53800 From: "randallparr2003" Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 8:04pm Subject: Introduction -> Let me say that I'm Phil and I want to learn about Vipassana randallparr2003 Let me introduce myself. I am Phil. I'm a white Anglo-Saxon male from the Northeastern part of USA known as "New England". There is an acronym called "WASP" which means "white Anglo-Saxon Protestant." This is merely a way of identifying an ethnic group, and has no derogatory intent to it. I was once a Protestant too, which is a Christian "religion" that protested against the original Roman Catholic church and started its own sect. It later branched out into many denominations. I think like I'm still a teenager, but in reality I'm nearing retirement age. I'm 61. Inside, however, I think I'm pretty young. Why am I here? I saw a movie last week put on by a group called "Peace and Justice" and I don't want to get into politics but this group of concerned citizens formed when our nation's leaders violated an important principle and instigated an unprovoked invasion of another country and angered many citizens who consider this an immoral as well as an illegal act. The "Peace and Justice" group believes that peaceful means, not war, should be used to solve problems. This is the reason for "Peace and Justice." It has been around in this community for about 3 years. It has been in the USA for much longer. The film shown by "Peace and Justice" was about how a well-educated and enlightened woman became the warden at a very difficult prison in India and brought in ... pardon me for my vocabulary which is inadequate, I'm sure, since I am a beginner in this field... Vipassana, which I had much trouble remembering since I am uneducated of the cultures of the East. The film showed how hardened criminals in this prison were able to release their pent up feelings of anger through Vipassana and become intimate with one another and gain inner peace. It was a very moving film and it raised some very strong emotions in me. In many ways the United States is a country of contradiction. Our founding fathers and documents say that we are believers in freedom and equality, yet the prison system holds more inmates as a percent of the total population, I believe, than most nations of the world, perhaps more than all of them. Media dominates the national mood. Although we may try to avoid hearing the latest catastrophes from around the world, I can't do so. I can't avoid hearing of the tsunami that destroyed the Asia coast or the hurricanes that destroyed Louisiana and Mississippi in the Southern USA, or the earthquakes that destoyed parts of central Asia, or the continued terrorist bombings throughout the world. I do not think I am the only one affected by this state of discouragement. I know many of my friends are affected. I know many others in my country feel this way. We have a need for world leadership on a path that leads to hope for a better future, a better tomorrow, one that will bring opportunity and happiness, and life and construction. One that will bring an end to violence, killing, death, destruction and hopelessness. So I'm here because I want to learn more about Vipassana. Oh and let me say since winter solstice is here now: Seasons greetings to everyone and let us hope for peace on earth. I don't know about the customs are in this audience but we try to make connections with people during this time that we do not see much in our daily lives. Our family and those who are dear to us. I also wanted to say that I started here with the email option but got overwhelmed with too many messages and so I'm starting over as Sarah suggested and telling something about myself. Peace. Regards, Phil 53801 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 4:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Introduction -> Let me say that I'm Phil and I want to learn abou... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 12/20/05 11:30:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, randallparr2003@... writes: > So I'm here because I want to learn more about Vipassana. ====================== The film you saw, "Doing Time, Doing Vipassana" was produced by the S.N. Goenka people. The style of meditation he teaches is one interpretation of what the Buddha taught in the Satipatthana Sutta, a translation of which you can find at the site http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-010-tb0.html. Mr. Goenka's implementation of cultivation of insight s described in that sutta involves first calming the mind by means of meditating on the breath, and then turning one's attention to sensations throughout the body by mentally scanning the body in a regular way. (BTW, there are other forms of meditation than his which also call themselves vipassana meditation.) The best way, really the only way, to learn Goenka's approach is by attending one of his 10-day meditation retreats. (I attended one, and I benefited greatly from doing so.) 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) 53802 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 9:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration as the 4 jhanas jonoabb Hi Joop Thanks for the detailed comments, and for the further paragraphs from BB's introduction to the Mahavagga of SN. Joop wrote: >Jon, thanks for your rich two messages to me. Some misunderstanding >disappear, one important disagreement still exists: if that we had to >do till we get streamenterer can be called the NEP. You say no and I >say yes. > Well, you may be surprised to know that my answer to that question would be a qualified 'yes' ;-)). Stream-entry is attained by the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas, and such insight is referred to in the commentaries as the mundane path. Mundane path consciousness is accompanied by some but not all of the same path factors. My comments to date have been on a slightly different point, namely, that the NEP as declared by the Buddha in the context of the Four Noble Truths is the path from stream-entry to arahantship. However, for reasons just given, I don't see this as in any sense negating the need for the development of the (mundane) path as a prerequisite for the attainment of stream entry. >Or even that was a big misunderstand because you say now: " Of course >it goes without saying, and is a matter of definition, that the >supramundane path can only be 'practised' by an ariya-puggala, and >that a non-ariyan may 'practise' only the mundane path." >Forgiving you the use of the term "of course" (it was not "of course" >at all) you were talking about the supramundane path and I was >talking about the path now, still a wordling. > I use the term 'practise the path' to mean the same as 'be on the path', because that is how I think it is used in the texts. I could also have used 'develop' instead of 'practise', thus: "Of course it goes without saying, and is a matter of definition, that the supramundane path can only be developed by an ariya-puggala, and that a non-ariyan may develop only the mundane path." A person who has not attained at least stream-entry cannot be said, correctly speaking, to be *developing* the supramundane path (at best they could be said to be developing the means for attaining the supramundane path). Colloquial expression is of course another matter, but we are here concerned with how terms are used in the texts. So as I see it whether or not a person is 'on' the (mundane) path at any given moment comes down to a question of the nature of the consciousness at that moment. For example, regardless of how one sees the role of samatha in the attainment of enlightenment, a moment of actual samatha development is not (or, if you like, may not) be accompanied by the panna that sees the true nature of a presently arising dhamma, and thus could not be considered a path moment. >If you want I can say this path has moments: billions; if you want to >call every arising and falling away of a dhamma "one moment". > Well, yes, as I understand the texts, the path is reckoned in terms of moments; for a given individual, the (mundane) path has as many moments as there are moments of insight into the true nature of a presently arising dhamma. >(What I had to do and what's happening from the moment I got >streamenterer: I will start to study that when it's the "right time"; >so I have no opinion about post-mundane path-moments.) > ;-)). But there is no harm in being exposed to what the Buddha said about the rest of the path, I think? It is a frequent topic of the suttas. >Jon: "I think the paragraph that follows is BB the individual >speaking, rather than BB the Pali/sutta scholar." >Joop: I see totally no reason this theory "of the two BB's": the >individual speaker and the scholar. May I ask you a personal >question, Jon; is it because you are raised as an Englishman or >because you are a Sujin-Buddhist (because Nina is doing the same): >that you can not straight say: "I don't agree with Bhikkhu Bodhi" ? > > Hmmm, I'm not sure how this advances the discussion, but I'll answer anyway ;-)) I think everyone here knows that I have a different view to that of BB, but the purpose of my comment was something else, namely, to point out that the passage in question was 'editorial comment' and was unsupported by references, unlike the bulk of the introduction which is analysis of the suttas and supporting commentaries. And I would say that the same goes for the further paragraphs you have copied out in your message (although I notice there is one reference cited there). >Jon (to James): "The path here is a metaphorical one, so some licence >is allowable ;-))." >Joop: It's another topic but that's really a breakthrough to me! I >did not know, Jon, that also for you parts of the Tipitaka should not >be taken literally but metaphorically, I have proposed that some >weeks till months ago in threads about 'Modern Theravada'. Perhaps we >two can make a list of topics in the Tipitaka that better can be >understood metaphorical? > > I would say that certain terms, rather than parts of the Tipitaka, have a non-conventional meaning. I cannot off-hand think of any actual topics that can better be understood as metaphorical, but I'm open to suggestions ;-)) If you don't mind, I'll respond on the Right Livelihood point in a separate message. Jon >Continuation of # 53680 (skipping the most Pali-terms) > >"[ …a picture of how the path unfolds in actual experience.] >On gaining faith in the Buddha in his role as the Tathagata, the >supreme guide to deliverance, the disciple must first arrive at a >clear conceptual understanding of the teaching, particcularly with >respect to the principle of kamma and its fruit and the Four Noble >Truths. This is right view in its embryonic stage. ... > 53803 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Brahmajala Sutta english to french translation sarahprocter... Hi Sebastien, I hope you’re still checking in..... I had intended to continue our discussion before now. --- Sebastien aka French Dread aka Mesa wrote: > Well there is nothing special in any center, just trained > practitioners and instructors that could help. I am sure that > awareness can be maintained in any situation, even now as you said. .... Sarah: Just to clarify and fine tune a little. What I said was this: > > Sarah: Can there be `meditation' or `seclusion' even now as we write? > Can > > there not be awareness of `seeing' or `visible object' > or `thinking' or > > `doubt' right now? When awareness arises, there is a `living alone' > with > > the present dhamma. Isn't this what `meditation' or bhavana is all > about, > > rather than waiting til we visit a Theravadin centre? ... Sarah: I think this is different from ‘awareness can be maintained in any situation’. No dhamma can ‘be maintained’. All dhammas, including awareness, fall away as soon as they’ve arisen. Even a Buddha could not have ‘maintained’ awareness. .... > > Sarah: Btw, with regard to your comments on why sometimes ignorance and > > sometimes attachment are given `as the beginning',the commentary to > the > > Dhammasangani (Sammohavinodani) gives a lot of detail about why > each is > > used in different contexts. .... .... Sebastien:> Don't hesitate if you have any link, otherwise I will do my own > research ... Sarah: I couldn’t find the link to my other post easily. Just a couple of quotes again. Sammohavinodani, transl as Dispeller of Delusion (PTS), Classification of the Structure of Conditions, 612: “But why does the Blessed One give the exposition of the process with these two states (S: i.e ignorance and craving) at the head? Because they are the outstanding causes of kamma which leads to a happy destiny and that which leads to an unhappy destiny. For ignorance is the cause of outstanding kamma which leads to an unhappy destiny...... But craving for existence is the outstanding cause of kamma which leads to a happy destiny.... But as regards these [two] states which head the exposition of the process, in some instances the Blessed One gives instruction based on a single [one of these] states, for instance: ‘Accordingly, bhikkhus, formations have ignorance as their cause’ (S ii 31) and so on; likewise: ‘In one, bhikkhus, who dwells seeing satisfaction in states productive of craving, craving increases, with craving as condition clinging [arises]’ (S ii 84) and so on; some instances based on both, for instance: ‘Thus, bhikkhus, this body comes to arise for the fool who is hindered by ignorance and yoked to craving;.....(S ii 23f) and so on.” I can add more detail if you like. I forget which texts you have. Hoping your translation work is going well. Metta, Sarah ========== 53804 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:16pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 339- Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[i] 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;-) ========================================== [Ch20 - Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)] We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Fives, Chapter VI, §6, The preceptor) about a monk who complained to his preceptor concerning his lack of energy for kusala: *** "Now a certain monk approached his preceptor and said: “My body, sir, is as it were drugged; the quarters are not seen by me; things(1) are not clear to me; sloth and torpor compass my heart about and stay; joyless, I live the holy life; and doubt about things are ever with me.” " *** Such complaints may sound familiar to us, we may feel at times as though “drugged”. Doubts about realities cannot be solved unless right understanding is being developed. There are nåma and rúpa all the time, there is seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, anger or attachment; the objects of which right understanding is to be developed are right at hand but often there is no awareness of them. We read that the preceptor went with this monk to the Buddha who exhorted him thus: *** "“Monk, it is ever thus! When one dwells with doors of the senses unguarded, with no moderation in eating, not bent on vigilance, not looking for righteous things, nor day in day out practise the practice of making become things that are wings to enlightenment; then is the body as though drugged, the quarters are not seen, things are not clear, sloth and torpor compass the heart and stay; joyless, one lives the godly life; and doubts about things are ever with one”." *** We then read that the Buddha told that monk to guard the doors of the senses, to be moderate in eating, to be vigilant and to cultivate the factors leading to enlightenment. The monk followed the Buddha’s advice. The Buddha’s words were the right condition for him to develop insight, even to the degree that he could attain arahatship. Thus he was no longer subject to sloth and torpor. *** 1) Dhammas. The commentary, the “Manorathapúraùí”, explains: samatha and vipassanå do not appear to that monk. ***** Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[[to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 53805 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:33pm Subject: Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting (was: Re: Path & Fruit, momentary Path.) sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, debaters, dojo-busters & all, I’ve got lots of outstanding posts I’m meaning to respond to, but this just caught my eye on this question about ‘debate’. --- kenhowardau wrote: > I think debate is useful, but only in matters that can be proved one > way or the other. .... S: I don't really know what the difference is between 'debate' and 'discussion' as people use the terms here. It sometimes occurs to me that we may consider our own posts (whether in agreement, disagreement or in response) to be ‘discussion’ and ‘debate’(with more negative connotations) refers to others’ posts when they disagree with ours:-). Does it matter whether what we or others say can be 'proved' one way or the other? What kind of proof are we looking for? Book proof or direct knowledge proof? I was listening to part of a recording today in which K.Sujin was emphasisiing the importance of lots of discussion in order to really consider and reflect on the teachings. Of course I agree with this and it’s what we’re here for! So like you, I think discussion/debate is very important. After all, how much we’ve all had to listen, discuss and clarify for ourselves, asking the same questions or dilemmas over and over again to get to any little glimmers of understanding that may arise. A friend, Maeve, raised this point in India – the point that we sometimes forget our own past wrong views and disagreements when we lack tolerance or patience with others who have different ideas. Really, we all share so much ignorance of the techings, don’t we? And as we were reminded here by the ‘W.T.O. ‘Dojo-busters’ at the weekend too, everyone has their own different way of getting their different views across too.....some do so in a colourful carnival style, some quietly with placards and some so violently that they had to get arrested after closing down all the roads and transport around where we live:-/. Similarly, some here ask polite questions, some come out with strong statements of disagreement, some quote colouful textual passages and so on. Everyone has their own way or style:-). .... >We know that the Visuddhimagga says there is a > path but no goer on it, and I think we can agree, can we not, that > this means 'literally there is a path, but only figuratively is there > any goer on the path?' .... S: Of course I agree with this, but if others don’t, I don’t think that means there’s no point in further discussion as you also go on to say. ... > If we can't agree that that is the meaning of the text, then debate > will be useful in reaching agreement. However, debate over whether > the Visuddhimagga itself is correct or incorrect would be futile. .... S: I pretty much agree with this, though I also don’t think there’s any rule that anyone need accept the Vism as being correct either. Such confidence in the correctness of the text will only come about (if it does)through confidence in the correctness of its message. I do agree that discussions about the authenticity of the Vism and so on are of limited value as they don’t usually bring us back to present paramattha dhammas – but of course, that’s up for debate too:-). That was just some babble as Phil(C) would put it and a chance to say 'hi' and I pretty well agree with what you write as usual:-). Glad to see you around – have you been buried in Surf or Survey recently? Metta, Sarah p.s the surf here is about Noosa in August temperature now....brrr....usually Jon and I are the lone swimmers:-). ======== 53806 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 10:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha & Vipassana sarahprocter... Hi Vijita (& Rob M), [RobM,Vijita is another new member from Malaysia, from Penang - see #53245] --- Vijita Teoh wrote: > Hi Sarah & all, > > It's not too late for me to introduce myself to the group. Actually, > I'm just a lurker until I came across a post about Samatha better than > Vipassana. I find both methods have different function to play, it's > neither one better than the others. This subject caught my attention & I > feel that I must get involved to get things corrected. .... S: Many thanks for introducing yourself. We do have some other members from Penang...one was Alice. Of course, there is calm or samatha whenever there is vipassana. Usually, when there's an idea about developing one or other, again it's clinging rather than any understanding, don't you think? .... > S: Do you believe that all disciples of the Buddha (even when he was > alive) practised anapanasati? What do you believe it means to 'practise' > Vipassana, 'no matter what method' is used? > > V : I'm not sure what you exactly mean in the above paragraph but I > think you might be saying that we are practising Vipassana, no matter > what method we use. I don't mean that. .... S: I was using your words when you said before: V: "As I am concerned, both Anapanasati & Vipassana being practised by all meditators what method they use." S: Vipassana refers to insight, to well-developed satipatthana. So there cannot be any vipassana unless there is a beginning of satipatthana now. I think 'vipassana meditation' is widely used in a way that has little to do with the terms 'vipassana' and 'bhavana' as used in the texts. I was trying to find out more about how you use these terms. I also read you as suggesting that all followers of the Buddha or 'all meditators' practise anapanasati and couldn't agree with this. What is anapanasati? Is it merely focussing on the breath? I don't think so, but I'd be glad to hear more of your ideas. I was glad that Tep followed you more easily and helped to convey them. Apologies if I missed your points:-) In any case, hope we hear more from you. Metta, Sarah p.s Rob M: I thought of you and the process of cittas some time ago when I read Nina's quote from K.Sujin in #50496 about the 17 moments of citta and how 'the development of panna is not a matter of counting moments of citta' etc. Also, Nina's post to you #50734 which you might not have seen. The more detailed posts she refers to on processes of cittas can probably be found under 'Processes of cittas' in U.P. You mentioned (off-list) that you'd been reading the Vimuttimagga with more detail. Perhaps you'd like to share this. The Vimuttimagga is pretty controversial of course:-) ================== 53807 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:43pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG sarahprocter... Hi Charles D, --- Charles DaCosta wrote: > Boy, I almost missed this. > > Hi Sarah, > I think that sometimes posts get lost when a thread is split and no > warning > of the split is made. .... S: I was probably trying to keep the peace with Joop:-) Glad you found it. .... > C: I will be losing my job soon, so I will be spending much more time at > home (a mixed blessing). I hope to use my unemployment to write a few > books. ... S: Best wishes for this. What kind of books and in what language? Now, back to business: .... > C: when I touch a tree, thoughts are experienced (impulses as thoughts). > And > a lot depends on what the other senses are doing. But I think you are > looking for are the labels: "rough hardness." .... S: I'm not really looking for a label but for your experience. You say that when you touch a tree, thoughts are experienced, but aren't these thoughts on account of what is experienced through the body-sense or touch first of all? In other words, if there were no experience of the 'tangible object' such as the 'rough hardness', would there be any thoughts about that experience? .... > C: Yes, visible object, is that real? I just call this one "tree." It > is > real to me because it is a visible object. That is, something the mind > can > experience through the eye gate (sense organ) at first. No, it is not > experienced as emotion at first, but as a picture giving rise to > intellect > and thus emotion. ..... S: When there is the experience of seeing, the visible object seen is very real. Now we're looking at the computer, the visible object is all that is seen. Usually by 'emotion' we refer to likes and dislikes and as you suggest, these do not arise at the moment of seeing, but follow on afterwards, when there is the recalling, marking and thinking about what has just been seen. I think we agree in our own different words. .... > C: The same goes for "mad" -- thoughts are experienced (impulses as > thoughts), and a lot depends on what the other senses are doing. But I > think > you are looking for is the label: "anger." .... S: So anger or 'mad' accompanies the experiencing or thinking about those particular thoughts. In between the 'mad', there are bound to be moments of seeing, hearing and other experiences too. 'Mad' doesn't last either:-). .... > S: OK, when there's anger, it has its very own characteristic or nature, > regardless of whether there's any thinking about it before or after and > no > matter what thoughts there are. This is irrespective of the label > 'anger'. > > We could call it anything. > > > > C: The same can be said for tree. .... S: Not quite. The visible object when we look out of the window is real. The hardness/roughness you mentioned when touching the so-called tree is real, but the idea of tree is just a thought about these different experiences. Anger, on the other hand, has its own particular characteristic which definitely arises and passes away and can be known. .... > C: What makes hardness real and not tree? Is it because you consider > tactile input real and not visual input? .... S: Tactle input and visual input are both equally real. But visual input is not a tree or computer or people -- it is just visual input. (I rather like these terms of yours). As soon as we start defining the visual input and saying it's this or that, it's an idea about the visual input, not just that which is seen. .... > S: Both tactile input and visual input are real. But what is visual > input? > Isn't visual input merely visual input or visible data? When we think we > see > a tree or a person, aren't these concepts or thoughts about the visual > > input? .... > C: But the same could be said for tactile input. .... S: Exactly so. Tactile input is just tactile input. Just that which is experienced through the body-sense. This is why K.Sujin is reluctant to talk about details of motion, for example, because immediately there's a story about what is touched rather than being aware of tactile input. .... > C: Wait; is your problem really with the label (e.g., "tree") and not > the > object itself? If so, then keep in mind that "hardness" is also a word > or > label used for communicating some point, or an idea we have because of > what > is touched and remembered. .... S: As I said before, I'm very impressed by the comments you're making in this thread. The problem I have is not so much with any label but with any idea of 'something' in the visible or tangible objects. I agree that 'hardness', 'motion' or even 'colour' can lead people to have ideas of some special 'thing' in the tangible or visible objects. People can hear these words and try to experience just hardness or just motion or just colour, for example. Ignorance can take any words amiss. Even 'tangible object' or 'visible object' - people may have an idea that there is no distinction between different tangible objects or different visible objects because the meaning of 'khanda' is not understood. ..... > > C: But even the term sensory object (both visual and tactical) is a > label > used to describe the reality at the sense gate. So yes, there are lots > of > ideas, some facts, some fiction, and some are both fact and fiction. .... S: Very good:-). .... > C: It sounds to me like your real problem is with the labels and the > mental > stuff the labels trigger, not the object I am now looking at (I call it > a > tree). .... S: Yes, no problem with the visual object you're looking at. Certainly you can call it a tree:-). Just know that it's only visual object that's seen and the rest is 'the mental stuff the labels trigger' as you put it. No tree in the visual object itself, but sanna marks the visual object and it then gets identified in this way. ..... > S: All 'existence' is a 'mixture' of namas (those 'mental' qualities > which > can experience objects and rupas (those 'physical' qualities which can > never > experience objects). > .... > C: I am not sure what you mean here, but does it relate to > consciousness? Or > are you trying to say that sensory input is the only reality? .... S: I'm saying that the seeing consciousness is nama. The sensory input or visual input, for example, is rupa. Both of these are realities. Anger or 'mad' is another nama, another reality. Thinking is another nama. However the ideas, labels, thoughts of trees and so on are neither namas or rupas. They are concepts. So it is the namas and rupas which are to be known. Not the concepts. .... > S: There is the consciousness such as seeing experience or touching > experience or thinking experience (namas) and there is the sensory input > we've just discussed such as tangible object or visible object (rupas). > These exist and can be known. Trees and computers are ideas and in an > ultimate sense, such ideas do not exist. > > > > C: So again, it sounds like you have a problem with the label not the > object. .... S: The problem (we all have) is with ignorance. That is ignorance of namas and rupas. When there is awareness of not only the sensory input (the rupas) but also of the namas which can experience objects, such as the seeing, hearing or thinking, then there is no confusion. There is nothing wrong with labels or ideas, as long as we know these are not the realities. ..... > S: This is a very good discussion. Let's continue. > > C: I agree. But is this agreement real? Some Buddhists believe what ever > is > in the mind is real, and only what is in the mind. What is not in mind > does > not exist. Therefore, the agreement exists in my mind so now it is real. .... S: Ah this is another discussion in itself. Remind me of it later! Metta, Sarah p.s note: no subject change this time! ============== 53808 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 0:48am Subject: Re: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year jwromeijn Dear all Today is the shortest day, in the Northern hemisphere; special at higher altitudes there is only a few hours daylight. From from now it's getting better, the sun is coming back. It should be better that Australia has it's Christmas as Christine described it somewhere between June 20 and June 30. Let's not forget that originally Christmas was a heathen holiday: 'Sonnewende', Midwinter. I think 'Tejo' (experienced heath) is the best symbol for the Sun, that's why I propose we have Tejo-day, because Buddhism can also incorporate elements of more primitive religions. A good 2006 Metta Joop 53809 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 3:26am Subject: Re: Ethical considerations (was Right Concentration as the 4 jhanas) jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > ... > Connie (after looking up the term 'refraint' in her dictionary): > Following an ethic grounded on understanding dukkha, ethics (siila) would > be the paths/lines of thought/conduct the refugee would be well advised to > avoid (vaaritta) and do (caarita). Dear Connie, all 'Refraint', what a good term, meaning several things (according my dictionary english-dutch) But I will react to your message on a serious way (you know many times I like to be ironic) The most sharp I see that Abhidhamma (or Theravada in general) ethics many times is formulated in a negative way (not doing this, abstain of doing that etc.) is about the three cetasika's samma-vaca, samma- kammanta and samma-ajiva. All three are formulated in a positive way! But for some reason I cannot understand these three together in the Abhidahmma-system has a header with the title abstinences (virati)! The same, in Sutta language, with the Five preceps. Connie, you use a formal Pali term for refugee's phrase but in my mind my Five precepts are positive: right speech, etc There is no reason for example to formulate giving dana negative (is "adana" a Pali-term?) I'm not a Pali-knower and I remember Nina (I think) has explained the prefix "a" does not make a term negative in Pali. For exemple in 'adosa', but still I prefer to say 'metta' in stead of 'adosa' (if it's correct that these two exactly mean the same). But this is something else, this is not about language but about a way of thinking behind it. About the 'natural' human tendency to do bad, evil, things. Another theory, maybe more Mahayana, is that human nature is good, only something prevents the appearing of it. I prefer a more neutral theory: human nature has both tendencies. Fot this reason and because I think it has a better effect in influencing people (especially Westerners) it's better to use a positive formulated ethics. There is one other aspect, I recognised that in our discussion with Jon about the NEP, path or moments. With my example of "right livelihood": it's easier to perceive this path-factor as one moment when formulated negative: the moment of insight that till now one was wrong. And it's easier to perceive it as permanent moral behavior when formulated positive (Of course I'm only interested at the mundane level, I'm not yet a streamenterer). Your last remark "Support for the three right ways of life? Guarding/restraint of the sense faculties." What I try to do in my formal vipassana meditation (and in daily life as a result of it) is: be transparant. An image of for example a beautiful woman comes in my eyes, as a result desire arises in me; I observe both phenomena in me and then that event is already history, I let it behind me. It's a idealistic picture but it's what I try to do. Connie, you know the Pali Canon better than I do. You talk about "avoid (vaaritta) and do (caarita)" but most emphasis get "avoid". My question to you (and others) is: isn't a superior interpretation of the Canon that ethics should be formulated positive? Metta, and good Teja-days Joop 53810 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 5:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jonoabb Hi again Joop Joop wrote: >Joop (after looking up the term 'restraint' is his dictionary): We >should be careful to describe ethics in a negative way; sometimes >it's inevitable but better we formulate it in a positive way; so the >use of the term 'restraint' should not be the core-concept. >My question to you: can you describe "right livelihood" (as a >positive term) for a wordling and as "one moment"? I think you >cannot: "right livelihood" is having ethical considerations again and >again. A exemple: somebody has a job at research-department of a >multinational firm that produces medicine; she thinks this job >is "right livelihood" but doubt starts when she learns more and more >of the immoral policy of that firm, responsible for the death of >several people. Her consequences from this doubt is my exemple >of 'ethical behavior'. > I mentioned 'restraint' because that is the usual translation of the Pali term 'virati' which is used to describe the mental factors of right speech, action and livelihood. Among the sobhana cetasikas are 3 that (somewhat confusingly) have the same name as their Noble Path counterparts. They are the mental factors that arise to when there is wholesome restraint from doing an (anticipated) act of wrong speech, action or livelihood. For example, if an act of intended harsh speech is refrained from with kusala citta, that will be right speech. However, there is no arising of right speech if there is no inclination to speak wrongly in the first place. In the case of wrong livelihood, it is the restraint from wrong speech or action in the course of pursuing one's livelihood. Thus it depends not so much on the kind of job one does as on how one acts in doing one's job. For example, a person following a conventionally laudable occupation (doctor, social worker, etc) may be inclined to speak or act dishonestly in some way (for example, giving a false explanation to account for sloppy work done or an absence from work), which would be wrong livelihood, but any restraint from carrying out that intended action would be an instance of right livelihood, at that particular moment. This is how I understand the use of these terms in the teachings. For a detailed treatment of the 3 virati's, see Ch 32 of Nina's 'Cetasikas' at: http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas34.html Jon 53811 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting (was: Re: Path & Fruit, momentar... