51000 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 8:22am Subject: [dsg] Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. nidive Hi Sarah, Hope you have an enjoyable trip to India! > p.s I'm curious about the phrase 'without practice (wisdom) is lost' > in the Dhp 282 and whether it doesn't mean, just no conditions to > arise. Nothing is literally 'lost' as such, is it? I can only say that if one is at least a stream-enterer, then wisdom is not lost. The Buddha gave the assurance that a stream-enterer is destined for full awakening and can never be reborn in woeful realms. I don't think he gave the same kind of assurance for worldlings. Worldlings can spend numerous lifetimes in woeful realms before there is even a chance to become a human again. During those numerous lifetimes in woeful realms, there can be no practice of Dhamma. Regards, Swee Boon 51001 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 8:47am Subject: Re: Satori? buddhatrue Hi Dan (and Howard), It was very fascinating reading about your meditation experiences in Thailand. Thanks for sharing! To give you my opinion, and take it for what it's worth (about $2.00 on the open market ;-)), I think that what you experienced, when you had fear, was very similar to what Howard experienced. I have also had the same type of fear during vipassana meditation which interfered with my practice for many years. To come close to realizing that the `self' doesn't really exist is not an easy experience. And no one should expect it to be! Just think about for how many countless eons we have been carrying this self around! And then just think about how upset we become when our favorite TV show gets cancelled! ;-)) Those who talk so easily about anatta and how it makes their lives so much more peaceful to realize anatta, are talking a bunch of bs as far as I am concerned! They don't know the first thing about anatta- it is just an idea to them "Hey, I am not happy with the way I am…the Buddha said `I' don't really exist…that solves all my problems!" Whatever. I can get so tired of the Hallmark Card arahants! ;-)) Anyway, the experience of losing yourself is not pleasant or easy- it is terrifying. You experienced that but said that you pushed through it. Excuse me for saying so, but you are most definitely mistaken. You didn't push through your fear- you just covered it up. Your teachers were right: You had a great opportunity to have a fantastic insight but you decided to run away instead. You left your retreat early because of the fear. Just admit it- it's nothing to be ashamed of. You weren't ready. Sure, you might feel some regret about it, but that's better than fooling yourself that you really pushed through the fear. So, how do you become ready to face the fear of losing one's self? As Howard suggests, Jhana is the key. Jhana on a suitable object- or even better yet, jhana with the Brahma-Viharas. The Brahma Viharas can help one to shake loose the attachment to the self by replacing it with compassion for all people and sentinet beings. We are all so egocentric most of the time; we stay stuck in our personal little dramas. When we can see the big picture of universal suffering, we will be more willing to let go of the little self. But, that's just my opinion. So often, I feel like "Mr. Metta" in this group because that's what I often write about ;-)). Metta, James 51002 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 8:10am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. buddhatrue Hi Swee Boon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > Hi Rob M, > > > There are many Suttas where monks go to the Buddha and ask "why is > > this person like this..." and the Buddha replies, "in a previous > > life, ...". Rob K recently gave three examples in a post to me (a > > crow, a captain's wife and a group of monks trapped in a cave). > > My opinion is that these stories are there to encourage us to attain > what should be attained in this life. > > It is not an encouragement to believe in the efficacy of accumulations > extending into future lives. > > Regards, > Swee Boon Very good point! Excellent!! The Buddha never responded to such questions with "Well, that person isn't ready for nibbana in this lifetime. He/She doesn't have the proper accumulations. Let's hope for a better future lifetime." Actually, the Buddha once scolded Sariputta for selling a person short, so to speak, in regards to enlightenment. A Brahmin had asked Sariputta how one can become untied with Brahman and Sariputta taught him the Brahma-Viharas, but stopped there. The Buddha stressed to Sariputta that the Brahmin had the potential to reach full release but Sariputta had sold him short and didn't complete the teaching. This is the only serious mistake Sariputta made, that I know of. We shouldn't sell each other or ourselves short because of a unfounded confidence in accumulations. The Buddha wanted us all to become enlightened in this very life- not some future life. Metta, James 51003 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 9:12am Subject: Re: Satori? nidive Hi James, > To come close to realizing that the `self' doesn't really exist is > not an easy experience. And no one should expect it to be! Just > think about for how many countless eons we have been carrying this > self around! And then just think about how upset we become when > our favorite TV show gets cancelled! ;-)) I most certainly agree with you on this! It's not easy, and there will be fear. I experienced this fear too. But once you get used to it, the fear actually subsides. > Those who talk so easily about anatta and how it makes their lives > so much more peaceful to realize anatta, are talking a bunch of bs > as far as I am concerned! They don't know the first thing about > anatta- it is just an idea to them "Hey, I am not happy with the > way I am…the Buddha said `I' don't really exist…that solves all my > problems!" Whatever. I can get so tired of the Hallmark Card > arahants! ;-)) Your remarks are funny although not without truth. Regards, Swee Boon 51004 From: "nidive" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 9:27am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. nidive Hi James, > > My opinion is that these stories are there to encourage us to > > attain what should be attained in this life. > > > > It is not an encouragement to believe in the efficacy of > > accumulations extending into future lives. > Very good point! Excellent!! The Buddha never responded to such > questions with "Well, that person isn't ready for nibbana in this > lifetime. He/She doesn't have the proper accumulations. Let's hope > for a better future lifetime." Actually, the Buddha once scolded > Sariputta for selling a person short, so to speak, in regards to > enlightenment. A Brahmin had asked Sariputta how one can become > untied with Brahman and Sariputta taught him the Brahma-Viharas, but > stopped there. The Buddha stressed to Sariputta that the Brahmin > had the potential to reach full release but Sariputta had sold him > short and didn't complete the teaching. This is the only serious > mistake Sariputta made, that I know of. > > We shouldn't sell each other or ourselves short because of a > unfounded confidence in accumulations. The Buddha wanted us all > to become enlightened in this very life- not some future life. I am very delighted that you share the same thoughts! Regards, Swee Boon 51005 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 11:16am Subject: Re: Guarding the Sense Doors ? Is Kundaliya Sutta Misleading? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Sarah (Htoo, James and all) - > > Thank you for trying to explain why you disagree with my > disagreement with your view that indriya-samvara sila comes after > satipatthana (not the other way around). > > >Sarah: > > Tep, you also disagreed with my comment and said my `error' > >is caused by my `bias toward satipatthana' and re-quoted from > >the Kundaliya Sutta, which Htoo agreed with, suggesting it is > >the `detailed abhidhamma that biasedness arises' :). > > > > A few extra comments: > > > (snipped) > > > S: So I would suggest in conclusion that it is by the development of > > satipatthana alone, that the guarding of the sense doors as well adhi > > sila, adhi citta and adhi panna can be developed and perfected. not > >by any other means at all. > > > > Tep: I do have respect for your research on adhi siila, satipatthana > and sobhana cittas, visudhi and guarding of the sense, etc., etc. > However, I am afraid to say that you are not addressing the key issue, > namely : according to Kundaliya Sutta, restrainst of the senses (indriya > samvara) comes before the fulfillment of satipatthana. Is this sutta > wrong? Yes? > > > Respectfully, > > > Tep ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep, I think Sarah is right. We have to see other suttas as well. Suttas are interconnected. With respect, Htoo Naing 51006 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 11:13am Subject: Re: Guarding the Sense Doors htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Deat Tep & Htoo, > I won't be able to respond again for quite some time, but I always > appreciate reading all your post and comments. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======= -------------------------------------------------- --------------------- Dear Sarah, Tep (and all), Saadhu saadhu saadhu! Htoo Naing 51007 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 11:41am Subject: Re: Different Approaches .... Utopian Dream of a Super Right View? buddhistmedi... Hi, Sarah - It is easy to get swept away by what one reads between the lines of the original text. The more research one makes, the more expanding and complicated interpretation may arise (papa~nca) ! So please be reminded that we are discussing a pretty simple sutta, and that we should discuss it with no atta-ditthi. > > Tep: > > But we only have one sutta on parinna that I quoted earlier: > > "And which is comprehension(parinna)? Any ending of passion, > > ending of aversion, ending of delusion. > >This is called comprehension (parinna)." > > > > How much more can you read into this very straightforward > > meaning given by the Buddha? I think while you were reading > > this sutta you just added those words that the Buddha did not > > speak to it. Where in this sutta (or elsewhere) did the Buddha > > define 'parinna' by the three stages of development? > .... > S: I think that often different words are used to convey the meanings. >For example, in the sutta about the relay race, it's the same >visuddhis being referred to. In the sutta after the one you quoted >on pahana parinna, the 3 parinnas are being referred to as the >commentary made clear. Tep: I do not think that you have answered my questions ! :-) >Sarah: > Do you think the ancient commentators, said to be the Buddha's key > disciples such as Maha Kaccayana, were overlooking the obvious and attributing wrong meanings that merely confused and complicated those who were able to read the straightforward meanings intended? > Tep: Can you give me a sutta in which Maha Kaccayana extended the simple single meaning of 'parinna' into three stages and stated that the Buddha's original meaning [i.e. "And which is comprehension (parinna)? Any ending of passion, ending of aversion, ending of delusion. This is called comprehension(parinna)." ] was supposed to be the third stage? If you can, then I will be satisfied and no more question asked. >Sarah: As you've said, you sometimes find the commentary details helpful and sometimes quote from the Visuddhimagga. Surely we can't say that only when such commentary details accord with our views and understanding are they correct? I'm not trying to be tricky here. I think it's easy to go to the other extreme of religiously following the words in the book without any investigating and real considering of the meaning as it applies to the practice, the understanding of dhammas now. > Tep: When a sutta is not clear because it is too brief or the wording is difficult to understand, then an external help is certainly helpful. But for the case at hand (Parinna Sutta) it is brief and simple to follow. Have you heard of this saying : Keep It Simple, Stupid (KISS)? The choice to do more reading, or not, is up to the well-informed individual. It is a wisdom that knows the situation at hand and weighs alternatives accurately. It is a wisdom that knows an optimal choice -- more data is not always better; it may add more confusion and wrong views. > Sarah: > Tep, I left your messages until the end because they are usually the > hardest for me to respond to, but like Dan, I learn a lot from > corresponding with you and consider your contributions here to be a real asset. Keep up the good work! > Tep: Also, like Dan, what you think you have learned from our discussion is short lived. Thank you for this encouragement anyway. Also beware of the encouragement that is turned into a double-edged sword -- i.e. I might become even more active in finding fault with everyone, writing 20 posts daily, and thinking of my "contributions" as the greatest !! [:>|) Sarah: > I had also intended to respond to the comments you forwarded by Han Tun on the parinnas #50415. I agreed with some points and not with others. Very interesting and lots of meat but no time left. So, anything else will have to wait for my return unless it's really quick and simple:). > Tep: I am glad the Han Tun's post did not escape your eagle eye. As to the trip ti India, I hope you have a great time there; please take care and have a safe trip back home. Sarah: > p.s I appreciated your comments (to Dan) I think about being 'a little > kinder and more respectful to everyone from now'. We all need to learn from these words. You also wrote that you 'hope to see responses of the similar kind from everyone! Is this asking too much?'. > > S: Yes, I think so....I think it is this kind of hoping and expectation of > others that gets us into trouble.....:-)). Better to set a good example > and if we fail, try again:). Tep: Indeed, that's asking too much. We are in total agreement here ( a rare event ?). Respectfully, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Tep, > 51008 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 11:49am Subject: Re: Guarding the Sense Doors ? Is Kundaliya Sutta Misleading? buddhistmedi... Hi, Friend Htoo - Thank you for writing to me , but not for reversing your belief. > Dear Tep, > > I think Sarah is right. We have to see other suttas as well. Suttas > are interconnected. > > With respect, > > Htoo Naing Tep: It is a cliche' that "suttas are interconnected". Do you have to read all the 10,000+ suttas befor you can get the right view of the Buddha's Teachings? Warm regards, Tep ======== 51009 From: "seisen_au" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 2:55pm Subject: Re: Off again! seisen_au Dear Sarah, Jon and all others travellers, May you all have a safe and fruitful journey. Steve 51010 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 5:15pm Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 6, no 3. lbidd2 Forwarded from Nina Dear friends, Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 5:27pm Subject: Inevitable atta-ditthi when reading suttas? philofillet Hi Tep Tep > So please be > reminded that we are discussing a pretty simple sutta, and that we > should discuss it with no atta-ditthi. Doesn't this statement reveals your own atta-ditthi? It sounds as though you think ditti can be avoided as easily as rude speech. Ditthi, moha, lobha - and rude speech for that matter - all are conditioned and arise and fall away beyond our control. We should always be aware of this when we read suttas, and quote them to try to win an argument. Suttas give us an opportunity to look *upon* the deep understanding of the Buddha and those who learned directly from him, which is different from looking *into* the understanding - we only see the surface. We do not have "access to insight" as surely as we might like to believe. Patience, patience - and patience is in very short supply in this day and age. We are conditioned from childhood to want too much out of this one lifetime. A moment or two of detachment in a day - how valuable. We come closer to understanding the Buddha's teaching. But we aren't satisfied and latch on to suttas like lawyers finding precedence to win cases. I think there is almost always this kind of atta-ditthi at work when we read suttas. And certainly when we post here at DSG. Frankly, I find it hard to believe that any of us function at DSG without it. Instead of there being understanding, which might arise now and then in an unforced way, it is all about Phil's understanding, Tep's understanding, Nina's understanding, and whoever else.... My opinion, of course. My clinging to Phil's understanding, to concepts. The real understanding rises and falls away in a moment, with a conditioning value we cannot know. Phil p.s Apologies in advance. I am not in discussion mode these days, so as always I will offer you the final word. Of course if anyone else would like to discuss it as well... 51012 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 6:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] imageless lbidd2 "leoaive": "Hi I was reading Buddhist sutra and it says about meditating on imageless. What that can be? Is that anything imageless or something specific immaterial?" Hi "leoaive", Welcome to the group. It could refer to formless jhana in which the object of meditation is the idea of boundless space, or the idea of boundless consciousness, or the idea "nothing is there", or neither-perception-nor-non-perception. Or it could refer to the contemplation of the signless which is the same as contemplation of impermanence. This is a special contemplation focusing only on dissolution. Can you give us the name and number of the sutta? Maybe you could tell us a little about yourself, where you live, what is your background in Buddhadhamma etc. Also what is your name? Is "leoaive" a typo for "Leo alive"? Sarah and Jon are the moderators but they are enroute to Thailand at the moment. Please feel free to ask any questions or participate in the discussions. Larry 51013 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 6:14pm Subject: Apologies in advance for drive-by posting philofillet Hi all I'd just like to repeat a point that I made in the last post to Tep. I will be popping in and making comments now and then, but can't afford to get engaged in discussion/debate for the time being. My apologies in advance for this kind of drive-by posting style. Phil 51014 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 7:22pm Subject: Re: Apologies in advance for drive-by posting / Gladly accepted! buddhistmedi... Hi, Phil (and all) - It is nice to see you back ! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi all > > I'd just like to repeat a point that I made in the last post to Tep. > I will be popping in and making comments now and then, but can't afford > to get engaged in discussion/debate for the time being. My apologies in > advance for this kind of drive-by posting style. > > Phil Tep : Your apologies are gladly accepted. Like you, I no longer have a desire to debate any more. So let's just exchange some thoughts, now and then, without committing ourselves to wrapping it up (it is very hard to wrap up any discussion at DSG, anyway). I'll reply to your other post, a very interesting one, later (but not tonight). Best wishes, Tep ====== 51015 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 8:30pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches .... Utopian Dream of a Super Right View? buddhatrue Hi Tep (and Sarah), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Tep: Also, like Dan, what you think you have learned from our > discussion is short lived. Thank you for this encouragement anyway. > Also beware of the encouragement that is turned into a double- edged > sword -- i.e. I might become even more active in finding fault with > everyone, writing 20 posts daily, and thinking of my "contributions" as > the greatest !! [:>|) LOL! I agree with you here and I also once, long ago, asked Sarah to stop praising me (and she did). Unfounded praise and blame can be such a two-edged sword, as you point out. It is a hindrance to progress and learning. However, I don't think that Sarah means any harm by it (which took me a while to figure out). She is just being sweet and wants to give members encouragement. Really, I think it is a cultural thing. I don't know why, but the British seem to have a talent at often sounding insincere! ;-)) Metta, James Ps. I also agree with your KISS philosophy. No reason to over- complicate matters. But again, this is a dhamma STUDY group and Sarah is the queen study-ier ;-)). Just go with the flow. ;-) 51016 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 8:50pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I kenhowardau Hi Rob M, I have been without an internet or telephone connection for three days. At last, the repairman has done his work and I can reply to some messages - starting with this one from you (which was warmly applauded by Swee Boon and Howard). To begin with, we need to agree on a definition of the term 'formal meditation' as it is used on DSG: Formal meditation is not bhavana (mental development). Bhavana is a paramattha dhamma synonymous with panna, right understanding. Formal meditation (or formal practice) is a concept. More specifically, it is a concept that denies the difference between concepts and paramattha dhammas. Therefore, it arises exclusively with wrong view. To give an example: A carpenter normally uses a hammer without having wrong view. There may be a case, however, where he thinks, "This hammer is real. In order to prove it is real, I will drive a nail with it." In that case the carpenter has wrong view and is engaged in formal practice. When we first hear the Dhamma, we are told about ultimate reality - the six worlds of the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body and the mind. In the all-inclusive present moment, there are only conditioned namas and rupas arising at one of six doorways, and all of them are fleeting, unsatisfactory and devoid of self. Even the attainment of enlightenment is only a moment of nama and rupa. Unable to accept this information, some uninstructed worldlings engage in formal practice. They say, "Look, I can sit. I can stand. I can walk. I can concentrate on sensations. In these ways, I can know anatta. I can attain enlightenment." So Rob, I think you were very wide of the mark when you said that the monks during the time of the Buddha "sat under trees doing what you might call "formal meditation"." You continued: --------- RM: > The same was true for ascetics of other sects. --------- Did alarm bells ring when you wrote that? There was a difference you know! :-) --------------- RM: > So in the Satipatthana Sutta, when the Buddha says, "...having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree or to an empty place, sits down with his legs crossed, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness alert..." what the Buddha is really saying is "...while going through your daily activities...". ---------------- Anyone can sit at the foot of a tree, but in the context of the Satipatthana Sutta, those words refer specifically to the daily activities of a monk who uses jhana as a vehicle for satipatthana. ------------------------------ RM: > Later in the Sutta, the Buddha talks about maintaining mindfulness while going, standing, sitting or lying down. When are we not doing one of those things? Clearly, the Buddha is advocating mindfulness at all times during daily life. ---------------------------- But that is *my* point! Aren't you arguing that the monk has a formal practice - something done specifically to bring about satipatthana. ------------------------------------------------------ RM: > So what is the role of "formal meditation"? ------------------------------------------------------- I snipped a bit that dealt with the paramattha dhamma, bhavana, instead of the concept, formal practice. There is no disagreement about bhavana. No one doubts that samatha (the calm that arises with kusala concentration) is beneficial. However, there is no control over samatha. As you said, some arahants including the Buddha practised jhana meditation (which means they developed samatha to its limits), while other arahants did not. ------------------------ <. . .> RM: > Formal meditation will improve one's concentration and lead to tranquillity (samadhi). -------------------------- We are back on topic now because you have returned to DSG's definition of formal meditation. I don't think there is any record of the Buddha's teaching formal meditation. That is why I asked you for textual references. On other occasions, I have asked the same thing of Htoo. As I understand his answer, he thinks the Buddha did give instructions for formal practice, but, for reasons best known to Ananda, those instructions were not recited at the First Council, and therefore they were not preserved. --------------------------------------------- RH: > Samadhi (tranquillity) and Vipassana (insight) are called the swift pair of messengers (see SN XXXV.204) which deliver Nibbana. --------------------------------------------- Yes, but here again, we are back to talking about bhavana, not about formal practice. What, according to the texts, are the factors leading to satipatthana (which in turn leads to the Ariyan Eightfold Path)? The answer I have seen is, "Association with the wise, hearing the true Dhamma and wise consideration." Why does that answer make no mention of formal meditation? ----------------------------------------------------------- RM: > So my interpretation of the Suttas is that you need to have a tranquil mind (samadhi) to support insight into the three characteristics. ------------------------------------------------------------ Well, that would entail an additional factor for enlightenment not mentioned in the texts. In practice, it would mean there could be no right understanding for a monk who did not make formal preparations for it. For example, there could be no right understanding for a monk who, having sat on an ant's nest, was running around screaming in pain. As I understand tranquillity and insight, they are dhammas and they are perfectly capable of arising regardless of whatever a monk seems to be doing in conventional reality. --------------------------- RM: > Regular formal meditation is one way to develop a tranquil mind. ---------------------------- Hmmm, I don't want to digress, but I wonder if there is any empirical evidence of that (even in the conventional sense of "tranquil mind"). I practised formal meditation over a period of 26 years, and look at me! :-) -------------------------------------------------- RM: > All of this is at the "core"; it is in the Suttas. The Suttas do not give a lot of practical advice on how to practice formal vipassana meditation. From what I have read, the Satipatthana Sutta is as specific as it gets. ---------------------------------------------------- It gives no advice on formal practice whatsoever, Rob. As I have quoted to you many times, the commentaries warn us against confusing satipatthana with ordinary, conceptual, mindfulness. You choose not to heed that warning, and that is your privilege, but you will always get an argument from me. :-) The Satipatthana sutta is entirely about knowing paramattha dhammas as they appear now regardless of conventional circumstances. It is a marvellous thing that right mindfulness can happen that way. We can begin to comprehend it only when we accept the ultimate reality of the six worlds. Ken H 51017 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 9:11pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I buddhatrue Hi Ken H. (Rob M), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > --------------- > RM: > So in the Satipatthana Sutta, when the Buddha says, "...having > gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree or to an empty place, sits > down with his legs crossed, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness > alert..." what the Buddha is really saying is "...while going through > your daily activities...". > ---------------- > > Anyone can sit at the foot of a tree, but in the context of the > Satipatthana Sutta, those words refer specifically to the daily > activities of a monk who uses jhana as a vehicle for satipatthana. > Right. The Buddha is giving instructions for "formal meditation", not just sitting quietly at the foot of a tree. What's the problem? I'm confused by your arguments and I really want to understand. Could you explain why meditation is wrong, in a straightforward manner? Metta, James ps. Meditating for 26 years and not receiving any benefit doesn't prove anything. Meditation is about quality, not quantity. 51018 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 10:18pm Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > > My opinion is that these stories are there to encourage us to attain > > what should be attained in this life. > > > > It is not an encouragement to believe in the efficacy of > accumulations > > extending into future lives. > > > > Regards, > > Swee Boon > > Very good point! Excellent!! The Buddha never responded to such > questions with "Well, that person isn't ready for nibbana in this > lifetime. He/She doesn't have the proper accumulations. Let's hope > for a better future lifetime." Actually, the Buddha once scolded > Sariputta for selling a person short, so to speak, in regards to > enlightenment. A Brahmin had asked Sariputta how one can become > untied with Brahman and Sariputta taught him the Brahma-Viharas, but > stopped there. The Buddha stressed to Sariputta that the Brahmin had > the potential to reach full release but Sariputta had sold him short > and didn't complete the teaching. This is the only serious mistake > Sariputta made, that I know of. > > We shouldn't sell each other or ourselves short because of a unfounded > confidence in accumulations. The Buddha wanted us all to become > enlightened in this very life- not some future life. > > Metta, > James Dear James and See Boon, What do you make of this passage I quoted to James earlier in this thread? 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." robert 51019 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon Oct 3, 2005 10:24pm Subject: Re: Off again! gazita2002 Hello Steve, thanks for your well wishes. I began my journey yesterday morning, Oct3. due to a spectacular storm over Bangkok, last nite, that looked like 'war of the worlds', I was sure my journey would end in a lightening-struck Swiss airline. However, the pilot circuled the city to avoid being fried, and we landed safely - whew! looking forward to lots of dhamma chats with friends, given the right conditions of course. I just wish the Buddha was there (-: howzat for clinging! patience, courage and good cheer azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "seisen_au" wrote: > Dear Sarah, Jon and all others travellers, > > May you all have a safe and fruitful journey. > > Steve 51020 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 2:46am Subject: Re: (Sukinder & Htoo)Long Discussion 3 (2nd session) 3 sukinderpal Dear Htoo (and James), This is just to inform you that I try to find the time to answer your mail, but I don't think there will be any till after the India trip. Also Htoo, I think you assume that I am Pali literate, no I am not. I am not particularly interested in learning it, as I am generally weak in learning and using languages. So if you can, please translate into English any of the Pali you have written in this and the other posts in this thread. Thanks in advance. Metta, Sukinder --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Continue: > > Sukin: > > 6. Not having eradicated self-view, is no excuse to "do" anything > with `self'. > > You should not underestimate the importance of pariyatti. If on the > pariyatti level, it says that there is no self, then one is simply > following a *wrong theory* when one states to the effect that, "since > we are not sotapannas, we must still practice with self". > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I do not mean that. But self-view is only eradicated at > sotapatti magga kaala. I did not mean to practise with self. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin continued: > > The underlying annusaya may still be there, but it does not manifest > most of the time. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > Anusaya is not our business. It is the business of respective magga > naana. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin continued: > > In fact when pariyatti level of understanding is conditioned to > arise, at that ..snip..weak level. > > So ask yourself, if the idea that one should sit down to mediate > and/or go on a retreat is in line with correct pariyatti. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I have asked myself many times. The answer that arise in my > mind is the same. One should diligently follow the Path. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > 7. Too much stress on Panna. > > Can there ever be too much stress on panna? Bhavana is necessarily > with panna isn't it? And isn't the whole idea of studying the > teachings is to grow in understanding? And what is satipatthana if > not the development of "panna"? Sati has the same paramattha dhamma > as object; the difference is in the panna which understands better > and better the different characteristics and conditions. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I know. But panna does not arise all the time when the Path is > being followed. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > 8. Fear of Self. > > Is identifying `self' and subsequently not encouraging it rooted in > fear? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: But it sounds like fear of self not to do satipatthaana at > retreats. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > Not wishing to meditate is not from fear that `self' will arise when > one does so, but rather the perception that the very idea of > meditating is conditioned by self-view. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > That is exactly 'fear of self-view'. Self-view is only eradicated by > sotapatti magga naana. It is the business of sotapatti magga naana. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > 9. No Self who keeps precepts. > > Keeping precept is ultimately the function of paramattha dhammas. If > one thinks that this is due to a decision made and followed upon by > one, then this is believing in the illusion of self and control. And > when one comes from this position, then it is understandable that > others who speak strongly against the idea of self and control, will > be perceived as being `careless'. But paramattha dhammas roll on, > while one is concerned about making a choice to keep precepts, > satipatthana may not be one of those dhammas. ;-) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: :-)) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > 10. "Conditions", is this used in the same sense as "God" idea? > > There can be understanding of realities `now', and this is the same > as understanding better about conditions. On the other hand, "God" is > and forever will be an idea only. Why do you assume that when I > appeal to `conditions', that this is only a philosophical idea? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > This is just a manifestation of believing in God unexpressively. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > 11. Knowing moment to moment realties. > > When I talk about knowing moment to moment realities, it is not > saying that each citta is observed or should be. There may not even > be any sati for days. The idea is to understand the citta does arise > and fall the way they do, each being conditioned by object and other > conditions. That it is same here as it is there. Therefore thinking > in terms of better place and time is to be placing oneself to not > have sati at any time at all. Yet the potential is there for > realities to be known at all times. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: It is almost impossible to know 'citta by citta' or 'ciita > after citta' or 'moment to moment' realities. I do not think even > arahats know each and every citta. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > 12. Wherever we are, it is by conditions. > > We may be living in Thailand or Burma, or Iraq or Afghanistan. We may > be married with family responsibilities or we may be single and > without any burden. We may be a prostitute or a teacher. Our > surroundings may consist of people shouting and demanding things from > us or we may be living with a peaceful and understanding person. > > Whatever it is, we are where we are, by force of conditions. At any > given moment, there is no saying that sati of any level can arise, > provided that we have heard and correctly understood the teachings. > > Some may have the luxury to go on a retreat and some may not. Both > however *need* to understand conditioned realities as conditioned > realties whatever those are and wherever. The idea of another time > and place only adds to the confusion, since realties are realities, > whether here or there. And insisting on the value of retreats as > against any other place, does not help. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: :-)). I think you and DSGs hate 'the idea of specific place and > time'. But whatever you are saying The Buddha teachings say 'ara~n~na > gato vaa, rukkhamula gato vaa, su~n~nagaara gato vaa'. The Buddha did > say this. The Buddha never say 'unfruitful speech'. How do you think? > > PS: See Mahaasatipatthaana Sutta. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > 16. Destruction of Sasana. > > Finally, not promoting retreats is no indication of the destruction > of the Sasana. The deterioration of the Sasana is proportional to > Teachings being wrongly understood. If the pariyatti is wrong, then > patipatti is also wrong. As stated above, I think the idea of > meditation/retreat is consequence of wrong view. So in fact the > popularity, within the age group ranging between 7 and 100, for the > idea of retreat and meditation, may be the very sign of the Sasana > becoming other than what it was meant to be. :-) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: No. This is not. Have you asked anyone? Any professor, any > Dhamma-lecturers? > > I think you are destroying. Because you seem to be saying 'people, > you do not go to retreat. The idea of going there is not good.' If > people follow your advice then there will be no one at retreats and > there will be fewer and fewer people following the Path. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > My time for DSG becomes less and less, so I may decide not to > continue with our discussions, hope you don't mind. > --------------------- > Htoo: More than happy, Sukin. My time is substantially reduced as you > can see right now. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > Besides I prefer to read, and I am way behind in my reading, even > after choosing not to read several posts. > > Metta, > > Sukinder > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > > For me, I do > > 1. su > 2. ci > 3. pu > 4. bhaa > 5. vi > 6. li > 7. si > 8. dhaa > > :-)) > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing 51021 From: "Hal" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 4:01am Subject: Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) bardosein Hi Dan, Rob and Howard, "Bhikkhus, 'I am' is an involvement with conceit, 'I am this' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be' is an involvement with conceit, 'I shall not be' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall consist of form' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be percipient' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be nonpercipient' is an involvement with conceit;..... Involvement with conceit is a disease, involvement with conceit is a turmour; involvement with disease is a dart. Therefore, bhikkhus, you should train yourselves thus: 'We will dwell with a mind in which conceit has been struck down.' Thus you should train yourselves." (35. _Salayatanasamyutta_, (SN p.1259) Here's some more of Bhikkhu Bodhi's interesting comments taken from his notes to the above paragraph: "_Managata_. Spk: Conceit itself is an involvement with conceit. In this passage, "I am" is stated by way of the conceit associated with craving; "I am this," by way of view. Although conceit does not arise in immediate conjunction with views (according to the Abhidhamma analysis of mind-moments, they are mutually exclusive), views occur because conceit has not been abandoned. So this is said with reference to views rooted in conceit." (SN 1432) H: Based on BB's athematic/thematic (or if you prefer), an affective/cognitive distinction it should evident that "wrong view" cannot be eradicated through thematic (cognitive) modes of attention (paryatti). "I am is a proliferation; "I am this" is a proliferation," (SN p.1259) and in rapid succession, these distinct citta-kkhanas mutually proliferate each other. As BB says, "views occur because conceit has not been abandoned." Conceit must first be uprooted before wrong view can be eliminated. And this training (bhavana) is to be found in the Satipatthana, beginning with kayanupassana, the training in non-discursive modes of mindful awareness (see also: "...dwell in with a mind devoid of proliferation" (SN p.1259)) Bare attention is directed towards the body beginning with anapanasati and followed by asubha kamatthana. These trainings are aimed at uprooting conceit associated with craving and concomitantly the overcoming of wrong view. At this point in the training, a proclivity towards paryatti at the expense of patipatti will lead to further proliferation of views, not their abandonment. Hal ____________________________________________________ "We had the experience but missed the meaning...." T.S. Eliot --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Hi Hal, > I like your wording on the distinction between 'conceit' and 'wrong > view': affective mode (conceit) vs. cognitive mode (wrong view). The > distinction is also discussed in a colorful exchange between Khemaka > (an anagami) and a group of curious bhikkhus (S. 22:89/iii,130): > > "I do not say 'I am' in regard to material form, feeling, perception, > mental formations, or consciousness, nor do I say that there is an 'I > am' apart from material form, feeling perception, mental formations, > or consciousness. However, a sense that 'I am' is still found in me > in reference to the five clinging aggregates; but I do not > consider 'this I am'.... Even though the ariyan disciple has > abandoned the five lower fetters (making him a non-returner), > nevertheless a residual conceit 'I am', desire 'I am', latent > tendency 'I am' still remains in him in reference to the five > clinging aggregates." > > BB expounds on this sutta in the introduction to his little > booklet "The discourse on the root of existence: The mulapariyaya > sutta and its commentaries" (p. 16), and his interpretation is > similar to yours (but your "affective/cognitive" is easier on the > ears than his "athematic/thematic"): > > "The idea 'I am' is a spontaneous, athematic notion born from the > basic unawareness of the egoless nature of phenomena. It becomes > manifest in consciousness in dual form -- as a conceit or wrong > estimation of oneself in relation to actuality and as a desire > directed towards the perpetuation of one's being. Both these forms > are in essence prereflective...The view of the self, on the other > hand, is a thematic consideration bound up with reflectivity as an > inherent part of its structure. Even when held dogmatically or > accepted in faith without examination, it involves at least a modicum > of deliberation precipitating a doctrinal stance as its articulated > product. ...[With the learner], so long as a trace of ignorance > remains unabolished in the deeper strata of his mental continuum, an > attenuated sense of egohood lingers over is experience in the form of > a subtle craving and conceit." > > > Dan > > > Rob M, > > > > Thanks so much for your comments. If I'm following your reasoning > > here, I think this is what I was partially trying to suggest as > well. > > The characteristic mark of conceit (as I understand it) is > affective, > > being that sort of swelling/deflating feeling that we all know > well. > > So I take the CMA to mean that there is an affective state of "I > am," > > concomitant with bodily awareness that is not dependent on the "I > am" > > that arises from the discursive nature of cognitive processes. In > > other words, we have an affective mode of "I am" (conceit) and a > > cognitive mode of "I am" (wrong view). > > > > Hal > > ____________________________________________________ > > "We had the experience but missed the meaning...." T.S. Eliot 51022 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 5:11am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. buddhatrue Hi Robert K, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear James and See Boon, > What do you make of this passage I quoted to James earlier in this > thread? > 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." > robert What about it? Metta, James 51023 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) upasaka_howard Hi, Hal - In a message dated 10/4/05 7:05:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, halwilson@... writes: > Here's some more of Bhikkhu Bodhi's interesting comments taken from > his notes to the above paragraph: > > "_Managata_. Spk: Conceit itself is an involvement with conceit. In > this passage, "I am" is stated by way of the conceit associated with > craving; "I am this," by way of view. Although conceit does not > arise in immediate conjunction with views (according to the > Abhidhamma analysis of mind-moments, they are mutually exclusive), > views occur because conceit has not been abandoned. So this is said > with reference to views rooted in conceit." (SN 1432) ---------------------------------------------- Howard: The sentence "views occur because conceit has not been abandoned" is a misleadingmulation, I believe. Conceit is one of the requisite conditions for atta-view. Thus, *if* conceit had been abandoned, there could not be ditthi. Ditthi remains a possibility so long as conceit holds. This does *not* mean, as I understand it, that when self-view is gone, so must conceit be gone. Self-view, like all conditioned dhammas, has multiple requisite conditions, the absence of any of which disables self-view. ----------------------------------------------- > > H: Based on BB's athematic/thematic (or if you prefer), an > affective/cognitive distinction it should evident that "wrong view" > cannot be eradicated through thematic (cognitive) modes of attention > (paryatti). > > "I am is a proliferation; "I am this" is a proliferation," (SN > p.1259) and in rapid succession, these distinct citta-kkhanas > mutually proliferate each other. As BB says, "views occur because > conceit has not been abandoned." ----------------------------------------------- Howard: If there were no conceit, there could be no self-view. That is true. It is not so, however, that if there *is* conceit, there must be self-view. The stream entrant has eradicated self-view, but not yet conceit. BB's statement seems misleading, as it suggests that conceit is the sole condition for views. ------------------------------------------------ > Conceit must first be uprooted > before wrong view can be eliminated. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: If I'm not mistaken, atta-view is uprooted at stream-entry, but conceit not until arahanthood. So wrong view is eliminated first it seems, not conceit. Conceit is *one* requisite condition for self-view, but it is not a sufficient one. Self-view is eliminated at stream entry. ========================== 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) 51024 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 6:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nama and rupa distinguishable. jonoabb Hi Hal Welcome from me, and thanks for coming in on this thread. As you may have noticed from a recent post, Sarah and I are away from Hong Kong at the moment, so I hope you don't mind if I keep my reply comments brief. Hal wrote: >Hi Johnathon (and Howard), > >I did appreciate reading this thread. However, I'm new to this study >group and have so much to learn here. I've only just begun making my >way through Nina's very helpful introductory book that I recently got >in the mail. Please excuse my questions if they are misguided. > No at all. Your questions are very perceptive. >J: "The main 'baddie' is wrong view (rather than ignorance), because >it results in wrong practice, and wrong practice takes one further and >further away from the goal." > > >H: Stated this way, it would seem that "right view" is a necessary >preconditon for undertaking any type of practise whatsoever. How >could one ever begin? > Right view (the mental factor of panna, wisdom) can arise if the conditions for its arising have been developed. Of course, it cannot arise at the same moment at wrong view, but as each are momentarily occurring mental factors there is no reason why they cannot arise at different times in the same individual. The conditions for the arising of right view include hearing the true dhamma and reflecting on what has been heard. >I also don't understand how you can >seperate "ignorance" from "right view" or give priority to one over >the other? Besides, isn't the latter a consequent of the former? > Ignorance (avijja, moha) and wrong view (miccha-ditthi) are terms used to describe 2 different kinds of mental factors. Briefly, ignorance 'does not know' the object, while wrong view perceives it wrongly. The consciousness with wrong view is rooted in lobha (attachment). Yes, all akusala is ultimately rooted in ignorance, but nevertheless there are different kinds of akusala, and each is to be know and seen for what it is. There was no intention to give priority to one over the other, but rather to reflect the fact that wrong view is to be eradicated first (at sotapatti-magga), whereas ignorance is not finally eradicated until arahantship. > The >Satipatthana method as outlined and estolled by the Buddha, followed >as prescribed, in the very *embodied* process of the undertaking, >allows for the establishment of conditions whereby (as you said >earlier in the same thread), panna will arise, > "...naturally on occasion and not by dint of > directed effort on our part leads only to better and better > understanding, not to misapprehension of any kind" > >Aren't your remarks about right view quoted above, also prescriptive >in the same way that you consider Howard's remarks "health warnings"? > My remarks were not meant to be prescriptive in any sense. I was simply trying to highlight the danger (and likely prevalence) of wrong view. Many dhamma followers have the idea that because they have embraced the teachings and fully accept the teaching on no-self, etc, they have no wrong view. Wrong view is by its nature likely to be taken for right view. I hope these answers aren't too brief. Looking forward to your further comments. Jon (Bangkok) 51025 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 6:21am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 289 Conceit -maana (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;-) ========================================== [Ch17- Conceit(maana)contd] All those who are not arahats, even the ariyans who have not attained arahatship, have to develop satipaììhåna until all akusala dhammas have been eradicated. This reminds us to be aware of what appears now, even if it is conceit. The akusala dhammas which arise can remind us of the need to continue to be mindful even though we do not see much progress. We should be grateful to the Buddha who taught us all dhammas. If he had not taught about conceit we would not have known that there are many opportunities for its arising. It is beneficial to come to realize one’s akusala dhammas. ***** [Conceit(maana)to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 51026 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 2:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] Absolute Peace ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Dear friend Howard upasaka@... who wisely asked: >What, as you understand it, is the difference, then, between bodhi and nibbana? Bodhi = Final momentary act or process of Awakening... Nibbana = The State of having been Awakened... Regarding Nibbana being 'conditioned' by the awakening process or the path! Actually it is no really so. Though fuel conditions the burning fire, it cannot be stated that an Absence! of fuel 'conditions' the absence of fire (quenching)! insofar as a 'condition' is defined as a positive Presence! of some factor... Even so when reaching complete absence of greed, hate & confusion, this absence itself!, is the unconditioned state of Nibbana... & not the cause of it! IMHO (currently...) "Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbana-elements. What are the two? The Nibbana-element with residue left & the Nibbana-element with no remains left. "What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahat, one whose mental fermentations is eliminated, who have fulfilled the Noble life, who has done all what was to be done, who has laid down the burden, attained the goal, who has destroyed the bondages of being, who is completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense abilities remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable, and feels both pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, aversion, and confusion in him, that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left. "Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue remaining? Here a bhikkhu is an arahat, one whose mental fermentations is eliminated, who have fulfilled the Noble life, who has done all what was to be done, who has laid down the burden, attained the goal, who has destroyed the bondages of being, who is completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will grow cool right there & cease. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left. "These, bhikkhus, are the two Dimensions of Nibbana." These two Nibbana-elements were thus made known by the Seeing One, confident & detached: The first is the element with substrates of being remaining, realized here and now, but with re-becoming destroyed. The other, having no residue left for the future, is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease. Having understood this unconstructed state, released in mind, with the cord to becoming eliminated, They attain to the sublime essence of all states. Delighting in the ceasing & calming of craving, those steady ones have left all being & becoming.' Source; Thus Was it Said: Itivuttaka II.17; Iti 38 Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <....> 51027 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 3:30am Subject: Nibbida = Disgust or ? ... bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend cosmique wrote: >Can there be any alternative translations of this word “nibbida”? 'Dispassion' is often seen used, yet IMHO a too weak designation. : - ] 51028 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:03am Subject: What is Mara - the Evil One - ... ??? bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What is Mara, Transient, Painful, No-Self & a State of Ceasing ? At Savatthi. While seated, the Venerable Radha asked the Blessed One: Venerable Sir, one says: Mara, Mara!! What, Venerable Sir, is Evil Mara? Radha, form, feeling, perception, mental construction, and consciousness is Mara, is a state of Mara, is impermanent, is of an impermanent nature, is suffering, is of a painful nature, is no-self, is of an impersonal nature, is in a state of destruction, is in a state of vanishing, is a fluctuating state, is always in a state of momentary ceasing... Radha, you should therefore leave behind desire, should leave behind lust, you should leave behind all desire and lust for whatever is a state of Mara, for whatever is impermanent, for whatever is only impermanent appearance, for whatever is suffering, for whatever is of a painful nature, for whatever is no-self, for whatever is of a selfless nature, for whatever is a state of destruction, for whatever is a state of vanishing, for whatever is in a state of arising, for whatever that is a state of cessation... And what, Radha, is a state of cessation? Form is a state of cessation. Feeling, Perception, Mental Constructions, and this Consciousness is also a state of continuous ceasing... Understanding this, Radha, the well instructed Noble Disciple experiences disgust towards form, disgust towards feeling, disgust towards perception, disgust towards mental construction, & disgust towards consciousness itself! Experiencing disgust, he becomes disillusioned! Through disillusion his mind is released. When it is released, one instantly knows: This mind is liberated, and one understands: Extinguished is birth, this Noble Life is all completed, done is what should be done, there is no state of being beyond this... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya 23:24-34 III 199 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 !!! <....> 51029 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 8:09am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. nidive Hi RobertK, > What do you make of this passage I quoted to James earlier in this > thread? > 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." I presume the Buddha spoke to you before and forsaw your destiny? If that's the case, then I must say: Congratulations! Seriously, I think you are deluded. Regards, Swee Boon 51030 From: "Hal" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 7:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) bardosein Hi Howard, Great comments. Thanks. Yes you might be right; it might be interesting to as BB about this. However: 1.) The elimination of views (ditthi) at the level of stream entry is not an all or nothing affair (i.e samma dhitti); rather, it is a matter of degree, but sufficient to the extent that neither doubt in the triple gem nor personality belief (sakya-dhitti) nor attachments to rituals will occur. 2.) It would be interesting to know if BB's statement is intentional. If he is saying: if conceit then views; it follows that if no views then no conceit. And if he meant this, then views cannot be completely eliminated at stream entry, because there surely is conceit. So from this standpoint, dhitti must remain in some way commensurate with the level of conceit. This view seems consistent with what is being suggested by this sutta; namely that views are rooted in conceit,"I am this" and "I am" are related although they're mutually exclusive citta-kkhanas. Consider that peculiarly worded statement of BB's: "Conceit itself is an involvement with conceit." That is to say, dhitti arise because conceit is, no? 3.)At stream entry, delusion (moha) has not been uprooted. Doesn't it also condition conceit and dhitti? 4)Sakkaya-ditthi is entirely abandoned at stream entry. But this refers to the 20 or so forms of personality beliefs (4 types of belief with 5 types of existence). This doesn't mean that the Sotappana has reached a stable condition of samma-ditti? Ditti still remains and so does conceit. They arise and fall. Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Hal - > > In a message dated 10/4/05 7:05:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > halwilson@g... writes: > > > Here's some more of Bhikkhu Bodhi's interesting comments taken from > > his notes to the above paragraph: > > > > "_Managata_. Spk: Conceit itself is an involvement with conceit. In > > this passage, "I am" is stated by way of the conceit associated with > > craving; "I am this," by way of view. Although conceit does not > > arise in immediate conjunction with views (according to the > > Abhidhamma analysis of mind-moments, they are mutually exclusive), > > views occur because conceit has not been abandoned. So this is said > > with reference to views rooted in conceit." (SN 1432) > > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > The sentence "views occur because conceit has not been abandoned" is a > misleadingmulation, I believe. Conceit is one of the requisite conditions for > atta-view. Thus, *if* conceit had been abandoned, there could not be ditthi. > Ditthi remains a possibility so long as conceit holds. This does *not* mean, > as I understand it, that when self-view is gone, so must conceit be gone. > Self-view, like all conditioned dhammas, has multiple requisite conditions, the > absence of any of which disables self-view. > ----------------------------------------------- > > > > > H: Based on BB's athematic/thematic (or if you prefer), an > > affective/cognitive distinction it should evident that "wrong view" > > cannot be eradicated through thematic (cognitive) modes of attention > > (paryatti). > > > > "I am is a proliferation; "I am this" is a proliferation," (SN > > p.1259) and in rapid succession, these distinct citta-kkhanas > > mutually proliferate each other. As BB says, "views occur because > > conceit has not been abandoned." > > ----------------------------------------------- > Howard: > If there were no conceit, there could be no self-view. That is true. > It is not so, however, that if there *is* conceit, there must be self-view. The > stream entrant has eradicated self-view, but not yet conceit. BB's statement > seems misleading, as it suggests that conceit is the sole condition for views. > ------------------------------------------------ > > > Conceit must first be uprooted > > before wrong view can be eliminated. > ------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > If I'm not mistaken, atta-view is uprooted at stream-entry, but > conceit not until arahanthood. So wrong view is eliminated first it seems, not > conceit. Conceit is *one* requisite condition for self-view, but it is not a > sufficient one. Self-view is eliminated at stream entry. > ========================== > With metta > Howard 51031 From: "nidive" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 9:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Absolute Peace ... !!! nidive Hi Bhikkhu Samahita, > Regarding Nibbana being 'conditioned' by the awakening process or > the path! > Actually it is not really so. Though fuel conditions the burning > fire, it cannot be stated that an Absence! of fuel 'conditions' > the absence of fire (quenching)! > insofar as a 'condition' is defined as a positive Presence! of some > factor... > Even so when reaching complete absence of greed, hate & confusion, > this absence itself!, is the unconditioned state of Nibbana... > & not the cause of it! Your phrase "insofar as a 'condition' is defined as a positive Presence! of some factor" is noteworthy. -------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn-12-002-tb0.html "And what is dependent co-arising? From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness. From consciousness as a requisite condition comes name-&-form. From name-&-form as a requisite condition come the six sense media. From the six sense media as a requisite condition comes contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering. ... "Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. From the cessation of fabrications comes the cessation of consciousness. From the cessation of consciousness comes the cessation of name-&-form. From the cessation of name-&-form comes the cessation of the six sense media. From the cessation of the six sense media comes the cessation of contact. From the cessation of contact comes the cessation of feeling. From the cessation of feeling comes the cessation of craving. From the cessation of craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering." -------------------------------------------------------------------- The phrase "requisite condition" appears repeatedly in the forward order of dependent co-arising, but disappears entirely in the reverse order. Regards, Swee Boon 51032 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 6:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) upasaka_howard Hi again, Hall & all - In a message dated 10/4/05 9:01:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: > The sentence "views occur because conceit has not been abandoned" is a > misleadingmulation, I believe. ====================== The gibberish "misleadingmulation" was intended to be "misleading formulation". Sorry! ;-) 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) 51033 From: "Dan D." Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 10:37am Subject: Re: Satori? onco111 Howdy, James (and Howard), It's great to see you on board this thread James. I appreciate your input. I really don't like to talk about meditation experiences because that topic is particularly well-suited to proliferation of views, so I'll try to keep my comments brief. I'm going to respond to your comments in a different order than you made them and snip some other parts. If you want me to respond specifically to other parts as well, let me know. > Anyway, the experience of losing yourself is not pleasant or easy- > it is terrifying. You experienced that but said that you pushed > through it. Excuse me for saying so, but you are most definitely > mistaken. You didn't push through your fear- you just covered it > up. You are correct that I just covered it up. What I said was that I was able to go through the whirlwind by calming (or covering up, suppressing) the fear by dint of great effort and concentration. Nominally, I was practicing 'vipassana', i.e. following Mahasi-style instructions for 16 hours a day, but "dealing with" a whirlwind, if done with kusala, is samatha. And, if done "correctly", jhana can be attained. Although it is very tempting to speculate that a base of jhana would enable insighting of the characteristics by "holding on just a little longer to see what is really going on, to get through the slipping away of the world and the fear it induces", but overcoming turmoil to see calm and peace *is* jhana if all goes as planned. Vipassana is different. It is not at all seeing a destination and fixing the mind on it, but, rather, a seeing very clearly the moment as it is. There is no struggling to deal with fear, no trying to hold on through the whirlwind to see what's on the other side. With jhana, there is a sense of "losing yourself" as the focus shifts entirely to the object of samadhi. Attaining jhana requires a moment called "change-of-lineage" (gotrabhuu), as at that moment "overcomes the sense-sphere lineage and evolves the lineage of sublime consciousness." [CMA IV, 14]. That involves turbulence, except in the case where the faculties are keen and in the case where it isn't really occuring. It is quite interesting that gotrabhuu also occurs at the inception of supramundane path consciousness for the budding sotapanna (CMA IX, 34). However, the turbulence is resolved not by overcoming or overpowering it, but by insighting it. When discussing these things and thinking about them, there is tremendous need for caution. There are a lot of things that *seem* like jhana or path consciousness that really aren't. When in doubt, it wasn't jhana, it wasn't path consciousness. When you are pretty confident about it, it wasn't jhana, it wasn't path consciousness. When one thinks, "I was close to jhana (or path consciousness)", the proper conclusion is usually that jhana (or path) was far away. > So, how do you become ready to face the fear of losing one's self? > As Howard suggests, Jhana is the key. Jhana involves suppressing fear, not eradicating it. The real key is in understanding that there is no "self" to lose in the first place. When the whirlwind is insighted, fear has no opportunity to arise at all. However, the dhammas themselves are recognized as intrinsically terrifying (CMA IX, 33), but there is no being fooled by that, and fear itself does not arise. Recognizing the dhammas as terrifying but not having fear arise is much, much different from the jhana- inclined "going through" fear, or "overcoming fear" or "suppressing fear" or "covering up" fear. But, again, fear can be suppressed, covered up, overcome, gone through with sharp, strong, clear, one-pointed concentration that is not jhana. Metta, Dan 51034 From: "Dan D." Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 10:37am Subject: Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) onco111 Hi Hal, Interesting comments... > H: Based on BB's athematic/thematic (or if you prefer), an > affective/cognitive distinction it should evident that "wrong view" > cannot be eradicated through thematic (cognitive) modes of attention > (paryatti). I think you are right that 'wrong view' cannot be eradicted by thematic modes of attention, but how does this follow from BB's comments? What's wrong with saying, "Wrong view is eliminated by building up a strong conceptual and theoretical Right View. When the bulwark of conceptual right view is strong enough, there is no longer room for wrong view." > "I am is a proliferation; "I am this" is a proliferation," (SN > p.1259) and in rapid succession, these distinct citta-kkhanas > mutually proliferate each other. As BB says, "views occur because > conceit has not been abandoned." Conceit must first be uprooted > before wrong view can be eliminated. I think you are misreading BB. Conceit is only uprooted in the arahant, but ditthi is uprooted by the first path. His sentence is ambiguous, but he must mean that non-eradication of conceit is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for views to proliferate, i.e. if conceit has been eradicated, then there is no ditthi; therefore, views occur only because conceit has not been abandoned. > Bare attention is directed towards the body beginning with > anapanasati and followed by asubha kamatthana. These trainings are > aimed at uprooting conceit associated with craving and concomitantly > the overcoming of wrong view. How does an instruction to direct the mind toward a particular object differ from a ritual? And doesn't the path explicitly reject ritual as a vehicle for insight? > At this point in the training, a > proclivity towards paryatti at the expense of patipatti will lead to > further proliferation of views, not their abandonment. I fully agree that over-indulgence in theorizing and reading leads to proliferation of views. And that that proliferation may even be justified and strongly defended as developing a bulwark of conceptual right view as an antidote to wrong view. There's another layer, though, that we haven't touched on yet. The thematic mode (ditthi) may well occur even when the proper words are mouthed. "I am fully convinced in the non-reality of the self," could very well be ditthi if there is no real understanding of the distinction between concept and reality, if the "fully convinced" is a blind attachment to a dogma, or if there is the idea that "I" have this belief. Oh dear! I have burned more time on dsg that I can rightly afford today. Metta, Dan 51035 From: "Dan D." Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) onco111 Hi Hal (and Howard), Comments interspersed... > 1.) The elimination of views (ditthi) at the level of stream entry is > not an all or nothing affair (i.e samma dhitti); rather, it is a > matter of degree, but sufficient to the extent that neither doubt in > the triple gem nor personality belief (sakya-dhitti) nor attachments > to rituals will occur. 1. Is it ditthi that is eradicated or just sakayaditthi? 2. There is plenty of opportunity for cittas dissociated from both ditthi and sammaditthi. 3. The three fetters are extremely closely related -- even the degree of being different aspects of the same fetter (ditthi)? > 3.)At stream entry, delusion (moha) has not been uprooted. Doesn't it > also condition conceit and dhitti? Moha conditions conceit and ditthi, but it is only a necessary condition for ditthi. The final five fetters are extremely closely related, and my working hypothesis is moha is necessary for conceit and in some sense sufficient (but Abhidhamma texts tell me conceit and ditthi do not arise at the same time). > 4)Sakkaya-ditthi is entirely abandoned at stream entry. But this > refers to the 20 or so forms of personality beliefs (4 types of > belief with 5 types of existence). This doesn't mean that the > Sotappana has reached a stable condition of samma-ditti? No. Ditthi and sammaditthi are a false dichotomy, i.e., absense of sammaditthi does not imply ditthi, and absense of ditthi does not imply sammaditthi. > Ditti still remains and so does conceit. They arise and fall. Conceit remains. Ditthi does not (CMA, IX, 38). Metta, Dan 51036 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:34am Subject: Re: Guarding the Sense Doors ? Is Kundaliya Sutta Misleading? htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > Hi, Friend Htoo - > > Thank you for writing to me , but not for reversing your belief. > > > Dear Tep, > > > > I think Sarah is right. We have to see other suttas as well. Suttas > > are interconnected. > > > > With respect, > > > > Htoo Naing > > > Tep: It is a cliche' that "suttas are interconnected". Do you have to > read all the 10,000+ suttas befor you can get the right view of the > Buddha's Teachings? > > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > > ======== ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Tep, If you need you will have to read any specific sutta. For me abhidhamatthasangaha is just enough. Whether one need to read all suttas will depend on their perfection and accumulations. If they are blunt reading more than 20,000 suttas will not help them. If perfected, even a single word may suffice. With Metta, Htoo Naing 51037 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 7:42am Subject: Question on Interpreting a Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, all - The following sutta, copied from ATI, is translated and commented on by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. In it, 'a~n~nato' is translated as "something separate". This makes no sense to me, whereas the commentarial meaning of "in another way" or "differently," which is not to the liking of the venerable, makes perfectly good sense to me. To see things with the eye of wisdom is indeed to see them differently, going against the stream. On the other hand, another plausible meaning for 'a~n~nato' that occurs to me might be "other than I," i.e., "not self". I would be interested in hearing the comments of others on this. With metta, Howard ________________________ Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.80 Avijja Sutta Ignorance Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, is there any one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?" "Yes monk, there is one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." "What is that one thing?" "Ignorance, monk, is the one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." [1] "But how does a monk know, how does a monk see, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?" "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes (all objects) as something separate. [2] "He sees the eye as something separate. He sees forms as something separate. He sees eye-consciousness as something separate. He sees eye-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact -- experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too he sees as something separate. "He sees the ear as something separate... "He sees the nose as something separate... "He sees the tongue as something separate... "He sees the body as something separate... "He sees the intellect as something separate. He sees ideas as something separate. He sees intellect-consciousness as something separate. He sees intellect-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on intellect-contact -- experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too he sees as something separate. "This is how a monk knows, this is how a monk sees, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." Notes 1. In other words, ignorance is so fundamental that it has to be attacked directly. [Go back] 2. Aññato: literally, "as other." The Commentary explains this as "in another way" or "differently" from the way ordinary beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor does it really answer the monk's question. [Go back] Revised: Friday 2005-09-30 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-080.html ______________________________ /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) 51038 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:52am Subject: Re: (Sukinder & Htoo)Long Discussion 3 (2nd session) 3 htootintnaing Dear Sukin, I will. With Metta, Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: Dear Htoo (and James), This is just to inform you that I try to find the time to answer your mail, but I don't think there will be any till after the India trip. --------------- Htoo: It is OK. -------------------------- Sukin: Also Htoo, I think you assume that I am Pali literate, no I am not. I am not particularly interested in learning it, as I am generally weak in learning and using languages. So if you can, please translate into English any of the Pali you have written in this and the other posts in this thread. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Why I am in groups is to see 'English usage of Dhamma-related word'. I did not know 1. fetter 2. defilement 3. wholesome 4. profitable 5. woeful 6. realm 7. serene 8. stream-entering 9. path 10.fruit 11.absorption 12.mental factor 13.sphere 14.fine material and many other words (more than 150 words). I am also not a Paali expert. Just a partial user. I just know about 100 of basic Paali words. That is all. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sukin: Thanks in advance. Metta, Sukinder -------------------- Htoo: See below for English. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > Continue: > Sukin: > > 6. Not having eradicated self-view, is no excuse to "do" anything > > with `self'. > > > > You should not underestimate the importance of pariyatti. If on the > > pariyatti level, it says that there is no self, then one is simply > > following a *wrong theory* when one states to the effect that, "since > > we are not sotapannas, we must still practice with self". ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I do not mean that. But self-view is only eradicated at sotapatti magga kaala. I did not mean to practise with self. sotapatti magga kaala = the time when stream-entering path- consciousness arises ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin continued: > The underlying annusaya may still be there, but it does not manifest > most of the time. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > Anusaya is not our business. It is the business of respective magga > naana. Anusaya = latent tendency; magga naana = path-knowledge ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin continued: > > In fact when pariyatti level of understanding is conditioned to > > arise, at that ..snip..weak level. > > > > So ask yourself, if the idea that one should sit down to mediate > > and/or go on a retreat is in line with correct pariyatti. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I have asked myself many times. The answer that arise in my > mind is the same. One should diligently follow the Path. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > 7. Too much stress on Panna. > > > > Can there ever be too much stress on panna? Bhavana is necessarily > > with panna isn't it? And isn't the whole idea of studying the > > teachings is to grow in understanding? And what is satipatthana if > > not the development of "panna"? Sati has the same paramattha > dhamma > > as object; the difference is in the panna which understands better > > and better the different characteristics and conditions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: I know. But panna does not arise all the time when the Path is being followed. Panna = wisdom ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > 8. Fear of Self. > > > > Is identifying `self' and subsequently not encouraging it rooted in > > fear? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: But it sounds like fear of self not to do satipatthaana at retreats. satipatthaana = 'vipassanaa' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > Not wishing to meditate is not from fear that `self' will arise when > > one does so, but rather the perception that the very idea of > > meditating is conditioned by self-view. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > That is exactly 'fear of self-view'. Self-view is only eradicated by > sotapatti magga naana. It is the business of sotapatti magga naana. sotapatti magga naana = stream-entering path-knowledge ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > 9. No Self who keeps precepts. > > > > Keeping precept is ultimately the function of paramattha dhammas. If > > one thinks that this is due to a decision made and followed upon by > > one, then this is believing in the illusion of self and control. And > > when one comes from this position, then it is understandable that > > others who speak strongly against the idea of self and control, will > > be perceived as being `careless'. But paramattha dhammas roll on, > > while one is concerned about making a choice to keep precepts, > > satipatthana may not be one of those dhammas. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: :-)) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > 10. "Conditions", is this used in the same sense as "God" idea? > > > > There can be understanding of realities `now', and this is the same > > as understanding better about conditions. On the other hand, "God" is > > and forever will be an idea only. Why do you assume that when I > > appeal to `conditions', that this is only a philosophical idea? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > This is just a manifestation of believing in God unexpressively. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > 11. Knowing moment to moment realties. > > > > When I talk about knowing moment to moment realities, it is not > > saying that each citta is observed or should be. There may not even > > be any sati for days. The idea is to understand the citta does arise > > and fall the way they do, each being conditioned by object and other > > conditions. That it is same here as it is there. Therefore thinking > > in terms of better place and time is to be placing oneself to not > > have sati at any time at all. Yet the potential is there for > > realities to be known at all times. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: It is almost impossible to know 'citta by citta' or 'ciita > after citta' or 'moment to moment' realities. I do not think even > arahats know each and every citta. citta = consciousness ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > 12. Wherever we are, it is by conditions. > > > > We may be living in Thailand or Burma, or Iraq or Afghanistan. We > may > > be married with family responsibilities or we may be single and > > without any burden. We may be a prostitute or a teacher. Our > > surroundings may consist of people shouting and demanding things > from > > us or we may be living with a peaceful and understanding person. > > > > Whatever it is, we are where we are, by force of conditions. At any > > given moment, there is no saying that sati of any level can arise, > > provided that we have heard and correctly understood the teachings. > > > > Some may have the luxury to go on a retreat and some may not. Both > > however *need* to understand conditioned realities as conditioned > > realties whatever those are and wherever. The idea of another time > > and place only adds to the confusion, since realties are realities, > > whether here or there. And insisting on the value of retreats as > > against any other place, does not help. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: :-)). I think you and DSGs hate 'the idea of specific place and time'. But whatever you are saying The Buddha teachings say 'ara~n~na gato vaa, rukkhamula gato vaa, su~n~nagaara gato vaa'. The Buddha did say this. The Buddha never say 'unfruitful speech'. How do you think? PS: See Mahaasatipatthaana Sutta. There is no reason not to know this 'mahaasatipatthaana sutta'. ''aranna gato vaa, rukkhamuula gato vaa, sunnagara gato vaa'' = having gone to forest, having gone to foot of tree, having gone to unoccupied building/place. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Sukin: > > > > 16. Destruction of Sasana. > > > > Finally, not promoting retreats is no indication of the destruction > > of the Sasana. The deterioration of the Sasana is proportional to > > Teachings being wrongly understood. If the pariyatti is wrong, then > > patipatti is also wrong. As stated above, I think the idea of > > meditation/retreat is consequence of wrong view. So in fact the > > popularity, within the age group ranging between 7 and 100, for the > > idea of retreat and meditation, may be the very sign of the Sasana > > becoming other than what it was meant to be. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: No. This is not. Have you asked anyone? Any professor, any > Dhamma-lecturers? > I think you are destroying. Because you seem to be saying 'people, > you do not go to retreat. The idea of going there is not good.' If > people follow your advice then there will be no one at retreats and > there will be fewer and fewer people following the Path. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > My time for DSG becomes less and less, so I may decide not to > > continue with our discussions, hope you don't mind. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: More than happy, Sukin. My time is substantially reduced as you > > can see right now. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: > > > > Besides I prefer to read, and I am way behind in my reading, even > > after choosing not to read several posts. > > > > Metta, > > > > Sukinder ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: > For me, I do > 1. su > 2. ci > 3. pu > 4. bhaa > 5. vi > 6. li > 7. si > 8. dhaa > :-)) > With Metta, > Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This is higher. If you want to know you can search yourself. With Metta, Htoo Naing 51039 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:56am Subject: Re: Guarding the Sense Doors ? Is Kundaliya Sutta Misleading? buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo - Your coded message has "done me in". :-<] > Htoo: > If you need you will have to read any specific sutta. For me > abhidhamatthasangaha is just enough. Whether one need to read all > suttas will depend on their perfection and accumulations. If they are > blunt reading more than 20,000 suttas will not help them. If > perfected, even a single word may suffice. > Tep : What do you mean by "If perfected, even a single word may suffice." ?? With unlimited confusion, Tep ====== 51040 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 0:07pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 565 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, There are dhamma that are saccaa or truths. They are 1. the truth of suffering (dukkha saccaa) 2. the truth of cause of suffering (samudaya saccaa) 3. the truth of cessation of suffering (nirodha saccaa) 4. the truth of the path leading to cessation of suffering(magga saccaa) 1. the truth of suffering (dukkha saccaa) There are 11 groups of dhamma and they all are dukkha saccaa or the truth of suffering. In summary that truth is '5 clinging aggregates'. Along with this summary there are 12 groups of dhamma that are suffering or dukkha saccaa. 1. jaati (birth/rebirth) 2. jaraa (ageing) 3. marana (death) 4. soka (sorrow) 5. parideva (lamentation) 6. dukkha (pain or physical suffering) 7. domanassa ( mental pain or all mental suffering) 8. upayaasaa (despair) 9. appi ye hi sampayogo (association with unwanted things) 10.pi ye hi vippayogo (dissociation with loved one or wanted things) 11.tam pi iccham na labhati (not gaining of what is wanted) 12.pancupadaana-kkhandhaa (5 clinging aggregates) They are all in 3 rounds namely kilesa vatta, kamma vatta, and vipaaka vatta. Or the round of defilements, the round of kamma, and the round of vipaaka. May you 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. 51041 From: Frank Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 0:47pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Question on Interpreting a Sutta dhamma_service Hi Howard, My guess is Than.B. finds "differently than a worlding sees" not incorrect but not specific enough in targeting the questioning monk's original question of how one directly sees ignorance and its removal. For example, I see the world different than the vast majority of wordlings, but by no means am I an arahant who sees the abandoning of ignorance. Thus, my seeing "differently than a worldling" is nothing to write home about and certainly does not indicate how much underlying defilments have been eradicated. "As separate" maybe conveys a better sense of seeing the 5 aggregates as merely aggregates, without any sense of identiy, possessiveness, drama or fantasy imbued in any combination of 6 sense media and 5 aggregates. Being able to truly see 5 aggregates as truly "separate" and not mine, not my self, not I would indicate seeing [lack of] ignorance and the true abandoning of ignorance. -fk -----Original Message----- From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of upasaka@... Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 8:43 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Question on Interpreting a Sutta Hi, all - The following sutta, copied from ATI, is translated and commented on by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. In it, 'a~n~nato' is translated as "something separate". This makes no sense to me, whereas the commentarial meaning of "in another way" or "differently," which is not to the liking of the venerable, makes perfectly good sense to me. To see things with the eye of wisdom is indeed to see them differently, going against the stream. On the other hand, another plausible meaning for 'a~n~nato' that occurs to me might be "other than I," i.e., "not self". I would be interested in hearing the comments of others on this. With metta, Howard ________________________ Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.80 Avijja Sutta Ignorance Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. Then a certain monk went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, is there any one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?" "Yes monk, there is one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." "What is that one thing?" "Ignorance, monk, is the one thing with whose abandoning in a monk ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." [1] "But how does a monk know, how does a monk see, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?" "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes (all objects) as something separate. [2] "He sees the eye as something separate. He sees forms as something separate. He sees eye-consciousness as something separate. He sees eye-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on eye-contact -- experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too he sees as something separate. "He sees the ear as something separate... "He sees the nose as something separate... "He sees the tongue as something separate... "He sees the body as something separate... "He sees the intellect as something separate. He sees ideas as something separate. He sees intellect-consciousness as something separate. He sees intellect-contact as something separate. And whatever arises in dependence on intellect-contact -- experienced either as pleasure, as pain, or as neither-pleasure-nor-pain -- that too he sees as something separate. "This is how a monk knows, this is how a monk sees, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises." Notes 1. In other words, ignorance is so fundamental that it has to be attacked directly. [Go back] 2. Aññato: literally, "as other." The Commentary explains this as "in another way" or "differently" from the way ordinary beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor does it really answer the monk's question. [Go back] Revised: Friday 2005-09-30 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn35-080.html ______________________________ 51042 From: "Hal" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 0:57pm Subject: Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) bardosein Thanks again Dan, A couple of remarks below. I'm trying to argue this point from what might well be a missrepresentation of BB's reading (my apologies to the author), but I was interested in seeing how far I could maintain this line of reasoning, because of a hunch I have about the nature of conceit (most likely dhitti/conceit/delusion) that their are some more subtle forms of dhitti that are quite inarticulate, sublte forms that are infact more pernicious and dangerous than the gross forms we can easily state with our mouths or think in our minds or clearly misapprehend from our experiences. ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > Hi Hal (and Howard), > Comments interspersed... > > 1.) The elimination of views (ditthi) at the level of stream entry > is > > not an all or nothing affair (i.e samma dhitti); rather, it is a > > matter of degree, but sufficient to the extent that neither doubt > in > > the triple gem nor personality belief (sakya-dhitti) nor > attachments > > to rituals will occur. > > 1. Is it ditthi that is eradicated or just sakayaditthi? -------------------------------------------------------------- H: This is what I'm asking basically? Does eliminating sakayaditthi, necessary mean the elimination of all dhitti? I was supposing that their are forms of ditthi like "I am this..." that don't lead one to the lower worlds but still prevail at the lower levels of sanctity. Are you saying that "I am this...", however momentary, never arises in a Sotapanna? In an arahant yes, of course. -------------------------------------------------------------- > > 2. There is plenty of opportunity for cittas dissociated from both > ditthi and sammaditthi. > > 3. The three fetters are extremely closely related -- even the degree > of being different aspects of the same fetter (ditthi)? > > > 3.)At stream entry, delusion (moha) has not been uprooted. Doesn't > it > > also condition conceit and dhitti? > > Moha conditions conceit and ditthi, but it is only a necessary > condition for ditthi. The final five fetters are extremely closely > related, and my working hypothesis is moha is necessary for conceit > and in some sense sufficient (but Abhidhamma texts tell me conceit > and ditthi do not arise at the same time). >-------------------------------------------------------------------- H: Yes. Your last point about Abhidhamma view is supported in the note by BB and in previous threads? ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 4)Sakkaya-ditthi is entirely abandoned at stream entry. But this > > refers to the 20 or so forms of personality beliefs (4 types of > > belief with 5 types of existence). This doesn't mean that the > > Sotappana has reached a stable condition of samma-ditti? > > No. Ditthi and sammaditthi are a false dichotomy, i.e., absense of > sammaditthi does not imply ditthi, and absense of ditthi does not > imply sammaditthi. > > > Ditti still remains and so does conceit. They arise and fall. > > Conceit remains. Ditthi does not (CMA, IX, 38). >_-------------------------------------------------------------- H: Ok, I agree. No matter, my point doesn't rest on that dichotomy. I meant to say: "This doesn't mean that the Sotappana in overcoming sakyadhitti has eradicated all dhitti." In saying this I wanted to know if there are subtler forms that still persist that arise with subtler forms of conceit, now that sakyadhitti no longer conditioning them. Is this a false dichotomy or is it just false? ------------------------------------------------------------- Hal 51043 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:29pm Subject: Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > The following sutta, copied from ATI, is translated and commented on > by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. In it, 'a~n~nato' is translated as "something separate". > This makes no sense to me, whereas the commentarial meaning of "in another > way" or "differently," which is not to the liking of the venerable, makes > perfectly good sense to me. To see things with the eye of wisdom is indeed to see > them differently, going against the stream. > On the other hand, another plausible meaning for 'a~n~nato' that > occurs to me might be "other than I," i.e., "not self". I would be interested in > hearing the comments of others on this. > > With metta, > Howard I agree with you on this. Something is wrong with Thanisarro's translation. It doesn't make any sense that the arahant would see all of those things as "something separate". In enlightenment, there is no separation- everything is empty of self nature. Probably the better translation is 'not self' because the Buddha is emphasizing the need for non-attachment to the phenomenal world. Metta, James 51044 From: "Hal" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 2:13pm Subject: Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta bardosein Hi Howard and James, One can recognize something seperate without attributing any self nature to it. One can experience separateness without experiencing self. Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > > > The following sutta, copied from ATI, is translated and > commented on > > by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. In it, 'a~n~nato' is translated > as "something separate". > > This makes no sense to me, whereas the commentarial meaning of "in > another > > way" or "differently," which is not to the liking of the > venerable, makes > > perfectly good sense to me. To see things with the eye of wisdom > is indeed to see > > them differently, going against the stream. > > On the other hand, another plausible meaning for 'a~n~nato' > that > > occurs to me might be "other than I," i.e., "not self". I would be > interested in > > hearing the comments of others on this. > > > > With metta, > > Howard > > I agree with you on this. Something is wrong with Thanisarro's > translation. It doesn't make any sense that the arahant would see > all of those things as "something separate". In enlightenment, > there is no separation- everything is empty of self nature. > > Probably the better translation is 'not self' because the Buddha is > emphasizing the need for non-attachment to the phenomenal world. > > Metta, > James 51045 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 3:28pm Subject: Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta christine_fo... Hello Howard, James, Frank, Hal, all, Just about to leave for the airport and Bkk to join the India trip .... A quick look at the notes to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation ... he says: ' The first part of this instruction, as far as "he fully understands everything," is included in the "brief advice on liberation through the extinction of craving": at MN I 251, 21-25 and AN IV 88, 11-15; the sequel is different. Spk: "He sees all signs differently" (sabbanimittaani a~n~nato passati): He sees all the signs of formations (sa.nkhaaranimittaani) in a way different from that of people who have not fully understood the adherences. For such people see all signs as self, but one who has fully understood the adherences see them as nonself, not as self. Thus in this sutta the characteristic of nonself is discussed. ' mett and peace, Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Hal" wrote: > Hi Howard and James, > > One can recognize something seperate without attributing any self > nature to it. One can experience separateness without experiencing > self. > > Hal > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" > wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, all - > > > > > > The following sutta, copied from ATI, is translated and > > commented on > > > by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. In it, 'a~n~nato' is translated > > as "something separate". > > > This makes no sense to me, whereas the commentarial meaning > of "in > > another > > > way" or "differently," which is not to the liking of the > > venerable, makes > > > perfectly good sense to me. To see things with the eye of wisdom > > is indeed to see > > > them differently, going against the stream. > > > On the other hand, another plausible meaning > for 'a~n~nato' > > that > > > occurs to me might be "other than I," i.e., "not self". I would > be > > interested in > > > hearing the comments of others on this. > > > > > > With metta, > > > Howard > > > > I agree with you on this. Something is wrong with Thanisarro's > > translation. It doesn't make any sense that the arahant would see > > all of those things as "something separate". In enlightenment, > > there is no separation- everything is empty of self nature. > > > > Probably the better translation is 'not self' because the Buddha is > > emphasizing the need for non-attachment to the phenomenal world. > > > > Metta, > > James 51046 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 3:33pm Subject: Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard (Frank, James, Hal and all) - You say 'a~n~nato' is translated as "something separate" by Thanissaro Bhikkhu and it does not make sense. The translator also knew about the usual Pali meaning and the commentary, but they did not make sense to him. Thanissaro's Note: A~n~nato: literally, "as other." The Commentary explains this as "in another way" or "differently" from the way ordinary beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor does it really answer the monk's question. Howard: In it (the translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu), 'a~n~nato' is translated as "something separate". This makes no sense to me, whereas the commentarial meaning of "in another way" or "differently," which is not to the liking of the venerable, makes perfectly good sense to me. To see things with the eye of wisdom is indeed to see them differently, going against the stream. On the other hand, another plausible meaning for 'a~n~nato' that occurs to me might be "other than I," i.e., "not self". I would be interested in hearing the comments of others on this. Tep: I think your interpretation is right. The third question asked by the monk in Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.80, Avijja Sutta, was: "But how does a monk know, how does a monk see, so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?" Buddha: "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes (all objects) as something separate." Tep: By comparing the Buddha's answer in this sutta to MN 148, it is my understanding that "something separate" is the same as "something else that does not belong, or does not connect", or "not related to ourselves", or simply "not self" as you have suggested. MN 148: "Now, this is the path of practice leading to the cessation of self-identification. One assumes about the eye that 'This is not me, this is not my self, this is not what I am.' One assumes about forms... One assumes about consciousness at the eye... One assumes about contact at the eye... One assumes about feeling... One assumes about craving that 'This is not me, this is not my self, this is not what I am.' {ear ..., nose, ..., mind ...} Regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > The following sutta, copied from ATI, is translated and commented on by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. In it, 'a~n~nato' is translated as "something separate". (snipped) 51047 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 4:52pm Subject: Re: Nibbida = Disgust or ? ... philofillet Hi Bhikkhu Samahita, cosmique and all Bhikkhu Bodhi uses "revulsion." But the most important thing to remember, in my opinion, is that nibbida (in the suttas I have seen at least- correct me if I am wrong) is an attainment of "the instructed noble disciple." (ie ariyans) We are not ariyans so should be aware when we find ourself drawn to seeking to imitate them. If we do, there will be cittas rooted in ignorance (moha) and greed (lobha) at such times, even if we are thinking about nibbida. I know this personally, because I used to stop and wonder "do I feel revulsion yet?" when reading such suttas. Whatever English word is used, we cannot directly understand this nibbida yet. When we do, we won't need words to do so. Patience. Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Bhikkhu samahita wrote: > Friend cosmique wrote: > > >Can there be any alternative translations of this word "nibbida?E > 'Dispassion' is often seen used, yet IMHO a too weak designation. > > : - ] 51048 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 5:09pm Subject: Re: Different Approaches .... Utopian Dream of a Super Right View? buddhistmedi... Hi, James (and Sarah too ) - I think it is a human nature to be pleased/displeased with agreeable/disagreeable comments. So far I have not found anyone who is above praises and criticism! James: >Unfounded praise and blame can be such a two-edged sword, as >you point out. It is a hindrance to progress and learning. Tep: On the second thought I think our reaction to praise and blame is a hindrance to the mind, rather than the loka-dhamma itself. The important thing I must try to remember is to "discern rightly". "Gain/loss, status/disgrace, censure/praise, pleasure/pain: these conditions among human beings are inconstant, impermanent, subject to change. Knowing this, the wise person, mindful, ponders these changing conditions. "Desirable things don't charm the mind, undesirable ones bring no resistance. His welcoming & rebelling are scattered, gone to their end, do not exist. Knowing the dustless, sorrowless state, he discerns rightly, has gone, beyond becoming, to the Further Shore. [AN VIII.6, Lokavipatti Sutta] >James: However, I don't think that Sarah means any harm by it (which >took me a while to figure out). She is just being sweet and wants to >give members encouragement. Tep: Absolutely, James. Without any question, I know that Sarah is an exceptional Buddhist and a sweet & kind moderator. [That has been one reason why I am still an active member here. :-)) ] >James: Ps. I also agree with your KISS philosophy. No reason to >over-complicate matters. But again, this is a dhamma STUDY >group and Sarah is the queen study-ier ;-)). Just go with the flow. ;-) Tep: I agree with your keen observation that we are in a dhamma STUDY group. That's why the KISS philosophy is NOT working here. Best wishes, Tep ============= 51049 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Question on Interpreting a Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Frank - In a message dated 10/4/05 4:03:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time, frank@... writes: > Hi Howard, > My guess is Than.B. finds "differently than a worlding sees" not incorrect > but not specific enough in targeting the questioning monk's original > question of how one directly sees ignorance and its removal. > -------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I think that part of the sutta was an "extra" that the Buddha provided, beyond what the monk was asking about. ------------------------------------------------ For example, I see the world different than the vast majority of wordlings, but by > no means am I an arahant who sees the abandoning of ignorance. > Thus, my seeing "differently than a worldling" is nothing to write home about > and certainly does not indicate how much underlying defilments have been > eradicated. > "As separate" maybe conveys a better sense of seeing the 5 aggregates as > merely aggregates, without any sense of identiy, possessiveness, drama or > fantasy imbued in any combination of 6 sense media and 5 aggregates. Being able > to truly see 5 aggregates as truly "separate" and not mine, not my self, not > I would indicate seeing [lack of] ignorance and the true abandoning of > ignorance. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Well, if that is what he has in mind, that isn't bad. 9It was my alternative reading.) But without further elaboration,"separate" doesn't speak to me. Separate from what? --------------------------------------- > > -fk > ==================== Thanks for the reply, Frank. 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) 51050 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, James - Thanks for the reply. In a message dated 10/4/05 4:44:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Probably the better translation is 'not self' because the Buddha is > emphasizing the need for non-attachment to the phenomenal world. > ===================== I think that is a good possibility. :-) 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) 51051 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Hal - In a message dated 10/4/05 5:19:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, halwilson@... writes: > Hi Howard and James, > > One can recognize something seperate without attributing any self > nature to it. One can experience separateness without experiencing > self. > > Hal > ====================== To me, 'separate' implies more than "distinguishable" - it implies "self-existent". 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) 51052 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:19pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and all) - Tep, thank you for the following very complete analysis! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/4/05 6:39:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: > > Hi, Howard (Frank, James, Hal and all) - > > You say 'a~n~nato' is translated as "something separate" by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu and it does not make sense. The translator also > knew about the usual Pali meaning and the commentary, but they did > not make sense to him. > > Thanissaro's Note: A~n~nato: literally, "as other." The Commentary > explains this as "in another way" or "differently" from the way ordinary > beings view things, but that does not fit with the syntax of the Pali, nor > does it really answer the monk's question. > > Howard: > In it (the translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu), 'a~n~nato' is translated > as "something separate". This makes no sense to me, whereas the > commentarial meaning of "in another way" or "differently," which is not > to the liking of the venerable, makes perfectly good sense to me. To > see things with the eye of wisdom is indeed to see them differently, > going against the stream. > On the other hand, another plausible meaning for 'a~n~nato' that > occurs to me might be "other than I," i.e., "not self". I would be > interested in hearing the comments of others on this. > > > Tep: I think your interpretation is right. > > The third question asked by the monk in Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.80, > Avijja Sutta, was: "But how does a monk know, how does a monk see, > so that ignorance is abandoned and clear knowing arises?" > > Buddha: "There is the case, monk, where a monk has heard, 'All things > are unworthy of attachment.' Having heard that all things are unworthy of > attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, > he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all > themes (all objects) as something separate." > > Tep: By comparing the Buddha's answer in this sutta to MN 148, it is > my understanding that "something separate" is the same > as "something else that does not belong, or does not connect", or "not > related to ourselves", or simply "not self" as you have suggested. > > MN 148: "Now, this is the path of practice leading to the cessation of > self-identification. One assumes about the eye that 'This is not me, this > is not my self, this is not what I am.' One assumes about forms... One > assumes about consciousness at the eye... One assumes about > contact at the eye... One assumes about feeling... One assumes about > craving that 'This is not me, this is not my self, this is not what I am.' > {ear ..., nose, ..., mind ...} > > > Regards, > > > Tep > /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) 51053 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 1:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Chris - Thanks for taking the time to reply. Have a wonderful trip, and please send my very best to all the others too! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/4/05 6:39:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, cforsyth1@... writes: > Hello Howard, James, Frank, Hal, all, > > Just about to leave for the airport and Bkk to join the India > trip .... > > A quick look at the notes to Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation ... he says: > > ' The first part of this instruction, as far as "he fully > understands everything," is included in the "brief advice on > liberation through the extinction of craving": at MN I 251, 21-25 > and AN IV 88, 11-15; the sequel is different. Spk: "He sees all > signs differently" (sabbanimittaani a~n~nato passati): He sees all > the signs of formations (sa.nkhaaranimittaani) in a way different > from that of people who have not fully understood the adherences. > For such people see all signs as self, but one who has fully > understood the adherences see them as nonself, not as self. Thus in > this sutta the characteristic of nonself is discussed. ' > > mett and peace, > Chris /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) 51054 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 5:34pm Subject: Re: Apologies in advance for drive-by posting / Gladly accepted! philofillet Hi Tep > Tep : Your apologies are gladly accepted. > > Like you, I no longer have a desire to debate any more. So let's just > exchange some thoughts, now and then, without committing ourselves to > wrapping it up (it is very hard to wrap up any discussion at DSG, anyway). Thanks for this, Tep. The desire to reach a conclusion in a debate is natural, and of course it could have wholesome roots, but in my case I find it is just making me clinging more tightly to this idea of Phil who is trying to win an argument and prove his supeior understanding of Dhamma. Not at all what the Buddha had in mind. But that is me - I'm sure other people including you have much more wholesome, selfless motivations for debating. > > I'll reply to your other post, a very interesting one, later (but not tonight). Take your time. And I will take my time. *My* time. More clinging! :) Phil 51055 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 6:37pm Subject: Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta : Seeing All Signs as Self buddhistmedi... Hi, Chris (Howard and all) - Thank you for this interesting commentary. Chris : > ' The first part of this instruction, as far as "he fully > understands everything," is included in the "brief advice on > liberation through the extinction of craving": at MN I 251, 21-25 > and AN IV 88, 11-15; the sequel is different. Spk: "He sees all > signs differently" (sabbanimittaani a~n~nato passati): He sees all > the signs of formations (sa.nkhaaranimittaani) in a way different > from that of people who have not fully understood the adherences. > For such people see all signs as self, but one who has fully > understood the adherences see them as nonself, not as self. Thus in > this sutta the characteristic of nonself is discussed. ' > Tep: What are those signs of formations that are seen as self by people who "have not fully understood the adherences"? Respectfully, Tep =========== 51056 From: "robmoult" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 7:45pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Ken H and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > To begin with, we need to agree on a definition of the term 'formal > meditation' as it is used on DSG: > > Formal meditation is not bhavana (mental development). Bhavana is a > paramattha dhamma synonymous with panna, right understanding. Formal > meditation (or formal practice) is a concept. More specifically, it > is a concept that denies the difference between concepts and > paramattha dhammas. Therefore, it arises exclusively with wrong view. > ===== I agree that bhavana is a broader concept than "formal meditation". The Sangiti Sutta (DN33) lists three bases of merit: - dana (that of giving) - sila (that of morality) - bhavana (that of mental development) In contemporary books, bhavana is further split into "meditation", "hearing the dhamma", "preaching the dhamma" and "straightening out one's view". This expansion is based on a passage from the Atthasalini (p209ff). You may be surprised to hear how the Atthasalini explains "meditation" (translated as culture in the PTS version): In one who cultivates himself, regarding both the eye as impermanent, ill and selfless, and the other senses and the mind, also visible and other sense-objects, objects of thought, sense-cognition with mental cognition, sense-contact, feeling born of sense-contact, perception of sense-objects, old age and death all in same way as is taught in analytical knowledge (Patisambhida) by the path of insight, all his volitions that have not attained ecstasy in the 38 objects of consciousness (40 kammatthanas minus aloka and akasa) constitute the basis of meritorious action in culture (bhavana). Ken, the 40 kammatthanas are the list of jhana meditation objects (the vast majority of which would fall into the "concept" bucket). My defition of "formal meditation" is sitting in a specific posture concentrating the mind leading to jhana. I find your term "formal vipassana meditation" as a bit of an oxymoron (I will explain more later). ===== > To give an example: A carpenter normally uses a hammer without having > wrong view. There may be a case, however, where he thinks, "This > hammer is real. In order to prove it is real, I will drive a nail > with it." In that case the carpenter has wrong view and is engaged in > formal practice. > > When we first hear the Dhamma, we are told about ultimate reality - > the six worlds of the eye, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body > and the mind. In the all-inclusive present moment, there are only > conditioned namas and rupas arising at one of six doorways, and all > of them are fleeting, unsatisfactory and devoid of self. Even the > attainment of enlightenment is only a moment of nama and rupa. > > Unable to accept this information, some uninstructed worldlings > engage in formal practice. They say, "Look, I can sit. I can stand. I > can walk. I can concentrate on sensations. In these ways, I can know > anatta. I can attain enlightenment." > > So Rob, I think you were very wide of the mark when you said that the > monks during the time of the Buddha "sat under trees doing what you > might call "formal meditation"." ===== I stand by my position that Buddhist monks (and other ascetics at the time) sat around doing "formal meditation" and attaining jhanas. Formal meditation (to achieve jhanas) figures prominently in the Suttas; it is definitely part of the Buddha's teaching. Before enlightenment, Gotama learned jhana meditation from his two teachers. This shows that other ascetics also practiced "formal meditation" leading to jhanas. ===== > > You continued: > --------- > RM: > The same was true for ascetics of other sects. > --------- > > Did alarm bells ring when you wrote that? There was a difference you > know! :-) ===== I do not think that there was any difference in the jhana meditation techniques taught by the Buddha and taught by other ascetics. However, vipassana... the insight into the three characterisitics, is unique to the Buddha's teaching. ===== > > --------------- > RM: > So in the Satipatthana Sutta, when the Buddha says, "...having > gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree or to an empty place, sits > down with his legs crossed, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness > alert..." what the Buddha is really saying is "...while going through > your daily activities...". > ---------------- > > Anyone can sit at the foot of a tree, but in the context of the > Satipatthana Sutta, those words refer specifically to the daily > activities of a monk who uses jhana as a vehicle for satipatthana. ===== 100% agree! ===== > > ------------------------------ > RM: > Later in the Sutta, the Buddha talks about > maintaining mindfulness while going, standing, sitting or lying down. > When are we not doing one of those things? > Clearly, the Buddha is advocating mindfulness at all times during > daily life. > ---------------------------- > > But that is *my* point! Aren't you arguing that the monk has a > formal practice - something done specifically to bring about > satipatthana. ===== Then we agree - I am not arguing that there is a "formal vipassana meditation" in the Suttas; I am saying that "formal vipassana meditation" is a recent invention (by Mahasi Sayadaw and Goenka) based on the principles in the Satipatthana Sutta. I label "formal vispassana meditation" as an oxymoron as "formal meditation" happens at a specific time while "vipassana" should be constant. ===== > > ------------------------------------------------------ > RM: > So what is the role of "formal meditation"? > ------------------------------------------------------- > > I snipped a bit that dealt with the paramattha dhamma, bhavana, > instead of the concept, formal practice. There is no disagreement > about bhavana. No one doubts that samatha (the calm that arises with > kusala concentration) is beneficial. > > However, there is no control over samatha. As you said, some arahants > including the Buddha practised jhana meditation (which means they > developed samatha to its limits), while other arahants did not. > > ------------------------ > <. . .> > RM: > Formal meditation will improve one's concentration and lead to > tranquillity (samadhi). > -------------------------- > > We are back on topic now because you have returned to DSG's > definition of formal meditation. > > I don't think there is any record of the Buddha's teaching formal > meditation. That is why I asked you for textual references. On other > occasions, I have asked the same thing of Htoo. As I understand his > answer, he thinks the Buddha did give instructions for formal > practice, but, for reasons best known to Ananda, those instructions > were not recited at the First Council, and therefore they were not > preserved. > ===== Sitting with your legs crossed is an important part of jhana "formal meditation". Lots of people were preaching that... it is not unique to the Buddha's teaching. Perhaps this is why it was not detailed in the Tipitaka (however it is covered in detail in the Visuddhimagga). Ken, I have snipped a bunch of your reply because I want to find our common ground and areas of difference before going into those points. In summary form, here is my perspective: A. Jhana is an important part of the Buddha's teaching (it is "right concentration" in the Noble Eightfold Path). Achieving jhana requires "formal meditation" (sitting with one's legs crossed, etc.). B. Vipassana is a unique part of the Buddha's teaching and should be applied at all moments (however there are different techniques for accomplishing this - see Kimsuka Sutta SN XXXV.204 for four different modes practiced by different Arahants) C. "Formal vipassana meditation" is a recent invention (i.e. Mahasi Sayadaw, Goenka), not described in the Suttas (though it is based on principles found in the Suttas) D. "Formal vipassana meditation" can be very helpful for some people (depending on their accumulations) Ken, I am hoping that we agree on all four of these points and that perhaps you consider yourself as falling into the "not helpful for me" bucket of Point D. Am I correct that your position is that the modern "formal vipassana meditation" practice is not helpful for anybody? Metta, Rob M :-) 51057 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 6:21pm Subject: Re: Inevitable atta-ditthi when reading suttas? buddhistmedi... Dear Phil (and a few other friends) - Thank you for showing me a mirror so that I may look at my face ! {:-<] >Tep: So please be reminded that we are discussing a pretty simple >sutta, and that we should discuss it with no atta-ditthi. Phil: Doesn't this statement reveals your own atta-ditthi? It sounds as though you think ditti can be avoided as easily as rude speech. Ditthi, moha, lobha - and rude speech for that matter - all are conditioned and arise and fall away beyond our control. We should always be aware of this when we read suttas, and quote them to try to win an argument. Tep: Indeed, it does! Sure, "my own atta-ditthi" has not been completely abandoned yet. {:-( So I must learn more from you. Could you please teach me how to develop full awareness in those extremely-fast arising-and-falling-away, uncontrollable, conditioned dhammas such that my thick atta-ditthi may be eradicated too? ------------------------------ Phil: Suttas give us an opportunity to look *upon* the deep understanding of the Buddha and those who learned directly from him, which is different from looking *into* the understanding - we only see the surface. We do not have "access to insight" as surely as we might like to believe. Tep: Oh, I did not know that you had read suttas too. I thought you only studied commentaries and Khun Sujin's teachings. How do you tell if someone (say, Tep) only sees the surface , or he is able to "look" beyond that ? Have you that mind-reading capability? ----------------------------- Phil: We are conditioned from childhood to want too much out of this one lifetime. A moment or two of detachment in a day - how valuable. We come closer to understanding the Buddha's teaching. But we aren't satisfied and latch on to suttas like lawyers finding precedence to win cases. Tep: Who are the "we" you are talking about anyway? The "we" in the last sentence is not the same as the previous "we", it seems. Anyway, you should know that not EVERY lawyer is bad. Great lawyers, who are dedicated to good laws, moral principles, and the welfare of people, do EXIST. ^_* ------------------------------------- Phil : I think there is almost always this kind of atta-ditthi at work when we read suttas. Tep: Is this "kind of atta-ditthi" gone when we stop reading suttas, and then comes back when we start reading again? ------------------------------------ Phil: My opinion, of course. My clinging to Phil's understanding, to concepts. The real understanding rises and falls away in a moment, with a conditioning value we cannot know. Tep: Your opinion and your atta-ditthi are close friends. BTW : how can you tell when "the real understanding" arises again? Have you labelled it with a color marker? Yours truly, Tep ===== 51058 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 6:34pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I kenhowardau Hi James, Rob M quoted some lines from the Satipatthana Sutta, and said' "What the Buddha is really saying is "while going through your daily activities . . ." (practise satipatthana). I agreed with Rob on that point. However, daily activities do vary from person to person. Some of the daily activities mentioned in the sutta are those of a monk who practises jhana and satipatthana in tandem. (This is the monk referred to as going to the foot of a tree.) Other activities mentioned later in the sutta are those of monks who practise satipatthana during more normal daily lives. You responded: ------------------------ > Right. The Buddha is giving instructions for "formal meditation", not just sitting quietly at the foot of a tree. ------------------------ That is a different point from the one I was making, and it is one I disagree with. Therefore, I don't really know how to answer your next question: "What's the problem?" You continue: --------------------------------------------------------- J: > I'm confused by your arguments and I really want to understand. Could you explain why meditation is wrong, in a straightforward manner? ---------------------------------------------------------- During our years in DSG, we have both seen explanations of why formal meditation is wrong meditation. They have been phrased and rephrased in just about every possible way. In my opinion, you will never catch on while you remain ideologically opposed. As I was saying to Htoo recently, I like to keep repeating the same points in different ways, even if it's only for my own benefit. The message I sent to Rob M was one of my better efforts: it's probably as straightforward as I can manage. But if you could ask some specific questions, I will gladly try again. ----------------------------- J: > ps. Meditating for 26 years and not receiving any benefit doesn't prove anything. Meditation is about quality, not quantity ----------------------------- Though I say so myself, I was a pretty good meditator. When I first looked for fellow Buddhists on the internet, I had an idea of teaching meditation. I had a technique that was probably a form of autosuggestion or self- hypnosis. Whatever it was, it produced instant euphoria. I can still do it now. (Just did.) If a person reflects on the Dhamma while he is in this euphoric state, he can think he is making real progress. But I know now it has nothing to do with what the Buddha taught. As I was saying to Rob, I have seen no evidence that meditation makes a person's overall personality tranquil. In my experience, the highs were followed by equally intense lows. Ken H 51059 From: "Hal" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 11:46pm Subject: Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta bardosein Hi Howard, Yes, I see your point, but my hunch (or my dhitti..lol) is that there is a categorical error here. We are, so to speak, confusing the map with the territory. From the Arahat's perspective "seperate" is not a spatial relation, rather it denotes a temporal dynamic one. Consider the statements: "here now"..."here now." These are two designations denoting "seperated" mind moments, yet where is the "self-existent" subject implied? I would suggest, that an Arahat, having perfect mindfulness, would experience "seperation" dynamically (not spacially), and therefore his designations, (or distinctions/seperations) do not imply "self-existence" as the conventional (spatial) notion would imply. Furthermore, because these "seperated" designations are temporal, they have the characteristic mark of impermanence, hence uncontrolability and non- self. So designations denoting separation (from a temporal perspective) do not imply/or posit any self-existant entity. I haven't had time to study the sutta yet, not think very carefully about what I have just said, so I apologize if this is way off the mark, irelevant or just plain wrong or worse. Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Hal - > > In a message dated 10/4/05 5:19:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > halwilson@g... writes: > > > Hi Howard and James, > > > > One can recognize something seperate without attributing any self > > nature to it. One can experience separateness without experiencing > > self. > > > > Hal > > > ====================== > To me, 'separate' implies more than "distinguishable" - it implies > "self-existent". > > With metta, > Howard > 51060 From: "Hal" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 0:26am Subject: [dsg] Re: nama and rupa distinguishable. bardosein Jonothon, Thank you so much for your warm welcome, helpful comments and for taking the time, while traveling, to offer a reply. After reading your comments I now see that my remarks expose more of my own priorities (bias) and prescriptions rather than yours (as they also did in my rather hasty comments I made to one of Nina's posts). I do agree that right view is so very important at all stages of training, and perhaps even more so in the later stages along the path. I understand the need for such a warning, in the context that you've made it. I appreciate the reminder. This is a terrific forum and a great resource. I'm rather awe-struck by the knowledge of the scriptures and Pali that many of the members here demonstrate. I feel a little overwhelmed, but hope to gradually master the Pali sufficiently, so I can contribute more substantially to the discussions. BTW, I was delighted to receive the first volume CD of Bhikkhu Bodhi's_Exploring the Word of the Buddha: The Systematic Study of the MN) from the Bodhi monastery. I thoroughly enjoy listening to his dhamma talks and his masterful renditions of the suttas. After listening to a few of them, I'm now inclined to favor Sutta study before trying to master these much more difficult texts, like the Vissudhimagga. Once again, I wish you and Sarah the very best. May you both enjoy a safe and pleasant journey Hal ___________________________________________________ "We had the experience but missed the meaning...." T.S. Eliot 51061 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 8:39pm Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. rjkjp1 > Robert: What do you make of this passage I quoted to James earlier in this > > thread? > > 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." > ==================================================================== James: What about it? Metta, James ============== Swee Boon: I presume the Buddha spoke to you before and forsaw your destiny? > > If that's the case, then I must say: Congratulations! > > Seriously, I think you are deluded. > > Regards, > Swee Boon =========================== Dear James and Swee Boon, Swee Boon, you wrote that earlier thaT *My opinion is that these stories are there to encourage us to attain > > what should be attained in this life. > > > > It is not an encouragement to believe in the efficacy of > accumulations > > extending into future lives.* ============ And James said: > > Very good point! Excellent!! The Buddha never responded to such > questions with "Well, that person isn't ready for nibbana in this > lifetime. He/She doesn't have the proper accumulations. ...The Buddha wanted us all to become > enlightened in this very life- not some future life. ==================== I think the passage above suggests that the Buddha thought some people would not attain in this life, but nevertheless were still taught so that they could attain in the future - or do you read it differently. Swee Boon, not sure why you think I believe the Buddha sopke to me on any occasion, let alone predicted my future destiny? RobertK 51062 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 10:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Absolute Peace ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend Swee Boon (nidive) wrote: >Your phrase "insofar as a 'condition' is defined as a positive >Presence! of some factor" is noteworthy. >The phrase "requisite condition" appears repeatedly in the forward >order of dependent co-arising, but disappears entirely in the reverse order. Well noted and pin-pointed out! Thanx indeed! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <....> 51063 From: "leoaive" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 0:43am Subject: Conditional that bring conditional leoaive Hi I thank you for your answer about imageless and it is now I have some ideas what to meditate on. You ask me about myself. I am living in California, USA, and at present time, I am MBA student. Beside that,I am interested in Dhamma/Dharma. It is always gives you good mental way that bring happiness. I am familiar with Buddhism long time, maybe 20 years or so. Now I am 37 y.o. Recently, I was reading some sutras from sanskrit (I read suttas from Pali too), that is where I found about meditating on imageless. At the same time I was reading about some people, that meditate/practice tranquality. As I understand, Buddha way was much more then that. I suppose he was meditating on what condition will bring next condition and the result of it. It is conditional meditation, that if used right can bring happiness. But it is for advanced, who can grasp to the evolution and process of supposed object of meditation and see its result. Hard to explain. But I found it is a good way to see and realise some things, that is hard to find in books. Buddha was teaching Dhamma and Dhamma is big, but at the same time he said to Ananda that he knows a lot, but some things should be seing first, he does not see. That is interesting. I suppose it should be a right condition and ground for taking it right, just to know it is not the right way as I understand. What do you think? 51064 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Oct 4, 2005 9:31pm Subject: The Buddha on Kamma ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What the Buddha said about Kamma = Intentional Action: I am the owner of my actions (kamma), inheritor of my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my judge ... Whatever I do, good or evil, I will feel the resulting effects of that ... Source: AN V 57 Intention, Bhikkhus, is what I call action, for through intention one initiates these actions through the door of the body, speech or mind. There is kamma (intentional action), Bhikkhus, that ripens in hell.... There is kamma that ripens in the animal world.. There is kamma that ripens in the world of humans.... There is kamma that ripens in the heavenly world.... Threefold, however, is this ripening fruit of kamma: ripening during here in this life, & ripening during the next rebirth, and ripening in later rebirths ... Source: AN VI 63 The 10 advantageous courses of action: The 3 bodily actions: avoidance of killing, stealing, abusive sexuality. The 4 verbal actions: avoidance of lying, slandering, angry & empty speech. The 3 mental actions: withdrawal, good-will, right views. Source: MN 9 Greed, Bhikkhus, is a condition for the arising of kamma. Hate is a condition for the arising of kamma. Confusion is a condition for the arising of kamma. Source: AN III 109 One who kills & harms goes either to hell or, if reborn as man, will be short-lived. One who torments others will be afflicted with disease. The angry one will look ugly, the envious one will be without influence. The stingy one will be poor, the stubborn will be low & stupid. The lazy will be without knowledge. In the contrary case, one will be reborn in heaven or reborn as man. One will be long-lived, beautiful, influential, highborn & intelligent Source: MN 135 There are 10 meritorious actions leading to human or divine rebirth: 1: Giving. 2: Morality. 3: Meditation. 4: Reverence by paying respect to monks & elder. 5: Performing services to others. 6: Transference of merits to others. 7: Rejoicing in others' merit. 8: Learning this true Dhamma. 9: Teaching this true Dhamma. 10: Correcting views. To the extent that there are beings, past & future, passing away & re-arising, all beings are the owner of their actions, inheritor to their actions, born of their actions, related through their actions, & live dependent on their actions. Whatever they do, for good or for evil, from that will they feel the result... Source: AN V 57 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 !!! <....> 51065 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 4:47am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I jwromeijn Hallo Rob, Ken, James and all, Rob thanks for your 'perspective', it's really helpful: > In summary form, here is my perspective: > > A. Jhana is an important part of the Buddha's teaching (it is "right concentration" in the Noble Eightfold Path). Achieving jhana requires "formal meditation" (sitting with one's legs crossed, etc.). > > B. Vipassana is a unique part of the Buddha's teaching and should be applied at all moments (however there are different techniques for > accomplishing this - see Kimsuka Sutta SN XXXV.204 for four different > modes practiced by different Arahants) > > C. "Formal vipassana meditation" is a recent invention (i.e. Mahasi > Sayadaw, Goenka), not described in the Suttas (though it is based on principles found in the Suttas) > > D. "Formal vipassana meditation" can be very helpful for some people depending on their accumulations) > I'm sure (on this moment) I'm one of the categorie D fellows. Perhaps it's accumulation plus culture, for exemple western culture that predosits to insight-meditation? Said otherwise: what exact are the dispositions that makes one for which it is helpful? Thanks for it, Rob Ken, you said to James: "During our years in DSG, we have both seen explanations of why formal meditation is wrong meditation. They have been phrased and rephrased in just about every possible way. In my opinion, you will never catch on while you remain ideologically opposed." Ken, what exactly do you mean "never catch on"? English is not my native language, so I hope that the meaning: "leave DSG" is wrong Metta Joop 51066 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 5:08am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 290 Conceit -maana (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;-) ========================================== [Ch17- Conceit(maana)contd] Questions i Conceit arises with lobha-múla-citta without wrong view. Is there conceit every time such a type of lobha-múla-citta arises? ii Why is there conceit when one thinks oneself inferior to someone else? iii The sotåpanna has eradicated the wrong view of self. Why can he still have conceit? ***** [Conceit(maana)finished] Metta, Sarah ====== 51067 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 5:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) sarahprocter... Hi Hal & all, --- Hal wrote: > "This doesn't mean that the Sotappana in overcoming sakyadhitti has > eradicated all dhitti." In saying this I wanted to know if there are > subtler forms that still persist that arise with subtler forms of > conceit, now that sakyadhitti no longer conditioning them. > > Is this a false dichotomy or is it just false? .... S: Just false:). All wrong views depend on sakayaditthi and when they are eradicated so are all other ditthi. Completely eradicated by sotapatti magga citta. You may like to look at past posts under 'conceit vs wrong view' in 'Useful Posts' (under 'conceit'). This topic came up in our discussion in Bangkok today with a lively group of friends including Sukin and Azita - easy to see others' wrong views' - not so easy to be aware of 'our' wrong views when they arise and when it's sakkaya ditthi,to know which kind of sakkaya ditthi it is with awareness, not just thinking about it afterwards. Azita asked about looking at oneself in the mirror - usually just with lobha. Any wrong view arising? Only sati and panna can answer if they arise:-). Metta, Sarah ======== 51068 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 5:20am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I jwromeijn Rob I forgot to ask you a question. You said: A. Jhana is an important part of the Buddha's teaching ..is "right concentration" in the Noble Eightfold Path)." I agree but vipassana (insight) is the mindfulness as another aspect of the Noble Eighfold Path: in formal (vipassana) meditation AND in daily life. Do you agree? Metta Joop 51069 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 1:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta upasaka_howard Hi, Hal - In a message dated 10/5/05 2:58:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time, halwilson@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Yes, I see your point, but my hunch (or my dhitti..lol) is that there > is a categorical error here. We are, so to speak, confusing the map > with the territory. From the Arahat's perspective "seperate" is not a > spatial relation, rather it denotes a temporal dynamic one. Consider > the statements: "here now"..."here now." These are two designations > denoting "seperated" mind moments, yet where is the "self-existent" > subject implied? I would suggest, that an Arahat, having perfect > mindfulness, would experience "seperation" dynamically (not > spacially), and therefore his designations, (or > distinctions/seperations) do not imply "self-existence" as the > conventional (spatial) notion would imply. Furthermore, because > these "seperated" designations are temporal, they have the > characteristic mark of impermanence, hence uncontrolability and non- > self. So designations denoting separation (from a temporal > perspective) do not imply/or posit any self-existant entity. > > I haven't had time to study the sutta yet, not think very carefully > about what I have just said, so I apologize if this is way off the > mark, irelevant or just plain wrong or worse. > > Hal > > ============================= I don't think we are in substantive disagreement. When 'separate' has the intended meaning of "distinguishable" as opposed to "self-existent", I have no problem with its usage. My problem is the pragmatic one that 'separate' t ypically denotes (and almost always connotes) more than "distinguishable" in ordinary parlance. But I don't think the issue is a time versus space one. There is temporal reification just as well as spatial reification. 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) 51070 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 6:19am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi James, > > Though I say so myself, I was a pretty good meditator. When I first > looked for fellow Buddhists on the internet, I had an idea of > teaching meditation. > > I had a technique that was probably a form of autosuggestion or self- > hypnosis. Whatever it was, it produced instant euphoria. I can still > do it now. (Just did.) James: How strange! What kind of meditation is that? That sure doesn't sound like Buddhist meditation. > > If a person reflects on the Dhamma while he is in this euphoric > state, he can think he is making real progress. But I know now it > has nothing to do with what the Buddha taught. James: Of course it doesn't; it isn't Buddhist meditation- as far as I can tell. You are criticizing the practice of meditation based on your false practice in the past! No wonder I can never understand your arguments (I really don't see what the big deal is). But practicing a form of meditation that gives you instant euphoria, like an orgasm or something, is definitely wrong practice and not what the Buddha taught! > > As I was saying to Rob, I have seen no evidence that meditation makes > a person's overall personality tranquil. In my experience, the highs > were followed by equally intense lows. James: Yeah, you probably had to smoke a cigarette after you finished meditating! LOL! ;-) > > Ken H Metta, James 51071 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 6:25am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. nidive Hi RobertK, > > > Swee Boon, you wrote that earlier thaT *My opinion is that these > > > stories are there to encourage us to attain what should be > > > attained in this life. > > > It is not an encouragement to believe in the efficacy of > > > accumulations extending into future lives.* > ==================== > > And James said: > > Very good point! Excellent!! The Buddha never responded to such > > questions with "Well, that person isn't ready for nibbana in this > > lifetime. He/She doesn't have the proper accumulations. ...The > > Buddha wanted us all to become enlightened in this very life- not > > some future life. > ==================== > I think the passage above suggests that the Buddha thought some > people would not attain in this life, but nevertheless were still > taught so that they could attain in the future - or do you read it > differently. Isn't it a presumption when you think that Saccaka *could not* attain in that life? He jolly well could if he took up the practice seriously. But I think he is too preoccupied with mundane affairs. Nevertheless, I think the Buddha teaches all beings at the appropriate time whenever possible out of compassion. > Swee Boon, not sure why you think I believe the Buddha sopke to me > on any occasion, let alone predicted my future destiny? I am glad you are not using that example to prove the efficacy of accumulations extending into future lives. The conditions are vastly different. Regards, Swee Boon 51072 From: "Hal" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 6:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) bardosein Hi Sarah, & all, That it is just false does make sense as you say, but what I'm struggling to understand is how can conceit still arise without sakkyadhitti? (question iii, in your most recent post). I look forward to hearing from others and will check the useful posts you have suggested. Thanks. Concerning wrong view, here are some remarks of Ledi Sayadaw taken from the _Requistites_, BPS edition (pp.54-56): (please excuse my typing) "Wrong View (dhitti) is established in beings in three planes or layers, viz, _Vitikamma_ Transgression (in deeds or speech) _Pariyutthana_, obsession (of mind by evil thoughts, mental involvement with the Stains or defilements, kilesa), _anusaya_, Proclivityor latent disposition to the Stains. These layers are the realm of Personality Belief (sakkayaditthi). They may be called coarse, middling and fine aspects of Wrong view. I shall now discuss how the offsprings of _dhitti_(Wrong View)_, the ten Evil Deeds (duccarita: see Note 47), enter in to the layers of _dhitti_. The coarse layer of Wrong View, 'Transgression' (vitikkama) comprises unwholesome kammic actions (akusala kamma), committed through overt deeds and speech. The middling layer of 'Obsession' (pariyutthana) layer comprises the evil that occurs in thoughts. The finest layer, 'Proclivity' (anusaya) is the evil that lies latent in the personalities of beings throughout the beginningless round of rebirths (anamatagga-samsara), though it may not yet result in manifestations of act, speech or thoughts. It may be said that there are three kinds of fire in a match box. The first is the fire that lies latent in the whole match-box. The second is the fire that ignites the match stick when it is struck. The third is the fire that is transferred to another object when it is brought in contact with the flame of the match stick. Such a fire is that which burns rubbish heaps, clothes, houses monasteries and villages. This fire, the fire that is transferred to another object, resembles the coarse _vitikkama ditthi_, manifested in transgressions by acts and speech. The fire that burns the match stick resembles the middling _pariyutthana ditthi_ which is manifested in the mind every time it comes in contact with objects of thought. The fire that is latent in the box of matches resembles the _anusaya ditthi_ the succession of lives in _anamatagga samsara_, the unfathomable aeons of existence. This fire that lies latent in the box of matches does not burst into flame so long as the match head is not rubbed with the nitrous surface of the match-box. It does not cause any harm even if it be kept in contact with highly inflammable articles such as gunpowder. In the same way, the _anusaya ditthi_ lies latent in the personality and does not manifest itself so long as it does not come into contact with evil objects of thought or other causes of evil. When, however, evil objects of thought or other causes impinge on the six sense- doors, the _anusaya ditthi_ is disturbed and begins to make itself manifest in the mind-door, or in the plane of the _pariyutthana_ through the function of volition. If at that time the manifestations can be suppressed by good doctrines, they disappear from the _pariyutthana_ plane and return to the _anusaya_ plane and reside there as latent natural tendencies. If they cannot be suppressed, they continue to manifest themselves developing volitions. If they are further disturbed (in the _pariyutthana_ plane), they manifest themselves in the _vitikkama_ plane in the form of evil speech and evil acts. In the world, if a person can control himself in the _vitikkama_ and _pariyutthana_ planes, and if thereby his acts, speech, and thoughts are, so to say, clean and unsoiled, he is called a good, pious, or moral man. But such a person is not aware of the _anusaya_ plane. If the _anusaya_ plane is not destroyed, even if perfect control is exercised over the _vitikkama_ and _pariyutthana_ planes, such control can only be of a temporary nature. If the person is strong in the observance of good principles, the control can last for the whole of his life. But there can be no certainty about the next life, when upheavals in these two planes may occur." Hal ____________________________________________________ "We had the experience but missed the meaning...." T.S. Eliot --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Hi Hal & all, > > --- Hal wrote: > > > "This doesn't mean that the Sotappana in overcoming sakyadhitti has > > eradicated all dhitti." In saying this I wanted to know if there are > > subtler forms that still persist that arise with subtler forms of > > conceit, now that sakyadhitti no longer conditioning them. > > > > Is this a false dichotomy or is it just false? > .... > S: Just false:). All wrong views depend on sakayaditthi and when they are > eradicated so are all other ditthi. Completely eradicated by sotapatti > magga citta. > > You may like to look at past posts under 'conceit vs wrong view' in > 'Useful Posts' (under 'conceit'). > > This topic came up in our discussion in Bangkok today with a lively group > of friends including Sukin and Azita - easy to see others' wrong views' - > not so easy to be aware of 'our' wrong views when they arise and when it's > sakkaya ditthi,to know which kind of sakkaya ditthi it is with awareness, > not just thinking about it afterwards. Azita asked about looking at > oneself in the mirror - usually just with lobha. Any wrong view arising? > > Only sati and panna can answer if they arise:-). > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== 51073 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 7:03am Subject: Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. buddhatrue Hi Robert K., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > > Robert: > What do you make of this passage I quoted to James earlier in this > > > thread? > > > 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." > > > ==================================================================== > I think the passage above suggests that the Buddha thought some > people would not attain in this life, but nevertheless were still > taught so that they could attain in the future - or do you read it > differently. Hi Robert K., Okay, thank you for explaining. Frankly, I find this commentary rather dubious for two reasons. 1. Kala Buddharakkhita Thera simply practiced the Buddha's teaching to attain enlightenment (it's not as if he achieved nibbana by some unusual, supernatural means- which would definitely show the influence of the Buddha): "A Thera of Ceylon, an arahant. He belonged to a minister's family and was born in a village near Dakkhinagiri-vihára. When he came of age, he entered the Order, learned the whole of the Tipitaka, and, on going with a large concourse to see his teacher, was asked to give up his following and go into solitude to practise meditation. He went to the Vátakasitapabbata-vihára, practised meditation and became an arahant...." http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/ka/kaala_budd.htm 2. The Buddha, even though he was limited-omniscient, could not see deep into the future. He could only know those things which are knowable, and the deep future is not knowable. At most, he could know where someone was going to be reborn because of performed kamma (but he would not know anything past that because the future isn't predetermined): "In his reply, the Buddha says nothing about having omniscience, he simply asserts that he has the three knowledges (tevijjā), that is: he is able to recollect his manifold past lives (pubbe nāvāsānussati- ñāṇa); he is able - with his divine eye - to see the passing away and reappearing of beings and he understands how beings pass on according to their actions (dibba-cakkhu-ñāṇa); and finally, having realised for himself with direct knowledge (abhiñnā), he knows that he has destroyed the taints (āsava-kkhaya-ñāṇa). http://216.109.125.130/search/cache? p=omniscience+of+the+Buddha&prssweb=Search&ei=UTF- 8&fl=0&u=www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol4/Was%2520the%2520Buddha% 2520Omniscient2.pdf&w=omniscience+buddha&d=C3CHUWFULgb4&icp=1&.intl=u s Metta, James 51074 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 7:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) jonoabb Hi Hal (and Dan, Rob and Howard) Hal wrote: >Hi Dan, Rob and Howard, > >"Bhikkhus, 'I am' is an involvement with conceit, 'I am this' is an >involvement with conceit; 'I shall be' is an involvement with >conceit, 'I shall not be' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall >consist of form' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be >percipient' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be >nonpercipient' is an involvement with conceit;..... Involvement with >conceit is a disease, involvement with conceit is a turmour; >involvement with disease is a dart. Therefore, bhikkhus, you should >train yourselves thus: 'We will dwell with a mind in which conceit >has been struck down.' Thus you should train yourselves." (35. >_Salayatanasamyutta_, (SN p.1259) > > >Here's some more of Bhikkhu Bodhi's interesting comments taken from >his notes to the above paragraph: > >"_Managata_. Spk: Conceit itself is an involvement with conceit. In >this passage, "I am" is stated by way of the conceit associated with >craving; "I am this," by way of view. Although conceit does not >arise in immediate conjunction with views (according to the >Abhidhamma analysis of mind-moments, they are mutually exclusive), >views occur because conceit has not been abandoned. So this is said >with reference to views rooted in conceit." (SN 1432) > > This is an interesting area to discuss, but I'd like to clarify which parts of the above note are comments of BB and which are translation of the commentary ('Spk'). On the face of it, everything except what is in brackets appears to be from the commentary -- is that how it appears in the printed version? Thanks. Jon 51075 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 7:29am Subject: Nyanaponika and creativity (Was: Re: [dsg] A Short Post: Conditions, N jwromeijn Dear Sarah We simply don't agree about the fact that Theravada has had some changes (additions) in the last 2000 years And we don't agree that this had to occur in the future and will occur: everything changes, according to conditions. You said nice things about Ven. Nyanaponika but you don't agree with some of his texts. Why exact are they heretic or (favorite DSG term) false views? Metta Joop > Hi Joop, > > You asked for my comments on a passage of Nyanaponika's: > > --- Joop wrote: > > 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. … > .... > S: It starts OK, but I don't agree with the last sentence (if I understand > it). > > As for the rest of the extract, I'm pretty so-so about it, e.g > > >....