsg] Re: Time flies by and the danger in death. mettaa and adosa. christine_fo... Hello Nina, Thank you for your very clear explanation about dosa, adosa, metta. English has so many de-valued words. 'Love' is one example- it is used as a catch-all to mean anything from the slightest desire "I'd love a cup of coffee", to raging lust, to identifying with a group living in a specific geographic area "love my country", to a parent giving their life out of love for an endangered child. I am always grateful that the Dhamma is precise. metta and peace, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: <<>> > N: I want to speak first about dosa: this has many shades and subjects: > fear, anxiety, annoyance, aversion, anger, hate. It arises whenever > something is disliked. The accompanying feeling is unpleasant, and this > feeling may be very slight or strong. > The subject of dosa can be an object experienced through one of the senses, > or the mind, it can be a concept we are thinking of. You stub your toe, or > the wind blows too hard, this is an occasion for dosa. Someone has to > undergo an unpleasant medical test, or the doctor tells one that there is a > negative result, or one has to lose a dear person through death. These are > occasions for fear, anxiety, sadness. Or one finds another person not > sympathetic, and dislike can arise. > > Adosa: this is the absence of all those negative qualities. Thus, its object > includes sense impressions, concepts and events one thinks of, and also > persons. > Thus, at first there may be fear and anxiety, or sadness when there are the > unpleasant wordly conditions of loss, blame, dishonour or bodily misery. But > then one may consider that whatever happens in life does take its course > anyway because it is conditioned. The worldly condiitons change all the > time. The next day there may be gain, praise, honour, bodily wellbeing. We > see here that understanding of ultimates, conditioned dhammas, helps us to > react more positively in daily life. > When adosa arises instead of dosa, there is patience and calm. It helps to > face difficult circumstances. (Not so easy for me!!I wish I had more, I need > it.) > Mettaa: this is actually the quality of adosa, but we use the word mettaa > when it is directed towards people. 50229 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:18am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 551 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, d) sabba sangaha or general stock of dhamma 1. khandha or aggregates 2. upadaana-kkhandha or clinging aggregates 3. aayatana or sense-bases 4. dhaatu or elements 5. saccaa or Noble Truths There are 5 khandhas or 5 aggregates. 1. ruupa-kkhandhaa or aggregates of materials 2. vedana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of feeling 3. sanna-kkhandhaa or aggregates of perception 4. sankhaara-kkhandhaa or aggregates of formation 5. vi~n~naana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of consciousness Where does sannaa arise? a) sannaa arises at ruupa (visual object). b) sannaa arises at sadda (sadda-sannaa) c) sannaa arises at gandha(gandha-sannaa) d) sannaa arises at rasa (rasa-sannaa) e) sannaa arises at photthabbaa (photthabbaa-sannaa) f) sannaa arises at dhammaa (dhamma-sannaa) All these are aggregates of perception or sanna-kkhandhaa. The first five sannaa have been discussed. There are still many sannaa. Most will be in dhamma-sannaa. When do they arise? They arise at dhamma. Dhamma are mind-objects. There are 6 different kinds of mind-object or dhammaa-rammana. They are 1. 5 panca-pasaada ruupas or 5 sense-sensitivities (eye,ear etc.) 2.16 sukhuma ruupa or 16 subtle materials (like gesture, speech etc.) 3.89 cittas or 89 consciousness (like dosa citta, jhaana citta) 4.52 cetasikas or 52 mental factors (like dosa, maana, pannaa etc.) 5. 1 nibbana or absolute peace 6. 1 pannatti or names-concepts-ideas Sannaa or perceptions arise at these dhamma or thought-objects. Examples are 1)eye-sensitivity is known because of sannaa and likewise other 4 pasaada ruupas are known with the help of sannaa or perception. 2)sukhuma ruupas are also known with the help of sannaa or perception. Without sannaa or perceptions one will never know any speech, any gesture or anything related to these matters. 3) 89 consciousness are also known with the help of sannaa or perception. Without it these 89 consciousness will never be known. 4) 52 cetasikas or mental factors are also seen with the help of sannaa or perception. Without it dosa, lobha, maana, hiri, panna and many other mental factors will not be known. 5) nibbana is seen by a citta called lokuttaraa citta. That citta also has a sannaa or perception. Without it nibbana will not be seen. This is seeing of nibbana. At the discovery or at magga kaala or at the time when magga citta arises there also is sannaa or perception. Further arising of consciousness like these lokuttaraa cittas are phala cittas or fruition consciousness and they also have sannaa or perceptions. 6) pannatti is known by sannaa and sannaa arises at mind door when pannatti is being directed even though pannatti is not a paramattha dhamma. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 50230 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:42am Subject: Re: (Sukinder & Htoo)Long Discussion 3(2nd session) 2 htootintnaing 2nd session page 2: Sukin wrote: And if not, is there any good in encouraging them, especially in light of the fact that the purpose of following the Buddha is to eradicate all kinds of akusala? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: As I said there are 4 kaamaavacara mahaakusala cittas that do not have any pannaa. But they are still kusala. If you hinder people no doing kusala then you are obstructing them in developing kusala. Is it good or bad? You can keep in your mind that 'this kusala is not good'. It will be OK for you. I would encourage anyone to do kusala whatever it is. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: But again this is all `thinking' and if it encourages more thinking, then indeed we are missing the point. What use is it to argue about whether which place is better or worse for the development of satipatthana? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I am not arguing for place or time. But you deny goodness in retreats and you seem encouraging brothals, discos, and daily activity matters. Satipatthaana can arise at any time at any place if there are conditions. But retreats are retreats and brothals are brothals. Are brothals the places for satipatthaana? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: I don't even like to think about "anywhere and anytime" because even this is concept and can encourage the idea that `self' can choose to develop sati at anytime. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Ha ha ha ha. Self is only eradicated at sotapatti magga kaala. You and some seem to be very afraid of *self*. This is beyond logic. Maybe this is *autophobia*. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: So even if there were a momentary realization that this life is precious in terms of the opportunity to develop satipatthana, can the `self' then *do* anything about that? =============================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You are right if speaks from dhamma point of view. But the self, which is our individual, needs to do good things. Being frightened of self and not doing any good things will be a great loss. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To be continued: 50231 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 'Mundane' (was, Walking Meditation ...) /Jhana References jonoabb Hi Tep Tep Sastri wrote: >>Tep: Some sutta evidence is now given below. More research should >>be done by studying the whole Sutta-pitaka. Since you have asked for >>it, I would consider you to be very polite and honest if you could read >>my research below and give me a critique. >> > >Jon: Thanks for the sutta references (snipped from this post) to support >your idea of 2 kinds of jhana, one of which you describe as 'dumb' (let's >call the other one 'smart'). > >Jon: If you don't mind, I'd like to try an understand a little more about >this distinction before attempting to comment on the references. It >would help if you could answer the following queries: >(a) When did the Bodhisatta first attain the 'smart' jhana. Was it at >the time he was a child and attained jhana under the apple tree, or was >it in the period preceding his enlightenment? Could he have attained >'smart' jhana in previous existences as the Bodhisatta? >(b) According to your understanding, what accounts for the difference >between the 2 kinds of jhana. In other words, what factors present in >the smart jhana are absent in the dumb jhana? >(c) If a person develops jhana today, what will determine whether the >jhana he attains is the dumb or the smart variety? >(d) Following on from (c), take the case of a person who has not heard >the dhamma but who attains jhana. If I have understood you correctly, >this would have to be dumb jhana. If that person then hears the >dhamma, does it make a difference to the jhana he experiences when next >attaining jhana? > > >Tep: I appreciate your courteous reply with the intention to review the >sutta references that were used as the (small) basis of my Jhana >research. However, the above extended questions are not fair for the >following reasons. > Sorry for the 'unfair' questions. I will try to put my thoughts in the form of a statement. If the Buddha had truly discovered a new form of jhana, superior to the old, I think he would have said as much, and indicated the factors present in the new that were not in the old, and how the development of the new differed from that of the old. But I do not find anything along these lines in the materials you quote. (Those materials seem to be mainly on the theme of the necessity of jhana for enlightenment. I'm happy to continue the discussion on that topic if you're interested.) There were some materials in earlier post of yours regarding this point, but I see them in much the same way as Swee Boon does: descriptions of different aspects of jhana that are common to jhana of all times. Jon 50232 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] nama and rupa distinguishable. jonoabb Hi Howard Hope you had a good trip to Vermont. upasaka@... wrote: >Hi, Jon - > >In a message dated 9/11/05 10:27:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, >jonabbott@... writes: > > > >If you are saying that the hardness experienced at the moment of >sense-door consciousness is subsequently taken as a self-existent, >independent "thing", then I would have to say there appears to be a >difference between us. To my understanding, it is not a case of there >being a tendency to 'reify' dhammas; it is a case of our ignoreance and >wrong view leading to a perception of the world as a world of people and >things, places and situations, rather than a world of dhammas. The >reason for this perception is that there is not the developed panna that >sees dhammas as they truly are. The panna that sees things as they >truly are is developed stage by stage, it must first see namas as namas >and rupas as rupas, although even this is already an advanced level >compared to our present meagre attainments. As panna is further >developed, 'the world' is gradually seen to be nothing more than dhammas >that are anicca, dukkha and anatta. >------------------------------------------ >Howard: > I agree with most of the foregoing. However, I think our conceptual >distorting applies not only in the area of obvious pa~n~natti. I believe that we >commonly conceptually distort our perception of paramattha dhammas, substituting >ersatz, reified, and hardened concepts for the realities actually observed. >------------------------------------------ > I am not quite with you on this. Could you give an example of what you have in mind here (i.e., something that would not be covered by my earlier comments with which you agree). To indicate where my difficulty lies, you talk about 'substituting ersatz, reified, and hardened concepts for the realities actually observed'. Do you mean something like thinking we are seeing a tree, whereas in fact only visible object is being seen? In such an instance, I'm not sure it's correct to say the the dhamma of visible object is 'observed' in any real sense of the word; it is simply the object of seeing consciousness and then of mind-door moments which think about it. Of course, as we have often remarked, there is nothing 'wrong' with concepts per se. The arahant still has thinking with concepts as object. The difference is that for him/her there is no thinking rooted in lobha, dosa or moha (a very big difference, of course). Nevertheless, all concepts are 'ersatz, are they not? And what is a 'reified' concept? >As I understand it, avijja is ignorant of the object, whereas >miccha-ditthi takes the object to be other than it is. > >Also, not all craving is based on a belief in self. The sotapanna has >eradicated all sense of self (although not of course the conceit 'I >am'), but still has craving (including attachment to sensual objects). >---------------------------------------- >Howard: > No, I don't think the stream enterer has eradicated all *sense* of self, >but only *belief* in self. >-------------------------------------- > (This point is now incidental, as we have agreed on the miccha-ditthi vs. avijja issue. However, no harm in continuing the discussion ;-)) I am not familiar with the distinction between 'sense of self' and 'belief in self'. Could you give an example of the difference? It occurs to me that your 'sense of self' may be the same as the 'conceit of "I am"'. >H: mindstate can be entirely bereft of wisdom.> > >To my understanding of the texts, wisdom is one kind of kusala, but >there are other kinds of kusala besides. Helping others, being >considerate, (having metta) does not require any level of panna. >------------------------------------------ >Howard: > I don't believe that. As I see it, lovingkindness requires *some* >presence of wisdom. If on an occasion one is entirely bereft of wisdom, genuine metta could not be then present as I see it. >-------------------------------------------- > An interesting observation. Could you explain a little further your thinking on why panna is a necessary component of metta, dana, sila (abstinence from ill deeds), etc? These forms of kusala can arise in people of any age or persuasion, I would say. Jon 50233 From: "seisen_au" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 5:03am Subject: Re: Paali seisen_au Hi Htoo Just a few comments below on some of the questions you raised. == Htoo: Pali use 3 nouns regarding gendar. They are musculine, feminine and neuter. Musculine to feminine change; Naro ( man ) --> Narii (woman) Raajo(king ) --> Rajinii(queen) Should katamo change to katamii or katimii? Or is it neuter? If neuter why katamo is musculine and katamaa is feminine? == St: Katama = pronominal adjective As katama is not a noun, it is declined according to the gender/case/number of the noun it qualifies. == katamo ca bhikkhave sammaavaayaamo(Mas/Nom/sing)? (effort male?) katamaa ca bhikkhava sammaasati(Fem/Nom/sing)? (mindfulness female?) katamo ca bhikkhave sammaasamaadhi(Mas/Nom/sing)?(concentra. male?) == St: Yes. For me, the best way to determine the gender of a noun is to have a pali dictionary handy. == Htoo: When I read the initial chapter of Pali grammar there writes_: --o for singular nominative, and --aa for plural nominative. --a.m for singular accusative, and --e for plural accusative. == St: Yes. Those are the declensions for masculine nouns ending in -a. Rgrds Steve 50234 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:01am Subject: Re: Paali htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "seisen_au" wrote: > Hi Htoo > > Just a few comments below on some of the questions you raised. > > == > Htoo: > Pali use 3 nouns regarding gendar. They are musculine, feminine and > neuter. > > Musculine to feminine change; > > Naro ( man ) --> Narii (woman) > Raajo(king ) --> Rajinii(queen) > > Should katamo change to katamii or katimii? Or is it neuter? If > neuter why katamo is musculine and katamaa is feminine? > == > St: > Katama = pronominal adjective > > As katama is not a noun, it is declined according to the > gender/case/number of the noun it qualifies. > > == > katamo ca bhikkhave sammaavaayaamo(Mas/Nom/sing)? (effort male?) > katamaa ca bhikkhava sammaasati(Fem/Nom/sing)? (mindfulness female?) > katamo ca bhikkhave sammaasamaadhi(Mas/Nom/sing)?(concentra. male?) > == > St: Yes. For me, the best way to determine the gender of a noun is to > have a pali dictionary handy. > == > Htoo: > When I read the initial chapter > of Pali grammar there writes_: > > --o for singular nominative, and --aa for plural nominative. > --a.m for singular accusative, and --e for plural accusative. > == > St: Yes. Those are the declensions for masculine nouns ending in -a. > > > Rgrds > Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Steve, Thank you very much. I really appreciate your reply and answer. I read in Myanmar. And I tried to read in Paali. I study Paali so that I can communicate more effectively. But I am still a beginner in Paali study. Thanks again for your help, With Metta, Htoo Naing 50235 From: "Dan D." Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:01am Subject: Re: Picture Yourself on a boat on a river. Beattles. onco111 Hi Colette, You write: > could you point me to the sutta or sutra or ... where it's > mentioned this way or that, politics. My belief is that politics are > a necessary evil since anarchy would exist without rules, structures. The value of politics is a great Dhamma question. The question, though, is whether discussion of politics is conducive to bhavana, and not whether this political view or that political view is the correct one. In my view, the whole teaching is anti-political in the sense that the basic premise is that suffering is caused by one's own cravings for things of the world, earrings, money, all kinds of sensory stimulation (music, video, food, sex, books, discussion, etc.) and not caused by the particulars of the material conditions one is in. I.e., it is my ignorance that is *wholly* responsible for my suffering, and what *they* do has no bearing whatsoever (and what is "politics" other than the struggle to control what *they* are doing?). There are several suttas in which "politics" is discussed directly. One we've already discussed in this thread (the bhikkhus were getting worked up about a king who was taking slaves, and Buddha responded by telling them that the REAL strong bonds and the bonds that must be broken to attain liberation are the attachments and cravings to the things of the world). Another is the Sandaka sutta (MN 76): "on that occasion the wanderer Sandaka was seated with a large assembly of wanderers who were making an upraor, loudly and noisily talking many kinds of poinless talk, such as talk of kings, robbers, ministers, armies, dangers, battles,..., cities, countries..." I think the word "pointless" describes it pretty well, at least as far as Dhamma is concerned. Such talk and worries *of course* have value in the "world", but Buddha's teaching is geared to releasing us from the attachments and sufferings of this world. The commentary explains that such talk is "pointless" because it does not lead to either liberation or a fortunate rebirth. A third sutta that discusses "politics" more or less directly is the "Simile of the Saw" (Kakacupama sutta, MN 21), which includes the following: "Bhikkhus, even if bandits were to sever you savagely limb by limb with a two-handed saw, he who gave rise to a mind of hate towards them would not be carrying out my teaching." Following the Buddha's teaching *requires* not getting worked up about politics -- even if the politics were to violently take our arms and legs. > Without atmosphere then we'd be all forced into living on LOX or > Liquid Oxygen (sounds pretty alien doesn't it). You've seen your > liquidity haven't you? Doesn't it slip through you hands like grains > of sand i.e. a fool and his money are soon parted? > ---------------------------- And Dan laughingly responds, "So, you think I'm a fool, eh?!" > colette: I will have the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha quote for you > tomorrow however the gist is that ALL evil has the foundation of > IGNORANCE, moha! Now to put an end to those nasty little cravings or > aversions or delusions of granduer one has to get to the bottom of it > and find where the thought process deviated, got onto the off ramp > into the quagmires of craving, aversion, and conceit. When you see > the big sign that says WELCOME TO IGNORANCE OPEN 24 HRS A DAY 365 > DAYS A YR. <...> > ---------------------------- I'm not so sure that it is useful to speculate where the thought process deviates. Just the arising and passing away of the moment. And finally... > colette: dhamma applies to everything without acceptions! If it > doesn't apply then it is worthless. I'm not so sure what you mean here. "Dhamma" is the Buddha's teachings. I might be missing something, but did he teach anything about designing a jet engine? Dhamma applies strictly to the development of wisdom and the struggle for enlightenment. If talk doesn't apply to that goal, then *it* is worthless, not the Dhamma. Metta, Dan 50236 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) nilovg Hi James, here is a misunderstanding that is not nevessary. Let me put it straight. What you quote is not Buddhaghosa, it is from Soma Thera's Introduction, containing his personal ideas. One can agree or not, that is not the point here. I have the book in front of me, and you can also check going to Rob K's web. I hope this helps. Nina. op 17-09-2005 08:30 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > James: I think that there can be no doubt whatsoever that K. Sujin > is contradicting this commentary. 50237 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Short Post: Conditions, substantialism, to Howard. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 9/17/05 3:37:58 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > I am just wondering whether this is a misunderstanding as to substantialism > that could easily be ironed out. > As I understand the Abh and Commentaries, there is not such teaching in > them, and if I can do anything to clear misunderstandings I will gladly make > an effort. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: The discussion between Ken and me included the following: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Ken wrote: Sorry to digress, but you are presuming the Buddha's Middle Way is between substantialism and nihilism. But that is not the Theravada position, is it? According to the texts, dhammas have sabhava (their own substance). I replied: I read the Kaccayanagotta Sutta to say, in part, that the middle way is also a "middle" between substantialism and nihilism. As to the Theravadin position, to the extent that the Theravadin Abhidhamma and commentaries take dhammas to be substantial entitities with self-nature, that is an extent to which I am not a Theravadin. I'm not hung up on categorizing myself as Theravadin or anything else for that matter. But I understand 'sabhava' in Theravada not to mean "substance" but merely "characteristic". _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ So, Ken spoke of "the Theravada position," which I took to refer to what is expressed in the Theravadin Abhidhamma and commentaries. My reply alluded to the Kaccayanagotta Sutta which rejects the extremes of nihilism and substantialism. It also said that TO THE EXTENT [emphasis added here by me] that the Theravadin Abhidhamma and commentaries take dhammas to be substantial entitities with self-nature, that is an extent to which I am not a Theravadin. Note that I didn't assert that there *is* such a position taken by Theravada. The "extent" might well be close to nil! In fact, I went on to point out that as I understand it, Theravada does not interpret 'sabhava' to mean "own-being" or "self-existence", but merely characteristic nature, so that, for example, hardness is distinguishable from warmth due to differing sabhava. Thus I was pointing to what I consider to be the dependent, contingent nature of dhammas as interpreted by Theravada, the same, BTW, as in Mahayana. ------------------------------------------------------------- > Just recently I found an impressive text in U Narada (which you have), p. > 54: > ---------------------------------------------- Howard: By "U Narada," are you referring to the Abhi. Sangaha? ---------------------------------------------- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > There is no place where materiality and mentality are stored for their > continual arising and ceasing in succession. Just as when a match is struck > a flame appears from no where and then disappears, so also, when object and > base coincide consciousness and mental factors arise from nowhere, last for > a thought-moment and then cease and vanish altogether. In this condition, > volition, which is an ultimate reality, also arises and ceases in the same > fashion. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: I like the foregoing. ----------------------------------------- However, the force, which is left behind after volition ceases, is > not > destroyed and may be present for countless worlds in the successive > continuity of a being, bound by craving, conceit and wrong views, to produce > a result suddenly. The result cannot be foreseen and seems to be > spontaneous. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: The terminology suggesting a force that "hangs on" has a substantialist ring to my ears. I think that is misleading terminology. Metaphorical speech of some force being passed on, as opposed to current events being conditions for future events (harmless this-that conditionality), easily leads to a substantialist misunderstanding. ------------------------------------------------- > Sorry I misunderstood as to your appreciation of paramattha dhammas. You > made that clear. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Good! :-) ------------------------------------------------- > Another point: I like it that the Tiika to the Visuddhimagga explains: this > is suttanta method, this is Abhidhamma method. Both methods are useful. No > contradictions. We worldlings need both so much. I appreciate what you wrote > about that. > > Now to your post: > op 13-09-2005 15:14 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > > >As to the Theravadin > >position, to the extent that the Theravadin Abhidhamma and commentaries > take > >dhammas to be substantial entitities with self-nature, that is an extent to > >which I > >am not a Theravadin. I'm not hung up on categorizing myself as Theravadin > or > >anything else for that matter. But I understand 'sabhava' in Theravada not > to > >mean "substance" but merely "characteristic". > ------ > You remember the long discussions we had with Michael. Sabhava merely is: > its own characteristic or nature. But it does not last! Unfortunately > Nyanamoli translates it as individual essence. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, that is unfortunate. ------------------------------------------- It is a matter of> > translation, that is all. I quote from his translation of the the > Visuddhimagga (XV, 15): > > <...here, however, all formed bases (aayatanas) should be regarded as > having no provenance and no destination.For they do not come from anywhere > previous to their rise, nor do they go anywhere after their fall. On the > contrary, before thgeir rise they had no individual essence (sabhaava, own > characteristic), and after their fall their individual essences are > completely dissolved. And they occur without mastery [being exercisable over > them] since they exist in dependence on conditions and in between the past > and the future. > > ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, that's not bad (without the "essence" terminology). However, even at the time any dhamma is present, though it certainly has a distinguishing feature or character, in a sense its nature is not its "own", because its very existence is not its own, being utterly dependent on the coming together of other conditions, making it empty of own-being. No dhamma is a separate, self-existent, independent entity. I believe that the contingent and dependent status of all conditioned dhammas is of major importance. ---------------------------------------------------- > > See here, no misunderstanding, they are dependent on conditions, do not > last. > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, but I see there being a problem in emphasis and terminology. It isn't terrible, but it is troublesome. The extremes of substantialism and nihilism are like Scilla and Charybdis, twin dangers to be avoided. They must always be kept in mind because they are such easy and tempting hazards for worldlings to fall prey to. -------------------------------------------------- > We do not have to label ourselves as Theravadin, or call ourselves > anything. > We are just studying the Buddha's teachings. > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, pretty much all Buddhists take the Sutta Pitaka to constitute teachings of the Buddha, but as soon as one goes beyond that, the situation becomes far more "iffy". -------------------------------------------------- > Nina. > P.S. I hope you had good walking in Vermont. > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks! :-) It was lovely!! ======================== 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) 50238 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:49am Subject: Re: (Sukinder & Htoo)Long Discussion 3 (2nd session) 3 htootintnaing Continuation: > Htoo: > When existing in the place (on this earth of human world) do > satipatthaana. > When it is the time in human realm do satipatthana. Sukinder: Yes if indeed there was control over the arising of citta, then it would make sense to say, "do satipatthana", but is there? The conditions are in place, in terms of potential objects of satipatthana, and just knowing this theoretically is not enough. There must be the accumulated panna to actually condition kusala citta with panna to arise and take a paramattha dhamma as object. But we cannot will this to happen. ========================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Again there is a thin marginal layer. When you practise siila don't you control not to break precepts? We cannot loosely live as it is. Otherwise there will be disaster. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > A. Where is satipatthaana more frequent? > a) hell realms > b) animal realms > c) ghost realms > d) human realm > e) deva realms > f) brahma realms Sukinder: In principle and according to theory, d. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Ha ha ha ha. Apology for my behaviour, which looks definitely bad. But ... ... ... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- =============================== > Htoo: > B. Where is satipatthaana more frequent? > a) brothals > b) discos > c) wars > d) retreats > e) hurricane > f) tsunami Sukinder: Now this is different, because we don't know the conditions, whether kamma or whatever other conditions, that we are where we are at any given moment. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Conditions?? This is something like God ideation even though it is not mentioned. I never heard someone became an arahat or anagami or sakadagaami or sotapam while actively working in brothals. No one has enlightened when having sex. Siriimaa, Ambapaali etc actually became so not at the time of having sex at brothals but because listening and reflecting while they were preached by Venerables. No one became enlightened when they were singing. No one seems to be enlightened when killing others at wars. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: We can talk in general about kamma being the cause of human birth, but can we say the same about moment to moment realities? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Moment to moment realities?? Can you know that moment to moment realities. Can you sense each citta in vithi vaara? There do arise cittas because of kamma. So we can say the same about moment to moment realities. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: By very strong lobha we may be driven to a brothel, but we may also have developed enough panna to condition sati at whatever level. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You said lobha. Yes it may drive to there. But does pannaa drive to be enlightened when having sex at brothals? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: And so by pakatupanissaya paccaya, sati may arise. On the other hand we can also by other conditions, find ourselves at a meditation retreat and here too by pakatupanissaya paccaya, sati may arise. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Whatever it is ask anyone from age 7 to 100 years. Is it good to go for a retreat? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: However in either situation, there is no saying what cittas are going to arise and what kind of vipaka is going to condition what javana. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Now you are reciting theory. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: True, given that the accumulation of akusala being far greater than kusala and panna, the chances of the former conditioning is far greater, but this applies equally to all situations a to f don't you think? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I do not understand. Can you rephrase it in another way? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: And though it may be true that dosa would most likely arise during tsunamis and lobha for brothels for example, this does not mean "sati" is going to arise at retreats! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Who say? I ask where is more frequent for satipatthaana to arise. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: It may be just *weaker* and less frequent dosa and lobha. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Whatever it is, it is good to go for a retreat as compared to going brothals. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: But what about "ditthi", the main enemy? I see however that you factor in "teacher" as well below, so I'll comment more there. ===================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Ha ha ha ha. Ditthi is for sotapatti magga naana and it will eradicate forever. Why do you fear that? When doing kusala whatever there is pannaa or not there is no ditthi at all. These are 8 mahaakusala cittas. 4 cittas are without pannaa. But these 4 cittas that are kusala are still KUSALA. They do not have any ditthi at all. Why do you so fear that ditthi that you cannot see directly even though you may have some kind of idea through studying? As long as cittas are kusala there is NO DITTHI at all. But there may be cittas that do not have pannaa at all such as naana- vippayutta mahaakusala cittas. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > It is right that satipatthaana does not depend on *chosen time* and > *chosen place*. But could you please answer above 2 questions? Sukinder: I doubt my answers above are satisfactory…… ========================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: ??? :-)) --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > It is natural for us to react with dosa to noisy places, and with > lobha to peace and quiet. And it is said that lobha is harder to > perceive as an enemy, compared to dosa. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: Both lobha and dosa are the object of satipatthaana. > But 'will satipatthaana more frequently be arising when in hurricane, in tsunami, in torture, in wars?' Sukinder: Better not speculate, perhaps? ================================= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Retreats-haters and sitting-haters will not speculate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > So do you think it is easier at the retreat for sati to arise > especially with preconceived ideas and expectations? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > For retreats-non-believers the answer will be already there in their > mind. > It is not *the retreat* that helps. It is *the learned teacher* that > matters. Sukinder: It is really not a matter of not believing in retreats, but about thinking that there is a better time and place and acting upon the thought. Regarding teachers, I think we really go there with absolutely *no* idea about whether the teacher really knows or not, we take it all on faith. What is our understanding with regard to the concept of retreat and meditation instructors? I think it is vague and blurry, mixed with hope and expectation. And given the level of our ignorance, wouldn't the wise and compassionate thing to do is to teach the Teachings so as to gain some understanding of what Dhamma really is? Because once there is a degree of understanding there grows a corresponding level of confidence not so much in the meditation teacher, but in the Dhamma itself. And this will allow for a level of independence in the student from where he wouldn't then have to follow like sheep any teacher, but gain instead the necessary understanding needed to being a lamp unto himself. Isn't this the purpose of the Teachings? Actually this is why I once started the discussion about what a beginning student of dhamma needs to hear, but I won't go into that now. =========================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Good argumentation. When you do not believe retreats are beneficial this idea should not be promoted. This is partly destruction of saasanaa. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > And what about the other side, i.e. the tendency to lobha "sexy > voice", "brothels" etc. being more than in a retreat? Same here, if > seen with wrong understanding, then the retreat will only serve as > conditions for more lobha. ---------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > Lobha is also the object for satipatthaana. > That lobha may be related to sensuous things. > That lobha may be related to non-sensuous things. > Brothals do not have satipatthaana teachers while retreats are led by satipatthaana teachers. > As lobha is the object of satipatthaana and you also think retreats > are not of your taste then you can choose brothals or anything you > like except retreats. Sukinder: I hope you are now clear that I object not to retreats, but to the idea of choosing. Though of course, when it comes to "retreats", so much wrong view is attached to this concept, that yes, retreat does become a special problem. ;-) So I choosing brothel or whatever place is definitely silly. ================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You object the idea of choosing? OK. It is bad. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Htoo: > > Did you say 'Culapanthaka did not have ditthi before he became an > > > > arahat on that day? > Sukinder: > I suppose he must have, but I was trying to distinguish his case from > the more obvious cases. In his case I believe the primary hindrance > was moha rooted in uddacca and that moha with doubt must have > arisen > relatively less. I was distinguishing mainly with modern day > Buddhists who flock like sheep to meditation retreats mostly with > miccha ditthi. =============================== > Htoo: > So you believe Culapanthaka did have ditthi (including self- identity). > Sarah aslo said 'self-view' has to be released before the start of > journey. Please refer to our very old discussions. Actually ditthi is > killed and eradicated at sotapatti magga door. > I would not discuss about retreats. Sukinder: I don't get your point. Please explain. ======================================== ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Ditthi is there in all puthujanas but ditthi is eradicated in sotapams. So before enlightenment there may have ditthi. We cannot say 'ditthi you do not arise in me I am meditating' but when there are conditions then ditthi will not arise. But you seem to be frightening ditthi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukinder: > Saddha must be with panna. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > Here *must* comes from your own thought. There are many > saddhaa. Not all saddhaa are with pannaa. This does not mean that those saddhaa without pannaa are not to be developed. Any saddha is good. If with pannaa it is much much more better. Sukinder: You left out what followed this part. In that you would see that I did not deny saddha with respect to other levels of kusala. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: OK. Now I see you did not deny. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: However I was hinting at the possibility of not even developing that if the Teachings is wrongly understood. Allow me to elaborate: I think many people are attracted to Buddhism genuinely to develop more kusala. However because they do not understand correctly at the pariyatti level the Teachings, they may grow to be attached to developing kusala. And here `self' is at work. So much so many even want and do become monks, but this is not the correct motivation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: This is OK. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: You can't start the journey of eradicating kilesas without knowing and recognizing self-view. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: True. But self-view does arise even though there is theoretical understanding. So why do you fear that? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: For similar reasons, many others go to retreats, some with the idea of experiencing less "sense impressions". But little do they realize that when they have such thoughts, at that moment they do *not* understand the Buddha's teachings. The Dhamma is meant to teach us to understand any and every experience as "dhatu" and "anatta" and not simply to prefer the experience of one type of dhamma over another, i.e. kusala to akusala. You can't understand dhamma as dhamma if it is all the time being covered up by `self' in one form or the other. So for a person who genuinely wants to develop kusala but misunderstands the Buddha's teachings, his intentions will be so mixed up with wrong view that I think there is a danger of ending up being neither here nor there. Again this is too long, hope you don't mind. Metta, Sukinder. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Not that very long. Good discussion. Try to complete pariyatti. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 50239 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:51am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 552 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, d) sabba sangaha or general stock of dhamma 1. khandha or aggregates 2. upadaana-kkhandha or clinging aggregates 3. aayatana or sense-bases 4. dhaatu or elements 5. saccaa or Noble Truths There are 5 khandhas or 5 aggregates. 1. ruupa-kkhandhaa or aggregates of materials 2. vedana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of feeling 3. sanna-kkhandhaa or aggregates of perception 4. sankhaara-kkhandhaa or aggregates of formation 5. vi~n~naana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of consciousness 4. sankhaara-kkhandhaa or aggregates of formations Here there are 2 words. One is Pali and another is my translation of it. Both need to be understood. Aggregate is simple and does not need to be explained. So 'formation' will be explained here along with 'sankhaara'. Pali word 'sankhaara-khandhaa' has two part. Khandha means 'aggregate'. So 'formation' and 'sankhaara' will be explained to some details. Sakhaara _ i)Sankhaara means 'composition', 'aggregate'. Aggregate of the conditions or essential properties for a given process or result. Examples; the sum of the conditions or properties making up or resulting in life or existence; the essentials or "element" of anything (--?, e.g ayusankhara, life--element, bhavasankhara, jivitasankhara, etc. ii)Sankhaara means 'essential conditions, antecedents or synergy (co- ordinated activity), mental coefficients, requisite for act, speech, thought: Examples; kaaya-sankhaara, vacii-sankhaara, citta-sankhaara, or mano-sankhaara, described respectively as "respiration," "attention and consideration," "percepts and feelings," "because these are (respectively) bound up with," or "precede" those. iii)Sankhaara means 'One of the five khandhas, or constitutional elements of physical life, comprising all the citta-sampayutta- cetasika dhamma - i.e. the mental concomitants, or adjuncts which come, or tend to come, into consciousness at the uprising of a citta, or unit of cognition. As thus classified, the sankhara's form the mental factor corresponding to the bodily aggregate or rupakkhandha, and are in contrast to the three khandhas which represent a single mental function only. But just as kaaya stands for both body and action, so do the concrete mental syntheses called sankhaara tend to take on the implication of synergies, of purposive intellection, connoted by the term abhisankhara, where sankhara are a purposive, aspiring state of mind to induce a specific rebirth; is catalogued as the three classes of abhisankhara; namely apunnaabhisankhaara, punnaabhisankhaara, and anenjaabhisankhaara. So sankhaara is action. Sankhaara is formation. Sankhaara is formation of kamma. Kamma is action. Action is kamma. Kamma is sankhaara and sankhaara is kamma. As mentioned above there are three classes of sankhaara namely apunna, punna, and anenja-abhisankhaara. Here the chief is cetana cetasika even though there are many other associated cetasikas along with cetana. Among other cetasikas vedana and sanna are separate khandhaa. So as there are 52 cetasikas or 52 mental factors, leaving vedana and sanna, 50 cetasikas are all sankhaara-kkhandhaa. Because they form kamma, they form actions they are called formations. Examples are dosa. Dosa is a cetasika. It forms the character of dosa and because of it citta is called dosa citta and so dosa is a body of sankhaara. Likewise other cetasikas are also sankhaara bodies. So these 50 cetasikas are sankhaara-kkhandhaa. Among these 50 cetasikas, cetana cetasika behaves like a leader in terms of kamma. Sankhaara-kkhandhas can be grouped in many different way. As actions are performed at three doors of kamma, sankhaara can be divided into 1) kaaya sankhaara 2) vacii sankhaara 3) mano sankhaara Kaayasankhaara are formations that happen at body-door like offering, killing, stealing. Vaciisankhaara are formations that happen at verbal-door like dhamma-preaching, telling lies etc. Manosankhaara are formations that happen at mind-door like 'byaapaada' or 'destructive thinking', bhavanaa or meditation etc. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 50240 From: "Philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:54am Subject: Perfections: conditioning power of a moment of panna philofillet Hi Nina and all The below is very timely for me, Nina. I've been listening to the Perfections, and respond with such confidence when I hear about khanti (patience) because there is so much of this *letting go* involved. What you describe below, seeing the disadvantage of akusala, understanding even in a shallow way the impermanence of conditioned realites, and then we can let go. And I really believe that listening and reflecting on this will condition more of it. There is the beautiful line in the section on panna, where the Bodhisatta saw the dew drops, and had the conditions to understand impermanence. This beautiful passage, from some commentary, I think: "The Bodhisatta realized the impermanence of the dew drops, and made this predominant in accumulating a sense of urgency and disenchantment. It arose once and then became a condition leading to its arising very often." This is so clear, so powerful. I do not have insight to that degree, but there can be moments of intellectual understanding of anicca, anatta and dukkha that have significant conditioning power, I believe. But then I listen to the section on metta, and there is so much of "if one realizes that he is lacking in loving kindness, he should develop loving kindness" or words to that effect. It simply doesn't make sense to me, not at all. We have loving kindness, or we don't. I can understand how detachment, and disenchantment, and letting go arises, conditioned by the accumulation of right understanding. But being told that one should generate loving kindness when one is lacking in it. It simply doesn't make sense to me. But I will keep listening and reflecting. I do believe that when there is the kind of wisdom described above, insight into the impermanence and unsatisfactoriness of samsara, then compassion and loving kindness will arise more often. Metta is condtioned by understanding the noble truths, I really truly believe this. This talk of "one should develop loving kindness" - it puzzles me and sounds like a completely different faith. If we try to have loving kindness when it isn't already there, how on earth can it be loving kindness? How can it not be about pleasant feeling, or about thinking about loving kindness? Does thinking about metta condition metta? I guess that's the idea, but it doesn't make sense to me, at this point. But I guess it must- that's the only possible explanation, or the Buddha wouldn't have taught it. I have not reflected carefully and what you wrote below, Nina, on adosa and metta. Will be reading it many times, I'm sure. But for me adosa as letting go of hatred makes so much more sense than metta as the generation of loving kindness. That's where I'm at now. Things will change - they always do. Phil > Adosa: this is the absence of all those negative qualities. Thus, its object > includes sense impressions, concepts and events one thinks of, and also > persons. > Thus, at first there may be fear and anxiety, or sadness when there are the > unpleasant wordly conditions of loss, blame, dishonour or bodily misery. But > then one may consider that whatever happens in life does take its course > anyway because it is conditioned. The worldly condiitons change all the > time. The next day there may be gain, praise, honour, bodily wellbeing. We > see here that understanding of ultimates, conditioned dhammas, helps us to > react more positively in daily life. > When adosa arises instead of dosa, there is patience and calm. It helps to > face difficult circumstances. ( 50241 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] nama and rupa distinguishable. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 9/17/05 7:15:30 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: > > Hi Howard > > Hope you had a good trip to Vermont. > > upasaka@... wrote: > > >Hi, Jon - > > > >In a message dated 9/11/05 10:27:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > >jonabbott@... writes: > > > > > > > >If you are saying that the hardness experienced at the moment of > >sense-door consciousness is subsequently taken as a self-existent, > >independent "thing", then I would have to say there appears to be a > >difference between us. To my understanding, it is not a case of there > >being a tendency to 'reify' dhammas; it is a case of our ignoreance and > >wrong view leading to a perception of the world as a world of people and > >things, places and situations, rather than a world of dhammas. The > >reason for this perception is that there is not the developed panna that > >sees dhammas as they truly are. The panna that sees things as they > >truly are is developed stage by stage, it must first see namas as namas > >and rupas as rupas, although even this is already an advanced level > >compared to our present meagre attainments. As panna is further > >developed, 'the world' is gradually seen to be nothing more than dhammas > >that are anicca, dukkha and anatta. > >------------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > I agree with most of the foregoing. However, I think our conceptual > >distorting applies not only in the area of obvious pa~n~natti. I believe > that we > >commonly conceptually distort our perception of paramattha dhammas, > substituting > >ersatz, reified, and hardened concepts for the realities actually observed. > >------------------------------------------ > > > > I am not quite with you on this. Could you give an example of what you > have in mind here (i.e., something that would not be covered by my > earlier comments with which you agree). > > To indicate where my difficulty lies, you talk about 'substituting > ersatz, reified, and hardened concepts for the realities actually > observed'. Do you mean something like thinking we are seeing a tree, > whereas in fact only visible object is being seen? In such an instance, > I'm not sure it's correct to say the the dhamma of visible object is > 'observed' in any real sense of the word; it is simply the object of > seeing consciousness and then of mind-door moments which think about it. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: What I'm saying is the following: The actual hardness that we experience is not the same as the hardness we think of. In fact, just moments after the fleeting moment of felt hardness has come and gone in response to conditions, the mind clamps down on that just passed hardness and engages in cognitive proliferation, conceptually turning it into a seemingly self-existent entity. Not only that - the mind also posits a knowing self that has observed that alleged entity. This is reification of the object and reification of the subject. The foregoing is the *best* I can do in explaining what I mean, Jon. So there is little point in trying to get more out of me on this! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- > > Of course, as we have often remarked, there is nothing 'wrong' with > concepts per se. The arahant still has thinking with concepts as > object. The difference is that for him/her there is no thinking rooted > in lobha, dosa or moha (a very big difference, of course). > Nevertheless, all concepts are 'ersatz, are they not? And what is a > 'reified' concept? > -------------------------------------------- Howard: I hope this has been answered by what I wrote above. -------------------------------------------- > > >As I understand it, avijja is ignorant of the object, whereas > >miccha-ditthi takes the object to be other than it is. > > > >Also, not all craving is based on a belief in self. The sotapanna has > >eradicated all sense of self (although not of course the conceit 'I > >am'), but still has craving (including attachment to sensual objects). > >---------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > No, I don't think the stream enterer has eradicated all *sense* of self, > >but only *belief* in self. > >-------------------------------------- > > > > (This point is now incidental, as we have agreed on the miccha-ditthi > vs. avijja issue. However, no harm in continuing the discussion ;-)) > > I am not familiar with the distinction between 'sense of self' and > 'belief in self'. Could you give an example of the difference? It > occurs to me that your 'sense of self' may be the same as the 'conceit > of "I am"'. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Probably so! (Your last sentence, I mean.) -------------------------------------------- > > >H: >mindstate can be entirely bereft of wisdom.> > > > >To my understanding of the texts, wisdom is one kind of kusala, but > >there are other kinds of kusala besides. Helping others, being > >considerate, (having metta) does not require any level of panna. > >------------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > I don't believe that. As I see it, lovingkindness requires *some* > >presence of wisdom. If on an occasion one is entirely bereft of wisdom, > genuine metta could not be then present as I see it. > >-------------------------------------------- > > > > An interesting observation. Could you explain a little further your > thinking on why panna is a necessary component of metta, dana, sila > (abstinence from ill deeds), etc? These forms of kusala can arise in > people of any age or persuasion, I would say. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I'm afraid I cannot defend my position on this, though I believe it to be true. I believe that any state *entirely* bereft of wisdom must be akusala. ------------------------------------------ > > 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) 50242 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Breathing Treatise - Higher Trainings in Anapanasati nilovg Hi Tep, op 14-09-2005 23:05 schreef Tep Sastri op tepsastri@...: Tep: As shown in the above list the 15 dhammas that help foster the > three Higher trainings are more than "being aware of the nama or rupa > that appears at the present moment", which is the 8th item :'establishing > mindfulness (satim upatthapento sikkhati)', I think. ------ N: being aware of the nama or rupa that appears at the present moment", that is satipatthana, that is the development of the eightfold Path. This is not without paññaa, and right thinking which touches the naama and ruupa that appears, so that pannñaa can know that very dhamma as it is. Also the other factors are necessary. ------- T: > I agree with you that practicing according to the Eightfold path is > developing sila, samadhi, and panna. However, item #11 (direct > knowledge), #12 (full understanding - parinneyya), and #15 (realization - > - sacchikata) seem to be beyond the 8 path factors, i.e. samma-nana > and samma-vimutti. Don't you think so ? ------- N: I repeat the text again: > 11. by directly knowing what is to be directly known(abhinneyyam > abhijaananto sikkhati) > 12. by fully understanding what is to be fully understood (parinneyyam > parijaananto sikkhati) > 13. by abandoning what is to be abandoned (pahaatabbam pajahanto > sikkhati) > 14. by developing what is to be developed (bhaavetabbam > bhaavento sikkhati) > 15. by realizing what is to be realized (sacchikaatabbam > sacchikaronto sikkhati) ------- N: Glad you ask, I discover here something. This reminds me of the three rounds of understanding the four noble Truths. The first Truth has to be fully understood. It should be understood what dukkha is. The second one, lobha, has to be abandoned. The fourth, the Path, has to be developed. The third, nibbaana has to be realized. This pertains to the development of paññaa up to enlightenment. But there are three rounds: sacca nnaa.na: understanding of what the Path is has to become firmer and firmer. Then there will be conditions for kicca ñaa.na: direct understanding of dhammas through satipatthana. This will lead to kata ñaa.na, the realization of the truth. We read in the Vis. Ch XXII, 92: Tep, I think your quoted text refers to the path consciousness with these four functions. Cessation is nibbaana. Nina. 50243 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:39am Subject: Re: Perceiving Transience ... !!! How Does It Happen? buddhistmedi... Dear Ven. Samahita (and all) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > Dear friend Tep Sastri asked: > > >how does perception of impermanence eliminate all ignorance? > > > 1: What is ignorance? > Ignorance is not knowing Suffering, it's cause, it's end > and the Way to end Suffering. Ignorance is Not Knowing > These 4 Noble Truths... > > 2: Perception of impermanence gradually: > A: Induce direct knowledge of the lack of stability of all. > B: Induce direct knowledge of the dissatisfaction inherent in all. > C: Induce direct knowledge of the ego & ownerlessness of all. > > ABC: Gives direct experience of what Suffering is! > B: Points out that the cause of Suffering is Craving what is painful! > B: Thereby also points to the ending Suffering by ending Craving! > ABC: All pushes one further into the only possible alternative to > becoming: > By initiation, cultivation & completion of the Noble Way to reach > Release! > > In this way do perception of impermanence gradually > induce direct knowledge of the the 4 Noble Truths... > When these are fully understood, is ignorance eradicated!!! > I am grateful to your explanation that the "perception of impermanence" can gradually eliminate "all ignorances" by inducing "direct knowledges", although you have not explained how it does that. It is not difficult for me to see why the act of perceiving all conditioned dhammas as impermanent can induce the (intellectual) knowledge that such things are unstable and therefore are dissatisfactory. But to gain the "direct knowledge" of not-self (anatta) from contemplation of the impermanence characteristic is beyond me. Several DSG members may, however, already have achieved their direct knowledges of not- self, since they have dedicated their exclusive attention to the issue of alobha and anatta for a long time. Question: Wouldn't contemplation of not-self alone be enough: a kind of super express highway that bypasses concentration(samadhi) and the perception of impermanence altogether? Respectfully, Tep ====== 50244 From: "Philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:44am Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner27-Contact /Phassa(m) philofillet Hi Nina I've gone back to the beginning of Cetasikas. When you have a moment, could you kindly help me out with these questions? Much appreciated. > iv What is the difference between eye-contact and the eye-door? Eye contact is nama and eye door is rupa. The contact, seeing and form all arise at the eye door? So the eye door actually arises before the triad of seeing, form and contact? > v Are `mano-samphassa?E(mind-contact) and the mind-door > different from each other? Mind door is also nama, I guess. I don't know how it could be rupa. Or is it "heart base" which is rupa in some subtle way? Or mind door doubles as another citta - the last bhavanga before mind door processes arise? Something like that? I really am sorry to ask you to write this out so often for me. You can see I'm absolutely confused about this. I do have to go back to ADL as well. > x Is a concept an object that phassa can contact? I sense the answer is no but I want to say yes. A concept is a mental object. If there isn't phassa, the nama that knows it (thinking?) can't know it. Concept must be known, by thinking, and to be known there must be phassa, it seems to me...but I think it's wrong. Because obviously concept isn't rupa, and nama knows rupa. And since nama knows rupa, phassa contacts only rupa. So the answer is no. Wait. Of course nama knows nama too. But concept is neither nama nor rupa.... it's ...concept. Gaaargh.... Thanks in advance, Nina. Phil > xi Why must there be phassa with every citta? > ***** > [Contact (Phassa) Finished:-)] > 50245 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 7:52am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > (snipped) > > Are there not arahats who never attained any ruupa jhaana? > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing .................. I don't have any ideas for such a case that is beyond my domain of knowledge ! Respectfully, Tep =========== 50246 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:13am Subject: Re: anatta? search for self called off buddhistmedi... Hi, Chris (and Frank) - Thank you for opening a door to the strange new world for me. > Chris: > :-) :-) Such strong opinions and views Tep! > I wonder what you think of the Lead story of this edition? > http://www.theonion.com/content/index > > Tep - it is a 'spoof' magazine. Nothing is factual in it. It > exists to laugh at pomposity ('take the mickey out of'), and those > who take themselves too seriously. Look at the stories on the right > hand side ... > Yes, I read the fictitious story of the Bush's strange nominee. But I am not interested in that kind of magazine. Nothing is wrong with Tep's sense of humor, though. :-) Yet, I still think that 'spoof' story (posted by Frank) was unfit to be on the DSG message board. Don't you think? "...The sooner you realize you have no self to discover, the sooner you can get on with what's truly important: celebrity magazines, snack foods, and Internet porn." It might have offended Khun Sujin too! Sincerely, Tep ========= 50247 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:38am Subject: Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) buddhistmedi... Hi, James - Thank you very much for taking time to write a very clear answer to my question. James: I think that there can be no doubt whatsoever that K. Sujin is contradicting this commentary. It is very specific and leaves no room for doubt about what must be done. However, not only does K. Sujin contradict this commentary, she belittles it by using such phrases as "Someone may GUESS about his temperament" and "He HOPES to obtain a result by this way of practice." (Emphasis mine). Tep: Khun Sujin has her very firm belief in what she wants to believe. At times, when one's belief is strong enough it will contradict with others. I would not blame her for the extreme view that rejects a practical monk's guidelines on selecting meditation object . In fact, Acariya Buddhaghosa also wrote about this very same subject of temperament in The Visuddhimagga. Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Tep, Nina, Sarah, and all, > 50248 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:45am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues buddhistmedi... Hi, Swee (and of course, Htoo) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi Tep, > > You raised one interesting question for me! > > > Haven't you ever wondered why the Lord Buddha never mentioned the object of sammasamadhi in any of his discourses on right > > concentration? > > That's very true! I often wonder why the Buddha simply said that one > enters and remains in the rupa jhanas without specifying the object of > meditation. > Tep: Thank you for sharing you thought with me. My limited knowledge tells me that specifying an object of satipatthana is necessary, but in samadhi the purpose is for unity and non-distraction of the citta. Let me ask Htoo to kindly tell us what he thinks. Sincerely, Tep ======== 50249 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:50am Subject: Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) buddhatrue Hi Nina, Nina: here is a misunderstanding that is not nevessary. Let me put it straight. What you quote is not Buddhaghosa, it is from Soma Thera's Introduction, containing his personal ideas. James: From my reading, Soma Thera didn't come up with these ideas himself. They are from the commentaries to the Satipatthana Sutta compiled by Buddhaghosa, as Soma Thera states in the introduction: "If one finds the explanation given in the commentary to the discourse on mindfulness on any preliminary object one chooses insufficient, one should read the exposition of it in the Path of Purification [Visuddhi Magga] of our commentator." Unfortunately I don't have access to my relevant Nikayas or I would check out the information myself. However, it seems unlikely that Soma Thera would just come up with this elaborate explanation of choosing a preliminary object of concentration based on character, temperament, and cognizing slant himself. Either way, I agree with it. Metta, James 50250 From: "Philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 8:50am Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off philofillet Hi Tep > It might have offended Khun Sujin too! Is there really need to be offended by things like that? If they are silly, isn't it best just to disregard? Isn't being offended just a sign of our own clinging to the way we want things to be? I don't mean to say that in a contentious way. Is there blasphemy in Dhamma? I think of the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan being blown up. Would the Buddha have cared? I doubt it, as long as no one was killed or injured, or suffered emotional trauma because of it. He wouldn't have cared about the statues themselves. Whether we dislike an article, or like it, it is akusala, just dosa or lobha. And the same goes for liking or disliking people's posts, most of the time - just dosa or lobha, clinging to the way we'd like DSG to be, with a sprinkling of understanding now and then. When we like the weather, or dislike it, it is akusala. Patience, renounciation - so rare. Again, not intending to judge you, Tep. Though I am, of course. We do it all the time. *All* the time. Mana, mana, mana. Are there people out there who read posts without thinking "I understand better than him" or "less than him" or "he's a good writer" or "what a disrespectful person - I'm not like that." Are there people out there who get straight at the dhammas without getting into judging, comparing, categorizing, conceptualizing about the person who wrote the post? I guess if there are, they are sotapanna. Just thinking out loud, Tep. Phil 50251 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:20am Subject: [dsg] Re: 'Mundane' (was, Walking Meditation ...) /Jhana References buddhistmedi... Hi Jon, Swee, James, Steve, Htoo, Howard and others - The subject of jhana is fascinating and undeniably important and there is more for us to learn from the Suttapitaka . At this point, after long discussions with you and others, I want to admit that so far I have not been able to effectively reject all arguments made by you and others. But, for now let's simply drop the subject like you have suggested. :-) > Jon: > If the Buddha had truly discovered a new form of jhana, superior to the old, I think he would have said as much, and indicated the factors > present in the new that were not in the old, and how the development of the new differed from that of the old. > > But I do not find anything along these lines in the materials you > quote. (Those materials seem to be mainly on the theme of the necessity of jhana for enlightenment. I'm happy to continue the discussion on that topic if you're interested.) > > There were some materials in earlier post of yours regarding this point, but I see them in much the same way as Swee Boon does: descriptions of different aspects of jhana that are common to jhana of all times. > Tep: As for the future, I may again raise a few questions about jhana and continue to learn from a discussion with anyone, as long as there is some interest on this subject. Thank you all for your patience with me. Respectfully, Tep ==== 50252 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:25am Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off buddhistmedi... Hi, Phil - Thank you for writing. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > > Hi Tep > > > It might have offended Khun Sujin too! > > > Is there really need to be offended by things like that? If they are > silly, isn't it best just to disregard? Isn't being offended just a > sign of our own clinging to the way we want things to be? I don't mean > to say that in a contentious way. Is there blasphemy in Dhamma? I think of the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan being blown up. Would the Buddha have cared? I doubt it, as long as no one was killed or injured, or suffered emotional trauma because of it. He wouldn't have cared about the statues themselves. > > Whether we dislike an article, or like it, it is akusala, just dosa > or lobha. And the same goes for liking or disliking people's posts, > most of the time - just dosa or lobha, clinging to the way we'd like > DSG to be, with a sprinkling of understanding now and then. > > When we like the weather, or dislike it, it is akusala. Patience, > renounciation - so rare. Again, not intending to judge you, Tep. Though I am, of course. We do it all the time. *All* the time. Mana, mana, mana. Are there people out there who read posts without thinking "I understand better than him" or "less than him" or "he's a good writer" or "what a disrespectful person - I'm not like that." Are there people out there who get straight at the dhammas without getting into judging, comparing, categorizing, conceptualizing about the person who wrote the post? I guess if there are, they are sotapanna. Just thinking out loud, > Tep: You have made good points, Phil. Sincerely, Tep ====== 50253 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:34am Subject: [dsg] Re: Breathing Treatise - Higher Trainings in Anapanasati buddhistmedi... Hi Nina - I am delighted by your complete answer that was based on a careful study. > N: Glad you ask, I discover here something. This reminds me of the three rounds of understanding the four noble Truths. > The first Truth has to be fully understood. It should be understood what dukkha is. > The second one, lobha, has to be abandoned. The fourth, the Path, has to be developed. The third, nibbaana has to be realized. > This pertains to the development of paññaa up to enlightenment. But there are three rounds: sacca nnaa.na: understanding of what the Path is has to become firmer and firmer. Then there will be conditions for kicca ñaa.na: direct understanding of dhammas through satipatthana. This will lead to kata ñaa.na, the realization of the truth. > > We read in the Vis. Ch XXII, 92: > > Respectfully, Tep 50254 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 6:04am Subject: My Level of Posting on DSG upasaka_howard Hi, all - I've just returned from vacation. While away, I sent a couple posts and a few more upon my return home. For a while, however, I plan to reduce my level of posting, because I strongly feel the need to devote more of my time to private bhavana in the form of study, contemplation, regular mindfulness practice, and, most of all, "formal meditation". I will, of course, reply to posts directed to me. I will also enter into discussions from time to time when strongly concerned about the topic. I will probably even introduce topics from time to time. But I will be reducing my overall level of participation at least for a while, and though I will be keeping up with reading the posts as best I can, I will be less "up-front visible". 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) 50255 From: "m. nease" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off mlnease Hi Phil, Good points IMHO, just one note-- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip" To: Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2005 8:50 AM Subject: [dsg] Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off > *All* the time. Mana, mana, > mana. Are there people out there who read posts without thinking "I > understand better than him" or "less than him" or "he's a good writer" > or "what a disrespectful person - I'm not like that." Are there people > out there who get straight at the dhammas without getting into judging, > comparing, categorizing, conceptualizing about the person who wrote the > post? I guess if there are, they are sotapanna. Just thinking out loud, > Tep. Unfortunately even a sotaapanna is still subject to conceit and hatred. In fact (according to the texts) only the arahanta is free from maa.na. mike 50256 From: "m. nease" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ mlnease Hi Dan (and Hal), Great post, thanks--just this, below: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan D." To: Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 7:09 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ And a quibble -- ti-lakkhana are spoken of as characteristics of paramattha dhamma. Wouldn't you think that if there is such a thing as a universe bereft of sentient beings, there would be no paramattha dhammas and no tilakkhana there? An interesting question--of course, ruupa (the paramattha dhamma) could still exist in a universe with no sentient beings and would still be impermanent and not-self--and assuming that everything in that universe would be powerless to satisfy--even in the absence of a being to satisfy--wouldn't that 'satisfy' one meaning of dukkha? Seems to me this could be a difference between methods, suttanta vs. abhidhamma. Sentient beings in the former, not in the latter...just thinking out loud. mike 50257 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:12am Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ lbidd2 Hi Dan, Hal, and Howard, Regarding the reality status of the tilakkana maybe we could say impermanence, etc. are characteristics of formation (sankhara). That way there wouldn't be the problem of thinking impermanence is not impermanent because it is a concept. Also, it would mean I was wrong in saying the perception of a group is the perception of a concept. It would be better to say the perception of a group is the perception of a compact formation. Vism. talks about the "resolution of the compact" in terms of sorting out a formation into its ultimate experiential elements (khandhas) which are, themselves, formations in that they are impermanent, undesirable, and not self. It is tempting to think that a formation is a concept but I think that is incorrect because formations are impermanent. Of course there are also concepts of impermanence. In the quote below from Ledi Sayadaw we could say a particular jar is a formation, the idea of a jar is a concept, and "relations" means formation (sankhara). I think this also may facilitate Howard's argument for a middle way between concept and reality. A particular jar is a complex "compact formation" while hardness, for example, is an elemental or ultimate formation. Neither formation is a concept because both are impermanent. One could say the same thing about a person and still see that there is no self in a person. Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Dear Hal, > Your question about the failure of the tilakkana to apply to paññati > is a good one -- it strikes at the heart of the distinction between > paramattha dhamma and concept. > > I found the Ledi Sayadaw reference -- an essay entitled "On the > philosophy of relations" in Journal of the Pali Text Society, vol. > VII (1915-1916), pp. 21-53. On page 25, he writes: > > "Now, the Real, with the sole exception of Nibbana, is impermanent > because it is subject to a ceaseless flux of change involved in > becoming. But even as space is regarded as permanent, general > concepts and ideas may be said to be also permanent, in the sense of > exemption from the phenomena of becoming (i.e., arising and ceasing). > How? Although the name 'jar' is no longer applicable to a particular > jar when it is broken into pieces, yet the general concepts or notion > of jar still remains in our mind to denote other individual members > of that class of vessels. Relations, however, are not permanent, as > are general concepts of relations." > 50258 From: nina Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:28am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 3, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections: conditioning power of a moment of panna nilovg Hi Philip, op 17-09-2005 15:54 schreef Philip op philco777@...: > > But then I listen to the section on metta, and there is so much > of "if one realizes that he is lacking in loving kindness, he should > develop loving kindness" or words to that effect. It simply doesn't > make sense to me, not at all. ----- N: It is meant just as a reminder, sometimes we can consider: yes, I neglect so many perfections, waste my life with akusala, what am I doing on this earth. But we do not need to rationalize about it too much. ------ Ph: Does thinking about metta condition metta? ------- N: Kh Sujin stresses: apply it, in action and speech. Apply it and don't think too much. As I wrote to James: we need energy to practise mettaa, we need it for all kinds of kusala. I also heard about energy : then there is no discouragement, we are not weary to study the characteristic that appears. I am now listening to energy. Nina. 50260 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) nilovg Hi James, Shall we drop it? :-)) LOL. Nina. op 17-09-2005 17:50 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > James: From my reading, Soma Thera didn't come up with these ideas > himself. 50261 From: "Philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:40am Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off philofillet Hi Tep and Mike I > think of the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan being blown up. Would the > Buddha have cared? I doubt it, as long as no one was killed or > injured, or suffered emotional trauma because of it. He wouldn't have > cared about the statues themselves. I thought afterwards that I'm not so sure about this point. He would care about the kamma of the person who used violence with a heart full of hatred. But I guess that's included in the "emotional trauma" above. And the question I asked, which I've never thought of before: is there blasphemy/sacrilege in Dhamma? Hard to imagine Buddhists picketing a movie entitled "The Last Temptation of the Buddha" (as happened with "The Last Temptation of Christ" some years back) but I imagine such things have happened. Here in Japan, during the Edo period in the 17th century, Christianity was persecuted and suspected Christians were ordered to walk on Christian icons to prove that they weren't Christian - no Christian could walk on an image of Christ, they were sure. Would I stomp on a Buddhist image? Why I be loathe to do so? What is the meaning of that "if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him?" Would it be even worse to say "if you meet the Buddha on the road, pull down his pants and spank his plump bottom?" I don't mean to be silly. Just curious about what is offensive and why it bothers us. It didn't bother me at all when Herman used "bullshit" - I'd been thinking he was full of it for months! (If you are out there, Herman, just teasing - please come back soon.) The real world is full of people who cuss and babble and bitch. Why shouldn't DSG be? Of course, if there is hatred it is to be let go of asap. Just some vapid thoughts. I am curious about Buddhist blasphemy, though. Phil 50262 From: "Philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:53am Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off philofillet Hi again > Just some vapid thoughts. I am curious about Buddhist blasphemy, > though. I guess it comes down to respect. Such respect for the Buddha for his teaching, thus not wanting to "dis" him. And using Him sometimes instead of him. What is this respect? It's not a perfection. What cetasika is it? Related to hiri and ottapa? Phil 50263 From: "Philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 0:14pm Subject: Re: Perfections: conditioning power of a moment of panna philofillet Hi Nina > N: Kh Sujin stresses: apply it, in action and speech. Apply it and don't > think too much. Yes, I'm thinking too much now. I think (oops) listening to the Perfections will be helpful to cultivate more of a "just do it" tendency. But on the other hand, "just do it" can lead to wrong practice. I heard this in Lord of the Rings the other day. "It's a dangerous thing, going out one's door. You step on to the road, and if your feet aren't solidly planted, you don't know where you'll be swept off too." > As I wrote to James: we need energy to practise mettaa, we need it for all > kinds of kusala. > > I also heard about energy : then there is no discouragement, we are not > weary to study the characteristic that appears. I am now listening to > energy. Yes, thank you Nina, you're right. It's in energy that the answer to my confusion about metta must lie. For we know wholesome states that are not yet arisen are to be aroused etc, as well as the ones that already have arisen are to be maintained - it is not that metta is created out of thin air, there is right energy that catches the moment at which metta can arise due to conditions. If the energy is not there, the moment will be lost. Still, this right energy is also conditioned, and can't be had just by sitting down and deciding to have it. (Or deciding to have it and sitting down!) But I feel a little closer to understanding - thanks. Phil 50264 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 0:33pm Subject: Re: My Level of Posting on DSG buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I've just returned from vacation. While away, I sent a couple posts > and a few more upon my return home. For a while, however, I plan to reduce my > level of posting, because I strongly feel the need to devote more of my time to > private bhavana in the form of study, contemplation, regular mindfulness > practice, and, most of all, "formal meditation". I will, of course, reply to posts > directed to me. I will also enter into discussions from time to time when > strongly concerned about the topic. I will probably even introduce topics from > time to time. But I will be reducing my overall level of participation at least > for a while, and though I will be keeping up with reading the posts as best I > can, I will be less "up-front visible". > > With metta, > Howard Good for you and best wishes! I have been thinking that I am posting too much also and should cut back, but sometimes the posting is helpful to my practice- provides inspiration. But sometimes it is negative in that it provides frustration. Hard to say. But I will probably have to cut back anyway since my threads keep getting 'dropped'! ;-)) Metta, James 50265 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 0:37pm Subject: [dsg] Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi James, > Shall we drop it? :-)) LOL. > Nina. > op 17-09-2005 17:50 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@y...: > > > James: From my reading, Soma Thera didn't come up with these ideas > > himself. Geez! I guess so if you want to. However, I would like to know if I am mistaken or not before this thread is dropped. If I am mistaken then there is no need to deliver my question to K. Sujin. Anyway, not the end of the world. Metta, James 50266 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Level of Posting on DSG upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 9/17/05 3:33:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > > Good for you and best wishes! > -------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks!! :-) -------------------------------------- I have been thinking that I am > > posting too much also and should cut back, but sometimes the posting > is helpful to my practice- provides inspiration. -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, at times - definitely. ----------------------------------- But sometimes it > is negative in that it provides frustration. Hard to > say. But I > will probably have to cut back anyway since my threads keep > getting 'dropped'! ;-)) ---------------------------------- Howard: LOL. --------------------------------- > > Metta, > James > ====================== 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) 50267 From: Frank Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:18pm Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off dhamma_service Hi Phil, Tep, MIke, rest of the gang, When it comes to guidelines for offensiveness, realizing that every culture, subculture, regional whatever differences, I find it's best to just try to assess each situation and use my best judgement, as there is no universal rule for what constitutes buddhist blasphemy or offensiveness. Some examples: 1) if I'm in a group of pure land mahayanists who treat the printed sutras as sacred items to be revered as if they were the Buddha himself, I'll show restraint by not mentioning to them that if I'm alone in my house and I need to answer nature's call while I'm in the middle of reading a particularly engrossing sutta, let's just say I won't stop reading the sutta. Out of courtesy for their point of view, I won't offer my view that I think the highest respect I can pay to the Buddha is my ragged worn down beat up looking dhamma book that I've read so many times I thought my eyes would bleed. A pristine dhamma book says to me it hasn't been properly used the way that would make the Buddha proud. The dhamma is in the heart, not on printed text. 2) For me, the mere appearance of colloquialisms, slang, colorful metaphors and colloquialism alone can not offend [me]. It's entirely dependent on how I perceive or believe the intention behind it. Let's say for example DSG had some new members with tourette's syndrome (the strain where they tend to use colorful language). I would hope we make allowances for that. Colloquialism means nothing without context. Shit. Shit. Shit. Shit. Are you offended? Without context, shit carries no weight. In some cultures, your lack of using the word "shit' would be deeply offensive to them, because they would perceive you as believing yourself to be superior to them and looking down at their unsophisticated language. 