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Ken & all) - In a message dated 12/21/05 1:34:21 AM Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: > Hi Ken H, debaters, dojo-busters &all, > > I’ve got lots of outstanding posts I’m meaning to respond to, but this > just caught my eye on this question about ‘debate’. > > --- kenhowardau wrote: > >I think debate is useful, but only in matters that can be proved one > >way or the other. > .... > S: I don't really know what the difference is between 'debate' and > 'discussion' as people use the terms here. It sometimes occurs to me that > we may consider our own posts (whether in agreement, disagreement or in > response) to be ‘discussion’ and ‘debate’(with more negative connotations) > refers to others’ posts when they disagree with ours:-). > ======================= Good point, Sarah! ;-) I think that the difference between discussion and debate is that of attitude and intention. I view discussion as a cooperative venture with the aims being the discovery of truth and mutual benefit. I view debate as motivated by scoring points and by "winning," an ego-driven waste of time. ;-) One of several wonderful things about DSG is that it is overwhelmingly a haven for good discussion and not debate. 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) 53812 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 8:00am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi again Joop > >.... Hallo Jon, Connie, all Your message to me crossed mine to Connie (53809) on nearly the same subject. Three remarks on it First: thanks for the information about the three cetasikas; it made things more clear (especially your way of thinking). Second: as I said to Connie, it's strange that the three cetasikas themselves are formulated positive (about doing) but that the header of the three (virati) is negative, (about not doing). I will say it more straight: even it's not according the Pali Canon, I prefer the positive formulation of ethics. For example: "give dana" works better than "don't keep all your money for yourself". Third. I understand your emphasis of this three as cetasikas, and not so much as Path-factors. But still it surprises me you don't talk about ethical behavior. I have now on my desk 'An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics', by Peter Harvey, I think one of the main books about this topic. He explains (what I partly already knew; and I know he does it in negative terms): " 'Wrong livelihood' is trade in: weapons (being an arms salesman), living beings (keeping animals for slaughter; Ven. Payutto sees this as also including controlling prostitutes), meat (being a slaughterer, meat salesman, hunter or fisherman), alcoholic drink, or poison. …Wrong livelihood is also seen as any mode of livelihood that is based on trickery or greed. …While the early texts only give a short list of types of 'wrong livelihood', in the modern context, a Buddhist might add others to the list. For example: doing experiments on animals … or even working in advertising, to the extent that this is seen as encouraging greed, hatred and delusion, or perverting the truth." (p. 188) Jon, I will react on an other moment on your other message to me. Metta Joop 53813 From: "m. nease" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 10:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP mlnease Hi Jon, ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonothan Abbott" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 5:27 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP > Among the sobhana cetasikas are 3 that (somewhat confusingly) have the > same name as their Noble Path counterparts. They are the mental factors > that arise to when there is wholesome restraint from doing an > (anticipated) act of wrong speech, action or livelihood. Aren't these the same mental factors? I thought it was arising with the other (at least five) path factors that made them supramundane. Is there some other difference that's more than semantic? mike 53814 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Survey, to Joop. nilovg Dear Joop, But I can still give you several copies after Febr, also for Buddhist associations you think may be interested. You know more about them than I, because I have no contacts with organisations (lack of time). Lodewijk also mentioned: universities and libraries. Perhaps this is a good idea. Nina. op 20-12-2005 21:49 schreef Joop op jwromeijn@...: > About the Survey: Sarah has convinced me not to be modest so I send > Sukin my postal adress 53815 From: nina Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:03am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, ***** Nina. 53816 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Introduction -> Vipassana, Lodewijk's approach. nilovg Dear Phil R (we have another Phil here), Wellcome here and thank you for your introduction. I can feel with you. op 21-12-2005 05:04 schreef randallparr2003 op randallparr2003@...:> > So I'm here because I want to learn more about Vipassana. -------- N: I discussed your letter with my husband, Lodewijk. We talked about it how difficult it is to give a summary of what vipassana is. Lodewijk said he would try to give an approach: It is best if you give some input by your remarks or questions, seasons greetings to you, Nina. 53817 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:sati and focussing nilovg Hi Matheesha, Just taking out a few points and snipping, posts tend to become long. op 20-12-2005 21:34 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...: ps- thank you for your kind comments about the post to James. For > someone steeped in paramatta, I appreciate your ability to appreciate > such things. -------- N: Oh, then I failed in making it clear that paramattha dhammas are not abstract, not theoretical. Abhidhamma and its application, which is satipatthana, are most helpful for our social life. Paramattha dhammas are so real, occurring all the time. Seeing, hearing, our defilements, and kusala cittas. I quote from Kh Sujin's Perfections: I tried to explain this further in a few articles on the Brahmaviharas (on Zolag web). ------- > > M: ... But it seems difficult to pin point exactly > where things become supramundane. I think it is at the point of > vimutti/magga-citta. But then it clashes with 'ariya' right view > which arises before magga-citta. ... ------- N: It is paññaa that knows when nibbaana is the object. As I said to Tep, I see right view as beginning and developing more and more. Many levels. >> --------- > > M: If lobha and dosa are acting there cannot be any concentration in > a meditative sense. Ths mind is in a state of turmoil -there is no > calm capable of seeing a dhamma arise and pass away. The samadhi of a > jhana suppresses lobha because it imposes a state of calm - a state > of mind which cannot give rise to lobha. ------ N: I see it thus: samatha is the development of calm, vipassana is the development of understanding, and both forms of mental development have a different aim and a different way of development. Vipassana is developed in daily life, in the midst of our activities, turmoils, difficult situations, contrary events. why is that possible? Because it is a matter of understanding, understanding whatever appears. Nobody can select any object, we never know beforehand what our experiences will be: pleasant or unpleasant, kusala or akusala. They all occur because of their own conditions, they can be understood as conditioned elements. ---------- M.... I'm not talking about this type of weak > concentration. Such a 'concentration' cannot see anything because we > all have it anyway. A type of concentration which is present when > lobha is also present wont give rise to a degree of calmness of mind > which enables us to see the dhammas, because in such states the mind > is in turmoil. ------ N: Turmoil is conditioned and can be understood as such. At the moment of understanding, there is momentary concentration, khanika samaadhi also, and it accompanies the citta with awareness. There is no need for extra concentration. Paññaa and sati can do their own work. > ---------------------- > M: ... Samatha is only for teaching focus and calming the > mind. ... Sitting is good for training samatha, to develop calm > through anapanasati. Vipassana is every moment of the day. > > N: > If one tries to focus on visible object, there is thinking, no > awareness of >> the present dhamma. > > M: Perhaps you will see that this is not the case always. The reason > that vitakka vicara dissappears in the second jhana is a higher > degree of samadhi. There is no thinking there. If we train our mind > in samadhi, it can be done. --------- N: But in Vipassana thinking has to be known as a type of nama. Thinking occurs time and again, thinking about people and events, it is very natural. No need to suppress it. We either think with kusala citta or with akusala citta, but mostly with akusala citta. So, in general I would say about our different points of view that you believe that the citta should have calm first, and that you see the lack of sati and samadhi are an obstruction. I hope I did not misrepresent you. I am inclined to emphasize understanding above all. I think that it is understanding stemming from listening that can condition direct awareness and that can become direct understanding. I do not believe in doing certain things first, such as concentrating on breath. I believe that vipassana can and should be developed in daily life. I do not see vipassana as a deep concentration. That is the way I would describe jhana. I have to add that I consider jhana great kusala, it is higher than kusala of the sense-sphere. I know the texts about the combination of jhana and vipassana, yuganaddha etc. But their ways of development are different. In vipassana also akusala should be object of right understanding. It is real and it has a characteristic. There are mostly moments of forgetfulness, no sati, but if we worry about that it shows clinging, wanting to have many moments of sati. Our many defilements are the cause of forgetfulness. We should keep on listening, studying the Dhamma and considering. We never listen enough. Our aim is understanding, not many moments of sati. **** Nina 53818 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 1:12pm Subject: Re:sati and focussing matheesha333 Hi Nina, > N: I see it thus: samatha is the development of calm, vipassana is the > development of understanding, and both forms of mental development have a > different aim and a different way of development. M: For me it is different like production of wax and production of string in making candles. The way they come about are different, do different things. Both of them serve a purpose - one without the other is useless. Similarly I see samatha and vipassana as necessary components of the one path. Samatha and vipassana has been described as the two wheels of the chariot which carries us to nibbana by the Buddha. N:Nobody can select any object, > we never know beforehand what our experiences will be: pleasant or > unpleasant, kusala or akusala. They all occur because of their own > conditions, they can be understood as conditioned elements. M: Are you saying that samatha is impossible? This is not supported in the suttas: ...he should approach an individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced -Samadhisutta/AN I'm sure the visuddhimagga and other commentaries would consider it the same. What is one pointedness of mind? It is that unwavering quality, that it does not rush about caught up in cravings and aversions. How is it trained - by bringing the mind back again and again to that one point. This does not mean that the mind will not run at all. Ofcourse it will, that is the nature of the untamed beast. But if you can understand how we can sit here and focus on one email and type away, and keep only your reply in focus, it is possible to understand samatha. It does not mean that we focus on the email exclusively, but rather we focus most of the time. > ---------- > M.... I'm not talking about this type of weak > > concentration. Such a 'concentration' cannot see anything because we > > all have it anyway. A type of concentration which is present when > > lobha is also present wont give rise to a degree of calmness of mind > > which enables us to see the dhammas, because in such states the mind > > is in turmoil. > ------ > N: Turmoil is conditioned and can be understood as such. At the moment of > understanding, there is momentary concentration, khanika samaadhi also, and > it accompanies the citta with awareness. There is no need for extra > concentration. Paññaa and sati can do their own work. M: Unfortunately this is not enough. With a blink of an eye you hope to read an entire page. Even with continuous sati of seeing dhammas arising and passing away it takes hours to days for understanding of tilakkhana and anatta to arise even in a tranquil retreat setting and even more to go on to things like nibbida. The buddha never intended such a thing, because the path will never finish in 7 years or less by just seeing a glimpse. A little bit of turmoil/agitation can be noticed. But to be caught up in it intensely is to only see what it wants us to see - through the lense of a defilement. We have to approach without 'greed and distress' as mentioned in the satipattana sutta. > > N: > If one tries to focus on visible object, there is thinking, no > > awareness of > >> the present dhamma. > > M: Perhaps you will see that this is not the case always. The reason > > that vitakka vicara dissappears in the second jhana is a higher > > degree of samadhi. There is no thinking there. If we train our mind > > in samadhi, it can be done. > --------- > N: But in Vipassana thinking has to be known as a type of nama. Thinking > occurs time and again, thinking about people and events, it is very natural. > No need to suppress it. M: Nina, do you remember a time when you were really sad or angry? It is difficult to think rationally much less to see without avijja. You say that focusing is thinking, and then that in vipassana thinking has to be known as such. I'm trying to understand why you feel focusing is thinking. Is it because it is a mental event? We are talking about vinnana here. vinnana is needed to sense rupa as well as nama. If we direct our awareness/vinnana to focus on arising or nama or rupa we are in touch with the dhammas. In focusing there need not be the thought 'now let me focus' -arising of vitakka vicara. There has to be only intention and the movement of vinnana. As to knowing that you are thinking when you are thinking is one of the most difficult things in meditation, because we are so caught up in thoughts. There have been times in deep samadhi when i have caught my mind having streams of thought, where 'i' was removed and could be an independant observer, but such times are rare. often we know after the event. But you are right, it has to be known in vipassana -samadhi wont irradicate it entirely, but lessens it to the degree that noticing other dhammas is not hindered. The papanca will not get carried unendingly when there is samadhi. Awareness arises more and more and papanca will stop after one or two thoughts because of the one pointedness. However when you actively focus, there is only 'experiencing' for that duration. N: > So, in general I would say about our different points of view that you > believe that the citta should have calm first, and that you see the lack of > sati and samadhi are an obstruction. I hope I did not misrepresent you. M: Yes, that is correct. I think this post will clarify it even further why i think that the process of gaining insight is weakened greatly without these, even though I belive that some insight is possible in the method you described. > I am inclined to emphasize understanding above all. I think that it is > understanding stemming from listening that can condition direct awareness > and that can become direct understanding. M: I'm begining to understand you more. So it is like knowing what the page says in meaning, then actually seeing the page in a blink of an eye, so that more understanding is possible (conditioned, primed) when it does happen. Interesting. You would possibly gain a lot if you actually meditated. I believe that vipassana can > and should be developed in daily life. M: I agree. N: I know the texts about the combination of jhana and > vipassana, yuganaddha etc. But their ways of development are different. M: I guess that is what i am describing. N: > There are mostly moments of forgetfulness, no sati, but if we worry about > that it shows clinging, wanting to have many moments of sati. M: Worrying is a sign of clinging indeed and is counterproductive even to meditation. But I think you will understand the difference between doing something merely from intent and doing it out of craving. We can move and arm without craving. We can move sati without craving as well. Vipassana is well described as being goalless, undirected, detached etc etc. If the vipassana meditator approaches it expecting results he will be dissappointed due to the turmoil that causes and soon learn detachment if he is to continue. That is the nature of it. Meditation is simply climibing a mountain hoping to get a better view. Your method is learning all about the view so that when one see it through the trees, it will be quickly recognised (am i right?). metta Matheesha ps - sorry if the post is long, but i need to use so many words to express myself 53819 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:28pm Subject: Re: understanding nama-rupa pariccheda (previously origin of right view!!) buddhistmedi... Dear Matheesha - Please do not overestimate my intelligence. I asked that you describe your experiential understanding of 'annataro' through your "deep concentrated vipassana state", now you give me a vipassana note of your teacher! So I have to be a very, very intelligent man (with clairvoyance) to be able to transform the information in the written note into the experiential understanding of 'anataro' that occurs in your mind during a nama-rupa contemplation. Yet, I want to tell you that I like this "1st vipassana kammathana" by your teacher. The requirement that "the mind is stable and does not wander, in pre-jhana samadhi, making continued mindfulness possible" implies that this meditation exercise (or "experimenting") is samatha first then vipassana. Questions: 1. What samatha meditation did your teacher recommend? I guess it was anapanasati (using the first tetrad only). 2. The note states, "Do not let strings of thoughts arise. If this happens, become aware of it, then put and end to it." How would you effectively put an end to such extraneous thoughts? Warm regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > T:So, what is > > the > > > > non-conjecture meaning of 'annataro' that you have experienced > > > > through the "deep concentrated vipassana state" ? > > M: I was trying to explain to you what i thought to be 'annataro' > based on my experiencing. Perhaps you wanted me to tell you a bit > more about the experience itself, rather than my understandingo of > the word. > > I'm posting a section on the 1st vipassana kammattana of my teacher. > It's something i wrote sometime back and talks of differentiating > nama and rupa, based on vinnana, object, sense organ, contact etc > (note that it might not use those words). > > ----------------------- > > VIPASSANA > > Vipassana should be attempted immediately after doing Samatha > (tranquility/calm) meditations, and ideally after reaching a jhanic > level of samadhi (one-pointedness). The minimum level of required > samadhi could be seen as where the mind is stable and does not > wander, in pre-jhana samadhi, making continued mindfulness possible. > You should maintain mindfulness intelligently and with curiosity. > (snipped) 53820 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 3:32pm Subject: Re: The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Perspective buddhistmedi... Hi, Friend Howard (and all) - It seems to me that you are trying again to explain to some disbelieving Abhidhammikas among us what factors contribute to their (partial ?) misinterpretations of the Buddha's Teachings. But this is not the first time you have tried; why do it again? :-)) Your main points in the message #53788, accordingto my raw (unrefined) understanding, are listed below. 1. The Abhidhamma commentarial theory of "discrete" realities is just a theory accepted by "any of its proponents" who do not have direct knowledge of it. So they claim that the theory is the Buddha's truth. They even go further to force "everything" to "fit this scheme". 2. The "theory of discrete quanta" , the packet or "atomic theory" of the Abhidhamma, states that consciousness ("experiential stream") is discrete without "sharp beginning or ending" (i.e. it is described by on/off, arising/dissolving discrete states, not a continuous flow or stream). 3. Such view, or model of the consciousness, "while not necessarily false, need not be presumed as necessarily true". You suggest that "except for moments of complete unconsciousness, there are no gaps in the experiential stream". [It would be convincing to them if you can give some supports of this opposite "theory".] 4. Dropping such a false atomic theory, you say, "much of Abhidhamma and all of the sutta material" still remain intact (and sound). "...impermanence is still very much observable and accounted for. All the Dhamma including the tilakkhana, the four noble truths, dependent origination, all of it, remains without the atomic perspective". 5. In conclusion, you are proposing that they drop the unnecessary "atomic theory" of the Abhidhamma. Please correct me if I misunderstood your writing. This message of yours is "tough" to chew (unless the reader has stronger "teeth" than mine). Warm regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > Abhidhamma, and more so, it seems, the commentarial tradition, presume a theory of discrete quanta as being what are "real". This conceptual picture is one which few if any of its proponents have direct knowledge of, but even though this theory is not directly confirmed and is not put forth in the suttas, it is taken to be Buddha's truth (as opposed to Gospel truth ;-), and everything that is then taken up for consideration is forced to fit this scheme. (snipped) > P.S. This is how I see the matter. I expect most of you to disgree with me on this, and I'm not looking to defend my perspective as a "position". Actually, I think that "positions" are really unimportant. Only reality is important, and that isn't discovered by debate, but by looking and seeing. Part of what needs to be looked at, I believe, is our presuppositions. > 53821 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Persp... upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 12/21/05 6:34:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > > Hi, Friend Howard (and all) - > > It seems to me that you are trying again to explain to some > disbelieving Abhidhammikas among us what factors contribute to their > (partial ?) misinterpretations of the Buddha's Teachings. But this is > not the first time you have tried; why do it again? :-)) ------------------------------------ Howard: LOL!. However, Tep, I wouldn't put the matter quiet as you have. I'm just pointing out that there are other ways to view things. Who knows? Perhaps they are right and I am wrong! (I don't think so, of course. That is why my belief (or, better, my disbelief, is mine! ;-) ------------------------------------ > > Your main points in the message #53788, accordingto my raw (unrefined) > understanding, are listed below. > > 1. The Abhidhamma commentarial theory of "discrete" realities is just > a theory accepted by "any of its proponents" who do not have direct > knowledge of it. So they claim that the theory is the Buddha's truth. > They even go further to force "everything" to "fit this scheme". > > 2. The "theory of discrete quanta" , the packet or "atomic theory" of > the Abhidhamma, states that consciousness ("experiential stream") is > discrete without "sharp beginning or ending" (i.e. it is described by > on/off, arising/dissolving discrete states, not a continuous flow or > stream). ----------------------------------------- Howard: Uh, that statement is off the mark in one respect. You need to drop the phrase <> The "atomic theory" does presume sharp boundaries. Actually, this matter is a bit complex. Abhidhamma, as I understand it, does not countenance gaps between cittas. At the same time, however, it, and the commentaries perhaps more so, I have heard tell, consider the cittas to be separate states with sharp, well defined beginnings and endings, each with own being. So, the picture seems to be that of a gapless sequence of contiguous, self-existent states, each with sharp boundaries - much like the frames on a movie film strip . ----------------------------------------- > > 3. Such view, or model of the consciousness, "while not necessarily > false, need not be presumed as necessarily true". You suggest that > "except for moments of complete unconsciousness, there are no gaps in > the experiential stream". [It would be convincing to them if you can > give some supports of this opposite "theory".] ---------------------------------------- Howard: As far as I know, no convincing on that point is necessary, as the gaplessness is already accepted. ---------------------------------------- > > 4. Dropping such a false atomic theory, you say, "much of Abhidhamma > and all of the sutta material" still remain intact (and sound). > "...impermanence is still very much observable and accounted for. All > the Dhamma including the tilakkhana, the four noble truths, dependent > origination, all of it, remains without the atomic perspective". > > 5. In conclusion, you are proposing that they drop the unnecessary > "atomic theory" of the Abhidhamma. ------------------------------------------- Howard: No, I'm proposing that there be no clinging to such a theory, and that there be an allowing for the possibility that the facts might be otherwise. ------------------------------------------- > > Please correct me if I misunderstood your writing. This message of > yours is "tough" to chew (unless the reader has stronger "teeth" than > mine). > > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 53822 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 4:38pm Subject: Re: understanding nama-rupa pariccheda (previously origin of right view!!) matheesha333 Hi Tep, I feel like im going in circles! A common feeling here perhaps!! We should give it a name. What would be pali for going in circles?! I'm sorry tep, i did give you exactly what you asked and i cant give you anymore than what ive already said. :) trust me - it doesnt matter, and its already something you know, from your answers i can see. its nothing special or anything more thna i have said. T:> 1. What samatha meditation did your teacher recommend? I guess it was > anapanasati (using the first tetrad only). M: Good guess. Actually it is pure samatha - just focusing on the sensation of the breath without and idea of long or short, which leads to stronger development of samadhi. Upto the fourth jhana. That being the basis for starting vipassana. Very commentarial acutally. He was into abhidhamma himself! T: > 2. The note states, "Do not let strings of thoughts arise. If this > happens, become aware of it, then put and end to it." How would you > effectively put an end to such extraneous thoughts? M: Well hopefully, the samadhi already developed would give rise to more clarity and calmness of mind in the first place. The beast is tamed. Since sati is maintained from moment to moment, and break in that trend would be noticed fairly quickly. When having papanca we are caught up in the content of the thought, without much awareness. So it can be noticed after coming out of the spell of the papanca. Just going back to noticing dhammas naturally as they arise. A bit like training in samatha really, when thoughts take you away from the object of awareness, its a matter of getting back to it. No special method - it's mostly the preperation with samadhi. metta Matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Dear Matheesha - > > Please do not overestimate my intelligence. I asked that you describe > your experiential understanding of 'annataro' through your "deep > concentrated vipassana state", now you give me a vipassana note of > your teacher! So I have to be a very, very intelligent man (with > clairvoyance) to be able to transform the information in the written > note into the experiential understanding of 'anataro' that occurs in > your mind during a nama-rupa contemplation. > > Yet, I want to tell you that I like this "1st vipassana kammathana" by > your teacher. The requirement that "the mind is stable and does not > wander, in pre-jhana samadhi, making continued mindfulness possible" > implies that this meditation exercise (or "experimenting") is samatha > first then vipassana. > > Questions: > > 1. What samatha meditation did your teacher recommend? I guess it was > anapanasati (using the first tetrad only). > 2. The note states, "Do not let strings of thoughts arise. If this > happens, become aware of it, then put and end to it." How would you > effectively put an end to such extraneous thoughts? > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > > ======= > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" > wrote: > > > > Dear Tep, > > > > T:So, what is > > the > > > > > non-conjecture meaning of 'annataro' that you have experienced > > > > > through the "deep concentrated vipassana state" ? > > > > M: I was trying to explain to you what i thought to be 'annataro' > > based on my experiencing. Perhaps you wanted me to tell you a bit > > more about the experience itself, rather than my understandingo of > > the word. > > > > I'm posting a section on the 1st vipassana kammattana of my teacher. > > It's something i wrote sometime back and talks of differentiating > > nama and rupa, based on vinnana, object, sense organ, contact etc > > (note that it might not use those words). > > > > ----------------------- > > > > VIPASSANA > > > > Vipassana should be attempted immediately after doing Samatha > > (tranquility/calm) meditations, and ideally after reaching a jhanic > > level of samadhi (one-pointedness). The minimum level of required > > samadhi could be seen as where the mind is stable and does not > > wander, in pre-jhana samadhi, making continued mindfulness possible. > > You should maintain mindfulness intelligently and with curiosity. > > > (snipped) > 53823 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Persp... upasaka_howard Hi again, Tep - Freud would have a great laugh!! In a message dated 12/21/05 7:34:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > However, Tep, I wouldn't put the matter quiet as you have. > ======================== The word 'quiet' was suposed to be 'quite'!! ;-)) 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) 53824 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 5:31pm Subject: Re: The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Persp... buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard - Thank you very much for giving me a feedback that helps me detect a typo and other incorrect understandings that I had. Please replace "without sharp beginning .." in 2. below by "with sharp beginning ..." : >>Tep 2. The "theory of discrete quanta" , the packet or "atomic theory" of the Abhidhamma, states that consciousness ("experiential stream") is discrete without "sharp beginning or ending" (i.e. it is described by on/off, arising/dissolving discrete states, not a continuous flow or stream). ............. > Howard: >So, the picture seems to be that of a gapless sequence of >contiguous, self-existent states, each with sharp boundaries > - much like the frames on a movie film strip . Tep: Yes, I see that now. The gapless feature means there is zero delay between the previous ending moment and the next beginning event. This view is compatible with the Visuddhimagga's model of consciousnesses. ................ > >Tep: > 5. In conclusion, you are proposing that they drop the unnecessary > "atomic theory" of the Abhidhamma. ------------------------------------------- >Howard: >No, I'm proposing that there be no clinging to such a theory, and that >there be an allowing for the possibility that the facts might be otherwise. Tep: Okay. But they might tell you that because it is their "right understanding", so there is no clinging and there is no reason for "allowing for the possibility that the facts might be otherwise". Sincerely, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Tep - > > In a message dated 12/21/05 6:34:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, > tepsastri@y... writes: > > > > > Hi, Friend Howard (and all) - > > > > It seems to me that you are trying again to explain to some > > disbelieving Abhidhammikas among us what factors contribute to their > > (partial ?) misinterpretations of the Buddha's Teachings. But this is > > not the first time you have tried; why do it again? :-)) > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > LOL!. However, Tep, I wouldn't put the matter quiet as you have. I'm > just pointing out that there are other ways to view things. Who knows? Perhaps > they are right and I am wrong! (I don't think so, of course. That is why my > belief (or, better, my disbelief, is mine! ;-) > ------------------------------------ (snipped) 53825 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 5:48pm Subject: Re: understanding nama-rupa pariccheda (previously origin of right view!!) buddhistmedi... Hi, Matheesha - Thanks for the quick reply. Math. I feel like im going in circles! Tep: Sorry for chasing you in circles ! So we are now back to square zero again. {:->)} .......................... > Math. > trust me - it doesnt matter, and its already something you know, > from your answers i can see. its nothing special or anything more > thna i have said. Tep: The key words in your reply are "nothing special" and "no special method". In fact, I thought you had something "special" that you did not say out loud. .......................... > > Tep: " How would you effectively put an end to such extraneous > > thoughts? > > M: Well hopefully, the samadhi already developed would give rise to > more clarity and calmness of mind in the first place. The beast is > tamed. Since sati is maintained from moment to moment, and break in that trend would be noticed fairly quickly. When having papanca we > are caught up in the content of the thought, without much awareness. > So it can be noticed after coming out of the spell of the papanca. > Just going back to noticing dhammas naturally as they arise. A bit > like training in samatha really, when thoughts take you away from > the object of awareness, its a matter of getting back to it. No > special method - it's mostly the preperation with samadhi. Tep: You were right. Nothing special indeed. Respectfully, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > I feel like im going in circles! A common feeling here perhaps!! We > should give it a name. What would be pali for going in circles?! > > I'm sorry tep, i did give you exactly what you asked and i cant give > you anymore than what ive already said. :) > (snipped) > 53826 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 5:55pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Persp... buddhistmedi... > Howard: > Freud would have a great laugh!! > > In a message dated 12/21/05 7:34:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@a... > writes: > > > However, Tep, I wouldn't put the matter quiet as you have. > > ======================== > The word 'quiet' was suposed to be 'quite'!! ;-)) > Tep: I also have a tendency to leave one or two typos in my post. I pondered over that word "quiet" a little bit and thought you might mean that I did not make my points loud enough to be heard. :-) Warm regards, Tep ======= 53827 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 9:38pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 340- Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[j] 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;-) ========================================== [Ch20 - Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)] Sloth and torpor destruct energy for kusala. When there is right effort there are no sloth and torpor. However, there is no self who can put forth energy for kusala, for the study of the Dhamma or for the development of right understanding. We can prove this when there is listlessness and no energy for kusala. At such a moment we cannot force ourselves to take an interest in kusala. Right effort is only a conditioned dhamma, not self. There can be a long period of indolence, but at times there can be conditions for remembering words of the teachings which can encourage us to develop right understanding. Also sad events which happen in life can serve as a reminder of the impermanence of conditioned realities and then we may be urged to be vigilant, to “guard the sense-doors”, that is, to be mindful of the realities appearing through the different doorways. In this life we are in the human plane where there is opportunity for all kinds of kusala, for the study of the Dhamma and the development of right understanding. The goal has been reached only when all defilements have been eradicated, when arahatship has been attained. When we realize the task which lies ahead of us we are reminded not to waste time with akusala. When there is a true sense of urgency to develop right understanding there will be less opportunity for sloth and torpor. In the following sutta we are reminded of what we fail to win when there is indolence and what can be won when there is right energy. We read in the Kindred Sayings (II, Nidåna-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Cause, 3, §22) that the Buddha encouraged the monks to apply energy in order to attain the goal. He said: * "Sadly, monks, lives the man of sloth, involved in bad, wicked things. Great is the salvation which he fails to win. But he of stirred up energy lives happily, aloof from bad, wicked things. Great is the salvation that he makes perfect." ***** Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[[to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 53828 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:19pm Subject: Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting (was: Re: Path & Fruit, momentary Path.) philofillet Hi Sarah and all I was eating a salad with a creamy dressing and it conditioned a pang of guilt about apparently no longer being my usually friendly self at DSG - perhaps you'll remember why, Sarah! :) But only a pang of guilt. Mostly it's interest and a sense that it confirms the Buddha's teaching that this sort of thing can't be controlled. It makes perfect sense, if I speculate on what is going on. In daily life, appreciating that bad things that happen to me are vipaka have really, really lightened the dosa impact of unpleasant events and/or unkind people. No more of those "regrettable incidents" I used to add up (though of course the conditions are latent to have them - I expect to.) I have become so much more easy going in daily life, thanks to even this shallow understanding of the Buddha's teaching. More peace with Naomi as well - her tempermental days (few and far betwee) are understood as my vipaka too. All is quiet, all is bright. But when I come to DSG, look out! I get irritated almost immediately. It's funny, really. But it makes perfect sense. All that accumulated dosa has to find objects, and where is my lobha strongest these days? Dhamma. So there goes the dosa too. It'll work out, but who know when. There is not telling. In the past, a few years ago, I would have done intentional metta exercises, designating "troublesome person" and that sort of stuff. And it would work, I could come with a sense of friendliness, conditioned by the intentional exercises. But it would not be the Buddha's teaching. There is no way to eradicate our defilments but by knowing them thoroughly. The point of Dhamma is not to be friendly, though that is a likely consequence of that which *is* the point - knowing and then fully knowing and thereby eradicating defilements in order to gain detachment from conditioned dhammas. So I am not bothered by feeling cantankerous when I come here. It will pass, probably, or it won't. > I was listening to part of a recording today in which K.Sujin was > emphasisiing the importance of lots of discussion in order to really > consider and reflect on the teachings. Of course I agree with this and > it's what we're here for! It's an interesting point. I would remember, Sarah, that in addition to accumulations from past lives that we don't know about, in this lifetime you have been accumulating right intellectual understanding of Dhamma for some 30 years I guess. For someone like myself, only 2 years, it can be an entirely different experience. Let's say I lay down a tentative statement of appreciating the momentary nature of dhammas. And someone comes back and says, no, that's not the Buddha's teaching. What do I do? Just let it go would be the wise thing. But what would I do? I'd gather all my intellectual knowledge of Dhamma, scramble to find the right sutta, dig hard in my memory to remember something Nina said - it wouldn't be natural, the way understanding should develop. It would be forced, with strong self-identity at the core. That depends on the person's accumulations, of course. I assume for someone like you, or Nina, or Jon, or Robert K, it would just be as easy and natural as breathing to lay down the right retort - and in most cases there *is* a right retort, from a Dhamma point of view. But for beginners, who must scramble and dig hard and then ponder afterwards if they've written the right thing - personally, I think it screws up the cultivation of understanding. I think we should listen more - which obviously is something I could learn to do. I always used to say that we learn by speaking out and making mistakes, like ESL students - have I changed my mind. I don't know. Just babbling out loud - I know you *love* it when I babble, Sarah. On the other hand, it can be very good for us beginners to read in on others' debates/discussions. For example, when I saw this morning that Howard was apparently posting doubts about the momentary nature of ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) my first reaction was something like this - "this is a good example of what I'm talking about the futility of Dhamma discussion between people who are destined to disagree - Howard is without question a true prince as a human being, a real gentleman, makes Jon look like a bucaneer's rum bottler, but if he doesn't see that realities are momentary, how can we gain anything from discussing? It's like baseball fans and cricket fans discussing strategy and not realizing they are playing on an entirely different field." But then I remembered some of the posts of Nina's that I have gathered, that she wrote to Howard, that have been very helpful for me (they're in a binder) and also some points that Howard has said that have really, really stuck with me, so of course I realized that there is always value in disagreement on Dhamma points. Anyways, just a babble there. I expect I will be listening more and posting a little less next year but who knows? Thanks as always to you and Jon for the work you put into DSG, Sarah and best holiday wishes to everyone in the group. Phil So like you, I think discussion/debate is very > important. After all, how much we've all had to listen, discuss and > clarify for ourselves, asking the same questions or dilemmas over and over > again to get to any little glimmers of understanding that may arise. > > A friend, Maeve, raised this point in India ?Ethe point that we sometimes > forget our own past wrong views and disagreements when we lack tolerance > or patience with others who have different ideas. Really, we all share so > much ignorance of the techings, don't we? > > And as we were reminded here by the `W.T.O. `Dojo-busters?Eat the weekend > too, everyone has their own different way of getting their different views > across too.....some do so in a colourful carnival style, some quietly with > placards and some so violently that they had to get arrested after closing > down all the roads and transport around where we live:-/. Similarly, some > here ask polite questions, some come out with strong statements of > disagreement, some quote colouful textual passages and so on. Everyone has > their own way or style:-). > .... > >We know that the Visuddhimagga says there is a > > path but no goer on it, and I think we can agree, can we not, that > > this means 'literally there is a path, but only figuratively is there > > any goer on the path?' > .... > S: Of course I agree with this, but if others don't, I don't think that > means there's no point in further discussion as you also go on to say. > ... > > If we can't agree that that is the meaning of the text, then debate > > will be useful in reaching agreement. However, debate over whether > > the Visuddhimagga itself is correct or incorrect would be futile. > .... > S: I pretty much agree with this, though I also don't think there 's any > rule that anyone need accept the Vism as being correct either. Such > confidence in the correctness of the text will only come about (if it > does)through confidence in the correctness of its message. I do agree > that discussions about the authenticity of the Vism and so on are of > limited value as they don't usually bring us back to present paramattha > dhammas ?Ebut of course, that's up for debate too:-). > > That was just some babble as Phil(C) would put it and a chance to say 'hi' > and I pretty well agree with what you write as usual:-). > > Glad to see you around ?Ehave you been buried in Surf or Survey recently? > > Metta, > > Sarah > p.s the surf here is about Noosa in August temperature > now....brrr....usually Jon and I are the lone swimmers:-). > ======== > 53829 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 21, 2005 11:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Buddhist art analysis based on Pali Canon sarahprocter... Hi Leo, I really no next to nothing on this subject, but as no one else has responded so far, let me have a try.... --- Leo wrote: > Hi > I study Buddhism for 14 years. Some time ago, when I was reading > writing in one book about ancient India, I found that originally, when > Buddha was asked on Buddhist art, Buddha suggested to paint it on > cloth. .... S: I wonder if you're an artist from your questions and comments? Where do you live? If you come across this reference in a sutta, pls share it....it doesn't ring any bells with me. We know there was 'Buddhist art' in caves in the centuries after the Buddha's death, but I'm not sure anything was said by the Buddha about any kind of Buddhist art. See Sebastien's post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/52499 Of course, there is no reason at all why you shouldn't show your respect or appreciation by painting on cloth as others do. .... >Then I have seen that in one Sutta, of Pali Canon, it says that > rock is comparable to mara. Like rock distroys clay, in the same way > mara distroys mind. ..... S: Please can you find a reference for me sometime. I can only think of the Dhp verse (8) which says that the one with senses restrained and full of confidence and energy is not conquered by Mara, just as a rock is not destroyed by the wind. .... >Then I have seen in Vinaya, that monk can not use > weights, nor can have messengers or middle person, but can use > additional cloth for special purpose. Also, lotus in Vinaya (Pali) can > not be used for feet sweeper. I guess it is ok for art to have lotus > far away from feet and lotus should not be uprooted, it should be in a > pond. So Buddha image should be on cloth with lotuses and tree at the > distance. When it comes to anything else of hard material, then it > should be done in a way of aglyness, I suppose. Nibbana is not heavy or > something of negative. ..... S: I tried to check the Vinaya for the rule about the feet sweeper and lotus you mention, but couldn't find anything. All I found when I looked in the index for 'lotus' was a reference to a rule that it's an offence for bhikkhunis 'to see a king's house or a picture gallery or a park or a pleasure grove or a lotus pond'. What do you mean when you say 'Nibbana is not heavy or something of negative'? Are you painint nibbana???:-/ [Btw, I looked up the wonderful Aghatavinaya Sutta which you quoted before on 'Subduing Hatred' (2). It's in AN 5s, 162. When I went to my (PTS) translation, I saw that I had read and made various markings all over the text before ( a long time ago)! When I read your message, however, it was like reading a fresh sutta, thank you.] With your art questions, I think many of the ideas you refer to come from Mahayana texts rather than the Pali canon texts where there is no mention of art as we know it, I believe. I'd also like to comment that what is of most important is your good intention. If you are paying respect in your own way and you inadvertently give offence to anyone else, there is no wrong doing or harm in your mind. (I'm reminded of a time when K.Sujin and her friend once came to stay with us and we gave them our bedroom. There was a Buddha statue on a shelf in the corner of the room at a low level, lower than the bed. They promptly put it on a high shelf. No problem, we hadn't intended any disrespect!) Metta, Sarah ====== 53830 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 0:05am Subject: Re: Fwd: [dsg] Re: B.B.'s letter about Survey. sarahprocter... Dear 'pcyap', --- bodhi dhamma wrote: > Congratulation to Nina > > I also have the same wish that the book will "receive the > international attention it deserves". > > Also hope to find a copy in Malaysian bookstore. ... S: This was a kind note to Nina. Perhaps in due course it will make its way to book-stores. Have you read any of it on-line? It can be found at this web-site: http://www.abhidhamma.org/ Can I encourage you to post any short extracts you find helpful or wish to ask any questions about? Whereabouts in Malaysia are you from? I think this was your first message here....can we persuade you to write an introduction and tell us more about your background and interest and to give a (preferably real) name? .... > Note: forwarded message attached. ... S: I'd also like to point out that DSG is set not to accept attachments, so your f/w message didn't come through. Perhaps you can copy and paste the relevant part. Metta, Sarah ========= 53831 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 0:26am Subject: Re: An Interview With Htoo sukinderpal Hi Larry, I forgot about this post of yours. > Sukin: "It is not so much the perception that experiences are happening > "to" `self´, but rather the experiences themselves are taken to *be*`self´. > Larry: > Which experiences exactly do you take to be self? Sukin: According to theory, there are three ways in which experiences are taken for `self', namely, tanha, mana and ditthi. If there is no satipatthana, and the object of experience is taken to be `something', i.e. we assign a reality status to it, then I believe it is ditthi papanca. Though in a day, it is lobha and mana which arise more often, whenever we "do" something in the name of `practice', then invariably, ditthi arises and becomes a problem. Allow me to speculate a bit, as the memory of my own experience is so very vague. I think there is a difference between, when experiences are observed without reaction, in a way that some give the label `choice less awareness', and when a reality appears to sati in the midst of `normal' day to day experiences. In the former case it is always `someone' observing `something', even though one is not aware of this happening. It is `thinking' but one which has grown to be such that it does not, as it happens usually, `refer to the observer'. It seems therefore that there are only `rise and fall' of ephemeral experiences. But in reality, it is "thinking these processes", esp. when we have the idea that it is just these that we are supposed to be observing. Why did I give this example? Because, every time there is a deliberate noting of an experience, it involves more or less this same process. The thinking is moving away from any reference to the `experiencer', and so it seems that the object of experience is with a degree of objectivity and detachment. However, even though it seems that there is no `self' observing, the object is however taken to be `something', even when we like to believe that they are in fact namas or rupas. Sorry I have to end this abruptly as I just got a call from my wife to go instead of her, and pick our son up from school. Metta, Sukin 53832 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:50am Subject: [dsg] Re: Survey, to Joop. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Joop, > But I can still give you several copies after Febr, also for Buddhist > associations you think may be interested. You know more about them than I, Dear Nina I will answer off list Metta Joop 53833 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:58am Subject: Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting (was: Re: Path & Fruit, momentary Path.) kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Ken H, debaters, dojo-busters & all, > > I've got lots of outstanding posts I'm meaning to respond to, but this > just caught my eye on this question about `debate'. > Hi Sarah, Speaking of outstanding replies: my drafts folder is full to overflowing, and nothing is getting finished. I will whip off a reply to your message and not leave my desk until it has been posted. ----------------------------------- KH: > > I think debate is useful, but only in matters that can be proved one way or the other. > > .... S: > I don't really know what the difference is between 'debate' and 'discussion' as people use the terms here. It sometimes occurs to me that we may consider our own posts (whether in agreement, disagreement or in response) to be `discussion' and `debate'(with more negative connotations) refers to others' posts when they disagree with ours:-). ---------------------------------- Yes, that is the way it works. :-) ------------------ S: > Does it matter whether what we or others say can be 'proved' one way or the other? What kind of proof are we looking for? Book proof or direct knowledge proof? ------------------ Book proof would be a start. But that is easy for me to say because I favour the interpretations found in the books. Others are not so fortunate: some of us favour interpretations that fall outside the traditionally accepted Theravada books. ----------------------------- S: > I was listening to part of a recording today in which K.Sujin was emphasising the importance of lots of discussion in order to really consider and reflect on the teachings. Of course I agree with this and it's what we're here for! So like you, I think discussion/debate is very important. After all, how much we've all had to listen, discuss and clarify for ourselves, asking the same questions or dilemmas over and over again to get to any little glimmers of understanding that may arise. ------------------------------ The last thing I want is for people with opposing views to leave DSG. They are the ones I find easiest to talk to. I have said before (years ago) that in face-to-face discussions it is easiest to talk with people I agree with, whereas on DSG it is easiest to talk with people I [somewhat] disagree with. -------------------- S: > A friend, Maeve, raised this point in India – the point that we sometimes forget our own past wrong views and disagreements when we lack tolerance or patience with others who have different ideas. Really, we all share so much ignorance of the teachings, don't we? --------------------- Yes, "Before you remove the mote that is in your neighbour's eye, first remove the plank that is in your own." (I think Jesus said that.) ------------------------------ S: > And as we were reminded here by the `W.T.O. `Dojo-busters' at the weekend too, everyone has their own different way of getting their different views across too.....some do so in a colourful carnival style, some quietly with placards and some so violently that they had to get arrested after closing down all the roads and transport around where we live:-/. Similarly, some here ask polite questions, some come out with strong statements of disagreement, some quote colouful textual passages and so on. Everyone has their own way or style:-). ------------------------------ I haven't done the customary snipping because it is good to hear those words again. ----------------------------------------- KH: > > ........ S: > I pretty much agree with this, though I also don't think there's any rule that anyone need accept the Vism as being correct either. Such confidence in the correctness of the text will only come about (if it does) through confidence in the correctness of its message. I do agree that discussions about the authenticity of the Vism and so on are of limited value as they don't usually bring us back to present paramattha dhammas – but of course, that's up for debate too:-). ------------------------------------------ Yes, bring it on! --------------------------------- S: That was just some babble as Phil(C) would put it and a chance to say 'hi' ---------------------------------- It was not babble at all! I don't usually like babble, but Connie-and-Phil's babble about moderating DSG was superb. I still smile at Phil's mock enthusiasm; "Yes, yes! I would like that!" :-) ---------------- S: > Glad to see you around – have you been buried in Surf or Survey recently? ----------------- To my shame, it has been the former. The surf has been too calm for board riding but excellent for body surfing. Sue is on holidays (these teachers get it easy, don't they?) so I am kept busy with jobs I should have done during the year. Also, we have to prepare to accommodate five houseguests for a week over Christmas. ------------------------------------- . . . S: > p.s the surf here is about Noosa in August temperature now....brrr....usually Jon and I are the lone swimmers:-). ------------------------------------- I want everyone to know that these two are fearless! Never get into a scrap with them! I know from experience that they swim, not only in mid-winter, but at the crack of dawn - before the frost has melted! Ken H 53834 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:18am Subject: Re: Q. Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 13, no 6 philofillet Hi Nina Just to say a quick hello and tell you how much I've been enjoying SPD. I've had a very high fever all week, missed three days of work, but read most of the book. Now to get it out of the book. Not just a matter of looking up and thinking about the present moment, but that is helpful as long as we know it is only thinking. > N: When pariyatti is correct it is sure to lead to direct understanding some > time in the future, we do not know when. This is encouraging. I've been hearing a lot of good talks about pariyatti>patipatti and have reread Sukin's post and UPs. Clearly, pariyatti is all about the present moment. I like in one talk when Sarah says that, for example, when studying presently impenetrable realities such as all the detailed moments in a citta process, the pariyatti can be understanding the frustration, anxienty or whatever is going on at that moment, related to the studying. There are so many other things I've heard and read that I'd like to talk about but I'm still feeling a bit feverish so back to bed. Happy holiday wishes to you and Lodewijk. Phil p.s unfortunately the three days I missed from work were unpaid, so I lost the equivalent of a flight to Bangkok. It doesn't look good. I hope there's another opportunity in 2007 or maybe later in 2006. 53835 From: nina Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:24am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 209 nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 209 Text Vis.:(x)-(xi) The word 'far' is explained in the Viba.nga in the way beginning 'The unprofitable is far from the profitable and the indeterminate' (Vbh. 4) and the word 'near' in the way beginning 'Unprofitable feeling is near to unprofitable feeling' (Vbh. 4). Therefore, unprofitable feeling is far from the profitable and the indeterminate because of dissimilarity, unconnectedness,and non-resemblance. The profitable and the indeterminate are likewise far from the unprofitable. And so in all instances. But unprofitable feeling is near to unprofitable feeling because of similarity and resemblance. ------ N: In this section we are reminded that akusala is completely different from kusala. They are dissimilar, unconnected, and do not resemble each other. Selfish affection may resemble mettaa, but in fact they are completely different, they are far from each other. When there is mettaa one does not think of one¹s own comfort or gain. The cetasikas that accompany kusala citta are different from those that accompany akusala citta. The pleasant feeling that accompanies akusala citta and that which accompany kusala citta may be the same type of feeling, but their qualities are far away from each other. Pleasant feeling that accompanies lobha-muulacitta is affected by the akusala cetasikas and it is far from the pleasant feeling that accompanies kusala citta with generosity. Kusala citta is accompanied by confidence in kusala, by sati, by calm and other sobhana cetasikas which all condition the pleasant feeling. Also feeling that is akusala does not resemble feeling that is vipaaka. Feeling that is kusala does not resemble feeling that is vipaaka. Text Vis.:This is the section of the detailed explanation dealing with the past, etc., classifications of the feeling aggregate. -------- N: The text refers here to all the different ways feelings can be classified. As we have seen, feelings are classified as past, future or present, as internal or external, as gross or subtle, as inferior or superior, and as far or near. The classification of gross and subtle is according to the jaati or class of kusala, akusala, vipaaka and kiriya; according to characteristic, sabhaava; according to person, which actually means according to plane of citta; according to mundane (lokiya) and supramundane (lokuttara); according to the planes of existence where they occur; according to the physical basis, vatthu, which may be inferior or superior. It helps us to see that there are numerous conditions for all those feelings to be so varied. We do not have to find out all these details but they help us to see the meaning of khandha: it arises because of conditions, and then it falls away and never comes back. It is past. Even if the same type of feeling arises again, it will never be the same. Feelings are beyond control, nobody can make subtle feelings arise. When there are conditions for coarse feeling it arises, nobody can prevent what has arisen already, before we realize it. The goal of the development of satipatthana is understanding dhammas as they truly are. This understanding leads to detachment from dhammas, feelings included. We read the Anattalakkhana Sutta (Vinaya, Mahaavagga I, 6. 43-47): "Any kind of materiality whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.