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 … > ... > S: I see the danger more in the imaginative renderings which may seem like > living and growing organisms but which are actually an abuse of the > 'traditional exegetical literature':). In any case, it's not the > renderings or the textbook terms that are the issue, rather the > understanding of the dhammas taught by the Buddha. These dhammas are the > Abhidhamma and they're not in any literature. > > As for your comment about how I'm "not positive enough about the necessary > and possible evolution of Theravada", this may be so. On the other hand, > aren't we only having these discussions and our present access to the > Buddha's teachings because of the insistence of the Sangha in not allowing > any evolution of Theravada? Of course while we can and do use our own > words to speak, consider and reflect, isn't it helpful to also be able to > read and hear the Theravada texts themselves from time to time? > > You asked whether Sujin agrees with it. I can't say about this extract but > Nina mentioned that a very long time ago, K.Sujin had highly recommended > 'Abhidhamma Studies' to her. When I mentioned this to Sujin, with a touch > of surprise, she said that at the time, there was so little written in > English on the Abhidhamma and that it was better than other books. For > myself, I I've always found some parts very useful and some parts less so, > especially some of the parts that appeal to you which are couched in > western philosophical terminology. Isn't it usually the way? > > By the way, I remember at least one visit with K.Sujin, Nina and others to > visit Ven Nyanaponika and pay our respects. He was a very exemplary > bhikkhu and was very kind to us all. Jon also remembers him as very > gentlemanly, hard-working, well-spoken and always interested to share and > discuss Dhamma. I have a nice pic of him which maybe I'll load for you to > see sometime. 51076 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 7:33am Subject: Question for A. Sujin to Sarah, Jon or anyone else in Bangkok philofillet Hi all you folks in Bangkok. Sarah, I asked you to ask A. Sujin about why she says there is no need to think of prompted/unprompted cittas - strong or weak is enough. Actually, I don't really think it's an important question so unless you think it is, you can let it slide. On the other hand, I'd like to ask 1) Can you say a little to help this beginner understand why it is so important or difficult to know nama from rupa? Nama experiences, rupa is experienced. Isn't that straightforward? (Actually, I know it's not so straightforward, but it is always good to hear more on this topic. If you could phrase the question in a way that gets A. Sujin talking on the topic, it would be great.) 2) Also, I have often hear in the talks that it is not so important to know kusala from akusala. It seems to me that trying or intending to know kusala from akusala is not helpful but if knowing kusala from akusala arises due to conditions it can be very helpful. You have said "what good is it to know kusala from akusala if we don't know that realities are not-self. " It seems to me that we will know kusala from akusala before we know realities to be not-self. We know what is harmful to ourselves and others before we know the characteristics of dhammas, or so it seems to me. Can you help me to understand this point better? Sarah, or someone, that's a jumble, but if you have time could you work that into a usable question or two or three? Thanks. Please thank A. Sujin for these wonderful talks. Phil 51077 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 3:46am Subject: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, all - I frequently write "We start where we are, not where we would hope to be." I believe the following sutta supports that contention. With metta, Howard ______________________________ Anguttara Nikaya » Context of this sutta Anguttara Nikaya IV.159 Bhikkhuni Sutta The Nun Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's Park. Then a certain nun said to a certain man, "Go, my good man, to my lord Ananda and, on arrival, bowing your head to his feet in my name, tell him, 'The nun named such-and-such, venerable sir, is sick, in pain, severely ill. She bows her head to the feet of her lord Ananda and says, "It would be good if my lord Ananda were to go to the nuns' quarters, to visit this nun out of sympathy for her."'" Responding, "Yes, my lady," the man then approached Ven. Ananda and, on arrival, having bowed down, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to Ven. Ananda, "The nun named such-and-such, venerable sir, is sick, in pain, severely ill. She bows her head to the feet of her lord Ananda and says, 'It would be good if my lord Ananda were to go to the nuns' quarters, to visit this nun out of sympathy for her.'" Ven. Ananda accepted with silence. Then in the early morning, having put on his robes and, carrying his bowl and outer robe, he went to the nuns' quarters. The nun saw Ven. Ananda coming from afar. On seeing him, she lay down on a bed, having covered her head. Then Ven. Ananda approached the nun and, on arrival, sat down on a prepared seat. As he was sitting there, he said to the nun: "This body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying on food that food is to be abandoned. "This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned. "This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned. "This body comes into being through sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is to be abandoned. With regard to sexual intercourse, the Buddha declares the cutting off of the bridge. "'This body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying on food that food is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk, considering it thoughtfully, takes food -- not playfully, nor for intoxication, nor for putting on bulk, nor for beautification -- but simply for the survival & continuance of this body, for ending its afflictions, for the support of the holy life, [thinking,] 'Thus will I destroy old feelings [of hunger] and not create new feelings [from overeating]. I will maintain myself, be blameless, & live in comfort.' Then, at a later time, he abandons food, having relied on food. 'This body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying on food that food is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said. "'This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.' The thought occurs to him, 'I hope that I, too, will -- through the ending of the fermentations -- enter & remain in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for myself in the here & now.' Then, at a later time, he abandons craving, having relied on craving. 'This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said. "'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.' The thought occurs to him, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now. Then why not me?' Then, at a later time, he abandons conceit, having relied on conceit. 'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said. "This body comes into being through sexual intercourse. Sexual intercourse is to be abandoned. With regard to sexual intercourse, the Buddha declares the cutting off of the bridge." Then the nun -- getting up from her bed, arranging her upper robe over one shoulder, and bowing down with her head at Ven. Ananda's feet -- said, "A transgression has overcome me, venerable sir, in that I was so foolish, so muddle-headed, and so unskilled as to act in this way. May my lord Ananda please accept this confession of my transgression as such, so that I may restrain myself in the future." "Yes, sister, a transgression overcame you in that you were so foolish, so muddle-headed, and so unskilled as to act in this way. But because you see your transgression as such and make amends in accordance with the Dhamma, we accept your confession. For it is a cause of growth in the Dhamma & Discipline of the noble ones when, seeing a transgression as such, one makes amends in accordance with the Dhamma and exercises restraint in the future." That is what Ven. Ananda said. Gratified, the nun delighted in Ven. Ananda's words. Revised: Friday 2005-09-30 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-159.html /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) 51078 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 9:31am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard (and Htoo) - I thought only Htoo wrote coded messages. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, all - > > I frequently write "We start where we are, not where we would hope to be." I believe the following sutta supports that contention. > > ______________________________ > Anguttara Nikaya » Context of this sutta > Anguttara Nikaya IV.159 > > > > Bhikkhuni Sutta > (snipped) ----------------------------------------- Sorry, Howard. I have no idea what you meant. Regards, Tep ========== 51079 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 0:50pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Howard (and Htoo) - > > I thought only Htoo wrote coded messages. James: I didn't think the message was so coded. Howard didn't explain but he is maintaining a low profile to practice more. You just have to read the sutta. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > > > I frequently write "We start where we are, not where we would > hope to be." I believe the following sutta supports that contention. > > > > ______________________________ > > Anguttara Nikaya » Context of this sutta > > Anguttara Nikaya IV.159 > > > > > > > > Bhikkhuni Sutta > > > (snipped) > ----------------------------------------- > > Sorry, Howard. I have no idea what you meant. James: I believe that Howard was referring to this part of the sutta: ""This body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by relying on food that food is to be abandoned. "This body comes into being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned. "This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned." One of the big arguments on DSG, by the KS Crew, is that practice is wrong as long as the practice is done with craving or conceit. Supposedly, this is because the practice will only reinforce the false belief in a self and increase ignorance. Well, Ananda has effectively blown that argument out of the water with this one sutta. It is through craving and conceit, craving and conceit for liberation, that craving and conceit are abandoned. It is an excellent and straightforward sutta, and should put to bed all such arguments, but I'm sure it won't. ;-)) We will return to the regularly scheduled programming. ;-)) Metta, James > 51080 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 9:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and James) - In a message dated 10/5/05 12:32:33 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: > Hi, Howard (and Htoo) - > > I thought only Htoo wrote coded messages. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >Hi, all - > > > > I frequently write "We start where we are, not where we would > hope to be." I believe the following sutta supports that contention. > > > >______________________________ > >Anguttara Nikaya » Context of this sutta > >Anguttara Nikaya IV.159 > > > > > > > >Bhikkhuni Sutta > > > (snipped) > ----------------------------------------- > > Sorry, Howard. I have no idea what you meant. > > > Regards, > > > Tep > > ========================= Sorry I wasn't more clear, Tep. James has explained what I was saying quite well, for which I thank him! :-) 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) 51081 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 2:05pm Subject: Re: Guarding the Sense Doors ? Is Kundaliya Sutta Misleading? htootintnaing Tep : What do you mean by "If perfected, even a single word may suffice." ?? With unlimited confusion, Tep ====== Htoo: Dear Tep, there are people all over the world. Some go to school while some never go to school. Whatever it is there are different levels of intelligence. Your question on my 'statement' is the question that should be asked back to me. Because I mentioned that. Please re-read the whole sentence. There are two parts. 1. if perfected 2. may suffice 1. means 100% fulfilment 2. means uncertainty Example is 'rajo haranam'. This word is the shortest word that leads to full perfection of arahatta magga naana along with all 4 ruupa jhaana. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing 51082 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 2:25pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 566 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 1. the truth of suffering (dukkha saccaa) There are 11 groups of dhamma and they all are dukkha saccaa or the truth of suffering. In summary that truth is '5 clinging aggregates'. Along with this summary there are 12 groups of dhamma that are suffering or dukkha saccaa. 1. jaati (birth/rebirth) 2. jaraa (ageing) 3. marana (death) 4. soka (sorrow) 5. parideva (lamentation) 6. dukkha (pain or physical suffering) 7. domanassa ( mental pain or all mental suffering) 8. upayaasaa (despair) 9. appi ye hi sampayogo (association with unwanted things) 10.pi ye hi vippayogo (dissociation with loved one or wanted things) 11.tam pi iccham na labhati (not gaining of what is wanted) 12.pancupadaana-kkhandhaa (5 clinging aggregates) 1. jaati (birth/rebirth) Jaati is dukkha. Jaati is suffering. Jaati is birth. Jaati is rebirth. Jaati is initiation of a life. Initiation of a life is suffering. If there is no life then there will not be any suffering. All sufferings in current life are because of initiation of life. Jaati is acquisition new salaayatana or new 6 sense-bases (depending on kinds of being). Jaati is acquisition of new 5 clinging aggregates. These clinging aggregates are all suffering. May you 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. 51083 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 2:46pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine / Abandoning buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard and James - James was right -- I did not read the Bhikkhuni Sutta before posting my message (reposted below). James was also very sharp in seeing through the true meaning of this sutta. Thank you both ! Regards, Tep ========== > > Tep: > > I thought only Htoo wrote coded messages. > > > > > Howard: > > > I frequently write "We start where we are, not where we would > > hope to be." I believe the following sutta supports that contention. > > > > > >______________________________ > > >Anguttara Nikaya » Context of this sutta > > >Anguttara Nikaya IV.159 > > >Bhikkhuni Sutta > > > > > (snipped) > > ----------------------------------------- > > > > Sorry, Howard. I have no idea what you meant. > > > > Howard: > ========================= > Sorry I wasn't more clear, Tep. James has explained what I was >saying quite well, for which I thank him! :-) > 51084 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 3:06pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine / Abandoning Conceit buddhistmedi... Hi, James and Howard (Attn. Sarah, Ken H, Nina, Phil ) - I am pleased to be introduced to this excellent sutta by Howard and am grateful to James for his excellent interpretation of this sutta for me. Those DSG members who repeatedly remind me the danger of having self (conceit) and lobha (craving), that accompany my practice, should carefully study this Anguttara Nikaya IV.159, Bhikkhuni Sutta again and again. > > James: I believe that Howard was referring to this part of the sutta: > > ""This body, sister, comes into being through food. And yet it is by > relying on food that food is to be abandoned. "This body comes into > being through craving. And yet it is by relying on craving that > craving is to be abandoned. "This body comes into being through > conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be > abandoned." > > One of the big arguments on DSG, by the KS Crew, is that practice is > wrong as long as the practice is done with craving or conceit. > Supposedly, this is because the practice will only reinforce the > false belief in a self and increase ignorance. Well, Ananda has > effectively blown that argument out of the water with this one > sutta. It is through craving and conceit, craving and conceit for > liberation, that craving and conceit are abandoned. > > It is an excellent and straightforward sutta, and should put to bed > all such arguments, but I'm sure it won't. ;-)) We will return to > the regularly scheduled programming. ;-)) > Tep: Another part of the sutta is about using conceit (mana) of a " self " to abandon conceit. "'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said. And in reference to what was it said? There is the case, sister, where a monk hears, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now.' The thought occurs to him, 'The monk named such-and-such, they say, through the ending of the fermentations, has entered & remains in the fermentation-free awareness-release & discernment-release, having known & realized them for himself in the here & now. Then why not me?' Then, at a later time, he abandons conceit, having relied on conceit. 'This body comes into being through conceit. And yet it is by relying on conceit that conceit is to be abandoned.' Thus was it said, and in reference to this was it said. [endquote] Tep: It is important to notice the following. Although "conceit is to be abandoned" means complete eradication of conceit, "food is to be abandoned" does not mean quit eating food. Kind regards, Tep ============= 51085 From: cosmique Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 10:29am Subject: Re: Nibbida = Disgust or ? ... cosmique1000 Dear Bhante and friends, Thank you all for your valuable in-put but my point is that on the one hand, Buddha speaks of aversion (the other side of lust) as of a negative factor to be got rid of through the mental training. On the other hand, he speaks of disgust as of something good to be cultivated. What confusing about this issue is that aversion and disgust are synonyms. Therefore, the problem is more of linguistic nature rather than doctrinal. Psychologically, one cannot cultivate disgust and at the same time try to get rid of aversion. That is why it leads me to believe that the word “nibidda” traditionally translated as “disgust” might have a little different meaning here. Some translators translate this word as “disenchantment”, which is, IMHO, more adequate and in the spirit of the Dhamma than emotionally saturated “disgust”. What do you all think about disenchantment versus disgust? With mahametta, Cosmique The heaviness of one's burden is due to one's grasping. 51086 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 4:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta : Seeing All Signs as Self lbidd2 Tep: "What are those signs of formations that are seen as self by people who "have not fully understood the adherences"?" Hi Tep, From the sutta, the end of ignorance is understanding that nothing is truely desirable. The consequence of that is seeing things differently, namely, that nothing is desirable. Seeing things as desirable is therefore seeing everything as self. I might add that nothing is seen as problematical either. In other words, no dukkha. Here the commentary equates ignorance with self-view in a general way. Larry 51087 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 0:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine / Abandoning Conceit upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 10/5/05 6:13:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, tepsastri@... writes: > Tep: It is important to notice the following. Although "conceit is to be > abandoned" means complete eradication of conceit, "food is to be > abandoned" does not mean quit eating food. > ================= Yes! LOL! 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) 51088 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 4:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditional that bring conditional lbidd2 Hi Leoaive, Thanks for your introduction. Do I have your name correctly? One way of meditating on conditional arising is to focus on the present moment. Mindfulness of the present moment will condition the arising of the next present moment. To ignore the present moment will condition the arising of a reaction based on our accumulated tendencies and habits. A reaction can be anything such as like, dislike, boredom, panic, etc. As you say, this is a matter of understanding rather than tranquility. Understanding can take quite a while to develop ;-) I hope you find your stay here profitable (kusala). Larry 51089 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 4:57pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine philofillet Hi Howard > I frequently write "We start where we are, not where we would hope to > be." I believe the following sutta supports that contention. I frequently think about this line of yours, so I had better read this! I remember reading this sutta a could of years ago, and noting that while other defilements can be abandoned through right understanding of them, this is not the case for sexual intercourse, or that was the interpretation I made at that time. I think it is playing with fire for worldlings to say "well, the sutta says conceit can be abandoned by relying on conceit." And craving. Latching on to a sutta in order to justify using unwholesome roots for the development of wholesome roots? Hmm. No merci. Our understanding of suttas is superficial, so latching on to one to justify practices which logic says are unwholesome and unwise (using akusala to get rid of akusala) seems dangerous. I would rather reflect on the countless suttas that warn of the danger of greed (lobha) (as well as hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha)) than one sutta, but that is me. On the other hand, we certainly know that running away from craving or conceit, pretending that they don't exist, vowing and intending not to have them is futile. It is by understanding that akusala rises beyond our control, and understanding it when it arises that we can begin to develop the panna that will lead to their eradication. So in that sense, sure. Know them. It is by knowing them that we eradicate greed, hated and ignorance. There is a very clear sutta to that effect. But rely on them? Beware. Anyway, I know where you're coming from. About a year ago I posted about "using self for the purpose of laying off self" or something like that. But I think it is a device that goes against the whole point of the Buddha's teaching - detachment for the purpose of liberation. But the sutta is interesting and I will look at it again, if conditions bring it to my attention. I wish it were in SN or MN so I could read BB's translation. Hopefully we will have BB's AN in several years. Phil p.s Howard, I was feeling an affectionate comradery with you yesterday when thinking about how we both have recently stated that we would post less, but are back at it. Wholesome conditions at work, beyond our control. We are driven to discuss Dhamma - we don't do the driving. 51090 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 5:06pm Subject: Re: Inevitable atta-ditthi when reading suttas? philofillet Hi Tep > Thank you for showing me a mirror so that I may look at my face ! {:- Thanks for the long response, Tep. I will let you have the final word. Except on one point - it was uncharitable of you to say that I never read suttas. I have read and do read many. I often mention my fondness for SN. But I prefer not to use them as weapons as in a legal case. If I quote from a sutta, I do it within my prose, sharing what I understand of it (usually not much) rather than just laying down a link to acces to insight or a chunk of quotation. The suttas represent the Buddha's understanding, not our own. So it best to refer to them in the context of our own limited understanding rather than pretending that they represent our understanding. If we just wave them around to prove a point without discussing what we understand of them we are like crows with shiny things in their beaks, and not much more than that - in my opinion. Phil 51091 From: "nidive" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 5:53pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine nidive Hi Phil, > I think it is playing with fire for worldlings to say "well, the > sutta says conceit can be abandoned by relying on conceit." And > craving. Latching on to a sutta in order to justify using > unwholesome roots for the development of wholesome roots? Hmm. No > merci. Our understanding of suttas is superficial, so latching on to > one to justify practices which logic says are unwholesome and unwise > (using akusala to get rid of akusala) seems dangerous. I would > rather reflect on the countless suttas that warn of the danger of > greed (lobha) (as well as hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha)) than > one sutta, but that is me. Isn't it by means of conceit and craving that the Buddha-to-be perfected the paramis and achieved Buddhahood? Isn't it because of conceit that the Buddha-to-be thought that he would achieve Buddhahood just like all previous Buddhas? Isn't it because of craving that the Buddha-to-be left home in search of the Noble Ancient Path? Regards, Swee Boon 51092 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 6:31pm Subject: Listening to Dhamma with Joy robmoult Hi All, A good DSG friend contacted me off-list regarding my "problem" with being too critical of Dhamma speakers. He said, "How much of that earlier joy was conditioned by attachment and ignorance? Very easy it is to mistake piety and piiti for understanding. Discerning how much adhamma passes for Dhamma is not always pleasant but is necessary, I think--separating the wheat from the chaff." Here are the general guidelines that I use: - Unwholesome: "I enjoyed listening to the Dhamma Talk" - Wholesome: "I listened to the Dhamma talk with joy" Tranquility =========== - Unwholesome: I remember the amusing stories from the Dhamma talk. My pleasant feeling is mixed with excitement and agitation (uddhacca). - Wholesome: I am suffused with a warm feeling from being in the presence of something beautiful. I am patient to listen to the Dhamma so that I will have more understanding. I have no anxieties, "Do I have enough progress in the Dhamma" because I know it all depends on conditions. I do not forget the goal of the teachings. Agility ======= - Unwholesome: The Dhamma talk is finished; "the show is over". There are conditions for apathy, sloth and torpor. - Wholesome: I leave the Dhamma talk inspired to take positive action. My mind is ready to quickly seize an opportunity for kusala actions. Pliancy ======= - Unwholesome: I focus on my enjoyment of the experience. My focus is on myself, not on the Dhamma. There is a strong sense of conceit. - Wholesome: I focus on the application of the Dhamma. My mind is naturally spreading the Dhamma learned to various aspects of my life. Adaptability ============ - Unwholesome: Though I enjoyed the Dhamma talk, I would say that there were both "fun parts" and "boring parts". I classify portions of the talk as either good or bad thereby making my mind less workable. - Workable: I leave the talk with an even balance of muduta (pliancy); not too little so as to resist changing my mind, not too much so as to have the impressions of the Dhamma overwritten by the next sensation. Proficiency =========== - Unwholesome: I will soon feel dukkha. I will miss the fun experience of the Dhamma talk. My mental state is "sickly". - Wholesome: I have performed a kusala action by listening to the Dhamma talk and I am aware of this fact. This awareness gives my mental state confidence and strength. Uprightness =========== - Unwholesome: I remember who saw me attend the Dhamma talk and am pleased that I will be considered by others to be religious. There is a superficial hypocrisy in my mental state. - Wholesome: I am feeling a spontaneous love of the Dhamma. My volition is pure. As it is cetana that determines the moral quality of any action, the kammic effect of attending the Dhamma talk for me will be significant. Of course, in reality, there are always moments of unwholesome mixed with moments of wholesome. Abhidhammikas will recoginize this as an application of the six pairs of universal kusala cetasikas. Metta, Rob M :-) 51093 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 6:41pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta : Seeing All Signs as Self buddhistmedi... Hi, Larry - Thank you for responding to my question. -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > Tep: "What are those signs of formations that are seen as self by > people who "have not fully understood the adherences"?" > > Hi Tep, > > From the sutta, the end of ignorance is understanding that nothing is > truely desirable. The consequence of that is seeing things differently, > namely, that nothing is desirable. Seeing things as desirable is > therefore seeing everything as self. I might add that nothing is seen as > problematical either. In other words, no dukkha. Here the commentary > equates ignorance with self-view in a general way. > > Larry Tep: But what are the "signs of formations"? Regards, Tep ======== 51094 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 6:51pm Subject: Re: Inevitable atta-ditthi when reading suttas? buddhistmedi... Hi, Phil - Since you don't like a long reply, I can give you just one sentence. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > Hi Tep > > > Thank you for showing me a mirror so that I may look at my face ! > {:- > > > Thanks for the long response, Tep. I will let you have the final > word. Except on one point - it was uncharitable of you to say that I > never read suttas. I have read and do read many. I often mention my > fondness for SN. But I prefer not to use them as weapons as in a > legal case. If I quote from a sutta, I do it within my prose, > sharing what I understand of it (usually not much) rather than just > laying down a link to acces to insight or a chunk of quotation. The > suttas represent the Buddha's understanding, not our own. So it best > to refer to them in the context of our own limited understanding > rather than pretending that they represent our understanding. If we > just wave them around to prove a point without discussing what we > understand of them we are like crows with shiny things in their > beaks, and not much more than that - in my opinion. > > Phil Phil, you are assuming too much. Regards, Tep ============= 51095 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 7:19pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhistmedi... Hi, Swee and Phil - May I be allowed to say a few words? > Phil : > > > I think it is playing with fire for worldlings to say "well, the > > sutta says conceit can be abandoned by relying on conceit." And > > craving. Latching on to a sutta in order to justify using > > unwholesome roots for the development of wholesome roots? Hmm. No merci. Our understanding of suttas is superficial, so latching on to one to justify practices which logic says are unwholesome and unwise (using akusala to get rid of akusala) seems dangerous. I would > > rather reflect on the countless suttas that warn of the danger of > > greed (lobha) (as well as hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha)) than > > one sutta, but that is me. Tep: You are off the point, Phil. Saying "Latching on to a sutta in order to justify using unwholesome roots for the development of wholesome roots?" shows that you don't understand this sutta. Unwholesome roots must be clearly known in order that they may be abandoned and wholesome roots be developed in their place. Both kusala and akusala dhammas are parts of "the raft" that the Bodhisatta used to cross over the river of samsara. > Swee : > Isn't it by means of conceit and craving that the Buddha-to-be > perfected the paramis and achieved Buddhahood? > > Isn't it because of conceit that the Buddha-to-be thought that he > would achieve Buddhahood just like all previous Buddhas? > > Isn't it because of craving that the Buddha-to-be left home in search > of the Noble Ancient Path? > Tep: I appreciate your clear understanding of the Bhikkhuni Sutta. Regards, Tep ========== 51096 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 3:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 10/5/05 8:15:25 PM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > p.s Howard, I was feeling an affectionate comradery with you > yesterday when thinking about how we both have recently stated that > we would post less, but are back at it. Wholesome conditions at > work, beyond our control. We are driven to discuss Dhamma - we don't > do the driving. > ========================= With regard to reduced posting, I said at the outset that I would continue to reply to posts sent to me, and that also I would initiate matters I consider to be important. What I consider to be of great importance is the welfare of sentient beings. When I see good people going in what I believe is truly a wrong direction, I feel compelled (uh, oh - no control! ;-) to speak up. I particularly feel that Buddhists are going in the wrong direction when they are so much involved in a position that they even ignore the Buddha's direct and explicit teaching to the contrary. There are suttas that, due to our confusion or to a translation problem or to our lack of understanding of the culture circa 1500 BCE, are unclear in meaning to us. This is not an example of such. This is a sutta that is explicit and clear. Despite the posting I've been doing, I have yet resisted responding to many posts on this list and others, and my posts have been more parsimonious of verbiage. So, while I am not all-powerful (LOL!), I still am able to to exert some influence. ;-) Happily, my recent practice has been regular and heart ening, and I very much hope the same is true for you. 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) 51097 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 8:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on Interpreting a Sutta : Seeing All Signs as Self lbidd2 Tep: "what are the "signs of formations"? " Hi Tep, Signs (nimitta) are a kind of shorthand that we us to identify things. For example, the shape of a tree signals that that is a tree. The shape of a man signals that that is a being. When insight arises we see the signs of the 5 khandhas, or of impermanence, or of undesirable details such as hairs, teeth, sweat, etc. Signs are essential for the functioning of perception (sa~n~naa), imo. I haven't been able to find any detailed discussion of nimitta in the texts but it is mentioned in both sutta and commentary. I don't know if it is discussed or listed in the abhidhamma pitaka. Nimitta may not be discussed in detail because it is concept and concept is supposedly not reality, but I think what is not reality is the referent of concept or sign. There can be no real, literal, referent of a sign simply because a sign is an abstraction. Reality isn't as simple as a sign makes it appear. A sign makes a profusion of details appear as a single unit, a self. It accomplishes this by means of abstraction rather than synthesis, which is the domain of sankhara khandha. Because of that simplicity a sign is very useful as an object of tranquility meditation (jhana). In insight there is multiplicity in unity. Many details, like abhidhamma. It is said that perception marks its object like a carpenter marks a piece of wood [for identification]. Possibly what is meant by "mark" is "sign". Larry 51098 From: "Hal" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 10:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) bardosein Jonothan, I now see that I've created some confusion here regarding the authorship of these notes to the sutta. Thanks for the clarification. Hal . --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi Hal (and Dan, Rob and Howard) > > Hal wrote: > > >Hi Dan, Rob and Howard, > > > >"Bhikkhus, 'I am' is an involvement with conceit, 'I am this' is an > >involvement with conceit; 'I shall be' is an involvement with > >conceit, 'I shall not be' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall > >consist of form' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be > >percipient' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be > >nonpercipient' is an involvement with conceit;..... Involvement with > >conceit is a disease, involvement with conceit is a turmour; > >involvement with disease is a dart. Therefore, bhikkhus, you should > >train yourselves thus: 'We will dwell with a mind in which conceit > >has been struck down.' Thus you should train yourselves." (35. > >_Salayatanasamyutta_, (SN p.1259) > > > > > >Here's some more of Bhikkhu Bodhi's interesting comments taken from > >his notes to the above paragraph: > > > >"_Managata_. Spk: Conceit itself is an involvement with conceit. In > >this passage, "I am" is stated by way of the conceit associated with > >craving; "I am this," by way of view. Although conceit does not > >arise in immediate conjunction with views (according to the > >Abhidhamma analysis of mind-moments, they are mutually exclusive), > >views occur because conceit has not been abandoned. So this is said > >with reference to views rooted in conceit." (SN 1432) > > > > > > This is an interesting area to discuss, but I'd like to clarify which > parts of the above note are comments of BB and which are translation of > the commentary ('Spk'). On the face of it, everything except what is in > brackets appears to be from the commentary -- is that how it appears in > the printed version? Thanks. > > Jon 51099 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 10:18pm Subject: Re: (Sukinder & Htoo)Long Discussion 3 (2nd session) 3 kenhowardau Dear Htoo, You wrote to Sukin: --------------------- > I think you and DSGs hate 'the idea of specific place and time'. But whatever you are saying The Buddha teachings say 'ara~n~na gato vaa, rukkhamula gato vaa, su~n~nagaara gato vaa'. The Buddha did say this. The Buddha never say 'unfruitful speech'. How do you think? PS: See Mahaasatipatthaana Sutta. There is no reason not to know this 'mahaasatipatthaana sutta'. ''aranna gato vaa, rukkhamuula gato vaa, sunnagara gato vaa'' = having gone to forest, having gone to foot of tree, having gone to unoccupied building/place. ---------------------------- The Mahasatipatthana sutta describes how satipatthana can arise in cases where the conditions for its arising have been put in place. It begins by describing how satipatthana can arise in conjunction with jhana: it says, "There is the case where a monk, having gone to a forest, . . ." There is no instruction to go to a forest, is there? The same applies elsewhere in the sutta where it describes how satipatthana arises in the absence of jhana. There is no instruction, just a description. In fact, there are no instructions (to go somewhere or to do something) anywhere in the Tipitaka. This absence of instructions is very appropriate, don't you think? Right mindfulness will arise here and now, provided the conditions for its arising are in place. If some of those conditions are missing, there can be no right mindfulness here and now. There is no time to go out and do something about it: it is too late! We shouldn't be distressed about the lack of instructions. There is no self that exists now in an unenlightened state, hoping to continue into the future in an enlightened state. If there could be instructions to go somewhere or do something in order to get enlightened, then the universe could not possibly be the way the Buddha described it. But it is the way he described it, and there cannot be any instructions. We have the Buddha's description of ultimate reality, and, in the case where it has been studied thoroughly and understood correctly, panna cetasika can arise to know one of the presently arisen dhammas. In any other case, cetasikas of various other kinds will arise. I hope I don't seem to be prattling on with a lot of gobbledegook or trying to be clever: I really believe this is the way to understand the Dhamma. Ken H 51100 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 10:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine corvus121 Hello Howard In message 51096, you wrote to Phil: "What I consider to be of great importance is the welfare of sentient beings. When I see good people going in what I believe is truly a wrong direction, I feel compelled (uh, oh - no control! ;-) to speak up. I particularly feel that Buddhists are going in the wrong direction when they are so much involved in a position that they even ignore the Buddha's direct and explicit teaching to the contrary. There are suttas that, due to our confusion or to a translation problem or to our lack of understanding of the culture circa 1500 BCE, are unclear in meaning to us." If I may venture an opinion, I think your difficulty is with the concept of "desana", defined by Nyanatiloka thus: "exposition of the doctrine, may be either an exposition true in the highest sense (paramattha-desana); or it may not be true in the highest, but only in the conventional sense (vohara-desana)." The suttas tell us plainly that arahants do not confuse the highest with the conventional and vice versa e.g. "[The arahant] might still say `I speak', and he might say `They speak to me' [but] skilful, knowing the world's parlance, he uses such terms as mere expressions." (SN Devatasamyutta 25). We worldlings are different, of course. I think you are too distracted by – and maybe even averse to – expositions in paramattha-desana. And by the way, this is not an issue so unique to Buddhism. Linguists have noted that English religious language (in the Christian context) operates on 2 levels – one technical and the other pragmatic. Crystal and Davy give this example: "… the full theological exposition of a term such as `almighty' is a complicated matter: a number of other metaphysical concepts have to be introduced and related, Scriptural reference has to be made, and apparent counter-examples have to be dealt with. The meaning of `almighty' to the non-theologian, however, is very different: it is conceived of in essentially human terms, as simply the maximum degree of `might' that the believer can envisage, with all the implications of this. This is the main point about what is usually referred to as the `analogical' nature of religious language: it is capable of being interpreted on two largely independent planes. Both planes can ultimately be conflated in the central notion `God', but at any one time, either of the alternative modes of interpretation may be referred to. This inherent `duality' is a distinctive feature of the character of religious theological vocabulary. It is not found elsewhere in English." (Investigating English Style, Longman, London, 1969, page 167). Regarding the Bhikkhuni Sutta, I prefer Nyanaponika's translation which reads e.g. "this body has come into being through craving, yet based on craving, craving can be abandoned." Some may read this in a conventional sense and decide that "I" can use and control "my" craving to get myself to liberation. I think these people are being simplistic in the extreme and, as you say, going in a wrong direction. It seems clear to me that the Buddha did not see conventional thoughts like "I wish for this and that to happen" as determinative. They are more of a side-show, not always present. Hence, he says in AN VII 71 (Bhavana Sutta) that whether a hen's eggs will hatch isn't determined by her having the thought "I wish my eggs to hatch now". Indeed, even if the hen has no such thought at all, the eggs will still hatch if all the conditions are present. I will take it further and say that when the eggs hatch, the foolish hen then thinks "There you go, I hatched my eggs through my own volition." Volition is taken to be the only or the principal reason why the eggs hatched. That understanding is simplistic in the extreme and frankly wrong. I have just let my copy of the MN fall open and I have the Cetokhila Sutta in front of me as translated by BB and B. Nanamoli. There is a whole string of passages like "a bhikkhu is not angry and displeased with his companions in the holy life, nor resentful and callous towards them, and thus his mind inclines to ardour, devotion, perseverance, and striving. As his mind inclines to ardour, devotion, perseverance and striving, this fifth wilderness in the heart has been abandoned by him." In this translation, there are no sentences like "a bhikkhu should not be angry and resentful but should be devoted and persistent." But even in the absence of such language, many folk will re-write the passage in those terms and insist that that is the higher meaning. They say: "The meaning is perfectly clear. That's what the Buddha said monks have to do." As I see it, the problem with this is not that it sees a conventional message, but that it lets that conventional message deny or try to transform the higher level. I think the process should be reversed – an understanding, however weak, of the higher level may affect the conventional level. Just HOW that works is the part that interests me most – and I'm still very much working on it! Please feel free to point out any glaring errors in the above. And Howard, don't feel obliged to reply if it is disruptive to your meditation. Best wishes Andrew T 51101 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 10:52pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I kenhowardau Hi Rob M, Thank you for this message; I think it has been very helpful to our discussion. Your final paragraph is hard to resist, so I might start there and work backwards: ----------------------------------- RM: > Am I correct that your position is that the modern "formal vipassana meditation" practice is not helpful for anybody? ----------------------------------- Yes, that is correct, even though it might seem an extreme position to take. I hasten to add, however, that other kinds of meditation can have therapeutic value. But formal, so-called 'Buddhist' meditation always involves wrong view. (IMHO, of course). So I have to disappoint you where you say: ------------------------------------------ > Ken, I am hoping <. . .> that perhaps you consider yourself as falling into the "not helpful for me" bucket of Point D. ------------------------------------------ And Point D was, of course: ------------------------------------------------------ > D. "Formal vipassana meditation" can be very helpful for some people (depending on their accumulations) ------------------------------------------------------ This "working backwards" business is hard work! I will start again - this time at the beginning. --------------- RM: > I agree that bhavana is a broader concept than "formal meditation". You may be surprised to hear how the Atthasalini explains "meditation" (translated as culture in the PTS version): In one who cultivates himself, regarding both the eye as impermanent, ill and selfless, and the other senses and the mind, also visible and other sense-objects, objects of thought, sense-cognition with mental cognition, sense-contact, feeling born of sense-contact, perception of sense-objects, old age and death all in same way as is taught in analytical knowledge (Patisambhida) by the path of insight, all his volitions that have not attained ecstasy in the 38 objects of consciousness (40 kammatthanas minus aloka and akasa) constitute the basis of meritorious action in culture (bhavana). ------------------------------- I can see that is a very pertinent quote, but I'm not sure how to understand it. I'm not even sure how to discuss it. Perhaps we should leave it for another time. ---------------------------- <. . .> RM: > My definition of "formal meditation" is sitting in a specific posture concentrating the mind leading to jhana. I find your term "formal vipassana meditation" as a bit of an oxymoron (I will explain more later). ---------------------------- It's interesting that you deny the effectiveness of formal vipassana meditation. I didn't realise that. However, the debate is not over: my objections to formal practice extend to formal samatha practice. :-) -------------------------------- <. . .> RM: > I stand by my position that Buddhist monks (and other ascetics at the time) sat around doing "formal meditation" and attaining jhanas. Formal meditation (to achieve jhanas) figures prominently in the Suttas; it is definitely part of the Buddha's teaching. Before enlightenment, Gotama learned jhana meditation from his two teachers. This shows that other ascetics also practiced "formal meditation" leading to jhanas. ----------------------------------- Can your definition of formal meditation include lobha, dosa and moha? Do you remember the sutta story of the hypothetical monk who, having been attacked by bandits, impaled on a spear and rotated (twisting his bowel), had slight feelings of ill will? The Buddha declared that monk to be no monk of his. I think you will agree that the compassionate Buddha must have been talking about ultimate reality (the namas and rupas of six worlds). Akusala citta, regardless of how prompted it might be, can never be bhavana. ---------------------------------------------------- KH: > > Did alarm bells ring when you wrote that? There was a difference you know! :-) >===== RM: > I do not think that there was any difference in the jhana meditation techniques taught by the Buddha and taught by other ascetics. ------------------------- Good point, I take that back. Needless to say, jhana cittas remained the same after the Buddha as before him. They just came to be understood differently. In any case, jhana meditators of all sects knew the difference between kusala and akusala. They knew that samatha, which arose exclusively with kusala consciousness, conditioned more kusala consciousness and more samatha. There was no misapprehension that the akusala pleasant feeling that arose with attachment could ever condition samatha. Therefore, they understood that sitting straight-backed (for example) had no efficacy in its own right. The accompanying kusala consciousness was all-important. My guess is that sitting straight- backed was a sign of intense effort (though not always, of course). It was the effort, and not the posture that had potency. I would assume that a meditator with spinal deformities could still attain jhana. (?) ------------------------------------------ <. . .> RM: > - I am not arguing that there is a "formal vipassana meditation" in the Suttas; I am saying that "formal vipassana meditation" is a recent invention (by Mahasi Sayadaw and Goenka) based on the principles in the Satipatthana Sutta. ------------------------------------------ Yes, their teachings are new in a way. I suspect that various false versions of vipassana meditation occurred even in the earliest days of the Dhamma. Whenever the Dhamma is wrongly grasped, people will try to make vipassana happen. --------------------------- RM: > I label "formal vispassana meditation" as an oxymoron as "formal meditation" happens at a specific time while "vipassana" should be constant. --------------------------- Yes, it should be here and now - that is extremely important. Constant vipassana would be a bit too much to expect, though, don't you think? -------------------------------------- <. . .