3) Continuing on the theme of the intention behind the word that accounts for the offensiveness, one of the most deeply offensive things I ever read was written in eloquent, intellectual prose free of any words that were profane or offensive if analayzed word by word. Yet, the meaning of those words when put together, and the intention and mental state of the author was the most profane, blasphemous and offensive thing I could possibily imagine or dream up. No need to identify the author by name here (cough, cough, oh my I'm suddenly coughing vicar-ously), but what offends me more than anything is hatred and ignorance from a highly respected and influential figure who has the potential to infect millions of people with similar hatred and ignorance. -fk p.s. Here's a quick self-quiz. What offended you the most after reading this post? 1) That I used the dirty word "shit" 5 times. 2) that I see bodily function as mere bodily function and have no problems multitasking that with reading sutras 3) That I lied about not identifying the highly respected author of the offensive text (1 count of violating right speech added to my permanent record) 4) That I not only lied but disingenously gave an unambigous hint in coughing. (1 more count of violating right speech added to my permanent record) 5) that my corny sense of humor is not only offensive and unfunny 6) all of the above ------------------------------------------------------------------ answer key: If you answered: 1) you're not a mahayanist even if you think you are 2) grey area - can not infer anything about your wisdom 3) this answer is very correct: If you picked it, it shows that you value right speech enough that you are probably scrupulous about observing it, find white lies, casual social white lying, white lying for humorous reasons offensive and unnecessary. 4) this is also a very correct answer, see above (3). 5) you need to broaden your sense of humor 6) being equally offended by items 1-5, while under highly unusual circumstances might be a correct answer, in most cases would indicate lack of discernment and aptitude for analytical thinking. frank@... 50268 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:29pm Subject: Re: My Level of Posting on DSG buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard - This kind of I-will-tone-down-my-activity announcement is unusual, I guess. Noone has done it successfully before; they either left (e.g. Hasituppada), or popped in and out several times, e.g. Ken O. and Htoo :-)) Howard: I will also enter into discussions from time to time when strongly concerned about the topic. I will probably even introduce topics from time to time. But I will be reducing my overall level of participation at least for a while, and though I will be keeping up with reading the posts as best I can, I will be less "up-front visible". Tep: May your strong dedication to "formal" meditation result in a great success. Sincerely, Tep =============== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > 50269 From: Frank Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:46pm Subject: offensiveness and saving thousands of lives dhamma_service Along the lines of what Phillip was describing about the test of one' s christianity by ordering them to walk on some type of christian icon, this got me thinking about the fairly recent event where the US caught much flak for their disrespectful use of Quoran in the Iraq prison camps. If the fundamentalist Muslim extremists view the printed Quoran as completely sacred, I have an idea that could save the lives of hundreds of American soldiers. We make body armor for them out of Quorans, and armor for the tanks as well. "Don't shoot! If you fire on us, you'll be be defiling your sacred texts!". I would save this tactic for important situations, rather than as a broad initiative, in which case the fundamentalist leaders have time to circumvent this maneuver with some bizarre exemption, such as "those quoran's were not printed under proper circumstances so the rule doesn't apply here". You think I'm joking about this? Only partially. If I was a soldier in Iraq, I could definitely see a potential situation where my life is being threatened, I whip out a legitimate copy of the Quoran I"ve been carrying aroudn for just this occasion, I cover a vital organ like my head or chest with the quoran, shouting out in their native langauge, "Don't shoot! I'm holding a genuine Quoran!", just as one would use a hostage. I bet it would buy me just enough time to do what I needed to do. -fk frank@... 50270 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Level of Posting on DSG upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 9/17/05 5:31:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: > Hi, Howard - > > This kind of I-will-tone-down-my-activity announcement is unusual, I > guess. Noone has done it successfully before; they either left (e.g. > Hasituppada), or popped in and out several times, e.g. Ken O. and > Htoo :-)) > --------------------------------------------- Howard: You are correct! I've made such a vow before, and the results were certainly imperfect! ;-) I hope to do better this time. --------------------------------------------- > > Howard: I will also enter into discussions from time to time when > strongly concerned about the topic. I will probably even introduce > topics from time to time. But I will be reducing my overall level of > participation at least for a while, and though I will be keeping up with > reading the posts as best I can, I will be less "up-front visible". > > Tep: May your strong dedication to "formal" meditation result in a great > success. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks! :-) ---------------------------------------- > > > Sincerely, > > > Tep > > ======================== 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) 50271 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 2:56pm Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off buddhistmedi... Hi, Phil (Chris, James and Mike) - O.K. let's continue the discussion on the issue of Buddhist blasphemy that you have raised. Ph. : I thought afterwards that I'm not so sure about this point. He would care about the kamma of the person who used violence with a heart full of hatred. ... And the question I asked, which I've never thought of before: is there blasphemy/sacrilege in Dhamma? Ph. : Just curious about what is offensive and why it bothers us. Tep: I can only speak for myself. I am always bothered (not strongly enough to be dosa/hate, but rather disgusted/dislike) by actions and words that show disrespect of the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha (in that order). Yes, there is always blasphemy in the Dhamma. For example, in the article that Frank posted; it is the blasphemy of the Anatta principle that bothered me <"...The sooner you realize you have no self to discover, the sooner you can get on with what's truly important: celebrity magazines, snack foods, and Internet porn.">. James might have something to add to this discussion? Regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > Hi Tep and Mike > (snipped) > Here in Japan, during the Edo period in the 17th century, > Christianity was persecuted and suspected Christians were ordered to walk on Christian icons to prove that they weren't Christian - no > Christian could walk on an image of Christ, they were sure. Would I > stomp on a Buddhist image? Why I be loathe to do so? What is the > meaning of that "if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him?" > Would it be even worse to say "if you meet the Buddha on the road, > pull down his pants and spank his plump bottom?" I don't mean to be > silly. Just curious about what is offensive and why it bothers us. > It didn't bother me at all when Herman used "bullshit" - I'd been > thinking he was full of it for months! (If you are out there, > Herman, just teasing - please come back soon.) > The real world is full of people who cuss and babble and bitch. > Why shouldn't DSG be? Of course, if there is hatred it is to be let > go of asap. > 50272 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:13pm Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off buddhistmedi... Hi, Frank (and all)- Would it surprise you if I say that I do not think that your posts are offensive at all? I also want you to know that I think your assessment of the the cases (examples 1 - 3) is reasonable. So the "self quiz" is not applicable to me. Thank you for the explanation. Sincerely, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Frank wrote: > Hi Phil, Tep, MIke, rest of the gang, (snipped) > Here's a quick self-quiz. What offended you the most after reading this post? > 1) That I used the dirty word "shit" 5 times. > 2) that I see bodily function as mere bodily function and have no problems multitasking that with reading sutras > 3) That I lied about not identifying the highly respected author of the offensive text (1 count of violating right speech added to my permanent record) > 4) That I not only lied but disingenously gave an unambigous hint in coughing. (1 more count of violating right speech added to my permanent record) > 5) that my corny sense of humor is not only offensive and unfunny > 6) all of the above (snipped) 50273 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 3:33pm Subject: Re: No Igor not eye of Newt. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > Hi Joop, > ... Good afternoon or so, dear Colette This morning I had only have half an hour before I had to go to Amsterdam to meet old friends That was not enough to answer you in the right way: ironic and with respect at the same moment; serious and light at the same moment; at the same level to each other and to a younger woman from an old man (me) who thinks to have psychological insights at the same moment. You said: "What will hurt our conversation will probably be the cultural differences, and my lack of formal university education." I know people who have a formal university education and still write very chaotic. Perhaps is's more that you have to much thoughts. The only way to get my head empty, is meditation, to accept coming is disappearing thoughts. That's the way to experience emptiness, that's all that is there to say about it" "the rest is silence" Colette: "I think it is a beautiful thing that we have found a "Real Thing" that interests us both since we are so divergent and distant from eachother." Joop: is that really so? The distance is not so enormous? And the cultural differences are not so enormous, I understand you live somewehre in the US and I in "the old Europe". Do you meditate, Colette? I think that will be good for you Metta Joop 50274 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:17pm Subject: Vism.XIV,193 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 193. (vii)-(ix) 'Inferior and superior' are twofold, namely, figuratively (relatively) and absolutely (literally). Herein, the materiality of the Sudassin deities is inferior to the materiality of the Akani.t.tha (Highest) deities. That same materiality [of the Sudassin deities] is superior to the materiality of the Sudassa deities. Thus, firstly, should inferiority and superiority be understood figuratively (relatively) down as far as the denizens of hell. But absolutely (literally) it is inferior where it arises as unprofitable result, and it is superior where it arises as profitable result.76 ----------------------------- Note 76. Profitable result is superior because it produces a desirable object (see Pm. 498). This question is treated at length at VbhA. 9f. 50275 From: "colette" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:02am Subject: Bhikkhu Samahita: Perceiving Transience ... !!! How Does It Happen? ksheri3 Good Morning my fine Bhikkhu, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > Dear friend Tep Sastri asked: > > >how does perception of impermanence eliminate all ignorance? > > 2: Perception of impermanence gradually: > A: Induce direct knowledge of the lack of stability of all. > B: Induce direct knowledge of the dissatisfaction inherent in all. > C: Induce direct knowledge of the ego & ownerlessness of all. colette: I have been taught to be frugal and to not waste. I adopted that belief on my own. Unfortunately when I accepted this reality as a part of my Self I ended up finding that I was manifesting a reality, creating a foundation upon which others would build without any hesitation or consideration for their actions. With this said then, I say to you that you have manifested the means to your own end. Allow me to explain, the Red Sangaha has a passion for the dislike of those lay-people that follow the White Sangaha which is to say that monks OBSESS ON THE TIPITAKA, ETC, AND THEY OBSESS ON OWNING THE ENTIRE CONCEPT OF BUDDHIS, thus they argue, they create discord, by their discrediting of the lay person who chooses the White Sangaha. I can only find out the limitations, parameters, of your statement of "what is" in the above "A:, B:, and C:," statements by direct application(s), and gain the contact with them to see if what you say is buddhism or not. > A: Induce direct knowledge of the lack of stability of all. colette: bad choice of words "stability" since this implies goal orientation which is directly in opposition of buddhism and it cannot exist: all is illusion. > B: Induce direct knowledge of the dissatisfaction inherent in all. colette: ouch, I wonder if it is wise to even attempt to explain this since you have used a lovely combination of words, "dissatisfaction" and "suffering is craving". I think not, it stands on it's own. > C: Induce direct knowledge of the ego & ownerlessness of all. colette: IMPOSSIBLE, although I reserve the right to be wrong. There is no "beaten path" given in the above definition, a step by step direction: see your standard "Popular Mechanics" and to fulfill the definition of "Man" one must religiously read and accept as gospel, the procedure of the Popular Mechanic. You, Bhikku, have given me a plastic piece of a model kit which has it's parts all attached to one piece of plastic and I have to recognize each part, detach it from the whole, and place it into the model that the piece of plastic was manufactured for. If this or that piece of plastic is not inserted in the model at the correct time of construction then the model itself is not according to "the plan" which is to say you have misquoted and misinterpreted what the buddha has said which blatantly makes you a pervert. -------------------- > > ABC: Gives direct experience of what Suffering is! > B: Points out that the cause of Suffering is Craving what is painful! > B: Thereby also points to the ending Suffering by ending Craving! > ABC: All pushes one further into the only possible alternative to > becoming: colette: AHHHHHHHHHH, what on earth are you trying to say! I can picture the cover graphics of King Crimson's CD "21st Century Schitziod Man"! "...alternative to becoming" how can you suggest such a blatant blasphemy? You, in your obsession with "becoming" have then suggested your DESIRE for others and future others to SUFFER. This is not a good thing. ----------------- > By initiation, cultivation & completion of the Noble Way to reach > Release! colette: and where does "release" come from? is it not the individual themselves that manifests release? <....> toodles, colette 50276 From: "Philip" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:57pm Subject: Sati and the pot of hot oil (to Rob M) philofillet Hi Rob M How have you been? You'll remember that when we met in Tokyo, you mentionned the sutta in which the man is walking with a pot of hot oil on his head, and an executioner's sword at his neck that will fall if he spills a drop, and dancing girls along the road to make things even more difficult. You said that the sati in this simile is *not* where we'd assume, in the man's taking care to be mindful not to spill a drop. I told you not to tell me the answer, that I'd think about it as homework. I have thought about it now and then, but give up. I have trouble understanding sati because I cling to the notion of panna that supercedees everything else. In this case, for me, it would be something like the man having enough understanding to know that there was no executioner, and no sword, or something like that, adn this understanding would relax him and he would just carry on and not spill a drop, because of not clinging to the importance of one lifetime. Something like that. Anways, I give up. Where is the sati in this simile? Phil p.s sorry I had to work last time you were in Tokyo. Hopefully next time. 50277 From: "nidive" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 10:57pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Samahita: Perceiving Transience ... !!! How Does It Happen? nidive Hi Colette, > > C: Induce direct knowledge of the ego & ownerlessness of all. > colette: IMPOSSIBLE, although I reserve the right to be wrong. There > is no "beaten path" given in the above definition, a step by step > direction: see your standard "Popular Mechanics" and to fulfill the > definition of "Man" one must religiously read and accept as gospel, > the procedure of the Popular Mechanic. You, Bhikku, have given me a > plastic piece of a model kit which has it's parts all attached to > one piece of plastic and I have to recognize each part, detach it > from the whole, and place it into the model that the piece of > plastic was manufactured for. If this or that piece of plastic is > not inserted in the model at the correct time of construction then > the model itself is not according to "the plan" which is to say you > have misquoted and misinterpreted what the buddha has said which > blatantly makes you a pervert. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/udana/ud4-01.html He should develop the perception of inconstancy so as to uproot the conceit, 'I am.' For a monk perceiving inconstancy, the perception of not-self is made firm. One perceiving not-self attains the uprooting of the conceit, 'I am' -- Unbinding in the here and now. -------------------------------------------------------------------- This sutta says it all. Perception of inconstancy/impermanence induces the perception of not-self and makes it firm. Are you saying the Buddha is a pervert too? > > ABC: All pushes one further into the only possible alternative > > to becoming: > colette: AHHHHHHHHHH, what on earth are you trying to say! I can > picture the cover graphics of King Crimson's CD "21st Century > Schitziod Man"! "...alternative to becoming" how can you suggest > such a blatant blasphemy? You, in your obsession with "becoming" > have then suggested your DESIRE for others and future others to > SUFFER. This is not a good thing. The only possible alternative to "becoming" is nibbana, isn't it? I don't know what makes you so hostile towards Bhikkhu Samahita. I think you are being blatantly rude. Regards, Swee Boon 50278 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Sep 17, 2005 11:20pm Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Samahita: Perceiving Transience ... !!! How Does It Happen? buddhistmedi... Hi, Colette (and Ven. Samahita) - > Samahita Bhikkhu: > > C: Induce direct knowledge of the ego & ownerlessness of all. > > colette: IMPOSSIBLE, although I reserve the right to be wrong. There > is no "beaten path" given in the above definition, a step by step > direction: see your standard "Popular Mechanics" and to fulfill the > definition of "Man" one must religiously read and accept as gospel, > the procedure of the Popular Mechanic. I am really impressed by this post of yours; it is a masterpiece. Several issues that have been in the center of DSG discussions are neatly gathered in your post. I think Sarah, Phil and KenH (among other Paramattha dhamma specialists) are happy by your pizazz. I eagerly look forward to hearing Bhkkhu Samahita's reply. Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > Good Morning my fine Bhikkhu, > (snipped) > > > > > ABC: Gives direct experience of what Suffering is! > > B: Points out that the cause of Suffering is Craving what is > painful! > > B: Thereby also points to the ending Suffering by ending > Craving! > > ABC: All pushes one further into the only possible alternative > to > > becoming: > > colette: AHHHHHHHHHH, what on earth are you trying to say! I can > picture the cover graphics of King Crimson's CD "21st Century > Schitziod Man"! "...alternative to becoming" how can you suggest such a blatant blasphemy? You, in your obsession with "becoming" have then suggested your DESIRE for others and future others to SUFFER. This is not a good thing. > ----------------- 50279 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Question for K. Sujin (Re: Dhamma in Cambodia) nilovg Hi James, I could not resist making a joke, although you recently reminded us to refrain from idle talk. In earnest, I shall bring up your points, it is a subject mentioned in the commentary. But not Ven. Soma's text; with due respect, he inserted his own ideas in it. Kh Sujin is quite familiar with the text of the Co. I want to go to the background and not post so much before India, like Howard. But dangerous to say so, see Phil. We say so but we don't. There are two matters for discussion later on, after India: what is a character. What is the meaning of the four Applications of Mindfulness. As to the first: as we say in Dutch: nothing is black or white, we better see nuances, fine distinctions. I mentioned the latent tendencies to show that what we call character is very momentary and what type of citta appears depends on many conditions. As to point two: It varies from moment to moment as to what is the object of mindfulness. But enough for now. op 17-09-2005 21:37 schreef buddhatrue op buddhatrue@...: > > Geez! I guess so if you want to. However, I would like to know if I > am mistaken or not before this thread is dropped. If I am mistaken > then there is no need to deliver my question to K. Sujin. Anyway, not > the end of the world. 50280 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:15am Subject: Re: Bhikkhu Samahita: Perceiving Transience ... !!! How Does It Happen? christine_fo... Hello Collette, I think it should be easy enough for adults to hold a courteous discussion in which their viewpoints may differ - all the time keeping within the bounds of Right Speech. Bhikkhu Samahita is a widely respected member of the Theravada Sangha and is treated with politeness wherever he posts. Personally, I learn a great deal from the fresh and accurate way he presents his daily dhamma postings. Though this sutta below is directed at Bhikkhus, it may be worth members of dsg reflecting upon it: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu who desires to admonish another should do so after investigating five conditions in himself and after establishing five other conditions in himself. What are the five conditions which he should investigate in himself? [1] "Am I one who practices purity in bodily action, flawless and untainted...? [2] "Am I one who practices purity in speech, flawless and untainted...? [3] "Is the heart of goodwill, free from malice, established in me towards fellow-farers in the holy life...? [4] "Am I or am I not one who has heard much, who bears in mind what he has heard, who stores up what he has heard? Those teachings which are good alike in their beginning, middle, and ending, proclaiming perfectly the spirit and the letter of the utterly purified holy life — have such teachings been much heard by me, borne in mind, practiced in speech, pondered in the heart and rightly penetrated by insight...? [5] "Are the Patimokkhas [rules of conduct for monks and nuns] in full thoroughly learned by heart, well-analyzed with thorough knowledge of their meanings, clearly divided sutta by sutta and known in minute detail by me...? "These five conditions must be investigated in himself. "And what other five conditions must be established in himself? [1] "Do I speak at the right time, or not? [2] "Do I speak of facts, or not? [3] "Do I speak gently or harshly? [4] "Do I speak profitable words or not? [5] "Do I speak with a kindly heart, or inwardly malicious? "O bhikkhus, these five conditions are to be investigated in himself and the latter five established in himself by a bhikkhu who desires to admonish another." metta and peace, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 50281 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:14am Subject: The Noble Stream-Enterer ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Ceasing of the Five Clusters of Clinging Ceases all Suffering! At Savatthi, the Blessed Buddha said this: Bhikkhus, there are these five clusters of clinging! What five? The cluster of clinging to form... The cluster of clinging to feeling... The cluster of clinging to perception... The cluster of clinging to construction... The cluster of clinging to consciousness... When, Bhikkhus, a Noble Disciple understands as they really are: The arising, the ceasing, the satisfaction, the danger, and the escape from these five clusters of clinging, then he is called a Noble Disciple, who is a Stream-Enterer, no longer bound to the painful lower worlds, fixed in destiny, with Enlightenment as his assured destination! Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya 22:109 III 161 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Explanation: The body arises from food and ceases in absence of food. Feeling, perception & mental construction arises from contact and ceases in absence of sense contact... Consciousness arises from mentality-&-materiality and ceases in absence of this body-&-mind; mentality-&-materiality. These are the clusters proximate causes... Their remote causes is past ignorance, lust and intentional action! The satisfaction of these five clusters of clinging is the pleasure and joy they temporarily induce... The danger of these five clusters of clinging is their impermanence & fading away! The Escape is the Noble Way of ceasing all craving for these 5 clusters of clinging!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <....> 50282 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:40am Subject: RE: How Does It Happens in 3 Ways ? bhikkhu_ekamuni Dear friend Tep Sastri: Be patient. The tree do not flower and set fruit the same day one plants it! Some nursing time is quite necessary also in the case of awakening... Yet if planted, if the root sets, & if it is properly watered, weeded & fertilized sure is the fruition! Question: Wouldn't contemplation of not-self alone be enough: Yes even all three characteristics are enough in themselves!!! Those who preferentially focuses on impermanence later awakens by the signless release! Those who preferentially focuses on Suffering later awakens by the desireless release! Those who preferentially focuses on No-self later awakens by the void release! *From: *http://www.What-Buddha-Said.org/library/Buddhist.Dictionary/dic_idx.htm* * *Vimokkha: *'liberation' (deliverance). I. the 3 I. The 3 liberations are: 1. the conditionless (or signless) liberation /(animitta-v.),/ 2. the desireless liberation /(apanihita-v.), /3. the emptiness (or void) liberation /(suññatá-v. )./ They are also called 'the triple gateway to liberation' /(vimokkha-mukha;/ Vis.M. XXI, 66ff), as they are three different approaches to the paths of holiness. - See /visuddhi/ VI, 8. Cf. Vis XXI, 6ff, 121ff; Pts.M. II. Vimokkha-Kathá. 1. "Whosoever being filled with determination /(adhimokkha, /q.v.), considers all formations as impermanent /(anicca), /such a one attains the conditionless liberation. 2. Whosoever being filled with tranquillity, considers all formations as painful /(dukkha), /such a one attains the desireless liberation. 3. Whosoever being filled with wisdom, considers all formations as without a self /(anattá), /such a one attains the emptiness liberation" (Vis.M. XXI, 70 = Pts.M. II, p. 58). (1) and (2) are mentioned and explained in M. 43, under the name of deliverances of mind /(ceto-vimutti/). (2) and (3) appear in Dhs. (344ff, 353ff) in the section on supramundane consciousness. (see Atthasálini Tr., p. 299ff). Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <...> Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 50283 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:55am Subject: Reg: Shooting from the Hips ... bhikkhu_ekamuni Dear friend colette: Please lower the smoking guns! ;-) Instead Start with very simple task: Faced with whatever phenomena: Whether mental or physical, Whether internal or external, Whether gross or fine, Whether high or low, Whether far or near, Ask this question: Is this thing Impermanent or permanent ? Is this thing Vanishing or lasting? Note the conclusion & then ask: Is this thing Safe or Unsafe? Is this thing Happiness or Suffering? Note the conclusion again. Keep on keeping on doing that with all things... best wishes, good luck to you ;-) Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <...> 50284 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:52am Subject: The Traps of the Jhanas. nidive Hi All, ------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn138.html "And how is the mind said to be internally positioned? There is the case where a monk, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. His consciousness follows the drift of the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, is tied to... chained... fettered, & joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal. Or further, with the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. His consciousness follows the drift of the rapture & pleasure born of composure, is tied to... chained... fettered, & joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure born of composure. Or further, with the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' His consciousness follows the drift of the equanimity & pleasure, is tied to... chained... fettered, & joined to the attraction of the equanimity & pleasure. Or further, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. His consciousness follows the drift of the neither pleasure nor pain, is tied to... chained to... fettered, & joined to the attraction of the neither pleasure nor pain: The mind is said to be internally positioned. "And how is the mind said not to be internally positioned? There is the case where a monk, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. His consciousness does not follow the drift of the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, is not tied to... chained to... fettered, or joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal. Or further, with the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation -- internal assurance. His consciousness does not follow the drift of the rapture & pleasure born of composure, is not tied to... chained... fettered, or joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure born of composure. Or further, with the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' His consciousness does not follow the drift of the equanimity & pleasure, is not tied to... chained... fettered, or joined to the attraction of the equanimity & pleasure. Or further, with the abandoning of pleasure & pain -- as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress -- he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. His consciousness does not follow the drift of the neither pleasure nor pain, is not tied to... chained to... fettered, or joined to the attraction of the neither pleasure nor pain: The mind is said to be not internally positioned. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Conclusion: Attaining the jhanas does not automatically mean that one has attained Noble Right Concentration. Why? Because Noble Right Mindfulness is missing. Regards, Swee Boon 50285 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:23am Subject: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! nidive Hi All, -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-134.html "Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands -- this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant. "The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are inconstant. "Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands -- this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are stressful. "The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are stressful. "Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands -- this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All phenomena are not-self.[1] "The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All phenomena are not-self." -------------------------------------------------------------------- When anicca is truly comprehended, dukkha and anatta are also comprehended. When dukkha is truly comprehended, anicca and anatta are also comprehended. When anatta is truly comprehended, anicca and dukkha are also comprehended. These three characteristics are inseparable. Regards, Swee Boon 50286 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:38am Subject: The Three Forms of Dukkha. nidive Hi All, Would anyone kindly provide some detailed commentary notes to these three forms of dukkha? 1. the stressfulness of pain 2. the stressfulness of fabrication 3. the stressfulness of change Your generosity is kindly appreciated. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn38-014.html On one occasion Ven. Sariputta was staying in Magadha in Nalaka Village. Then Jambukhadika the wanderer went to Ven. Sariputta and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After this exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Sariputta: "'Stress, stress,' it is said, my friend Sariputta. Which type of stress [are they referring to]?" "There are these three forms of stressfulness, my friend: the stressfulness of pain, the stressfulness of fabrication, the stressfulness of change. These are the three forms of stressfulness." -------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon 50287 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:57am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! nidive Hi All, > When anicca is truly comprehended, dukkha and anatta are also > comprehended. > > When dukkha is truly comprehended, anicca and anatta are also > comprehended. > > When anatta is truly comprehended, anicca and dukkha are also > comprehended. > > These three characteristics are inseparable. A related question to ponder about is: Why does the Buddha and his disciples always seem to proceed from anicca to justify dukkha, and from anicca and dukkha to justify anatta? -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn-22-059-tb0.html "What do you think, monks — Is form constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, lord." "And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?" "Stressful, lord." "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" "No, lord." -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn146.html "Now what do you think, sisters: Is eye-consciousness constant or inconstant?" "Inconstant, venerable sir." "And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?" "Stressful, venerable sir." "And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?" "No, venerable sir." -------------------------------------------------------------------- The order appears to be: anicca --> dukkha --> anatta. Is there any sutta that describes the order: anatta --> dukkha --> anicca? How about: anicca --> anatta --> dukkha dukkha --> anatta --> anicca dukkha --> anicca --> anatta anatta --> anicca --> dukkha Regards, Swee Boon 50288 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati and the pot of hot oil (to Rob M) nilovg Hi Phil, I rather see this sutta as giving us a sense of urgency, reminding us not to be forgetful. Death can come at anytime, so onforeseen. Nina. op 18-09-2005 01:57 schreef Philip op philco777@...: You'll remember that when we met in Tokyo, you mentionned the > sutta in which the man is walking with a pot of hot oil on his head, > and an executioner's sword at his neck that will fall if he spills a > drop, and dancing girls along the road to make things even more > difficult. 50289 From: "Philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:12am Subject: Re: The Three Forms of Dukkha. philofillet Hi Swee Boon from B. Bodhi's brief notes: "The three types are explained at Vism 499 14-21. Briefly, suffering due to pain (dukhhakuddhata) is painful bodily and mental feelin; suffering due to the formations (sankharadukkhata) is all conditioned phenomena of the three planes, because they are oppressed by rise and fall; and suffering due to change (viparinamadukkhata) is pleasant feeling, which brings suffering when it comes to an end." I'm sure some one else can post the Vism passage if you'd like. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > Would anyone kindly provide some detailed commentary notes to these > three forms of dukkha? > > 1. the stressfulness of pain > 2. the stressfulness of fabrication > 3. the stressfulness of change > 50290 From: "Philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:56am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! philofillet Hi Swee Boon > Is there any sutta that describes the order: > anatta --> dukkha --> anicca? > How about the antta sutta (SN 22:59): "Bhikkhus, form is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, form were self, this form would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to have it of form: 'Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.' But because form is nonself, form leads to affliction, and it is not possible to have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form not be thus." Phil ps Thanks for the question. I've been intending to review all the suttas I read in SN and and you've given me a good framework to work with. 50291 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:01am Subject: Re: The Traps of the Jhanas. buddhistmedi... Hi, Swee : It is very nice of you to continue studying jhanas in the suttas. > Swee : > Conclusion: Attaining the jhanas does not automatically mean that one has attained Noble Right Concentration. Why? Because Noble Right Mindfulness is missing. > Tep: MN 117 says it fully: you need the support of all seven prior (samma-ditthi up to and including samma-sati) in order for cognizance (citta) to attain sama-samadhi. Thus, you must have the support of the three higher trainings(sikkha). Please see the discussion that Nina posted in the Breathing Treatise thread. Best wishes, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn138.html > > "And how is the mind said to be internally positioned? There is the > case where a monk, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from > unskillful (mental) qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: > rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed > thought & evaluation. His consciousness follows the drift of the > rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, is tied to... chained... > fettered, & joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure born of > withdrawal. (snipped). > > "And how is the mind said not to be internally positioned? There is > the case where a monk, quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities, enters & remains in the first jhana: > rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed > thought & evaluation. His consciousness does not follow the drift of > the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, is not tied to... chained > to... fettered, or joined to the attraction of the rapture & pleasure > born of withdrawal. Or further, with the stilling of directed thought > & evaluation, he (snipped) > 50292 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:17am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! onco111 Hi Swee Boon, You make an interesting comment in: > These three characteristics [anicca, anatta, dukkha] are inseparable. I think you are right, but in the perception of them, one or another of the three colors is prominent. Upon later reflection -- perhaps in the very next moment -- there might be the thought "The three are inseparable," but could the three be directly perceived as inseparable or only inferentially conceived as inseparable? Metta, Dan 50293 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:20am Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ onco111 Hi Mike, By my understanding, materiality is not "rupa" unless it is experienced. Metta, Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" wrote: > Hi Dan (and Hal), > > Great post, thanks--just this, below: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan D." > To: > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 7:09 PM > Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ > > And a quibble -- ti-lakkhana are spoken of as characteristics of > paramattha dhamma. Wouldn't you think that if there is such a thing > as a universe bereft of sentient beings, there would be no paramattha > dhammas and no tilakkhana there? > > An interesting question--of course, ruupa (the paramattha dhamma) could > still exist in a universe with no sentient beings and would still be > impermanent and not-self--and assuming that everything in that universe > would be powerless to satisfy--even in the absence of a being to > satisfy--wouldn't that 'satisfy' one meaning of dukkha? > > Seems to me this could be a difference between methods, suttanta vs. > abhidhamma. Sentient beings in the former, not in the latter...just > thinking out loud. > > mike > 50294 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:26am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! nidive Hi Phil, > "Bhikkhus, form is nonself. For if, bhikkhus, form were self, > this form would not lead to affliction, and it would be possible to > have it of form: 'Let my form be thus; let my form not be thus.' But > because form is nonself, form leads to affliction, and it is not > possible to have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form not > be thus." Yes, I see this as anatta --> dukkha (leading to affliction) --> anicca (not possible to have it of form: 'Let my form be permanent, let my form not be impermanent'). Thanks. Regards, Swee Boon 50295 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:38am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! nidive Hi Dan, > > These three characteristics [anicca, anatta, dukkha] are > > inseparable. > I think you are right, but in the perception of them, one or > another of the three colors is prominent. Upon later reflection > -- perhaps in the very next moment -- there might be the thought > "The three are inseparable," but could the three be directly > perceived as inseparable or only inferentially conceived as > inseparable? I think it is impossible to penetrate one without also penetrating the other two. Regards, Swee Boon 50296 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:50am Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ onco111 Nice to hear from you, Larry! Comments interspersed... > Regarding the reality status of the tilakkana maybe we could say > impermanence, etc. are characteristics of formation (sankhara). 1. What makes the ti-lakkhana different from other characteristics of the sankhara (viz., phassa, vedana, sañña, cetana, ekaggata, jivitindriya, manasikara, vitakka, vicara, adhimiokkha, viriya, piti, chanda, moha, ahirika, uddhacca, lobha, ditthi, mana, dosa, issa, macchariya, kukkucca, thina, middha, vicikiccha, saddha, sati, hiri, ottappa, alobha, adosa, tatramajjhimattata, passaddhi, lahuta, muduta, kammaññata, paguññata, ujjukata, sammavaca, sammakammanta, samma-ajiva, karuna, mudita, pañña)? 2. Aren't they not also characteristics of the other khanda? > Also, it would mean I was wrong > in saying the perception of a group is the perception of a concept. > It would be better to say the perception of a group is the perception of a compact formation. Vism. talks about the "resolution of the compact" in terms of sorting out a formation into its ultimate > experiential elements (khandhas) which are, themselves, formations in > that they are impermanent, undesirable, and not self. It is tempting > to think that a formation is a concept but I think that is incorrect > because formations are impermanent. Is this ["x is impermanent"] a reliable basis for the rational conclusion ["therefore not a concept"]? The issue I am driving at is whether or not the "groups" and "khandas" that Buddhagosa and Buddha discuss are the same as what you conceive of as "groups" and "khandas". > of impermanence. In the quote below from Ledi Sayadaw we could say a > particular jar is a formation, the idea of a jar is a concept, > and "relations" means formation (sankhara). I think this also may > facilitate Howard's argument for a middle way between concept and > reality. A particular jar is a complex "compact formation" while > hardness, for example, is an elemental or ultimate formation. Neither > formation is a concept because both are impermanent. One could say > the same thing about a person and still see that there is no self in > a person. Ledi Sayadaw might take issue with your notion of a "compact formation" as a reality. He makes a distinction between atthapaññati (a la Plato's "forms", e.g., the notion of a jar) and saddapaññati, which is "the name of a thing, as expressed in a word, or represented by a sign" -- or perhaps "compact formation"(?) He continues (p. 24): "For example, when clay is shaped by a potter's hand into a vessel, the peculiar form, figure, or shape gives rise to our idea of it as 'jar' and we attach the name 'jar' to it. This name will adhere to it so long as it retains its shape. But as soon as the jar is broken up into pieces we no longer call it a jar. In this example matter is one thing and form another. ...the form of the jar is just a concept derived from a combination and arrangement of clay in a certain manner. It is not inherent in clay. It is artificial and is not a constant element. The name 'jar', too, is applicable only when clay may be made to assume different forms -- e.g., the form of a cup -- all these forms are temporary phenomena, or mere appearances.... It is through hallucination of our mind that we mistake the mere forms of animate and inanimate objects for realities." Metta, Dan 50297 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 6:56am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! onco111 Swee Boon, I think you are right, but in the experience of the tilakkhana, one aspect or another is prominent. E.g., what do you make of the "three doors to emancipation" (CMA IX, 35)? Or of the difference between bhanga-ñana and bhaya-ñana? Metta, Dan > I think it is impossible to penetrate one without also penetrating the > other two. > > Regards, > Swee Boon 50298 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:01am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! onco111 Swee Boon, Also, don't you also see silabbataparamasasamyojanam, ditthisamyojanam, and vicikicchasamyojanam as being likewise inseparable? Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi Dan, > > > > These three characteristics [anicca, anatta, dukkha] are > > > inseparable. > > > I think you are right, but in the perception of them, one or > > another of the three colors is prominent. Upon later reflection > > -- perhaps in the very next moment -- there might be the thought > > "The three are inseparable," but could the three be directly > > perceived as inseparable or only inferentially conceived as > > inseparable? > > I think it is impossible to penetrate one without also penetrating the > other two. > > Regards, > Swee Boon 50299 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off nilovg Hi Phil, op 17-09-2005 20:53 schreef Philip op philco777@...: >> Just some vapid thoughts. I am curious about Buddhist blasphemy, >> though. > > I guess it comes down to respect. Such respect for the Buddha for his > teaching, thus not wanting to "dis" him. And using Him sometimes > instead of him. > > What is this respect? It's not a perfection. What cetasika is it? > Related to hiri and ottapa? ------- N: Kusala citta that has respect for the Buddha is a form of siila. This citta is accompanied by confidence, saddhaa and many other sobhana cetasikas. When one has more understanding of the teachings, saddha will grow, there will be a greater respect. When there is ignorance there is no respect. It is ignorance that conditions disrespect. Nina. 50300 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Short Post: Conditions, substantialism, to Howard. nilovg Hi, Howard, op 17-09-2005 15:46 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The discussion between Ken and me included the following:(snipped) My reply > alluded to the Kaccayanagotta Sutta which rejects the extremes of nihilism and > substantialism. It also said that TO THE EXTENT [emphasis added here by me] > that > the Theravadin Abhidhamma and commentaries take dhammas to be substantial > entitities with self-nature, that is an extent to which I am not a Theravadin. > Note > that I didn't assert that there *is* such a position taken by Theravada. The > "extent" might well be close to nil! In fact, I went on to point out that as I > understand it, Theravada does not interpret 'sabhava' to mean "own-being" or > "self-existence", but merely characteristic nature, so that, for example, > hardness is distinguishable from warmth due to differing sabhava. Thus I was > pointing to what I consider to be the dependent, contingent nature of dhammas > as > interpreted by Theravada, the same, BTW, as in Mahayana. > ------------------------------------------------------------- N: Yes, that is clear. There is nil, indeed. We can 'drop' to that extent. >> Just recently I found an impressive text in U Narada (which you have), p. >> 54: >> > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > By "U Narada," are you referring to the Abhi. Sangaha? > ---------------------------------------------- N: No. The Guide to Conditional Relations, which you have. > ----------------------------------------- > However, the force, which is left behind after volition ceases, is > not >> destroyed and may be present for countless worlds in the successive >> continuity of a being, bound by craving, conceit and wrong views, to produce >> a result suddenly. The result cannot be foreseen and seems to be >> spontaneous. > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The terminology suggesting a force that "hangs on" has a > substantialist ring to my ears. ------ N: Clear, there isn't anything that lasts. U Narada explains past kamma as a conditioning factor, accumulated indeed from citta to citta, but each citta arises and falls away. The citta that has fallen away conditions the next one by way of proximity condition. This brings us to the question of accumulation. Accumulations are not something static or abstract. -------- H: I think that is misleading terminology. > Metaphorical speech > of some force being passed on, as opposed to current events being conditions > for future events (harmless this-that conditionality), easily leads to a > substantialist misunderstanding. > ------------------------------------------------- N: Of course, anybody can misunderstand and twist any point of the teachings. The current events now become past and can condition the present by way of strong natural dependence condition. ------------------------------------------------- >> Visuddhimagga (XV, 15): >> >> <...here, however, all formed bases (aayatanas) should be regarded as >> having no provenance and no destination.For they do not come from anywhere >> previous to their rise, nor do they go anywhere after their fall. .... > ---------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, that's not bad (without the "essence" terminology). However, even > at the time any dhamma is present, though it certainly has a distinguishing > feature or character, in a sense its nature is not its "own", because its very > existence is not its own, being utterly dependent on the coming together of > other conditions, making it empty of own-being. No dhamma is a separate, > self-existent, independent entity. I believe that the contingent and dependent > status > of all conditioned dhammas is of major importance. > ---------------------------------------------------- N: We should not fall over the word own: in Pali: sa. Sa can also mean: with. Thus: with a characteristic, or it has a characteristic, that is all. Lobha is not dosa, lobha has a characteristic different from dosa. Nothing more to it. From the beginning of the Dhammasangani on it is explained that dhammas (not counting nibbaana) arise dependent on conditions. Here are many condiitons: the sense sphere, the object, the accompanying cetasikas that support the citta, etc. All the other books of the Abhidhamma emphasize conditions to explain the non-self nature. > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, but I see there being a problem in emphasis and terminology. It > isn't terrible, but it is troublesome. The extremes of substantialism and > nihilism are like Scilla and Charybdis, twin dangers to be avoided. They must > always be kept in mind because they are such easy and tempting hazards for > worldlings to fall prey to. > -------------------------------------------------- N: Not if we keep to the texts of the Tipitaka, Abhidhamma included and the ancient commentaries. No substantialism, reification, etc. Not a trace of them. Nina. P.S. We can drop this thread for now since we both decided to stay in the background. 50301 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] giving without wisdom, to Howard. nilovg Hi Howard, No need to answer, just a remark. op 17-09-2005 16:10 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > I'm afraid I cannot defend my position on this, though I believe it to > be true. I believe that any state *entirely* bereft of wisdom must be > akusala. > ------- N: Four types of kusala citta are accompanied by wisdom, four are without it. When kusala citta with wisdom performs kusala kamma, the wisdom or understanding can be of different degrees. There may be understanding that kusala brings its result accordingly, or understanding of the degree of insight that realizes kusala as non-self. Or kusala kamma may be performed without understanding, depending on conditions. The Visuddhimagga gives an example of young children in order to illustrate kusala citta without understanding, but this type arises also in the case of adults. It depends on many conditions what type of kusala citta arises at a particular moment. We read in Vis. Ch XIV,85. <(3) But when young children have a natural habit due to seeing the behavior of relatives and are joyful on seeing bhikkhus and at once give them whatever they have in their hands or pay homage, then the third kind of consciousness arises. (4) But when they behave like this on being urged by their relatives, 'Give; pay homage', then the fourth kind of consciousness arises. > The third and fourth types are without wisdom. Is it not so that people may just give without any idea that this is kusala, that they give because they have accumulated such inclination? They may have been taught from their youth. Nina. 50302 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:32am Subject: Different Approaches to Anatta? nidive Hi All, One thing that I find very consistent about the Buddha's teachings is his emphasis on anicca, the arising and ceasing of the five aggregates and/or the six-fold senses. I discovered that the purpose of developing Noble Right Mindfulness and Noble Right Concentration is none other than to discern anicca, or what the Buddha termed as "things as they actually are present". http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-099.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-041.html Once anicca is discerned, dukkha is discerned. Once anicca and dukkha are both discerned, anatta is discerned. In short, whatever is anicca is dukkha; whatever is both anicca and dukkha is anatta. However, Khun Sujin's teachings seems to use a different approach to anatta. She places lots of emphasis on "conditions"; because the five aggregates are conditioned, there can be no control at all; if anyone attempts to control, then "self" will pop out like a devil from nowhere and start to attack his/her mind. In short, if one does not control and just let conditions take care of themselves, then one has arrived at a true glimpse of anatta. So, following her teachings, we will have situations such as: A. One should not select a theme of mindfulness meditation, because that will induce the idea of "self". B. One should not select what food to eat, because that will induce the idea of "self". C. One should not select which dhammastudygroup post to reply to, because that will induce the idea of "self". And so on and so forth ... I clearly see Khun Sujin's teachings as a detraction from the Buddha's teachings. The Buddha's approach is to develop Noble Right Concentration (supported by the other 7 Noble Right Factors) that penetrates anicca, which subsequently penetrates anatta. Khun Sujin's approach is to accumulate moments of understanding about conditions and relinquishing control to achieve the glimpse of anatta. It is understood that she claims that at those moments of understanding, there is also Noble Right Concentration present. There is therefore no requirement for formal meditation to develop Noble Right Concentration. I am not suggesting that an understanding of conditions is not necessary to achieve supramundane achievements. But the direct knowledge of the 24 conditions is the domain of the Buddha. We can never ever obtain direct knowledge of these 24 conditions. Not even when we become sotapannas. It is already hard enough to understand Dependent Origination. Even a sotapanna like Ananda could not understand it in it's full glory. So why dabble into conditions as if they hold some supramundane secret? I seriously think there could be an overdose of Abhidhamma in this group. Do all paths lead to anatta? I don't think so. Just thinking out loud ... Regards, Swee Boon 50303 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Short Post: Conditions, substantialism, to Howard. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - All good! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/18/05 10:27:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time, va ngorko@... writes: > Hi, Howard, > op 17-09-2005 15:46 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > >----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > >The discussion between Ken and me included the following:(snipped) > My reply > >alluded to the Kaccayanagotta Sutta which rejects the extremes of nihilism > and > >substantialism. It also said that TO THE EXTENT [emphasis added here by me] > >that > >the Theravadin Abhidhamma and commentaries take dhammas to be substantial > >entitities with self-nature, that is an extent to which I am not a > Theravadin. > >Note > >that I didn't assert that there *is* such a position taken by Theravada. > The > >"extent" might well be close to nil! In fact, I went on to point out that > as I > >understand it, Theravada does not interpret 'sabhava' to mean "own-being" > or > >"self-existence", but merely characteristic nature, so that, for example, > >hardness is distinguishable from warmth due to differing sabhava. Thus I > was > >pointing to what I consider to be the dependent, contingent nature of > dhammas > >as > >interpreted by Theravada, the same, BTW, as in Mahayana. > >------------------------------------------------------------- > N: Yes, that is clear. There is nil, indeed. We can 'drop' to that extent. > >>Just recently I found an impressive text in U Narada (which you have), p. > >>54: > >> > >---------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > >By "U Narada," are you referring to the Abhi. Sangaha? > >---------------------------------------------- > N: No. The Guide to Conditional Relations, which you have. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Ah, of course! ---------------------------------------- > > P.S. We can drop this thread for now since we both decided to stay in the > background. > > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, indeed. :-) ======================= 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) 50304 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] giving without wisdom, to Howard. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - There is a quick reply by me near the end, Nina. In a message dated 9/18/05 10:27:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > No need to answer, just a remark. > op 17-09-2005 16:10 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > > >I'm afraid I cannot defend my position on this, though I believe it to > >be true. I believe that any state *entirely* bereft of wisdom must be > >akusala. > >------- > N: Four types of kusala citta are accompanied by wisdom, four are without > it. > When kusala citta with wisdom performs kusala kamma, the wisdom or > understanding can be of different degrees. There may be understanding that > kusala brings its result accordingly, or understanding of the degree of > insight that realizes kusala as non-self. > Or kusala kamma may be performed without understanding, depending on > conditions. The Visuddhimagga gives an example of young children in order to > illustrate kusala citta without understanding, but this type arises also in > the case of adults. It depends on many conditions what type of kusala citta > arises at a particular moment. > > We read in Vis. Ch XIV,85. > > <(3) But when young children have a natural habit due to seeing the > behavior of relatives and are joyful on seeing bhikkhus and at once give > them whatever they have in their hands or pay homage, then the third > kind of consciousness arises. (4) But when they behave like this on > being urged by their relatives, 'Give; pay homage', then the fourth kind > of consciousness arises. > > > The third and fourth types are without wisdom. > Is it not so that people may just give without any idea that this is kusala, > that they give because they have accumulated such inclination? They may have > been taught from their youth. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Depending on other conditions and details, 3 & 4 may well be deluded and without merit. Depending on motivation, these may be akusala or kusala or neutral, but with no wisdom present at all, IMO, they will be at best morally neutral. Just mere opinion on my part, Nina, and not soliciting debate. ;-) ---------------------------------------- > Nina. > > =================== 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) 50305 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 8:24am Subject: Offensive posts ( was Re: anatta? search for self called off buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Phil (Chris, James and Mike) - > > O.K. let's continue the discussion on the issue of Buddhist blasphemy > that you have raised. > > James might have something to add to this discussion? > > > Regards, > > > Tep Thanks for thinking of me. I would say that the only real blasphemy against the Buddhadhamma is to not practice the teaching with all earnestness. The Buddha said that the only and best way to honor him was to practice his teaching, so it would stand to reason that the only way to insult the Buddha is to not practice his teaching. Everything else is just superficial and not worth thinking/worrying about. Metta, James 50306 From: "nidive" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 8:54am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! nidive Hi Dan, > Also, don't you also see silabbataparamasasamyojanam, > ditthisamyojanam, and vicikicchasamyojanam as being likewise > inseparable? I was intimidated by these long Pali words. Searching the Internet gives me: silabbataparamasasamyojanam: grasping at precepts & practices ditthisamyojanam: self-identity views vicikicchasamyojanam: uncertainty about the Dhamma In a way, yes, these three are also inseparable. Regards, Swee Boon 50307 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:03am Subject: Ignorance, Understanding, Conviction, and Respect (was Offensive posts) buddhistmedi... Hi, Nina (and Phil) - It was good to discuss respect because it is right at the beginning before saddha in the Triple-gem may arise. Respect can be quite independent of understanding. Nina: Kusala citta that has respect for the Buddha is a form of siila. This citta is accompanied by confidence, saddhaa and many other sobhana cetasikas. Tep: I like this definition, which centers on the citta, very much. The citta and cetasika building blocks of the Paramattha dhamma are very useful for systematically explaining formations of the various mental states. But to explain a complex mental phenomenon/process it takes much more than these building blocks. ------------------------------------- Nina: When one has more understanding of the teachings, saddha will grow, there will be a greater respect. When there is ignorance there is no respect. It is ignorance that conditions disrespect. Tep: Here you are trying to explain a mental phenomenon. Based on your theory of 'understanding comes first, everything else follows', it is clear why you say saddha grows from understanding, which is the antithesis of ignorance. But in a certain situation can saddha come first, then respect and understanding? Or, can respect come first, then saddha, and then understanding? In some situations, zero understanding is not uncommon. When I was a very young Buddhist I had zero understanding of Buddhism, but my mom taught me to respect the Buddha and the Sangha. Whenever I followed her to a nearby Buddhist temple to give food to the monks, my heart was always filled with joy and respect for them even when I knew nothing about their behaviors with regard to the dhamma vinaya. In my case, respect came first, then saddha, even when ignorance was at its maximum level. When I grew up and understood more(less ignorance) about those monks and their behaviors, I respected them less and I had less saddha in them. Because of my respect of the Buddha I started to learn about the Teachings, my understanding of the Dhamma was no longer at the zero level, and my saddha in the Buddha and the Dhamma increased. But the thick ignorance (not knowing the four Noble Truths) was slowly reducing after I had started practicing according to the Eightfold Path. Warm regards, Tep ======= 50308 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:39am Subject: Nyanaponika and creativity (Was: Re: [dsg] A Short Post: Conditions, N jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Howard (Joop, Larry, Ven Samahita), > ... Btw, Joop, with regard to > your comment in a message to me about Theravada being dead in fifty years > without more creativity....etc, see 'Decline of the Sasana' in U.P. > According to the Buddha, it is some of the imaginative renderings and > alterations to the teachings from within that leads to the decline. When > the teachings are not carefully read in detail and so on. Also see > especially Jon's fairly recent post #48619 with the quote from AN about > the 5 factors which lead to the disappearance of the true dhamma: not > hearing the dhamma, learning the dhamma, retaining the dhamma, > investigating and knowing what is significant and practising... > > Of course, a day may come when Theravada seems to be flourishing, but > actually has little or no resemblance to the Buddha's teachings. Also, see > Metta, > > Sarah Dear Sarah, Howard and all Sarah, I think you are not positive enough about the necessary and possible evolution of Theravada. In the preface to his Abhidhamma Studies, Nyanaponika states: "There is no reason why the Abhidhamma philosophy of the Southern or Theravada tradition should stagnate today or why its further development should not be resumed. In fact, through many centuries there has been a living growth of Abhidhamma thought ... There are are a vast number of subjects in the canonical and commentarial Abhidhamma literature that deserve and require closer investigation and new presentation in the language of our time. There are many lines of thought, only briefly sketched in Abhidhamma tradition, that merit detailed treatment in connection with parallel tendencies in modern thought. … Abhidhamma is meant for enquiring spirits who are not satisfied by monotonously and uncritically repeating ready-made terms, even if these are Abhidhamma terms. Abhidhamma is for imaginative minds who are able to fill in, as it were, the columns of the tabulations, for which the canonical Abhidhamma books have furnished the concise headings. The Abhidhamma is not for those timid souls who are not content that a philosophical thought should not actually contradict Buddhist tradition, but demand that it must be expressly, even literally, supported by canonical or commentarial authority. Such an attitude is contrary to the letter and the spirit of the Buddha- Dhamma. It would mean that the Abhidhamma philosophy must remain within the limits of whatever has been preserved of the traditional exegetical literature and hence will cease to be a living and growing organism … We are convinced that the Abhidhamma, if suitably presented, could also enrich modern non-Buddhist thought, … It is … important that the Buddhist way of presenting and solving the respective problems should show modern independent thinkers new vistas and open new avenues of thought, which in turn might revive Buddhist philosophy in the East. (page XXVII-XXVIII) I'm curiuos if you (and Sujin !) agree with it. And if you, with me, will be your best to realize this program of Nynaponika. Metta Joop 50309 From: "m. nease" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 10:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ mlnease Hi Dan, In the abhidhamma method, for sure--but I think not the suttanta method. Maybe I've misunderstood this though. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan D." To: Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 6:20 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ > Hi Mike, > By my understanding, materiality is not "rupa" unless it is > experienced. > > Metta, > Dan > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" > wrote: >> Hi Dan (and Hal), >> >> Great post, thanks--just this, below: >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Dan D." >> To: >> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 7:09 PM >> Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ >> >> And a quibble -- ti-lakkhana are spoken of as characteristics of >> paramattha dhamma. Wouldn't you think that if there is such a thing >> as a universe bereft of sentient beings, there would be no > paramattha >> dhammas and no tilakkhana there? >> >> An interesting question--of course, ruupa (the paramattha dhamma) > could >> still exist in a universe with no sentient beings and would still > be >> impermanent and not-self--and assuming that everything in that > universe >> would be powerless to satisfy--even in the absence of a being to >> satisfy--wouldn't that 'satisfy' one meaning of dukkha? >> >> Seems to me this could be a difference between methods, suttanta > vs. >> abhidhamma. Sentient beings in the former, not in the > latter...just >> thinking out loud. 50310 From: nina Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:12am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 3, no. 2. nilovg Dear friends, Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:52am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhistmedi... Hi, Swee - @ Congratulations on the very well-written post that accurately summarizes Ajahn Sujin's approach to anatta, her objection to "formal meditation", the idea of panna accumulation and the relinqushing of control of conditions (the "let it be" philosophy). But, there have been a great many posts on these issues already. Are you about to start another round of debate? James has tried. Hasituppada tried. Howard has tried. Herman tried. Tep has tried. ...... I doubt if you are going to make any difference this time. @@ The followings are some highlights of your post that I like very much. > > In short, whatever is anicca is dukkha; whatever is both anicca and > dukkha is anatta. > > > She places lots of emphasis on "conditions"; because the five > aggregates are conditioned, there can be no control at all; if anyone > attempts to control, then "self" will pop out like a devil from > nowhere and start to attack his/her mind. > > > Khun Sujin's approach is to accumulate moments of understanding about conditions and relinquishing control to achieve the glimpse of anatta. It is understood that she claims that at those moments of > understanding, there is also Noble Right Concentration present. >There is therefore no requirement for formal meditation to >develop Noble Right Concentration. > > > Do all paths lead to anatta? I don't think so. > @ Keep on thinking rightly and writing rightly. Best wishes, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-099.html > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-041.html > > In short, if one does not control and just let conditions take care of > themselves, then one has arrived at a true glimpse of anatta. > > > I am not suggesting that an understanding of conditions is not > necessary to achieve supramundane achievements. > > But the direct knowledge of the 24 conditions is the domain of the > Buddha. We can never ever obtain direct knowledge of these 24 > conditions. Not even when we become sotapannas. > 50312 From: "Larry" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:12pm Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ lbidd2 Hi Dan, Replies below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Nice to hear from you, Larry! > > Comments interspersed... > > > Regarding the reality status of the tilakkana maybe we could say > > impermanence, etc. are characteristics of formation (sankhara). > > 1. What makes the ti-lakkhana different from other characteristics of > the sankhara (viz., phassa, vedana, sañña, cetana, ekaggata, > jivitindriya, manasikara, vitakka, vicara, adhimiokkha, viriya, piti, > chanda, moha, ahirika, uddhacca, lobha, ditthi, mana, dosa, issa, > macchariya, kukkucca, thina, middha, vicikiccha, saddha, sati, hiri, > ottappa, alobha, adosa, tatramajjhimattata, passaddhi, lahuta, > muduta, kammaññata, paguññata, ujjukata, sammavaca, sammakammanta, > samma-ajiva, karuna, mudita, pañña)? > > 2. Aren't they not also characteristics of the other khanda? ---------------------------------- L: What I meant by saying impermanence etc. are characteristics of formation (sankhara) is the tilakkhana are characteristics of conditioned arising, in other words, the activity of formation. All the khandhas are sankhata. The reason they are not listed as separate realities is because they are common to all conditioned realities. Not only are they general characteristics, they are also particular characteristics. That is, they are characteristics of particular realities. What ignorance ignores and wisdom penetrates is the impermanence etc. of particular realities. Consciousness is aware of the impermanence, undesirability, and not self characteristic of "compact formations" but insight experiences these characteristics via immediate particulars. ------------------------------------ > > > Also, it would mean I was wrong > > in saying the perception of a group is the perception of a concept. > > It would be better to say the perception of a group is the > perception of a compact formation. Vism. talks about the "resolution > of the compact" in terms of sorting out a formation into its ultimate > > experiential elements (khandhas) which are, themselves, formations > in > > that they are impermanent, undesirable, and not self. It is > tempting > > to think that a formation is a concept but I think that is > incorrect > > because formations are impermanent. > D: > Is this ["x is impermanent"] a reliable basis for the rational > conclusion ["therefore not a concept"]? The issue I am driving at is > whether or not the "groups" and "khandas" that Buddhagosa and Buddha > discuss are the same as what you conceive of as "groups" > and "khandas". ------------------------------------------- L: Yes, I think impermanence is the basic definer of reality (except nibbana). Whatever is impermanent is not a concept. So the question is, is a perceived group (compact formation) such as a jar impermanent? I think everyone would agree that it is. However, this view evolved over time. The Buddha would say a jar is a concept, but is he talking about the idea of a jar or the formation of a jar? He doesn't really discuss groups of realities except insofar as "khandha" means "group". Buddhaghosa discusses "compact formations" and resolution of the compact as an analytical procedure for getting at ultimate reality and its emptiness of a self, but doesn't say whether a compact formation is concept or reality. He does say that ultimate reality has an "own nature" (sabhava). It is left to latter commentators to say that sabhava is ultimately "becoming" (arising, presence, dissolution) and that this becoming is unique. What I am proposing goes beyond this in saying that a compact formation is a reality, not a concept, but not an ultimate reality. Compact formation is slightly different from conventional reality in that it is not completely dependent on social agreements the way language is, but there is considerable latitude in what constitutes a formation. For example, a table and a chair together is a formation. The same table and a lamp is a formation. And the same lamp and a computer is a formation. These formations are cognitively formed but they don't stand for something, the way concept does. ----------------------------- > > > of impermanence. In the quote below from Ledi Sayadaw we could say > a > > particular jar is a formation, the idea of a jar is a concept, > > and "relations" means formation (sankhara). I think this also may > > facilitate Howard's argument for a middle way between concept and > > reality. A particular jar is a complex "compact formation" while > > hardness, for example, is an elemental or ultimate formation. > Neither > > formation is a concept because both are impermanent. One could say > > the same thing about a person and still see that there is no self > in > > a person. > > Ledi Sayadaw might take issue with your notion of a "compact > formation" as a reality. He makes a distinction between atthapaññati > (a la Plato's "forms", e.g., the notion of a jar) and saddapaññati, > which is "the name of a thing, as expressed in a word, or represented > by a sign" -- or perhaps "compact formation"(?) > ----------------------------- L: This distinction comes from the Abhidhammatta Sangaha. I am interpreting this as two kinds of words, naming words and evocative words. Nina may not agree with that. I would say compact formation is not a concept in Buddhaghosa's usage, but possibly it is in the Buddha's usage. Also, this brings up a problem: the spoken word is a reality, vocal intimation rupa. It would seem to take a pretty sharp sword to separate word concept from word reality. Also, conventions arise and cease. Even ideas arise and cease. Maybe it isn't possible to be completely rigorous with a concept and reality distinction. Or maybe we just need better concepts. ;-) ---------------------------------------- > He continues (p. 24): "For example, when clay is shaped by a potter's > hand into a vessel, the peculiar form, figure, or shape gives rise to > our idea of it as 'jar' and we attach the name 'jar' to it. This name > will adhere to it so long as it retains its shape. But as soon as the > jar is broken up into pieces we no longer call it a jar. In this > example matter is one thing and form another. ...the form of the jar > is just a concept derived from a combination and arrangement of clay > in a certain manner. It is not inherent in clay. It is artificial and > is not a constant element. The name 'jar', too, is applicable only > when clay may be made to assume different forms -- e.g., the form of > a cup -- all these forms are temporary phenomena, or mere > appearances.... It is through hallucination of our mind that we > mistake the mere forms of animate and inanimate objects for > realities." > > Metta, > > Dan ---------------------------------- L: When he says "all these forms are temporary phenomena" I would have to interpret this as referring to realities wrongly identified, but I don't think that is what Ledi Sayadaw meant; so I guess we disagree. Larry 50313 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:55pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhatrue Hi Tep and Swee Boon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Swee - > > @ Congratulations on the very well-written post that accurately > summarizes Ajahn Sujin's approach to anatta, her objection to "formal > meditation", the idea of panna accumulation and the relinqushing of > control of conditions (the "let it be" philosophy). > > But, there have been a great many posts on these issues already. Are > you about to start another round of debate? James has tried. > Hasituppada tried. Howard has tried. Herman tried. Tep has tried. ...... > > I doubt if you are going to make any difference this time. I also very much liked Swee's post for his ability to summarize K. Sujin's philosophy and the problems contained therein. You make an interesting point though: Does it do any good? From my time on DSG, over a year or so, I have been arguing against the philosophy of K. Sujin since the beginning and I haven't seen it do one bit of good. The people who were advocates of K. Sujin back then are still advocates of K. Sujin today. But, does that mean that I, and others, shouldn't still raise the issues again and again? I believe not. Really, I speak against K. Sujin out of compassion, compassion for her and for those who are deceived by her. When you see fellow Buddhists who appreciate the dhamma but are still wasting the precious opportunity they have been given as humans in this sasana by just waiting for panna to arise while immobile in a gridlock of panic over "self", then the compassionate thing to do is to say something about it. Maybe it won't do any good, but it is better than not saying anything. Metta, James 50314 From: "Philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 2:50pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? philofillet Hi Swee, Tep, James and all > Swee: However, Khun Sujin's teachings seems to use a different approach to > anatta. > > She places lots of emphasis on "conditions"; because the five > aggregates are conditioned, there can be no control at all; if anyone > attempts to control, then "self" will pop out like a devil from > nowhere and start to attack his/her mind. I think any teaching should be examined on this point - does it lead to the eradication of the unwholesome roots and the cultivation of wholesome roots? So an investigation of A. Sujin's teaching without mentioning lobha (greed, sensual desire) and moha (delusion) is not getting at the core. There is not "panic about self" or fear that "self will pop out" - there is awareness of how much greed and delusion has been accumulated. Of course, you'd say that it is for this very reason that we should apply ourselves forcefully to intentional practice. I see your point, but, again, intentional practice rooted in lobha and moha will just lead to more lobha and moha. You would say we start rooted in lobha and moha, of course, but the intentional practice leads out of it - that's the point. Again, I see your point. Again, I think a more patient approach is better. A few rare openings in the akusala drenched world we create with our minds is of great value. And of course the way we agree to disagree in a friendly way is bhavana in itself. Phil 50315 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 3:50pm Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ onco111 Whatever... Nothing more than philospophical speculation in any case... > Hi Dan, > > In the abhidhamma method, for sure--but I think not the suttanta method. > Maybe I've misunderstood this though. > > mike > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dan D." > To: > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 6:20 AM > Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ > > > > Hi Mike, > > By my understanding, materiality is not "rupa" unless it is > > experienced. > > > > Metta, > > Dan > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" > > wrote: > >> Hi Dan (and Hal), > >> > >> Great post, thanks--just this, below: > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: "Dan D." > >> To: > >> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 7:09 PM > >> Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ > >> > >> And a quibble -- ti-lakkhana are spoken of as characteristics of > >> paramattha dhamma. Wouldn't you think that if there is such a thing > >> as a universe bereft of sentient beings, there would be no > > paramattha > >> dhammas and no tilakkhana there? > >> > >> An interesting question--of course, ruupa (the paramattha dhamma) > > could > >> still exist in a universe with no sentient beings and would still > > be > >> impermanent and not-self--and assuming that everything in that > > universe > >> would be powerless to satisfy--even in the absence of a being to > >> satisfy--wouldn't that 'satisfy' one meaning of dukkha? > >> > >> Seems to me this could be a difference between methods, suttanta > > vs. > >> abhidhamma. Sentient beings in the former, not in the > > latter...just > >> thinking out loud. > > 50316 From: "m. nease" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ mlnease Hi Dan, Yes, I think you're right. But I don't think that that is to say that the conventional speech of the suttanta, even when dealing with concepts and designations, isn't profound and true. There are, I think, those concepts and designations (and ways of considering them) that lead toward unbinding, and those that don't. So considering the nature of ruupa according to either method is not necessarily a bad thing, I don't think. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan D." To: Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 3:50 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ > Whatever... > > Nothing more than philospophical speculation in any case... > > >> Hi Dan, >> >> In the abhidhamma method, for sure--but I think not the suttanta > method. >> Maybe I've misunderstood this though. >> >> mike >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Dan D." >> To: >> Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 6:20 AM >> Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ >> >> >> > Hi Mike, >> > By my understanding, materiality is not "rupa" unless it is >> > experienced. >> > >> > Metta, >> > Dan >> > >> > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "m. nease" >> > wrote: >> >> Hi Dan (and Hal), >> >> >> >> Great post, thanks--just this, below: >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> >> From: "Dan D." >> >> To: >> >> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 7:09 PM >> >> Subject: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ >> >> >> >> And a quibble -- ti-lakkhana are spoken of as characteristics of >> >> paramattha dhamma. Wouldn't you think that if there is such a > thing >> >> as a universe bereft of sentient beings, there would be no >> > paramattha >> >> dhammas and no tilakkhana there? >> >> >> >> An interesting question--of course, ruupa (the paramattha dhamma) >> > could >> >> still exist in a universe with no sentient beings and would still >> > be >> >> impermanent and not-self--and assuming that everything in that >> > universe >> >> would be powerless to satisfy--even in the absence of a being to >> >> satisfy--wouldn't that 'satisfy' one meaning of dukkha? >> >> >> >> Seems to me this could be a difference between methods, suttanta >> > vs. >> >> abhidhamma. Sentient beings in the former, not in the >> > latter...just >> >> thinking out loud. 50317 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:18pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhistmedi... Hi, James - Thank you for your right-to-the -point feedback. > James : When you see fellow > Buddhists who appreciate the dhamma but are still wasting the > precious opportunity they have been given as humans in this sasana > by just waiting for panna to arise while immobile in a gridlock of > panic over "self", then the compassionate thing to do is to say > something about it. Maybe it won't do any good, but it is better > than not saying anything. > Tep: It is better than not saying anything, if we can keep on thinking rightly and writing rightly without having to debate those stale issues over and over again. Hopefully, one day those "immobile Buddhists" would wake up. If they didn't want to, then nobody could help them. Respectfully, Tep 50318 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 0:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 9/18/05 5:52:42 PM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > I see your point, but, again, intentional > practice rooted in lobha and moha will just lead to more lobha and > moha. ===================== Ah, but will it? Always? And necessarily? Then the goal is an impossibility! For we all start with lobha & moha. If all our motives were perfectly pure and benign to begin with, then we would have attained the goal at the outset! But how about if one uses some common sense with this, Phil? Speaking ordinary speak: Isn't it often the case that actions taken to achieve certain ends effect changes in the person acting which lead him/her in an entirely different direction, changing his/her motivation and perspective entirely? Does a not-very-nice person sometimes seek the company of another for very unworthy purposes, and end up learning from that other person lessons that completely change him/herself? Can you not think of cases of people working to achieve certain goals for the wrong reasons, and, in the process, transforming themselves into people who come to see the proper reasons? Sometimes good results occur inadvertently due to unintended and even unanticipated conditions. Intention (kamma) is important, but it is not all-determining. With metta, Howard P.S. Unfortunately, though I wish to reduce my posting, I feel compelled to post when I think that people's welfare is at stake. /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) 50319 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:14pm Subject: Re: Breathing Treatise - Section iv, para 244-264 buddhistmedi... Hi, all DSG Friends - Last week the presentation of vatthu #3 was completed. For this post we start vatthu #4 (i.e. the meditator trains in tranquillizing the body formation(kayasankhaara) while breathing in and breathing out). Again, the pattern of presentation is the same for every vatthu (1 to 16), i.e. analysis of the object of contemplation; the foundation of mindfulness; training; exercise of mindfulness and full-awareness; combining the faculties, etc. 265. How is it that he trains thus (7) 'I shall breathe in tranquillizing the body formation'; (8) he trains thus 'I shall breathe out tranquillizing the body formation'? [Analysis of the Object of Contemplation] 266. What is the 'body formation'? Long in-breaths are of the body; these things, being bound up with the body, are body formations; [See M i 301] he trains in tranquillizing, stopping, stilling, those body formations. Long out-breaths belong to the body; ... Short in-breaths belong to the body; ... Short out-breaths belong to the body; ... In- breaths while acquainted with the whole body [of breaths] belong to the body; ... Out-breaths while acquainted with the whole body [of breaths] belong to the body; these things, being bound up with the body, are body formations;he trains in tranquillizing, stopping, stilling, those body formations. When there are such body formations whereby there is bending backwards, sideways, in all directions, and forwards, and perturbations, excitement, moving, and shaking, of the body, he trains thus 'I shall breathe in tranquillizing the body formation'; he trains thus 'I shall breathe out tranquillizing the body formation'. When there are such body formations whereby there is no bending backwards, sideways, in all directions, and forwards, and no perturbations, excitement, moving, and shaking, of the body, quiet and subtle, he trains thus 'I shall breathe in tranquillizing the body formation'; he trains thus 'I shall breathe out tranquillizing the body formation'. So then he trains thus 'I shall breathe in tranquillizing the body formation', he trains thus 'I shall breathe out tranquillizing the body formation': that being so, there is no production of experience of wind, and there is no production of in-breaths and out-breaths, and there is no production of mindfulness of breathing, and there is no production of concentration by mindfulness of breathing, and consequently the wise neither enter into nor emerge from that attainment. So then he trains thus 'I shall breathe in tranquillizing the body formation', he trains thus 'I shall breathe out tranquillizing the body formation': that being so, there is production of experience of wind, and there is production of in-breaths and out-breaths, and there is production of mindfulness of breathing, and there is production of concentration by mindfulness of breathing, and consequently the wise enter into and emerge from that attainment. Like what? Just as when the gong is struck. At first gross sounds occur and [cognizance occurs] because the sign of the gross sounds is well apprehended, well attended to, well observed; and when the gross sounds have ceased, then afterwards faint sounds occur and [cognizance occurs] because the sign [The sign is an aspect of those sounds; and the sign of the sound is not something other than the sound. PsA 358 Se ] of the faint sounds is well apprehended, well attended to, well observed; and when the faint sounds have ceased, then afterwards cognizance occurs because it has the sign of the faint sounds as its object -- so too, at first gross in-breaths and out-breaths occur and [cognizance does not become distracted] because the sign of the gross in-breaths and out-breaths is well apprehended, well attended to, well observed; and when the gross in-breaths and out- breaths have ceased, then afterwards faint in-breaths and out-breaths occur and [cognizance does not become distracted] because the sign of the faint in-breaths and out-breaths is well apprehended, well attended to, well observed; and when the faint in-breaths and out- breaths have ceased, then afterwards cognizance does not become distracted because it has the sign of the faint in-breaths and out- breaths as its object. That being so, there is production of experience of wind, and there is production of in-breaths and out-breaths, and there is production of mindfulness of breathing, and there is production of concentration by mindfulness of breathing, and consequently the wise neither enter into and emerge from that attainment. Tep's Note: So we are now at the end of of this unusually long paragraph 266. Next week will see the end of vatthu #4, para 267 - 289 with a conclusion of the first tetrad. We still have 3 more tetrads after that ! Best wishes, Tep ============ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, all - > > It is a little less than two weeks since the first part of the vatthu #3 was > posted. This post goes from para 244 to para 264 of the third vatthu. > Next week we shall start with vatthu #4 [He trains thus 'I shall breathe in > tranquillizing the body formation' and 'I shall breathe out tranquillizing > the body formation' .] > > (iii, part 2) > 50320 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:26pm Subject: Breathing Treatise - Section iv, para 265 - 266 buddhistmedi... Hi, all - The title of the previous post should be interchanged with this post ! The content of the earlier post is correct, but its title was wrong. Please change it to be as shown above. Thanks. Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, all DSG Friends - > > Last week the presentation of vatthu #3 was completed. For this post > we start vatthu #4 (i.e. the meditator trains in tranquillizing > the body formation(kayasankhaara) while breathing in and breathing > out). Again, the pattern of presentation is the same for every > vatthu (1 to 16), i.e. analysis of the object of contemplation; the > foundation of mindfulness; training; exercise of mindfulness and > full-awareness; combining the faculties, etc. > > 265. How is it that he trains thus (7) 'I shall breathe in tranquillizing the > body formation'; (8) he trains thus 'I shall breathe out tranquillizing the > body formation'? > 50321 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Breathing Treatise - Section iv, para 244-264 lbidd2 Hi Tep, There is a typo in a couple of these: "and consequently the wise neither enter into and emerge from that attainment." The "neither" shouldn't be there. Otherwise, good job! Larry 50322 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:29pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Breathing Treatise - Section iv, para 244-264 buddhistmedi... Hi, Larry - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Tep, > > There is a typo in a couple of these: "and consequently the wise neither > enter into and emerge from that attainment." The "neither" shouldn't be > there. Otherwise, good job! > > Larry I appreciate your keen observation ! Thank you. Regards, Tep ========= 50323 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 7:53pm Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ onco111 Hi Mike, You write: > So considering the nature of ruupa according to either method is not > necessarily a bad thing, I don't think. Yoniso manasikara as to the rupa that is experience leads to unbinding. Can speculative consideration to "rupa" that is not experienced be "yoniso"? Can consideration of the nature non-experienced rupa be anything BUT speculative? I think not... Metta, Dan 50324 From: "Philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 8:13pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? philofillet Hi Howard (and James at the end) > > I see your point, but, again, intentional > > practice rooted in lobha and moha will just lead to more lobha and > > moha. > ===================== > Ah, but will it? Always? And necessarily? Then the goal is an > impossibility! For we all start with lobha & moha. If all our motives were perfectly > pure and benign to begin with, then we would have attained the goal at the > outset! I certainly see your point, Howard. Thus I am keeping an open mind on this point - does the imitation of satipatthana (or thinking about satipatthana, which is what will certainly be going on if we approach the satipatthana sutta by interpreting it in a very literal way, following instructions) condition the arising of satipatthana? Does the imitation of metta (thinking about metta) condition the arising of metta? I am still open to this possibility. Certainly I believe that shallow degrees of panna are necessary a necessary condition for the "real" thing. But I think you're wrong to assume an "impossibility" if we reject intentional practice. Every moment is a moment in which kusala cittas can arise, kusala virya can arise, khanti can arise, metta can arise. Daily life is so full of opportunities to note the arising of right understanding, and appreciating each of these moments is a condition for more to arise. There are so many opportunities for right effort, for metta, for patience. There seems to be this notion that A. Sujin is saying that we should just wait passively for panna to arise. It's not like that at all. Have you listened to Lodewijk reading the perfection of virya? There is nothing passive/hopeless/lazy about the way right effort is cultivated, nor any of the other perfections. (I don't necessarily think you are one of the people who thinks that A. Sujin says we should be passive - I forget who says what.) > But how about if one uses some common sense with this, Phil? Speaking > ordinary speak: Isn't it often the case that actions taken to achieve certain > ends effect changes in the person acting which lead him/her in an entirely > different direction, changing his/her motivation and perspective entirely? Does a > not-very-nice person sometimes seek the company of another for very unworthy > purposes, and end up learning from that other person lessons that completely > change him/herself? Can you not think of cases of people working to achieve > certain goals for the wrong reasons, and, in the process, transforming themselves > into people who come to see the proper reasons? Sometimes good results occur > inadvertently due to unintended and even unanticipated conditions. Intention > (kamma) is important, but it is not all-determining. You've expressed this very well, Howard, as always. You always help me to keep an open mind - it helps that you don't make personal attacks on A. Sujin or people who are encouraged by her approach to Dhamma (which we would of course say is not "her" approach but simply right understanding of the Buddha's teaching, but that goes without saying.) James, please take note. When I read Howard's posts, I want to think more deeply about his point of view. When I read some of your posts in which you use phrases like "in a panic about self" (or something like that) to describe people you are debating with, I just want to dismiss your point of view, and do so too readily. You can express your understanding of Dhamma better with honey than with vinegar - well, not honey, but you know what I mean. Phil 50325 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:00pm Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. rjkjp1 Dear James, sorry about the delay. I arrived back in Japan a few days ago and have been lazy to write. In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Robert K., > > You wrote that you would like to continue this discussion because of > its importance. I agree with that and wish to continue this > discussion also. > > > Let me just throw in this quote: > Wisdom arises from practice; > Without practice it is lost. > Knowing these two ways of gain and loss, > Conduct yourself so that wisdom grows. > -Dhammapada 282 > > This is the only quote from the Buddha which states indirectly that > wisdom isn't accumulated from lifetime to lifetime. It is only the > practice of dhamma which will carry wisdom from life to life, > without the practice the wisdom is lost (as in forever gone, not > just supressed). ++++++++++++ Not sure how you reach that conclusion. If wisdom is forever lost then we would all start each life completely equal- no difference between a bodhisatta and someone who had never even heard the teachings in any life. Not all suttas refer to past life accumulations. This one does: http://www.abhidhamma.org/anguttara_nikaya.%20(2)%2020htm.htm Anguttara Nikaya Mahavaggo THE GREAT CHAPTER (1) Blessings BRETHREN, four blessings should be expected from listening to with the ear, constant recitation with the voice, careful consideration with the mind and penetration of the Norm through insight (1). What four ? Herein, brethren, a brother masters the Norm consisting of the Suttas..... Vedalla (2). He thus listens to, constantly recites, carefully ponders over and penetrates the Norm. When he dies bewildered (3) in mind and is reborn in a certain assembly of devas, there the blissful ones recite to him the stanzas of the Norm. Brethren, the arising of mindfulness is slow, but such a being quickly achieves distinction therein.(4) Brethren, this is the first blessing that should be expected from listening to, constant recitation, careful consideration and penetration of the Norm through insight. ++++++++ 1 Diññiyà,. Comy. says 'himself penetrates it by his wisdom both as regards sense and cause.' 2 See suppra, P. 8. 3 Comy. says 'he is still a puthujjana'' One dying without reaching the Paths is said to die with mindfulness not established. 4 Comy`. He becomes nibbàna-gàmin (bound for the goal).' +++++++++ > > Now, one thing that you have emphasized in this thread is the > paramis and how the fact that wisdom is one of the paramis must mean > it is accumulated. On the surface, this seems like a good argument, > but when one examines the nature of the paramis much closer your > argument isn't as convincing. Take for example this description of > how long the paramis must be developed the bodhsatta to become a > Buddha, from "A Treatise on the Paramis" by Acariya Dhammapala > and translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi: > > "(xiv) HOW MUCH TIME IS REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISH THEM? > As a minimum, four incalculables (asankheyya) and a hundred thousand > great aeons (mahakappa); as a middle figure, eight incalculables and > a hundred thousand great aeons; and as a maximum, sixteen > incalculables and a hundred thousand great aeons.31 This threefold > division obtains by way of those in whom wisdom is predominant, > those in whom faith is predominant, and those in whom energy is > predominant, respectively. For those in whom wisdom is predominant, > faith is weakest and wisdom keenest; for those in whom faith is > predominant, wisdom is middling (and energy weakest); and for those > in whom energy is predominant, wisdom is weakest (and faith > middling). But supreme enlightenment must be achieved by the power > of wisdom; so it is said in the commentary." > http://www.geocities.com/~madg/gangessangha/ParamisTreatise.html#top > > Now, wisdom isn't described here as something that is accumulated, > it is described more as a character trait. If wisdom is accumulated > than there wouldn't be bodhisattas with predominate wisdom, middling > wisdom, and weakest wisdom, right? ++++++++ Actually it is because wisdom is accumulated that there are bodhisattas of predominant, middling and weaker wisdom. Before becoming bodhisatta each being has developed different aspects of wisdom and the other parami; they start their bodhisatta life with wisdom, sadda or viriya predominant > > As for your quote from the Therigatha, Robert, I don't see it saying > anything about wisdom being accumulated. It doesn't even mention > wisdom. +++++++ It spoke about how she had listened and taught Dhamma over many lifetimes. These are conditions that develop wisdom. Robertk 50326 From: "Philip" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:07pm Subject: Re: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 3, no. 2. philofillet Hi Nina and all > panna is not the understanding of what has not appeared yet. That is a good line. Panna only refers to the understanding of paramattha dhammas, when they arise or after they have fallen away, I guess. But what if I reflect on something that has not happened? In my mind I see a man's face, twisted with anger, I imagine it, and reflect that if I were to see that, actually, there would be no "face" in reality, only rupa twisted by angry citta, or that the kamma that makes the angry face is owned by the person in question, not me - there needn't be new akusala kamma arising from my angry response. I just imagined that scenario, and reflected on it, and reflecting on it might condition a wise response if an angry face arises during the day to come. The paramattha dhammas have not appeared, only thinking, and concepts, and speculation, but if the reflection I just did conditions a wise, patient response to akusala vipaka at a later time, could it not be a degree of panna that is arising for me now? (or did when I reflected on how I would respond to an imagined situation.) Can panna not be reflecting on our potential for patient responses to akusala vipaka? (I'm not saying taht we should intentionally imagine these kind of situations, but if the reflection occurs, when looking up from a Dhamma book or whatnot...) Nina, I am dropping a lot of questions and comments on you these days and I expect there will be a lot more because I am feeling very keen. (Posting a lot when I had resolved not to is a confirmation for me that there is no self that can control that sort of thing - frustrating in a sense, but in a deeper sense reassuring because it confirms the Buddha's teaching.) Please don't respond to all of them. It is good for me to ask them, or make comments - that is sometimes enough, without feedback. Asking a question can be condition for understanding to arise later I think. Phil 50327 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 5:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and James) - In a message dated 9/18/05 11:14:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > Hi Howard (and James at the end) > > >>I see your point, but, again, intentional > >>practice rooted in lobha and moha will just lead to more lobha > and > >>moha. > >===================== > > Ah, but will it? Always? And necessarily? Then the goal is > an > >impossibility! For we all start with lobha &moha. If all our > motives were perfectly > >pure and benign to begin with, then we would have attained the > goal at the > >outset! > > I certainly see your point, Howard. Thus I am keeping an open mind > on this point - does the imitation of satipatthana (or thinking > about satipatthana, which is what will certainly be going on if we > approach the satipatthana sutta by interpreting it in a very literal > way, following instructions) condition the arising of satipatthana? ------------------------------------ Howard: I doubt that merely thinking about it will. ----------------------------------- > Does the imitation of metta (thinking about metta) condition the > arising of metta? ----------------------------------- Howard: Again, I doubt that mere thinking about it will. But I do believe that metta can be cultivated. ---------------------------------- I am still open to this possibility. Certainly I > > believe that shallow degrees of panna are necessary a necessary > condition for the "real" thing. ---------------------------------- Howard: Excellent. We agree on this. --------------------------------- > > But I think you're wrong to assume an "impossibility" if we reject > intentional practice. Every moment is a moment in which kusala > cittas can arise, kusala virya can arise, khanti can arise, metta > can arise. > ------------------------------------- Howard: CAN arise! Randomly? For anyone? With no intentional cultivation? For Mormons and Baptists just a much as for Buddhists who follow the Buddha's instructions? Why should that happen? Aren't appropriate causes and conditions needed? ------------------------------------ Daily life is so full of opportunities to note the > > arising of right understanding, and appreciating each of these > moments is a condition for more to arise. ------------------------------------ Howard: These opportunities are there for all people. Do all people take advantage of them? And what is required to take advantage of them? Isn't intentionally paying attention necessary? ---------------------------------- There are so many > > opportunities for right effort, for metta, for patience. -------------------------------- Howard: What does it mean for a circumstance to be an "opportunity"? Can one expend effort by accident? Does patience arise accidently or by intentional practice & cultivation? -------------------------------- There seems > > to be this notion that A. Sujin is saying that we should just wait > passively for panna to arise. It's not like that at all. ------------------------------- Howard: I'm not involved in the Khun Sujin conversations. I'm more interested in the principles. If one is not waiting passively for pa~n~na to arise, what *is* one doing? My answer is that one is intentionally following the Buddha's teachings. One is acting morally to calm the mind and to be good to others, one is calming the mind through meditation, one is guarding the senses, and one is paying attention to whatever arises, how it does so, and how it ceases. --------------------------------------------- Have you > > listened to Lodewijk reading the perfection of virya? > -------------------------------------------- Howard: No, not yet. I look forward to it, though. ------------------------------------------- There is > > nothing passive/hopeless/lazy about the way right effort is > cultivated, nor any of the other perfections. ------------------------------------------ Howard: That is most assuredly so! ------------------------------------------ (I don't necessarily > > think you are one of the people who thinks that A. Sujin says we > should be passive - I forget who says what.) ------------------------------------------ Howard: Actually, from the little I have read by her, it seems to me that her emphasis is that of intentionally being mindful of whatever arises and ceases under all possible circumstances, an emphasis that I applaud. ------------------------------------------ > > > > But how about if one uses some common sense with this, > Phil? Speaking > >ordinary speak: Isn't it often the case that actions taken to > achieve certain > >ends effect changes in the person acting which lead him/her in an > entirely > >different direction, changing his/her motivation and perspective > entirely? Does a > >not-very-nice person sometimes seek the company of another for > very unworthy > >purposes, and end up learning from that other person lessons that > completely > >change him/herself? Can you not think of cases of people working > to achieve > >certain goals for the wrong reasons, and, in the process, > transforming themselves > >into people who come to see the proper reasons? Sometimes good > results occur > >inadvertently due to unintended and even unanticipated conditions. > Intention > >(kamma) is important, but it is not all-determining. > > You've expressed this very well, Howard, as always. You always > help me to keep an open mind - it helps that you don't make personal > attacks on A. Sujin or people who are encouraged by her approach to > Dhamma (which we would of course say is not "her" approach but > simply right understanding of the Buddha's teaching, but that goes > without saying.) > > James, please take note. When I read Howard's posts, I want to > think more deeply about his point of view. When I read some of your > posts in which you use phrases like "in a panic about self" (or > something like that) to describe people you are debating with, I > just want to dismiss your point of view, and do so too readily. You > can express your understanding of Dhamma better with honey than with > vinegar - well, not honey, but you know what I mean. > > Phil > ======================== 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) 50328 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:33pm Subject: announcement - easier search is coming rjkjp1 Dear Group, The useful posts files has many great posts but it is becoming time consuming to find them. Today I bought Invision software for making a forum. Which I will host on abhidhamma.org and list all the topics (I'll be copying each useful post from dsg files into it) in the useful posts index. This will make for easy scrolling of each topic - no need to click and open. And also allow further comments on each topic to be added in a very easy to search style. It is complex software so it will take a little time for me to get it running. If anyone who has posts in the useful posts file doesn't want them included let me know off-list. Robertk 50329 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 8:57pm Subject: Kindness is the Key! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Goodwill Heals all Hate! Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer... Sutta Nipata I, 8 May all creatures, all living things, all beings one and all, experience good fortune only... May they not fall into any harm! Anguttara Nikaya II, 72 For one who mindfully develops Boundlessly friendly loving-kindness Seeing the destruction of clinging, The fetters are quickly worn away since they become soft and slack! Itivuttaka 27 Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! 50330 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:28pm Subject: Cut Craving ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Cutting Craving for the Clusters of Clinging Ends all Pain! At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha said this: Bhikkhus: Whatever desire & lust there is for form, feeling, perception, mental construction and consciousness, whatever greed, urge & craving, whatever engagement, entanglement & clinging, whatever habitual addiction, obsession, and underlying tendency there is for this form, feeling, perception, mental construction and consciousness, overcome, eliminate & leave it behind!!! Thus all that form, feeling, perception, mental construction and consciousness will be overcome & conquered, cut off at the very root, made like a palm stump, completely destroyed, so that it is unable to rearise again... This - only this - is the End of Suffering...!!! Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya 22:112 III 162 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <...> 50331 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 0:33am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? kenhowardau Hi Swee Boon, ---------------------- S: > One thing that I find very consistent about the Buddha's teachings is his emphasis on anicca, the arising and ceasing of the five aggregates and/or the six-fold senses. I discovered that the purpose of developing Noble Right Mindfulness and Noble Right Concentration is none other than to discern anicca, or what the Buddha termed as "things as they actually are present". http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-099.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-041.html Once anicca is discerned, dukkha is discerned. Once anicca and dukkha are both discerned, anatta is discerned. ----------------------------------- I haven't looked at those references yet, but are you saying the three characteristics can be learnt one at a time? Can there be direct discernment of anicca without any knowledge of dukkha and anatta? That sounds highly unlikely. --------------------------------------------------- S: > In short, whatever is anicca is dukkha; whatever is both anicca and dukkha is anatta. --------------------------------------------------- Yes, although that doesn't explain how Nibbana (which is neither anicca nor dukkha) is anatta. ---------------------------------------------------------- S: > However, Khun Sujin's teachings seems to use a different approach to anatta. She places lots of emphasis on "conditions"; ---------------------------------------------------------- Conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta. If, as you say, KS places emphasis on conditions, that would be a good thing, would it not? If we don't know the meaning of conditions, then we don't know the meaning of conditioned dhammas, and if we don't know the meaning of conditioned dhammas we don't know the meaning of anicca dukkha and anatta. -------------------------- S: > because the five aggregates are conditioned, there can be no control at all; -------------------------- I'm sure you agree the five aggregates are conditioned, but do you also agree that means they are beyond control? It is enough to know that the five aggregates are conditioned, but if we want to expand on that, we could say, "That means they are beyond control." That would be just an elucidation: it would not be meant as adding anything to the original statement. I suspect you see a fundamental difference between; "The five aggregates are conditioned" and; "There can be no control at all." If so, what is that difference? ------------------------------------------------------- S: > if anyone attempts to control, then "self" will pop out like a devil from nowhere and start to attack his/her mind. -------------------------------------------------------- I have never heard K Sujin use those, very emotive, words. Even if she did, I would understand them purely as an elucidation of "The five aggregates are conditioned" - not as adding anything extra. Perhaps when you are criticising the way KS teaches, you should stick more closely to her actual words. ------------------------ S: > In short, if one does not control and just let conditions take care of themselves, then one has arrived at a true glimpse of anatta. ------------------------ Again, those are your words. "If one does not control," suggests there is a choice - to control or not to control. But there is no possibility of control for anyone, regardless of their beliefs. I think a better choice of words would have been; "If one does not believe in control." Similarly, your words; "just let conditions take care of themselves" could be taken to mean there is a choice involved. I don't know if that is what you are saying, but I am sure it is not what KS is saying. ------------------------------------------- S: > So, following her teachings, we will have situations such as: A. One should not select a theme of mindfulness meditation, because that will induce the idea of "self". --------------------------------------------- (Let's read that as; "One should not *believe one has* control over the selection of . . .") Selection of 'objects for right mindfulness' occurs in the realm of paramattha dhammas: there is no self that selects them. Or are you suggesting you can single out, say, visible rupas from audible rupas (which come and go in less than a billionth of a second) and say, "I'll be mindful of those; but I won't be mindful of the others!" You would be foolish to suggest you have that ability, and we would be foolish to believe you. ---------------------------------------------------------------- S: > B. One should not select what food to eat, because that will induce the idea of "self". ----------------------------------------------------------------- No question of Dhamma arises when we believe we can select what food to eat, and so there is no wrong view at such times. However, when we believe we have control over dhammas we are refuting the Buddha's teaching, and there most definitely is wrong view. In the course of your frequent visits to DSG, you have seen that explanation over and over again. Please consider the possibility that the fault could lie with you. That is to say, the fault could lie in your inability to comprehend what has been repeatedly explained to you. Please don't be in a hurry to blame K Sujin and others for what may well be your own shortcomings. ---------------------------------------------- S: > C. One should not select which dhammastudygroup post to reply to, because that will induce the idea of "self". And so on and so forth ... I clearly see Khun Sujin's teachings as a detraction from the Buddha's teachings. ----------------------------------------------- Before you make that accusation be sure you know what K Sujin is saying. Has she ever said, "One should not select which dhammastudygroup post to reply to, because that will induce the idea of "self,"or, " One should not select what food to eat, because that will induce the idea of "self?" That is just your wrong interpretation of her words. --------------------------- S: > The Buddha's approach is to develop Noble Right Concentration (supported by the other 7 Noble Right Factors) ---------------------------- Are you saying right concentration comes first? Where did the Buddha say that? It seems highly illogical. If right concentration came first, then people with great powers of concentration (snipers, safe-crackers, chess-masters,) should be very careful. They would be in danger of spontaneous enlightenment and parinibbana - the final cessation of khandhas. They might not want that! ------------------------------ S: > that penetrates anicca, ------------------------------ There can be no penetration of anicca until there has been repeated practise of all kinds of right mindfulness. From the very beginning, there has to be right (intellectual) understanding of; "All conditioned dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta; all dhammas are anatta." -------------------------------------------- S: > which subsequently penetrates anatta. ---------------------------------------- The vipassana nanas (insight-knowledges) are developed gradually - together. --------------------------------------------------------- S: > Khun Sujin's approach is to accumulate moments of understanding about conditions and relinquishing control to achieve the glimpse of anatta. -------------------------------------------------------- Her approach is to relinquish wrong views (including belief in a controlling self). That can happen as a result of studying and discussing the Dhamma. ------------------------------------------------------------------- S: > It is understood that she claims that at those moments of understanding, there is also Noble Right Concentration present. There is therefore no requirement for formal meditation to develop Noble Right Concentration. ------------------------------------------------------------------ I agree with that assessment. The only correction I would make is; it would be *mundane* - not Noble - right concentration at those moments. Noble (Ariyan) right concentration occurs only in moments of supramundane Path-consciousness (which have Nibbana as object). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- S: > I am not suggesting that an understanding of conditions is not necessary to achieve supramundane achievements. But the direct knowledge of the 24 conditions is the domain of the Buddha. We can never ever obtain direct knowledge of these 24 conditions. Not even when we become sotapannas. It is already hard enough to understand Dependent Origination. Even a sotapanna like Ananda could not understand it in it's full glory. So why dabble into conditions as if they hold some supramundane secret? I seriously think there could be an overdose of Abhidhamma in this group. --------------------------------- That would be at odds with my favourite quote: "I have taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all things." (M III (PTS), p.19; S III, p. 103) Ken H 50332 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 0:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] announcement - easier search is coming jonoabb Hi RobK and All Thanks for telling us of your plans to make the searching of our UP selection easier. I'm glad you find it so helpful (it is of course the result of considerable work on our part!). As you know, members often do bring up on the list posts or threads they have come across in their browsing of the UP's or the archives. We're always pleased to see this, and we hope members will continue to post these responses to DSG as usual. From our point of view, no thread is ever considered closed (even if it has been 'dropped' ;-)). Jon rjkjp1 wrote: >Dear Group, >The useful posts files has many great posts but it is becoming time >consuming to find them. >Today I bought Invision software for making a forum. Which I will host >on abhidhamma.org and list all the topics (I'll be copying each useful >post from dsg files into it) in the useful posts index. This will make >for easy scrolling of each topic - no need to click and open. And also >allow further comments on each topic to be added in a very easy to >search style. >It is complex software so it will take a little time for me to get it >running. > >If anyone who has posts in the useful posts file doesn't want them >included let me know off-list. >Robertk > > 50333 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:09am Subject: New Book by Bhikkhu Bodhi christine_fo... Hello all, Bhikkhu Bodhi's new book (with Forward by the Dalai Lama): http://wisdompubs.org/products/0861714911.cfm metta, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 50334 From: "Philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:14am Subject: Re: The Three Forms of Dukkha. philofillet Hi again Swee I thought about the below when I came across this sutta passage from one of my notebooks: "There are three feelings spoken of by me, but I have also said 'whatever is felt comes under dukkha.'" (Sorry, the scribbled sutta title is indecipherable. It's from SN.) So whether pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or indifferent feeling, they can all fall under dukkha. This is viparinamakuddhata, I guess. Phil > from B. Bodhi's brief notes: "The three types are explained at Vism > 499 14-21. Briefly, suffering due to pain (dukhhakuddhata) is painful > bodily and mental feelin; suffering due to the formations > (sankharadukkhata) is all conditioned phenomena of the three planes, > because they are oppressed by rise and fall; and suffering due to > change (viparinamadukkhata) is pleasant feeling, which brings suffering > when it comes to an end." > 50335 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:23am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 276- Wrong View/di.t.thi (l) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch16- Wrong View (di.t.thi)continued] So long as wrong view has not been eradicated it can still arise when there are conditions for its arising. Only through mindfulness will we be able to know when it arises. When we think of concepts such as people and things there is not necessarily wrong view. We can think of a person with kusala citta, for example, when we have compassion for him. Or we can think of a person with lobha-múla-citta without wrong view or with dosa-múla-citta. Wrong view has to be eradicated first before other defilements can be eradicated. As we have seen, the non-ariyan, who has not eradicated wrong view, still has conditions to neglect the five precepts; he still has conditions for killing, stealing, sexual misbehaviour, lying and the taking of intoxicants, including alcoholic drinks. When we understand that the clinging to the concept of self causes us many problems in life, that it leads to what is unprofitable, we may see the benefit of the development of right understanding. If we really see the danger of wrong view, it can condition the arising of mindfulness and thus right understanding can develop. Right understanding can only develop if there is mindfulness now, not if we merely think of ways how to have more mindfulness later on. ***** [Wrong View (di.t.thi) to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 50336 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Three Forms of Dukkha. sarahprocter... Hi Phil & Swee Boon, See this from K.Sujin's talks in Cambodia which Nina recently posted: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/49909 Also, lots, lots more under 'Dukkha' in U.P. on the 3 kinds of dukkha with lots more textual references. Sorry, no time to add more. Always a good topic for further discussion. Metta, Sarah ======= --- Philip wrote: > > Hi again Swee > > I thought about the below when I came across this sutta passage from > one of my notebooks: "There are three feelings spoken of by me, but I > have also said 'whatever is felt comes under dukkha.'" (Sorry, the > scribbled sutta title is indecipherable. It's from SN.) > > So whether pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or indifferent > feeling, they can all fall under dukkha. 50337 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. sarahprocter... Hi Icaro (Larry, Howard) Good to see you back! --- icarofranca wrote: > It´s a matter of choosing out a good definition. > It seems to me (just an opinion, folks!) that "Accumulation" is a > genus that encompasses the idea of "Karma" (Genus -> Species) - All > Karma is a kind of Accumulation, but not all Accumulation is Karma - > nothing to do with accumulation of Gold, Money, Stocks or Basketball > cards, you see... > Again, all is grounded on a good and proper definition of > "Accumulation" - an issue that sometimes is very obscure on Abhidhamma! .... S: In terms of paccaya (conditions), I think we can say that kamma can only bring results with the support of accumulations (natural desive support condition), but the latter condition or accumulations 'accumulate' even as we speak, even when there is no kamma bringing any result. So every experience of any object 'accumulates' from moment to moment - even thoughts of gold, money, stocks or basketball cards:). I look forward to hearing more obscure or not-so-obscure Abhidhamma from you. Thanks to Larry for his encouragement too. Metta, Sarah ========= 50338 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:07am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 553 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 5 khandhas or 5 aggregates. 1. ruupa-kkhandhaa or aggregates of materials 2. vedana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of feeling 3. sanna-kkhandhaa or aggregates of perception 4. sankhaara-kkhandhaa or aggregates of formation 5. vi~n~naana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of consciousness 4. sankhaara-kkhandhaa or aggregates of formations These 52 cetasikas and they are vedana, sanna and other 50 cetasikas. Other 50 cetasikas are sankhaara-kkhandhaa. Among these 50 cetasikas, cetana cetasika behaves like a leader in terms of kamma. Sankhaara-kkhandhas can be grouped in many different way. As actions are performed at three doors of kamma, sankhaara can be divided into 1) kaaya sankhaara (bodily formation) 2) vacii sankhaara (verbal formation) 3) mano sankhaara (mental formation) There always are sources where dhamma arise. Depending on this cetana can be grouped into six as follow. 1. ruupa-san-cetana or visual-volition (volition at visual object) 2. sadda-san-cetana or auditory-volition (at sound) 3. gandha-san-cetana or olfactory-volition (at smell) 4. rasa-san-cetana or gustatory-volition (at taste) 5. photthabbaa-san-cetana or tactile-volition (at touches) 6. dhamma-san-cetana or dhamma-volition (at dhamma or thought) When these cetana arise there also are other cetasikas and they all are sankhaara-kkhandhaa except feeling, which is vedana-kkhandhaa and perception, which is sanna-kkhandhaa. So we may call these 6 groups as sankhaara-kkhandhaa. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 50339 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:35am Subject: Re: announcement - easier search is coming htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Group, > The useful posts files has many great posts but it is becoming time > consuming to find them. > Today I bought Invision software for making a forum. Which ... .. .. search style. > It is complex software so it will take a little time for me to get it > running. > > If anyone who has posts in the useful posts file doesn't want them > included let me know off-list. > Robertk --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Robert K, Thanks for your effort. So we have to go to abhidhamma.org site to scroll UP? With respect, Htoo Naing 50340 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:39am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > James, please take note. When I read Howard's posts, I want to > think more deeply about his point of view. When I read some of your > posts in which you use phrases like "in a panic about self" (or > something like that) to describe people you are debating with, I > just want to dismiss your point of view, and do so too readily. You > can express your understanding of Dhamma better with honey than with > vinegar - well, not honey, but you know what I mean. > > Phil Well, excuse me for living! LOL! This part of your post is rather personal and should have been directed to me off-list. There is no reason to discuss if James is naughty or nice on-list (we can leave that to Santa ;-)), we should only discuss the dhamma. But, since you brought it up, I will respond to some extent. I have already admitted, several times, that my language can be rough. For the most part, I don't even realize that it is rough until someone tells me. For example, when you state that my phrase "in a panic about self" upset you, I have no idea why. I just find it to be a more creative way of saying the same thing Howard said to you. I'm not trying to win a popularity contest and I don't really care if you automatically reject my message because of my words. If you truly wanted to be wise, you would look past my words that offend you and try to see the message. Really, Phil, I think that this is your problem and not mine. If my posts bother you then don't read them anymore, no one is forcing you to. Metta, James 50341 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:46am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? nidive Hi Tep, > @ Congratulations on the very well-written post that accurately > summarizes Ajahn Sujin's approach to anatta, her objection to > "formal meditation", the idea of panna accumulation and the > relinqushing of control of conditions (the "let it be" philosophy). > > But, there have been a great many posts on these issues already. Are > you about to start another round of debate? James has tried. > Hasituppada tried. Howard has tried. Herman tried. Tep has tried. > > I doubt if you are going to make any difference this time. > @ Keep on thinking rightly and writing rightly. Thank you for your encouragement! Since so many others have failed before me, I guess there isn't a need for another round of debate. I like the way you phrase it: (the "let it be" philosophy), it's so accurate and succinct. Thanks again! Regards, Swee Boon 50342 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:48am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: Hi All, One thing that I find very consistent about the Buddha's teachings is his emphasis on anicca, the arising and ceasing of the five aggregates and/or the six-fold senses. I discovered that the purpose of However, Khun Sujin's teachings seems to use a different approach to anatta. She places lots of emphasis on "conditions"; because the five aggregates are conditioned, there can be no control at all; if anyone attempts to control, then "self" will pop out like a devil from nowhere and start to attack his/her mind. In short, if one does not control and just let conditions take care of themselves, then one has arrived at a true glimpse of anatta. So, following her teachings, we will have situations such as Khun Sujin's approach is to accumulate moments of understanding about conditions and relinquishing control to achieve the glimpse of anatta. I am not suggesting that an understanding of conditions is not necessary to achieve supramundane achievements. But the direct knowledge of the 24 conditions is the domain of the Buddha. We can never ever obtain direct knowledge of these 24 conditions. Not even when we become sotapannas. It is already hard enough to understand Dependent Origination. Even a sotapanna like Ananda could not understand it in it's full glory. So why dabble into conditions as if they hold some supramundane secret? I seriously think there could be an overdose of Abhidhamma in this group. Do all paths lead to anatta? I don't think so. Just thinking out loud ... Regards, Swee Boon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Swee Boon, Truely overdosed. Whenever I meet Dhamma-teachers I ask about dhammas that are hold by DSGs, the teachers all smile. These teachers are both learning and teaching and stay in seclusion. Regarding anatta and anicca, there are strange ideas that_ Theravadii's main theme is anicca while Mahaayaana's main theme is anatta. Some person asked why anicca followed by dukkha followed by anatta. Why does anatta not come first? When anatta is first seen is it possible to see dukkha? And many more? Food for thought! With Metta, Htoo Naing 50343 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:52am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: Hi, Swee - @ Congratulations on the very well-written post that accurately summarizes Ajahn Sujin's approach to anatta, her objection to "formal meditation", the idea of panna accumulation and the relinqushing of control of conditions (the "let it be" philosophy). But, there have been a great many posts on these issues already. Are you about to start another round of debate? James has tried. Hasituppada tried. Howard has tried. Herman tried. Tep has tried. ...... I doubt if you are going to make any difference this time. @@ The followings are some highlights of your post that I like very much. In short, whatever is anicca is dukkha; whatever is both anicca and dukkha is anatta. > > > > > She places lots of emphasis on "conditions"; because the five > > aggregates are conditioned, there can be no control at all; if anyone > > attempts to control, then "self" will pop out like a devil from > > nowhere and start to attack his/her mind. > > > > > > Khun Sujin's approach is to accumulate moments of understanding > about conditions and relinquishing control to achieve the glimpse of > anatta. It is understood that she claims that at those moments of > > understanding, there is also Noble Right Concentration present. > >There is therefore no requirement for formal meditation to > >develop Noble Right Concentration. > > > > > > Do all paths lead to anatta? I don't think so. > > @ Keep on thinking rightly and writing rightly. Best wishes, Tep ======= ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep ( and Swee Boon ), Thanks Tep for your reply to Swee Boon. Some many have tried before. I will be looking forward to seeing Swee's more posts by keeping on thinking rightly and writing rightly. With regards, Htoo 50344 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 6:57am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: Hi Tep and Swee Boon, Maybe it won't do any good, but it is better than not saying anything. Metta, James -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear James, Thanks for your reply to Tep's reply. Maybe, maybe. With respect, Htoo Naing 50345 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:00am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, James - > > Thank you for your right-to-the -point feedback. > > > James : When you see fellow > > Buddhists who appreciate the dhamma but are still wasting the > > precious opportunity they have been given as humans in this sasana > > by just waiting for panna to arise while immobile in a gridlock of > > panic over "self", then the compassionate thing to do is to say > > something about it. Maybe it won't do any good, but it is better > > than not saying anything. > > > > Tep: It is better than not saying anything, if we can keep on thinking > rightly and writing rightly without having to debate those stale issues > over and over again. Hopefully, one day those "immobile Buddhists" > would wake up. If they didn't want to, then nobody could help them. > > > Respectfully, > > > Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep, Very good comment. Even if many wake them up they will not rise from immobility because they are WAITING for accumulation of wisdom. Sabbe sattaa kammassakaa, Htoo Naing 50346 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:05am Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Phil - With metta, Howard P.S. Unfortunately, though I wish to reduce my posting, I feel compelled to post when I think that people's welfare is at stake. -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Howard, So we will be losing something if you reduce your postings. With respect, Htoo Naing 50347 From: "Dan D." Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:08am Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ onco111 Good answers, Larry. And, of course, good answers so often lend themselves well to more questions... > L: What I meant by saying impermanence etc. are characteristics of > formation (sankhara) is the tilakkhana are characteristics of > conditioned arising, in other words, the activity of formation. All > the khandhas are sankhata. The reason they are not listed as separate > realities is because they are common to all conditioned realities. You must be right about that. They cannot be classed as citta, cetasika, rupa, nibbana, or paññati, but they are characteristics of all citta, cetasika, and rupa. But citta, cetasika, and rupa are classes of characteristics themselves, so why not another class of paramattha dhamma, the tilakkhana? > Not only are they general characteristics, they are also particular > characteristics. That is, they are characteristics of particular > realities. What ignorance ignores and wisdom penetrates is the > impermanence etc. of particular realities. That is my understanding as well, but then I read things like "sabbe sankhara anicca". Is that just theory because penetration of tilakkhana is penetration of a particular moment? Consciousness is aware of > the impermanence, undesirability, and not self characteristic > of "compact formations" but insight experiences these characteristics > via immediate particulars. I'm not seeing the value of your "compact formations" hypothesis yet. Is it more than philosophical speculation? > L: Yes, I think impermanence is the basic definer of reality (except > nibbana). Whatever is impermanent is not a concept. So the question > is, is a perceived group (compact formation) such as a jar > impermanent? I think everyone would agree that it is. However, this > view evolved over time. The Buddha would say a jar is a concept, but > is he talking about the idea of a jar or the formation of a jar? He > doesn't really discuss groups of realities except insofar > as "khandha" means "group". That's right. He limits discussion to those things that conduce to liberation! > Buddhaghosa discusses "compact > formations" and resolution of the compact as an analytical procedure > for getting at ultimate reality and its emptiness of a self, but > doesn't say whether a compact formation is concept or reality. He > does say that ultimate reality has an "own nature" (sabhava). It is > left to latter commentators to say that sabhava is > ultimately "becoming" (arising, presence, dissolution) and that this > becoming is unique. What I am proposing goes beyond this in saying > that a compact formation is a reality, not a concept, but not an > ultimate reality. Compact formation is slightly different from > conventional reality in that it is not completely dependent on social > agreements the way language is, but there is considerable latitude in > what constitutes a formation. For example, a table and a chair > together is a formation. The same table and a lamp is a formation. > And the same lamp and a computer is a formation. These formations are > cognitively formed but they don't stand for something, the way > concept does. > ----------------------------- Larry, this idea of "formation" is quite far removed from the "formation" that we read about in the texts. I'm going to pass on the temptation to speculate. > ----------------------------- > L: This distinction comes from the Abhidhammatta Sangaha. I am > interpreting this as two kinds of words, naming words and evocative > words. Nina may not agree with that. I would say compact formation is > not a concept in Buddhaghosa's usage, but possibly it is in the > Buddha's usage. > > Also, this brings up a problem: the spoken word is a reality, vocal > intimation rupa. It would seem to take a pretty sharp sword to > separate word concept from word reality. Also, conventions arise and > cease. Even ideas arise and cease. Maybe it isn't possible to be > completely rigorous with a concept and reality distinction. Or maybe > we just need better concepts. ;-) > ---------------------------------------- Maybe in reality, we can be completely rigorous with the distinction, but in words/concept/theory we cannot be. Metta, Dan 50348 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:06am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. buddhatrue Hi Robert K., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear James, > sorry about the delay. I arrived back in Japan a few days ago and > have been lazy to write. James: That's okay. Hope you are enjoying your time in Japan. I may have to visit Japan one day- at least so I can give Phil a good spanking! ;-)) > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > > Hi Robert K., > > > > You wrote that you would like to continue this discussion because > of > > its importance. I agree with that and wish to continue this > > discussion also. > > > > > Let me just throw in this quote: > > Wisdom arises from practice; > > Without practice it is lost. > > Knowing these two ways of gain and loss, > > Conduct yourself so that wisdom grows. > > -Dhammapada 282 > > > > This is the only quote from the Buddha which states indirectly > that > > wisdom isn't accumulated from lifetime to lifetime. It is only > the > > practice of dhamma which will carry wisdom from life to life, > > without the practice the wisdom is lost (as in forever gone, not > > just supressed). > ++++++++++++ > Not sure how you reach that conclusion. James: I didn't reach that conclusion, that is what the Buddha said. Personally, I don't know anything first-hand about it. I don't have memory of my past lives. If wisdom is forever lost > then we would all start each life completely equal- no difference > between a bodhisatta and someone who had never even heard the > teachings in any life. James: The quote didn't say that wisdom is lost with each new lifetime, it said that wisdom is lost when the practice is stopped. Robert, you seem to be confusing accumulations with kamma. As Sarah pointed out in a recent post (#50337), accumulations condition kamma but kamma doesn't necessarily condition accumulations. Accumulations are something that go forward independent of kamma, like mannerisms, personal tastes, etc., but the Buddha is saying here that when practice (an impetus for kamma) is stopped then wisdom is also stopped. So, from my interpretation, wisdom isn't accumulated. Not all suttas refer to past life > accumulations. > This one does: > http://www.abhidhamma.org/anguttara_nikaya.%20(2)%2020htm.htm > Anguttara Nikaya > Mahavaggo THE GREAT CHAPTER > (1) Blessings > > BRETHREN, four blessings should be expected from listening to with > the ear, constant recitation with the voice, careful consideration > with the mind and penetration of the Norm through insight (1). What > four ? > > Herein, brethren, a brother masters the Norm consisting of the > Suttas..... Vedalla (2). He thus listens to, constantly recites, > carefully ponders over and penetrates the Norm. When he dies > bewildered (3) in mind and is reborn in a certain assembly of devas, > there the blissful ones recite to him the stanzas of the Norm. > Brethren, the arising of mindfulness is slow, but such a being > quickly achieves distinction therein.(4) Brethren, this is the first > blessing that should be expected from listening to, constant > recitation, careful consideration and penetration of the Norm > through insight. > > ++++++++ > > 1 Diññiyà,. Comy. says 'himself penetrates it by his wisdom both as > regards sense and cause.' > > 2 See suppra, P. 8. > > 3 Comy. says 'he is still a puthujjana'' One dying without reaching > the Paths is said to die with mindfulness not established. > > 4 Comy`. He becomes nibbàna-gàmin (bound for the goal).' > > +++++++++ James: This sutta seems to be pointing to kamma, or continuation of practice. I don't see how it relates to accumulation. > > > > > > > Now, one thing that you have emphasized in this thread is the > > paramis and how the fact that wisdom is one of the paramis must > mean > > it is accumulated. On the surface, this seems like a good > argument, > > but when one examines the nature of the paramis much closer your > > argument isn't as convincing. Take for example this description > of > > how long the paramis must be developed the bodhsatta to become a > > Buddha, from "A Treatise on the Paramis" by Acariya Dhammapala > > and translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi: > > > > "(xiv) HOW MUCH TIME IS REQUIRED TO ACCOMPLISH THEM? > > As a minimum, four incalculables (asankheyya) and a hundred > thousand > > great aeons (mahakappa); as a middle figure, eight incalculables > and > > a hundred thousand great aeons; and as a maximum, sixteen > > incalculables and a hundred thousand great aeons.31 This threefold > > division obtains by way of those in whom wisdom is predominant, > > those in whom faith is predominant, and those in whom energy is > > predominant, respectively. For those in whom wisdom is > predominant, > > faith is weakest and wisdom keenest; for those in whom faith is > > predominant, wisdom is middling (and energy weakest); and for > those > > in whom energy is predominant, wisdom is weakest (and faith > > middling). But supreme enlightenment must be achieved by the power > > of wisdom; so it is said in the commentary." > > > http://www.geocities.com/~madg/gangessangha/ParamisTreatise.html#top > > > > Now, wisdom isn't described here as something that is accumulated, > > it is described more as a character trait. If wisdom is > accumulated > > than there wouldn't be bodhisattas with predominate wisdom, > middling > > wisdom, and weakest wisdom, right? > > ++++++++ > Actually it is because wisdom is accumulated that there are > bodhisattas of predominant, middling and weaker wisdom. Before > becoming bodhisatta each being has developed different aspects of > wisdom and the other parami; they start their bodhisatta life with > wisdom, sadda or viriya predominant James: They each start at a different stage because of kamma, and that stage doesn't change. If wisdom accumulated they would all take the same amount of time to reach the goal and their wisdom would soon be the same. Since kamma only conditions kamma, and not necessarily accumulations, their wisdom remains different and the time required to reach Buddhahood remains different. > > > > > > > As for your quote from the Therigatha, Robert, I don't see it > saying > > anything about wisdom being accumulated. It doesn't even mention > > wisdom. > > +++++++ > It spoke about how she had listened and taught Dhamma over many > lifetimes. These are conditions that develop wisdom. James: Yes, that is practice, kamma, which develops wisdom. Again, different from accumulations. If she had stopped practicing the dhamma at any point in all those lifetimes, she would have lost the wisdom she had gained through practice. Why? Because it doesn't accumulate. > Robertk Metta, James 50349 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:13am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Phil, Well, excuse me for living! LOL! This part of your post is rather > personal and should have been directed to me off-list. There is no > reason to discuss if James is naughty or nice on-list (we can leave > that to Santa ;-)), we should only discuss the dhamma. But, since > you brought it up, I will respond to some extent. > > I have already admitted, several times, that my language can be > rough. For the most part, I don't even realize that it is rough > until someone tells me. For example, when you state that my > phrase "in a panic about self" upset you, I have no idea why. I > just find it to be a more creative way of saying the same thing > Howard said to you. I'm not trying to win a popularity contest and > I don't really care if you automatically reject my message because > of my words. If you truly wanted to be wise, you would look past my > words that offend you and try to see the message. Really, Phil, I > think that this is your problem and not mine. If my posts bother > you then don't read them anymore, no one is forcing you to. > > Metta, > James ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear James, Well said! It is true that if some posts seem bothering them do not read them and no one is forcing to do so. More ture is that the problems reside in readers. With Metta, Htoo Naing PS: ?? 50350 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:28am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi Swee Boon, ------------------------------------------------------------------ Ken H: I agree with that assessment. The only correction I would make is; it would be *mundane* - not Noble - right concentration at those moments. Noble (Ariyan) right concentration occurs only in moments of supramundane Path-consciousness (which have Nibbana as object). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Ken H, May I ask some questions here? 1) Is 1st ruupa jhaana through 4th ruupa jhaana mundane or supramundane 'right concentration'? 2) What is the object of 1st ruupa jhaana through 4th ruupa jhaana? 3) What is the object of supramundane 'right concentration'? 4) Are the objects the same when one is in jhaana and when one is in (magga)/ phala? With respect, Htoo Naing > Ken H 50351 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Swee Boon) - In a message dated 9/19/05 3:35:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > Hi Swee Boon, > > ---------------------- > S: >One thing that I find very consistent about the Buddha's > teachings is his emphasis on anicca, the arising and ceasing of the > five aggregates and/or the six-fold senses. > > I discovered that the purpose of developing Noble Right Mindfulness > and Noble Right Concentration is none other than to discern anicca, > or what the Buddha termed as "things as they actually are present". ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Impermanence is a critically important *part* of how things are, but only a part. Closer to the full story of how things are is dependent origination, which subsumes impermanence, conditionality, impersonality, lack of own being, and inability to satisfy (dukkha). ----------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------------------> > > Yes, although that doesn't explain how Nibbana (which is neither > anicca nor dukkha) is anatta. ------------------------------------------------------- Howard: That's right! I would say that one reason that nibbana is anatta is that it is impersonal. Nibbana is not me or mine. ------------------------------------------------------ > > It is enough to know that the five aggregates are conditioned, but if > we want to expand on that, we could say, "That means they are beyond > control." That would be just an elucidation: it would not be meant as > adding anything to the original statement. --------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I agree. -------------------------------------- > > Selection of 'objects for right mindfulness' occurs in the > realm of paramattha dhammas: there is no self that selects them. Or > are you suggesting you can single out, say, visible rupas from > audible rupas (which come and go in less than a billionth of a > second) and say, "I'll be mindful of those; but I won't be mindful of > the others!" > > You would be foolish to suggest you have that ability, and we would > be foolish to believe you. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Not entirely, Ken. Let's take an ordinary example: You are at a social gathering at which there are many loud converstations in progress. You are talking with a particular person. What you do is concentrate on what that person is saying, paying particular attention to his/her words and attempting to ignore (literally "not know") all the other din. Generally you are reasonably successful in this. What is actually happening? I would say that *all* the sound is heard, but the sound coming from your friend is being highlighted by heightened attention directed towards it. Similarly, when attending an opera, an event of dramatic sight and sound, there are times at which one will attend more closely to the sound than to sight, highlighting the auditory mindstates over and above the others as consciousness flits from sense door to sense door. The same will happen, for example, at a play, when one strains to hear certain dialogue. Of course, all this is ultimately quite impersonal, being merely cetana, viriya, maniskara and other cetasikas occurring. ---------------------------------------------- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > S: >B. One should not select what food to eat, because that will > induce the idea of "self". > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > No question of Dhamma arises when we believe we can select what food > to eat, and so there is no wrong view at such times. However, when > we believe we have control over dhammas we are refuting the Buddha's > teaching, and there most definitely is wrong view. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Howard: If we say "we" control, and literally mean there is an agent who controls, that is certainly wrong view. If, on the other hand, when we say that we choose what we eat we realize that this is just a conventional shorthand for complex processes involving no agent, then there is no problem at all. --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > That would be at odds with my favourite quote: > > "I have taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in > all things." > (M III (PTS), p.19; S III, p. 103) > > Ken H > > ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 50352 From: "Hal" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:37am Subject: Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ bardosein Dan, Larry and Mike, Yes, great comments. I wrote a reply earlier, addressing some of the concerns that have been discussed in the last few posts. Fortunately or unfortunately, thanks to my unreliable overseas connection, my effort was lost in the void of cyberspace. Just as well, as I'm feeling a little dizzy pondering over all the conumdrums this thread has raised. Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Good answers, Larry. And, of course, good answers so often lend > themselves well to more questions... > >[snip].... 50353 From: "Philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:43am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? philofillet Hi James > Well, excuse me for living! LOL! This part of your post is rather > personal and should have been directed to me off-list. There is no > reason to discuss if James is naughty or nice on-list (we can leave > that to Santa ;-)), we should only discuss the dhamma. You know me - I write things off the top of my head. And most of the time when I write to you it's like I'm writing to myself because you are the person I feel most kindred to here. I was interested in the phenomenon, related to developing understanding, about why I had interest in Howard's post, but just kind of laughed off yours, disregarded it. (read it again, the condescension/mock compassion) You could make the same points as Howard, but there would be less communication of the points, because people, with their tendencies to aversion, would just take a pass and miss the Dhamma point, because of the aversion to harsh language. Tat aversion can be seen through at times, but most of the time most people won't have the conditions for wisdom at that moment and will just think what an obnoxious guy and move to the next post. That's human nature. So what, right? Well, every moment we have to try to communicate our understanding of Dhamma is a precious gift, as you know, so why waste it? Right effort and metta and other kusala cittas could arise at that moment and lead you to being sweeter, I guess. Something like that. I don't know. At other times I think that the most important thing is developing patience and understanding of the aversion because at such times I think that we who disagree can't persuade each other anyways, our views are so rigid, so the only thing that goes on here is developing patience and metta or whatever so any harsh language is helpful in itself for that kind of bhavana. Different ways of seeing it from moment to moment. > If you truly wanted to be wise, you would look past my > words that offend you and try to see the message. Exactly. See above. But the point isn't that you should try to win a popularity contest. I would think that respect for the Buddha's teaching, which I know you feel deeply, would motivate you to express your understanding of Dhamma in the most amiable way possible, at that moment, so more people could appreciate it more deeply. Faking amiability? It might seem like that sometimes, it might be that sometimes, but it could also be culivation of metta at times. My thoughts on this change all the time. Never mind. Back to the regularly scheduled programming. Phil 50354 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:50am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? nidive Hi Ken H, Just two points to reply to ... > Are you saying right concentration comes first? Where did the Buddha > say that? It seems highly illogical. Of course not. See MN 117. http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-117-tb0.html > That would be at odds with my favourite quote: > > "I have taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in > all things." > (M III (PTS), p.19; S III, p. 103) There is nothing at odds with your favourite quote. See SN XII.20. http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn12-020.html We need to see both (1) dependent co-arising (or this/that conditionality), and (2) dependently co-arisen phenomena as they are actually present: inconstant, compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation in order to comprehend anatta. Implications: (A) It is impossible to comprehend anatta with just (1) alone. (B) It is unnecessary to dabble into the 24 conditions found inside the Abhidhamma. All conditions can be generalized into the statement "this/that conditionality". -------------------------------------------------------------------- Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands -- this regularity of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma, this this/that conditionality. ... What's there in this way is a reality, not an unreality, not other than what it seems, conditioned by this/that. This is called dependent co-arising. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Whatever conditions there are, they can always be understood as just "this/that conditionality". (C) You need Right Concentration supported by the other 7 Right Factors in order to realize (2). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-099.