³ The same is said of feeling and the other naama-khandhas. ***** Nina. 53836 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:sati and focussing nilovg Hi Matheesha, op 21-12-2005 22:12 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...: Similarly I see samatha and vipassana as necessary > components of the one path. Samatha and vipassana has been described > as the two wheels of the chariot which carries us to nibbana by the > Buddha. ------ N: Yes, there are the factors of sati, energy and concentration which are the samaadhi of the eightfold Path. Samaadhi develops together with sammaaditthi of the eightfold Path. This does not mean that everybody has to develop samatha to the degree of jhana. There were many debates here already, I will not repeat them. Moreover, considering the texts and what one hears with kusala citta is also a kind of samatha, having as subject dhammanusati. ------- > > M: Are you saying that samatha is impossible? This is not supported > in the suttas: > -Samadhisutta/AN >----- No, not impossible. It depends on a person's accumulated wisdom. There are more samaadhi-suttas (which one you quoted?), but we have to see the Co: samatha and vipassana may be lokiya or lokuttara. When lokuttara, also for a sukha vipassaka, samaadhi has the strength of the first jhaana, but the object is nibbaana. -------- M: What is one pointedness of mind? It is that unwavering quality, that > it does not rush about caught up in cravings and aversions. How is > it trained - by bringing the mind back again and again to that one > point. --- N: Now I am trying to understand a person (I know of one person reading this, and I know his thoughts) who says, sensuality is so strong, even motivating akusala kamma patha, and citta has to be calmed first. He cannot wait for insight to grow, that takes too long, and he finds this an urgent problem. I do not have an answer ready. I think it needs also great paññaa to calm citta in the right way, and if it is done with lobha, it may at first seem effective, but in fact one turns away from the truth. What to advise then? I think any kind of kusala through body, speech and mind brings calm, and at such moments one does not think of oneself or one's problems. Each kusala citta is accompanied by the cetasikas that are calm (passadhi). There are always opportunities for one of the ten bases of meritorious deeds. How good there are ten! But I am open for other suggestions. -------- M: quotes: There is no need for extra >> concentration. Paññaa and sati can do their own work. The buddha never > intended such a thing, because the path will never finish in 7 years > or less by just seeing a glimpse. ------ N: If this glimpse is right it surely conditions next moments of glimpses, because it accumulates. I do not think of seven years or so, that is the future. That distracts from the present moment. ---------- M: A little bit of turmoil/agitation can be noticed. But to be caught > up in it intensely is to only see what it wants us to see - through > the lense of a defilement. We have to approach without 'greed and > distress' as mentioned in the satipattana sutta. ------- N: There should be no greed or distress with regard to any object that presents itself already because of conditions. But it is hard to apply, I understand. The same sutta under mental objects states that also akusala has to be known as it is. This is important. When we hear a reminder it sometimes clicks. Not always. I heard that we should not be disturbed by an unpleasant object and it clicked. Also the same words about Dhamma heard again after two or three years become so much more meaningful, I find. The glimpse is growing, but very slowly. I do not mind, we can continue with courage and gladness. -------- > M: Nina, do you remember a time when you were really sad or angry? > It is difficult to think rationally much less to see without avijja. ------ N: quite so, naturally there are moments of going down. ---------- >M: I'm trying to understand why you feel focusing is thinking. ... In focusing there need not be the thought 'now let me focus' -arising of vitakka vicara. There has to > be only intention and the movement of vinnana. ------- N: No, one may not even think: I shall focus. But I think that dhammas arise and fall away so fast, there is no time to do anything, like intending, planning, focussing, watching sound or hearing going to the ear. That last expression your teacher used I find incomprehensible. I see it thus: the element of sound and earsense fall together so that there is the element of hearing. The Buddha explained realities as elements (see M.N. no 115). In that way our world crumbles away (K.S. IV, First Fifty, Ch III, §82). Before we can blink our eyes, all the rupas of the body have already gone, from head to toe, there is nothing remaining. I quote what was quoted here before: Elements, dhåtus, are realities devoid of self. U Narada wrote in his Introduction to the translation of Dhåtu-Kathå, the third Book of the Abhidhamma (PTS:Discourse on Elements): <“The elements are not permanently present. They arise to exhibit their own characteristic natures and perform their own characteristic functions when the proper conditions are satisfied, and they cease after their span of duration. Thus no being has any control over the arising and ceasing of the elements and they are not at his mercy or will however mighty and powerful he may be. In other words, the elements have no regard for anyone, show no favour to anyone and do not accede to the wishes of anyone. They are entirely dependent on conditions... For example, when the four conditions: a visible object, the sense of sight, light and attention, are present, the eye-consciousness element arises. No power can prevent this element from arising when these conditions are present or cause it to arise when one of them is absent.²> "We" cannot do anything. Elements are much too rapidly arising and falling away. But developed paññaa is extremely fast: it can shoot from far very rapidly and precisely. ------- > > M: I'm begining to understand you more. So it is like knowing what > the page says in meaning, then actually seeing the page in a blink > of an eye, so that more understanding is possible (conditioned, > primed) when it does happen. ------ N: This is not my idea. I see more a gradual process of pariyatti, pa.tipatti and pativedha. ------- M: Vipassana is well described as being > goalless, undirected, detached etc etc. ------- N: Not my idea. There is a goal, and it is directed, but no one there to plan or direct. Kh. Sujin is not a teacher to whom we report progress or regression. We listen and are grateful for reminders of: 'what about this moment'. Or reminders about a subtle self who is doing, planning, intending, doing something else first, before developing understanding. But the development is paccattam, everybody can know only for himself. That is why we find in the Tipitaka and Commentaries not many details about the stages of vipassana. ***** Nina. 53837 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 13, no 6 nilovg Hi Phil. Thank you for your good wishes and also to you and Naomi. Three days sick and no flight to BGk? Can you catch it up? Otherwise I would say: India Oct. 2007. op 22-12-2005 11:18 schreef Phil op philco777@...: >> N: When pariyatti is correct it is sure to lead to direct > understanding some >> time in the future, we do not know when. > > This is encouraging. Clearly, pariyatti is all about the present moment. ------ N: That is the essence. Otherwise there is no pariyatti that could lead to patipatti and pativedha. Nina. 53838 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Perspective nilovg Hi Howard, further on in your post where you elaborate, I cannot see any problem. What if you put 'elements' instead of atoms? Not a bad idea. There are many suttas about elements, dhaatus. No gaps in the stream of citta: clear, otherwise we would die. Except in the case of a high attainment of the temporary stopping of perception and feeling. So, there is the condiiton of contiguity-condition, anantara paccaya, each citta being succeeded by a next one, without interval Anantara means without interval. Nina. op 20-12-2005 20:41 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > Abhidhamma, and more so, it seems, the commentarial tradition, presume > a theory of discrete quanta as being what are "real". This conceptual picture > is one which few if any of its proponents have direct knowledge of, but even > though this theory is not directly confirmed and is not put forth in the > suttas, it is taken to be Buddha's truth (as opposed to Gospel truth ;-), and > everything that is then taken up for consideration is forced to fit this > scheme. ... 53839 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:44am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Persp... jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > ... Dear Howard, Tep, all I must admit with Tep that the message of Howard is "tough to chew", I think Howard didn't want to make sweeping statements that makes discussions with abhidhammikas impossible. But as far as I understood, I think I can agree with Howard. To me the Abhidhamma is a theory that can (a la Karl Popper) be falsified. But there is one big difference with scientific theories: the function of it is not to describe the truth but to awaken the student of it: a soteriological function. And it's hard to prove if this function works or not. I think it can, for special personaliy-types. Two scientific remarks (I'm only a semi-scientist): There is one variant of the string theory which states that time is not continue but had step of 10^-38 seconds; in general: the idea that time jumps with time-quanta instead of flows is not totally impossible. The Abhidhamma-theory has to fit in neuroscientific research-results. More then a million citta's in a second is impossible, more than hundred (and that's still very quick) is more realistic. But I think this points are not really important, the main question is: does it has its presumed function or not? Metta Joop 53840 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting nilovg Hi Ken and Sarah, what a good exchange between the two of you. I had to laugh. and so much to the point. op 22-12-2005 10:58 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowa@...: > Book proof would be a start. But that is easy for me to say because I > favour the interpretations found in the books. Others are not so > fortunate: some of us favour interpretations that fall outside the > traditionally accepted Theravada books. > ----------------------------- > S: > I was listening to part of a recording today in which K.Sujin was > emphasising the importance of lots of discussion in order to really > consider and reflect on the teachings. ... > ------------------------------ N: It is also personal, Lodewijk cannot do this. ------ S:...After all, how much we've all had to listen, discuss and clarify for ourselves, asking the same questions or dilemmas over and over again to get to any little glimmers of understanding that may arise. ------- N: The glimmers are accumulated. ------------------------------ > S: .....some do so in a colourful > carnival style, some quietly with placards and some so violently that > they had to get arrested after closing down all the roads and > transport around where we live:-/. ... Everyone has their own way > or style:-). > ------------------------------ >Ken: I haven't done the customary snipping because it is good to hear > those words again. ------ N: I endorse Ken. > ----------------------------------------- > S: > I pretty much agree with this, though I also don't think > there's any rule that anyone need accept the Vism as being correct > either. Such confidence in the correctness of the text will only come > about (if it does) through confidence in the correctness of its > message. I do agree that discussions about the authenticity of the > Vism and so on are of limited value as they don't usually bring us > back to present paramattha dhammas – but of course, that's up for > debate too:-). > ------------------------------------------ > Ken: Yes, bring it on! ------- N: Yes, yes. I like to help people to have confidence in the message of the Vis. And the whole purpose of its classifications is: bringing people to the present moment. The five khandhas are arising and falling just now. They are never the same, take colours or sounds, these are never the same. Take tangible object, it is never identical. That is the meaning of khandha. > --------------------------------- > S: That was just some babble as Phil(C) would put it and a chance > to say 'hi' ------ N: I also like Phil's 'babble' very much, but I agree with Ken, Sarah's and Phil's are not babble. > ---------------------------------- Nina. 53841 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration as the 4 jhanas jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Joop > > Thanks for the detailed comments, and for the further paragraphs from > BB's introduction to the Mahavagga of SN. ... Hallo Jon, Tep, all Tep, it's good to end our discussion with your remarks: more harmony is not possible. But feel free to the discussion between Jon and me, that will of course (!) not be impermanent either. If Jon wants, he may have the last words too. Jon, there is no need to repeat discussions when we agree or agree to disagree. Thanks for your clear explanations. Some points: Jon: "For example, regardless of how one sees the role of samatha in the attainment of enlightenment, a moment of actual samatha development is not (or, if you like, may not) be accompanied by the panna that sees the true nature of a presently arising dhamma, and thus could not be considered a path moment." Joop: That's right, but we can NOT SKIP all the samatha-moments accompanied by the panna that sees the true nature of a presently arising dhamma. Joop (some days ago): >(What I had to do and what's happening from the moment I got >streamenterer: I will start to study that when it's the "right time"; >so I have no opinion about post-mundane path-moments.) Jon: "there is no harm in being exposed to what the Buddha said about the rest of the path, I think?" Joop: No harm, all I want to state that some students (DSG- participants) spend to much energy in what will happen and what they have to do in a far future, when they are streamenterer; and that they spend to less energy in what they had to do now. Jon:"I think everyone here knows that I have a different view to that of BB, but the purpose of my comment was something else, namely, to point out that the passage in question was 'editorial comment' and was unsupported by references, unlike the bulk of the introduction which is analysis of the suttas and supporting commentaries. And I would say that the same goes for the further paragraphs you have copied out in your message (although I notice there is one reference cited there)." Joop: I did not know - till now - of your different view. And I prefer BB's view, it fit's in my intuition (yes I trust that intuition, even without sutta-reference). Joop (some days ago): Perhaps we two can make a list of topics in the Tipitaka that better can be understood metaphorical? Jon: "I would say that certain terms, rather than parts of the Tipitaka, have a non-conventional meaning. I cannot off-hand think of any actual topics that can better be understood as metaphorical, but I'm open to suggestions ;-))" Joop (now) : I was teasing you with my proposal because used your remark "The path here is a metaphorical one" seemed a ad hoc argument to me, without a theory what in the Tipitaka is literal and what metaphorical. It's another topic, but I can give some examples of what I will not take literal (said more subjective: what I don't believe). Stephen Batchelor in 'Buddhism without beliefs' is a model for my ideas. And for myself: The idea that there are 31 realmls of existence. For me only 2 of them exist, the other 29 are a product of the human mind; but they exist in our mind and that's important. Metta Joop 53842 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting (was: Re: Path & Fruit, momentar... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Sarah and all) - Phil, there are a couple points in this post of yours I was thinking about replying to, but questioning whether it was really necessary to. So, I had decided to let this one go, because I'm starting to post a bit too much again! ;-) But when I came to the point that you were speaking of me, I decided that I ought to reply to that part, and if I was going to do that I might as well include some more as well. :-) So, here goes a reply. In a message dated 12/22/05 2:21:35 AM Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: > Hi Sarah and all > > I was eating a salad with a creamy dressing and it conditioned a > pang of guilt about apparently no longer being my usually friendly > self at DSG - perhaps you'll remember why, Sarah! :) > > But only a pang of guilt. Mostly it's interest and a sense that it > confirms the Buddha's teaching that this sort of thing can't be > controlled. It makes perfect sense, if I speculate on what is going > on. In daily life, appreciating that bad things that happen to me > are vipaka have really, really lightened the dosa impact of > unpleasant events and/or unkind people. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Just pointing out that your volitional studies and speculations that have "lightened the dosa impact of unpleasant events and/or unkind people" are a form of volitional cultivation, and that is a form of control - not immediate control, but control (or, better, influence) nonetheless. ------------------------------------ No more of > > those "regrettable incidents" I used to add up (though of course the > conditions are latent to have them - I expect to.) I have become so > much more easy going in daily life, thanks to even this shallow > understanding of the Buddha's teaching. > ------------------------------------ Howard: How wonderful, Phil. I'm very happy for you! ------------------------------------ More peace with Naomi as > > well - her tempermental days (few and far betwee) are understood as > my vipaka too. ------------------------------------ Howard: Hmm! Sort unfair, is it not, that *your* kamma causes causes unpleasant temperment in Naomi? ---------------------------------- All is quiet, all is bright. But when I come to DSG, > > look out! I get irritated almost immediately. It's funny, really. > But it makes perfect sense. All that accumulated dosa has to find > objects, and where is my lobha strongest these days? Dhamma. So > there goes the dosa too. It'll work out, but who know when. There is > not telling. In the past, a few years ago, I would have done > intentional metta exercises, designating "troublesome person" and > that sort of stuff. And it would work, I could come with a sense of > friendliness, conditioned by the intentional exercises. But it would > not be the Buddha's teaching. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Are you so certain of that, Phil? What of the following sutta? <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Karaniya Metta Sutta Good Will Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. For free distribution only. Note: This sutta also appears at Khp 9. > This is to be done by one skilled in aims > who wants to break through to the state of peace: > Be capable, upright, & straightforward, > easy to instruct, gentle, & not conceited, > content & easy to support, > with few duties, living lightly, > with peaceful faculties, masterful, > modest, & no greed for supporters. Do not do the slightest thing > that the wise would later censure. THINK [Captialization Howard's]: Happy, > at rest, > may all beings be happy at heart. > Whatever beings there may be, > weak or strong, without exception, > long, large, > middling, short, > subtle, blatant, > seen & unseen, > near & far, > born & seeking birth: > May all beings be happy at heart. Let no one deceive another > or despise anyone anywhere, > or through anger or resistance > wish for another to suffer. As a mother would risk her life > to protect her child, her only child, > even so should one cultivate a limitless heart > with regard to all beings. > With good will for the entire cosmos, > cultivate a limitless heart: > Above, below, & all around, > unobstructed, without hostility or hate. > Whether standing, walking, > sitting, or lying down, > as long as one is alert, > one should be resolved on this mindfulness. > This is called a sublime abiding > here & now. Not taken with views, > but virtuous & consummate in vision, > having subdued desire for sensual pleasures, > one never again > will lie in the womb. > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- There is no way to eradicate our > > defilments but by knowing them thoroughly. The point of Dhamma is > not to be friendly, though that is a likely consequence of that > which *is* the point - knowing and then fully knowing and thereby > eradicating defilements in order to gain detachment from conditioned > dhammas. So I am not bothered by feeling cantankerous when I come > here. It will pass, probably, or it won't. > > >I was listening to part of a recording today in which K.Sujin was > >emphasisiing the importance of lots of discussion in order to > really > >consider and reflect on the teachings. Of course I agree with this > and > >it's what we're here for! > > It's an interesting point. I would remember, Sarah, that in > addition to accumulations from past lives that we don't know about, > in this lifetime you have been accumulating right intellectual > understanding of Dhamma for some 30 years I guess. For someone like > myself, only 2 years, it can be an entirely different experience. > Let's say I lay down a tentative statement of appreciating the > momentary nature of dhammas. And someone comes back and says, no, > that's not the Buddha's teaching. What do I do? > -------------------------------------------------- Howard: Your post particularly caught my attention here, Phil, because I realized that there is some ambiguity in the term 'momentary', and that you might be misunderstanding me. More about that later. ------------------------------------------------- Just let it go would > > be the wise thing. But what would I do? I'd gather all my > intellectual knowledge of Dhamma, scramble to find the right sutta, > dig hard in my memory to remember something Nina said - it wouldn't > be natural, the way understanding should develop. It would be > forced, with strong self-identity at the core. That depends on the > person's accumulations, of course. I assume for someone like you, or > Nina, or Jon, or Robert K, it would just be as easy and natural as > breathing to lay down the right retort - and in most cases there > *is* a right retort, from a Dhamma point of view. But for beginners, > who must scramble and dig hard and then ponder afterwards if they've > written the right thing - personally, I think it screws up the > cultivation of understanding. I think we should listen more - which > obviously is something I could learn to do. I always used to say > that we learn by speaking out and making mistakes, like ESL > students - have I changed my mind. I don't know. Just babbling out > loud - I know you *love* it when I babble, Sarah. > > On the other hand, it can be very good for us beginners to read > in on others' debates/discussions. For example, when I saw this > morning that Howard was apparently posting doubts about the > momentary nature of ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) my first > reaction was something like this - "this is a good example of what > I'm talking about the futility of Dhamma discussion between people > who are destined to disagree - Howard is without question a true > prince as a human being, a real gentleman > --------------------------------------------- Howard: :-) --------------------------------------------- , makes Jon look like a > > bucaneer's rum bottler, ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Not in the slightest! --------------------------------------------- but if he doesn't see that realities are > > momentary, how can we gain anything from discussing? It's like > baseball fans and cricket fans discussing strategy and not realizing > they are playing on an entirely different field." --------------------------------------------- Howard: I think that a clarification is urgent at this point, Phil. I hasten to make the following points as to my perspective: 1) There is only *now*! Past is mere memory and future mere imagination, and, for that matter, present is ungraspable and gone the very moment it arises. 2) Nothing remains. And all ultimate realities are so fleeting compared to conventional worldly things as to be untouchable. 3) The momentary nowness of all phenomena is not doubted in the slightest by me. What is doubted are sharp, pinpointable beginnings and endings. Whatever exists right now was once nonexistent, and will yet be nonexistent again. But there is no seeing of exact startpoints and endpoints. Looking within at our experience, it seems at first that there are clear starting and ending points. But as we look more closely, more microscopically, what we thought was a boundary point is actually a temporal interval which, itself seems to have a start point and end point. Ah, but then we can look more closely yet. Reality is far more subtle, un-conventional, mysterious, and ungraspable than it seems at first take, or second, or third. All phenomena are ungraspable, and without graspable start or end - flickering ghosts haunting the hallways of our mind. ------------------------------------------------------ But then I > > remembered some of the posts of Nina's that I have gathered, that > she wrote to Howard, that have been very helpful for me (they're in > a binder) and also some points that Howard has said that have > really, really stuck with me, so of course I realized that there is > always value in disagreement on Dhamma points. > > Anyways, just a babble there. I expect I will be listening more > and posting a little less next year but who knows? > > Thanks as always to you and Jon for the work you put into DSG, > Sarah and best holiday wishes to everyone in the group. > > Phil > ======================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 53843 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Fragmented, Movie-Frame, Packet Perspective upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/22/05 6:30:47 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > further on in your post where you elaborate, I cannot see any problem. > What if you put 'elements' instead of atoms? Not a bad idea. There are many > suttas about elements, dhaatus. > No gaps in the stream of citta: clear, otherwise we would die. Except in the > case of a high attainment of the temporary stopping of perception and > feeling. So, there is the condiiton of contiguity-condition, anantara > paccaya, each citta being succeeded by a next one, without interval Anantara > means without interval. > Nina. ======================== Nina, I admire you for so many reasons. One of these was summed up by a Hebrew about 2000 years ago, when he said "Blessed are the peacemakers"! :-) 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) 53844 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 9:15am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration as the 4 jhanas Typo jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: ... Typo in #53841 Joop: That's right, but we can NOT SKIP all the samatha-moments accompanied by the panna that sees the true nature of a presently arising dhamma. Had to be: Joop: That's right, but we can NOT SKIP all the samatha-moments NOT accompanied by the panna that sees the true nature of a presently arising dhamma. 53845 From: nina Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 10:38am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:13pm Subject: [dsg] Re:sati and focussing matheesha333 Hi Nina, > N: Yes, there are the factors of sati, energy and concentration which are > the samaadhi of the eightfold Path. Samaadhi develops together with > sammaaditthi of the eightfold Path. This does not mean that everybody has to > develop samatha to the degree of jhana. M: I agree. I dont believe that jhana is required for the sotapanna and sakadagami levels, but is needed for higher levels. But my teacher's method does train in them, because they are very useful and have many advantages, and because it believes in checking phala (Very commentarial like i said!) But I do believe that training in one-pointedness is required to do formal vipassana as I have explained. N: Moreover, considering the texts and what > one hears with kusala citta is also a kind of samatha, having as subject > dhammanusati. M: Is this dhammanussati as in the 4th foundation (which is vipassana), or as in the anupassanas (contemplating the nature of the dhammas akalika, ehipassika etc and taking delight in that)? Kusala citta is one without lobha,dosa and moha. So it will be naturally calm. But it lasts a moment before the waters of those three swallow it up again. It would possibly suit the model of practice that you follow. But my concerns are that such moments are two few and far in between and I don't see the Buddha defining Samadhi in that manner. He speaks of actively focusing the mind, learning to bring it into one –pointedness etc. Hardly anyone claims to have understood anatta by direct experiencing after many decades. I must admit there has been more understanding among hundreds we have trained through direct experiencing because faculties other than just panna have been prepared for the event. Time spans spent on the path has been linked to the degree of development of indriya/faculties in the suttas. > > M: Are you saying that samatha is impossible? This is not supported > > in the suttas: > > -Samadhisutta/AN > >----- > No, not impossible. It depends on a person's accumulated wisdom. There are > more samaadhi-suttas (which one you quoted?), The deliberate development of calm has been described in the suttas as I showed in the last post. See below: http://www.metta.lk/mirror/www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/angutt ara/an04-094.html N: but we have to see the Co: > samatha and vipassana may be lokiya or lokuttara. When lokuttara, also for a > sukha vipassaka, samaadhi has the strength of the first jhaana, but the > object is nibbaana. M: So you are saying that the Samadhi component will be fulfilled in your approach as well. I guess my concern is that I don't see noticing one dhamma (say, per day) is going to ever take a person to a level passing nibbida etc where such a degree of Samadhi will be enjoyed. As you know sati gives rise to Samadhi. The only way such a great supramundane Samadhi will arise is with continued sati. > N: Now I am trying to understand a person who says, sensuality is so strong, even > motivating akusala kamma patha, and citta has to be calmed first. He cannot > wait for insight to grow, that takes too long, and he finds this an urgent > problem. M: I hope you are not talking about me because I do not feel this way at all! N: > I do not have an answer ready. I think it needs also great paññaa to calm > citta in the right way, and if it is done with lobha, it may at first seem > effective, but in fact one turns away from the truth. M: Where there is calm, there is no lobha. Oil and water. A pleasant calm and an unpleasant disturbance. This is something important to think about. The road to developing that calm is focusing. Samadhi, leads to Panna. It takes a calm mind to see dhammas directly. We can learn from the dhammas – the teacher of the buddhas, rather than learning about them only from books. To quietly see that patterns in the arising and passing away of dhammas. Impermanence is understood as an inherant pattern, a characteristic. Like watching rain – each drop impermanent. This is how Samadhi leads to Panna. N: > What to advise then? I think any kind of kusala through body, speech and > mind brings calm, and at such moments one does not think of oneself or one's > problems. Each kusala citta is accompanied by the cetasikas that are calm > (passadhi). There are always opportunities for one of the ten bases of > meritorious deeds. How good there are ten! But I am open for other > suggestions. > -------- M: I think we both agree that calming citta is possible by one- pointed concentration. I don't entirely agree that developing kusala is the way to go. For someone who has done nothing to stop arising of lobha (like developing Samadhi, or developing ashubha sanna) lobha will arise unhindered. Most likely lobha for developing kusala. Lobha will give rise to papanca with whatever it considers desirable including kusla or panna for that matter. To put it in another way, how much kusala can be developed for someone who's lobha, dosa remains untouched, unaltered? If Samadhi is developed with focus, then lobha and dosa arises less (tadanga pahana). I was noticing yesterday, even sleep is not very compatible with it because it conditions a steady clarity. Keeping precepts become easier, sense restraint becomes easier. There is more kusala. If this done in a retreat setting, the Samadhi eroding distractions are less as well and jhanas become possible. When Samadhi has deteriorated lobha for it can arise. But when someone becomes skilled in the practice, s/he sees that lobha is a hinderence for developing Samadhi and that the only way to go further is to give up expectations. A small problem, like desire for nibbana. But I have seen it successfully navigated by many many people. What it requires is proper instruction. Even Samadhi is impermanent and is not the goal. It is not a big a problem as it might seem on paper and a non existent one with greater samadhi. - > N: If this glimpse is right it surely conditions next moments of glimpses, > because it accumulates. > I do not think of seven years or so, that is the future. That distracts from > the present moment. M: Then equally the other moments of avijja must condition greater avijja, unless propped up by continuous study of texts and thinking (papanca) about it. Nina, if someone spoke of continuous sati and said `thinking about 7 years distracts from the present moment' I would accept it. But your method requires much less present moment sati. But the question remains, and it is not an easy one for most modern Buddhist practitioners anywhere in the world…sadly. > M: A little bit of turmoil/agitation can be noticed. But to be caught > > up in it intensely is to only see what it wants us to see - through > > the lense of a defilement. We have to approach without 'greed and > > distress' as mentioned in the satipattana sutta. > ------- > N: There should be no greed or distress with regard to any object that > presents itself already because of conditions. But it is hard to apply, I > understand. The same sutta under mental objects states that also akusala has > to be known as it is. M: Yes, akusala should be known. But akusala so strong that conditions for sati or panna cannot arise is useless, as in intense anger. So weak akusala can be helpful in terms of practice as objects for understanding . But there are objects which clearly should not be pursued, which give rise to the hinderences, as mentioned in the suttas. Developing one-pointedness fulfils the criteria of giving up `greed and distress' before satipattaana. This is important. > When we hear a reminder it sometimes clicks. Not always. I heard that we > should not be disturbed by an unpleasant object and it clicked. > Also the same words about Dhamma heard again after two or three years become > so much more meaningful, I find. The glimpse is growing, but very slowly. I > do not mind, we can continue with courage and gladness. M: I am glad that understanding is growing. I respect your khanti. I know what you mean by clicking. Impermanance is an `ah hah!' dukka is an `oh no', anatta is a thunderclap. Tears in my eyes, not of joy, but of sadness that I cannot follow this path to its ultimate conclusion because of the ties that i have, because there is no higher and wretched truth. We have to pay for our bad kamma, I guess that's all there is to it. Ignorance is sweet, but there is no going back. One eye on the path like a cow grazing in the field also watching its calf. Still so much to do. Insight is buried, life goes on. But it does make so many things easier to deal with. Less worries about my needs, my wants, me being hurt, me being insulted. Watching desires arise and not getting caught up in them. Suffering feels like it has one limb amputated so things are better. I feel my lay life is luckier for the kusala I generate. Still other areas of practice im not very good at – like sila, hiri otappa, sense restraint, but there is progress