> RM: > In summary form, here is my perspective: A. Jhana is an important part of the Buddha's teaching ---------------------------------- I would agree in so far as all of the Buddha's teaching is important. Jhana is just one type of citta that needs to be understood. That includes understanding it is not an essential factor for enlightenment. ----------------------------------- RM: > (it is "right concentration" in the Noble Eightfold Path). ----------------------------------- No, strictly speaking, right concentration of the NEP is unique. It is very intense - at least as intense as the first jhana and sometimes as intense as the higher jhanas. But that is where the similarity ends, I think. (Corrections welcome.) ------------------------- RM: > Achieving jhana requires "formal meditation" (sitting with one's legs crossed, etc.). -------------------------- In the later stages of samatha development, when the meditator has mastered morality (suppressed immorality), it becomes possible for javana cittas at the mind-door to repeatedly arise uninterrupted by any other kind of citta. I think that is when straight-backed sitting and the homeless life become necessary. If the meditator becomes distracted by akusala consciousness, he risks losing the meditation object permanently. More to the point, achieving right concentration of the NEP does not require sitting, does it? ----------------------------------- RM: > B. Vipassana is a unique part of the Buddha's teaching and should be applied at all moments (however there are different techniques for accomplishing this - see Kimsuka Sutta SN XXXV.204 for four different modes practiced by different Arahants) ------------------------------------ Yes, although as I said, there is a difference between 'all moments' and 'the present moment.' ---------------------- RM: > C. "Formal vipassana meditation" is a recent invention (i.e. Mahasi Sayadaw, Goenka), not described in the Suttas (though it is based on principles found in the Suttas) ----------------------- Incorrectly based. -------------------------------- RM: > D. "Formal vipassana meditation" can be very helpful for some people (depending on their accumulations) -------------------------------- Yoga meditation (for example) can be helpful, but formal vipassana meditation cannot. It denies conditionality. What could be less helpful - and more harmful - than that? But this is where I came in. It's always nice chatting with you Rob. I look forward to any further comments you might like to make. Ken H 51102 From: "robmoult" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 11:10pm Subject: A bit more harmony, please :-) robmoult Hi All, I have noticed that recent discussions on DSG have been slightly less harmonious than in the past. By harmony, I am not hoping that there is more agreement among DSG members (I never learned anything from anybody who agreed with me). By harmony, I am saying that it is nicer for everybody (including lurkers) when we conduct our discussions with respect and compassion. We all have bad days; this applies both to "posters" and "postees". I will be adding a new group as I radiate metta during meditation... "DSG Members". May you all be well and happy. Metta, Rob M :-) PS: Ken H, it is only a coincidence that this post happens to follow your excellent message to me :-) 51103 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 11:43pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhatrue Hi Phil (Howard, Tep, Swee Boon), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > I think it is playing with fire for worldlings to say "well, the > sutta says conceit can be abandoned by relying on conceit." And > craving. Latching on to a sutta in order to justify using > unwholesome roots for the development of wholesome roots? Hmm. No > merci. Our understanding of suttas is superficial, so latching on to > one to justify practices which logic says are unwholesome and unwise > (using akusala to get rid of akusala) seems dangerous. I would > rather reflect on the countless suttas that warn of the danger of > greed (lobha) (as well as hatred (dosa) and delusion (moha)) than > one sutta, but that is me. You have something of a point here, but I think that the context is all wrong. To give an example, one might misunderstand the teaching of Mahayana that "Samsara is Nibbana, and Nibbana is Samsara" by thinking that the way to nibbana is through lust, greed, and delusion. That, of course, is not correct. There was even a movement in the United States during the sixties called `Beat Zen'. The adherents believed that by running around, taking drugs, disrespecting society, having illicit sex, and getting drunk, that they could get closer to nibbana. Of course, they were mistaken, and it cost the founder of this movement, Jack Kerouac, his life at an early age. But, as I said, your comments are wrong in this context. Do you see me, Howard, Tep, or Swee Boon advocating the use of drugs and/or alcohol, illicit sex, thrill seeking, and disrespecting society as a means to enlightenment? I don't see that and so I think that your concerns are unfounded. There is such a thing as wholesome desire (even Nina agrees). There is also such a thing as wholesome conceit. And I read before on nibbana.com, but I lost my bookmark, that there is such a think as wholesome disappointment and depression (by being disappointed and or depressed that one hasn't been able to follow the Noble Eightfold Path). Our argument isn't, "Hey, Ananda said that desire and conceit can be used to abandon desire and conceit! Bring out the beer keg! Get the strippers! Let the party begin!" ;-)). We are advocating the use of WHOLESOME desire and conceit. The problem with the KS crew, including you, is that you have become so fearful of desire and conceit that it causes a paralysis in your practice. Now, one final thing, I know that the wholesome and the unwholesome are mixed up all the time. It is not possible for any of us to say that we will always use only wholesome desire and conceit in following the Noble Eightfold Path. Some unwholesome stuff will get mixed in. But, that is the point of practice, to work closer and closer to simply the wholesome. Being overly fearful and cautious doesn't assure this, pure practice is the only way to separate the bad from the good. Metta, James 51104 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:01am Subject: Re: A bit more harmony, please :-) buddhatrue Hi Rob M., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi All, > > I have noticed that recent discussions on DSG have been slightly less > harmonious than in the past. James: Really? What past? You have just rejoined DSG after a long absence so I am wondering what past you are referring to. It seems to me that discussions go through periods of harmony and then periods of disharmony. Anicca. But, you make me wonder if you find my posts creating disharmony (as some do). If so, just say the word and I can stop posting or post less. I don't like to create disharmony- but I am also not going to sacrifice my beliefs. (Maybe other members also wonder who you mean??). > > By harmony, I am not hoping that there is more agreement among DSG > members (I never learned anything from anybody who agreed with me). > > By harmony, I am saying that it is nicer for everybody (including > lurkers) when we conduct our discussions with respect and compassion. > > We all have bad days; this applies both to "posters" and "postees". > > I will be adding a new group as I radiate metta during > meditation... "DSG Members". May you all be well and happy. James: That will be nice! Glad to see you practicing the Brahma Viharas. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) Metta, James 51105 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:09am Subject: Re: Inevitable atta-ditthi when reading suttas? philofillet Hi Tep > Phil, you are assuming too much. You're right - proliferation galore. Thanks for the above line - I think it will stick with me. Phil 51106 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:25am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine philofillet Hi Swee > Isn't it by means of conceit and craving that the Buddha-to-be > perfected the paramis and achieved Buddhahood? > > Isn't it because of conceit that the Buddha-to-be thought that he > would achieve Buddhahood just like all previous Buddhas? > > Isn't it because of craving that the Buddha-to-be left home in search > of the Noble Ancient Path? > Thanks for these questions, Swee. I really appreciate the way you lay things out - always good gist for reflection. I wouldn't have thought it was craving and conceit motivating the Buddha-to-be. Wasn't it samvega, a sense of urgency, or chanda (zeal?) But I know what you mean. If there is any progress being made by Phil on the path, it is rooted most of the time in conceit and craving, yes, that's true. If I'm honest, I have to admit that's true. But I really think we should beware of accepting this an an inevitability. I read this sutta that made me think of this thread: "Who so delights in form (and other khandas, including mental formations) delights in suffering. Who so delights in suffering will not be freed from suffering." I think we should be aware that the pleasure ("delight") we get out of Dhamma and our Dhamma practice might not be as wholesome as we assume. There can be clinging to the pleasant mental states (mental formation khanda) associated with Dhamma practice, and this could be as the passage above suggests deepening rather than loosening our bonds. This is what I came to see with the way I was approaching Brahma- Viharas, though this needn't be the case for anyone else. Phil 51107 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:26am Subject: Re: A bit more harmony, please :-) robmoult Hi James, You are correct... I had been away for quite a while. Perhaps while I was away, I created an "idealized DSG" in my mind in which everybody generally got along :-) Perhaps, when I returned, the "real DSG" was different from how I thought I remembered it. Perhaps the intrinsic nature of DSG hasn't changed at all!! My message was not aimed at a particuar individual, nor even a set of individuals; I was commenting on a general impression, not reacting to a specific post or set of posts. James, the post was not aimed at you or any other individual. You know, walking barefoot on the earth can be painful at times. I can solve this problem either by covering the entire earth with a layer of soft leather, or alternatively by covering the soles of my feet with soft leather. Metta meditation is my way of putting soft leather on the soles of my feet. The world is as it is. In any case, a bit more harmony wouldn't hurt... :-) Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Rob M., > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I have noticed that recent discussions on DSG have been slightly > less > > harmonious than in the past. > > James: Really? What past? You have just rejoined DSG after a long > absence so I am wondering what past you are referring to. It seems > to me that discussions go through periods of harmony and then > periods of disharmony. Anicca. But, you make me wonder if you find > my posts creating disharmony (as some do). If so, just say the word > and I can stop posting or post less. I don't like to create > disharmony- but I am also not going to sacrifice my beliefs. (Maybe > other members also wonder who you mean??). > > > > > By harmony, I am not hoping that there is more agreement among DSG > > members (I never learned anything from anybody who agreed with me). > > > > By harmony, I am saying that it is nicer for everybody (including > > lurkers) when we conduct our discussions with respect and > compassion. > > > > We all have bad days; this applies both to "posters" and "postees". > > > > I will be adding a new group as I radiate metta during > > meditation... "DSG Members". May you all be well and happy. > > James: That will be nice! Glad to see you practicing the Brahma > Viharas. > > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > Metta, > James 51108 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:40am Subject: Re: A bit more harmony, please :-) philofillet Hi Rob > I have noticed that recent discussions on DSG have been slightly less > harmonious than in the past. That could be because of me. To be honest, there are many days I feel a lot of hostility towards people who slag A. Sujin by using terms that suggest she is a cult leader, because this group does after all stem from her talks, as I've said before. It seems like bad manners. Also, I am a new "devotee" ("brainwashee", some would say) and naturally there is a beginnner's defensiveness happening because of that. I think it will pass, and your reminder could be a helpful condition in that direction. > > I will be adding a new group as I radiate metta during > meditation... "DSG Members" >May you all be well and happy. Thanks. And thanks always for your posts. Personally, I think we help each other more by sharing our knowledge of Dhamma than by radiating metta, but please keep radiating that metta my way just in case I am wrong. I want to cover all my bases. :) Phil 51109 From: "leoaive" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:46am Subject: everyday schedule leoaive Hi! i want to follow by some kind of time schedule in my life. I have my work and study, and I want to set everything by time. How many hours should I sleep, meditate, read and so far. I could not find that in suttas. In Vinaya it is given for monks, but my style of life is much different. I wish to know what would be good for lay people. Does anyone has an idea? 51110 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 9:45pm Subject: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend Phil wrote: Reg: Translation of Nibbida: >Bhikkhu Bodhi uses "revulsion." Bhuddhadhatta Mahathera suggests "weariness" "disgust" "aversion" Agree with the patience! It is like eating: While still hungry one delights in more food. When approaching being full this urge calms. When being too full one disgusts more food! This disgust induces disillusion in the sense one realizes the futility & slavery of any (food) urge... That disillusion releases mind in the sense that it inhibits future arising of lust & urge. This is thus stilling, peace, freedom & bliss! In conclusion: Disgust leads (paradoxically) to Bliss! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 51111 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 5:56am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine jwromeijn About AN IV 159 Bhikkhuni Sutta What happened in the nunnery? I did read this sutta a year or so ago and did not give it much attention: it seemed evident what Ananda teached. But today I read it again and again, in the translation of Nyanaponika and that of Thanissaro Bhikkhu; especially because I could not understand why the nun (unnamed, how wise of Ananda) apologized so strongly after Ananda's explanation. And then my conclusion was, after reading Ananda's quote of the Buddha's words that "sexual intercourse [is] a cutting off of the bridge": the nun was not sick at all, she was laying in bed trying to seduce Ananda. Maybe that is not important at all and only an occasion to give this explanation, so good explained by James. But maybe this fact - that Ananda of course got immediately - is the explanation for the words he used (although I don't understand the connection) Metta Joop 51112 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 6:38am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Ken H, I am going to preface each of my comments with either "fact" or "opinion". I treat a "fact" as something that can be verified by consulting Suttas whereas "opinion" is something that is outside the Suttas. We can debate "facts" by consulting the ancient texts. I am less interested in debating opinions as there may be no resolution (i.e. you say "tom-ah-to", I say "tom-ay-to"). Please review my comments below and let me know if you disagree with anything that I have presented as "fact". Then let me know which of my "opinions" you disagree with. I think that I can guess...:-) ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Thank you for this message; I think it has been very helpful to our > discussion. Your final paragraph is hard to resist, so I might start > there and work backwards: > > ----------------------------------- > RM: > Am I correct that your position is that the modern "formal > vipassana meditation" practice is not helpful for anybody? > ----------------------------------- > > Yes, that is correct, even though it might seem an extreme position > to take. > > I hasten to add, however, that other kinds of meditation can have > therapeutic value. But formal, so-called 'Buddhist' meditation always > involves wrong view. (IMHO, of course). ===== Opinion: I understand your position though I disagree with it. ===== > RM: > My definition of "formal meditation" is sitting in a specific > posture concentrating the mind leading to jhana. I find your > term "formal vipassana meditation" as a bit of an oxymoron (I will > explain more later). > ---------------------------- > > It's interesting that you deny the effectiveness of formal vipassana > meditation. I didn't realise that. However, the debate is not over: > my objections to formal practice extend to formal samatha > practice. :-) ===== Opinion: I belive that what is called "formal vipassana meditation" can be of great benefit, though I find the name to be an oxymoron. Fact: The Buddha defined Right Concentration as attaining the jhanas (see SN XLV.8). Fact: Attaining jhana requires intense concentration Opinion: The only way to achieve this level of intense concentration is to maintain a fixed posture over an extended time period; one does not attain jhana walking to the supermarket... one must remain motionless in a posture that supports motionless for an extended period (i.e. cross legged with straight back). Fact: It is the mental state that defines jhana; sitting in a full lotus for one hour is meaningless if the mental state is not appropriate. Interesting Fact: Experiencing Nibbana does not require intense concentration; there are many stories of people achieving sainthood while doing the equivalent of "going to the supermarket". ===== > > -------------------------------- > <. . .> > RM: > I stand by my position that Buddhist monks (and other ascetics > at the time) sat around doing "formal meditation" and attaining > jhanas. Formal meditation (to achieve jhanas) figures prominently in > the Suttas; it is definitely part of the Buddha's teaching. Before > enlightenment, Gotama learned jhana meditation from his two teachers. > This shows that other ascetics also practiced "formal meditation" > leading to jhanas. > ----------------------------------- > > Can your definition of formal meditation include lobha, dosa and > moha? ===== Fact: Jhana mental states never ever include lobha, dosa or moha. The Abhidhamma treats jhana mental states as kusala and kusala mental states never include unwholesome roots. ===== > > Do you remember the sutta story of the hypothetical monk who, having > been attacked by bandits, impaled on a spear and rotated (twisting > his bowel), had slight feelings of ill will? The Buddha declared that > monk to be no monk of his. ===== Opinion :-) : I haven't heard this before. ===== > > I think you will agree that the compassionate Buddha must have been > talking about ultimate reality (the namas and rupas of six worlds). > Akusala citta, regardless of how prompted it might be, can never be > bhavana. > ===== Opinion: I have never seen any references to "ultimate realities" in the Suttas (I have looked very hard - Ven. Nyanatiloka is of the same opinion in his "Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines"). Fact: Akusala citta can never be bhavana. ===== > Needless to say, jhana cittas remained the same after the Buddha as > before him. They just came to be understood differently. ===== Opinion: If by "understood differently" you mean that other sects saw jhanas as an end in themselves whereas the Buddha saw jhanas as part of a larger picture... then I agree ===== > > In any case, jhana meditators of all sects knew the difference > between kusala and akusala. They knew that samatha, which arose > exclusively with kusala consciousness, conditioned more kusala > consciousness and more samatha. There was no misapprehension that > the akusala pleasant feeling that arose with attachment could ever > condition samatha. ===== Opinion: I do not believe that the definitions of kusala / akusala were agreed upon by all sects; in fact in reviewing some of the views put forward in the Brahmajala Sutta, I am pretty confident that some of the sects had very different moral views from the Buddha. So I cannot say that I agree with your statement that "There was no misapprehension that the akusala pleasant feeling that arose with attachment could ever condition samatha." ===== > > Therefore, they understood that sitting straight-backed (for example) > had no efficacy in its own right. ===== Fact: Many of the sects believed that specific actions were key to purification. There were sects who believed that behaving like a dog or like a cow was the way to purify oneself. The Buddha defined clinging to wrong rites and rituals (silabbata-paramasa) as a fetter that is only uprooted when one becomes a Sotapanna. Opinion: The above fact may fly in the face of your statement above. ===== > ------------------------------------------ > <. . .> > RM: > - I am not arguing that there is a "formal vipassana > meditation" in the Suttas; I am saying that "formal vipassana > meditation" is a recent invention (by Mahasi Sayadaw and Goenka) > based on the principles in the Satipatthana Sutta. > ------------------------------------------ > > Yes, their teachings are new in a way. I suspect that various false > versions of vipassana meditation occurred even in the earliest days > of the Dhamma. Whenever the Dhamma is wrongly grasped, people will > try to make vipassana happen. ===== Opinion: I do not agree with your assessment that Mahasi Sayadaw and Goenka have wrongly grasped the Dhamma. ===== > > --------------------------- > RM: > I label "formal vispassana meditation" as an oxymoron > as "formal meditation" happens at a specific time while "vipassana" > should be constant. > --------------------------- > > Yes, it should be here and now - that is extremely important. > Constant vipassana would be a bit too much to expect, though, don't > you think? ===== Opinion: If it is "here and now" then it is "constant", isn't it? Is there any other time period other than the "here and now"? Doesn't "here and now" cover everything? THere is a Sutta (wish that I could find the reference to move this to the "fact" column :-) ) which talks about a prisoner carying a pot of oil on his head. If he lets any oil drop, then an executioner would kill him immediately. There were dancing girls on one side of the road and musicians on the other side. When first hearing this example, we think that mindfulness is the state of mind of the prisoner. This is wrong. The Buddha is saying that mindfulness is like the pot of oil that must be guarded as if one were guarding ones own life. Fact: The Buddha said, "Satin ca khvaham bhikkhave sabbatthikam vadami" (O Bhikkhus, I declare mindfulness to be essential in every act) - sorry I don't have the Sutta reference. Fact: According to the Abhidhamma, Akusala cittas (without mindfulness) can arise in all beings except Arahants. Opinon: Based on the above, I don't think that constant mindfulness is too much to ask (for an Arahant). ===== > > -------------------------------------- > <. . .> > RM: > In summary form, here is my perspective: > > A. Jhana is an important part of the Buddha's teaching > ---------------------------------- > > I would agree in so far as all of the Buddha's teaching is important. > Jhana is just one type of citta that needs to be understood. That > includes understanding it is not an essential factor for > enlightenment. ===== Opinion: Jhana is far more than "one type of citta". It is an element in the Noble Eightfold Path and is one of the key themes repeated through the Suttas. It is a core part of the Buddha's teaching. ===== > > ----------------------------------- > RM: > (it is "right concentration" in the Noble Eightfold Path). > ----------------------------------- > > No, strictly speaking, right concentration of the NEP is unique. It > is very intense - at least as intense as the first jhana and > sometimes as intense as the higher jhanas. But that is where the > similarity ends, I think. (Corrections welcome.) ===== Fact: In SN XLV.8, the Buddha defines Right Concentration as being the four jhanas. Fact: In AN IX.36, the Buddha said, "I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana... the second jhana... the third... the fourth... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness. I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the dimension of neither perception nor non- perception." ===== > > ------------------------- > RM: > Achieving jhana requires "formal meditation" (sitting with > one's legs crossed, etc.). > -------------------------- > > In the later stages of samatha development, when the meditator has > mastered morality (suppressed immorality), it becomes possible for > javana cittas at the mind-door to repeatedly arise uninterrupted by > any other kind of citta. ===== Fact: This is not how the Abhidhamma describes things. See BB's CMA p169 (I suspect that you are not interested in the technical details) ===== > I think that is when straight-backed sitting > and the homeless life become necessary. If the meditator becomes > distracted by akusala consciousness, he risks losing the meditation > object permanently. ===== Opinion: Straight backed sitting becomes necessary when one wants to attain jhanas. Homesless life becomes necessary when one wants to renounce. Fact: If the medititator becomes distracted by an akusala citta, he risks losing the meditation object temporarily. THere are many examples of meditators re-entering jhanas. Jhanas can arise repeatedly (unlike the change of lineage for saints which arise only once and cannot be "cancelled"). ===== > > More to the point, achieving right concentration of the NEP does not > require sitting, does it? ===== Fact: Achieving right concentration of the NEP requires jhanas. Opinion: Sustained, intense concentration can only be done when one is motionless and the body is supported such as arises in sitting posture. ===== > > ----------------------------------- > RM: > B. Vipassana is a unique part of the Buddha's teaching and > should be applied at all moments (however there are different > techniques for accomplishing this - see Kimsuka Sutta SN XXXV.204 for > four different modes practiced by different Arahants) > ------------------------------------ > > Yes, although as I said, there is a difference between 'all moments' > and 'the present moment.' ===== Opinion: no difference :-) see above. ===== > > ---------------------- > RM: > C. "Formal vipassana meditation" is a recent invention (i.e. > Mahasi Sayadaw, Goenka), not described in the Suttas (though it is > based on principles found in the Suttas) > ----------------------- > > Incorrectly based. ===== Opinion: Not necessarily incorrectly based ===== > > -------------------------------- > RM: > D. "Formal vipassana meditation" can be very helpful for some > people (depending on their accumulations) > -------------------------------- > > Yoga meditation (for example) can be helpful, but formal vipassana > meditation cannot. It denies conditionality. What could be less > helpful - and more harmful - than that? ===== Opinion: "Formal vipassana meditation" can give one the experiential backround to lay a foundation for mental development. Metta, Rob M :-) 51113 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 6:56am Subject: Re: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! philofillet Hello Bhikkhu Samahita Phil >> >Bhikkhu Bodhi uses "revulsion." > Bhuddhadhatta Mahathera suggests "weariness" > "disgust" > "aversion" > Bhikkhu Samahita: Agree with the patience! > It is like eating: > > While still hungry one delights in more food. > When approaching being full this urge calms. > When being too full one disgusts more food! > > This disgust induces disillusion in the sense > one realizes the futility & slavery of any (food) urge... > > That disillusion releases mind in the sense > that it inhibits future arising of lust & urge. > > This is thus stilling, peace, freedom & bliss! > > In conclusion: Disgust leads (paradoxically) to Bliss! Phil: This nibbida certainly is very important to get a grasp on. In the Buddha's second (burning) and third (anatta) discourses, it is this nibbida that leads the ariyan disciple to release from a world in which "the eye etc is burning" with greed, hatred and delusion with no-self that can give rise to khandas that can quell the burning. But then comes nibbida to save the day. Alas, at least in the commentarial note of Bhikkhu Bodhi it does not seem to be quite as you describe above, not really disgust or disillusion in the sense of realizing the futility and slavery of urges. It is something much deeper, more refined, from what I understand. B Bodhi's note: "Nibidda, "revulsion", is usually taken to refer to an advanced level of insight which follows knowledge and vision of things as they really are by way of the three kind of full understanding" In another note, BB explains about the three kinds of full understanding: " i - by full understanding of the known (nataparinna) one understands the five aggregates in terms of their individual characteristics, etc. ii - by full understanding by scrutinization (tiraparinna) one scrutinizes them in forty-two modes as impermanent, suffering etc. iii - by full understanding as abandonment (pahanaparinna) one abandons desire and lust for the aggregates by means of the supreme path." Respectfully I think there is a danger in putting these kind of attaiments (which are path moments, it seems, attained only by the ariyans) into conventional terms like "disgust" and "disillusion" and using images of gluttony to get it across. I think in this age people are eager for results and will latch on to such terms, and mistakenly think they are attaining more than they actually are. It is no rare attainment to feel disgusted and disillusioned after over indulging in sense pleasure, but it does not seem to be nibbida. It seems to me from the above notes by B. Bodhi that nibbida is something that is difficult to even grasp intellectually let alone be experienced directly by worldings. Of course that is just a beginner's opinion. Phil 51105 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:09am Subject: Re: Inevitable atta-ditthi when reading suttas? philofillet Hi Tep > Phil, you are assuming too much. You're right - proliferation galore. Thanks for the above line - I think it will stick with me. Phil 51106 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:25am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine philofillet Hi Swee > Isn't it by means of conceit and craving that the Buddha-to-be > perfected the paramis and achieved Buddhahood? > > Isn't it because of conceit that the Buddha-to-be thought that he > would achieve Buddhahood just like all previous Buddhas? > > Isn't it because of craving that the Buddha-to-be left home in search > of the Noble Ancient Path? > Thanks for these questions, Swee. I really appreciate the way you lay things out - always good gist for reflection. I wouldn't have thought it was craving and conceit motivating the Buddha-to-be. Wasn't it samvega, a sense of urgency, or chanda (zeal?) But I know what you mean. If there is any progress being made by Phil on the path, it is rooted most of the time in conceit and craving, yes, that's true. If I'm honest, I have to admit that's true. But I really think we should beware of accepting this an an inevitability. I read this sutta that made me think of this thread: "Who so delights in form (and other khandas, including mental formations) delights in suffering. Who so delights in suffering will not be freed from suffering." I think we should be aware that the pleasure ("delight") we get out of Dhamma and our Dhamma practice might not be as wholesome as we assume. There can be clinging to the pleasant mental states (mental formation khanda) associated with Dhamma practice, and this could be as the passage above suggests deepening rather than loosening our bonds. This is what I came to see with the way I was approaching Brahma- Viharas, though this needn't be the case for anyone else. Phil 51107 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:26am Subject: Re: A bit more harmony, please :-) robmoult Hi James, You are correct... I had been away for quite a while. Perhaps while I was away, I created an "idealized DSG" in my mind in which everybody generally got along :-) Perhaps, when I returned, the "real DSG" was different from how I thought I remembered it. Perhaps the intrinsic nature of DSG hasn't changed at all!! My message was not aimed at a particuar individual, nor even a set of individuals; I was commenting on a general impression, not reacting to a specific post or set of posts. James, the post was not aimed at you or any other individual. You know, walking barefoot on the earth can be painful at times. I can solve this problem either by covering the entire earth with a layer of soft leather, or alternatively by covering the soles of my feet with soft leather. Metta meditation is my way of putting soft leather on the soles of my feet. The world is as it is. In any case, a bit more harmony wouldn't hurt... :-) Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Rob M., > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > I have noticed that recent discussions on DSG have been slightly > less > > harmonious than in the past. > > James: Really? What past? You have just rejoined DSG after a long > absence so I am wondering what past you are referring to. It seems > to me that discussions go through periods of harmony and then > periods of disharmony. Anicca. But, you make me wonder if you find > my posts creating disharmony (as some do). If so, just say the word > and I can stop posting or post less. I don't like to create > disharmony- but I am also not going to sacrifice my beliefs. (Maybe > other members also wonder who you mean??). > > > > > By harmony, I am not hoping that there is more agreement among DSG > > members (I never learned anything from anybody who agreed with me). > > > > By harmony, I am saying that it is nicer for everybody (including > > lurkers) when we conduct our discussions with respect and > compassion. > > > > We all have bad days; this applies both to "posters" and "postees". > > > > I will be adding a new group as I radiate metta during > > meditation... "DSG Members". May you all be well and happy. > > James: That will be nice! Glad to see you practicing the Brahma > Viharas. > > > > > Metta, > > Rob M :-) > > Metta, > James 51108 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:40am Subject: Re: A bit more harmony, please :-) philofillet Hi Rob > I have noticed that recent discussions on DSG have been slightly less > harmonious than in the past. That could be because of me. To be honest, there are many days I feel a lot of hostility towards people who slag A. Sujin by using terms that suggest she is a cult leader, because this group does after all stem from her talks, as I've said before. It seems like bad manners. Also, I am a new "devotee" ("brainwashee", some would say) and naturally there is a beginnner's defensiveness happening because of that. I think it will pass, and your reminder could be a helpful condition in that direction. > > I will be adding a new group as I radiate metta during > meditation... "DSG Members" >May you all be well and happy. Thanks. And thanks always for your posts. Personally, I think we help each other more by sharing our knowledge of Dhamma than by radiating metta, but please keep radiating that metta my way just in case I am wrong. I want to cover all my bases. :) Phil 51109 From: "leoaive" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:46am Subject: everyday schedule leoaive Hi! i want to follow by some kind of time schedule in my life. I have my work and study, and I want to set everything by time. How many hours should I sleep, meditate, read and so far. I could not find that in suttas. In Vinaya it is given for monks, but my style of life is much different. I wish to know what would be good for lay people. Does anyone has an idea? 51110 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Wed Oct 5, 2005 9:45pm Subject: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friend Phil wrote: Reg: Translation of Nibbida: >Bhikkhu Bodhi uses "revulsion." Bhuddhadhatta Mahathera suggests "weariness" "disgust" "aversion" Agree with the patience! It is like eating: While still hungry one delights in more food. When approaching being full this urge calms. When being too full one disgusts more food! This disgust induces disillusion in the sense one realizes the futility & slavery of any (food) urge... That disillusion releases mind in the sense that it inhibits future arising of lust & urge. This is thus stilling, peace, freedom & bliss! In conclusion: Disgust leads (paradoxically) to Bliss! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. 51111 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 5:56am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine jwromeijn About AN IV 159 Bhikkhuni Sutta What happened in the nunnery? I did read this sutta a year or so ago and did not give it much attention: it seemed evident what Ananda teached. But today I read it again and again, in the translation of Nyanaponika and that of Thanissaro Bhikkhu; especially because I could not understand why the nun (unnamed, how wise of Ananda) apologized so strongly after Ananda's explanation. And then my conclusion was, after reading Ananda's quote of the Buddha's words that "sexual intercourse [is] a cutting off of the bridge": the nun was not sick at all, she was laying in bed trying to seduce Ananda. Maybe that is not important at all and only an occasion to give this explanation, so good explained by James. But maybe this fact - that Ananda of course got immediately - is the explanation for the words he used (although I don't understand the connection) Metta Joop 51112 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 6:38am Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I robmoult Hi Ken H, I am going to preface each of my comments with either "fact" or "opinion". I treat a "fact" as something that can be verified by consulting Suttas whereas "opinion" is something that is outside the Suttas. We can debate "facts" by consulting the ancient texts. I am less interested in debating opinions as there may be no resolution (i.e. you say "tom-ah-to", I say "tom-ay-to"). Please review my comments below and let me know if you disagree with anything that I have presented as "fact". Then let me know which of my "opinions" you disagree with. I think that I can guess...:-) ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Thank you for this message; I think it has been very helpful to our > discussion. Your final paragraph is hard to resist, so I might start > there and work backwards: > > ----------------------------------- > RM: > Am I correct that your position is that the modern "formal > vipassana meditation" practice is not helpful for anybody? > ----------------------------------- > > Yes, that is correct, even though it might seem an extreme position > to take. > > I hasten to add, however, that other kinds of meditation can have > therapeutic value. But formal, so-called 'Buddhist' meditation always > involves wrong view. (IMHO, of course). ===== Opinion: I understand your position though I disagree with it. ===== > RM: > My definition of "formal meditation" is sitting in a specific > posture concentrating the mind leading to jhana. I find your > term "formal vipassana meditation" as a bit of an oxymoron (I will > explain more later). > ---------------------------- > > It's interesting that you deny the effectiveness of formal vipassana > meditation. I didn't realise that. However, the debate is not over: > my objections to formal practice extend to formal samatha > practice. :-) ===== Opinion: I belive that what is called "formal vipassana meditation" can be of great benefit, though I find the name to be an oxymoron. Fact: The Buddha defined Right Concentration as attaining the jhanas (see SN XLV.8). Fact: Attaining jhana requires intense concentration Opinion: The only way to achieve this level of intense concentration is to maintain a fixed posture over an extended time period; one does not attain jhana walking to the supermarket... one must remain motionless in a posture that supports motionless for an extended period (i.e. cross legged with straight back). Fact: It is the mental state that defines jhana; sitting in a full lotus for one hour is meaningless if the mental state is not appropriate. Interesting Fact: Experiencing Nibbana does not require intense concentration; there are many stories of people achieving sainthood while doing the equivalent of "going to the supermarket". ===== > > -------------------------------- > <. . .> > RM: > I stand by my position that Buddhist monks (and other ascetics > at the time) sat around doing "formal meditation" and attaining > jhanas. Formal meditation (to achieve jhanas) figures prominently in > the Suttas; it is definitely part of the Buddha's teaching. Before > enlightenment, Gotama learned jhana meditation from his two teachers. > This shows that other ascetics also practiced "formal meditation" > leading to jhanas. > ----------------------------------- > > Can your definition of formal meditation include lobha, dosa and > moha? ===== Fact: Jhana mental states never ever include lobha, dosa or moha. The Abhidhamma treats jhana mental states as kusala and kusala mental states never include unwholesome roots. ===== > > Do you remember the sutta story of the hypothetical monk who, having > been attacked by bandits, impaled on a spear and rotated (twisting > his bowel), had slight feelings of ill will? The Buddha declared that > monk to be no monk of his. ===== Opinion :-) : I haven't heard this before. ===== > > I think you will agree that the compassionate Buddha must have been > talking about ultimate reality (the namas and rupas of six worlds). > Akusala citta, regardless of how prompted it might be, can never be > bhavana. > ===== Opinion: I have never seen any references to "ultimate realities" in the Suttas (I have looked very hard - Ven. Nyanatiloka is of the same opinion in his "Manual of Buddhist Terms and Doctrines"). Fact: Akusala citta can never be bhavana. ===== > Needless to say, jhana cittas remained the same after the Buddha as > before him. They just came to be understood differently. ===== Opinion: If by "understood differently" you mean that other sects saw jhanas as an end in themselves whereas the Buddha saw jhanas as part of a larger picture... then I agree ===== > > In any case, jhana meditators of all sects knew the difference > between kusala and akusala. They knew that samatha, which arose > exclusively with kusala consciousness, conditioned more kusala > consciousness and more samatha. There was no misapprehension that > the akusala pleasant feeling that arose with attachment could ever > condition samatha. ===== Opinion: I do not believe that the definitions of kusala / akusala were agreed upon by all sects; in fact in reviewing some of the views put forward in the Brahmajala Sutta, I am pretty confident that some of the sects had very different moral views from the Buddha. So I cannot say that I agree with your statement that "There was no misapprehension that the akusala pleasant feeling that arose with attachment could ever condition samatha." ===== > > Therefore, they understood that sitting straight-backed (for example) > had no efficacy in its own right. ===== Fact: Many of the sects believed that specific actions were key to purification. There were sects who believed that behaving like a dog or like a cow was the way to purify oneself. The Buddha defined clinging to wrong rites and rituals (silabbata-paramasa) as a fetter that is only uprooted when one becomes a Sotapanna. Opinion: The above fact may fly in the face of your statement above. ===== > ------------------------------------------ > <. . .> > RM: > - I am not arguing that there is a "formal vipassana > meditation" in the Suttas; I am saying that "formal vipassana > meditation" is a recent invention (by Mahasi Sayadaw and Goenka) > based on the principles in the Satipatthana Sutta. > ------------------------------------------ > > Yes, their teachings are new in a way. I suspect that various false > versions of vipassana meditation occurred even in the earliest days > of the Dhamma. Whenever the Dhamma is wrongly grasped, people will > try to make vipassana happen. ===== Opinion: I do not agree with your assessment that Mahasi Sayadaw and Goenka have wrongly grasped the Dhamma. ===== > > --------------------------- > RM: > I label "formal vispassana meditation" as an oxymoron > as "formal meditation" happens at a specific time while "vipassana" > should be constant. > --------------------------- > > Yes, it should be here and now - that is extremely important. > Constant vipassana would be a bit too much to expect, though, don't > you think? ===== Opinion: If it is "here and now" then it is "constant", isn't it? Is there any other time period other than the "here and now"? Doesn't "here and now" cover everything? THere is a Sutta (wish that I could find the reference to move this to the "fact" column :-) ) which talks about a prisoner carying a pot of oil on his head. If he lets any oil drop, then an executioner would kill him immediately. There were dancing girls on one side of the road and musicians on the other side. When first hearing this example, we think that mindfulness is the state of mind of the prisoner. This is wrong. The Buddha is saying that mindfulness is like the pot of oil that must be guarded as if one were guarding ones own life. Fact: The Buddha said, "Satin ca khvaham bhikkhave sabbatthikam vadami" (O Bhikkhus, I declare mindfulness to be essential in every act) - sorry I don't have the Sutta reference. Fact: According to the Abhidhamma, Akusala cittas (without mindfulness) can arise in all beings except Arahants. Opinon: Based on the above, I don't think that constant mindfulness is too much to ask (for an Arahant). ===== > > -------------------------------------- > <. . .> > RM: > In summary form, here is my perspective: > > A. Jhana is an important part of the Buddha's teaching > ---------------------------------- > > I would agree in so far as all of the Buddha's teaching is important. > Jhana is just one type of citta that needs to be understood. That > includes understanding it is not an essential factor for > enlightenment. ===== Opinion: Jhana is far more than "one type of citta". It is an element in the Noble Eightfold Path and is one of the key themes repeated through the Suttas. It is a core part of the Buddha's teaching. ===== > > ----------------------------------- > RM: > (it is "right concentration" in the Noble Eightfold Path). > ----------------------------------- > > No, strictly speaking, right concentration of the NEP is unique. It > is very intense - at least as intense as the first jhana and > sometimes as intense as the higher jhanas. But that is where the > similarity ends, I think. (Corrections welcome.) ===== Fact: In SN XLV.8, the Buddha defines Right Concentration as being the four jhanas. Fact: In AN IX.36, the Buddha said, "I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana... the second jhana... the third... the fourth... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness. I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the dimension of neither perception nor non- perception." ===== > > ------------------------- > RM: > Achieving jhana requires "formal meditation" (sitting with > one's legs crossed, etc.). > -------------------------- > > In the later stages of samatha development, when the meditator has > mastered morality (suppressed immorality), it becomes possible for > javana cittas at the mind-door to repeatedly arise uninterrupted by > any other kind of citta. ===== Fact: This is not how the Abhidhamma describes things. See BB's CMA p169 (I suspect that you are not interested in the technical details) ===== > I think that is when straight-backed sitting > and the homeless life become necessary. If the meditator becomes > distracted by akusala consciousness, he risks losing the meditation > object permanently. ===== Opinion: Straight backed sitting becomes necessary when one wants to attain jhanas. Homesless life becomes necessary when one wants to renounce. Fact: If the medititator becomes distracted by an akusala citta, he risks losing the meditation object temporarily. THere are many examples of meditators re-entering jhanas. Jhanas can arise repeatedly (unlike the change of lineage for saints which arise only once and cannot be "cancelled"). ===== > > More to the point, achieving right concentration of the NEP does not > require sitting, does it? ===== Fact: Achieving right concentration of the NEP requires jhanas. Opinion: Sustained, intense concentration can only be done when one is motionless and the body is supported such as arises in sitting posture. ===== > > ----------------------------------- > RM: > B. Vipassana is a unique part of the Buddha's teaching and > should be applied at all moments (however there are different > techniques for accomplishing this - see Kimsuka Sutta SN XXXV.204 for > four different modes practiced by different Arahants) > ------------------------------------ > > Yes, although as I said, there is a difference between 'all moments' > and 'the present moment.' ===== Opinion: no difference :-) see above. ===== > > ---------------------- > RM: > C. "Formal vipassana meditation" is a recent invention (i.e. > Mahasi Sayadaw, Goenka), not described in the Suttas (though it is > based on principles found in the Suttas) > ----------------------- > > Incorrectly based. ===== Opinion: Not necessarily incorrectly based ===== > > -------------------------------- > RM: > D. "Formal vipassana meditation" can be very helpful for some > people (depending on their accumulations) > -------------------------------- > > Yoga meditation (for example) can be helpful, but formal vipassana > meditation cannot. It denies conditionality. What could be less > helpful - and more harmful - than that? ===== Opinion: "Formal vipassana meditation" can give one the experiential backround to lay a foundation for mental development. Metta, Rob M :-) 51113 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 6:56am Subject: Re: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! philofillet Hello Bhikkhu Samahita Phil >> >Bhikkhu Bodhi uses "revulsion." > Bhuddhadhatta Mahathera suggests "weariness" > "disgust" > "aversion" > Bhikkhu Samahita: Agree with the patience! > It is like eating: > > While still hungry one delights in more food. > When approaching being full this urge calms. > When being too full one disgusts more food! > > This disgust induces disillusion in the sense > one realizes the futility & slavery of any (food) urge... > > That disillusion releases mind in the sense > that it inhibits future arising of lust & urge. > > This is thus stilling, peace, freedom & bliss! > > In conclusion: Disgust leads (paradoxically) to Bliss! Phil: This nibbida certainly is very important to get a grasp on. In the Buddha's second (burning) and third (anatta) discourses, it is this nibbida that leads the ariyan disciple to release from a world in which "the eye etc is burning" with greed, hatred and delusion with no-self that can give rise to khandas that can quell the burning. But then comes nibbida to save the day. Alas, at least in the commentarial note of Bhikkhu Bodhi it does not seem to be quite as you describe above, not really disgust or disillusion in the sense of realizing the futility and slavery of urges. It is something much deeper, more refined, from what I understand. B Bodhi's note: "Nibidda, "revulsion", is usually taken to refer to an advanced level of insight which follows knowledge and vision of things as they really are by way of the three kind of full understanding" In another note, BB explains about the three kinds of full understanding: " i - by full understanding of the known (nataparinna) one understands the five aggregates in terms of their individual characteristics, etc. ii - by full understanding by scrutinization (tiraparinna) one scrutinizes them in forty-two modes as impermanent, suffering etc. iii - by full understanding as abandonment (pahanaparinna) one abandons desire and lust for the aggregates by means of the supreme path." Respectfully I think there is a danger in putting these kind of attaiments (which are path moments, it seems, attained only by the ariyans) into conventional terms like "disgust" and "disillusion" and using images of gluttony to get it across. I think in this age people are eager for results and will latch on to such terms, and mistakenly think they are attaining more than they actually are. It is no rare attainment to feel disgusted and disillusioned after over indulging in sense pleasure, but it does not seem to be nibbida. It seems to me from the above notes by B. Bodhi that nibbida is something that is difficult to even grasp intellectually let alone be experienced directly by worldings. Of course that is just a beginner's opinion. Phil 51114 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 8:02am Subject: Re: (Sukinder & Htoo)Long Discussion 3 (2nd session) 3 htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Dear Htoo, > > You wrote to Sukin: > > --------------------- > > I think you and DSGs hate 'the idea of specific place and > time'. But whatever you are saying The Buddha teachings > say 'ara~n~na gato vaa, rukkhamula gato vaa, su~n~nagaara gato vaa'. > The Buddha did say this. The Buddha never say 'unfruitful speech'. > How do you think? > > PS: See Mahaasatipatthaana Sutta. > > There is no reason not to know this 'mahaasatipatthaana sutta'. > > ''aranna gato vaa, rukkhamuula gato vaa, sunnagara gato vaa'' = > > having gone to forest, having gone to foot of tree, having gone to > unoccupied building/place. > ---------------------------- > > The Mahasatipatthana sutta describes how satipatthana can arise in > cases where the conditions for its arising have been put in place. It > begins by describing how satipatthana can arise in conjunction with > jhana: it says, "There is the case where a monk, having gone to a > forest, . . ." There is no instruction to go to a forest, is there? > > The same applies elsewhere in the sutta where it describes how > satipatthana arises in the absence of jhana. There is no instruction, > just a description. In fact, there are no instructions (to go > somewhere or to do something) anywhere in the Tipitaka. > > This absence of instructions is very appropriate, don't you think? > Right mindfulness will arise here and now, provided the conditions > for its arising are in place. If some of those conditions are > missing, there can be no right mindfulness here and now. There is no > time to go out and do something about it: it is too late! > > We shouldn't be distressed about the lack of instructions. There is > no self that exists now in an unenlightened state, hoping to continue > into the future in an enlightened state. > > If there could be instructions to go somewhere or do something in > order to get enlightened, then the universe could not possibly be the > way the Buddha described it. But it is the way he described it, and > there cannot be any instructions. > > We have the Buddha's description of ultimate reality, and, in the > case where it has been studied thoroughly and understood correctly, > panna cetasika can arise to know one of the presently arisen dhammas. > In any other case, cetasikas of various other kinds will arise. > > I hope I don't seem to be prattling on with a lot of gobbledegook or > trying to be clever: I really believe this is the way to understand > the Dhamma. > > Ken H ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear ken H, Thanks for your kind wish. It works. With respect, Htoo Naing 51115 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 8:14am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 567 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 1. the truth of suffering (dukkha saccaa) There are 11 groups of dhamma and they all are dukkha saccaa or the truth of suffering. In summary that truth is '5 clinging aggregates'. Along with this summary there are 12 groups of dhamma that are suffering or dukkha saccaa. 