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-041.html Regards, Swee Boon 50355 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:14am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Swee (and of course, Htoo) - > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" > wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > > > You raised one interesting question for me! > > > > > Haven't you ever wondered why the Lord Buddha never mentioned > the object of sammasamadhi in any of his discourses on right > > > concentration? > > > > That's very true! I often wonder why the Buddha simply said that one > > enters and remains in the rupa jhanas without specifying the object of > > meditation. > > Tep: Thank you for sharing you thought with me. My limited knowledge tells me that specifying an object of satipatthana is necessary, but in samadhi the purpose is for unity and non-distraction of the citta. Let me ask Htoo to kindly tell us what he thinks. Sincerely, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep ( Swee Boon and all), Well, what I think is that when 'the object' is not considered here then the power of concentration will be the same that is almost the same. So it can be said that magga cittas arise with the power of jhaana. But magga cittas are never jhaana-cittas even though all magga cittas and all phala cittas are appanaa cittas. Ruupaavacara ruupa jhaana-cittas and aruupavacara aruupa jhaana- cittas are never classified or never said as supramundane consciousness or lokuttaraa cittas. If so, both Alaara Kalama and Udaka Raamaputta would have attained lokuttaraa cittas and attained nibbana. But they were not. Instead they both were reborn in aruupa realms (Alaara in 3rd realm and Udaka in 4th realm) where there is no eyes to see Sammaasambuddha and no ear to listen The Buddha's Dhamma. So they cannot see anicca, dukkha, anatta when now they are in 3rd and 4th aruupa realm respectively. As soon as The Buddha finished satta-sattaaha or 7-weeks phala- samaapatti, He started to consider whom to preach and remembered 2 teachers. But they were no longer there in human realm or not in any listenable realms. Magga cittas all have the power of jhaana. But magga cittas are not jhaana cittas. Phala cittas are all exactly EXACTLY the same as their corresponding magga cittas. The only difference is that they are vipaaka cittas while magga cittas are lokuttaraa kusala cittas. Another difference is that phala cittas never come before their corresponding magga cittas. There are many dhammas and The Buddha preached in many different ways. The objects were preached. But when sammaa-samaadhi is preached the focus is supramundane dhamma and not mundane dhamma. So the object is OBVIOUSLY *NIBBANA*. As the name already implies, the object is not talked there. When the object is nibbana, there is no reason for magga cittas to take pannatti as thier object as in cases of mundane jhaanas 1st through 4th jhaana. When *nibbana* is directed, then I say that jhaana is released. That is not the power of jhaana but the object of jhaana. Because object has now to change to nibbana and no more on *pannatti*. I WILL repeat that the object of 1st jhaana through 4th jhaana are all pannatti and these objects are all signs. Kammatthaanas that may give rise to 1st jhaana are a) 10 asubha kammatthaana ( 10 foul meditation) b) 10 kasina kammatthaana c) 3 brahmavihaara or 3 brahacariya kammatthaana(metta,karuna,mudita) d) 1 kaayagataasati (32 body part recollections) e) 1 aanaapaanassati (breathing meditation) ------ 00025 meditations These 25 meditations do have different objects. But all these 25 objects are pannatti and they are just signs. Some arahats became arahats through kayagataasati. But this is not the direct way but kayagataasati is based for higher consciousness. Because of (example) kaayagataasati, mind becomes calm. All the components of jhaana citta is maintained but the object is changed to mind (naama) , which looked those signs of kaayagataasati and see that citta is not permanent and see all 3 lakkhanas and become ariya through successive arising of magga cittas. Object is not talked in sammaa-samaadhi because object is known and it is nibbana, no doubt. WHoEVER WILL DENY THIS? But when we talk on ruupa jhaana and aruupa jhaana, we will have to deal with objects. Example_ Aanapaanassati deals with 'breathing' and not with *nibbana*. There are 25 objects that may give rise to 1st ruupa jhaana and all these 1st jhaanas are mundane. They are never supramundane. To become supramundane the object has to be released. That is instead of constantly seeing signs, mind (jhaana citta) is contemplated and mind contents (jhaana cetasikas) like vitakka, vicaara, piiti, sukha, ekaggataa are contemplated. They are not permanent and they are unsatisfactory. This contemplation CAN BE DONE *ONLY* by 'saavaka or disciples of The Sammaasambuddha' [Sammaasambuddhas and paccekabuddhas CAN because they are founders and first discoverers]. As Aalaara and Udaka were not the disciples of The Buddha they could not contemplate on their aruupa jhaana as anicca, dukkha, anatta. So their aruupa jhaana were all mundane and not supramundane. To become supramundane, the object has to be *NIBBANA* and not pannatti. I DO HOPE this whole message help all DSGs including TEP, who have a very very strong view that sammaa-samaadhi is *ONLY* 1st through 4th ruupa jhaana. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: I will repeat that there are 1. mental state when there is no hindrance 2. mental state that qualifies as 1st ruupa jhaana 3. mental state that has the power of 2nd jhaana but not absorbed yet. 4. mental state that qualifies as 2nd ruupa jhaana 5. mental state that has the power of 3rd ruupa jhaana 6. mental state of 3rd ruupa jhaana 7. mental state that has the power of 4th ruupa jhaana but not jhaana 8. mental state of 4th ruupa jhaana 9. mental state that has the power of 1st aruupa jhaana but not aruupa 10.mental state of 1st aruupa jhaana 11.mental state that has the power of 2nd aruupa jhaana but not aruupa 12.mental state of 2nd aruupa jhaana 13.mental state that has the power of 3rd aruupa jhaana but not jhaana 14.mental state of 3rd aruupa jhaana 15.mental state that has the power of 4th aruupa jhaana but not jhaana 16.mental state of 4th aruupa jhaana and all these 16 mental states can be the base of magga citta. If sammaa-samaadhi is *ONLY* 1st ruupa jhaana through 4th ruupa jhaana what about THE BUDDHA who attain all 8 jhaanas? If sammaa-samaadhi is 4 ruupa jhaana what about arahats who attained arahatta magga naana through aruupa jhaana? Htoo Naing 50356 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:17am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Nonsensical Issues htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: Dear Htoo - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > (snipped) > Are there not arahats who never attained any ruupa jhaana? > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing .................. I don't have any ideas for such a case that is beyond my domain of knowledge ! Respectfully, Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep, Have you ever heard of *sukkhavipassakaa*? Dry insighter. With Metta, Htoo Naing 50357 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:25am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi Ken H, -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Whatever conditions there are, they can always be understood as just > "this/that conditionality". > > (C) You need Right Concentration supported by the other 7 Right > Factors in order to realize (2). > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-099.html > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-041.html > > Regards, > Swee Boon -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Ken H (and Swee ), I did not find Swee said sammaa-samaadhi comes first. But he did say sammaa-samaadhi is supported by the other 7 sammaa-dhamma. With regards, Htoo Naing 50358 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:27am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 554 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are 5 khandhas or 5 aggregates. 1. ruupa-kkhandhaa or aggregates of materials 2. vedana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of feeling 3. sanna-kkhandhaa or aggregates of perception 4. sankhaara-kkhandhaa or aggregates of formation 5. vi~n~naana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of consciousness 5. vi~n~naana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of consciousness These are consciousness. It is one of 4 naama-kkhandhaa or aggregates of non-material mental things. These 4 naama-kkhandhas never leave any components of them and they are in line with association condition or sampayutta paccaya. They are associated with each other. There are 89 different states of mind or there are 121 different states of mind. Or they can be called as 89 cittas or 121 cittas. They all are vinnaana-kkhandhaa or aggregates of consciousness. When aggregates of consciousness or vinnaanakkhandhas is talked the focus is at citta even though citta does arises with other naama- kkhandhaa like vedana or feeling, sannaa or perception and sankhaara or other 50 cetasikas. These vinnaana or cittas are 89 or 121 in total. This is talking characterwise. But in actual sense there are infinite cittas even in an idividual let alone beings in the whole universe or beings in 31 planes of existence or 31 realms. Basing on these 31 realms, vinnaana or cittas can be grouped into 4. But this division is not exactly like 31 realms. These are separate planes of citta rather than realms. So there are 4 different planes of cittas or 4 realms of cittas. They are 1. cittas of sensuous sphere (kaamaavacara cittas) 2. cittas of fine material sphere (ruupaavacara cittas) 3. cittas of non-material sphere (aruupaavacara cittas) 4. cittas beyond three-spheres (lokuttaraa cittas) These are planes of vinnaana or planes of citta. They are not like realms for being. So it is possible that cittas of sensuous sphere can arise in fine material sphere and non-material sphere provided that these higher beings have appropraite sense-base like manayatana and so on. May you all be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 50359 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:36am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Robert K., > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > wrote: > > Dear James, > > sorry about the delay. I arrived back in Japan a few days ago and > > have been lazy to write. > > James: That's okay. Hope you are enjoying your time in Japan. Dear James, Well it's back to work soon... . ________ > > > > James: The quote didn't say that wisdom is lost with each new > lifetime, it said that wisdom is lost when the practice is stopped. > Robert, you seem to be confusing accumulations with kamma. As Sarah > pointed out in a recent post (#50337), accumulations condition kamma > but kamma doesn't necessarily condition accumulations. Accumulations are something that go forward independent of kamma, > like mannerisms, personal tastes, etc., but the Buddha is saying > here that when practice (an impetus for kamma) is stopped then > wisdom is also stopped. So, from my interpretation, wisdom isn't > accumulated. > +++++++++ How do you interpret this from Majjhimakanikaya atthakattha. p1229 note 394 Bodhi translation of Majjhima "MA explains that even though saccaka did not reach any attainments or even become established in the three refuges, the Buddha taught him two long suttas in order to DEPOSIT in him a mental impression (vasana) COMING TO MATURITY in the future. For he forsaw that at a later time, after the dispensation became established in SRi Lanka Saccaka would be reborn there and would attain arahantship as the great arahant Kala Buddharakkhita thera." Robertk 50360 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:47am Subject: Overdose htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, When there is an incidence then there is a way to solve it. Recently someone brought up a case of overdose. The case was overdose of abhidhammaa. Overdoses are not without risk. So they need proper care and they should be attended as emergency. At a time these overloads hinder real arising of true-knowledge or direct-knowledge. In which way they hinder? The already overloaded knowledge behave as if the knowledge is of own or true-knowledge or direct-knowledge. Such overdosed beings will not see a small gap between actual arising of dhamma and arising of their copied knolwedge in the course. Still they are thinking that they do have direct-knowldge. They think that they do have true knowledge. They do think they have their own knowledge. Actually not. This is the danger of OVERDOSE of ABHIDHAMMAA. Overdosers would say 'see, right now there is sound it is ruupa and there is hearing it is naama and there is ear it is ruupa'. 'Do people understand in this way?' they would think. But what they see or understand is just arising of copied knolwedge that arise very very later after actual arising of dhamma. What is the danger? The danger is that 'being not own-knowledge or own-experience or direct-knowledge' means that it is copied knowledge. As soon as the copies are lost there will not be any help. Own copies *ONLY* develop through real practice. Do not label anything like formal or informal or *doing* or *practice* or *ritual*. How can copies be lost? Through various accidents like mental disasters like madness, insanity or any mental disorders that might attack copied knolwdge. Various attacks by brain disorders like strokes or dementia or specific memory defect, sensory dysphasia etc etc. How to treat overdose? The level of overdose will decrease when doses are no more taken while own-copies or own-experience can to be developed. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Thanks Swee Boon. 50361 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:58am Subject: Re: Overdose htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, >How to treat overdose? > > The level of overdose will decrease when doses are no more taken > while own-copies or own-experience can to be developed. > > With Unlimited Metta, > > Htoo Naing > > PS: Thanks Swee Boon. -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear Dhamma Friends, How do you think? Does overdose hinder or not? Some even said through away books for 6 months to a year and do meditation and so on. This is another extreme, which sounds like blinds while the first extreme, which is cases of overdose of abhidhammaa are like people with broken legs. There is a case that the broken-legged person is transported by the blind, who has good legs but the broken-legged person has to instruct where to go because good-legged person cannot see the way. How do you think DSGs? With respect, Htoo Naing 50362 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:01am Subject: Re: Overdose htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: ---------------------- Dear Dhamma Friends, How do you think? Does overdose hinder or not? Some even said through away books for 6 months to a year and do meditation and so on. How do you think DSGs? With respect, Htoo Naing -------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Dear all, Apology for typo. Please correct 'even said throw away books for 6 months...' With thanks, Htoo Naing 50363 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:10am Subject: Sammaa-samaadhi ( right concentration) mundane & supramundane htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, When 'the object' is not considered while sammaa-samaadhi is studied, then the power of concentration will be the same that is almost the same in both cases of genuine ruupa jhaanas and lokuttaraa cittas. So it can be said that magga cittas arise with the power of jhaana. But magga cittas are never jhaana-cittas even though all magga cittas and all phala cittas are appanaa cittas. Ruupaavacara ruupa jhaana-cittas and aruupavacara aruupa jhaana- cittas are never classified or never said as supramundane consciousness or lokuttaraa cittas. If so, both Alaara Kalama and Udaka Raamaputta would have attained lokuttaraa cittas and attained nibbana. But they were not. Instead they both were reborn in aruupa realms (Alaara in 3rd realm and Udaka in 4th realm) where there is no eyes to see Sammaasambuddha and no ear to listen The Buddha's Dhamma. So they cannot see anicca, dukkha, anatta when now they are in 3rd and 4th aruupa realm respectively. As soon as The Buddha finished satta-sattaaha or 7-weeks phala- samaapatti, He started to consider whom to preach and remembered 2 teachers. But they were no longer there in human realm or not in any listenable realms. Magga cittas all have the power of jhaana. But magga cittas are not jhaana cittas. Phala cittas are all exactly EXACTLY the same as their corresponding magga cittas. The only difference is that they are vipaaka cittas while magga cittas are lokuttaraa kusala cittas. Another difference is that phala cittas never come before their corresponding magga cittas. There are many dhammas and The Buddha preached in many different ways. The objects were preached. But when sammaa-samaadhi is preached the focus is supramundane dhamma and not mundane dhamma. So the object is OBVIOUSLY *NIBBANA*. As the name already implies, the object is not discussed extensively when sammaa-samaadhi is preached. When the object is nibbana, there is no reason for magga cittas to take pannatti as thier object as in cases of mundane jhaanas 1st through 4th jhaana, all of whom take the object pannatti (signs) as their object. When *nibbana* is directed, then, I say, that jhaana is released. That is not the power of jhaana but the object of jhaana. Because object has now to be changed to nibbana and no more on *pannatti*. I WILL repeat that the object of 1st jhaana through 4th jhaana are all pannatti and these objects are all signs. Kammatthaanas or meditation that may give rise to 1st jhaana are a) 10 asubha kammatthaana ( 10 meditations on dead bodies) b) 10 kasina kammatthaana ( 10 meditation on wholeness sign-kasina) c) 3 brahmavihaara or 3 brahacariya kammatthaana(metta,karuna,mudita) d) 1 kaayagataasati (32 body part recollections) e) 1 aanaapaanassati (breathing meditation) ------ 00025 meditations These 25 meditations do have different objects. But all these 25 objects are pannatti and they are just signs. Some arahats became arahats through kayagataasati. But this is not the direct way but kayagataasati is based for higher consciousness. Because of (example) kaayagataasati, mind becomes calm. All the components of jhaana citta is maintained but the object is changed to mind (naama) , which looked those signs of kaayagataasati and see that citta is not permanent and see all 3 lakkhanas and become ariya through successive arising of magga cittas. Object is not talked in sammaa-samaadhi because object is known and it is nibbana, no doubt. WHO EVER WILL DENY THIS? But when we talk on ruupa jhaana and aruupa jhaana, we will have to deal with objects. Example_ Aanapaanassati deals with 'breathing' and not with *nibbana*. There are 25 objects that may give rise to 1st ruupa jhaana and all these 1st jhaanas are mundane. They are never supramundane. To become supramundane the object has to be released. That is instead of constantly seeing signs, mind (jhaana citta) is contemplated and mind contents (jhaana cetasikas) like vitakka, vicaara, piiti, sukha, ekaggataa are contemplated. They are not permanent and they are unsatisfactory. This contemplation CAN BE DONE *ONLY* by 'saavaka or disciples of The Sammaasambuddha' [Sammaasambuddhas and paccekabuddhas CAN because they are founders and first discoverers]. As Aalaara and Udaka were not the disciples of The Buddha they could not contemplate on their aruupa jhaana as anicca, dukkha, anatta. So their aruupa jhaana were all mundane and not supramundane. To become supramundane, the object has to be *NIBBANA* and not pannatti. I hope all these are clear. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: I will repeat that there are 1. mental state when there is no hindrance 2. mental state that qualifies as 1st ruupa jhaana 3. mental state that has the power of 2nd jhaana but not absorbed yet. 4. mental state that qualifies as 2nd ruupa jhaana 5. mental state that has the power of 3rd ruupa jhaana 6. mental state of 3rd ruupa jhaana 7. mental state that has the power of 4th ruupa jhaana but not jhaana 8. mental state of 4th ruupa jhaana 9. mental state that has the power of 1st aruupa jhaana but not aruupa 10.mental state of 1st aruupa jhaana 11.mental state that has the power of 2nd aruupa jhaana but not aruupa 12.mental state of 2nd aruupa jhaana 13.mental state that has the power of 3rd aruupa jhaana but not jhaana 14.mental state of 3rd aruupa jhaana 15.mental state that has the power of 4th aruupa jhaana but not jhaana 16.mental state of 4th aruupa jhaana and all these 16 mental states can be the base of magga citta. If sammaa-samaadhi is *ONLY* 1st ruupa jhaana through 4th ruupa jhaana what about THE BUDDHA who attain all 8 jhaanas? If sammaa-samaadhi is 4 ruupa jhaana what about arahats who attained arahatta magga naana through aruupa jhaana? Htoo Naing 50364 From: "Dan D." Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:24am Subject: Re: announcement - easier search is coming onco111 Great idea, Robert. Anumodana, Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Group, > The useful posts files has many great posts but it is becoming time > consuming to find them. > Today I bought Invision software for making a forum. Which I will host > on abhidhamma.org and list all the topics (I'll be copying each useful > post from dsg files into it) in the useful posts index. This will make > for easy scrolling of each topic - no need to click and open. And also > allow further comments on each topic to be added in a very easy to > search style. > It is complex software so it will take a little time for me to get it > running. > > If anyone who has posts in the useful posts file doesn't want them > included let me know off-list. > Robertk 50365 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:28am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 543 ) Magga, phala, and nibbana buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo - Today, in just one day only, you wrote me 4 emails! And the last one gave me an indigestion, friend, since you discussed magga, phala and nibbana (that are far away from my domain of knowledge). Here is a list of the highlights from your email messages : #50343: Htoo: Thanks Tep for your reply to Swee Boon. Some many have tried before. I will be looking forward to seeing Swee's more posts by keeping on thinking rightly and writing rightly. # 50344: Htoo: Dear James, Thanks for your reply to Tep's reply. Maybe, maybe. #50345 : > Tep: Hopefully, one day those "immobile Buddhists" > would wake up. If they didn't want to, then nobody could help them. > Htoo: Very good comment. Even if many wake them up they will not rise from immobility because they are WAITING for accumulation of wisdom. Sabbe sattaa kammassakaa, #50355 : Htoo: So it can be said that magga cittas arise with the power of jhaana. But magga cittas are never jhaana-cittas even though all magga cittas and all phala cittas are appanaa cittas. When *nibbana* is directed, then I say that jhaana is released. That is not the power of jhaana but the object of jhaana. Because object has now to change to nibbana and no more on *pannatti*. etc. etc. Tep: Give me some time to digest the tough material and come back for a friendly discussion with you on jhana, magga, phala, and nibbana. The last three items are beyond me, so I will be learning from you. Sincerely, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: (snipped) > > PS: I will repeat that there are > > 1. mental state when there is no hindrance > 2. mental state that qualifies as 1st ruupa jhaana > 3. mental state that has the power of 2nd jhaana but not absorbed yet. > 4. mental state that qualifies as 2nd ruupa jhaana > 5. mental state that has the power of 3rd ruupa jhaana > 6. mental state of 3rd ruupa jhaana > 7. mental state that has the power of 4th ruupa jhaana but not jhaana > 8. mental state of 4th ruupa jhaana > 9. mental state that has the power of 1st aruupa jhaana but not aruupa > 10.mental state of 1st aruupa jhaana > 11.mental state that has the power of 2nd aruupa jhaana but not aruupa > 12.mental state of 2nd aruupa jhaana > 13.mental state that has the power of 3rd aruupa jhaana but not jhaana > 14.mental state of 3rd aruupa jhaana > 15.mental state that has the power of 4th aruupa jhaana but not jhaana > 16.mental state of 4th aruupa jhaana > > and all these 16 mental states can be the base of magga citta. > > If sammaa-samaadhi is *ONLY* 1st ruupa jhaana through 4th ruupa > jhaana what about THE BUDDHA who attain all 8 jhaanas? > > If sammaa-samaadhi is 4 ruupa jhaana what about arahats who attained arahatta magga naana through aruupa jhaana? > > Htoo Naing 50366 From: "Dan D." Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:29am Subject: Re: My Level of Posting on DSG onco111 Hi Howard, It sounds like conditions for understanding are coalescing all around you. Let us know what you learn! Much mudita, Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I've just returned from vacation. While away, I sent a couple posts > and a few more upon my return home. For a while, however, I plan to reduce my > level of posting, because I strongly feel the need to devote more of my time to > private bhavana in the form of study, contemplation, regular mindfulness > practice, and, most of all, "formal meditation". I will, of course, reply to posts > directed to me. I will also enter into discussions from time to time when > strongly concerned about the topic. I will probably even introduce topics from > time to time. But I will be reducing my overall level of participation at least > for a while, and though I will be keeping up with reading the posts as best I > can, I will be less "up-front visible". > > 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) > > 50367 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:48am Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhistmedi... Hi, Ken H, Howard and Swee: In the message #50351 Howard replied to to Ken H, who had said : > KenH: > Selection of 'objects for right mindfulness' occurs in the > realm of paramattha dhammas: there is no self that selects them. Or > are you suggesting you can single out, say, visible rupas from > audible rupas (which come and go in less than a billionth of a > second) and say, "I'll be mindful of those; but I won't be mindful of > the others!" > > You would be foolish to suggest you have that ability, and we would > be foolish to believe you. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Not entirely, Ken. Let's take an ordinary example: You are at a social gathering at which there are many loud converstations in progress. You are talking with a particular person. What you do is concentrate on what that person is saying, paying particular attention to his/her words and attempting to ignore (literally "not know") all the other din. Generally you are reasonably successful in this. What is actually happening? I would say that *all* the sound is heard, but the sound coming from your friend is being highlighted by heightened attention directed towards it. Similarly, when attending an opera, an event of dramatic sight and sound, there are times at which one will attend more closely to the sound than to sight, highlighting the auditory mindstates over and above the others as consciousness flits from sense door to sense door. The same will happen, for example, at a play, when one strains to hear certain dialogue. Of course, all this is ultimately quite impersonal, being merely cetana, viriya, maniskara and other cetasikas occurring. ---------------------------------------------- Tep: Howard's reply was nice. I think it is the mind (cognizance, citta) that selects an object and everybody knows the mind is not-self. Yet, the "ability to select" is not something that only belongs to a self. Sincerely, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Ken (and Swee Boon) - (snipped) > Howard: > If we say "we" control, and literally mean there is an agent who > controls, that is certainly wrong view. If, on the other hand, when we say that we choose what we eat we realize that this is just a conventional shorthand for complex processes involving no agent, then there is no problem at all. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 50368 From: "Dan D." Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:51am Subject: Re: The Orderliness of the Dhamma! onco111 Hi Swee Boon, Sorry to throw these intimidating words at you. These are the three fetters that are shattered by the sotapanna -- and all are shattered at the same time. They seem quite different at first glance, but the more you look at them, the more striking the similarities. The similarities between the first two are a topic of frequent discussion in dsg. Metta, Dan > I was intimidated by these long Pali words. > > Searching the Internet gives me: > > silabbataparamasasamyojanam: grasping at precepts & practices > ditthisamyojanam: self-identity views > vicikicchasamyojanam: uncertainty about the Dhamma > > In a way, yes, these three are also inseparable. > > Regards, > Swee Boon 50369 From: nina Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:03am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 3, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? nilovg Hi Ken H, you have some lovely reminders in your post. like below. Very daily, happening all the time. The sounds just come intruding upon me. How can I select? Sitting before the computer, can I prevent seeing? op 19-09-2005 09:33 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowa@...: > Selection of 'objects for right mindfulness' occurs in the > realm of paramattha dhammas: there is no self that selects them. Or > are you suggesting you can single out, say, visible rupas from > audible rupas (which come and go in less than a billionth of a > second) and say, "I'll be mindful of those; but I won't be mindful of those? --------- N: I also like this one , by which I first knew you: <"I have taught you, O bhikkhus, to see conditionality everywhere in all things." (M III (PTS), p.19; S III, p. 103)> It is very consoling too when we have worries. Nina. 50371 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:05am Subject: Re: Overdose / Words of Gold buddhistmedi... Hi, Htoo - Thanks for your words of gold. >Htoo: >(1) Such overdosed beings will not see a small gap between actual arising of dhamma and arising of their copied knolwedge in the course. Still they are thinking that they do have direct-knowldge. They think that they do have true knowledge. They do think they have their own knowledge. Actually not. This is the danger of OVERDOSE of ABHIDHAMMAA. >(2) The danger is that 'being not own-knowledge or own-experience or direct-knowledge' means that it is copied knowledge. >(3) Own copies *ONLY* develop through real practice. Do not label anything like formal or informal or *doing* or *practice* or *ritual*. Tep: It is the real practice in the present moment, according to the Eightfold Path, with samma-sati, sampajanna, and samma-vayama being guided by samma-ditthi (knowledge of the four Noble Truths). With much appreciation, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > When there is an incidence then there is a way to solve it. Recently > someone brought up a case of overdose. > > The case was overdose of abhidhammaa. > > Overdoses are not without risk. So they need proper care and they > should be attended as emergency. > 50372 From: "Dan D." Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:07am Subject: Re: Overdose onco111 Dear Htoo Naing, Interesting (and biting) post on overdose of abhidhamma. I agree that there can be overdosing on Abhidhamma -- e.g., thinking that memorizing lists or playing intellectual games can condition the arising of wisdom. > Overdosers would say 'see, right now there is sound it is ruupa and > there is hearing it is naama and there is ear it is ruupa'. 'Do > people understand in this way?' they would think. > > But what they see or understand is just arising of copied knolwedge > that arise very very later after actual arising of dhamma. To borrow a tack of Bhikkhu Samahita... Hold on there, partner! Those guns you're flashing around are dangerous. Better to put them back in the holster! Or, in other words, how is it that you presume to know so much about other people's seeing or understanding? Better to deal directly with what is said than to judge the person and argue ad hominem, don't you agree? Metta, Dan 50373 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? nilovg Hi Swee Boon and Tep, No need to dismiss. You know, those are questions that come up all the time, also in Thailand. Always useful to discuss. I bring it up in India. Nina. op 19-09-2005 15:46 schreef nidive op nidive@...: > @ Congratulations on the very well-written post that accurately >> summarizes Ajahn Sujin's approach to anatta, her objection to >> "formal meditation", the idea of panna accumulation and the >> relinqushing of control of conditions (the "let it be" philosophy). 50374 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 0:43pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta?/ the Perfect One buddhistmedi... Dear Nina (and all) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Swee Boon and Tep, > No need to dismiss. You know, those are questions that come up all the time, > also in Thailand. Always useful to discuss. I bring it up in India. > > Nina. > op 19-09-2005 15:46 schreef nidive op nidive@y...: > > > @ Congratulations on the very well-written post that accurately > >> summarizes Ajahn Sujin's approach to anatta, her objection to > >> "formal meditation", the idea of panna accumulation and the > >> relinqushing of control of conditions (the "let it be" philosophy). Tep : To have unshaken confidence in one's teacher's teachings is an admirable quality. But there is a real risk in believing the teachings of any teachers who are imperfect. It is much, much better to have questions about the Teachings of Lord Buddha, who was the Perfect One, because we know the questions arise from our imperfect knowledge of the Dhamma, not because the Buddha's understanding was imperfect. Respectfully, Tep ===== 50375 From: "Philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:19pm Subject: Re: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 3, no 3. philofillet Hi Nina and all > The whole Dhamma the Buddha taught is the truth of realities he > realized through his enlightenment. The person who studies in order to know > the true nature of realities should develop the paññ?Ethat realizes the > characteristics of realities that appear. But no need to press too hard. We know our limits and keep listening and reflecting and "panna works its way" as I heard the other day. "Studies in order to know the true nature" or realities contains both the meaning of studying from books and reflecting on experience in daily life. It is easy to have too much of the former and not enough of the latter. Listening helps. Then he will penetrate the true > meaning of all dhammas that have been taught and that he studied, to the > extent his paññ?Ehas been developed. And no further. There is no point in pressing to understand something when conditions have not arisen (or "coalesced" as Dan used to Howard) How do we know? We know, or don't know. There is no technique, no instructions to follow. Thus patience is so important. Panna works its way, and all kusala work their way. We become more aware of the potential in so many moments of daily life for virya to arise to support this process. Virya is the supporting pole that keeps the rotten old hut from collapsing, the reinforcement army that keeps the forces of kusala conditioning courageous and vigorous. There are kusala conditioning processes at work, energized by virya, directed by sati and panna, sweetened and lightened by metta and khanti and equanimity and dosa. Very encouraging. On the other hand is the great flood of akusala. But there is an increasingly strong current of kusala working its way. Little by little, and that is enough, because without the Buddha's teaching it would not be there. We should not just listen to a > subject of the Dhamma and then neglect to consider it more. Each word that > we hear and understand we should continue to investigate. In that way our > understanding can be in conformity with the subjects we shall learn about > further on. But we are bound by moha and lobha and also dosa to skip ahead to the next fresh object, the next topic, always hungering for something fresh, something new instead of investigating with patience. Again, virya and the other perfections can arise and invigorate our bhavana. Even the saying I just referred to, ²there is not, there is, and > then there is nothing to be found ² is miraculous. Yes!!!! ( category 4 exclamation points) We should consider that > at the moment of bhavanga-citta (life-continuum) nothing appears [4]. We will not know this directly, but the Buddha knew, and taught us. Gratitude to the Buddha!!!! (now that I have started, how can I stop category 4 exclamation points. Please assume they are there from this point on) The elements that are not self > are miraculous. There are the elements of hardness, of sound, of odour, of > heat, of cold, of anger, of attachment, of jealousy; everything is only an > element. The words dhamma and dhåtu, element, have the same meaning in so > far as they have no owner, they do not belong to anybody, they are not self, > a being or a person. Each of the elements has its own characteristic that is > real. The element of seeing is different from the element of hearing, and > the element of hardness is different from the element of odour. Whenever > someone knows the truth that all that appears is only an element and that > there is nobody, no person, there is paññ?Ethat understands the true nature > of realities. Yes!!!!! (this post reached category 5.) Nina, I would like to hear you read this outloud the way Lodewijk reads. Would you consider choosing some material and reading it? Phil 50376 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:53pm Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. buddhatrue Hi Robert K., Goodness, you snipped a lot of my post. I was looking forward to your thoughts. We seem to keep branching out. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > +++++++++ > How do you interpret this from Majjhimakanikaya atthakattha. > p1229 note 394 Bodhi translation of Majjhima > "MA explains that even though saccaka did not reach any attainments > or even become established in the three refuges, the Buddha taught > him two long suttas in order to DEPOSIT in him a mental impression > (vasana) COMING TO MATURITY in the future. For he forsaw that at a > later time, after the dispensation became established in SRi Lanka > Saccaka would be reborn there and would attain arahantship as the > great arahant Kala Buddharakkhita thera." > Robertk That was very nice of the Buddha. We can never begin to even fathom the wonderful things the Buddha did. But, I interpret that example as an example of kamma. Kamma is planted in the past and bears fruit in the future; is that the nature of accumulations? Don't accumulations continue to accumulate from now to eternity? With kamma there is often a gap, with accumulations there is never a gap. That is my understanding. Robert, please address this difference between kamma and accumulations before we proceed further with this thread. We seem to be communicating at cross-purposes. Metta, James 50377 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:02pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Ken (and Swee Boon) - > > In a message dated 9/19/05 3:35:04 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > kenhowa@g... writes: > > > Hi Swee Boon, > > > > ---------------------- > > S: >One thing that I find very consistent about the Buddha's > > teachings is his emphasis on anicca, the arising and ceasing of the > > five aggregates and/or the six-fold senses. > > > > I discovered that the purpose of developing Noble Right Mindfulness > > and Noble Right Concentration is none other than to discern anicca, > > or what the Buddha termed as "things as they actually are present". > > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Impermanence is a critically important *part* of how things are, but > only a part. Closer to the full story of how things are is dependent > origination, which subsumes impermanence, conditionality, impersonality, lack of own > being, and inability to satisfy (dukkha). > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > -----------------------------------------------> > > > > Yes, although that doesn't explain how Nibbana (which is neither > > anicca nor dukkha) is anatta. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That's right! I would say that one reason that nibbana is anatta is > that it is impersonal. Nibbana is not me or mine. > ------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > It is enough to know that the five aggregates are conditioned, but if > > we want to expand on that, we could say, "That means they are beyond > > control." That would be just an elucidation: it would not be meant as > > adding anything to the original statement. > > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes, I agree. > -------------------------------------- > > > > > > > Selection of 'objects for right mindfulness' occurs in the > > realm of paramattha dhammas: there is no self that selects them. Or > > are you suggesting you can single out, say, visible rupas from > > audible rupas (which come and go in less than a billionth of a > > second) and say, "I'll be mindful of those; but I won't be mindful of > > the others!" > > > > You would be foolish to suggest you have that ability, and we would > > be foolish to believe you. > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Not entirely, Ken. Let's take an ordinary example: You are at a social > gathering at which there are many loud converstations in progress. You are > talking with a particular person. What you do is concentrate on what that person > is saying, paying particular attention to his/her words and attempting to > ignore (literally "not know") all the other din. Generally you are reasonably > successful in this. What is actually happening? I would say that *all* the sound > is heard, but the sound coming from your Shhhhhhhhhh!!!!! You are giving me a headache with all this blather! You should be meditating! ;-)) Metta, James ps. Just a friendly reminder. 50378 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:05pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Hi Ken H, > you have some lovely reminders in your post. like below. Very daily, > happening all the time. The sounds just come intruding upon me. How can I > select? Sitting before the computer, can I prevent seeing? Yeah, just close your eyes. Metta, James 50379 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:10pm Subject: Re: Overdose buddhatrue Hi Dan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Dear Htoo Naing, > > Overdosers would say 'see, right now there is sound it is ruupa and > > there is hearing it is naama and there is ear it is ruupa'. 'Do > > people understand in this way?' they would think. > > > > But what they see or understand is just arising of copied knolwedge > > that arise very very later after actual arising of dhamma. > > To borrow a tack of Bhikkhu Samahita... > > Hold on there, partner! Those guns you're flashing around are > dangerous. Better to put them back in the holster! > > Or, in other words, how is it that you presume to know so much about > other people's seeing or understanding? Better to deal directly with > what is said than to judge the person and argue ad hominem, don't you > agree? > > Metta, > > Dan Htoo is entirely correct in my opinion because any type of labeling must be done after the fact- which is the direct experience. The mind can only hold one object at a time. It cannot hold an object and label the object as nama or rupa at the same time; the labeling must occur later. Htoo's guns aren't too smoking- more like water pistols! ;-)) Metta, James 50380 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:38pm Subject: Re: Sammaa-samaadhi ... / A Discussion Format for #50363. buddhistmedi... Dea Htoo : In order to facilitate our long discussion that may stem from your message #50363 let me partition your "thesis proposal" into numbered segments as shown below. After this step I'll ask questions and/or discuss each segment one at a time, until we are through with whole post. Finally, we'll put everything we have discussed together and make a conclusion. This is a systematic approach to our complex discussion process, which I hope to work well. If you feel like changing this proposed scheme in any way you'd like, then do it. Once we have an agreed- upon format, then I shall go ahead with Question 1. There are 13 partitions in your message #50363 (shown below) that I think are relevant for discussion. Please feel free to combine, delete, or expand them. 1. When 'the object' is not considered while sammaa-samaadhi is studied, then the power of concentration will be the same that is almost the same in both cases of genuine ruupa jhaanas and lokuttaraa cittas. So it can be said that magga cittas arise with the power of jhaana. 