made so im hopeful. > >M: I'm trying to understand why you feel focusing is thinking. ... In focusing > there need not be the thought 'now let me focus' -arising of vitakka vicara. > There has to > > be only intention and the movement of vinnana. > ------- > N: No, one may not even think: I shall focus. But I think that dhammas arise > and fall away so fast, there is no time to do anything, like intending, > planning, focussing, watching sound or hearing going to the ear. That last > expression your teacher used I find incomprehensible. > M: I didn't know what intention was until I experienced this naama dhamma just before each movement of my body in vipassana. The naama dhamma of craving is experientially very different from it. Papanca is different to both of them. Just because there is intention and something is done, like directing awareness it does not mean there is craving. We can do many things during the day without any craving arising. It is not `hearing going to the ear' rather `vinnana going to the ear'! It is the experience of the movement of vinnana to the sense door! The Dhammapada speaks of the mind like a monkey jumping from one branch to the other. This is an accurate and experiential description of vinnana shifting from one sense door to the other. Also dhammapada speaks of mind flopping like a fish. When the mind is very calm and hardly moving, this can be experienced when it becomes a bit shaken. N: > I see it thus: the element of sound and earsense fall together so that there > is the element of hearing. Before we can > blink our eyes, all the rupas of the body have already gone, from head to > toe, there is nothing remaining. > M: This is a figurative way of talking. A bit like trying to `catch up' with arammana. It is like water from a tap. The drops keep coming. Each one does pass away. But new ones form to take its place almost immediately. It is a continuous happening. So it can be observed at any moment, every moment. It does not run out except under special circumstances. All we need is the developed indirya to experience it. > "We" cannot do anything. Elements are much too rapidly arising and falling > away. But developed paññaa is extremely fast: it can shoot from far very > rapidly and precisely. > ------- > > M: This is why I thought your method was to understand as much as possible in one moment of experiencing. Or to put it in another, develop a `quick' panna. We can do something, and that is bhavana –development of the mind. Since arising and passing away is happening all the time all there is to do is to develop the ability to see it. More sensitivity, more clarity. The 5 hinderences (to nibbana) has been described as weed, dye, mud etc all in water. The mind literally have to be cleared of these to See what is going on within it. It needs to be made clear of turmoil. It is a very practical thing and the similie is very close to reality. The answer is samadhi, where the hindrences are suppresed. That is why going to the forests were encouraged, why ordination was encouraged. Otherwise it wouldn't make much sense why the Buddha kept these institutions intact and developing. Any sutta about lay people doing vipassana doesn't alter these facts. They remain and can be explained by the method im describing. That however doesn't mean that other models cant work. > > M: I'm begining to understand you more. So it is like knowing what > > the page says in meaning, then actually seeing the page in a blink > > of an eye, so that more understanding is possible (conditioned, > > primed) when it does happen. > ------ > N: This is not my idea. I see more a gradual process of pariyatti, > pa.tipatti and pativedha. > ------- M: so insight is slowly built up with listening, learning discussing and this should condition a moment of experiencing the dhammas. But then there is more building up along the same lines. > M: Vipassana is well described as being > > goalless, undirected, detached etc etc. > ------- > N: Not my idea. There is a goal, and it is directed, but no one there to > plan or direct. M: I think you will see that if someone says I will maintain sati that thought arises and passes away. Then the next thought might be something else altgother. Or moments of sati. I don't see the problem. If Samadhi is present lobha wont take hold. > Kh. Sujin is not a teacher to whom we report progress or regression. We > listen and are grateful for reminders of: 'what about this moment'. M: So your sati is conditioned from outside? At that moment intention would arise, awareness will be directed from pannati to the present experiencing. Who is to say there is no lobha? But I think it can work. N: Or > reminders about a subtle self who is doing, planning, intending, doing > something else first, before developing understanding. But the development > is paccattam, everybody can know only for himself. That is why we find in > the Tipitaka and Commentaries not many details about the stages of > vipassana. M: I think it contains as much as it needs to contain. The Buddha was good at saying what was just required for enlightenment. When it is experiential less words are required. Like saying `go and peel and eat the orange and the taste will be sweet and tangy'. Or you could write a book on what sweet and tangy is like – but if you just eat it you will know. A picture is worth a thousand words. Heres a question: what amount of dhamma does one need to know, to understand tilakkana? Metta Matheesha 53847 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:15am Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG dacostacharles Hi Sarah, I forgot (the books): a simplified practical Buddhist outlook on life; Kung Fu (Pak hok) principles and basics; what is mind (interacting cognitive subsystems). Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta -----Original Message----- From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sarah abbott Sent: Wednesday, 21 December, 2005 08:43 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG .... > C: I will be losing my job soon, so I will be spending much more time at > home (a mixed blessing). I hope to use my unemployment to write a few > books. ... S: Best wishes for this. What kind of books and in what language? 53848 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:05am Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG dacostacharles Hi Sarah, Boy, I can see how it is useful, at times, to get rid of the old stuff already addressed. I got a little lost but I think we are on the same page. The only points are labels and objects. We have to be careful when mixing them. It is good to ask what is really meant by a label because they are often misleading, like the time I say "TREE" when I meant, "STOP, we are crashing into something that is harder than I am." I am traveling to Hong Kong some time early next year. I think my teacher is trying to find a good cheap flat for me for 3 weeks. Do you know of any? Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta -----Original Message----- From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of sarah abbott Sent: Wednesday, 21 December, 2005 08:43 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG Hi Charles D, --- Charles DaCosta wrote: > Boy, I almost missed this. > > Hi Sarah, > I think that sometimes posts get lost when a thread is split and no > warning > of the split is made. .... S: I was probably trying to keep the peace with Joop:-) Glad you found it. <....> 53849 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jonoabb Hi, Mike m. nease wrote: >Hi Jon, > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Jonothan Abbott" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 5:27 AM >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP > > > > >>Among the sobhana cetasikas are 3 that (somewhat confusingly) have the >>same name as their Noble Path counterparts. They are the mental factors >>that arise to when there is wholesome restraint from doing an >>(anticipated) act of wrong speech, action or livelihood. >> >> > >Aren't these the same mental factors? I thought it was arising with the >other (at least five) path factors that made them supramundane. Is there >some other difference that's more than semantic? > > No, no other difference that I was alluding to. I was just making the comment that the terms Right-Speech, -Action and -Livelihood each include cetasikas that are mundane and non-path, whereas all the other 'Rights' refer to path factors only, and their non-path 'counterparts' have different names. Jon 53850 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 2:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration as the 4 jhanas jonoabb Hi Tep Tep Sastri wrote: >Hi, Jon (and other friends) - > >I wonder if you plan to pursue the discussion on NEP till everybody >reaches the same conclusion, or just to establish relevant definitions >pertaining to NEP for your own reference? > I thought I should post some references relating to my original comments, in case anyone was interested. >>Jon: 1. The NEP and the 'stream' of stream-entry (and beyond) are one >>and the same thing. >> > >Tep: The "and beyond" is not clear in the quoted sutta SN 55:5. > Not explicitly stated, but I think 'stream' implies something that applies to more than just the attaining of the sotapanna stage. >>Jon: 2. As regards the gaining of stream-entry (i.e., for the >>uninstructed worldling), the relevant factors are the 4 factors given >>here. To my knowledge, one does not find the NEP mentioned in this >>context. >> > >Tep: Relevant, yes. But there are other factors of stream-entry in >other suttas that should be considered. NEP is in the context of the >stream-entry factors because stream-entry is for stream-enterers to >enter and the stream-enterers' qualifications are stated in term of >the stream-entry factors. > There are apparently 2 distinct sets of 'stream-entry factors' (Pali: sotaapattiyanga) given in the suttas. One of these is the factors that *define a person as a stream-enterer*; the other is the *preliminary factors for attaining stream-entry*. BB distinguishes the two sets by translating the former as 'factors *of* stream-entry' and the latter as 'factors *for* stream-entry' (see note 325 at p.1955 of CDB). > >Jon: I see this passage as saying that, in the teaching of the Four >Noble Truths, the factors of the NEP are the 8 cetasikas that arise at >the moment of path and fruition consciousness, that is to say, that >accompany moments of supramundane consciousness. > >Tep: We should keep in mind that the quoted words of BB are in the >context of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha commentarial notes -- i.e. it is >entirely separated from the sutta SN 55:5. It is not fair to build >your own bridge to connect the two. > I'm not sure what you mean by 'building a bridge', but I was just giving 2 references that I saw as being relevant. Jon 53851 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 3:16pm Subject: Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting (was: Re: Path & Fruit, momentar... philofillet Hi Howard I popped in yesterday to relieve some guilt, thereby breaking a promise not to post so I'll keep this very quick. if you don't mind. In daily life, appreciating that bad things that happen to me > > are vipaka have really, really lightened the dosa impact of > > unpleasant events and/or unkind people. > > > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > Just pointing out that your volitional studies and speculations that > have "lightened the dosa impact of unpleasant events and/or unkind people" are > a form of volitional cultivation, and that is a form of control - not > immediate control, but control (or, better, influence) nonetheless. I think studying Dhamma is a form of conditioning, for sure. You can call it control if you'd like. Increasing or decreasing probabilities of things happening, whatever. But it's all very superficial until paramattha dhammas are more directly understood. Not yet, for me. > ------------------------------------ > No more of > > > those "regrettable incidents" I used to add up (though of course the > > conditions are latent to have them - I expect to.) I have become so > > much more easy going in daily life, thanks to even this shallow > > understanding of the Buddha's teaching. > > > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > How wonderful, Phil. I'm very happy for you! But I know the next one could happen on any outing. I sometimes think I should intentionally meditate "metta" towards drivers in the morning as a way of preventing run-ins. Cheating, but to avoid violence could be good. We'll see if this is a condition to do so. > ------------------------------------ > More peace with Naomi as > > > well - her tempermental days (few and far betwee) are understood as > > my vipaka too. > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > Hmm! Sort unfair, is it not, that *your* kamma causes causes > unpleasant temperment in Naomi? She decided to marry me Howard!!!! ;) Seriously I just posted that without thinking seriously about the Dhamma implications. I just know the last time, about 6 weeks ago, that she was in a very bad mood there was no fight because I thought about what was going on as a kind of vipaka. That's not good or true dhamma, just thinking to cope with a situation, the way using metta intentionally is just thinking to cope with a situation, I'm aware of that. But understanding about vipaka is just beginning to be developed. Certainly there is tons and tons of vipaka arising, all the time, every time we see, hear, taste, touch etc. I don't know if that's one of the points that are disputed here. I guess it is. So be it, nevermind. I remember when I first came to DSG I pestered Nina about this - if I hear a drunk man screaming in the middle of the night, why is this my vipaka? It doesn't make sense. Now I just see that kamma and vipaka are so complex that we would go mad trying to figure them out. >---------------- > Howard: > Are you so certain of that, Phil? What of the following sutta? > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< > > Karaniya Metta Sutta Of course I know this sutta well. Used to know it by heart, actually, as a kind of magic spell. I guess it refers to what happens when metta arises as a meditative attainment (absorption something or other) in people of advanced understanding I really doubt it refers to what happens when stressed people sit down and decide to send loving kindness here and there - I really doubt it. I think it's been exploited, but it makes people happy and less harmful, so it's very good. But I don't think what goes on for most people who apply this sutta in an intentional way is truly metta. That's why I say "metta." > > There is no way to eradicate our > > > defilments but by knowing them thoroughly. The point of Dhamma is > > not to be friendly, though that is a likely consequence of that > > which *is* the point - knowing and then fully knowing and thereby > > eradicating defilements in order to gain detachment from conditioned > > dhammas. So I am not bothered by feeling cantankerous when I come > > here. It will pass, probably, or it won't. > > > > >I was listening to part of a recording today in which K.Sujin was > > >emphasisiing the importance of lots of discussion in order to > > really > > >consider and reflect on the teachings. Of course I agree with this > > and > > >it's what we're here for! > > > > It's an interesting point. I would remember, Sarah, that in > > addition to accumulations from past lives that we don't know about, > > in this lifetime you have been accumulating right intellectual > > understanding of Dhamma for some 30 years I guess. For someone like > > myself, only 2 years, it can be an entirely different experience. > > Let's say I lay down a tentative statement of appreciating the > > momentary nature of dhammas. And someone comes back and says, no, > > that's not the Buddha's teaching. What do I do? > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Your post particularly caught my attention here, Phil, because I > realized that there is some ambiguity in the term 'momentary', and that you might > be misunderstanding me. More about that later. > ------------------------------------------------- > > I'm talking about the futility of Dhamma discussion between people > > who are destined to disagree - Howard is without question a true > > prince as a human being, a real gentleman > > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > :-) > --------------------------------------------- > , makes Jon look like a > > > bucaneer's rum bottler, > ---------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Not in the slightest! A joke of course, because we all know what a gent Jon is. But your are just as genty. > --------------------------------------------- > but if he doesn't see that realities are > > > momentary, how can we gain anything from discussing? It's like > > baseball fans and cricket fans discussing strategy and not realizing > > they are playing on an entirely different field." > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I think that a clarification is urgent at this point, Phil. I was afraid you would! I posted that so quickly yesterday, having read about one line of a post of Tep talking about a post of yours. I'll just apologize if I misinterpreted you and leave it there. Phil p.s And I'll offer you the last word if there's anything that you still need to clarify. Thanks. 53852 From: "m. nease" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP mlnease Hi Jon, I know there are numerous synonyms for the other five factors in various contexts--are you referring to something more specific than this? Thanks again. mike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jonothan Abbott" To: Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 2:39 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Jonothan Abbott" >>To: >>Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 5:27 AM >>Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP >>>Among the sobhana cetasikas are 3 that (somewhat confusingly) have the >>>same name as their Noble Path counterparts. They are the mental factors >>>that arise to when there is wholesome restraint from doing an >>>(anticipated) act of wrong speech, action or livelihood. >>> >>Aren't these the same mental factors? I thought it was arising with the >>other (at least five) path factors that made them supramundane. Is there >>some other difference that's more than semantic? > > No, no other difference that I was alluding to. I was just making the > comment that the terms Right-Speech, -Action and -Livelihood each > include cetasikas that are mundane and non-path, whereas all the other > 'Rights' refer to path factors only, and their non-path 'counterparts' > have different names. 53853 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 Sukin: "It is not so much the perception that experiences are happening "to" `self´, but rather the experiences themselves are taken to *be*`self´." Hi Sukin, In your abbreviated reply you equated self with existence. We could discuss this, but what I was really interested in is what experiences do you take to be you. Is there any experience that you think, "I am this experience"? Larry 53854 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 4:20pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Concentration as the 4 jhanas buddhistmedi... Hi, Jon - There is only one question in your post, so this post is going to be short. > > > >Tep: We should keep in mind that the quoted words of BB are in the > >context of the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha commentarial notes -- > > i.e. it is entirely separated from the sutta SN 55:5. > >It is not fair to build your own bridge to connect the two. > > > Jon: > I'm not sure what you mean by 'building a bridge', but I was just giving > 2 references that I saw as being relevant. > Tep: Plain and simple. The "bridge" is your own words that neither belong to BB's comment about SN 55.5 (Island A) nor his comment about the Abhidhammattha-Sangaha commentarial notes (Island B). Island A ==== Bridge ====== Island B. {:-)) Regards, Tep ======= 53855 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting (was: Re: Path & Fruit, momentar... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - In a message dated 12/22/05 6:17:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: > >------------------------------------ > > More peace with Naomi as > > >>well - her tempermental days (few and far betwee) are understood > as > >>my vipaka too. > >------------------------------------ > >Howard: > > Hmm! Sort unfair, is it not, that *your* kamma causes > causes > >unpleasant temperment in Naomi? > > She decided to marry me Howard!!!! ;) ------------------------------------------------------ Howard: LOLOL!! ----------------------------------------------------- > > Seriously I just posted that without thinking seriously about the > Dhamma implications. I just know the last time, about 6 weeks ago, > that she was in a very bad mood there was no fight because I thought > about what was going on as a kind of vipaka. That's not good or true > dhamma, just thinking to cope with a situation, the way using metta > intentionally is just thinking to cope with a situation, I'm aware > of that. But understanding about vipaka is just beginning to be > developed. Certainly there is tons and tons of vipaka arising, all > the time, every time we see, hear, taste, touch etc. I don't know if > that's one of the points that are disputed here. I guess it is. So > be it, nevermind. > > I remember when I first came to DSG I pestered Nina about this - > if I hear a drunk man screaming in the middle of the night, why is > this my vipaka? It doesn't make sense. Now I just see that kamma and > vipaka are so complex that we would go mad trying to figure them > out. > > --------------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, indeed. Kamma is a matter that is deep and complex, and probably left alone for the most part. It happens that I do believe, and in fact consider it obvious, that the kamma (volitional actions) of beings effect others, and not themselves alone, though only as conditions, and not as kamma vipaka. So, in fact, your kamma is indeed a condition for mental states of others, which, in turn, will have a rebound effect on 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) 53856 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:06pm Subject: Re: An Interview With Htoo sukinderpal Hi Larry, ================================ Sukin: "It is not so much the perception that experiences are happening "to" `self, but rather the experiences themselves are taken to *be*`self." Hi Sukin, In your abbreviated reply you equated self with existence. We could discuss this, but what I was really interested in is what experiences do you take to be you. Is there any experience that you think, "I am this experience"? ================================ I meant to come to this, but as you can see, I had to stop writing and attend to something else. But then from what I had written, I think you could find my answer. Anyway here I'll first answer your question. " Is there any experience that you think, "I am this experience"?" The answer is no. However, this is an understanding based only on 'theory'. And each time that I ask myself such a question, the answer will only be of this level. The danger in pursuing such a path as I see it is that one is likely to be fooled into thinking that one understands and sees more than one really does. In experience, I believe that 'wrong view' does often arise at a level beyond my awareness. This happens on the level of paramattha dhamma experiences and not only when I 'think' about right/wrong view. It is reflected in our thinking and as I said, in the idea of 'control'. So much so, that it may be the very influence behind any decision to 'look' or even the desire to find out if indeed there is or not a 'self'. In my last reply, I pointed out all three ways that 'self' can manifest. In my original response to Robert, the one I referred to was 'tanha'. If I tried to focus my attention to the details of what goes on, it will be with desire. But if I do it thinking that this is how I shall experience and understand realities, then it becomes a problem of wrong view. Yet a little sati can arise to take on signs of wrong thinking conditioned by wrong view, and this would have been understanding at the level of contemplation. And it may be enough to dissuade one from trying to catch realities or "do" anything else. Does this answer your question? Metta, Sukin 53857 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 8:37pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 Hi Sukin, Thanks for your reply. I take it then that you don't really know what self view is, or even if there is such a thing. Can we extend this to dukkha and anicca as well? You don't really know if there is suffering or impermanence? If that is the case I can only infer that you are, as far as you know, perfectly happy and content, or at least free from suffering. I think maybe you are a deva, Sukin. Larry 53858 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Dec 22, 2005 11:29pm Subject: Re: An Interview With Htoo sukinderpal Hi Larry, Any understanding that I have about anything at all, is through concept only. Conventional realities *is* concept, whereas ultimate realities are known only on the level of pariyatti. However this does not mean that there is doubt about even this. To the extent that anything can be known by a worldling, I know that much. Only I believe that compared to most others, I am looking in the right direction, one that is about direct and thorough understanding of ultimate realties. ;-) As to whether I am a deva, the concept of devas does not match the concept of me sitting here and writing this email to you, alternating with thoughts about the past and future in relation to this so called 'I'. Metta, Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Hi Sukin, > > Thanks for your reply. I take it then that you don't really know what > self view is, or even if there is such a thing. Can we extend this to > dukkha and anicca as well? You don't really know if there is suffering > or impermanence? If that is the case I can only infer that you are, as > far as you know, perfectly happy and content, or at least free from > suffering. I think maybe you are a deva, Sukin. > > Larry > 53859 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:51am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 341- Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[k] 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;-) ========================================== [Ch20 - Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)] Vicikicchå Vicikicchå or doubt is another akusala cetasika and this can accompany only one type of citta, namely the type of moha-múlacitta which is called: moha-múla-citta vicikicchå sampayutta (rooted in ignorance, accompanied by doubt). The reality of vicikicchå is not the same as what we mean by doubt in conventional language. Vicikicchå is not doubt about someone’s name or about the weather. Vicikicchå is doubt about realities , about nåma and rúpa, about cause and result, about the four noble Truths, about the “Dependant Origination”. The Atthasåliní (II, Part IX, Chapter III, 259) defines vicikicchå as follows: * "... It has shifting about as characteristic, mental wavering as function, indecision or uncertainty in grasp as manifestation, unsystematic thought (unwise attention) as proximate cause, and it should be regarded as a danger to attainment." * The Visuddhimagga (XIV, 177) gives a similar definition. ***** Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[[to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 53860 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:59am Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! Joop gazita2002 hello Joop, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" > wrote: > > > > ...Dear Azita > > I have not yet thanked you for your message #53343, in which you > described your Dhamma-study. It's a honest description. > You wrote about listening MP3, that are talks of and discussions with > K Sujin? > I think you already seen the teachings of Sujin don't resonate very > loud in me; I think that no problem as long people in DSG are clear > in their intentions. > > With metta > > Joop > azita: I guess this is one of those easy to accept differing points of view. Would like to add one thing tho. A. Sujin states that they are not her teachings - they are the teachings of the Buddha. Patience, courage and good cheer Azita. 53861 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Thread ( 593 ) gazita2002 Hello Nina and Htoo, firstly, to Htoo. My name is Azita and my email address is Gazita, so it is only one person to whom u are/were writing. thank you both for your replies. I need more explanation on certain aspects which will have to wait til later as I need to ask more specifically I think. Formulate a clearer question. Patience, courage and good cheer Azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Azita, > op 17-12-2005 07:34 schreef gazita2002 op gazita2002@y...: > > > azita: what if there is sati that knows visible object, is this not > > sammaa-sati? > ------ > N: Sati is aware, pañña understands. Sammaa-sati: when it is directly aware > of that characteristic that appears now. It accompanies sammaa- ditthi, right > understanding of the eightfold Path. > Nina. > 53862 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Debates, Discussion & Dojo-busting gazita2002 Hello Nina, Ken, Sarah, I also have been enjoying this. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Ken and Sarah, > what a good exchange between the two of you. I had to laugh. and so much to > the point. > op 22-12-2005 10:58 schreef kenhowardau op kenhowa@g...: > > > Book proof would be a start. But that is easy for me to say because I > > favour the interpretations found in the books. Others are not so > > fortunate: some of us favour interpretations that fall outside the > > traditionally accepted Theravada books. ......snip..... > N: Yes, yes. I like to help people to have confidence in the message of the > Vis. And the whole purpose of its classifications is: bringing people to the > present moment. The five khandhas are arising and falling just now. They are > never the same, take colours or sounds, these are never the same. Take > tangible object, it is never identical. That is the meaning of khandha. Azita: this for me, is one of the most important aspects of the teachings. I like the explanation of the 5 khandhas. For example, today I went to the cooler mountains and it was raining and it was very beautiful. I went for a couple of short walks in the rainforest and swam in a crater lake where the water was incredibly pleasant. To be reminded at the end of a wonderful day, that all is khandha, arising and falling away moment by moment, is what dhamma friendship is all about. This may sound tongue-in-cheek, however I am most serious, and I actually did think, while watching a little turtle swimming in a creek, that what was seen was just visible object; and then there was Lobha :-) But wait, there's more. Not just khandha, dukkha as well!!!! Patience, courage and good cheer Azita 53863 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jonoabb Hi Mike m. nease wrote: >Hi Jon, > >I know there are numerous synonyms for the other five factors in various >contexts--are you referring to something more specific than this? > > Going back to my original post, I was just trying to explain to Joop that 'Right' in the case of the 3 virati cetasikas did not necessarily connote the Eightfold Path factors. Sorry if I caused confusion! Jon 53864 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:09am Subject: Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, abhidhammika Dear Howard, Tep, Nina, Joop, Robert K, Mike N and all How are you? Thank you, Howard, for having written a serious post if with some flaws. You wrote: "Abhidhamma, and more so, it seems, the commentarial tradition, presume a theory of discrete quanta as being what are "real". This conceptual picture is one which few if any of its proponents have direct knowledge of, but even though this theory is not directly confirmed and is not put forth in the suttas, it is taken to be Buddha's truth (as opposed to Gospel truth ;-), and everything that is then taken up for consideration is forced to fit this scheme." You seem to assume that Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka implies a theory of discrete quanta as realities, and that Abhidhamma Pitaka contradicts Sutta Pitaka when you asserted that 'this theory is not directly confirmed and is not put forth in the suttas'. Do you realise that realities (paramattha dhammaa)taught in Sutta Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka are the same? Those realities, if other than nibbana, are dependently-arisen and thoroughly impermanent (aniccam) in both Pitakas. Please review the following two statements from Sutta Pitaka. 1. "imasmim sati idam hoti, imassuppaadaa idam uppajjati," Section 1, the First Sutta in Udana, Khuddaka Nikaaya. "When there is this condition, there is this consequence; upon the arising of this condition, this consequence arises." 