1. jaati (birth/rebirth) 2. jaraa (ageing) 3. marana (death) 4. soka (sorrow) 5. parideva (lamentation) 6. dukkha (pain or physical suffering) 7. domanassa ( mental pain or all mental suffering) 8. upayaasaa (despair) 9. appi ye hi sampayogo (association with unwanted things) 10.pi ye hi vippayogo (dissociation with loved one or wanted things) 11.tam pi iccham na labhati (not gaining of what is wanted) 12.pancupadaana-kkhandhaa (5 clinging aggregates) 2. jaraa (ageing) Jaraa or ageing is also suffering. Jaraa or ageing is dukkha. Jaraa or ageing is getting old. It is getting old of pancupadaana-kkhandhaa or getting old of 5 clinging aggregates. Everything once arises is no more fresh after arising. Soon after they arise they get old. Actually this happen at each moment. Anyway getting old or ageing is everywhere in every part of all aggregates. 3. marana (death) Marana or cessation of existence or death is dukkha. Marana or cessation of life or cessation of existence or death is suffering. Almost all people faced at one time or another with death of someone. May you 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. 51116 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Andrew - Andrew, I disagree with you. I believe that you are providing an example of the "contortions" one will go to to hold onto a position in the face of clear evidence to the contrary. I particularly had a big smile on my face when I read "I think you are too distracted by – and maybe even averse to – expositions in paramattha-desana." My, friend, you are wrong about this. I also perked up when reading<<"Regarding the Bhikkhuni Sutta, I prefer Nyanaponika's translation which reads e.g. "this body has come into being through craving, yet based on craving, craving can be abandoned." Some may read this in a conventional sense and decide that "I" can use and control "my" craving to get myself to liberation. I think these people are being simplistic in the extreme and, as you say, going in a wrong direction.>> I presume you are including me in this "some" to whom you refer. That simply amuses me. I do NOT consider that there is, in reality, any person who does anything, and I think that you and others here should realize that by now. Finally, I'd like to thank you for your closing sentence: "And Howard, don't feel obliged to reply if it is disruptive to your meditation." I appreciate that. With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/6/05 2:03:39 AM Eastern Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: > Hello Howard > > In message 51096, you wrote to Phil: > > "What I consider to be of great importance is the welfare of sentient > beings. When I see good people going in what I believe is truly > a wrong direction, I feel compelled (uh, oh - no control! ;-) to > speak up. I particularly feel that Buddhists are going in the wrong > direction when they are so much involved in a position that they even > ignore the Buddha's direct and explicit teaching to the contrary. > There are suttas that, due to our confusion or to a translation > problem or to our lack of understanding of the culture circa 1500 > BCE, are unclear in meaning to us." > > If I may venture an opinion, I think your difficulty is with the > concept of "desana", defined by Nyanatiloka thus: "exposition of the > doctrine, may be either an exposition true in the highest sense > (paramattha-desana); or it may not be true in the highest, but only > in the conventional sense (vohara-desana)." The suttas tell us > plainly that arahants do not confuse the highest with the > conventional and vice versa e.g. "[The arahant] might still say `I > speak', and he might say `They speak to me' [but] skilful, knowing > the world's parlance, he uses such terms as mere expressions." (SN > Devatasamyutta 25). We worldlings are different, of course. > /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) 51117 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A bit more harmony, please :-) upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Rob, and James, et al) - In a message dated 10/6/05 3:51:43 AM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > > Hi Rob > > >I have noticed that recent discussions on DSG have been slightly less > >harmonious than in the past. > > That could be because of me. To be honest, there are many days I feel > a lot of hostility towards people who slag A. Sujin by using terms that > suggest she is a cult leader, because this group does after all stem > from her talks, as I've said before. It seems like bad manners. Also, I > am a new "devotee" ("brainwashee", some would say) and naturally there > is a beginnner's defensiveness happening because of that. I think it > will pass, and your reminder could be a helpful condition in that > direction. > > > > >I will be adding a new group as I radiate metta during > >meditation... "DSG Members" > >May you all be well and happy. > > Thanks. And thanks always for your posts. Personally, I think we help > each other more by sharing our knowledge of Dhamma than by radiating > metta, but please keep radiating that metta my way just in case I am > wrong. I want to cover all my bases. :) > > > Phil > ======================== We're all good people here. As soon as someone writes about disharmony, each one thinks "Does he mean me?" ;-)) That thought went through my mind, and James', and probably many of us! Hey, let's just be kindly but without walking on eggshells! We can say exactly what we think so long as it is said with care and kindness. If an "accusation" made towards one doesn't ring true, then, hey, just smile and shrug it off. Of course, one should always engage in self-examination - in introspection, for we are all very far from perfect. It happens that in Judaism, this period of time between Rosh Hashana (the New Year) and Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) following 10 days later is exactly a period to be devoted to careful introspection. 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) 51118 From: "matheesha" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 10:14am Subject: Re: Mahaanidanasutta, paramis matheesha333 Oh no, not this again! [groans all around] Hi Ken H, K:> It is said that some people were able to hear the teaching in brief > and yet understand it in detail. I believe those lucky few had > accumulated right understanding from former lifetimes - under former > Buddhas - but I would like to hear your theory on that. M: There is such a thing as pragna (wisdom) paramita. So I would presume that such a mechanism is in action. However the Buddha doesnt (as far as I know) mention anything of the sort in any of the suttas when it comes to training for arahthood. What he does mention hundreds of times is development of mindfulness and the insight from direct experiencing, learning from hearing, and learning from thinking about the dhammas (or whatever the definitions for bhavanamaya, sutamaya and cintamaya panna is!). For me the only relavent panna are those three. It is bad enough that we cant remember our own name or where we lived from our previous life. How could we remember dhamma for it to aid understanding now? It is difficult enough to understand when it is spelt out in black and white. The closest it can get is vague familiarity IMO. It might be very different for someone in training to become Sammasambuddha. He has to discover the path in a time where it is lost to the world and without a teacher to guide him. Even the Bodhisattva was in the wilderness for 6 years, unable to remember where the path was. The whole purpose of the exercise of becomming a Buddha was so that we wouldnt have to rely on such uncertain methods of developing panna. It seemed to be a vehicle to carry panna through aeons of darkness. I personally wonder if the paramitas crept in in the time mahayana was being developed and was applied to arahath training as well (upaparamita, paramatta paramita etc) in the commentaries, in an 'us too' fashion. Ken, I want to reply you bit by bit. That maybe better than this telescoping out of control. metta Matheesha 51119 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 0:03pm Subject: Re: Mahaanidanasutta, paramis buddhatrue Hi Matheesha, I don't think I have ever written to you before. This will be a pleasure. :-) Matheesha: Oh no, not this again! [groans all around] James: LOL! Yeah, it can get exhausting talking about accumulations. But I think this subject is very, very, very important! In my viewpoint, when one believes that wisdom accumulates that is dangerously close to believing in an eternal, unchanging self. Matheesha: There is such a thing as pragna (wisdom) paramita. So I would presume that such a mechanism is in action. However the Buddha doesnt (as far as I know) mention anything of the sort in any of the suttas when it comes to training for arahthood. James: You're right; he doesn't mention the accumulation of wisdom when it comes to training for arahanthood. I think that it is important to differentiate that there are in fact different types of `wisdom'. `Wisdom' is such a nebulous word. There is discernment which is `wise' in the mundane, everyday world (also known as `intelligence' or ` being clever') and there is discernment which is `wise' in the supermundane world, wisdom of the Four Noble Truths. I posit that the first type of wisdom (intelligence) is the result of kamma and the second type of wisdom (panna) doesn't accumulate but is rather the result of practice. Matheesha: It might be very different for someone in training to become Sammasambuddha. He has to discover the path in a time where it is lost to the world and without a teacher to guide him. Even the Bodhisattva was in the wilderness for 6 years, unable to remember where the path was. James: This is very important to point out. The Bodhisattva who has made a vow to become a Buddha has made the vow to discover the path to enlightenment when that path is no longer visible. The development of the Bodhisattva in previous lifetimes is the development of mundane qualities, including panna which is also of a mundane nature, which create good karma for the Bodhisattva to be reborn to become a Sammasambuddha. If the Bodhisattva had been accumulating panna of a supermundane nature he would be born already knowing the path- he wouldn't have to struggle in the wilderness for 6 years, as you point out. Matheesha: I personally wonder if the paramitas crept in in the time Mahayana was being developed and was applied to arahath training as well (upaparamita, paramatta paramita etc) in the commentaries, in an 'us too' fashion. James: Research demonstrates that this is the case, but this is a somewhat side issue. Mahayana or Theravada, the paramitas shouldn't be taken for what they aren't. Metta, James 51121 From: "Hal" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 1:02pm Subject: Re: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! bardosein Hi Phil, Nibidda is experienced prior to the event of path attainment. The vision of reality is dawning at this stage of insight, but this causes a reaction in the meditator simply because insight has not yet reached full maturity. Path attainment can only be realized later at the stage of equinimity towards formations. Reaching this stage does not mean one has necessarily become an aryian. However, aryians at the lower levels of sanctity, having not reached full liberation, will continue to contemplate this insight,to some degree, until they attain Arahantship. "With the gradual maturation of the three contemplations of impermanence, suffering, and non-self, the perilous nature of condtioned phenomena becomes evident. This generates revulsion towards formations. This contemplation of revulsion develops gradually. When the knowledge of the dissolutions of formations (bhanga-nana) sets in, the contemplation of revulsion also gathers sufficient power to subdue delight. From this point on the contemplation gradually gains momentum, reaching its climax with the dawning of the insight of revulsion (nibbida-nana). Thereafter, when the knowledge of equanimity towards formations (sankhar upekkha-nana) is attained, the contemplation of revulsion recedes. Delight, as well as any semblance of revulsion, will disappear and the meditation of the insight will continue in a serene and dispassionate manner. The contemplation of revulsion assumes a place of paramount significance in insight meditation. The greater the revulsion, the easier the abandonment of formations. Through the complete abandonment of formations one will realize Nibbana. For those fortunate people sufficiently advanced in their journey toward arahantship--those whose spiritual faculties have reached a high degree of maturity through the prolonged practice of tranquility and insight meditation in their previous lives--revulsion may set in immediately and intensively through a deep realization of the three characteristics. They will be able to attain consummation of insight meditation quickly without the need to spend much time on the contemplation of revulsion." [_The Seven Contemplations of Insight_: A Treatise on Insight Meditation_ by Ven. Matara Sri Nanarama Mahathera, BPS editon). Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > Hello Bhikkhu Samahita > > > Phil >> >Bhikkhu Bodhi uses "revulsion." > > Bhuddhadhatta Mahathera suggests "weariness" > > "disgust" > > "aversion" > > Bhikkhu Samahita: > > Agree with the patience! > > It is like eating: > > > > While still hungry one delights in more food. > > When approaching being full this urge calms. > > When being too full one disgusts more food! > > > > This disgust induces disillusion in the sense > > one realizes the futility & slavery of any (food) urge... > > > > That disillusion releases mind in the sense > > that it inhibits future arising of lust & urge. > > > > This is thus stilling, peace, freedom & bliss! > > > > In conclusion: Disgust leads (paradoxically) to Bliss! > > Phil: This nibbida certainly is very important to get a grasp on. > In the Buddha's second (burning) and third (anatta) discourses, it > is this nibbida that leads the ariyan disciple to release from a > world in which "the eye etc is burning" with greed, hatred and > delusion with no-self that can give rise to khandas that can quell > the burning. But then comes nibbida to save the day. Alas, at least > in the commentarial note of Bhikkhu Bodhi it does not seem to be > quite as you describe above, not really disgust or disillusion in > the sense of realizing the futility and slavery of urges. It is > something much deeper, more refined, from what I understand. B > Bodhi's note: > > "Nibidda, "revulsion", is usually taken to refer to an advanced > level of insight which follows knowledge and vision of things as > they really are by way of the three kind of full understanding" > > In another note, BB explains about the three kinds of full > understanding: " i - by full understanding of the known > (nataparinna) one understands the five aggregates in terms of their > individual characteristics, etc. ii - by full understanding by > scrutinization (tiraparinna) one scrutinizes them in forty-two modes > as impermanent, suffering etc. iii - by full understanding as > abandonment (pahanaparinna) one abandons desire and lust for the > aggregates by means of the supreme path." > > Respectfully I think there is a danger in putting these kind of > attaiments (which are path moments, it seems, attained only by the > ariyans) into conventional terms like "disgust" and "disillusion" > and using images of gluttony to get it across. I think in this age > people are eager for results and will latch on to such terms, and > mistakenly think they are attaining more than they actually are. It > is no rare attainment to feel disgusted and disillusioned after over > indulging in sense pleasure, but it does not seem to be nibbida. > > It seems to me from the above notes by B. Bodhi that nibbida is > something that is difficult to even grasp intellectually let alone > be experienced directly by worldings. Of course that is just a > beginner's opinion. > > Phil 51122 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 2:08pm Subject: Re: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! the Seven Contemplations buddhistmedi... Hi, Hal and Phil - Thank you for posting the following exerpt from A Treatise on Insight Meditation. > Hal : > > "With the gradual maturation of the three contemplations of > impermanence, suffering, and non-self, the perilous nature of > condtioned phenomena becomes evident. This generates revulsion > towards formations. This contemplation of revulsion develops > gradually. When the knowledge of the dissolutions of formations > (bhanga-nana) sets in, the contemplation of revulsion also gathers > sufficient power to subdue delight. From this point on the > contemplation gradually gains momentum, reaching its climax with the dawning of the insight of revulsion (nibbida-nana). Thereafter, when > the knowledge of equanimity towards formations (sankhar upekkha- nana) is attained, the contemplation of revulsion recedes. Delight, as well as any semblance of revulsion, will disappear and the meditation of the insight will continue in a serene and dispassionate manner. > (snipped) >[ The Seven Contemplations of Insight_: A Treatise on Insight >Meditation_ by Ven. Matara Sri Nanarama Mahathera, BPS editon). > Tep : Paragraph 197 in the Breathing Treatise (a discourse by the Great Arahant Sariputta) is about the seven anupassana -- see below. (Nibbidanupassana is one of the seven contemplations. Here the object of the contemplations is the breath 'body'.) What is your thought about it? 197. 'He contemplates': how does he contemplate that body [the seven contemplations]? He contemplates it as impermanent (aniccanupassana), not as permanent; as painful(dukkhanupassana), not as pleasant; as not self(anattanupassana), not as self; he becomes dispassionate(nibbidaanupassana), does not delight; he causes greed to fade away(viraaganupassana), does not inflame it; he causes cessation(nirodhanupassana), not arising; he relinquishes (patinissagganupassana), does not grasp. When he contemplates as impermanent he abandons perception of permanence(niccasannaa), when he contemplates as painful he abandons perception of pleasure (sukhasannaa); when he contemplates as not self he abandons perception-of-self(attaasannaa), when he becomes dispassionate he abandons delight(nandi), when his greed fades away he abandons greed(raaga), when he causes cessation he abandons arising (uppaada), when he relinquishes he abandons grasping(aadaana). Thus he contemplates the body. [endquote] Regards, Tep =========== 51123 From: "Hal" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 2:48pm Subject: Re: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! the Seven Contemplations bardosein Hi Tep and Phil, Hal: Thanks for sharing the passage from the Breathing Treatise. The seven contemplations discussed in Ven. Nanarama Mahathera's treatise are the first seven insight knowledges of the group of eighteen as presented in the Vissudhimagga (XX,90). 1. contemplation of impermanence (anicca) 2. contemplation of suffering (dukkha) 3. contemplation of non-self (anatta) 4. contemplation of revulsion (nibbida) 5. contemplation of dispassion (viraga) 6. contemplation of cessation (nirodha) 7. contemplation of relinquishment (patinissagga) Hal: This appears to be the same sequence mentioned in the Breathing Treatise. SNM: "When considered from a practical point of view, the system based on the sevenfold group appears to be self-sufficient, and, as we shall see in the course of this work, insight can be analyzed entirely through these contemplations" (p.12) Hal: These follow the standard accepted sequence of insight knowledges. A study of them will show that there is an inner logic to the entire sequence. SNM: "One striking feature in this series of contemplations is that one defilement is eliminated by every contemplation developed" (p.12) Hal: The quote provided in the Breathing Treatise goes on to show what is abandoned with each stage of insight (i.e. in the first insight knowlege, one abandons the perception of permanence, etc..) Metta, Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Hal and Phil - > > Thank you for posting the following exerpt from A Treatise on Insight > Meditation. > > > Hal : > > > > "With the gradual maturation of the three contemplations of > > impermanence, suffering, and non-self, the perilous nature of > > condtioned phenomena becomes evident. This generates revulsion > > towards formations. This contemplation of revulsion develops > > gradually. When the knowledge of the dissolutions of formations > > (bhanga-nana) sets in, the contemplation of revulsion also gathers > > sufficient power to subdue delight. From this point on the > > contemplation gradually gains momentum, reaching its climax with > the dawning of the insight of revulsion (nibbida-nana). Thereafter, when > > the knowledge of equanimity towards formations (sankhar upekkha- > nana) is attained, the contemplation of revulsion recedes. Delight, as > well as any semblance of revulsion, will disappear and the meditation > of the insight will continue in a serene and dispassionate manner. > > > (snipped) > > >[ The Seven Contemplations of Insight_: A Treatise on Insight > >Meditation_ by Ven. Matara Sri Nanarama Mahathera, BPS editon). > > > > > Tep : Paragraph 197 in the Breathing Treatise (a discourse by the > Great Arahant Sariputta) is about the seven anupassana -- see below. > (Nibbidanupassana is one of the seven contemplations. Here the > object of the contemplations is the breath 'body'.) > > What is your thought about it? > > 197. 'He contemplates': how does he contemplate that body [the > seven contemplations]? He contemplates it as impermanent > (aniccanupassana), not as permanent; as painful(dukkhanupassana), > not as pleasant; as not self(anattanupassana), not as self; he > becomes dispassionate(nibbidaanupassana), does not delight; he > causes greed to fade away(viraaganupassana), does not inflame it; > he causes cessation(nirodhanupassana), not arising; he relinquishes > (patinissagganupassana), does not grasp. When he contemplates as > impermanent he abandons perception of permanence(niccasannaa), > when he contemplates as painful he abandons perception of pleasure > (sukhasannaa); when he contemplates as not self he abandons > perception-of-self(attaasannaa), when he becomes dispassionate he > abandons delight(nandi), when his greed fades away he abandons > greed(raaga), when he causes cessation he abandons arising > (uppaada), when he relinquishes he abandons grasping(aadaana). > Thus he contemplates the body. [endquote] > > > Regards, > > > Tep > > > =========== 51124 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 3:15pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I / Ignorance of a Key Teaching buddhistmedi... Hi, Ken H (and RobM ) - In the message # 51112 you two discuss samatha and vipassana meditation, which are rejected by Ken H. (due to ignorance?). > RM: > Am I correct that your position is that the modern "formal > vipassana meditation" practice is not helpful for anybody? > ----------------------------------- > KenH: > Yes, that is correct, even though it might seem an extreme position > to take. > > I hasten to add, however, that other kinds of meditation can have > therapeutic value. But formal, so-called 'Buddhist' meditation always involves wrong view. (IMHO, of course). ========== > RM: > My definition of "formal meditation" is sitting in a specific > posture concentrating the mind leading to jhana. I find your > term "formal vipassana meditation" as a bit of an oxymoron (I will > explain more later). > ---------------------------- > > Ken H: It's interesting that you deny the effectiveness of formal vipassana > meditation. I didn't realise that. However, the debate is not over: > my objections to formal practice extend to formal samatha > practice. :-) ....................................... Tep : For your information, I have found several suttas that support samatha-vipassana (tranquillity and insight) meditation as the Buddhist practice for developing the "direct knowledge" for eradicating ignorance and craving. For example, study MN 149. "He comprehends through direct knowledge whatever qualities are to be comprehended through direct knowledge, abandons through direct knowledge whatever qualities are to be abandoned through direct knowledge, develops through direct knowledge whatever qualities are to be developed through direct knowledge, and realizes through direct knowledge whatever qualities are to be realized through direct knowledge. "And what qualities are to be comprehended through direct knowledge? 'The five clinging-aggregates,' should be the reply. Which five? Form as a clinging-aggregate... feeling... perception... fabrications... consciousness as a clinging-aggregate. These are the qualities that are to be comprehended through direct knowledge. "And what qualities are to be abandoned through direct knowledge? Ignorance & craving for becoming: these are the qualities that are to be abandoned through direct knowledge. "And what qualities are to be developed through direct knowledge? Tranquillity & insight: these are the qualities that are to be developed through direct knowledge. "And what qualities are to be realized through direct knowledge? Clear knowing & release: these are the qualities that are to be realized through direct knowledge. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn149.html Apparently, a careful study of the suttas is greatly helpful for anyone who really wants to be well educated in Buddhism. {:->|) Regards, Tep, BuddhistMeditator ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > Hi Ken H, > >(snipped) > Opinion: "Formal vipassana meditation" can give one the experiential > backround to lay a foundation for mental development. > > Metta, > Rob M :-) 51125 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 3:42pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I / Ignorance of a Key Teaching buddhistmedi... Hi, Ken H and RobM - Please correct an error in the previous poat as indicated below. Previous Post: --------------------- For your information, I have found several suttas that support samatha-vipassana (tranquillity and insight) meditation as the Buddhist practice for developing the "direct knowledge" for eradicating ignorance and craving. Correction; ---------------- For your information, I have found several suttas that support samatha-vipassana (tranquillity and insight) meditation as the Buddhist practice to be developed through "direct knowledge" for eradicating ignorance and craving. Thank you. Tep ========== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Hi, Ken H (and RobM ) - > > In the message # 51112 you two discuss samatha and vipassana > meditation, which are rejected by Ken H. (due to ignorance?). > > > RM: > Am I correct that your position is that the modern "formal > > vipassana meditation" practice is not helpful for anybody? > > ----------------------------------- 51126 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:00pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine corvus121 Hi Howard Glad to hear I gave you a laugh. (-: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Andrew - > > Andrew, I disagree with you. I believe that you are providing an > example of the "contortions" one will go to to hold onto a position in the face of > clear evidence to the contrary. I particularly had a big smile on my face when > I read "I think you are too distracted by â€" and maybe even averse to â€" > expositions in paramattha-desana." My, friend, you are wrong about this. > I also perked up when reading<<"Regarding the Bhikkhuni Sutta, I > prefer Nyanaponika's translation which reads e.g. "this body has come into being > through craving, yet based on craving, craving can be abandoned." Some may read > this in a conventional sense and decide that "I" can use and control "my" > craving to get myself to liberation. I think these people are being simplistic > in the extreme and, as you say, going in a wrong direction.>> I presume you are > including me in this "some" to whom you refer. Andrew: Actually, no. You've stated your acceptance of anatta many times. I simply made the point because sometimes people reading for the first time aren't aware that there is, or should be, some meaning beyond the mere conventional that is worthy of reflection. > That simply amuses me. I do > NOT consider that there is, in reality, any person who does anything, and I > think that you and others here should realize that by now. Andrew: We do, we do. > Finally, I'd like to thank you for your closing sentence: "And Howard, > don't feel obliged to reply if it is disruptive to your meditation." I > appreciate that. Andrew: It was sincere. I feel I am a long way from comprehending the Dhamma in all its depth and I appreciate hearing a variety of viewpoints. And we certainly have variety on DSG. Look at all the threads on jhana. BB wrote an article saying that jhana was necessary for liberation, but not stream entry. Others claim that orthodox Theravada holds that jhana isn't necessary for liberation (dry insight arahants). Rob M just said to Ken H that jhana is necessary (assisted by certain postures) but liberation can occur when one is "going to the supermarket"! What fun to unravel it all! (-: Keeps us all contemplating and in good humour (well, some of the time!). Gotta go now. Best wishes Andrew T 51127 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:00pm Subject: Re: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! the Seven Contemplations buddhistmedi... Hi, Hal - Thank you much for your comments. > Hal: This appears to be the same sequence mentioned in the Breathing Treatise. > (snipped) > Hal: The quote provided in the Breathing Treatise goes on to show > what is abandoned with each stage of insight (i.e. in the first > insight knowlege, one abandons the perception of permanence, etc..) > Tep: Actually, even with my limited application of the seven contemplations, I understand that without Nibbida (dispassion) it would not be possible for anyone to let go (Patinissagga) of craving and other defilements. And without clearly seeing and knowing the drawbacks (ti-lakkhana) of the five aggregates, it would not be possible for dispassion to arise. Regards, Tep ======== 51128 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:07pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine corvus121 Hi Joop Yes, I too read that the nun had fallen in love with Ananda and he knew the whole thing was a set-up when he went to visit her. I think also that Ananda was not an arahant at the time all this occurred, but he was when he recited the sutta at the First Council. Best wishes Andrew T --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > About AN IV 159 Bhikkhuni Sutta > > What happened in the nunnery? > > I did read this sutta a year or so ago and did not give it much > attention: it seemed evident what Ananda teached. > But today I read it again and again, in the translation of > Nyanaponika and that of Thanissaro Bhikkhu; especially because I > could not understand why the nun (unnamed, how wise of Ananda) > apologized so strongly after Ananda's explanation. > And then my conclusion was, after reading Ananda's quote of the > Buddha's words that "sexual intercourse [is] a cutting off of the > bridge": the nun was not sick at all, she was laying in bed trying to > seduce Ananda. > Maybe that is not important at all and only an occasion to give this > explanation, so good explained by James. But maybe this fact - that > Ananda of course got immediately - is the explanation for the words > he used (although I don't understand the connection) 51129 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:21pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I kenhowardau Hi Joop, To me, the words, "never catch on," mean, "never follow the line of reasoning," "never understand what has been explained." I don't know how you thought it could mean, "leave DSG." Ken H > > Ken, you said to James: > "During our years in DSG, we have both seen explanations of why formal > meditation is wrong meditation. They have been phrased and rephrased > in just about every possible way. In my opinion, you will never catch > on while you remain ideologically opposed." > > Ken, what exactly do you mean "never catch on"? English is not my > native language, so I hope that the meaning: "leave DSG" is wrong > > Metta > > Joop 51130 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:31pm Subject: Re: Rob M’s Problem Reply Part I buddhatrue Hi Ken H., (Joop), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi Joop, > > To me, the words, "never catch on," mean, "never follow the line of > reasoning," "never understand what has been explained." James: Yep, been there; done that! ;-)) > > I don't know how you thought it could mean, "leave DSG." James: As Joop explained, English is not his first language so he wasn't sure. But it is so sweet that you want to emphasize that I shouldn't leave DSG! For all our differences, that is really kind. > > Ken H Metta, James > > > > > > Ken, you said to James: > > "During our years in DSG, we have both seen explanations of why > formal > > meditation is wrong meditation. They have been phrased and rephrased > > in just about every possible way. In my opinion, you will never > catch > > on while you remain ideologically opposed." > > > > Ken, what exactly do you mean "never catch on"? English is not my > > native language, so I hope that the meaning: "leave DSG" is wrong > > > > Metta > > > > Joop 51131 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:37pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine kenhowardau Hi Joop, You wrote: -------------------- <. . .> > And then my conclusion was, after reading Ananda's quote of the Buddha's words that "sexual intercourse [is] a cutting off of the bridge": the nun was not sick at all, she was laying in bed trying to seduce Ananda. --------------------- I agree with your conclusion. ----------------------------- J: > Maybe that is not important at all and only an occasion to give this explanation, so good explained by James. ------------------------------ I disagree with James's explanation. Actually, he has given more than one, but I think you are agreeing that craving and conceit can bring good results (progress on the Path). I find that totally unacceptable: the Buddha did not teach a way of unwholesomeness, even for beginners. Another suggestion has been that some sort of wholesome desire and wholesome conceit might be involved. That sounds like a reasonable compromise but, to my way of thinking, there is no need for a compromise. A bhikkhu's (and a bhikkhuni's) rules of training prohibit sexual intercourse, but they do not prohibit craving and conceit. That would be unworkable. Craving and conceit, along with other dhammas, arise, by conditions, billions of times every day. Sometimes they appear worthy (desiring to attain enlightenment and to be like on's role model): sometimes they are obviously unworthy (breaking the precepts). It is only by directly understanding craving and conceit, (as well as other dhammas) as they arise in daily life, that they are eventually eradicated. -------------------------------------- J: > But maybe this fact - that Ananda of course got immediately - is the explanation for the words he used (although I don't understand the connection) -------------------------------------- I agree: I feel sure that was the reason for Ananda's choice of words. We should be careful, of course, because suttas are notoriously difficult to understand without the help of expert commentaries. However, it does seem obvious that the bhikkhuni planned to seduce Ananda. A very simplistic version of Ananda's words might be; 'it is natural that craving should arise, and we should know craving for what it is (that is how it is eventually eradicated). It is natural that conceit should arise, and we should know conceit for what it is. Our rules of training do not permit sexual intercourse, and so we cannot directly know that particular kamma for what it is, however, it too will be eradicated when craving and conceit are eradicated.' Ken H 51132 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 4:47pm Subject: Ignorance of a Key Teaching - An Apology to Ken H buddhistmedi... Hi, Ken H - I am sorry for writing inappropriately in the earlier post. > > In the message # 51112 you two discuss samatha and vipassana > meditation, which are rejected by Ken H. (due to ignorance?). > (snipped) > > Apparently, a careful study of the suttas is greatly helpful for anyone > who really wants to be well educated in Buddhism. {:->|) > > James was kind enough to let me know. Ken, please accept my sincere apologies and forgive me for being rude to you. Kind regards, Tep ====== 51133 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 1:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Andrew - In a message dated 10/6/05 7:35:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: > I > presume you are > >including me in this "some" to whom you refer. > > Andrew: Actually, no. You've stated your acceptance of anatta many > times. I simply made the point because sometimes people reading for > the first time aren't aware that there is, or should be, some meaning > beyond the mere conventional that is worthy of reflection. > > >That simply amuses me. I do > >NOT consider that there is, in reality, any person who does > anything, and I > >think that you and others here should realize that by now. > > Andrew: We do, we do. > > ======================== ;-) Sorry about that! 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) 51134 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 1:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi again, Andrew - In a message dated 10/6/05 7:35:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time, athel60@... writes: > Finally, I'd like to thank you for your closing > sentence: "And Howard, > >don't feel obliged to reply if it is disruptive to your > meditation." I > >appreciate that. > > Andrew: It was sincere. > -------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you. Yes, I know that is was! :-) ------------------------------------ I feel I am a long way from comprehending the > > Dhamma in all its depth and I appreciate hearing a variety of > viewpoints. And we certainly have variety on DSG. Look at all the > threads on jhana. BB wrote an article saying that jhana was > necessary for liberation, but not stream entry. Others claim that > orthodox Theravada holds that jhana isn't necessary for liberation > (dry insight arahants). Rob M just said to Ken H that jhana is > necessary (assisted by certain postures) but liberation can occur > when one is "going to the supermarket"! > -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes - I agree that it can! But cultivation must occur first. First, the seed must be planted and the soil tended, tilled, and watered. Then, eventually, there will result the growth of the tree of wisdom. ------------------------------------- What fun to unravel it all! > > (-: Keeps us all contemplating and in good humour (well, some of the > time!). Gotta go now. > > Best wishes > Andrew T > ======================== With much 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) 51135 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 5:41pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine nidive Hi Howard, A sutta to go along with your comments ... > > BB wrote an article saying that jhana was necessary for > > liberation, but not stream entry. Others claim that > > orthodox Theravada holds that jhana isn't necessary for liberation > > (dry insight arahants). Rob M just said to Ken H that jhana is > > necessary (assisted by certain postures) but liberation can occur > > when one is "going to the supermarket"! > > > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > Yes - I agree that it can! But cultivation must occur first. First, > the seed must be planted and the soil tended, tilled, and watered. > Then, eventually, there will result the growth of the tree of > wisdom. ------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-091.html "There are these three urgent duties of a farming householder. Which three? "There is the case where a farming householder quickly gets his field well-plowed & well-harrowed. Having quickly gotten his field well- plowed & well-harrowed, he quickly plants the seed. Having quickly planted the seed, he quickly lets in the water & then lets it out. "These are the three urgent duties of a farming householder. Now, that farming householder does not have the power or might [to say:] 'May my crops spring up today, may the grains appear tomorrow, and may they ripen the next day.' But when the time has come, the farming householder's crops spring up, the grains appear, and they ripen. "In the same way, there are these three urgent duties of a monk. Which three? The undertaking of heightened virtue, the undertaking of heightened mind, the undertaking of heightened discernment. These are the three urgent duties of a monk. Now, that monk does not have the power or might [to say:] 'May my mind be released from fermentations through lack of clinging/sustenance today or tomorrow or the next day. ' But when the time has come, his mind is released from fermentations through lack of clinging/sustenance. "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's how you should train yourselves." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon 51136 From: "nidive" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 5:55pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine nidive Hi Howard (James & Tep) > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-091.html > > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our > desire for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be > our desire for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be > our desire for the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's > how you should train yourselves." > ------------------------------------------------------------------- The word 'desire' in the above sutta reminds me of another sutta by Ananda that says "desire is abandoned by means of desire". ------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn51-015.html I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's Park. Then the Brahman Unnabha went to where Ven. Ananda was staying and on arrival greeted him courteously. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Ananda: "Master Ananda, what is the aim of this holy life lived under the contemplative Gotama?" "Brahman, the holy life is lived under the Blessed One with the aim of abandoning desire." "Is there a path, is there a practice, for the abandoning of that desire?" "Yes, there is a path, there is a practice, for the abandoning of that desire." "What is the path, the practice, for the abandoning of that desire?" "Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the abandoning of that desire." "If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by means of desire." "In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular desire allayed?" "Yes, sir." "Didn't you first have persistence, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular persistence allayed?" "Yes, sir." "Didn't you first have the intent, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular intent allayed?" "Yes, sir." "Didn't you first have [an act of] discrimination, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular act of discrimination allayed?" "Yes, sir." "So it is with an arahant whose mental effluents are ended, who has reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who is released through right gnosis. Whatever desire he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular desire is allayed. Whatever persistence he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular persistence is allayed. Whatever intent he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular intent is allayed. Whatever discrimination he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular discrimination is allayed. So what do you think, brahman? Is this an endless path, or one with an end?" "You're right, Master Ananda. This is a path with an end, and not an endless one. Magnificent, Master Ananda! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Ananda -- through many lines of reasoning -- made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May Master Ananda remember me as a lay follower who has gone for refuge, from this day forward, for life." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon 51137 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 2:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - Excellent! Thank you. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/6/05 8:43:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > A sutta to go along with your comments ... > > >>BB wrote an article saying that jhana was necessary for > >>liberation, but not stream entry. Others claim that > >>orthodox Theravada holds that jhana isn't necessary for liberation > >>(dry insight arahants). Rob M just said to Ken H that jhana is > >>necessary (assisted by certain postures) but liberation can occur > >>when one is "going to the supermarket"! > >> > >-------------------------------------- > >Howard: > >Yes - I agree that it can! But cultivation must occur first. First, > >the seed must be planted and the soil tended, tilled, and watered. > >Then, eventually, there will result the growth of the tree of > >wisdom. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-091.html > > "There are these three urgent duties of a farming householder. Which > three? > > "There is the case where a farming householder quickly gets his field > well-plowed &well-harrowed. Having quickly gotten his field well- > plowed &well-harrowed, he quickly plants the seed. Having quickly > planted the seed, he quickly lets in the water &then lets it out. > > "These are the three urgent duties of a farming householder. Now, that > farming householder does not have the power or might [to say:] 'May my > crops spring up today, may the grains appear tomorrow, and may they > ripen the next day.' But when the time has come, the farming > householder's crops spring up, the grains appear, and they ripen. > > "In the same way, there are these three urgent duties of a monk. Which > three? The undertaking of heightened virtue, the undertaking of > heightened mind, the undertaking of heightened discernment. These are > the three urgent duties of a monk. Now, that monk does not have the > power or might [to say:] 'May my mind be released from fermentations > through lack of clinging/sustenance today or tomorrow or the next day. > ' But when the time has come, his mind is released from fermentations > through lack of clinging/sustenance. > > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire > for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire > for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for > the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's how you should > train yourselves." > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Regards, > Swee Boon > /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) 51138 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 2:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon (and James & Tep) - Wonderful Swee Boon! What a superb choice of crystal-clear sutta expounding this point. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 10/6/05 8:58:27 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > > Hi Howard (James &Tep) > > >------------------------------------------------------------------- > >http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-091.html > > > >"Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our > >desire for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be > >our desire for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be > >our desire for the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's > >how you should train yourselves." > >------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The word 'desire' in the above sutta reminds me of another sutta by > Ananda that says "desire is abandoned by means of desire". > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn51-015.html > > I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, > at Ghosita's Park. Then the Brahman Unnabha went to where Ven. Ananda > was staying and on arrival greeted him courteously. After an exchange > of friendly greetings &courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was > sitting there, he said to Ven. Ananda: "Master Ananda, what is the aim > of this holy life lived under the contemplative Gotama?" > > "Brahman, the holy life is lived under the Blessed One with the aim of > abandoning desire." > > "Is there a path, is there a practice, for the abandoning of that > desire?" > > "Yes, there is a path, there is a practice, for the abandoning of that > desire." > > "What is the path, the practice, for the abandoning of that desire?" > > "Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of power > endowed with concentration founded on desire &the fabrications of > exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration > founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... > concentration founded on discrimination &the fabrications of > exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the > abandoning of that desire." > > "If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one > with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by > means of desire." > > "In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as > you see fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, > thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, > wasn't that particular desire allayed?" > > "Yes, sir." > > "Didn't you first have persistence, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' > and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular persistence > allayed?" > > "Yes, sir." > > "Didn't you first have the intent, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' > and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular intent > allayed?" > > "Yes, sir." > > "Didn't you first have [an act of] discrimination, thinking, 'I'll go > to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that > particular act of discrimination allayed?" > > "Yes, sir." > > "So it is with an arahant whose mental effluents are ended, who has > reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the > true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who is > released through right gnosis. Whatever desire he first had for the > attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular > desire is allayed. Whatever persistence he first had for the > attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular > persistence is allayed. Whatever intent he first had for the > attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular > intent is allayed. Whatever discrimination he first had for the > attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular > discrimination is allayed. So what do you think, brahman? Is this an > endless path, or one with an end?" > > "You're right, Master Ananda. This is a path with an end, and not an > endless one. Magnificent, Master Ananda! Magnificent! Just as if he > were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, > to show the way to one who was lost, or to carry a lamp into the dark > so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master > Ananda -- through many lines of reasoning -- made the Dhamma clear. I > go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of > monks. May Master Ananda remember me as a lay follower who has gone > for refuge, from this day forward, for life." > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Regards, > Swee Boon > > /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) 51139 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 7:06pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > Hi Joop, > > You wrote: > -------------------- > <. . .