2. But magga cittas are never jhaana-cittas even though all magga cittas and all phala cittas are appanaa cittas. Ruupaavacara ruupa jhaana- cittas and aruupavacara aruupa jhaana-cittas are never classified or never said as supramundane consciousness or lokuttaraa cittas. If so, both Alaara Kalama and Udaka Raamaputta would have attained lokuttaraa cittas and attained nibbana. But they were not. Instead they both were reborn in aruupa realms (Alaara in 3rd realm and Udaka in 4th realm) where there is no eyes to see Sammaasambuddha and no ear to listen The Buddha's Dhamma. So they cannot see anicca, dukkha, anatta when now they are in 3rd and 4th aruupa realm respectively. 3. As soon as The Buddha finished satta-sattaaha or 7-weeks phala- samaapatti, He started to consider whom to preach and remembered 2 teachers. But they were no longer there in human realm or not in any listenable realms. 4. Magga cittas all have the power of jhaana. But magga cittas are not jhaana cittas. Phala cittas are all exactly EXACTLY the same as their corresponding magga cittas. The only difference is that they are vipaaka cittas while magga cittas are lokuttaraa kusala cittas. 5. Another difference is that phala cittas never come before their corresponding magga cittas. 6. There are many dhammas and The Buddha preached in many different ways. The objects were preached. But when sammaa-samaadhi is preached the focus is supramundane dhamma and not mundane dhamma. So the object is OBVIOUSLY *NIBBANA*. As the name already implies, the object is not discussed extensively when sammaa-samaadhi is preached. 7. When the object is nibbana, there is no reason for magga cittas to take pannatti as thier object as in cases of mundane jhaanas 1st through 4th jhaana, all of whom take the object pannatti (signs) as their object. 8. When *nibbana* is directed, then, I say, that jhaana is released. That is not the power of jhaana but the object of jhaana. Because object has now to be changed to nibbana and no more on *pannatti*. I WILL repeat that the object of 1st jhaana through 4th jhaana are all pannatti and these objects are all signs. 9. Kammatthaanas or meditation that may give rise to 1st jhaana are a) 10 asubha kammatthaana ( 10 meditations on dead bodies) b) 10 kasina kammatthaana ( 10 meditation on wholeness sign-kasina) c) 3 brahmavihaara or 3 brahacariya kammatthaana (metta,karuna,mudita) d) 1 kaayagataasati (32 body part recollections) e) 1 aanaapaanassati (breathing meditation) 10. These 25 meditations do have different objects. But all these 25 objects are pannatti and they are just signs. 11. Some arahats became arahats through kayagataasati. But this is not the direct way but kayagataasati is based for higher consciousness. 12. Because of (example) kaayagataasati, mind becomes calm. All the components of jhaana citta is maintained but the object is changed to mind (naama) , which looked those signs of kaayagataasati and see that citta is not permanent and see all 3 lakkhanas and become ariya through successive arising of magga cittas. 13. Object is not talked in sammaa-samaadhi because object is known and it is nibbana, no doubt. WHO EVER WILL DENY THIS? But when we talk on ruupa jhaana and aruupa jhaana, we will have to deal with objects. Let me know when you are ready ! Warm regards, Tep ======== 50381 From: Arry Berrigan Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:27am Subject: Re: Hello from New Member arryberrigan Hello, I am Arry Berrigan, a retired health administration personnel from the Ministry of Public Health, Bangkok, Thailand. A freelance writer for Thai medias in Thailand and in USA. A Meditation Master for Mindfulness Base Stress Reduction and Relaxation. Pleviously, I was the Buddhist Missionary Monk at Wat Thai Washington, D.C. I disrobed and remaining in Maryland, USA in order to be a private meditation master, and freelance writer. I am interested in the subjects that related to meditatin technique, philosophy, and health for wellness. I also the moderator of bmissionc6@... which I learned about DMSG from my group posted by Glenn, the owner of the group. I contribute the Word for Thought, and Daily Inspiration to the group regularly. Blessing, Peace & Happiness Arry Berrigan <...> 50382 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:52pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? Simple Truth First buddhistmedi... Hi, James (Nina and KenH) - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Nina, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Ken H, > > you have some lovely reminders in your post. like below. Very daily, > > happening all the time. The sounds just come intruding upon me. > >How can I select? Sitting before the computer, can I prevent seeing? > > Yeah, just close your eyes. > > Metta, > James ==================== It is very true, James. How can anyone not see that simple truth? One should master simple truths first, before trying to penetrate the Paramattha truths. Similarly, one should develop anicca-sanna first, then dukkha-sanna and anatta-sanna may arise. Regards, Tep ============ 50383 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:59pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > Hi James > > > Well, excuse me for living! LOL! This part of your post is rather > > personal and should have been directed to me off-list. There is > no > > reason to discuss if James is naughty or nice on-list (we can > leave > > that to Santa ;-)), we should only discuss the dhamma. > > You know me - I write things off the top of my head. And most of > the time when I write to you it's like I'm writing to myself because > you are the person I feel most kindred to here. James: That is very sweet of you to say, and as you know I don't mind personal comments and inputs- but they really should be off- list. Would it really be productive for the members of DSG to be discussing how I should or should not post? :-) Talk about giving a guy an ego! ;-)) > > I was interested in the phenomenon, related to developing > understanding, about why I had interest in Howard's post, but just > kind of laughed off yours, disregarded it. (read it again, the > condescension/mock compassion) You could make the same points as > Howard, but there would be less communication of the points, because > people, with their tendencies to aversion, would just take a pass > and miss the Dhamma point, because of the aversion to harsh > language. James: Okay, well here we are getting to something appropriate to discuss: your mindfulness input to the reaction between mine and Howard's post. So, to summarize, even though we were talking about the same thing you liked Howard's post more than mine. Okay. Well, Howard is much more advanced in the dhamma than myself and has a lot more experience communicating with various people on the Internet. He is usually suave and debonair while I am usually caustic and abrasive. So? You want me to change my personality for you? You want me to gain 30 years of dhamma experience overnight? I don't know what you want, Phil. It seems, to psychoanalyze, that you want me to be more like your heroes of DSG because you want to be more like them too. The fact that I don't try to emulate them or copy them really bothers you for some reason. Apply your mindfulness to that subject line and come up with some thoughts. Just contact me off-list with the results next time. Tat aversion can be seen through at times, but most of the > time most people won't have the conditions for wisdom at that moment > and will just think what an obnoxious guy and move to the next post. James: Okay, then so be it. But, really, I don't think that happens. I take some getting used to, I know, but people usually enjoy my posts and are disappointed when I stop posting. > That's human nature. So what, right? Well, every moment we have to > try to communicate our understanding of Dhamma is a precious gift, > as you know, so why waste it? Right effort and metta and other > kusala cittas could arise at that moment and lead you to being > sweeter, I guess. Something like that. I don't know. James: Well, figure it out and get back to me. I really appreciate your honesty and willingness to be vulnerable, but DSG is not meant for therapy time ;-)). > > At other times I think that the most important thing is developing > patience and understanding of the aversion because at such times I > think that we who disagree can't persuade each other anyways, our > views are so rigid, so the only thing that goes on here is > developing patience and metta or whatever so any harsh language is > helpful in itself for that kind of bhavana. Different ways of > seeing it from moment to moment. > > > If you truly wanted to be wise, you would look past my > > words that offend you and try to see the message. > > Exactly. See above. > > But the point isn't that you should try to win a popularity > contest. I would think that respect for the Buddha's teaching, which > I know you feel deeply, would motivate you to express your > understanding of Dhamma in the most amiable way possible, at that > moment, so more people could appreciate it more deeply. James: Shall I take a survey first to discover the greatest way to capture the largest audience? Phil, I am just me- flaws and all. No matter how freaky I may get in my posts, I don't think I could turn anyone away from the dhamma for life. Faking > amiability? It might seem like that sometimes, it might be that > sometimes, but it could also be culivation of metta at times. James: Sometimes I am very sweet. Just read my posts to the Star Kids. There was no faking there, because they are kids and didn't act fake with me. Fake people really irritate the hell out of me! But my students love me and tell me so practically everyday, no kidding (that's acceptable in Egypt). I have no significant problems with my life or my level of metta in my life. Again, I think this issue goes back to yourself. Examine yourself and get back to me- in private next time, please! > > My thoughts on this change all the time. Never mind. Back to the > regularly scheduled programming. James: Cute. Yes, impermanence- ain't it a bitch? ;-)) > > Phil Metta, James 50384 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Ven. Ledi Sayadaw's notion of _pannatti_ lbidd2 Hi Dan, Thanks for your comments. I don't have anything useful to add, just a thought on this: D: "That is my understanding as well, but then I read things like "sabbe sankhara anicca". Is that just theory because penetration of tilakkhana is penetration of a particular moment?" L: It's reasoning. Decisive support condition _is_ reasoning. This conditioning relation is crucial for both delusion and insight. A reasoning that is instantaneous and not a matter of discursive thinking. But I need to study this some more; so let's leave it at that. Needless to say, all this is subject to revision. Larry 50385 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: announcement - easier search is coming jonoabb Hi Htoo and All As far as we are concerned, there'll be no change in the way DSG is operating. We'll be saying more to RobK off-list. Jon (and Sarah) htootintnaing wrote: >Dear Robert K, > >Thanks for your effort. So we have to go to abhidhamma.org site to >scroll UP? > >With respect, > >Htoo Naing > > 50386 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 0:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: My Level of Posting on DSG upasaka_howard Hi, Dan - Thanks! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 9/19/05 1:32:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: > Hi Howard, > It sounds like conditions for understanding are coalescing all around > you. Let us know what you learn! > > > Much mudita, > > Dan > /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 50387 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 0:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 9/19/05 5:05:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Shhhhhhhhhh!!!!! You are giving me a headache with all this > blather! You should be meditating! ;-)) > > Metta, > James > ps. Just a friendly reminder. > ======================= Thanks! You're right!! (But still, there *has* been a reduction - I've consciously refrained from chiming in on several discussions. And I HAVE been meditating. :-) 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) 50388 From: "Philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 5:14pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? philofillet Hi James > But my students love me and tell me so practically everyday, no > kidding (that's acceptable in Egypt). What a coincidence! My students love me and *don't* tell me, no kidding (that's acceptable in Japan.) haha > I have no significant > problems with my life or my level of metta in my life. Being loved is not necessarily due to metta. In my case, sometimes I give a great lesson and have a lot of patience on the surface because I am concerned about my image but as soon as that happens, it is not metta, it is lobha. There are so many motivations for our kindness to others - sometimes it is metta. Or often it is metta. We cannot know so easily when it is metta and when there is lobha or other things at work. Again, I > think this issue goes back to yourself. Examine yourself and get > back to me- in private next time, please! Sorry, no guarantees. If you expose your bare bottom, I will probably have to spank it. Accumulated tendencies. Seriously, the "examine yourself" is the whole point, of course. I'm most interested in why I sometimes get irritated by the unnaturally courteous tone of exchange at DSG, and why I sometimes find it very wholesome and helpful. Can we drop it there, again? (Sorry if it seems that I'm always asking you to drop things, but I do that as a general rule these days.) Phil 50389 From: "Philip" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 7:02pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? Simple Truth First philofillet Hi Tep and all > It is very true, James. How can anyone not see that simple truth? > One should master simple truths first, before trying to penetrate the > Paramattha truths. Not so simple. Yes, close your eyes. Escape. But if you don't escape, and your eyes are open, it is not so easy to control what you see and what you don't see. I had an interesting example just a few minutes ago. I walked out to go to the library and a young woman approached on a bicycle. I've grown into the habit of not glancing at women to "check them out" as I used to to do. But I found that despite this intention, my eyes fixed on her breasts, causing her the discomfort that I had hoped to avoid. I wasn't even thinking about her breasts. But my eyes went there. Accumulated lobha, dosa and moha - these rule our lives, except for rare moments of sati. That is the simple truth that overconfident-about- sati folks don't get, in my opinion. >Similarly, one should develop anicca-sanna first, > then dukkha-sanna and anatta-sanna may arise. This is quite a statement, Tep. If you read the Samyutta Nikaya you will find that in different suttas the Buddha places emphasis on different characteristics. Obviously the anatta sutta emphasizes anatta. Some suttas emphasize dukkhka. I agree that the majority start with consideration of anicca. But I would reconsider the statement above. It's not so simple. Phil 50390 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 8:46pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? Simple Truth First buddhistmedi... Hi Phil and all - Thank you for giving a real-life example to demonstrate that it is "not so simple" to control (the mind) when the eyes are open. >Phil :Yes, close your eyes. Escape. But if you don't escape, >and your eyes are open, it is not so easy to control what you see and >what you don't see. .... I wasn't even thinking about her breasts. >But my eyes went there. Tep: In your situation it was the perception (san~n~a) of attractiveness that caused the trouble. Being a not-self guy, next time try contemplating that the body-part you're seeing is just a collection of the four basic elements that are void of ownership. But it is not effective to deal with subha san~n~a. The most effective, most direct, and more simple one in this case is asubha-sanna(perception of the unattractive): 'The perception of the unattractive, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end' [AN VII.46]. >Phil :Accumulated lobha, dosa and moha - these rule our lives, >except for rare moments of sati. That is the simple truth that >overconfident-about-sati folks don't get, in my opinion. Tep: Confidence must be balanced with understanding. When the faculties (indriya) are well balanced, then lobha, dosa and moha will be reduced, not accumulated. Sati is, of course, one of the five faculties. >Phil : If you read the Samyutta Nikaya you will find that in different >suttas the Buddha places emphasis on different characteristics. >Obviously the anatta sutta emphasizes anatta. Some suttas >emphasize dukkhka. >I agree that the majority start with consideration of anicca. Tep: Not only in the Samyutta Nikaya that the consideration of anicca is mentioned most often, you can find the same emphasis elsewhere too -- e.g. in the Anguttara Nikaya VII.46, Perceptions. "Monks, these seven perceptions, when developed & pursued, are of great fruit, of great benefit. They gain a footing in the Deathless, have the Deathless as their final end. Which seven? The perception of the unattractive, the perception of death, the perception of loathsomeness in food, the perception of distaste for every world, the perception of inconstancy, the perception of stress in what is inconstant, the perception of not-self in what is stressful". This sutta shows the sequential order for training san~n~a of the three characteristics: that is, anicca san~n~a --> dukkha san~n~a --> anatta san~n~a in that order. (Note that anicca = inconstancy in all Thanissaro Bhikkhu's translated suttas). Regards, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Philip" wrote: > > Hi Tep and all > > > It is very true, James. How can anyone not see that simple truth? > > One should master simple truths first, before trying to penetrate the > > Paramattha truths. > > Not so simple. Yes, close your eyes. Escape. But if you don't escape, and your eyes are open, it is not so easy to control what you see and what you don't see. > 50391 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:58pm Subject: Blazing & Bright ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Very Brilliant is the Mind released into Universal Friendliness ! Whatever meritorious action one performs, all these together are not worth 1/16th part of a mind released into friendliness, since the mind released into friendliness - all by itself - blazes forth, outshines all these with an unsurpassable brilliance... Just as the radiance from all the stars and planets does not match even a 1/16th part of the radiance from the moon, which thus outshines all the stars and planets, similarly; whatever intention making one do meritorious actions, all these together are not worth one-sixteenth fraction, of the mind released by global friendliness!!! Since a mind released into friendliness - all alone - friends!! blazes forth, outshine all these with an incomparable radiance... Just as the mighty sun, friends, rising at autumn dawn, by making any misty fog evaporate, scattering any dark thundercloud, makes the sky all blue & clear, so it alone freely shines, blazes in a blue brilliance, - exactly like that - whatever thoughts there may be for gaining merit, all together these are not worth one sixteenth fraction, of a mind released into friendliness!!! Since the mind released into friendliness - all alone - friends! - outshines all these with inestimable luminosity! Just as Venus, friends, in early morning rise to stand lighting up all directions of the dark, indiscriminately shining, blazing in brilliance, just like that; whatever motivations there may be behind doing good, all these summed up, are not worth one sixteenth fraction of a mind released into friendliness! Since a mind released into universal friendliness - all by itself - friends, blazes fiery forth, and outshines all such with a matchless brightness... So did the Lord Buddha state this matter, and in this context he further added: For the noble friend, who by will, who fully aware, who deliberately bring infinite, boundless and endless friendliness into being, this mountain like limitless goodwill makes all evil substrate evaporate, & the chains of mind, these mental fetters become thin, slender & slack. If a friend without ill will cares for even one single living being, such friend, through that, becomes quite skilled and clever, so far more the case for the Noble Friend, who by possessing a caring heart for all sentient beings, without even a single exception, accumulates great, massive, and immense amounts of merit!!! Those gurus & priests who sacrifices life, objects or fire, who baths ceremoniously, devoted to mere forms and empty ritual, blindly attached to & obsessed by culture, tradition of primeval & unknown origin, do never experience even a sixteenth of this release of mind by friendliness fully brought into being, just like the vagueness of even all the stars together, cannot either ever outshine the moon! Since there cannot be any animosity whatsoever, nor enmity at all, neither even an atomic trace of hate in a Nobly Released One, who by caring indiscriminately and infinitely for all living beings, who by possessing such treasure of a mind relinquished by friendliness, simply cannot ever suppress, dominate, harm, nor kill any sentient being, & who neither ever can cause any other to suppress, dominate, harm, or kill any sentient breathing being! Source: The Itivuttaka 27: Thus what it Said: http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=404214 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/iti/index.html -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PS: Please include the word Samahita in any comment, since then will my automatic mail filters pick it up and I will see it & respond!! Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <...> 50392 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:05pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello from New Member sarahprocter... Hi Arry. Many thanks for posting and introducing yourself here. --- Arry Berrigan wrote: > Hello, > I am Arry Berrigan, a retired health administration personnel from the > Ministry of Public Health, Bangkok, Thailand. A freelance writer for > Thai medias in Thailand and in USA. A Meditation Master for Mindfulness > Base Stress Reduction and Relaxation. > > Pleviously, I was the Buddhist Missionary Monk at Wat Thai Washington, > D.C. > I disrobed and remaining in Maryland, USA in order to be a private > meditation master, and freelance writer. .... S: All very interesting indeed. You're living in Bangkok now, is that right? If so, we may see you there one day. It's surprising just how many members here have some sort of connection with Thailand. .... > > I am interested in the subjects that related to meditatin technique, > philosophy, and health for wellness. ... S: I'll look forward to your contributions and particular 'angles' on threads. Thanks again, for letting us know of your presence:). Metta, Sarah ======== 50393 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:06pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 277- Wrong View/di.t.thi (m) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch16- Wrong View (di.t.thi)continued] Questions. i What is an example of wrong practice which people may follow today? ii Why is the proximate cause of wrong view “not to see ariyans”? iii What is the difference between annihilationism, the view that a self will be annihilated after death, and the seeing of the impermanence of conditioned phenomena? iv In which way can one think of past lives with wrong view? v Personality view can be eradicated through mindfulness of nåma and rúpa. Why is that so? vi Why does one not cling to speculative theories anymore when personality belief has been eradicated? vii When there is no awareness is there wrong view all the time? viii What is the difference between ignorance and wrong view? ix Why are the three kinds of wrong view which are akusala kamma patha particularly dangerous? x Why is it wrong to believe that we can see and hear at the same time? xi Does the fact that wrong view has not been eradicated have any influence on our morality (síla)? ***** [Wrong View (di.t.thi) finished!] Metta, Sarah ====== 50394 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2005 0:33am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? kenhowardau Hi Htoo, I said to Swee Boon: ------------------------------------------ > > The only correction I would make is; it would be *mundane* - not Noble - right concentration at those moments. Noble (Ariyan) right concentration occurs only in moments of supramundane Path- consciousness (which have Nibbana as object). -------------------------------------------- And you responded: ----------------------------------------------------------- H: > May I ask some questions here? 1) Is 1st ruupa jhaana through 4th ruupa jhaana mundane or supramundane 'right concentration'? > ------------------------------------------------------------ I would say it was neither. Samadhi cetasika is "right" concentration when it forms part of the ariyan eightfold path. It is also right concentration when it forms part of the mundane fivefold path (satipatthana). When samadhi cetasika forms part of jhana (or part of any lesser kusala consciousness) it is not "right" in the sense of being part of the Middle Way: it is right only in the ordinary sense - of being not wrong. -------------------- H: > 2) What is the object of 1st ruupa jhaana through 4th ruupa jhaana? -------------------- Here, I must try to remember your "Dhamma Threads" in which you said the object was: a concept in the case of the first jhana; the first-jhana citta in the case of the second jhana; a concept in the third jhana and third-jhana citta in the fourth jhana. Is that near enough? -------------------------------- H: > 3) What is the object of supramundane 'right concentration'? --------------------------------- Nibbana. ------------------ H: > 4) Are the objects the same when one is in jhaana and when one is in (magga)/ phala? ----------------- No, Nibbana is always the object of magga and phala citta. And it is the object of those cittas exclusively: it is never the object of jhana citta. --------------------------- H: > With respect, Htoo Naing -------------------------- Thanks, Htoo, I am sure those questions were asked with your usual respect, but may I ask where they were leading? What did I say in my post to Swee Boon that prompted those particular questions? Ken H 50395 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2005 0:58am Subject: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------------ KH: > > Selection of 'objects for right mindfulness' occurs in the > realm of paramattha dhammas: there is no self that selects them. Or > are you suggesting you can single out, say, visible rupas from > audible rupas (which come and go in less than a billionth of a > second) and say, "I'll be mindful of those; but I won't be mindful of > the others!" > > You would be foolish to suggest you have that ability, and we would > be foolish to believe you. ........................ H: > Not entirely, Ken. Let's take an ordinary example: You are at a social gathering at which there are many loud converstations in progress. You are talking with a particular person. What you do is concentrate on what that person is saying, paying particular attention to his/her words and attempting to ignore (literally "not know") all the other din. Generally you are reasonably successful in this. What is actually happening? I would say that *all* the sound is heard, but the sound coming from your friend is being highlighted by heightened attention directed towards it. -------------------------------- In successive moments, sound is being heard, images are being seen, textures being felt etc., etc., but in some of those moments, the mind thinks there is only hearing. And it thinks some audible objects are being heard while other audible objects are being screened out. If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting there is more than just thinking involved. You suggest certain audible rupas are actually being experienced more clearly than others, and this is due to the intention of the listener. ----------------------------------------- H: > Similarly, when attending an opera, an event of dramatic sight and sound, there are times at which one will attend more closely to the sound than to sight, highlighting the auditory mindstates over and above the others as consciousness flits from sense door to sense door. The same will happen, for example, at a play, when one strains to hear certain dialogue. ----------------------------------------- Again, we only think some objects are being selected over others. In reality the fruits of long-ago kamma are ripening in the form of sense-door experiences. There is no control over what will arise next and (as I understand) all objects are experienced equally clearly. We are just weaving stories of control around those experiences. --------------------------------------------------------------- H: > Of course, all this is ultimately quite impersonal, being merely cetana, viriya, maniskara and other cetasikas occurring. -------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks Howard, those "ordinary examples" might be useful metaphors for the workings of paramattha dhammas and, in particular, the for way there can be selection of particular objects-of-mindfulness for particular personality types. I have just spent some hours trying to match up which conventional object - the party, the party goer, the conversation, etc. - matched up metaphorically with which ultimate reality - the moment of satipatthana, sati, the arammana, etc. I had to give up: it got too complicated. But I assure you; I didn't find any evidence of control in the ultimate sense. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------- H: > If we say "we" control, and literally mean there is an agent who controls, that is certainly wrong view. If, on the other hand, when we say that we choose what we eat we realize that this is just a conventional shorthand for complex processes involving no agent, then there is no problem at all. --------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree there is no wrong view in that case. I think we can go further and say there is no wrong view at moments of choosing what to eat even if the chooser goes to church on Sundays and believes in an eternal soul. The point is; at those particular moments, the view of an eternal soul (or of a controlling entity) does not arise: there is just thinking about different foods and how some are preferable to others. Ken H 50396 From: "Philip" Date: Tue Sep 20, 2005 1:29am Subject: Re: Different Approaches to Anatta? Simple Truth First philofillet Hi Tep > Tep: In your situation it was the perception (san~n~a) of attractiveness > that caused the trouble. Being a not-self guy, next time try > contemplating that the body-part you're seeing is just a collection of the > four basic elements that are void of ownership (snip) Ph: Thanks Tep, I appreciate your concern and the advice above, some snipped. But on this occasion I wasn't posting about how to deal with the unwholesome tendencies, just to demonstrate that their very existence works through us in subtle ways that our not easily controlled. So close the eyes, yet, but when they are open no pretense that there is a self that controls what you see and don't see. Conditions are at work all the time. Another reminder that many people forget - it is impossible to see something and hear something at the same moment. People would naturally assume based on their experience that seeing is a continuous activity. In fact, there are countless moments of seeing, hearing, bhavanga citta between, millions of them, billions of them I guess, in a few second of looking at a computer screen. And there is no way to decide whether seeing or hearing will arise. They are vipaka, arising due to conditions. So we can close our eyes, but when they're open any idea that there is control over what we see is incorrect. We can turn our head and look in the direction of a noise, and see the noisy object, but we are not seeing it, seeing and hearing are arising due to conditions. You know this already, of course. It helps me to write it out anyways. > >Phil :Accumulated lobha, dosa and moha - these rule our lives, > >except for rare moments of sati. That is the simple truth that > >overconfident-about-sati folks don't get, in my opinion. > > Tep: Confidence must be balanced with understanding. When the > faculties (indriya) are well balanced, then lobha, dosa and moha will be > reduced, not accumulated. Sati is, of course, one of the five faculties. I don't know how to respond to this. Confidence and understanding are both kusala. Are you saying one should be reduced and the other increased if there is an imbalance, like a scale at the market? "I have too much confidence and not enough understanding, so I must increase understanding." I can imagine someone saying that. It would be a folly in the making. But of course I agree that we need to develop the indriyas, and perhaps they will become unshakeable enough to be balas (powers) some day. We discuss and debate a lot here, but we all agree that the unwholesome must be eradicated and the wholesome cultivated. > "Monks, these seven perceptions, when developed & pursued, are of > great fruit, of great benefit. They gain a footing in the Deathless, have > the Deathless as their final end. Which seven? The perception of the > unattractive, the perception of death, the perception of loathsomeness > in food, the perception of distaste for every world, the perception of > inconstancy, the perception of stress in what is inconstant, the > perception of not-self in what is stressful". > > This sutta shows the sequential order for training san~n~a of the three > characteristics: that is, anicca san~n~a --> dukkha san~n~a --> anatta > san~n~a in that order. That is one sutta. I could open my book and quote other suttas in which dukkha or anatta are emphasized ahead of anicca. We could play suttaball all day! But I do agree that the emphasis in must suttas in which the three characteristics are mentionned is first on anicca. I will leave it there, and let you have the last word if you'd like, Tep. Thanks again for the thoughtful guidance re my unwholesome tendencies. Phil 50397 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 20, 2005 1:54am Subject: Tep - a few comments on jhanas and the breathing treatise sarahprocter... Hi Tep, I have several of your posts in front of me which I’ve been meaning to respond to – apologies for the delays. If you don’t mind, I’ll just make a few brief comments here in note form as I do with Htoo when I get behind: 1.Your post #48193 on arammana. As you point out, dhammarammana (mind 0bjects) may be ‘physical or mental, past, present or future, real or imaginary.’ You go on to ask if all objects are dukkha without exception. I think Nina pointed out that nibbana is not dukkha. I’d also like to stress that concepts are not dukkha, they are ‘imaginary’ objects only. 2.In post #47712, you summarized B.Bodhi’s conclusions from ‘The Jhanas and the Lay Disciple’ These were posted here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/34293 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/34297 Iwished you to see my earlier replyto B.Bodhi but wasn’t able to find it when I was away: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/39500 You may wish to add further comments. B.Bodhi’s further comments were to the effect that he was limiting his conclusions to what he reads in the suttas only, but appreciated I was using a ‘synthetic’ approach incorporating the Abhidhmma and ancient commentaries in interpretation too. 3. With regard to the breathing treatise and your qu in #49561 on the use of ‘pajaanaati’ vs ‘sikkhati’, I’m not sure. It occurred to me that often panna is followed by pajaanaati – the function of panna is to ‘know’. Also, in the Satipatthana Sutta, the text is dealing with the mundane development of satipatthana prior to insight, I believe. The sekkha is the trainer, the sotapanna and above. Do the references to sikkhati in your textual passages refer to the ariyans’ knowledge ? I don’t know – I haven’t been able to follow the extracts closely. Nina responded on this topic in #50103. I wondered if the reason there is no virati cetasika is because of being a sekkha. Adhisiila sikkha is fulfilled. I may be quite wrong here. Perhaps I’ll bring it up in India. You asked what else ‘the breathing meditator’ can do to train in the higher sila-samadhi-panna. All that can ever be done for such a training is the development of satipatthana. It makes no difference whether there has been prior development of samatha or what prior development has taken place. Adhisila (higher virtue) is fulfilled by the sotapanna, adhicitta (higher concentration) by the anagami and adhipanna (higher wisdom) by the arahant only, They are very difficult passages and I admire your diligence and hard work with regard to sharing them, Tep. I’m afraid that much of the material is quite beyond me. You also asked in #48311 about the combining of the bodhipakkhiya dhammas with anupassana-nana. As I understand, the text is referring to the one who has attained jhana with breath as object. Prior to enlightenment, all the bodhipakkiya dhammas have to be fully developed as a result of the fully developed satipatthana and attainment of the vipassana nanas prior to final enlightenment. The text is referring to the one who uses jhana attainment as basis for enlightenment. As Htoo has explained, there should be no confusion about the different objects of jhana states and lokuttara dhammas (in the prior case, breath as object here, in the latter case, nibbana as object.). There should also be no question of trying to imitate the bhikkhus during the Buddha’s time who attained the highest patisambhidhas and were able to attain jhana and enlightenment in the way described. S: You also mentioned in 49561 that you believe, ‘adverting the citta’ refers to ‘aavajjata’, meaning ‘turn to’ or ‘observe’. You say ‘the meditator turns his ‘mind’ to the object (rupa or nama). I think this is OK as long as we understand that there is in truth no meditator, no person to turn his mind. It will depend entirely on conditions what the citta adverts to or takes as object at any moment. Tep, now I look at your posts addressed to me, I know why I delayed responding:) Such difficult questions. If you have any further specific questions you’d like me to raise with A.Sujin, of course I’ll be glad to do so as discussed. They are all good points. Metta, Sarah ======= 50398 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga, Ch XIV, 191, and Tiika, Part II. sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Larry, --- nina wrote: > Visuddhimagga, Ch XIV, 191, Part II. > > N: From the first moment of our life kamma produced a decad with the > ruupa > which is sex, femininity and masculinity, we are born as a female or a > male. > Also in the course of life kamma continues to produce the ruupas of > femininity or masculinity. > The Tiika explains that there can be a reversal of sex in the course of > life > but adds that this does not always occur. ... S: Thankfully not!! ... >People at that time may have > wondered whether this is due to a kamma different from that which > produced > sex at the first moment of life. > The Tiika explains the reason for a reversal of sex. > ------- > Tiika: However, when there comes to be reversal of sex, then the > male sex disappears owing to powerful unprofitable kamma, and the female > sex appears owing to weak profitable kamma; and the female sex > disappears owing to weak unprofitable kamma, while the male sex appears > owing to powerful profitable kamma (DhsA.321). .... S: This is one of those rather interesting and sensitive topics. When I read your posts it reminded me of the story which I also heard RobK refer to recently (if I recall from the Dhp commentary) about how a son of a merchant in the time of a previous Buddha turned into a woman for having insulted Mahakaccayana. All his masculine features disappeared as he became a woman and then had two children. it links up with our threads on apologies and forgiveness, because it was only after apologising and asking for forgiveness that he returned to being a man. Metta, Sarah ======= 50399 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Sep 20, 2005 2:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 3, no 3. nilovg Hi Philip, I am glad you like Dhamma in Cambodia. op 19-09-2005 22:19 schreef Philip op philco777@...: > > But no need to press too hard. We know our limits and keep > listening and reflecting and "panna works its way" as I heard the > other day. ____ N:I heard the other day about energy as continued exertion without stopping, and I thought of you, how you would react. We can see this as an exhortation, but nobody can force himself to have continued exertion. As understanding develops there will also be right effort. The factors will become balanced. ------- Ph: Even the saying I just referred to, ²there is not, there is, and >> then there is nothing to be found ² is miraculous. > > Yes!!!! ( category 4 exclamation points) ------- N: I am glad you understand and appreciate this. Not everybody will get this, it is profound. ------ Ph: We should consider that >> at the moment of bhavanga-citta (life-continuum) nothing appears > > We will not know this directly, but the Buddha knew, and taught > us. Gratitude to the Buddha!!!! --------- N: It can be known when insight is more developed. Kh. Sujin explained the difference: bhavangacitta does not experience an object impinging on one of the six doors, and then there are conditions for the experience of an object. In that way it will be clearer that there is not, there is, and then there is nothing to be found. -------- Ph; Nina, I would like to hear you read this outloud the way Lodewijk > reads. Would you consider choosing some material and reading it? ------ N: No objection, but my technical skill fails. Tom tried to help me, but no success, inspite of downloading Audicity for Mac. I sent him our Sony disc recorder (the small advanced one), we cannot handle it. But for now I read to Lodewijk after dinner a passage and then I post it. Nina.