2. "imasmim asati idam na hoti, imassa nirodhaa idam nirujjhati," Section 2, the Second Sutta in Udana, Khuddaka Nikaaya. "When there is not this condition, there is not this consequence; upon the vanishment of this condition, this consequence vanishes." The Buddha was making those two statements in connection with the processes of dependent origination and the reverse processes of it. I would like you to pay special attention to the terms vanishment / cessation (nirodhaa) and vanishes / ceases (nirujjhati) in the second Sutta. Now, Howard, what do you think? When a reality as a consequence vanishes upon the vanishment of another reality as its condition, is there the completeness of vanishment or cessation of the realities under consideration? If you answered Yes to my question, then impermanence taught by the Buddha in Sutta Pitaka is thorough and absolute. Remember that the Buddha was teaching nibbana in terms of cessation as the reverse processes of dependent origination in the second Sutta. The Buddha said the following in the second Sutta. "Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti." "Thus, there is cessation of this mere aggregate of misery." What can we infer from the Buddha's Sutta Teaching on Dependent Origination and the Reverse Process Of Dependent Origination? We can infer that realities do not exist in advance of their conditions because the Buddha said "When there is not this condition, there is not this consequence" in the second Sutta of Udana. We can also infer that conditioned realities happen as events with begining points and end points as the the Buddha said "When there is this condition, there is this consequence; upon the arising of this condition, this consequence arises" (for beginning points )in the first Sutta of Udana and "upon the vanishment of this condition, this consequence vanishes" (for end points) in the second Sutta of Undana. And the Buddha had direct knowledge of Dependent Origination and the Reverse Process Of Dependent Origination. The Buddha said in the first Sutta of Udana as follows " pa.ticcasamuppaadam anulomam saadhukam manasaakaasi" "The Buddha Bhagavaa objectizes well the forward process of Dependent Origination." The Buddha said in the second Sutta of Udana as follows " pa.ticcasamuppaadam pa.tilomam saadhukam manasaakaasi" "The Buddha Bhagavaa objectizes well the reverse process of Dependent Origination." Thus, I am afraid Howard might not have known what he was saying when he wrote "This conceptual picture is one which few if any of its proponents have direct knowledge of" and "All the Dhamma including the tilakkhana, the four noble truths, dependent origination, all of it, remains without the atomic perspective. (Or so it seems to me.)" By now, if you are a quick learner :-), you would become able to accept that Abhidhamma Pitaka does not contradict Sutta Pitaka when the former teaches conditioned realities (paramattha dhammaa) as having beginning points and end points and as undergoing thorough impermanence. With regards, Suan www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: Hi, all - Abhidhamma, and more so, it seems, the commentarial tradition, presume a theory of discrete quanta as being what are "real". This conceptual picture is one which few if any of its proponents have direct knowledge of, but even though this theory is not directly confirmed and is not put forth in the suttas, it is taken to be Buddha's truth (as opposed to Gospel truth ;-), and everything that is then taken up for consideration is forced to fit this scheme. observable and accounted for. All the Dhamma including the tilakkhana, the four noble truths, dependent origination, all of it, remains without the atomic perspective. (Or so it seems to me.) With metta, Howard P.S. This is how I see the matter. I expect most of you to disgree with me on this, and I'm not looking to defend my perspective as a "position". Actually, I think that "positions" are really unimportant. Only reality is important, and that isn't discovered by debate, but by looking and seeing. Part of what needs to be looked at, I believe, is our presuppositions. 53865 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:52am Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! Joop jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > hello Joop, > > azita: I guess this is one of those easy to accept differing points > of view. > Would like to add one thing tho. A. Sujin states that they are > not her teachings - they are the teachings of the Buddha. > > Patience, courage and good cheer > Azita. > Dear Azita For reasons hidden in DSG-history the name of this thread is 'Reasons for staying on DSG' (of course I know the reason but I prefer this text). It's not correct but I like that. Azita: "Would like to add one thing tho. A. Sujin states that they are not her teachings - they are the teachings of the Buddha." Joop: A have no doubt that A. Sujin is sincere and has a deep Dhamma- knowledge; but it's impossible to talk or write about the teachings of the Buddha without giving some interpretation. In another post you described being in the mountains and swimming in the lake. From the cold European perspective this sounds very idyllic. My first reaction was: I want to be there too. But after some spiritual reflection (and practical consideration) mudita was arising in me. Mudita without envy. Metta Joop 53866 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 5:54am Subject: Re: Reasons for staying on DSG! Joop jwromeijn Dear Azita The name is even: Reasons for staying on DSG Joop Metta Joop 53867 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 7:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, nilovg Dear Suan, I was just thinking of you and meant to write to you. You have such knowledge and experience in Dhamma and knowledge of Pali and it is so good you share this with us. I thought that you must have been busy with your many tasks, also helping others, as always. Your input is much appreciated, as always. Nina. op 23-12-2005 14:09 schreef abhidhammika op suanluzaw@...: > Dear Howard, Tep, Nina, Joop, Robert K, Mike N and all > > How are you? 53868 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:27am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, upasaka_howard Hi, Suan - In a message dated 12/23/05 8:12:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, suanluzaw@... writes: > > > Dear Howard, Tep, Nina, Joop, Robert K, Mike N and all > > How are you? > > Thank you, Howard, for having written a serious post if with some > flaws. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Certainly possible! :-) --------------------------------------- > > You wrote: > > "Abhidhamma, and more so, it seems, the commentarial tradition, > presume a theory of discrete quanta as being what are "real". This > conceptual picture is one which few if any of its proponents have > direct knowledge of, but even though this theory is not directly > confirmed and is not put forth in the suttas, it is taken to be > Buddha's truth (as opposed to Gospel truth ;-), and everything that > is then taken up for consideration is forced to fit this scheme." > > You seem to assume that Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka implies a theory of > discrete quanta as realities, and that Abhidhamma Pitaka contradicts > Sutta Pitaka when you asserted that 'this theory is not directly > confirmed and is not put forth in the suttas'. > > Do you realise that realities (paramattha dhammaa)taught in Sutta > Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka are the same? Those realities, if other > than nibbana, are dependently-arisen and thoroughly impermanent > (aniccam) in both Pitakas. --------------------------------------- Howard: For the most part, yes. The distinction I'm pointing to is, IMO, an important but very subtle one. --------------------------------------- > > Please review the following two statements from Sutta Pitaka. > > 1. "imasmim sati idam hoti, imassuppaadaa idam uppajjati," > Section 1, the First Sutta in Udana, Khuddaka Nikaaya. > > "When there is this condition, there is this consequence; upon the > arising of this condition, this consequence arises." > > 2. "imasmim asati idam na hoti, imassa nirodhaa idam nirujjhati," > Section 2, the Second Sutta in Udana, Khuddaka Nikaaya. > > "When there is not this condition, there is not this consequence; > upon the vanishment of this condition, this consequence vanishes." > > The Buddha was making those two statements in connection with the > processes of dependent origination and the reverse processes of it. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. ---------------------------------------- > > I would like you to pay special attention to the terms vanishment / > cessation (nirodhaa) and vanishes / ceases (nirujjhati) in the > second Sutta. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Okay. ---------------------------------------- > > Now, Howard, what do you think? When a reality as a consequence > vanishes upon the vanishment of another reality as its condition, is > there the completeness of vanishment or cessation of the realities > under consideration? ---------------------------------------- Howard: Vanishing is complete. Gone is gone. I am not taking a Sarvastivadin eternalist position. At some time a dhamma is in effect, and later on it is not to be found - it is fully gone, it is nonexistent. Anicca is the the fact that no conditioned dhamma remains. All that I am pointing to as questionable, though not necessarily false, is the common sense assumption of pinpointable, precise moments of arising and cessation, delimiting discrete packet-like phenomena. At present there is no fear "in me." Later there may be. Still later that fear will be gone. When the fear exists, it is truly present - it is actual, it is real. But exact beginnings and endings, commonplaces of expectation gained from our day-to-day conventional viewing of the stories we call "the world," are like quicksilver when we try to grasp them. Is it possible that it is merely human limitations that make them such, and that the film-strip view of matters is actually correct? Why sure. My point was not to demonstrate conclusively otherwise, but just to put forward what I see as the inessential nature of the packet view. -------------------------------------------- > > If you answered Yes to my question, then impermanence taught by the > Buddha in Sutta Pitaka is thorough and absolute. -------------------------------------------- Howard: And I don't question it at all! I am *certain* of the tilakkhana, and in a thoroughgoing manner. -------------------------------------------- > > Remember that the Buddha was teaching nibbana in terms of cessation > as the reverse processes of dependent origination in the second > Sutta. The Buddha said the following in the second Sutta. > > "Evametassa kevalassa dukkhakkhandhassa nirodho hoti." > > "Thus, there is cessation of this mere aggregate of misery." > > What can we infer from the Buddha's Sutta Teaching on Dependent > Origination and the Reverse Process Of Dependent Origination? > > We can infer that realities do not exist in advance of their > conditions because the Buddha said "When there is not this > condition, there is not this consequence" in the second Sutta of > Udana. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Agreed! Nothing arises without all the conditions for its arising in place. ------------------------------------------ > > We can also infer that conditioned realities happen as events with > begining points and end points as the the Buddha said "When there is > this condition, there is this consequence; upon the arising of this > condition, this consequence arises" (for beginning points )in the > first Sutta of Udana and "upon the vanishment of this condition, > this consequence vanishes" (for end points) in the second Sutta of > Undana. ------------------------------------------- Howard: No, that we cannot. It is natural for us to expect an exact time of arising and an exact time of cessation based on our conventional and not-so-closely-examined experience. It seems strange to us that matters could be otherwise. But the belief in precise moments of initiation and cessation is, I believe, comparable to the belief that the world consists of a flat, circular disc encompassed above by a massive dome of a sky. That is how it looks, and that is how the ancients saw it. But it needen't be that way in reality, and, in fact, closer examination has shown it to not be that way. The statement of conditionality does not imply or require precise points of initiation and cessation. -------------------------------------------------- > > And the Buddha had direct knowledge of Dependent Origination and the > Reverse Process Of Dependent Origination. > > The Buddha said in the first Sutta of Udana as follows > > " pa.ticcasamuppaadam anulomam saadhukam manasaakaasi" > > "The Buddha Bhagavaa objectizes well the forward process of > Dependent Origination." > > The Buddha said in the second Sutta of Udana as follows > > " pa.ticcasamuppaadam pa.tilomam saadhukam manasaakaasi" > > "The Buddha Bhagavaa objectizes well the reverse process of > Dependent Origination." > > Thus, I am afraid Howard might not have known what he was saying > when he wrote "This conceptual picture is one which few if any of > its proponents have direct knowledge of" and "All the Dhamma > including the tilakkhana, the four noble truths, dependent > origination, all of it, remains without the atomic perspective. (Or > so it seems to me.)" ----------------------------------------- Howard: Respectfully, I disagree. :-) ----------------------------------------- > > By now, if you are a quick learner :-), you would become able to > accept that Abhidhamma Pitaka does not contradict Sutta Pitaka when > the former teaches conditioned realities (paramattha dhammaa) as > having beginning points and end points and as undergoing thorough > impermanence. > > With regards, > > Suan > > www.bodhiology.org > ===================== 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) 53869 From: "mlnease" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 8:51am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP mlnease Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > Hi Mike > Going back to my original post, I was just trying to explain to Joop > that 'Right' in the case of the 3 virati cetasikas did not necessarily > connote the Eightfold Path factors. > > Sorry if I caused confusion! Thanks again--the confusion was all mine. Cheers, mike 53870 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/23/2005 8:29:52 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > By now, if you are a quick learner :-), you would become able to > accept that Abhidhamma Pitaka does not contradict Sutta Pitaka when > the former teaches conditioned realities (paramattha dhammaa) as > having beginning points and end points and as undergoing thorough > impermanence. > > With regards, > > Suan Hi Suan A couple of points if I may... What would you say to those "Abhidhammists" who claim that the end of one citta is the condition for the arising of the next citta? Isn't this a direct contradiction of the Buddha's dependent origination formula? -- This ceasing, that arises? -- As far as having discreet beginning points and ending points to states, I don't see any evidence that's the way the Buddha meant impermanence to be understood. There are many references in the Suttas to the Buddha describing impermanence as the "wearing away" and gradual alteration of states. The Buddha described his teaching and advancing through it as "gradual." The way I understand his teaching on things being impermanent -- is that too is gradual. "Things" are empty because they don't actually exist in the way the mind thinks about them. The Buddha said paraphrasing -- "he who sees the arising of the world does not believe in the non-existence of the world; he who sees the end of the world does not believe in the existence of the world." After this statement the Buddha goes on to describe dependent origination. It seems to me Abhidhammist's have taken the opposite extreme --and believe in complete existence and non-existence (of dhammas). TG 53871 From: "Larry" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 9:40am Subject: Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 Hi Sukin, Let's set the theories aside and talk about conventional reality. Do you think you exist? If so, how so? Do you think your body is you? Is discursive thinking you? Something else? Larry 53872 From: "m. nease" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 11:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, mlnease Hi TG and Suan, Hope you don't mind my butting in: ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 9:01 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, > "Things" are empty because they don't actually exist in the way the mind > thinks about them. > The Buddha said paraphrasing -- "he who sees the arising of the world does > not believe in the non-existence of the world; he who sees the end of the > world > does not believe in the existence of the world." After this statement the > Buddha goes on to describe dependent origination. It seems to me > Abhidhammist's have taken the opposite extreme --and believe in complete > existence and > non-existence (of dhammas). If by ""Things"" you also mean 'the world', this reminded me of a post of Htoo's, Htoo I hope I'm not taking your words out of context here: 50005 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Mon Sep 12, 2005 3:48am what is 'the world'? "The world is 'pancupadaana-kkhandhaa'. Pancupadaana-kkhandhaa are viewed as impermanent. This is very true and you can test now. 'Akaliko' will be proved. Do 'pancupadaana-kkhandha' have any soul-essence? You can answer for yourself. Are 'pancupadaana-kkhandha' not liable to suffering? You can asnwer for yourself. 'Sabbe sankhaaraa aniccaa, yadaa pa~n~naaya passati'. 'Sabbe sankhaaraa dukkhaa, yadaa pa~n~naaya passati'. 'Sabbe dhammaa anattaa, yadaa pa~n~naaya passati'." In this context 'the world' refers to the aggregates (specifically of attachment)--not to the concept of the world (even though, as I think Sukin pointed out recently, the concept of the world depends on misunderstanding of the aggregates). Since you have suggested that "Abhidhammist's" commit wrong view by way of both eternity- and annihilation-view, I was also reminded of this from Atthasaalinii: "...For owing to the fact that all [wrong] views are included by the eternity and annihilation views [together], all these beings who hold [wrong] views are dependent on those two kinds of [wrong] view...'This world, Kaccaayana, mostly depends on two things, on existence and non-existence' (S ii 17); and here, "existence" (atthitaa) is eternity, "non-existence" is annihilation (uccheda)." Dispeller 2281 Your comments seem to suggest that those with confidence in abhidhamma believe that an instant of existence is equal to eternal existence AND that cessation is equivalent to non-existence. The idea that an infinitesimally brief moment equals eternity seems to me a very strange--maybe mystical--construction. Though I wouldn't call myself an "Abhidhammist", I see nothing in any of the pitakas to suggest this or either the eternity or the annihilation view. My apologies if I've misconstrued your comments--no offense intended. mike 53873 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 11:40am Subject: Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, buddhistmedi... Dear Suan ('Abhidhammika') - >Suan: How are you? Tep: I am okay. Thank you. You wrote to Howard : > Suan: > You seem to assume that Pali Abhidhamma Pitaka implies a theory of > discrete quanta as realities, and that Abhidhamma Pitaka contradicts > Sutta Pitaka when you asserted that 'this theory is not directly > confirmed and is not put forth in the suttas'. > > Do you realise that realities (paramattha dhammaa)taught in Sutta > Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka are the same? Those realities, if other > than nibbana, are dependently-arisen and thoroughly impermanent > (aniccam) in both Pitakas. ... ... ... ... > > Now, Howard, what do you think? When a reality as a consequence > vanishes upon the vanishment of another reality as its condition, is > there the completeness of vanishment or cessation of the realities > under consideration? Tep: I don't think the fact that the paramattha-dhamma(except Nibbana) are both dependently co-arisen and anicca is a clear-and-firm basis for the "theory of discrete quanta as realities". Neither do I think that the Sutta-pitaka clearly (in black and white) puts forth such a theory. Further, I have no doubt that "realities (paramattha dhamma)taught in the Sutta Pitaka and Abhidhamma Pitaka are the same". But my confusions generally arise because of some "commentarial notes" as well as some invented Abhidhamma/Paramattha-dhamma concepts (by several DSG members) that the Buddha did not teach. Happy Holidays ! Sincerely, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Suan - > > In a message dated 12/23/05 8:12:01 AM Eastern Standard Time, > suanluzaw@b... writes: > > > > > > > Dear Howard, Tep, Nina, Joop, Robert K, Mike N and all > > > > How are you? > > (snipped) 53874 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 11:24am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Buddha's Dependent Origination dacostacharles Hi Icaro, I am sorry Ícaro, but I am a plain English kind of guy. You totally lost me. But if you are saying that DO is so advance that it is impossible for a commoner to understand it; then I disagree. You can never know what is in the mind of another. From what I have gathered, D.O. is a concept developed by the Buddha and not based on older thought (something that the Buddha could have used as a basis). So, to say it is complex, deep, and far reaching would mainly apply to the time of its inception. At that time, people were not use to thinking that way. Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta -----Original Message----- From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of icarofranca Sent: Tuesday, 20 December, 2005 11:36 To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: [dsg] Re: The Buddha's Dependent Origination Hi Charles! >------------------------------------------------------------------- > We can only speculate about how well most Buddhists know D.O. in >comparison > to the Venerable Ananda Thera at the time he told the Buddha that >he knew it > very well. >------------------------------------------------------------------ The Htoo´s reply to Tep Sastri is very clever, direct to main point. The Paticca-Sammupada - or the Dependent origination - is usualy the last item to be mastered in Buddhistic teaching. It´s so imense in purpose and scope that in The Dhammasangani - the first Abhidhamma´s treatise - its main featuras are considered as above the scope of all the book "... the rest of this matter ( about Kusala and Akusala, hetu and ahetu Dhammas, and so on)can be found at the paticca-sammupada ( Dependent origination)". Keeping efforts on the right tracks, one could only try to attain Paticca-sammupada after Samma-Sati and Samma-sammadhi. <....> 53875 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 0:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. nilovg Hi Sukin and Larry, It is more a subtle sense of self, clinging to me, me, my precious seeing, my precious body and life. Since we study the dhamma there is not coarse wrong view, but we can say that we have not realized the anattaness of dhammas. It will be good to pursue this in Bgk in Febr. Nina. op 23-12-2005 05:06 schreef Sukinder op sukinder@...: > > " Is there any experience that you think, "I am this experience"?" > > The answer is no. 53876 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 0:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Atomized, Digitized, nilovg Hi Howard, Our observation of realities is darkened by ignorance, and because of wrong view we have a wrong interpretation of reality. Everything is so blurred. I learnt that through the development of the stages of insight it all becomes clear. These stages are not only dealt with in the Commentaries, also in the Path of Discrimination, which you also have. Look at p.53, comprehension of groups (and these are the five khandhas which are past, future, present, etc.), until p. 71, fruition. The demarcation between nama and rupa becomes clear at the first tender stage of insight. Later on there is comprehension of the arising and falling of groups, then it becomes more precise at the first stage of principal insight: precise knowledge of a dhamma as it arises and falls away. After that contemplation of dissolution, bhanga ñaa.nana: pañña discerns the demarcations of the dhammas more and more precisely. It turns more towrads the falling away of dhammas. We cannot try to grasp all this, only pañña can when it has been developed to that stage. When time comes, and it will if we follow the right Path with detachment. Nina. op 23-12-2005 16:27 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > But exact beginnings and endings, commonplaces of expectation > gained from our day-to-day conventional viewing of the stories we call "the > world," are like quicksilver when we try to grasp them. 53877 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 0:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:sati and focussing nilovg Hi Matheesha, thank you for your sympathetic post and all the trouble going into my points. Adding some personal experience makes things clearer. I cannot react to everything, but I can choose a point now and then. op 22-12-2005 23:13 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...: >> Kh. Sujin is not a teacher to whom we report progress or > regression. We >> listen and are grateful for reminders of: 'what about this > moment'. > > M: So your sati is conditioned from outside? At that moment > intention would arise, awareness will be directed from pannati to > the present experiencing. Who is to say there is no lobha? But I > think it can work. ------- N: You are a fine observer. Yes, lobha always coming in, it is a mixture of kusala and akusala. Lots of conceit: I am listening, I am developing understanding, I, I, I. What you said about desire for samadhi can also be applied in the case of desire for insight: One realizes that expectations do not help, are counteractive. You asked: Sati conditioned from outside? There are many factors. Kusala formerly done, living in the right place, associating with the right friend in Dhamma. It also comes from inside, the accumulated conditions play their part, one must be ready to receive the Dhamma. The Atthasalini (p. 100) speaks of a concurrence of conditions and explains the term samaya, occasion. I repost what I wrote before in my Visuddhimagga studies: When we learn about all the different factors that are necessary conditions for the arising of one moment of kusala citta with paññaa we are reminded that kusala citta does not belong to us and that it falls away immediately. Kusala citta is very rare and even more so kusala citta with paññaa. We have accumulated a great amount of akusala and thus there are conditions for its arising very often. This is a pungent reminder to develop all kinds of kusala for which there is an opportunity.> And this is one of my favorite passages: "It shows the extreme shortness of the time in the occurrence of kusala citta and it points out . It stresses that advice has been given that we should have strenuousness and earnestness in pa.tivedha, realization of the truth, since this is very difficult: " Nina. 53878 From: nina Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 0:18pm Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 6 nilovg Dear friends, Hi Howard, > Our observation of realities is darkened by ignorance, and because of wrong > view we have a wrong interpretation of reality. Everything is so blurred. > I learnt that through the development of the stages of insight it all > becomes clear. > > These stages are not only dealt with in the Commentaries, also in the Path > of Discrimination, which you also have. Look at p.53, comprehension of > groups (and these are the five khandhas which are past, future, present, > etc.), until p. 71, fruition. > The demarcation between nama and rupa becomes clear at the first tender > stage of insight. Later on there is comprehension of the arising and falling > of groups, then it becomes more precise at the first stage of principal > insight: precise knowledge of a dhamma as it arises and falls away. After > that contemplation of dissolution, bhanga ñaa.nana: pañña discerns the > demarcations of the dhammas more and more precisely. It turns more towrads > the falling away of dhammas. > We cannot try to grasp all this, only pañña can when it has been developed > to that stage. When time comes, and it will if we follow the right Path with > detachment. > Nina. > ========================= This could well be so, Nina. I only pointed out that it need not surely be so. The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a variety materials, and it is far more Abhidhammic/commentarial in style and flavor than any of the other suttas. So, I am not entirely persuaded by this. ;-) But thank you very much for pointing this out. 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) 53881 From: "Larry" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. lbidd2 Hi Nina, In your own experience, do you think clinging is you? Larry --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Sukin and Larry, > It is more a subtle sense of self, clinging to me, me, my precious seeing, > my precious body and life. Since we study the dhamma there is not coarse > wrong view, but we can say that we have not realized the anattaness of > dhammas. It will be good to pursue this in Bgk in Febr. > Nina. > op 23-12-2005 05:06 schreef Sukinder op sukinder@k...: > > > > > " Is there any experience that you think, "I am this experience"?" > > > > The answer is no. > 53882 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > >>Hi again Joop >> >>.... >> >> > >Hallo Jon, Connie, all > >Your message to me crossed mine to Connie (53809) on nearly the same >subject. >Three remarks on it >First: thanks for the information about the three cetasikas; it made >things more clear (especially your way of thinking). > >Second: as I said to Connie, it's strange that the three cetasikas >themselves are formulated positive (about doing) but that the header >of the three (virati) is negative, (about not doing). >I will say it more straight: even it's not according the Pali Canon, >I prefer the positive formulation of ethics. For example: "give dana" >works better than "don't keep all your money for yourself". > > I'm still not sure exactly what you mean by 'ethics'. It seems you include dana, but in the texts the two are always treated as different heads of kusala, as far as I know. As I see it, the need for a group of 'restraints' arises from the fact that the mental factors involved in wholesome restraint from akusala (right speech, action and livelihood) are different from those involved in the performing of other forms of kusala such as being considerate, helpful or generous, or having metta or compassion, or developing insight. As far as formulation goes, I think that as long as one understands the underlying dhammas involved, there is scope for variation in the manner of formulation. >Third. I understand your emphasis of this three as cetasikas, and not >so much as Path-factors. But still it surprises me you don't talk >about ethical behavior. >I have now on my desk 'An Introduction to Buddhist Ethics', by Peter >Harvey, I think one of the main books about this topic. >He explains (what I partly already knew; and I know he does it in >negative terms): > >" 'Wrong livelihood' is trade in: weapons (being an arms salesman), >living beings (keeping animals for slaughter; Ven. Payutto sees this >as also including controlling prostitutes), meat (being a >slaughterer, meat salesman, hunter or fisherman), alcoholic drink, or >poison. …Wrong livelihood is also seen as any mode of livelihood that >is based on trickery or greed. >…While the early texts only give a short list of types of 'wrong >livelihood', in the modern context, a Buddhist might add others to >the list. For example: doing experiments on animals … or even working >in advertising, to the extent that this is seen as encouraging greed, >hatred and delusion, or perverting the truth." (p. 188) > > As I said in an earlier post, I do not see Right Livelihood as being a matter of the kind of occupation one pursues. I know that the Buddha mentioned certain occupations to be avoided, no doubt because the pursuit of those occupations necessarily involved some wrong livelihood, but I don't believe he was there laying down a definition of right or wrong livelihood. (Nina cites one such sutta in her 'Cetasikas' at the link I gave last time.) Jon 53883 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 9:01am Subject: Path of Discrimination -- Howard TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/23/2005 2:33:17 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: This could well be so, Nina. I only pointed out that it need not surely be so. The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a variety materials, and it is far more Abhidhammic/commentarial in style and flavor than any of the other suttas. So, I am not entirely persuaded by this. ;-) But thank you very much for pointing this out. With metta, Howard Hi Howard Just a side note... The Path of Discrimination, to me, is a commentary to the Suttas in the spirit of the Suttas and is more "Suttic" in flavor (in terms of content) than "Abhidhammic." However, I do see it as a commentary and not as authoritative as the 4 Great Nikayas. That being said, I haven't noticed any discrepancies in regards to the Suttas. TG 53884 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 10:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Path of Discrimination -- Howard upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 12/23/05 5:01:59 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Hi Howard > > Just a side note... > > The Path of Discrimination, to me, is a commentary to the Suttas in the > spirit of the Suttas and is more "Suttic" in flavor (in terms of content) > than > "Abhidhammic." > > However, I do see it as a commentary and not as authoritative as the 4 > Great > Nikayas. That being said, I haven't noticed any discrepancies in regards > to > the Suttas. > > TG > ====================== I mainly distinguish it from the other suttas by its quoting of suttas and discussing the content, but not itself being in the typical sutta style of the Buddha giving a lesson to monks and nuns at a particular place and involving particular people. It is a laying out of teaching that is quite different in style from all the other suttas. I don't see it to be at all sutta-like, but I agree with you that it is closer to commentarial than Abhidhammic. As to content, it is a multi-topic pastiche. Moreover, it includes topics that don't appear in other suttas. For example, there is a discussion at one point of emptiness and sabhava that almost approaches the Mahayana in perspective, a fact that fits well with its late introduction. Now, there is much in it that I like. But what I like or dislike isn't a proper measure of it being original word of the Buddha. With metta, Howard P.S. I have obtained the following at the site http://www.palikanon.com/english/pali_names/pa/patisambhidamagga.htm : _________________________________ Patisambhidámagga The twelfth "book" of the Khuddaka Nikáya. It really belongs to the literature of the Abhidhamma type, and describes how analytical knowledge can be acquired by an arahant. It presents a systematic exposition of certain important topics of Buddhism. It is possible that, before the development of the extant Abhidhamma Pitaka, it passed as one of the Abhidhamma treatises. The book consists of three Vaggas: Mahá Vagga, Yuganaddha Vagga Paññá Vagga and each Vagga contains ten topics (kathá). The treatment of the various topics is essentially scholastic in character, and whole passages are taken verbatim from the Vinaya and from various collections of the Sutta Pitaka, while a general acquaintance with the early Buddhist legends is assumed. (Published by the P.T.S. There is an index in J.R.A.S., 1908). A commentary exists, written by Mahánáma, a Thera of Ceylon, and called Saddhammappakásiní. ----------------------------------------------- /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) 53885 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:13pm Subject: Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, matheesha333 Hi Howard, and others, I agree with your idea that there is a certain blurring of the edges...and also with the idea that it doesnt make any difference to the teachings as we know it. It's interesting to note what the mind is doing when the blurring is happening (or around that time). It's possible to feel the shift in awareness from one thing to the next. As for reality I go with what TG has expressed -since something arises it cant be said to not exist, and since it passes away it cant be said that it does. As for the content of what arises, preceeding dhammas are very important. I also believe in the insubstantiality of what we perceive as in the phena sutta, similar to the sayings underneath your posts. metta Matheesha 53886 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re:sati and focussing matheesha333 Hi Nina, > And this is one of my favorite passages: > "It shows the extreme shortness of the time in the occurrence of kusala > citta and it points out . It stresses > that advice has been given that we should have strenuousness and earnestness > in pa.tivedha, realization of the truth, since this is very difficult: difficult for the mind as stringing pearls in the dark by a lightning-flash, > because of its extremely short duration.