> > > And then my conclusion was, after reading Ananda's quote of the > Buddha's words that "sexual intercourse [is] a cutting off of the > bridge": the nun was not sick at all, she was laying in bed trying to > seduce Ananda. > --------------------- > > I agree with your conclusion. > > ----------------------------- > J: > Maybe that is not important at all and only an occasion to give > this explanation, so good explained by James. > ------------------------------ > > I disagree with James's explanation. Actually, he has given more than > one, James: I did not give more than one explanation- I just wrote two posts with the same explanation. And I didn't expect you to agree with either post. ;-)) but I think you are agreeing that craving and conceit can bring > good results (progress on the Path). I find that totally > unacceptable: the Buddha did not teach a way of unwholesomeness, even > for beginners. James: I wrote against that also. And Joop isn't saying that either. Someone seems a little defensive??? ;-) > > Another suggestion has been that some sort of wholesome desire and > wholesome conceit might be involved. That sounds like a reasonable > compromise but, to my way of thinking, there is no need for a > compromise. James: No one mentioned a 'compromise', it is reality. Desire and conceit are not eradicated until the arahant. Until then, one must work with wholesome desire and conceit. > > A bhikkhu's (and a bhikkhuni's) rules of training prohibit sexual > intercourse, but they do not prohibit craving and conceit. That would > be unworkable. Craving and conceit, along with other dhammas, arise, > by conditions, billions of times every day. Sometimes they appear > worthy (desiring to attain enlightenment and to be like on's role > model): sometimes they are obviously unworthy (breaking the precepts). James: Okay, agreed. > > It is only by directly understanding craving and conceit, (as well > as other dhammas) as they arise in daily life, that they are > eventually eradicated. James: At what point? Of course you will agree with me that they only only eradicated in the arahant? What is one supposed to do until then? Answer: Work with wholesome desire and conceit. > > -------------------------------------- > J: > But maybe this fact - that Ananda of course got immediately - is > the explanation for the words he used (although I don't understand > the connection) > -------------------------------------- > > I agree: I feel sure that was the reason for Ananda's choice of > words. We should be careful, of course, because suttas are > notoriously difficult to understand without the help of expert > commentaries. However, it does seem obvious that the bhikkhuni > planned to seduce Ananda. James: I read this sutta before and that is how I recall the outcome also. But, Ken H., don't you think that this sutta has an important message also other than how Ananda was almost seduced? Do you think Ven. Ananda would recite this sutta at the First Council to just demonstrate how he was almost seduced and to shame a bhikkhuni? You must look deeper into the sutta. > > A very simplistic version of Ananda's words might be; 'it is natural > that craving should arise, and we should know craving for what it is > (that is how it is eventually eradicated). It is natural that conceit > should arise, and we should know conceit for what it is. Our rules of > training do not permit sexual intercourse, and so we cannot directly > know that particular kamma for what it is, however, it too will be > eradicated when craving and conceit are eradicated.' James: What?? That is the most mixed up reading of a sutta I have ever heard! Did you consult the commentaries for that interpretation? (I ask because I am sure you didn't). My reading goes like this: Food causes becoming but food is also used for liberation; desire causes becoming but desire is also used for liberation; conceit causes becoming but conceit is also used for liberation; sexual intercourse causes becoming but IN NO WAY is sexual intercourse used for liberation- so just forget it! ;-)). > > Ken H Metta, James 51140 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 8:04pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine philofillet Hi Swee Boon and all This is certainly a stimulating and encouraging passage. > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire > for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire > for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for > the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's how you should > train yourselves." But we're back to the problem of translation again. We want the desire that is chanda (zeal) but we don't want the desire that is lobha accompanied by wrong view. When we warn about "desire" in Dhamma practice, we are talking about lobha-mula citta accompanied by pleasant feeling, with wrong view, prompted or unprompted. Not chanda, which can be either wholesome or unwholesome. Different "desire" entirely, I think. Could someone kindly supply the Pali word that is used for "desire" in this sutta? Thanks in advance. Phil 51141 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 8:12pm Subject: [dsg] Re: A bit more harmony, please :-) philofillet Hi Howard > We're all good people here. As soon as someone writes about > disharmony, each one thinks "Does he mean me?" ;-)) That thought went through my mind, > and James', and probably many of us! It came at a good time for me, because I've been curious about why I feel such hostility at DSG sometimes. Dosa in daily life seems to have diminished a lot. I am very mellow at work, when commuting, at home with Naomi, my wife. But it almost seems that my strongest dosa happens at DSG, which is certainly ironic. But it makes sense. Dosa comes from lobha, and my attachment to Dhamma is so strong. I don't worry about it too much, but find it interesting. I'm quite sure it will pass. Today I feel very mellow when reading posts. But tomorrow I could be spitting bile again. Who knows? Interesting the way conditions work themselves out - fascinating, really! >It happens that in Judaism, this > period of time between Rosh Hashana (the New Year) and Yom Kippur (the Day of > Atonement) following 10 days later is exactly a period to be devoted to careful > introspection. Interesting. I heard recently something in a talk about a sutta or commentary in which the monk is told to be introspective in this way, a kind of self-questioning, three times a day if possible, or two times, or just once, at the least. Of course it sounded too intentional for me, but there are many suttas which point at this kind of self check, looking at "blemishes", at tendencies. Phil 51142 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 8:24pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine philofillet Hi James > Our argument isn't, "Hey, Ananda said that desire and conceit can be > used to abandon desire and conceit! Bring out the beer keg! Get > the strippers! Let the party begin!" ;-)). Ohhh....did you have to mention strippers!!! > We are advocating the > use of WHOLESOME desire and conceit. The problem with the KS crew, > including you, is that you have become so fearful of desire and > conceit that it causes a paralysis in your practice. Yes, see the other post to Swee I just wrote. The key is sorting out wholesome desire (chanda) from lobha (greed, unwholesome desire) cittas with wrong view. (I don't know about wholesome conceit, have never heard of it except in this one sutta, but it is interesting and I will bear it in mind, hopefully, when discussing or reflecting on mana. Certainly there is so, so much mana that to worry about it would be futile. But to praise it as wholesome still feels a bit dubious to me, despite the sutta. > > Now, one final thing, I know that the wholesome and the unwholesome > are mixed up all the time. It is not possible for any of us to say > that we will always use only wholesome desire and conceit in > following the Noble Eightfold Path. Some unwholesome stuff will get > mixed in. But, that is the point of practice, to work closer and > closer to simply the wholesome. Being overly fearful and cautious > doesn't assure this, pure practice is the only way to separate the > bad from the good. We don't worry about all the lobha and mana which rises naturally in daily life. There is so much of it. Even the sotapanna has mild forms of it. But lobha associated with wrong view - for example, believing that it is possible to intentionally generate sobhana (beautiful) cetasikas such as metta or sati out of cittas rooted in lobha (greed) and moha (deslusion) - is something that we should consider and patiently work towards eradicating. Phil p.s of course you know that when we say "unwholesome desire" the "unwholesome" doesn't mean sleazy or anything like the usual connotation. Just the way of translating akusala. So strippers etc are not the point. Well, sometimes they are the point!!! 51143 From: "seisen_au" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 9:35pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine seisen_au Hi Phil, > > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire > > for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire > > for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for > > the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's how you should > > train yourselves." > Could someone kindly supply the Pali word that is used for "desire" > in this sutta? Thanks in advance. > > Phil > Chanda Steve 51144 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 6:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 10/6/05 11:26:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: > p.s of course you know that when we say "unwholesome desire" > the "unwholesome" doesn't mean sleazy or anything like the usual > connotation. Just the way of translating akusala. So strippers etc > are not the point. Well, sometimes they are the point!!! > > ======================== Phil, you made me laugh out loud!! ;-)) 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) 51145 From: "Antony Woods" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 11:25pm Subject: "Phenomenality": profound word meaning pls antony272b2 Dear Group, Ven Nyanatiloka Mahathera (1878-1957) wrote: "In fact, the entire Abhidhamma Pitaka, as a whole, treats really of nothing but just these two doctrines: phenomenality - implying impersonality and conditionality of all existence." http://www.budsas.org/ebud/bud-dict/dic3_p.htm and: "The seventh stage is right mindfulness, or alertness of mind. It is the ever-ready mental clarity whatever we are doing, speaking, or thinking and in keeping before our mind the realities of existence, i.e. the impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and phenomenality (anicca, dukkha, anatta) of all forms of existence." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanatiloka/wheel394.html From the Satipatthana Sutta (translated by U Jotika and U Dhamminda): In this teaching, a disciple dwells perceiving again and again the body as just the body(14) (not mine, not I, not self, but just a phenomenon) http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/mahasati01.htm My dictionary defines "phenomenon": "any state or process known through the senses rather than by intuition or reasoning" http://www.wordreference.com/definition/phenomenon.htm When I think of the phrase "psycho-physical phenomena" I think of never being shocked at anything that arises. Can you say any more about "phenomenality", I'm finding that a difficult concept. Thanks / Antony. 51146 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 11:33pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine robmoult Hi Phil and All --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > Could someone kindly supply the Pali word that is used for "desire" > in this sutta? Thanks in advance. The following site has the entire Sutta Pitaka in Pali (most in English in Sinhala as well). http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/index.html As with "Access To Insight", you can also download the entire site onto your hard disk so that you can access it when not connected to the Internet. I find it to be very useful!! Whenever I want to know exactly which Pali word is used in a Sutta, I find the English version of the Sutta first and then switch to the Pali version. The English and Pali have the same paragraphing and order of sentences. Once I find the appropriate sentence in Pali, it is not too difficult to figure out which word means what (with a bit of practice). Metta, Rob M :-) 51147 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 0:05am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhistmedi... Dear Swee, my Dhamma Friend - "Whatever desire he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular desire is allayed. ..." [AN LI.15: Brahmana Sutta] Thank you for posting the magnificent discourse of the great Arahant Ananda. Related to desire is a goal : one has desire to reach a certain status, to solve a problem, to abandon craving, ... and for the attainment of arahantship. Warm regards, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Howard (James & Tep) > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-091.html > > > > "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our > > desire for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be > > our desire for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be > > our desire for the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's > > how you should train yourselves." > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The word 'desire' in the above sutta reminds me of another sutta by > Ananda that says "desire is abandoned by means of desire". > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn51-015.html > (snipped) > > "What is the path, the practice, for the abandoning of that desire?" > > "Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of > exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the > abandoning of that desire." > > "If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one > with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by > means of desire." > > "In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as > you see fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, > thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, > wasn't that particular desire allayed?" > 51148 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 0:21am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhatrue Hi Ken H. (Rob M.), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > James: What?? That is the most mixed up reading of a sutta I have > ever heard! Did you consult the commentaries for that > interpretation? (I ask because I am sure you didn't). I re-read my post today and I want to apologize for the harsh language I use here. I could have expressed myself in a more friendly manner. Metta, James 51149 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 0:29am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > p.s of course you know that when we say "unwholesome desire" > the "unwholesome" doesn't mean sleazy or anything like the usual > connotation. Just the way of translating akusala. So strippers etc > are not the point. Well, sometimes they are the point!!! > From my understanding, unwholesome (akusala) has many connotations. I used the extreme example to correspond with the example I gave of the 'Beat Zen' adherents. Metta, James 51150 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 0:36am Subject: Re: Ignorance of a Key Teaching - An Apology to Ken H kenhowardau Hi Tep, You wrote: --------------------- > I am sorry for writing inappropriately in the earlier post. ----------------------- Your apology is accepted of course, but I can't see any reason for it. To say that my opinions were, "Due to ignorance?" was entirely appropriate. I am grateful for the question mark. :-) Ken H 51151 From: "Leo (All Intelligent Views Exchange)" Date: Thu Oct 6, 2005 11:29pm Subject: Parinibbana Sutta leoaive Hi I was reading Parinibbana sutta some time ago and it says there, that Budddha was between trees at the time of parinibbana. I was looking at many images in Asia and I did not see any Buddha statue in parinibbhana position between trees. Do you know any city or vihara/Wat in Asia, that have that? I would really appreciate that. I want to see how it looks. Metta Leo 51152 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 0:48am Subject: Not I, not me, not mine, not what I am, not any self ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Seeing the Five Clusters of Clinging as Alien & Remote: What do you think, bhikkhus & friends, is form, feeling, perception mental constructions, and consciousness permanent or impermanent ?? Impermanent, Venerable Sir... Is what is impermanent suffering or happiness ?? Suffering, Venerable Sir... Is what is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change fit to be regarded thus: This is mine & me, this I am, this is my self ?? No, Venerable Sir... Therefore, bhikkhus & friends, any kind of form whatsoever, any kind of feeling whatsoever, any kind of perception whatsoever, any kind of mental constructions whatsoever, & any kind of consciousness whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or fine, high or low, far or near, all this should be seen as it really is with this absolutely true & transcending understanding in this very way: This is not mine, this is not me, this I am not, this is not my or any self... !!! Seeing thus, bhikkhus & friends, the learned Noble Disciple experiences revulsion towards form, towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards mental constructions, & revulsion towards consciousness !!! While experiencing this revulsion, he becomes disillusioned & detached ..... Through this detached disillusion, his mind is released. When it is released there emerges the assurance: It is all released! He understands: Destroyed is this rebirth, this Noble holy life has been lived, done is what had to be done, there is no state beyond this... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya 24:71 III 223 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 !!! 51153 From: "Hal" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 2:34am Subject: Re: "Phenomenality": profound word meaning pls bardosein Hi Antony, Good question! I can't find the exact quote and I'm not familiar with this exact term, but I expect the meaning bears some relation to _phenomenology_, the modern philosophical movement started by Edmund Husserl. One of the later thinkers in this tradition, Merleau-Ponty, offers some striking insights, that in my opinion (based on what very little I know of his work) are quite germane to Abhidhamma. [In this regard, a very interesting read, if you're inclined to this area of study, is Francisco J. Varela's _The Embodied Mind_ (MIT Press, 1993)]. Nyanaponika (the gifted student of Nyanatiloka)in his _Abhidhamma Studies_, particularly in the chapter on _The Twofold Method of Abhidhamma Philosophy_, (pp.19-30) contrasts phenomenology with ontology. Based on his understanding of these two philosophical schools, Nyanaponika portrays Abhidhamma as having a phenomenological approach in contrast to an ontological one. However, Bhikkhu Bodhi makes the following astute comments in his editor's introduction: "....Although the Ven. Nyanaponika distinguishes between phenomenology and ontology and assigns the Abhidhamma to the former rather than the latter, he does so on the assumption that ontology involves the quest for 'an essence, or ultimate principle, underlying the phenomenal world' (up.19). If, however, we understand ontology in a wider sense as the philosophical discipline concerned with determining what really exists, with discriminating between the real and the apparent, then we could justly claim that Abhidhamma is built upon an ontological vision. This vision is called the _dhamma_ theory [6]. The theory as such is articulated in the Abhidhamma Pitaka, which rarely makes explicit the premises that underlie its systematizing projects, but comes into prominence only in the later commentarial literature, particularly in the commentaries to the Abhidhamma manuals. Succinctly stated, the theory maintains that the manifold of phenomenal existence is made up of a multiplicity of 'thing-events' called _dhammas_,which are the realities that conceptual thought works upon to fabricate the consensual world of everyday reality. But the _dhammas_, though constitutive of experience, are distinctly different gross entities resulting from operations of conceptual thought...." (p.XVI). Hope this helps, Regards, Hal _________________________________________________ The dove descending breaks the air With flame of incandescent terror Of which the tongues declare The one discharge from sin and error. The only hope, or else despair Lies in the choice of pyre or pyre-- To be redeemed from fire by fire. (T.S. Eliot) 51154 From: Bhikkhu samahita Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 2:58am Subject: From Disgust to Bliss ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Here is a personal description of how one Noble Stream-Enterer experienced mental release following being thoroughly disgusted: "When I hit my bottom, I was spiritually bankrupt... I was disgusted with everything, not just my own behavior... My life had ceased to have meaning, and had completely disappointed me! The illusions I had used to protect myself from the universe were gone! I had plumbed the depths of disgust, and was disillusioned... Then something amazing happened...!!! Many of us describe this as a "moment of truth," when the mind is released and one suddenly knows!!! There is a letting go, a surrender, an experience of understanding and acceptance, that many in our ranks have referred to as the "Grace of God." (Sottapatti-magga, the path moment of stream-entrance) It doesn't matter what we call it. There are as many ways to experience it as there are human beings... For most recovering people, this moment of "psychic change" and facing the ultimate reality is a turning point, which only starts the process of a deeper and more gradual spiritual awakening... Today, I am grateful for the pit of disillusion!!! (Gratitude towards disgust!) Without it I could never have become free...' Note that it is the disgust, that finally detaches the clinging & releases...!!! Friendship is the Greatest ... Bhikkhu Samahita, Sri Lanka. <....> 51155 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 5:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine sarahprocter... Hi KenH & all finding solutions to support contentions:)) Just a quick KISS or two (to keep james & Tep happy - I mean the KISS not the content, of course!!) --- kenhowardau wrote: > A very simplistic version of Ananda's words might be; 'it is natural > that craving should arise, and we should know craving for what it is > (that is how it is eventually eradicated). It is natural that conceit > should arise, and we should know conceit for what it is. Our rules of > training do not permit sexual intercourse, and so we cannot directly > know that particular kamma for what it is, however, it too will be > eradicated when craving and conceit are eradicated.' .... S: Also, without craving would there be any dhammas arising and passing away now? Without craving would there be life? Without craving, could it be known for what it is and thereby eventually eradicated? Without food, could dhammas arise, could they be known for what they are? Dependent on sexual intercourse (in the past).....[don't have the sutta words in front of me]. As some of you have pointed out, craving and attachment are always unwholesome. Desire is sometimes used (unfortunately in my view)for chanda which, as Phil points out, can be wholesome or unwholesome. K.Sujin suggested 'interest' the other day as a possible translation for chanda (not in this context). Good and bad interest- I thought it sounded good. Off to Bodh Gaya in the morning. We had a very good all day discussion on Wednesday - lots more on the ayatanas, upadana and I forget what else as I write quickly - BUT, we found out that evening that all our recording was blank- it gave all the right indications, but no sound. Never mind, we thought, the foundation were also recording. BUT, there's hadn't worked either:-(. One friend had also recorded on his sony hi-md player, BUT he's unable to copy it, upload or make a disc because his computer has a virus and so the story has gone on....gain and loss, gain and loss and so on -- we listen to the dhamma and yet, still, so susceptible to the worldly conditions and of course more attachment because we'd prefer not to be....;-). I think it was Tep who also pointed out that we're all susceptible to praise and blame and other worldly conditions too. Oh, I start off planning to send a quick KISS and see what happens... Metta, Sarah p.s K.Sujin indicated to me that she plans from now on not to travel outside Asia (it may change of course!) but welcomes anyone to visit Bangkok, join trips to India etc, listen to recordings or discuss points here:). If anyone can attend discussions in Bkk in February when Nina will also be here, consider it! ======== 51156 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 5:17am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Guarding the Sense Doors ? Is Kundaliya Sutta Misleading? sarahprocter... Hi Tep, --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Hi, Sarah (Htoo, James and all) - > > Thank you for trying to explain why you disagree with my > disagreement with your view that indriya-samvara sila comes after > satipatthana (not the other way around). .... S: Ah, but I never expressed a view that indriya-samvara sila only 'comes after satipatthana'. I said in at least two posts that there is indriya samvara sila (guarding of the senses) whenever sati arises (i.e with all beautiful cittas). Ask Htoo:) or quote back my exact comments if it helps. .... > Tep: I do have respect for your research on adhi siila, satipatthana > and sobhana cittas, visudhi and guarding of the sense, etc., etc. > However, I am afraid to say that you are not addressing the key issue, > namely : according to Kundaliya Sutta, restrainst of the senses (indriya > > samvara) comes before the fulfillment of satipatthana. Is this sutta > wrong? Yes? .... S: the key issue, as I recall, was a comment of Htoo's (nothing to do with the Kundaliya Sutta) about meditation and samvara sila which I picked up to discuss. I believe Htoo got the point and I'll be happy to discuss the Kundaliya Sutta or any other sutta with you on return, Tep. I agree (and have said the same before) that the Kundaliya Sutta discusses indriya samvara sila before the fulfillment of satipatthana. As I've stressed, there is guarding from unwholesome states at any moments of sati. Without the development of satipatthana, such guarding will not be 'maintained' or 'perfected'. Apologies for any understandable confusion in my earlier long post. Metta, Sarah p.s does this qualify as a KISS on the run...?? ======== 51157 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 1:21am Subject: Phenomenalism/Antony upasaka_howard Hi, Antony (and all) - As I get it, phenomenalism is based on what the following diagram suggests: ||Entity|| -------> ||Sense Datum|| ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Conjectured Observed It is generally assumed by the majority of humankind that there are actual things "out there" and "in here" that are observed and are distinct from sense data. For most folks such entities include people, trees, cars, buildings, etc. For many Buddhists such things as I just listed do not, in fact, exist, but are mental constructs based on "true realities" like earth, air, fire, water, sights, sounds, flavors, etc, all being entities that exist independent of experience. From that perspective, a sense datum, or sensory experience, arises upon contact among the independent "reality" (as object), a sense door (as mediator), and an independent consciousness (as subject). Phenomenalism is the philosophical position that recognizes that it is only the sense data that are actually experienced, and thus any alleged underlying entities can only be conjectured. Now, *radical* phenomenalism mixes in pragmatism with phenomenalism, saying that what is in-principle unknowable, the conjectured but unobserved "underlying entities," may be pragmatically treated as nonexistent. For a radical phenomenalist, a sense datum and a consciousness observing it *may* still be considered as separate, self-existent phenomena that literally come into contact with each other. A radical phenomenalist who is *also* a (subject-object) nondualist does not consider the sense datum and the consciousness to exist separately, but to arise in mutual dependence, with the sense datum having no existence other than experiential, and the consciousness being no more than the (experiential) presence of the sense datum. I am a (subject-object) nondualist, radical-phenomenalist Buddhist or "NDRP Buddhist" for short. With metta, Howard P.S. A post such as this usually ends up getting me involved in a host of follow-up conversations. But I want to avoid that. So please consider this post as simply giving my perspective on phenomenalism and leaving it at that. If there are subsequent discussions, I intend to try to keep out of them! ;-)) /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) 51158 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 5:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. sarahprocter... Hi Swee Boon & all, A KISS for you too! --- nidive wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Hope you have an enjoyable trip to India! .. thx to you and everyone else for your good wishes and mudita:) .... > I can only say that if one is at least a stream-enterer, then wisdom > is not lost. The Buddha gave the assurance that a stream-enterer is > destined for full awakening and can never be reborn in woeful realms. .... S: Yes, no more conditions for the unwholesome kamma to arise (or for results of previous such kamma) to bring these results. Of course, wisdom, like all other states, arises and falls all the time.... .... > > I don't think he gave the same kind of assurance for worldlings. ... S: No, anything is possible. But look at someone like Devadatta,destined for the worst rebirth because of the akusala kamma, but later destined to become a pacceka Buddha because of previous good accumulations. Conditions are very complicated, aren't they? .... > > Worldlings can spend numerous lifetimes in woeful realms before there > is even a chance to become a human again. During those numerous > lifetimes in woeful realms, there can be no practice of Dhamma. .... S: Right, no conditions for bhavana (well, highly unlike, but some extraordinary cases in the peta stories), but when conditions change and there is rebirth in a better realm, then on hearing the dhamma, even a little, there may be conditions again for keen interest, wouldn't you say? Metta, Sarah ======= 51159 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 5:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Different Approaches .... Utopian Dream of a Super Right View? sarahprocter... Hi Tep, (PHIL, Larry, Hal & all) ..and my last KISS for a while:) --- Tep Sastri wrote: > > Hi, Sarah - > > It is easy to get swept away by what one reads between the lines of the > original text. The more research one makes, the more expanding and > complicated interpretation may arise (papa~nca) ! So please be > reminded that we are discussing a pretty simple sutta, and that we > should discuss it with no atta-ditthi. .... S: Yes, it is a different approach. I believe I joined in this discussion originally because there was some question about whether the parinnas (referred to by you) were really concerned with right understanding. for my part, I believe we need to consider each word of the Buddha's (or his great disciples) very carefully and with reference to many texts, not just one sutta. For example, if we take a word such as dhamma or parinna or nama or rupa or papanca, we had better really consider what they mean when we use them (or a translation). For me, without careful reflection of their meanings and reference to present dhammas, there will be no bhavana. When we read the suttas, I believe we must be careful and really consider these present realities. There is a reference to this somewhere near the beginning of the Patisambhidamagga. Dhammas cannot become clear or patisambhida without careful considering. It's no use remembering lists and numbers without such understanding of dhammas. Anyway, too much for a quick KISS (again, sigh!) and I know you do consider the texts, including the Patisambhidamagga, very, very carefully, Tep. I'm glad to see you stresing the danger of attha-ditthi....never too many of these reminders in my view. Thanks again for your comments and I'll look f/w to reading all your posts when we find internet connections on the trip. Metta, Sarah p.s PHIL - a quick KISS - Betty has printed out your question post and has offered to raise it in discussion (Azita already made a start the other day) and report back. A few people like Larry (& Hal if I recall) wrote to Nina. I've printed those out and will give them to her when I see her tomorrow:). Sorry, can't print anything else out from now on. (Any further brief qus to A.Sujin, we can copy down by hand to ask.) More KISSES later, Metta, Sarah > > > Tep: > > > But we only have one sutta on parinna that I quoted earlier: > > > "And which is comprehension(parinna)? Any ending of passion, > > > ending of aversion, ending of delusion. > > >This is called comprehension (parinna)." > > > > > > How much more can you read into this very straightforward > > > meaning given by the Buddha? 51160 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 6:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] nama and rupa distinguishable. jonoabb Hi Howard upasaka@... wrote: > I believe that I understood your perspective before and that I still >do. I find close to nothing in what you wrote in this post that we agree on! >LOL! > ;-)), ;-)) > Our perspectives on Buddhist "practice" appear to be almost entirely >mutually exclusive, and I honestly hardly know where to begin with discussing >this. You speak of "wrong practice", but I am not aware of your accepting any >sort of practice as I understand the term 'practice'. I DO believe the Buddha >taught a "directed practice", and I am devoted to carrying it out. > As I understand it, 'practice' in the present context simply means the doing of (as in the practice of a profession, rather than piano practice ;-)). So the practice of insight is any moment of the arising of insight. Clearly, if one understands 'practice' in terms of a moment of mundane insight then there is no need for any 'health warning' to accompany the practice. >I have >happily been engaging recently in a far more regular practice of formal meditation >(yes, a mainstay of my "practice") and of ongoing mindfulness and guarding the >senses, and doing so has created an increasing calm and peace for me. > I'm glad for your sake that you are experiencing increasing calm and peace in your life. However, I would imagine that a similar perception is shared at any given time by hundreds of thousands (millions?) of others in the world, most of whom are not students of the teachings (and many of whom would be students of other teachings). As to what are the indicators of the proper development of the path, this would be good topic for further discussion, I think. > I am >feeling much joy in the knowledge that I am not squandering this precious human >birth. (For myself, and I apply this only to myself, letting others decide for >themselves, I consider not enaging in directed practice to be a terrible >waste.) > We agree then that not to develop the path while one has the opportunity to do so is a terrible waste; but again the question comes down to what is the development of the path. Jon 51161 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 6:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: nama and rupa distinguishable. jonoabb Hi Hal (and All) Hal wrote: >... >Once again, I wish you and Sarah the very best. May you both enjoy a >safe and pleasant journey > > Thanks to you and others who sent good wishes. We leave for India in less than 24 hours, and expect to arrive in Bodh-Gaya a few hours later (taking advantage of the 1 direct flight each week between Bangkok and Gaya). Jon 51162 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 7:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Cetasikas' study corner 288 Conceit -maana (k) jonoabb Hi Hal Thanks for the clarification. The commentary statement that "views occur because conceit has not been abandoned" is I think to be taken to refer to a person in whom 'views' still arise. It can be compared to a statement to the effect that all dosa occurs because ignorance has not been eradicated. Jon --- Hal wrote: > Jonothan, > > I now see that I've created some confusion here regarding the > authorship of these notes to the sutta. Thanks for the clarification. > > Hal > > . > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > Hi Hal (and Dan, Rob and Howard) > > > > Hal wrote: > > > > >Hi Dan, Rob and Howard, > > > > > >"Bhikkhus, 'I am' is an involvement with conceit, 'I am this' is > an > > >involvement with conceit; 'I shall be' is an involvement with > > >conceit, 'I shall not be' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall > > >consist of form' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be > > >percipient' is an involvement with conceit; 'I shall be > > >nonpercipient' is an involvement with conceit;..... Involvement > with > > >conceit is a disease, involvement with conceit is a turmour; > > >involvement with disease is a dart. Therefore, bhikkhus, you > should > > >train yourselves thus: 'We will dwell with a mind in which conceit > > >has been struck down.' Thus you should train yourselves." (35. > > >_Salayatanasamyutta_, (SN p.1259) > > > > > > > > >Here's some more of Bhikkhu Bodhi's interesting comments taken > from > > >his notes to the above paragraph: > > > > > >"_Managata_. Spk: Conceit itself is an involvement with conceit. > In > > >this passage, "I am" is stated by way of the conceit associated > with > > >craving; "I am this," by way of view. Although conceit does not > > >arise in immediate conjunction with views (according to the > > >Abhidhamma analysis of mind-moments, they are mutually exclusive), > > >views occur because conceit has not been abandoned. So this is > said > > >with reference to views rooted in conceit." (SN 1432) > > > > > > > > > > This is an interesting area to discuss, but I'd like to clarify > which > > parts of the above note are comments of BB and which are > translation of > > the commentary ('Spk'). On the face of it, everything except what > is in > > brackets appears to be from the commentary -- is that how it > appears in > > the printed version? Thanks. > > > > Jon 51163 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 7:16am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine kenhowardau Hi Sarah, James and all, Sarah, I just noticed you have joined this thread - welcome (I hope you're enjoying your trip, BTW). It is past my bedtime, and so I will post this and compare notes with your message in the morning. James wrote. ---------------------------- > I did not give more than one explanation- I just wrote two posts with the same explanation. And I didn't expect you to agree with either post. ;-)) ------------------ Sorry, I didn't read the first post carefully enough. I think Howard, Tep and Swee Boon were saying lobha (craving) and mana (conceit) could bring desirable results. You expressed agreement with them and so I assumed (wrongly) you were agreeing with that particular point. ----------- J: > Desire and conceit are not eradicated until the arahant. Until then, one must work with wholesome desire and conceit. ----------- Chanda (intention) can be wholesome, and it is sometimes called wholesome desire. I suppose there could be another dhamma that is sometimes called wholesome conceit, but I don't know which one it would be. My suggestion avoided the need for a wholesome desire and a wholesome conceit, which are a bit of a stretch of the imagination. It is well known that craving and conceit can be taken as objects of right mindfulness: so why couldn't that be what Ananda referring to when he said "it is by relying on craving that craving is to be abandoned"? ------------------------------- <. . .> J: > Of course you will agree with me that they only only eradicated in the arahant? What is one supposed to do until then? Answer: Work with wholesome desire and conceit. ----------------- Unwholesome desire (lobha) is eradicated in the Anagami, while conceit is eradicated in the Arahant. That adds another loose end to your interpretation, and makes me even less confident of it. I still prefer my interpretation, but only marginally. ------------------------------------ J: > Do you think Ven. Ananda would recite this sutta at the First Council to just demonstrate how he was almost seduced and to shame a bhikkhuni? You must look deeper into the sutta. ------------------------------------ I don't think Ven. Ananda was ever likely to be seduced, but I agree, there has to be more to the sutta than a story of failed seduction. ------------------------------- J: > What?? That is the most mixed up reading of a sutta I have ever heard! Did you consult the commentaries for that interpretation? (I ask because I am sure you didn't). ------------------------------- I do have a poor track record when it comes to interpreting suttas. But I doubt that you are much better (sorry for the sour grapes): it is a very difficult business. --------------------------------------------------- J: > My reading goes like this: Food causes becoming but food is also used for liberation; desire causes becoming but desire is also used for liberation; conceit causes becoming but conceit is also used for liberation; sexual intercourse causes becoming but IN NO WAY is sexual intercourse used for liberation- so just forget it! ;-)). ------------------ I have to concede it's not bad. :-) Ken H 51164 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 7:56am Subject: [dsg] Re: nama and rupa distinguishable. htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Hal (and All) > > Hal wrote: > > >... > >Once again, I wish you and Sarah the very best. May you both enjoy a > >safe and pleasant journey > > > > > > Thanks to you and others who sent good wishes. We leave for India in > less than 24 hours, and expect to arrive in Bodh-Gaya a few hours later > (taking advantage of the 1 direct flight each week between Bangkok and > Gaya). > > Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Jon, Have a nice trip. Htoo Naing 51165 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:00am Subject: Ajahn Sumedho htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, With U Han Tun permission, I post his message here in this forum. U Han Tun posted at JourneyToNibbana this message: "Ajahn Sumedho" Dear Dhamma Friends, [This morning I was talking to Venerable Subbato and he was saying he never has developed anapanasati, mindfulness of the breath. So I said, 'Can you be mindful of one inhalation?' And he said, 'Oh yes.' 'And of one exhalation?' And he said, 'Yes.' And I said, 'Got it!' There's nothing more to it than that.] -------------------- [The way of the spiritual life is through renunciation, relinquishment, letting go not through attaining or acquiring. Even the jhanas are relinquishments rather than attainments. The attitude is most important. The attitude is always one of letting go, not attaching to any ideas or feelings that arise from that, so that you're always fresh with the next inhalation, the next exhalation, completely as it is. You're not carrying over anything. So it's a way of relinquishment, of letting go, rather than of attaining and achieving.] -------------------- [Last winter, Venerable Vipassi was meditating in the shrine room and someone was making quite distracting noises. Talking to Venerable Vipassi about it, I was quite impressed, because he said first he felt annoyed and then he decided the noises would be part of the practice. So, he opened his mind to the meditation hall with everything in it - the noises, the silence, the whole thing. That's wisdom, isn't it? If the noise is something you can stop - like a door banging in the wind - go close the door. If there's something you have control over, you can do that. But much of life you have no control over. You have no right to ask everything to be silent for 'my' meditation. When there is reflectiveness, instead of having a little mind that has to have total silence and special conditions, you have a big mind that can contain the whole of it: the noises, the disruptions, the silence, the bliss, the restlessness, the pain. The mind is all-embracing rather than specialising on a certain refinement in consciousness. Then you develop flexibility, because you can concentrate your mind. This is where wisdom is needed for real development. It's through wisdom that we develop it, not through willpower or controlling or manipulating environmental conditions; getting rid of the things we don't want and trying to set ourselves up so that we can follow this desire to achieve and attain.] -------------------- [Sustaining your attention on the breathing really develops awareness but when you get lost in thought or restlessness, that's all right too. Don't drive yourself. Don't be a slave driver or beat yourself with a whip and drive yourself in a nasty way. Lead, guide and train yourself; leading onward, guide yourself rather than driving and forcing yourself. Nibbana is a subtle realisation of non-grasping. You can't drive yourself to Nibbana. That's the sure way of never realising it. It's here and now, so if you're driving yourself to Nibbana, you're always going far away from it, driving right over it.] -------------------- Those are the words of Venerable Ajahn Sumedho, taken from his article, "Only One Breath." Venerable Ajahn Sumedho was born in Seattle, Washington, USA in 1934. He left the States in 1964 and took bhikkhu ordination in Nong Khai, N.E. Thailand in 1967. Soon after this he went to stay with Venerable Ajahn Chah at Wat Nong Pah Pong in Ubon Province. After ten years of stay there, he was invited to take up residence in London by the English Sangha Trust with three other Ajahn Chah's Western disciples. He now customarily resides at Amaravati Buddhist Monastery, Great Gaddesden, Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, HP1 3BZ, England. Please see below his article, "Only One Breath", and other articles. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed087.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed040.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha114.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha052.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha077.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha128.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha164.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebdha236.htm http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebmed083.htm With metta and deepest respect, Han Tun ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo:With kind permission of U Han Tun this message is forwarded here. 51166 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:07am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 568 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, The truth of suffering (dukkha saccaa) There are 11 groups of dhamma and they all are dukkha saccaa or the truth of suffering. In summary that truth is '5 clinging aggregates'. Along with this summary there are 12 groups of dhamma that are suffering or dukkha saccaa. 1. jaati (birth/rebirth) 2. jaraa (ageing) 3. marana (death) 4. soka (sorrow) 5. parideva (lamentation) 6. dukkha (pain or physical suffering) 7. domanassa ( mental pain or all mental suffering) 8. upayaasaa (despair) 9. appi ye hi sampayogo (association with unwanted things) 10.pi ye hi vippayogo (dissociation with loved one or wanted things) 11.tam pi iccham na labhati (not gaining of what is wanted) 12.pancupadaana-kkhandhaa (5 clinging aggregates) 4. soka (sorrow) Soka or sorrow is unsatisfactory. It is suffering. It arises when 1) properties are destroyed 2) relatives (including close family members) are destroyed 3) morality is destroyed 4) health is destroyed 5) belief is destroyed 6) pain (physical, mental) arises 7) defame 8) unattain 9) no friends May you 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. 51167 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:07am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine nidive Hi Phil, > But we're back to the problem of translation again. We want the > desire that is chanda (zeal) but we don't want the desire that > is lobha accompanied by wrong view. When we warn about "desire" in > Dhamma practice, we are talking about lobha-mula citta accompanied > by pleasant feeling, with wrong view, prompted or unprompted. > Not chanda, which can be either wholesome or unwholesome. Different > "desire" entirely, I think. How do you separate chanda from lobha in practice? I think it is great to be theoretically correct, but if we can't put the theory into practice, of what use is the theory? And because we can't put the theory into practice, the only solution is as Nina says: ------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas14.html Kusala chanda is a necessary factor for the development of the eightfold Path. if there is no wish-to-do one does not develop it. However, we do not have to try to have chanda, it arises because of its own conditions together with the citta which develops the eightfold Path. ------------------------------------------------------------------- This solution goes against the spirit of the sutta which I quoted: ------------------------------------------------------------------- http://accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an03-091.html "Thus, monks, you should train yourselves: 'Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened virtue. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened mind. Strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened discernment.' That's how you should train yourselves." ------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you have any other alternative solutions? Regards, Swee Boon 51168 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:28am Subject: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice matheesha333 Dear Ken, > KH: > > Today that is not the case, and Buddhism is > > widely considered as just another course in meditation. > .............. > M: Sadly, yes. But at least no one would consider it a course in > theory fortunately. > -------------------------------------------------- > >KH Which comes first, the theory or the practice? M: Theory ofcourse. But my point is that there is no practice wihout even a little bit of theory. To cleanly divide up the two is to live in a conceptual world and is not realistic. After all the reality is more like a bit of theory..a bit of practice ..more theory. ..more practice. The buddha has clearly said to have knowledge of the dhamma is not enough, and that practice is essential. This is why I feel practice is better then just theory. After all if someone does a bit of metta bhvaana he/she doesnt have to know a great deal of buddhism for it to be effective. I'm reminded of the years of training in wisdom (read, studying) in Tibetan traditions to fulfil pragna paramita of a bodhisattva. Mixing something like that up with arahath practice is not wise. The buddha promised arahathood or non reutrning in 7 years or less. He led cullpanthaka to enlightenment when he couldnt remmember the suttas at his temple. It would take lifetimes if we were to learn all of the dhamma and then get down to practice. This is to completely ignore that there is something called bhavanamaya panna, which is the quickest way of learning IMO, in the line of 'a picture is worth a thousand words'. I came across the pariyatti, practipatti quote just once in the suttas while i have come across the buddha talking about practice hundreds of times without any additions of 'finish your learning first' which would have seemed very important if it were the case. It seems that the subtle change in emphasis by bringing pariyatti, pratipatti to the fore was done by commentarial scholars whos work would have been justified by it. The scholar monk/forest monk split was always around and even now the work of adjusting the dhamma to fit ones own view happens. metta Matheesha 51169 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:31am Subject: [dsg] Re: Wisdom is not accumulated? was Cambodian Lectures by Kh. Sujin. nidive Hi Sarah, > S: No, anything is possible. But look at someone like Devadatta, > destined for the worst rebirth because of the akusala kamma, but > later destined to become a pacceka Buddha because of previous good > accumulations. Conditions are very complicated, aren't they? Sarah, if you say anything is possible, then anything is possible. To me, "anything is possible" is an impossibility. > S: Right, no conditions for bhavana (well, highly unlike, but some > extraordinary cases in the peta stories), but when conditions > change and there is rebirth in a better realm, then on hearing the > dhamma, even a little, there may be conditions again for keen > interest, wouldn't you say? May be 0.000000000000000000000000000000001% chance. May be I will meet you in the heavenly realms. Regards, Swee Boon 51170 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 4:32am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 10/7/05 10:37:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowa@... writes: > I think Howard, > Tep and Swee Boon were saying lobha (craving) and mana (conceit) > could bring desirable results. ==================== What I did was quote the Buddha. What I believe you did was to disagree with him or attempt to interpret what he said as meaning something quite different from the clear meaning conveyed by the sutta. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 51171 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:39am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 569 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, The truth of suffering (dukkha saccaa) There are 11 groups of dhamma and they all are dukkha saccaa or the truth of suffering. In summary that truth is '5 clinging aggregates'. Along with this summary there are 12 groups of dhamma that are suffering or dukkha saccaa. 1. jaati (birth/rebirth) 2. jaraa (ageing) 3. marana (death) 4. soka (sorrow) 5. parideva (lamentation) 6. dukkha (pain or physical suffering) 7. domanassa ( mental pain or all mental suffering) 8. upayaasaa (despair) 9. appi ye hi sampayogo (association with unwanted things) 10.pi ye hi vippayogo (dissociation with loved one or wanted things) 11.tam pi iccham na labhati (not gaining of what is wanted) 12.pancupadaana-kkhandhaa (5 clinging aggregates) 5. parideva (lamentation) Parideva or lamentation is unsatisfactory. It is suffering. It arises when 1) properties are destroyed 2) relatives (including close family members) are destroyed 3) morality is destroyed 4) health is destroyed 5) belief is destroyed 6) pain (physical, mental) arises 7) defame 8) unattain 9) no friends Parideva or lamentation is more expressive form of soka or sorrow. But as it is different it is counted as another item. It is unsatisfactory and it is dukkha. May you 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. 51172 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:45am Subject: Me and Sea htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, Last night, when it approached deeper meditation I saw the sea. The sea was full of nothing. It was like a clear halo. That halo surrounded me. When I arose from meditation what I remembered was that there was not me at that time when I saw the sea. That is the sea of nothing. All in all, there was the sea and me. There was not any other things. Me here is just me and it is not a man or a being or anything like that but just me. I was instructed that just note what I saw as i saw and do not go beyond. With Metta, Htoo Naing 51173 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine nidive Hi Ken, > I think Howard, Tep and Swee Boon were saying lobha (craving) > and mana (conceit) could bring desirable results. Craving is the direct cause of kusala chanda, isn't it? Conceit is the indirect cause of kusala chanda, isn't it? Regards, Swee Boon 51174 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:52am Subject: Re: Me and Sea htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > Last night, when it approached deeper meditation I saw the sea. The sea > was full of nothing. It was like a clear halo. That halo surrounded me. > When I arose from meditation what I remembered was that there was not > me at that time when I saw the sea. That is the sea of nothing. > > All in all, there was the sea and me. There was not any other things. Me > here is just me and it is not a man or a being or anything like that > but just me. I was instructed that just note what I saw as i saw and do > not go beyond. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: And I did not find anything that DSGs do not like when I went into deep meditation. I was not forcing anything. I was not longing anything. I was not expecting anything. With Metta, Htoo Naing > 51175 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 9:39am Subject: Skillful and Unskillful Craving. nidive Hi All, This is an interesting article on the skillfull and unskillful aspects of craving, covering suttas discussed recently. http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol2/tanha.html -------------------------------------------------------------------- In the A'nguttara Nikaaya we have the statement: 'he abandons ta.nhaa by means of ta.nhaa'.[27] But as to what this statement might imply, the sutta itself provides only a hint, and is in need of exegesis. Fortunately, the commentary provides some: Based on the present craving [ta.nhaa] (i. e., desire for becoming an Arahant), he gives up previous craving that was the root-cause of (one's involvement in) the cycle of rebirth. Now (it may be asked) whether such present craving (for Arahantship) is wholesome [kusala] or unwholesome [akusala]? — It is unwholesome. — Should it be pursued or not? — It should be pursued [sevitabbaa]. — Does it drag one into rebirth [pa.tisandhi.m aaka.d.dhati] or not? — It does not drag one into rebirth.[28] As Nyanaponika adds at the end of this quote, 'Such permissible (sevitabbaa) craving is abandoned when its object is attained'. In other words, the 'desire for becoming an Arahant', which is identified here as 'present ta.nhaa', is abandoned only when one attains Arahantship. However, it seems rather odd that although this 'present ta.nhaa', which Nyanaponika understands as the 'desire for becoming an Arahant', 'should be pursued' and 'does not drag one into rebirth', nevertheless it is regarded by the commentator as unskilful (akusala). How can the desire to become an Arahant be 'unwholesome' (akusala)? Perhaps the commentator has in mind a similar theme found in the Sa. myutta Nikaaya, where chanda or 'desire to do' replaces ta.nhaa, and which makes the matter a little clearer. There the brahmin U.n.naabha asks AAnanda: What is it, master AAnanda, for which the 'life of excellence' [brahmacariya] is lived under the recluse Gotama? For the sake of abandoning 'desire to do' [chanda], brahmin, the life of excellence is lived under the Exalted One. [S v. 271ff.] [29] When asked whether there is any practice for abandoning this chanda, AAnanda replies that chanda is to be abandoned by developing the four iddhi-paadas or 'paths to power', the first of which is chanda- samaadhi or 'concentration of will'.[30] U.n.naabha retorts: 'That he should get rid of one chanda by means of another chanda is an impossible thing'. AAnanda then asks U.n.naabha whether, before setting out to visit him, he had the chanda to visit him, and when he arrived at the Park, whether that chanda was not now abated? U.n. naabha agrees that this is the case: Very well then, brahmin. That monk who is [an] Arahant, in whom the aasavas are destroyed, who has reached perfection, done what had to be done, laid down the burden, reached the highest good, who has outworn the fetters of becoming and is freed by perfect knowledge [sammadaññaa] – that chanda which he previously had to attain Arahantship, now that Arahantship is won, that appropriate [tajja] chanda is appeased [pa.tippassaddha]. The chanda to be 'abandoned' [pahaana], which, interestingly, the commentator construes as ta.nhaa,[31] is to be abandoned by means of developing the 'appropriate' chanda, which, here, is the chanda or 'desire' for Arahantship. And, as the text tells us, this 'appropriate' chanda is not said to be simply negated at the attainment of Arahantship, but is said to be 'appeased', or, we could say, satisfied and fulfilled. All that is negated is the possibility of chanda having aims and objects whose pursuit would lead to frustration and unsatisfactoriness (dukkha).[32] Using this model, we can therefore fill out the statement 'he abandons ta.nhaa by means of ta.nhaa': ta.nhaa, whose aims and objects are within sa.msaara, is to be abandoned by developing 'appropriate' [tajja] ta.nhaa, which is a form of ta.nhaa that can become 'appeased' as its aim is Arahantship. But what form would this appropriate ta.nhaa take? Although there are no such terms in the suttas as 'thirsting after Arahantship' (arahatta-ta.nhaa), or 'thirsting after the Dhamma' (dhamma-ta.nhaa), [33] the notion that ta.nhaa can have Arahantship as its aim is found in the post-canonical Nettippakara.na:[34] There are two kinds of ta.nhaa: skilful [kusala] and unskilful [akusala]. Unskilful ta.nhaa leads to sa.msaara, skilful ta.nhaa is for abandoning, which leads to diminishing [of sa.msaaric activities]. [87][35] As the text goes on to tell us, quoting a passage from the Majjhima Nikaaya, such skilful ta.nhaa is synonymous with an 'eager desire [pihaa] to enter the peaceful sphere that the ariyas, who having realized it by themselves, dwell in'.[36] Thus, having 'liberation of mind' (ceto-vimutti) due to the 'fading away of [unskilful] desire' (raaga-viraaga) as its object, such ta.nhaa is skilful,[37] and, in the manner of chanda, can therefore be said to be eventually 'appeased'. The Paali commentator, Buddhaghosa, also understands ta.nhaa as having a wholesome aspect: just as … [a] cow, through her ta.nhaa for cold water, starts drinking cold water, which gives her satisfaction and allays her torment, so the worldly man in the grip of bhava-ta.nhaa performs actions of various kinds beginning with abstention from killing living beings. This leads to happy destinies and gives satisfaction because it is free from the burning defilements and, by bringing him to a happy destiny, allays the torment of suffering [that would be experienced] in those unhappy destinies.[38] Buddhaghosa points out that the spiritually ignorant person is like a thirsty cow who tries to slake her thirst by drinking hot water, 'which gives no satisfaction', and represents unskilful action leading to continual frustration and sorrow (dukkha). Given these examples, we can therefore say that 'getting rid of ta.nhaa by means of ta.nhaa' implies that ta.nhaa can only be 'appeased' by becoming skilful, by 'thirsting' after those things that, from the Buddhist point of view, can actually bring real satisfaction. In other words, ta.nhaa, as the general condition of unenlightened existence, can only be 'appeased' by taking up the Buddhist brahmacariya or 'pursuit of excellence', whose goal is nirvaa.na. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Regards, Swee Boon 51176 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 9:42am Subject: Re: Ignorance of a Key Teaching - An Apology to Ken H buddhistmedi... Dear ken H. - Thank you for making it easier for me to continue discussion with you. > Ken H. : > Your apology is accepted of course, but I can't see any reason for it. > To say that my opinions were, "Due to ignorance?" was entirely > appropriate. I am grateful for the question mark. :-) > I am also grateful for your open-mindedness and friendly attitude -- both are constructive. With appreciation, Tep ======== 51177 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 11:00am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > <. . .> > J: > Of course you will agree with me that they > only only eradicated in the arahant? What is one supposed to do > until then? Answer: Work with wholesome desire and conceit. > > ----------------- > > Unwholesome desire (lobha) is eradicated in the Anagami, while > conceit is eradicated in the Arahant. That adds another loose end to > your interpretation, and makes me even less confident of it. I didn't add any 'loose ends'. LOL! Ken, I was speaking about WHOLESOME DESIRE, which is only eradicated in the arahant (as I stated). From the article Swee Boon recently quoted: "As Nyanaponika adds at the end of this quote, 'Such permissible (sevitabbaa) craving is abandoned when its object is attained'. In other words, the 'desire for becoming an Arahant', which is identified here as 'present ta.nhaa', is abandoned only when one attains Arahantship." http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol2/tanha.html You don't have to be confident of my interpretation- I am not asking that. But you shouldn't insinuate that I don't know what I am talking about until you really know what you are talking about. Metta, James 51178 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 0:33pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Sumedho buddhistmedi... Dear Htoo - May I ask you why you find this article ("Ajahn Sumedho") valuable enough to deserve attention of the DSG members? Thank you in advance. Tep ============ --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > With U Han Tun permission, I post his message here in this forum. > > U Han Tun posted at JourneyToNibbana this message: > > "Ajahn Sumedho" > 51179 From: "tepsastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 1:30pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine/ The Key Ideas buddhistmedi... Hi, Ken H (Howard, Swee, James, Sarah and others) - Thanks to Howard whose "low-profile" participation in the DSG forum produced this special thread that keeps on moving like the energized bunny. :-) Ken to James (dsg # 51163): "I think Howard, Tep and Swee Boon were saying lobha (craving) and mana (conceit) could bring desirable results. You expressed agreement with them and so I assumed (wrongly) you were agreeing with that particular point." Tep: Geez, Ken, you are already famous because of your exceptional skill in twisting around the well-said words of Howard, Swee, James and Tep. The key idea of the sutta that we have been discussing so far, I believe, is cleverly summarized by Swee, who is also very intelligent but not so skilfull in twisting things around like you, in the following questions. Swee Boon to Phil (dsg # 51091): >Isn't it by means of conceit and craving that the Buddha-to-be >perfected the paramis and achieved Buddhahood? >Isn't it because of conceit that the Buddha-to-be thought that he >would achieve Buddhahood just like all previous Buddhas? >Isn't it because of craving that the Buddha-to-be left home in search >of the Noble Ancient Path? Dear Ken and Sarah, will you two be kind enough to answer the above three questions for me, please? Don't you think that the Buddha-to-be achieved Buddhahood without the initial impetus produced by craving and conceit? Respectfully, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Sarah, James and all, > > Sarah, I just noticed you have joined this thread - welcome (I hope > you're enjoying your trip, BTW). It is past my bedtime, and so I will > post this and compare notes with your message in the morning. > > James wrote. > ---------------------------- > > I did not give more than one explanation- I just wrote two > posts with the same explanation. And I didn't expect you to agree > with either post. ;-)) > ------------------ > > Sorry, I didn't read the first post carefully enough. I think Howard, > Tep and Swee Boon were saying lobha (craving) and mana (conceit) > could bring desirable results. You expressed agreement with them and > so I assumed (wrongly) you were agreeing with that particular point. > 51180 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 2:05pm Subject: Re: Me and Sea / Perception of the Breath Body? buddhistmedi... Hi, Htoo - Thanks for the interesting (personal) meditation experience. I hope you are kind enough to explain to me a little bit by answering the following questions. 1. What was the miditation ? I suppose it was anapanasati. 2. How did your meditation get deeper? 3. Why did you think of the halo you saw (with your eyes closed, I suppose) as a "sea"? Why not 'air', or 'cloud', or 'space'? 4. If you saw a halo, which was something, why then was "your halo" a sea of nothing? 5. Was it possible that your samadhi-nimitta, i.e. the halo, was simply your perception of the breath body [given that you did breathing meditation.]? 6. What did you mean by "just note what I saw as i saw and do not go beyond."? The following article by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, De-perception, might be helpful. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/deperception.htm l Yours truly, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > Last night, when it approached deeper meditation I saw the sea. The sea > was full of nothing. It was like a clear halo. That halo surrounded me. > When I arose from meditation what I remembered was that there was not > me at that time when I saw the sea. That is the sea of nothing. > > All in all, there was the sea and me. There was not any other things. Me > here is just me and it is not a man or a being or anything like that > but just me. I was instructed that just note what I saw as i saw and do > not go beyond. > 51181 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 2:13pm Subject: Re: Me and Sea buddhistmedi... > Htoo: > And I did not find anything that DSGs do not like when I went into > deep meditation. I was not forcing anything. I was not longing > anything. I was not expecting anything. > Tep: What could you do when you were in the sea of "nothing"? But is there a benefit? Regards, Tep ==== 51182 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 2:50pm Subject: Re: Me and Sea buddhatrue Hi Htoo, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > Last night, when it approached deeper meditation I saw the sea. The sea > was full of nothing. It was like a clear halo. That halo surrounded me. > When I arose from meditation what I remembered was that there was not > me at that time when I saw the sea. That is the sea of nothing. > > All in all, there was the sea and me. There was not any other things. Me > here is just me and it is not a man or a being or anything like that > but just me. I was instructed that just note what I saw as i saw and do > not go beyond. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing Hi Htoo, Thanks for sharing your meditation experience, even in a group like this. I'm afraid that your experience will probably be over- analyzed to death, but I am not going to do that. I just wanted to mention one thing: I have read something very similar to what you have experienced, sitting in front of a sea of nothingness, somewhere else. Unfortunately, right now, I can't remember exactly where it is that I read it (having read many secondary books on Buddhist), but I do remember that it is a significant experience- and one which I haven't had. Of what significance is the experience? That doesn't matter- just suffice it to say that I believe it is significant. Let it go, but continue to meditate in all earnestness! Ignore the naysayers and critics. I wish you blessings on your journey forward! Metta, James ps. Nice to see a change from you from the Pali listings. ;-) 51183 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 3:49pm Subject: Re: Me and Sea buddhatrue Hi Htoo (and all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > Hi Htoo, > I have read something very similar to what you have experienced, > sitting in front of a sea of nothingness, somewhere else. > Unfortunately, right now, I can't remember exactly where it is that > I read it (having read many secondary books on Buddhist), but I do > remember that it is a significant experience- and one which I > haven't had. I still can't remember the secondary source where I read about this experince, but I did remember a reference to a poem by the Chinese Song poet Lu You: The mind is like the water of a pool, tranquil without wind; Sitting silently for thousands of breaths; Midnight, but don't be surprised to see whales making huge waves to welcome the sun at dawn. Metta, James 51184 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 4:30pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine philofillet Hi Swee Boon > How do you separate chanda from lobha in practice? Phil: Yes, this is the question. In most cases where lobha is involved, ie related to sense objects in daily life, I'd say "don't worry about it" Understanding (panna) will understand when it understands, when conditions for understanding arise. But in the case of lobha that is lying undetected at the base of Dhamma practice, we have to be more strict. But how? > I think it is great to be theoretically correct, but if we can't put > the theory into practice, of what use is the theory? Phil: I think by understanding the theory (pariyatti) an essential condition is set for the practice (patipatthi (sp?)) to arise. so we do gradually put the theory into practice. It works its way. We find in daily life so many moments when we understand the theory in a more direct way, but in an unnatural and unforced way. We find the theory actualized or realized to a deeper degree, a slightly deeper degree. It happens. I think it's beautiful and fascinating, so beautiful and fascinating that it saves me from wanting more. But I have not yet firmly closed the door on practicing to develop satipatthana in a more intentional way. If I can work out or understand how it is possible to do so without hungering for results in a way which is akusala and which therefore interferes rather than fosters the arising of satipatthana, I may do so again. This thread is very helpful in that way. > And because we can't put the theory into practice, Phil: I say the theory is put into practice, gradually, as I said above. We don't put it into practice, but it happens. >the only solution > is as Nina says: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas14.html > > Kusala chanda is a necessary factor for the development of the > eightfold Path. if there is no wish-to-do one does not develop it. > However, we do not have to try to have chanda, it arises because of > its own conditions together with the citta which develops the > eightfold Path. > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > This solution goes against the spirit of the sutta which I quoted: Phil: But we know there is no self that gives rise to kusala citta. So even in the sutta passage below ("strong will be our desire for the undertaking of heightened virtue") this heightened virtue is by necessity arising due to conditions. How else could it? There is no self that can give rise to it.. (see the anatta sutta) So in this case, reading this stirring sutta will be one of many conditions that will give rise to this chanda. If you read the sutta and think "I must have chanda now" or when you are tired or discouraged you think "I must have chanda now" it will not be chanda, it will be lobha, I think. Better to understand patiently the feeling of tired of discouraged as conditioned nama, and that understanding will be another helpful condition that will allow chanda to arise, or samvega, that sense of urgency. > Do you have any other alternative solutions? Phil: That's about it, off the top of my head. Sorry for going on so long. I try to keep it as short as possible when I write to you. Phil 51185 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 4:52pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine philofillet Hi again, Swee Boon > > This solution goes against the spirit of the sutta which I quoted: An afterthought - please listen to a few of A. Sujin's chapters on the Perfections (paramis.) The chapter on energy (virya) in particular lays out how wholesome striving can and does arise moment by moment in daily life. Also with the other perfections. Again, no need to think "I must develop the paramis" but by listening to and reflecting on the Buddha's teaching, and appreciating moments of its arising in daily life, wholesome energy, wholesome striving is certainly conditioned and arises in daily life. I can't find the post where we were linked to this reading and I have to run. Would someone kindly post it. Personally, I recommend listening to the chapter on virya, if there is not time now to listen to more. Phil 51186 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 5:04pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine/Tep corvus121 Dear Tep I hope you don't mind me butting in here. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: [snip] > Related to desire is a goal : one has desire to reach a certain status, to > solve a problem, to abandon craving, ... and for the attainment of > arahantship. May I ask for your opinion? Who is it that has the desire you are talking about? I am posing this question in the hope that you will give us your analysis of the Anatta-lakhana sutta. Do you see anatta as a unique and core teaching of the Dhamma? Best wishes Andrew T 51187 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 5:14pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine nidive Hi Phil, > Understanding (panna) will understand when it understands, when > conditions for understanding arise. > I think by understanding the theory (pariyatti) an essential > condition is set for the practice (patipatthi (sp?)) to arise. so we > do gradually put the theory into practice. It works its way. > But I have not yet firmly closed the door on practicing to > develop satipatthana in a more intentional way. If I can work out or > understand how it is possible to do so without hungering for results > in a way which is akusala and which therefore interferes rather than > fosters the arising of satipatthana, I may do so again. The Buddha-to-be did not wait for conditions to arise. He actively sought after liberation, practicing all forms of austerities. He obviously did not believe in waiting for conditions to arise. If he did, he might as well stay at home. Regards, Swee Boon 51188 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 5:59pm Subject: The Doctrine of 'Conditions'. nidive Hi All, In the suttas, as far as I know, conditions is spoken of only in the context of Dependent Co-arising. But in DSG, some members seem to take the doctrine of conditions further. We have statements like: > Understanding (panna) will understand when it understands, when > conditions for understanding arise. > I think by understanding the theory (pariyatti) an essential > condition is set for the practice (patipatthi (sp?)) to arise. so we > do gradually put the theory into practice. It works its way. > S: Right, no conditions for bhavana (well, highly unlike, but some > extraordinary cases in the peta stories), but when conditions > change and there is rebirth in a better realm, then on hearing the > dhamma, even a little, there may be conditions again for keen > interest, wouldn't you say? Isn't this a doctrine of 'conditions' gone haywire? Regards, Swee Boon 51189 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 6:14pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine / A new Religion for Home Owners? buddhistmedi... Hi, Swee and Phil (and all of us)- I want to tell Phil that I do appreciate his sincere answers to Swee's challenging and well thought-out questions. However, the patient waiting for appropriate "conditions" for panna, sati, and even right efforts, to "arise" by themselves, or through one's past accumulations, or by listening and considering the Dhamma (from Khun Sujin's lectures), is very fascinating, though not very convincing. Why? Because this new philosophy is not quite compatible with the Buddha's Teachings and the Patisambhidamagga of the Great Arahant Sariputta. Later on when I have more time, I might post some collected excerpts from several suttas to show why I think so. But I know that Swee, James, Howard and a few other members have done exactly that and they have not made any difference, so there is no guarantee that this planned effort of mine will not also be in vain. {:>( > Phil: > Understanding (panna) will understand when it understands, when > conditions for understanding arise. > I think by understanding the theory (pariyatti) an essential > condition is set for the practice (patipatthi (sp?)) to arise. so we > do gradually put the theory into practice. It works its way. >Swee: The Buddha-to-be did not wait for conditions to arise. >He actively sought after liberation, practicing all forms of >austerities. He obviously did not believe in waiting for conditions to >arise. If he did, he might as well stay at home. .......................................... Tep : The teachings of Khun Sujin sounds like an ideal, new religion for householders who are happily surrounded by pleasurable things and loved ones. Yet these home owners may realize Nibbana like the homeless bhikkhus and bkikkhunis of the Buddha's time. Respectfully, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > > Understanding (panna) will understand when it understands, when > > conditions for understanding arise. > 51190 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 6:17pm Subject: Re: Mahaanidanasutta, paramis kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Oh no, not this again! [groans all around] > -------- Everybody hide! Pretend we're not here! :-) Hi Matheesha, No, seriously, we are all as keen as mustard to discuss accumulations again. Thanks for giving your thoughts on why some fortunate individuals were able to follow the Path as soon as it was revealed to them while others were not. I still like the explanation found in the texts (even if it is mainly in the commentaries). --------------------------- <. . .> M: > What he does mention hundreds of times is development of mindfulness and the insight from direct experiencing, learning from hearing, and learning from thinking about the dhammas (or whatever the definitions for bhavanamaya, sutamaya and cintamaya panna is!). For me the only relavent panna are those three. It is bad enough that we cant remember our own name or where we lived from our previous life. How could we remember dhamma for it to aid understanding now? It is difficult enough to understand when it is spelt out in black and white. The closest it can get is vague familiarity IMO. ---------------------------- We don't remember the theory we learned in previous lives: even the theory we learned yesterday is mostly forgotten. But panna is not theory: it is a conditioned dhamma. I think you accept that there is a continuous succession of cittas - each conditioned by its immediate predecessor - do you not? The present citta has arisen only because the conditions for it to arise were accumulated in the immediately preceding citta. At each moment, the overall accumulations are altered ever so slightly, and any alteration can influence events millions of years into the future. A degree of panna might have been developed fifty aeons ago: if so, it might help us to understand the Dhamma today. ------------------------------- <. . .> M: > Ken, I want to reply you bit by bit. That maybe better than this telescoping out of control. -------------------------------- Thanks, Matheesha, I look forward to more bits, and I will keep my replies to a minimum to help prevent telescoping. Ken H 51191 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 6:19pm Subject: Re: The Doctrine of 'Conditions'. philofillet Hi Swee Boon. Excellent timing. As it happens, Rob K is coming over to our place for dinner tonight, and I was thinking of discussing the relationship between paticca sammupaddha (sp?), the dependent origination (dependent co-arising) laid out in the suttas, and the web of 24 (?) conditional relations laid out (along with paticca sammupaddha) in abhidhamma. You are absolutely right to question the way we use "conditions" so loosely. Let's discuss this at length, looking at paticca sammupaddha (sp?) and the 24(?) conditional relations. Of course, if people don't accept Abhidhamma, we won't get very far. I look forward to discussing this together. Phil p.s re the other post about the Budddha-to-be not waiting for conditions, it's not that. It's not passively waiting. Conditions are arising all the time. Please listen to that talk on virya, if the link comes up. Opportunities to develop kusala and take steps towards eradicating akusala are arising constantly. Daily life can be filled with vigorous application of the Buddha's teaching - it happens naturally if we stay open to the teaching. I just think we have to be more patient about satipatthana or we botch it by letting lobha get in the way - I think, still thinking about it thanks to you. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" wrote: > > Hi All, > > In the suttas, as far as I know, conditions is spoken of only in the > context of Dependent Co-arising. > > But in DSG, some members seem to take the doctrine of conditions > further. 51192 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 6:58pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine/Tep buddhistmedi... Hi, Andrew (and Swee) - Andrew wrote: I hope you don't mind me butting in here. May I ask for your opinion? Who is it that has the desire you are talking about? I am posing this question in the hope that you will give us your analysis of the Anatta-lakhana sutta. Do you see anatta as a unique and core teaching of the Dhamma? Tep: You're welcome to join in a discussion anytime; I am honored by the asking. To answer your questions, may I refer back to the underlying sutta given by Swee? [AN LI.15: Brahmana Sutta] : "What is the path, the practice, for the abandoning of that desire?" "Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the abandoning of that desire." "Whatever desire he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular desire is allayed. ..." Tep: Here the desire to attain arahantship motivates "the monk" to develop the base of powers, etc. The path that the Buddha mentioned in this sutta leads to that "attainment" where the desire is abandoned (arahantship), which is clearly "the goal" or destination of the path. Think of a highway leading from point A to point B. The path connects A to B, and B is the goal or destination. There is no "self" involved, only the work to abandon tanha along with citta and cetasika, for example. There is no reason to think of an atta who controls, who has lobha, mana, etc. Thinking like that is a wrong view. Just practice for abandoning of that desire. That is my understanding of the sutta and anatta. Since there is no atta involved in the path of practice, the principle of anatta in the Anattalakkhana Sutta is satisfied. That is, there is no thinking of any of the rupa or nama in the present moment as ' this is mine, this is I, this is my atta'. Regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > Dear Tep > > I hope you don't mind me butting in here. > 51193 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:13pm Subject: Re: Mahaanidana sutta, theory/practice kenhowardau Hi Matheesha, ----------------- M: > I came across the pariyatti, practipatti quote just once in the suttas while i have come across the buddha talking about practice hundreds of times without any additions of 'finish your learning first' which would have seemed very important if it were the case. ---------------- Consider two different teachings. Teaching A says, - Theory is not enough: there has to be practice. - In truth and reality, there is no self. Teaching B simply says, - Theory is not enough: there has to be practice. What is the difference between those two teachings? Some people (including myself) would say the difference is monumental, and no progress can be made along the Path until that monumental difference is fully appreciated. Others might say the difference is minor and anatta does not become significant until we reach the final stages of the Path. They are very different opinions. It is not surprising that Dhamma discussions can get a little heated. :-) ------------------------ <. . .> M: > The buddha promised arahathood or non reutrning in 7 years or less. ------------------------ I have been a Buddhist for 29 years and neither arahanthood nor non- returning has happened to me. I think the same could be said for just about every other Buddhist in the world. If that is the case, does it mean that the Buddha was mistaken? Or do you think those 7 or less years might refer to a total of some kind? I don't know, but if the Buddha was referring to a total, then that total might exclude time spent in sleeping (for example). And what about the time we spend chasing after sense pleasures - that shouldn't be counted in the 7 or less years, should it? I have heard that a human being is extremely fortunate if there is one moment (less than a billionth of a second) of satipatthana in his entire lifetime. If the Buddha was referring to a *total* of 7 or less years, that fortunate being might still have a long, long way to go. ------------------ <. . .> M: > It seems that the subtle change in emphasis by bringing pariyatti, pratipatti to the fore was done by commentarial scholars whose work would have been justified by it. The scholar monk/forest monk split was always around and even now the work of adjusting the dhamma to fit ones own view happens. -------------------------------- I can see how it seems that way to you. Can you see how it seems the other way to me? I believe the ancient commentators consistently taught the same thing ever since the days of the Buddha. And it was the tradition of 'practice before study' that came to us as a recent innovation. Ken H 51194 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 8:58pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine/Tep corvus121 Dear Tep Thanks for your considered reply and kind words. I am one of these people who like to learn a teaching and understand it before I feel confidence in saying I accept it or not. Since joining DSG, my task has been to learn what is orthodox Theravada, without saying I'm pro or anti, just learning slowly and keeping an open mind, which includes being honest about the parts that seem odd to me and the parts I don't understand. I have a long way to go, but like everyone else, I develop 'working theories' about the meaning of this and that and how they relate. These theories have changed over time. Personally, I am most reluctant to claim absolute knowledge of what a sutta says, and that ancient commentators were wrong. That time is a long way off for me. I simply don't know enough and don't have 'a feel' for the overall scheme. So please excuse me if I am non- committal about the way you and Swee Boon interpret the Brahmana Sutta. You may be correct. But at the moment, it's not part of my plan to do away with sections of the Tipitika such as Abhidhamma and commentaries. My working theory of the Dhamma at the moment is that the core ideas are anatta and conditionality. It is these I tend to use as a yardstick, which gives me a preference for discussing Dhamma in ultimate terms (paramattha-desana). Many on DSG prefer the conventional or pragmatic outlook. At the end of the day, I think we are mostly all 'singing from the same songsheet' but in different keys! (-: Sometimes we get caught up in cycles, like the 'practice' and 'conditions' one. When Swee Boon says we can't 'wait for conditions' but must actively practice for liberation, the other side answers that conditions rule all ie whether we 'practice' or 'sit at home' is the outcome of conditions. So the argument rolls on - and is not so helpful for me. The Buddha said that his Dhamma was difficult to see - and it certainly is for me - another reason why I shy away from claims that a sutta is 'clear' or 'obvious'. Anyway, that's just a bit of background to help you understand where I am coming from. Please keep posting and sharing your ideas. I will be reading them, even if not actively agreeing or disagreeing. Time has got away and I must go now. Best wishes Andrew T In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Andrew (and Swee) - >> You're welcome to join in a discussion anytime; I am honored by the > asking. > > To answer your questions, may I refer back to the underlying sutta > given by Swee? > > [AN LI.15: Brahmana Sutta] : > > "What is the path, the practice, for the abandoning of that desire?" > > "Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of > power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the > fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with > concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on > intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of > exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the > abandoning of that desire." > > "Whatever desire he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on > attaining arahantship that particular desire is allayed. ..." > > Tep: > > Here the desire to attain arahantship motivates "the monk" to develop > the base of powers, etc. The path that the Buddha mentioned in this > sutta leads to that "attainment" where the desire is abandoned > (arahantship), which is clearly "the goal" or destination of the path. > > Think of a highway leading from point A to point B. The path connects > A to B, and B is the goal or destination. There is no "self" involved, only > the work to abandon tanha along with citta and cetasika, for example. > > There is no reason to think of an atta who controls, who has lobha, > mana, etc. Thinking like that is a wrong view. Just practice for > abandoning of that desire. That is my understanding of the sutta and > anatta. > > Since there is no atta involved in the path of practice, the principle of > anatta in the Anattalakkhana Sutta is satisfied. That is, there is no > thinking of any of the rupa or nama in the present moment as ' this is > mine, this is I, this is my atta'. 51195 From: "Hal" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 9:53pm Subject: Re: Me and Sea bardosein Greetings Htoo, Your comments reminded me of a humorous example mentioned in the Vissudhimagga (XX 109). "This story illustrates how it [obhasa] varies. Two elders, it seems, were sitting inside a room with a double wall at Cittalapabbata. It was the Uposatha of the dark of the moon that day. All directions were covered by a blanket of cloud, and at night the four-factored gloom[35]prevailed. Then one elder said, 'Venerable sir, the flowers of the five colours on the lion table on the shrine terrace are visible to me now'. The other said, 'What you say is nothing wonderful, friend. Actually the fishes and turtles in the ocean a league away are visible to me now'." (p.657 Nanamoli trans.) Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma Friends, > > Last night, when it approached deeper meditation I saw the sea. The sea > was full of nothing. It was like a clear halo. That halo surrounded me. > When I arose from meditation what I remembered was that there was not > me at that time when I saw the sea. That is the sea of nothing. > > All in all, there was the sea and me. There was not any other things. Me > here is just me and it is not a man or a being or anything like that > but just me. I was instructed that just note what I saw as i saw and do > not go beyond. > > With Metta, > > Htoo Naing > 51196 From: "robmoult" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 10:20pm Subject: Re: The Doctrine of 'Conditions'. robmoult Hi Phil, Swee Boon, Rob K and all, FYI - My message 33260 gives a detailed analysis of dependent origination using conditions. Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Swee Boon. > > Excellent timing. As it happens, Rob K is coming over to our > place for dinner tonight, and I was thinking of discussing the > relationship between paticca sammupaddha (sp?), the dependent > origination (dependent co-arising) laid out in the suttas, and the > web of 24 (?) conditional relations laid out (along with paticca > sammupaddha) in abhidhamma. > > You are absolutely right to question the way we use "conditions" > so loosely. Let's discuss this at length, looking at paticca > sammupaddha (sp?) and the 24(?) conditional relations. > > Of course, if people don't accept Abhidhamma, we won't get very > far. > > I look forward to discussing this together. > > Phil > > p.s re the other post about the Budddha-to-be not waiting for > conditions, it's not that. It's not passively waiting. Conditions > are arising all the time. Please listen to that talk on virya, if > the link comes up. Opportunities to develop kusala and take steps > towards eradicating akusala are arising constantly. Daily life can > be filled with vigorous application of the Buddha's teaching - it > happens naturally if we stay open to the teaching. I just think we > have to be more patient about satipatthana or we botch it by letting > lobha get in the way - I think, still thinking about it thanks to > you. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" > wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > In the suttas, as far as I know, conditions is spoken of only in > the > > context of Dependent Co-arising. > > > > But in DSG, some members seem to take the doctrine of conditions > > further. > 51197 From: "Hal" Date: Fri Oct 7, 2005 11:25pm Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine bardosein Dear Phil, Phil: But I have not yet firmly closed the door on practicing to develop satipatthana in a more intentional way. If I can work out or understand how it is possible to do so without hungering for results in a way which is akusala and which therefore interferes rather than fosters the arising of satipatthana, I may do so again. Hal: Rather than trying to "work out or understand how it is possible" in order to begin sattipatthana in a more intentional way, why not intentionally make this "hungering for results" the object of your practice? Observing this "hungering for results" come and go will lead to release from this hunger. Regards, Hal --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Swee Boon > > > How do you separate chanda from lobha in practice? > > Phil: Yes, this is the question. In most cases where lobha is > involved, ie related to sense objects in daily life, I'd say "don't > worry about it" Understanding (panna) will understand when it > understands, when conditions for understanding arise. > > But in the case of lobha that is lying undetected at the base of > Dhamma practice, we have to be more strict. > > But how? > > > I think it is great to be theoretically correct, but if we can't > put > > the theory into practice, of what use is the theory? > > Phil: I think by understanding the theory (pariyatti) an essential > condition is set for the practice (patipatthi (sp?)) to arise. so we > do gradually put the theory into practice. It works its way. We find > in daily life so many moments when we understand the theory in a > more direct way, but in an unnatural and unforced way. We find the > theory actualized or realized to a deeper degree, a slightly deeper > degree. It happens. I think it's beautiful and fascinating, so > beautiful and fascinating that it saves me from wanting more. > > But I have not yet firmly closed the door on practicing to > develop satipatthana in a more intentional way. If I can work out or > understand how it is possible to do so without hungering for results > in a way which is akusala and which therefore interferes rather than > fosters the arising of satipatthana, I may do so again. > > This thread is very helpful in that way. > > > > And because we can't put the theory into practice, > > Phil: I say the theory is put into practice, gradually, as I said > above. We don't put it into practice, but it happens. > > > >the only solution > > is as Nina says: > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ - > > http://www.dhammastudy.com/cetasikas14.html > > > > Kusala chanda is a necessary factor for the development of the > > eightfold Path. if there is no wish-to-do one does not develop it. > > However, we do not have to try to have chanda, it arises because > of > > its own conditions together with the citta which develops the > > eightfold Path. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ - > > > > This solution goes against the spirit of the sutta which I quoted: > > Phil: But we know there is no self that gives rise to kusala citta. > So even in the sutta passage below ("strong will be our desire for > the undertaking of heightened virtue") this heightened virtue is by > necessity arising due to conditions. How else could it? There is no > self that can give rise to it.. (see the anatta sutta) So in this > case, reading this stirring sutta will be one of many conditions > that will give rise to this chanda. If you read the sutta and > think "I must have chanda now" or when you are tired or discouraged > you think "I must have chanda now" it will not be chanda, it will be > lobha, I think. Better to understand patiently the feeling of tired > of discouraged as conditioned nama, and that understanding will be > another helpful condition that will allow chanda to arise, or > samvega, that sense of urgency. > > > > Do you have any other alternative solutions? > > > Phil: That's about it, off the top of my head. Sorry for going on > so long. I try to keep it as short as possible when I write to you. > > Phil > 51198 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2005 0:12am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine buddhatrue Hi Phil, Phil: But I have not yet firmly closed the door on practicing to develop satipatthana in a more intentional way. If I can work out or understand how it is possible to do so without hungering for results in a way which is akusala and which therefore interferes rather than fosters the arising of satipatthana, I may do so again. This thread is very helpful in that way. James: It is very good that you haven't `closed the door' on this subject and are willing to learn more. Allow me to give you my opinion and something to think about. Is lobha (desire) the most serious thing to think about, be concerned about, when developing satipatthana? According to K.Sujin it is, but I don't agree. I believe that one needs to be much more concerned about, and to recognize, moha (delusion). Phil, you need to accept a premise: absolutely every single way you* see the world is wrong! The way you view your job, your wife, your apartment, yourself, DSG, nama and rupa…the way you view everything is wrong, wrong, wrong! Reading suttas and listening to K.Sujin doesn't help anything because that involves wrong view also. Everything is wrong! Ignorance pervades everything for those who are unenlightened. Of course your "hungering for results" is akusala because you don't know what you are hungering for. You, in fact, are hungering for more ignorance. If you believe that the results are supposed to make you feel more safe and happy in your job, with your wife, in your apartment, with yourself, etc. Then you are hungering for the wrong results. It isn't the hungering that is the significant concern, it is the ignorance which doesn't allow you to know what the proper results should be. This is why the Buddha taught Satipatthana. Satipatthana is a means of deconstructing our reality in order to see the truth. It is an intentional practice and it isn't easy. However, Satipatthana is the only direct way to end this ignorance because the ignorance is in our mind, not in the `world out there'. I guess I have said enough. I will stop here and see if you respond. Metta, James ps. When I say *you* I include myself also. My world is also dominated by moha. 51199 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Oct 8, 2005 0:14am Subject: Re: A Sutta Supporting a Contention of Mine/ The Key Ideas kenhowardau Hi Tep, You wrote: -------------- Thanks to Howard whose "low-profile" participation in the DSG forum produced this special thread that keeps on moving like the energized bunny. :-) -------------- Yes, thanks Howard (wherever you are) for putting the cat among the pigeons. :-) ---------------------------- T: > Ken to James (dsg # 51163): "I think Howard, Tep and Swee Boon were saying lobha (craving) and mana (conceit) could bring desirable results. You expressed agreement with them and so I assumed (wrongly) you were agreeing with that particular point." Tep: Geez, Ken, you are already famous because of your exceptional skill in twisting around the well-said words of Howard, Swee, James and Tep. The key idea of the sutta that we have been discussing so far, I believe, is cleverly summarized by Swee, who is also very intelligent but not so skilfull in twisting things around like you, in the following questions. ----------------------------- It may seem as though I have been twisting people's words around, but that has not been entirely my fault. As I see it, my only fault has been in not reading some of James's messages as carefully as I should have. That has caused me to misrepresent his position on at least two occasions. But, apart from that, my motives have been as pure as the driven snow. :-) -------------------- T: > Swee Boon to Phil (dsg # 51091): >Isn't it by means of conceit and craving that the Buddha-to-be >perfected the paramis and achieved Buddhahood? >Isn't it because of conceit that the Buddha-to-be thought that he >would achieve Buddhahood just like all previous Buddhas? >Isn't it because of craving that the Buddha-to-be left home in search >of the Noble Ancient Path? Dear Ken and Sarah, will you two be kind enough to answer the above three questions for me, please? -------------------- My answers are, "No" "No" and "No." Sometimes a question needs further explanation. For example, if James had asked those same questions, my answers would have been, "Yes" "Yes" and "Yes." In these contexts, James defines craving and deceit differently from the way Swee Boon and Howard define them. I am not sure where you stand on the issue, but James would be referring to what he calls, "wholesome craving" and, "wholesome conceit." It really would be good if we could use Pali terms wherever there is this kind of confusion. Swee Boon and Howard could use 'lobha' and 'mana,' while James could use 'kusala-chanda' and some other word (for wholesome conceit) that has not been settled on yet. In summary, my answers are 'no, no and no,' *on the assumption* that you are referring to lobha and mana. --------------------------------- T: > Don't you think that the Buddha-to-be achieved Buddhahood without the initial impetus produced by craving and conceit? ---------------------------------- Now we have an added complication: a typo. :-) Assuming you meant to type, "Do" instead of "Don't" my answer is "Yes." I hope this has helped to untwist things. Ken H