>" M: Moments of insight are very short, and very rare. Moments of direct experiencing maybe much more common. One doesnt always lead to the other. You mentioned about rebirth consciousness in another post, and how it can be understood if other dhammas are understood. I would like to know what your understanding is on this - or if you could direct me to a place where i can find it. I have my theories on it but would like to have a clearer view of this. metta Matheesha 53887 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 11:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha (and TG, and all) - In a message dated 12/23/05 7:15:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, dhammachat@... writes: > > Hi Howard, and others, > > I agree with your idea that there is a certain blurring of the > edges...and also with the idea that it doesnt make any difference to > the teachings as we know it. It's interesting to note what the mind > is doing when the blurring is happening (or around that time). It's > possible to feel the shift in awareness from one thing to the next. ---------------------------------------- Howard: :-) Excellent. ---------------------------------------- > > As for reality I go with what TG has expressed -since something > arises it cant be said to not exist, and since it passes away it > cant be said that it does. --------------------------------------- Howard: Indeed! As in the Kaccayangotta Sutta. --------------------------------------- > > As for the content of what arises, preceeding dhammas are very > important. -------------------------------------- Howard: Yep, essential. -------------------------------------- > > I also believe in the insubstantiality of what we perceive as in the > phena sutta, similar to the sayings underneath your posts. -------------------------------------- Howard: One of my very favorite suttas! :-) -------------------------------------- > > metta > > Matheesha > ================== 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) 53888 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:55pm Subject: Vism.XIV,210 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV [PERCEPTION, FORMATIONS AND CONSCIOUSNESS] 210. This should also be understood of the perception, etc., associated with any kind of feeling. [D. CLASSES OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE AGGREGATES] Having understood this, again as regards these same aggregates: Knowledge of aggregates is classed (1) as to order, and (2) distinction, (3) as to neither less nor more, (4) and likewise as to simile, (5) and twice as to how to be seen, (6) and as to good for one seeing thus-- This is the way of exposition that a wise man should rightly know. ********************** 210. ta.mta.mvedanaasampayuttaana.m pana sa~n~naadiinampi evameva veditabba.m. kamaadivinicchayakathaa eva.m viditvaa ca puna etesveva -- khandhesu ~naa.nabhedattha.m, kamatotha visesato. anuunaadhikato ceva, upamaato tatheva ca.. da.t.thabbato dvidhaa eva.m, passantassatthasiddhito. vinicchayanayo sammaa, vi~n~naatabbo vibhaavinaa. 53889 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 3:08am Subject: Re: An Interview With Htoo sukinderpal Hi Larry, Larry: Let's set the theories aside and talk about conventional reality. ==================== Its too late, I can't escape from the consequence of acquired theory. ;-) But seriously, where is this line of distinction dividing theory and so called 'experiencing'? I think some people look to Abhidhamma as an abstract theory, much like philosophy or even mathematics. And we proponents of Abhidhamma are seen almost as if we are 'machines' spouting out 'theory' at the press of a button. Actually I don't even think that people of other religions and ways of thought, when questioned about what they 'think', will be speaking from 'theory' uninformed by experience. I know this is not what you are questioning, but I just thought that I should mention it since it seems that there are quite a few people who think that Abhidhammikas are necessarily only `theorists'. Yes the more the "Theory" seems to be 'right' as compared to the conclusions we otherwise make, the more therefore it is generally taken as the main reference in discussions. Besides, the theory is about realities!! And there can be `understanding' of these even while we discuss about them. So even when referring to 'conventional reality' and any experience of this, the understanding would still be in relation to the knowledge of dhammas, and this would be "my experience" at the moment!! But I'll try to answer your question more directly. ;-) Larry: Do you think you exist? If so, how so? Do you think your body is you? Is discursive thinking you? Something else? I don't question the fact that any experience including the ones you mention here, can at anytime, condition a glimpse and understanding of anatta at whatever level. But I do question it when someone thinks that this is the result of the particular line of enquiry, more so when this is then taken as a `method' by means of which such understanding will arise. If one is comes in with a conceptual understanding of realities, I say that the very asking of the question is wrong?! As I said in a post to Htoo, that 'you don't create a self, just so that you can then break it down to components. Instead each element of experience must 'appear' to sati as and when it arises'. Your method seems to be merely a process of 'thinking' along certain lines. You asked me firstly to take as a starting point my 'conventional self'. Wouldn't it have been better that I realize that this is only 'thinking'? You then ask if I take this to exist or not. To me this is already proliferation of view to a good degree. Then you go on to enquire about different elements of experience, and this sounds to me as being rooted in `self- view'. So any answer that I get will be my own pre-conceived understanding of anatta, but I think the experience of anatta itself is quite different. It is seen "now", and not at the end of some `thought out' program. Merry Christmas to you and all. :-) Metta, Sukin. 53890 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 3:22am Subject: [dsg] Is Anicca Halfway Or Thorough ? Re: The Atomized, Digitized, abhidhammika Dear Nina It is very kind of you to think of me. Yes, I have been busy with many issues, and will be even more so from New Year onward. But, I will try my best to drop by from time to time. Merry Chrastmas! With regards, Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Suan, I was just thinking of you and meant to write to you. You have such knowledge and experience in Dhamma and knowledge of Pali and it is so good you share this with us. I thought that you must have been busy with your many tasks, also helping others, as always. Your input is much appreciated, as always. Nina. 53891 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 3:37am Subject: Re: The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination abhidhammika Dear Nina, Howard, TGrand and all Howard wrote: "The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a variety materials," No, The Path Of Discrimination is taught by Sariputta, the Right- hand Disciple of the Buddha. Therefore, it embodies the teachings as old as or older than some Canonical teachings because Sariputta attained parinibbana before the Buddha. With regards Suan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Nina - > > In a message dated 12/23/05 3:40:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, > vangorko@x... writes: This could well be so, Nina. I only pointed out that it need not surely be so. The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a variety materials, and it is far more Abhidhammic/commentarial in style and flavor than any of the other suttas. So, I am not entirely persuaded by this. ;-) But thank you very much for pointing this out. With metta, Howard 53892 From: "robmoult" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 4:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samatha & Vipassana robmoult Hi Sarah, Vijita (and all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Vijita (& Rob M), > > [RobM,Vijita is another new member from Malaysia, from Penang - see > #53245] > ===== Vijita, welcome to DSG. I was in Penang earlier this week (working) but I live in KL. I teach Abhidhamma on Sunday mornings at Brickfields Vihara. I have been more of a lurker lately, but expect to become more active in the new year. ===== > --- Vijita Teoh wrote: > > > Hi Sarah & all, > > > > It's not too late for me to introduce myself to the group. Actually, > > I'm just a lurker until I came across a post about Samatha better than > > Vipassana. I find both methods have different function to play, it's > > neither one better than the others. This subject caught my attention & I > > feel that I must get involved to get things corrected. ===== My only comment on the issue of "Samatha and Vipassana" is that in the Kimsuka Sutta (SN XXXV.245 in BB or SN XXXV.204 on ATI), the Buddha referred to the two as "a swift pair of messengers". I interpret this as saying that they work together as a pair. ===== > p.s Rob M: I thought of you and the process of cittas some time ago when I > read Nina's quote from K.Sujin in #50496 about the 17 moments of citta and > how 'the development of panna is not a matter of counting moments of > citta' etc. Also, Nina's post to you #50734 which you might not have seen. > The more detailed posts she refers to on processes of cittas can probably > be found under 'Processes of cittas' in U.P. > > You mentioned (off-list) that you'd been reading the Vimuttimagga with > more detail. Perhaps you'd like to share this. The Vimuttimagga is pretty > controversial of course:-) > ================== ===== As you know, I have a particular interest in the citta process. In previous posts, I postulated that the details of the citta process were not articulated until the Abhidhimatthasangaha (10th century) since they were not explicitly laid out as a sequence in the Visuddhimagga (5th century). Lately, I have been reading the Vimuttimagga (The Path of Freedom) and found a wealth of new information. The Vimuttimagga was one of the sources used by Buddhaghosa (in an earlier post, I citied Buddhaghosa's reference to the Vimuttimagga in the area of carita). Sarah, I am not clear at all as to why you consider the Vimuttimagga to be controversial. In his introduction to the Visuddhimagga, Ven. Nanamoli Thera says, "The Vimuttimagga itself contains nothing at all of the Mahayana, its unorthodoxies being well within the 'Hinayana' field". Here is a quote from Chapter 11 of Vimuttimagga, "The Five Methods" under "Simile of the Thread" and "Simile of the Mango" (p256 in my text). The Simile of the Thread (possibly taken from DN2 Samanna-phala Sutta) Here the life-continuum is the consciousness-faculty of becoming. It is likened to the drawing of thread. Adverting is conditioned by the visible object at the eye-door. Through the visible object entering the field (of presentation?), the life-continuum vibrates, and is followed by adverting to the visible object. Adverting which depends on the eye is followed by discerning. This is followed by reception in the sense of experience. Then follows examining in the sense of (investigating) experience. After that becomes determining in the sense of understanding. Determining proceeds and is followed by apperception according to action. Apperception proceeding in the sense of full cognition and not in the sense of means is followed by registration of effect. After that consciousness lapses in the life- continuum. Simile of the Mango Q. What is the illustration? A. The king sleeps in his character, having closed the door. A slave-girl massages the king's feet. The queen sits near him. Ministers and courtiers are ranged in front of him. A deaf man is guarding the door with his back against it. At the time the king's gardener, bringing mangoes, knocks at the door. Hearing that's sound, the king awakes, and says to the slave- girl, "Go and open the door". The slave goes to the door-keeper and speaks to him in gesture. That deaf door-keeper understands her wish and opens the door and sees the mangoes. The king takes his sword. The slave brings the fruits and hands them to a minister. The minister presents them to the queen. The queen washes them and sorts the ripe from the raw, places them in a vessel and gives them to the king. Getting them, the king eats the fruits. After eating them, he talks of the merit or non-merit of them. After that he sleeps again. The sleeping king is the life-continuum. The king's gardener, bringing mangoes and knocking at the door, is the impact of the visible object on the eye-door. The awakening of the king by the knocking at the door, and his command to open the door, illustrate the vibration of the life-continuum. The slave-girl's gestures, in requesting the door-keeper to open the door, is adverting. The opening of the door by the deaf door-keeper and the sight of mangoes illustrate eye-consciousness. The taking of the sword by the king and the handing of the fruits by the slave to the minister illustrate reception. The presentation of the fruits by the minister to the queen is examining. The actions of washing, sorting, placing the fruits in a vessel and offering them to the king illustrate determining. The eating by the king is apperception His talking as to the merits or demerits of the fruits illustrate registration of effect, and his sleeping again is the lapsing into the life-continuum. Very interesting, eh? The citta process clearly laid out in a text that predates the Visuddhimagga! It is also interesting that the mango simile used to describe the citta process is different from the mango simile used by Sumangala's commentary to the Abhidhammatthasangaha to describe the same process. Metta, Rob M :-) 53893 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 6:25am Subject: The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard and Suan - > > Howard wrote: > > "The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late > addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a > variety materials," > > Suan: > No, The Path Of Discrimination is taught by Sariputta, the Right- > hand Disciple of the Buddha. Therefore, it embodies the teachings as old as or older than some Canonical teachings because Sariputta > attained parinibbana before the Buddha. > It is strange that this Abhidhammika knows the great Arahant Sariputta and the Patisambhidamagga better than Howard. Regards, Tep ===== 53894 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:53am Subject: The Nadi Sutta: A Lovely and Helpful Metaphor upasaka_howard Hi, all - In the following sutta, the Buddha describes the worldling as a person being swept along by the river of experience and who, instead of letting go to freely move along, smoothly, and without impediment, grasps frantically and desperately at what he encounters - the kasa grasses (rupa), kusa grasses (vedana), reeds (sa~n~na), birana grasses (sankhara), and trees (vi~n~nana), all ungraspable and leading only to hurt and disaster. What a dramatic picture of the panic and upset of samsara. __________________ SN XXII.93 Nadi Sutta The River Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS page: S iii 137 CDB i 949 Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. Copyright © 1997 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 1997 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said, "Monks, suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains, going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it, and — holding on to both banks — kasa grasses, kusa grasses, reeds, birana grasses, & trees were growing. Then a man swept away by the current would grab hold of the kasa grasses, but they would tear away, and so from that cause he would come to disaster. He would grab hold of the kusa grasses... the reeds... the birana grasses... the trees, but they would tear away, and so from that cause he would come to disaster."In the same way, there is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form. That form tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster."He assumes feeling to be the self, or the self as possessing feeling, or feeling as in the self, or the self as in feeling. That feeling tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster."He assumes perception to be the self, or the self as possessing perception, or perception as in the self, or the self as in perception. That perception tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster."He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self, or the self as possessing fabrications, or fabrications as in the self, or the self as in fabrications. Those fabrications tear away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster."He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness. That consciousness tears away from him, and so from that cause he would come to disaster."What do you think, monks — Is form constant or inconstant?""Inconstant, lord.""And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?""Stressful, lord.""And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?""No, lord.""...Is feeling constant or inconstant?""Inconstant, lord."..."...Is perception constant or inconstant?""Inconstant, lord."..."...Are fabrications constant or inconstant?""Inconstant, lord."..."What do you think, monks — Is consciousness constant or inconstant?""Inconstant, lord.""And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?""Stressful, lord.""And is it fitting to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?""No, lord.""Thus, monks, any body whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every body is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'"Any feeling whatsoever..."Any perception whatsoever..."Any fabrications whatsoever..."Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: every consciousness is to be seen as it actually is with right discernment as: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'"Seeing thus, the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with the body, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is fully released. With full release, there is the knowledge, 'Fully released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'" Revised: Sunday 2005-12-04 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn22-093.html With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./      (From the Diamond Sutra) 53895 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 2:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination upasaka_howard Hi, Tep (and Suan) - In a message dated 12/24/05 9:29:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > > Hi, Howard and Suan - > > > > >Howard wrote: > > > >"The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late > >addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a > >variety materials," > > > >Suan: > >No, The Path Of Discrimination is taught by Sariputta, the Right- > >hand Disciple of the Buddha. Therefore, it embodies the teachings > as old as or older than some Canonical teachings because Sariputta > >attained parinibbana before the Buddha. > > > > It is strange that this Abhidhammika knows the great Arahant Sariputta > and the Patisambhidamagga better than Howard. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Tep, I know that you have much reverence for the great Sariputta. I do as well. But it isn't a certainty, is it, that the Patisambhidamagga was created by him? Is it possible that some of it came from him, and some not? Is it possible that none did? Similarly, is it a certainty that the Abhidhamma Pitaka was spoken by the Buddha to devas, and then repeated to Sariputta, who further taught it to the Sangha? As to your question, if, indeed, Suan is correct about the Path of Discrimination being created by Sariputta and I am incorrect, why should there be anything surprising in this? There is no particular reason for me to be more "in the know" than Suan, who is far more of a Buddhist scholar than I. In particular, inasmuch as the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Patisambhidamagga are both associated in the Theravadin tradition with Sariputta, it is natural that an Abhidhammika would accept this as fact. --------------------------------------------------- > > > Regards, > > > Tep > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 53896 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 7:24am Subject: Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 Hi Sukin, Merry Christmas. My only agenda was to investigate the conventional sense of self. For example, for me, self certainly seems to be lasting, and it is bound up with a vague and somewhat incoherent sense of agency (control) and independence, which goes with it. But there is also something else which I can only call 'personality'. This is what identifies me as uniquely me. It seems to be unchanging throughout the years somewhat like certain characteristic features of my face. But I can't tie it directly to the khandhas. Nimitta (sign) seems like it might be close, but that's not really it. I'm not trying, necessarily, to explain this in abhidhamma terms, but rather to simply understand it. What I'm looking for is what exactly I really believe is my self. I know this goes against everything you believe in, but do you think you could bring yourself to look at your own experience and investigate your own sense of self? I would be particularly interested if you can find this mysterious 'personality', or something similar. Larry 53897 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 3:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Sukin) - In a message dated 12/24/05 10:25:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > > Hi Sukin, > > Merry Christmas. My only agenda was to investigate the conventional > sense of self. For example, for me, self certainly seems to be lasting, > and it is bound up with a vague and somewhat incoherent sense of agency > (control) and independence, which goes with it. But there is also > something else which I can only call 'personality'. This is what > identifies me as uniquely me. It seems to be unchanging throughout the > years somewhat like certain characteristic features of my face. But I > can't tie it directly to the khandhas. Nimitta (sign) seems like it > might be close, but that's not really it. I'm not trying, necessarily, > to explain this in abhidhamma terms, but rather to simply understand > it. What I'm looking for is what exactly I really believe is my self. > > I know this goes against everything you believe in, but do you think > you could bring yourself to look at your own experience and investigate > your own sense of self? I would be particularly interested if you can > find this mysterious 'personality', or something similar. > > Larry > ======================== I think that what you are doing, your introspective searching for what is the basis for your sense of self, may be a very useful and powerful thing to do. The matter of personal identity is quite mysterious and subtle and hard to see. Intensive, effortful looking is a kind of koan approach, it seems to me, an approach which attempts to avoid discursive thinking and to directly see. It is the sort of approach that I think, for some people, can well result in a shattering insight into the unreality of identity and the truth of anatta. But it is also an approach that, if carried out as required, is very, very hard - extraordinarily demanding and exhausting, and which could be dangerous, I think, unless one is quite stable psychologically and already has acquired considerable equanimity. 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) 53898 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:42am Subject: Planarian Worms and unique streams of consciousness christine_fo... Hello all, Hello all, A question arose in a discussion on cloning .... "How about planarian worms, which, when they are cut in half, may sometimes regenerate fully from the two halves, turning into two worms which then go about their separate ways? A worm presumably has one mindstream; but when it's cut in half, and both halves actually continue to live, how is it possible for there suddenly to be two? Where does the second one come from? Is the cutting-in-half of the original worm a form of birth? Which worm "houses" the mindstream originally present in the single worm? And so forth. Really, I'd love to hear the Buddhist take on this..." http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/dec98/913165926.Zo.r.html I have to wonder about this ... nothing has died, but a mindstream (which I believed was unique, encapsulated as it were), seems to have been replicated ... Any thoughts? metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 53899 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 6:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/24/2005 8:11:12 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: > >Suan: > >No, The Path Of Discrimination is taught by Sariputta, the Right- > >hand Disciple of the Buddha. Therefore, it embodies the teachings > as old as or older than some Canonical teachings because Sariputta > >attained parinibbana before the Buddha. > > > > It is strange that this Abhidhammika knows the great Arahant Sariputta > and the Patisambhidamagga better than Howard. ----------------------------------------- Howard: Tep, I know that you have much reverence for the great Sariputta. I do as well. But it isn't a certainty, is it, that the Patisambhidamagga was created by him? Is it possible that some of it came from him, and some not? Is it possible that none did? Similarly, is it a certainty that the Abhidhamma Pitaka was spoken by the Buddha to devas, and then repeated to Sariputta, who further taught it to the Sangha? As to your question, if, indeed, Suan is correct about the Path of Discrimination being created by Sariputta and I am incorrect, why should there be anything surprising in this? There is no particular reason for me to be more "in the know" than Suan, who is far more of a Buddhist scholar than I. In particular, inasmuch as the Abhidhamma Pitaka and the Patisambhidamagga are both associated in the Theravadin tradition with Sariputta, it is natural that an Abhidhammika would accept this as fact. Hi Howard, Suan, All ... Howard is much kinder than I (a news flash!). I guess a large part of what led me to Buddhism was the ability to know something and verify it as reasonably certain...if not perfectly accurate. It is a major turn-off to hear/read Buddhists making claims that they can't honestly be certain of. Even the 4 Great Nikayas are to some extent taken on faith as being the Buddha's own words. But due to the internal consistency of the 4 Great Nikayas it meets my expectations of being an "auteur" collection of work that points to a single author. Yet still I would say that it -- is believed -- that the Buddha taught the 4 Great Nikayas. To see a Buddhist scholar un-qualifying claim that Sariputta taught the Patisambhidamagga turns me off to the whole process; i.e., of engaging other minds in seeking the truth. I believe that Sariputta being the author of the Patisambhidamagga is a reasonable calculation. But comparing the style of Sariputta's teachings in the Suttas and the Path of Discrimination's style, they are not really the same but they are similar. Similar enough to believe the possibility exists! Yet, is there no doubt at all that Sariputta taught the Path of Discrimination? Could it be better put to say -- It is believed that Sariputta taught the Path of Discrimination ... or even that -- It is likely Sariputta taught the Path of Discrimination. (I'm a big fan of Both Sariputta's teaching and the Path of Discrimination, but that's not what this is about.) Side note: I agree with the notion that the material in the Path of Discrimination does more closely reflect the milieu within the Suttas. I believe it is a very early commentary, probably the earliest one on record. In like vein, I am always amazed to hear the faithful Abhidhammists who flatly claim the Buddha taught the Abhidhamma. The same people who split hairs over the exact nature of "dhammas", the precise nature of cittas, and what exactly are and are not "realities." Many of these same people seem to "throw caution to the wind" when it comes to "knowing" who the author of the Abhidhamma was. Or maybe, because there is virtually no internal consistency in style between Abhidhamma and Suttas, they need a "savior" (The Buddha) to bring it all together? Without claiming the Buddha was the author, they'd be hard-pressed to creatively interpret the Suttas to try to make them fit the Abhidhamma commentarial viewpoints. (I realize they don't believe they do this.) I think the Abhidhamma is a work of genius and an amazing analysis of the Suttas. I think it can bring more depth and richness to the Suttas. But I think the chances of them being composed by the same author as the Suttas is unlikely based on "internal" analysis as to style and lack of any historical connection. It just doesn't make sense that for 45 years a person teaches in a precise style in order to enlighten minds and then, all of a sudden, comes up with a method 100% different. Also, the "myth" of it being taught in the heaven worlds is the same kind of tact the Mahayanists take to support their Sutras authenticity. Interesting. None of this is to take anything away from an Abhidhammist adherent that benefits from the study and practice that correlates to the Path to Freedom that an enlightened mind has blessed us with. TG 53900 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. nilovg Hi Larry (and Howard), op 23-12-2005 22:34 schreef Larry op LBIDD@...: > In your own experience, do you think clinging is you? ------- N: Good you insist. In my whole life there has been and is clinging after seeing, hearing, etc. and countless times we do not know this. As soon as we think about or define what was seen, the citta is akusala when the objective is not dana, sila or bhavana. As Howard said, there are no clear demarcations in our experiences. That is, so long as there is no paññaa that sees things as they are. I am glad Howard brought up this point. Thus, we believe that we still see, but already we cling while defining. There seems to be a compact mass of dhammas. We fail to analyse the whole into different elements. We read in Visuddhimagga XIV, 213:< for there are those people who, while teachable, have fallen into assuming a self among the five aggregates owing to failure to analyze them; and the Blessed One is desirous of releasing them from the assumption by getting them to see how the [seeming] compactness of mass [in the five aggregates] is resolved> To return to your Q: , I can answer the second half: I am so used to clinging to all the objects, this clinging (this mass of seeing and clinging, hearing and clinging) is as it were belonging to myself. But as to experience: this is not experienced by insight. Nina. 53901 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Atomized, Digitized, nilovg Hi Howard, op 23-12-2005 22:23 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > ========================= > The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late > addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a variety > materials, > and it is far more Abhidhammic/commentarial in style and flavor than any of > the > other suttas. ------ N: Let us just look at the messages in the Path of Discrimination. The description of the stages of insight demonstrate so clearly that a growing insight turns more away from conditioned dhammas and inclines towards the unconditioned dhamma. It shows that paññaa leads to detachment. To me that is relevant. In many suttas we have also an Abhidhamma style, see M.N. suttas on elements, and K.S. very short suttas. As you know, this was discussed here before. Nina. 53902 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:24am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:sati and focussing nilovg Hi Matheesha, op 24-12-2005 01:26 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...:> > M: Moments of insight are very short, and very rare. Moments of direct > experiencing maybe much more common. One doesnt always lead to the > other. ----- N: direct experiencing: what type of citta experiences directly, that is the question. ------- M: You mentioned about rebirth consciousness in another post, and how it > can be understood if other dhammas are understood. I would like to > know what your understanding is on this - or if you could direct me to > a place where i can find it. I have my theories on it but would like > to have a clearer view of this. ------ N: Is it this: < The cittas arising in processes experience objects through the six doorways. The bhavanga-citta does not experience an object impinging on one of the six doorways, it experiences the same object as the rebirth-consciousness, and this is the object experienced shortly before dying in the preceding life. The object of the bhavanga-citta does not appear.> We cannot know this object. --------- M (from former post): Heres a question: what amount of dhamma does one need to know, to understand tilakkana? ------ N: One need to know all types of realities that appear through the six doors, in daily life. In the process during which enlightenment is attained, the dhamma that appears is realized as impermanent, or dukkha or anattaa. Each person is different, and it cannot be said how many dhammas are known as they truly are in the case of this or that person. Even arahats are different, they have accumulated different degrees of pañña, but all of them have eradicated all defilements. Nina. 53903 From: nina Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:24am Subject: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 7. nilovg dear friends, Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:46am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > > I'm still not sure exactly what you mean by 'ethics'. It seems you > include dana, but in the texts the two are always treated as different > heads of kusala, as far as I know. > Hallo Jon Best to end this thread by some short remark: Jon: "I'm still not sure exactly what you mean by 'ethics'. It seems you include dana, but in the texts the two are always treated as different heads of kusala, as far as I know." Joop: I'm afraid the gap between us is too big. I started this part of the thread by stating that you could not translate "right livelihood" as one of the aspects of the NEP in a "moment". I asked you if you could translate "live livelihood" to a cetasika; I think you didn't. When I talk of 'ethics' , it's about ethical behavior. Without the behavioral aspect thinking about ethics is useless. And at the behavioral level I combine the three (sila) aspects of the NEP, the Five precepts and other ethical points like giving dana without problems. That brings me back to the original question of Tep: ethics, that is ethical behavior, is needed for panna and samadi. Metta Joop 53905 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:58am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Buddha's Dependent Origination icarofranca Hi Charles!!! >----------------------------------------------------------------- > But if you are saying that DO is so advance that it is impossible >for a > commoner to understand it; then I disagree. You can never know >what is in > the mind of another. >------------------------------------------------------------------ No No No!!!! I never said that the poor commoner won´t ever be able to masterize such details... You see, Buddha explained out all details about his doctrine clearly, without doubts. The Paticca-sammupada is very clear about the progression of life, beginning with sheer ignorance and ending with oldness, decay and death. I am just pointing out the fact that many Abhidhamma´s surveys and ideas don´t even reach such formal complex ideas - that´s not necessary by the Dhammasangani´s author, for example: it´s a viewpoint - something like "If you are interested in more details, please consider with clever attention the D.O.". >------------------------------------------------------------------- > > From what I have gathered, D.O. is a concept developed by the >Buddha and not > based on older thought (something that the Buddha could have used >as a > basis). So, to say it is complex, deep, and far reaching would mainly apply > to the time of its inception. At that time, people were not use to thinking > that way. >----------------------------------------------------------------- More or less. People sometimes find hard to conceive single ideas like the beginning and the end of life, the humankind correct perspective about it and so on. At this point Buddha´s dispensation it´s only a register of facts and no about Metaphysics. Metta and Merry X´Mas!!! Ícaro > > Best Regards, > Charles A. DaCosta > > > -----Original Message----- > From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > [mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of icarofranca > Sent: Tuesday, 20 December, 2005 11:36 > To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [dsg] Re: The Buddha's Dependent Origination > > Hi Charles! > > >------------------------------------------------------------------ - > > We can only speculate about how well most Buddhists know D.O. in > >comparison > > to the Venerable Ananda Thera at the time he told the Buddha that > >he knew it > > very well. > >------------------------------------------------------------------ > > The Htoo´s reply to Tep Sastri is very clever, direct to main > point. > The Paticca-Sammupada - or the Dependent origination - is usualy > the last item to be mastered in Buddhistic teaching. It´s so imense > in purpose and scope that in The Dhammasangani - the first > Abhidhamma´s treatise - its main featuras are considered as above > the scope of all the book "... the rest of this matter ( about > Kusala and Akusala, hetu and ahetu Dhammas, and so on)can be found > at the paticca-sammupada ( Dependent origination)". Keeping efforts > on the right tracks, one could only try to attain Paticca- sammupada > after Samma-Sati and Samma-sammadhi. > > <....> > 53906 From: "icarofranca" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 0:07pm Subject: A MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL DSG MEMBERS! icarofranca Hello folks!!! A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year for all brave and bold Dhamma students, commoners, intellectuals, interested people, profound readers,clever questioners, argute explainers and women!!!![:D] Just kidding, ladies... Best Regards to our good mods, Jon and Sarah, To Upasaka Joe, Larry, Nina Van gorkon, Sukinderpal, TGrand,Ken H, Connie, James, Bhikkhu Samahita,Robmoult,Chistine Forsyth, Azita, Charles, Joop, Tep and all others newbies and veteran ones!!!!!!!! []s Ícaro 53907 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 4:41pm Subject: Re: A MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL DSG MEMBERS! buddhatrue Hi Icaro and All, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Hello folks!!! > > A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year for all brave and bold Dhamma > students, commoners, intellectuals, interested people, profound > readers,clever questioners, argute explainers and women!!!![:D] > > Just kidding, ladies... > > Best Regards to our good mods, Jon and Sarah, To Upasaka Joe, Larry, > Nina Van gorkon, Sukinderpal, TGrand,Ken H, Connie, James, Bhikkhu > Samahita,Robmoult,Chistine Forsyth, Azita, Charles, Joop, Tep and all > others newbies and veteran ones!!!!!!!! Thank you and Merry Christmas to you also! > > []s > > Ícaro > Metta, James 53908 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 6:19pm Subject: Re: Planarian Worms and unique streams of consciousness rjkjp1 Dear Christine, Some Buddhists believe that the mind base is in the brain! For them such phenomena as you describe must seem strange. But the mindbase is incredibly subtle. Mentality depends on materiality. If there is suitable materiality then consciousness can arise. In the case you describe it is simply a new life, a new rebirth. Robertk In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > Hello all, > > A question arose in a discussion on cloning .... > > "How about planarian worms, which, when they are cut in half, may > sometimes regenerate fully from the two halves, turning into two > worms which then go about their separate ways? A worm presumably has > one mindstream; but when it's cut in half, and both halves actually > continue to live, how is it possible for there suddenly to be two? > Where does the second one come from? Is the cutting-in-half of the > original worm a form of birth? Which worm "houses" the mindstream > originally present in the single worm? And so forth. Really, I'd > love to hear the Buddhist take on this..." > http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/dec98/913165926.Zo.r.html > > I have to wonder about this ... nothing has died, but a mindstream > (which I believed was unique, encapsulated as it were), seems to > have been replicated ... > > Any thoughts? > > metta > Chris > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > 53909 From: "Sukinder" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 6:23pm Subject: Re: experiences as self. sukinderpal Dear Nina and Larry, ================================ > It is more a subtle sense of self, clinging to me, me, my precious seeing, > my precious body and life. Since we study the dhamma there is not coarse > wrong view, but we can say that we have not realized the anattaness of > dhammas. It will be good to pursue this in Bgk in Febr. Larry: Is there any experience that you think, "I am this experience"? ================================ I look forward to the discussions with you in Feb. I realize that mana and lobha are almost always present and with me it is not only the subtle and intermediate forms, but very much so the gross ones as well. It seems to be just around the corner after any experience through any of the doorways. In fact not only does it quickly follow wrong view, but it can come immediately after a moment of right understanding as well. I however took Larry's question to be a statement about ditthi (the more gross levels) and actually in general, it is also that I like to discuss more about this. Often we forget when we talk about other dhammas that understanding them has to be "right", i.e. to have "right view" of those dhammas. This is why this must always be stressed. Nina, you suggested to me a couple of weeks ago that I encourage Mr. Knowing the new participant at our Saturday discussions, to join DSG. He says that he has a kind of 'reaction' towards the T.V. and monitor screen, so he can't do that. But you will be pleased to know that his interest and understanding on Dhamma is quite good, and that he seems to fit quite effortlessly with us at the discussions. :-) Metta, Sukin 53910 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 6:27pm Subject: The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination buddhistmedi... Dear Howard - Having "much reverence" for any great Arahant to me means that we have saddha much stronger than doubts in his teachings. Do you ever doubt the Buddha's Teachings (in the suttas) as much as you doubt the Patisambhidamagga? Of course, you may ask the same question about authenticity of the suttas. [Howard: Is it possible that some of it came from him, and some not? Is it possible that none did? ] A good answer I can offer you is to carefully read over the Patisambhidamagga: your doubt will greatly reduce while your saddha will greatly increase. Nobody else could have written the Patisambhidamagga except a great Arahant whose wisdom was second only to the Buddha. >Howard: Similarly, is it a certainty that the Abhidhamma Pitaka was spoken by the Buddha to devas, and then repeated to Sariputta, who further taught it to the Sangha? As to your question, if, indeed, Suan is correct about the Path of Discrimination being created by Sariputta and I am incorrect, why should there be anything surprising in this? Tep: I do not have an answer to your first question, Howard. It is like any other kinds of speculative question, there is no logical answer to it. To give you the answer, I gottta be there when it happenned ! I was surprised because he seemed to have studied the Patisambhidamagga (not only Khun Sujin's Teachings and the abhidhamma commentaries) while you, who has shown vast knowledge of Buddhism, have not. :-) Sincerely, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > (snipped) > > >Howard wrote: > > > > > >"The Path of Discrimination, however, I believe is a rather late > > >addition to the Canon, it appears to be a pasting together of a > > >variety materials," > > > > > >Suan: > > >No, The Path Of Discrimination is taught by Sariputta, the Right- > > >hand Disciple of the Buddha. Therefore, it embodies the teachings > > as old as or older than some Canonical teachings because Sariputta attained parinibbana before the Buddha. > > > > > > > It is strange that this Abhidhammika knows the great Arahant Sariputta and the Patisambhidamagga better than Howard. > > ----------------------------------------- (snipped) 53911 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:23pm Subject: Re: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 6 philofillet Hi Nina and all > and in all details. I do not disregard or neglect to consider the things I > read, such as bhavanga-citta. On the other hand, shallow panna can guide us away from trying to figure out or think too much about things that are beyond us. I've heard A. Sujin encourage people to study the realities that arise in daily life (such as seeing) more than the realities that do not arise to awareness. (ie bhavangas) But good to know about them, fascinating to consider how and why citta processes arise out of a stream of bhavangas. This is beyond our control. Seeing, for example, arises conditioned by the arising of visible object and eye- sense, both rupas. (Those who need suttas can find this in SN 35) Fascinating stuff that involves a paradigm shift from the way we would have gone on misunderstanding seeing had the Buddha not enlightened it. >When there is bhavanga-citta, life-continuum, > realities do not appear, but why is it that, after the bhavanga- citta has > fallen away, realities do appear, is that not amazing? Yes, it is! Fascinating. Miraculous. And without the Buddha, we would have never known about it. Phil 53912 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:12pm Subject: Re: Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 6 philofillet Hello again > >When there is bhavanga-citta, life-continuum, > > realities do not appear, but why is it that, after the bhavanga- > citta has > > fallen away, realities do appear, is that not amazing? > > Yes, it is! Fascinating. Miraculous. And without the Buddha, we > would have never known about it. Just after posting the above, came across the following passage in Survey of Paramattha Dhammas: "The painter takes his picture for something important, and even so the citta of the ordinatry person, who is not an ariyan, takes the sense objects which are only rupas for beings, people or self; for a thing which exists, and he will continue to do so in each new life." It made me think of how we are conditioned to have so much interest in people, in their stories, in their characters, in their appearance. Are we really so eager to give this up in order to gain liberation from samsara? As "we", if we, are moved by conditions through stages of enlightenment, moments of interest in people and things will become weaker and rarer until it is only the dusty residue of past accumulated tendencies. Objects that give rise to enthusiasm will increasingly be paramattha dhammas rather than concepts, I assume. We are so deeply conditioned to enjoy people. Deep deep conditions that make aspirations for enlightenment seem a bit hypocritical to me sometimes. I think we play at seeking detachment even while we are revelling in all our attachments. Sorry, just a bit dubious about the whole Noble Dhamma Enterprise these days. Phil 53913 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL DSG MEMBERS! sarahprocter... Hi Icaro & all (Suan & occaional posting veterans, see*) --- icarofranca wrote: > Hello folks!!! > > A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year for all brave and bold Dhamma > students, commoners, intellectuals, interested people, profound > readers,clever questioners, argute explainers and women!!!![:D] > > Just kidding, ladies... .... :-)) Thank you and I'd also like to wish a Very Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to all you wonderful contributors here and the men too!!! (:D) j/k too after one of those cold plunges in the sea (it may seem like clearing the ice to those from Sunny Queensland and Brazil, but it would seem like a hot summer's day to some from northern Europe, Canada, NY or other really icy spots:). Followed by a bowl of noodles for Jon and a cup of green tea for me on the empty beach, reading and appreciating all your posts and good reminders... And now, a little rest, some phone calls to family members, a few presies to open and some editing of recordings and maybe a post or two later... ... Thanks again, Icaro, to you and all for your good wishes .... and all > others newbies and veteran ones!!!!!!!! ... Likewise....we're nearing the 5th anniversary of DSG...only made possible by you all!!! Metta, Sarah *p.s Very nice to see some real veterans popping in after a break like Suan with one of his 'Lion's Roars'....pls keep them up when you have time!! ================= 53914 From: connie Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 10:52pm Subject: Re: Ethical considerations nichiconn Dear santa Joop, Joop: The most sharp I see that Abhidhamma (or Theravada in general) ethics many times is formulated in a negative way (not doing this, abstain of doing that etc.) is about the three cetasika's samma-vaca, samma- kammanta and samma-ajiva. All three are formulated in a positive way! But for some reason I cannot understand these three together in the Abhidahmma-system has a header with the title abstinences (virati)! The same, in Sutta language, with the Five preceps. Connie, you use a formal Pali term for refugee's phrase but in my mind my Five precepts are positive: right speech, etc Connie: Ok, they are still going to "have the respective characeristics of non-transgression by bodily misconduct, by wrong speech, and by wrong livelihood. Their function is to shrink back from evil deeds. They are manifested as the abstinence from such deeds. Their proximate causes are the special qualities of faith, shame, fear of wrongdoing, fewness of wishes, etc. They should be regarded as the mind's aversion to wrongdoing." CMA, Guide to II.6 Is that more to your liking? I had to laugh at myself... I think, "that Joop is stubborn!" and then read Tep saying (with some frustration?) that people will believe what they want to believe. But (like Joop) I am disagreeable and have to argue with the Tep in my head even when it would seem like we're in agreement the very second before: No. Belief is conditioned and there is no changing it just because we would like to think this or that. I would like to believe any number of things, but just can't. And who else would be able to change my mind when even I can't? Joop: There is no reason for example to formulate giving dana negative (is "adana" a Pali-term?) I'm not a Pali-knower and I remember Nina (I think) has explained the prefix "a" does not make a term negative in Pali. For exemple in 'adosa', but still I prefer to say 'metta' in stead of 'adosa' (if it's correct that these two exactly mean the same). But this is something else, this is not about language but about a way of thinking behind it. About the 'natural' human tendency to do bad, evil, things. Connie: Adana is (n) cooked rice & (v) eating. Aadaana is 'grasping' as in 'getting ahold of understanding'; pa.tivedha. Giving (up) is daana. "Perfections" quotes the Commentary to the "Basket of Conduct" <<1. Giving (daana) has the characteristic of relinquishing; its function is to dispel greed for things that can be given away; its manifestation is non-attachment, or the achievement of prosperity and a favourable state of existence; an object that can be relinquished is its proximate cause.>> Then, Nina also writes: <> Sarah gave me homework on 'nirutti' once upon a time, but I'll save my comments on language for now. Joop: Another theory, maybe more Mahayana, is that human nature is good, only something prevents the appearing of it. I prefer a more neutral theory: human nature has both tendencies. Fot this reason and because I think it has a better effect in influencing people (especially Westerners) it's better to use a positive formulated ethics. Connie: Maybe that 'something' is the 3 poisons - lobha, dosa and moha. Maybe their opposites are stronger when they do arise, but they don't arise as often? Maybe talking about 'human nature' makes it seem like it is some lasting thing. Not to put words in your mouth, but I'm reminded of the Mahayana's "Buddha Nature", the inherent or fundamental 'nirvana' or 'enlightenment' in each sentient being (or even rocks and such according to some!). There was this pretty influential Mahayana dude called Chih'i (Tendai / Tien-tai) who said, in effect, that evil was inherent even in this 'buddha nature' and that's pretty attractive thinking to a lot of people. Pretty twisted to me. But I guess it might be more Charles' concern with his Mahayana DO picture? But I'm rambling again, so let's just move back to "Perfections" quoting the "Commentary to the Basket of Conduct": <<2. Virtue (siila) has the characteristic of composing (siilana); co-ordinating (samaadhaana) and establishing (pati.t.thana) are also mentioned as its characteristic. Its function is to dispel moral depravity, or its function is blameless conduct; its manifestation is moral purity; shame and moral dread are its proximate cause.>> Is that acceptable? Joop: There is one other aspect, I recognised that in our discussion with Jon about the NEP, path or moments. With my example of "right livelihood": it's easier to perceive this path-factor as one moment when formulated negative: the moment of insight that till now one was wrong. And it's easier to perceive it as permanent moral behavior when formulated positive (Of course I'm only interested at the mundane level, I'm not yet a streamenterer). Your last remark "Support for the three right ways of life? Guarding/restraint of the sense faculties." What I try to do in my formal vipassana meditation (and in daily life as a result of it) is: be transparant. An image of for example a beautiful woman comes in my eyes, as a result desire arises in me; I observe both phenomena in me and then that event is already history, I let it behind me. It's a idealistic picture but it's what I try to do. Connie: I think I see what you mean, but no image of a human comes to our eyes; that only appears after the fact in our thinking about what was seen. Joop: Connie, you know the Pali Canon better than I do. You talk about "avoid (vaaritta) and do (caarita)" but most emphasis get "avoid". My question to you (and others) is: isn't a superior interpretation of the Canon that ethics should be formulated positive? Connie: What superior interpretation could there be than to learn Paa.li and let the texts speak to us on their own terms as long as we still need words? You keep on STUBBORNLY talking about Westerners and re-interpretation and I keep remembering "Points of Controversy", Book XXI, 1 "Of our Religion" which is one of my favorites, so I will quote the whole thing here: <> I have plenty more to say, but this is too long and disjointed already. peace, connie 53915 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 6:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 12/24/05 9:28:27 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > Dear Howard - > > Having "much reverence" for any great Arahant to me means that we > have saddha much stronger than doubts in his teachings. Do you ever > doubt the Buddha's Teachings (in the suttas) as much as you doubt the > Patisambhidamagga? ------------------------------------------ Howard: No, never. There might be one or two suttas that I am not 100% certain were the word of the Buddha, but other than that, no. But, Tep, trust in the Buddha and in Sariputta is not the same as trust in what specific works have been claimed to have been theirs. These forms of trust are not one and the same. Your trust in the Buddha is unshakable, I'm sure. Do you believe that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is the Buddha word? If I'm not mistaken, you do not. Should those who do then question your saddha in the Buddha? Would that be appropriate? Please seriously consider that. --------------------------------------- Of course, you may ask the same question > > about authenticity of the suttas. [Howard: Is it possible that some of it > came from him, and some not? Is it possible that none did? ] A good > answer I can offer you is to carefully read over the > Patisambhidamagga: your doubt will greatly reduce while your saddha > will greatly increase. Nobody else could have written the > Patisambhidamagga except a great Arahant whose wisdom was > second only to the Buddha. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: Tep, I have heard almost the identical words with regard to the Buddha and the Abhidhamma Pitaka! ----------------------------------------------- > > >Howard: Similarly, is it a certainty that the Abhidhamma Pitaka was > spoken by the Buddha to devas, and then repeated to Sariputta, who > further taught it to the Sangha? > As to your question, if, indeed, Suan is correct about the Path of > Discrimination being created by Sariputta and I am incorrect, why > should there be anything surprising in this? > > Tep: I do not have an answer to your first question, Howard. It is like > any other kinds of speculative question, there is no logical answer to it. > To give you the answer, I gottta be there when it happenned ! > > I was surprised because he seemed to have studied the > Patisambhidamagga (not only Khun Sujin's Teachings and the > abhidhamma commentaries) while you, who has shown vast > knowledge of Buddhism, have not. :-) ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I have studied it, Tep, and I have found considerable value in it. But I have not studied it thoroughly. Overall, it is not my cup of tea, not like the rest of the Sutta Pitaka. That may well be my deficiency - I don't claim otherwise. --------------------------------------------- > > > Sincerely, > > > Tep > > ====================== 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) 53916 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:24pm Subject: Re: Planarian Worms and unique streams of consciousness christine_fo... Dear Robert, hmm hmmmm .... what sort of rebirth is this? I would have expected there to have been the normal process - whatever is necessary for a being to be reborn as a Planarian Worm ... maybe eggs or live births. But this was merely cutting a part off an adult worm ... not the way they usually, naturally, reproduce. I thought there were only a few Planes of Existence where beings were 'spontaneously reborn'. Does this mean that the animal realm here is one of those? Somehow, I had assumed that it was Deva and Hell realms .... metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear Christine, > Some Buddhists believe that the mind base is in the brain! For them > such phenomena as you describe must seem strange. But the mindbase > is incredibly subtle. > Mentality depends on materiality. If there is suitable materiality > then consciousness can arise. In the case you describe it is simply > a new life, a new rebirth. > Robertk > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" > wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > Hello all, > > > > A question arose in a discussion on cloning .... > > > > "How about planarian worms, which, when they are cut in half, may > > sometimes regenerate fully from the two halves, turning into two > > worms which then go about their separate ways? A worm presumably > has > > one mindstream; but when it's cut in half, and both halves > actually > > continue to live, how is it possible for there suddenly to be two? > > Where does the second one come from? Is the cutting-in-half of the > > original worm a form of birth? Which worm "houses" the mindstream > > originally present in the single worm? And so forth. Really, I'd > > love to hear the Buddhist take on this..." > > http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/dec98/913165926.Zo.r.html > > > > I have to wonder about this ... nothing has died, but a mindstream > > (which I believed was unique, encapsulated as it were), seems to > > have been replicated ... > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > metta > > Chris > > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > > > 53917 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 1:04am Subject: The Formless Dimensions ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The Crown of the 4 Infinitely Divine States (Brahma-Viharas): The release of mind by universal friendliness, if developed in association with the 7 factors of enlightenment, has the Beautiful Liberation as culmination... The release of mind by compassionate pity, if developed fully joined with the 7 factors of enlightenment, has the 1st formless absorption: The infinitude of space, as culmination... The release of mind by altruistic & mutual joy, if developed fully linked with the 7 factors of enlightenment, has the 2nd formless absorption: The infinitude of consciousness, as culmination... The release of mind by imperturbable equanimity, if developed in combination with the 7 factors of enlightenment, has the 3rd formless absorption: The sphere of nothingness, as culmination... So do these 4 divine & infinite states of friendliness, pity, mutual joy & equanimity, when cultivated together the 7 enlightenment factors of: Awareness, Investigation, Energy, Joy, Tranquillity, Concentration and Equanimity, lead to entry & absorption into these sublime formless dimensions... Source: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book V 115-21 Section 46: On The Enlightenment Factors. Linked with Friendliness: 54. 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 !!! <...> 53918 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 3:09am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 342- Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[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;-) ========================================== [Ch20 - Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)] When there is doubt one “wavers”, one is not sure about realities. The Dhammasangaùi (§425) describes doubt in different ways and states among others that it is “uncertainty of grasp”, “stiffness of mind”. The Atthasåliní (II, 259, 260) in its explanation of this paragraph of the Dhammasangaùi states: * "...“Fluctuation” is the inability to establish anything in one mode, thus, “Is this state permanent, or is it impermanent?” Because of the inability to “comprehend” there is “uncertainty of grasp”...." * As to “stiffness”, the Atthasåliní remarks that “mental rigidity” is the inability to come to a decision as to the object. We read: “Stiffness is the meaning. For perplexity having arisen makes the mind stiff....” When there is doubt one wonders about realities: “Is it such or is it such?” One wonders, for example, whether a reality is permanent or impermanent, or whether the reality which appears now is nåma or rúpa. When there is doubt there is mental rigidity, there is not the wieldiness of mind which is necessary for the understanding of realities. Doubt is to be considered as a “danger for attainment”; when there is doubt it is impossible to apply oneself to mental development. ***** Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[[to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 53919 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 3:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Introduction -> Let me say that I'm Phil and I want to learn about Vipassana sarahprocter... Hi Phil R (Howard, Nina & Lodewijk), Thank you for your long and very interesting introduction. --- randallparr2003 wrote: > I also wanted to say that I > started here with the email option but got overwhelmed with too many > messages and so I'm starting over as Sarah suggested and telling > something about myself. .... S: Thank you for this....I'm sure it is quite overwhelming to just 'jump' into DSG these days....I really recommend that newcomers consider just starting their own threads and ignorant other more detailed ones using lots of Pali terms in the beginning. (Also, if you don't wish to receive all the emails in your in-box, consider changing the setting on the home-page to 'no mail' or 'digest' (or ask us off-list for assistance.) You said you wished to learn more about vipassana and I appreciated Lodewijk's and Howard's messages and explanations. What does vipassana mean to you, Phil? How did you find these other replies? I don't think we need to 'avoid' hearing about catastrophes or being affected. But, in the end, what is the real inner peace that the Buddha taught do you think? I'd like to hear more of your ideas about these comments so far. [Btw, Nina, of course not everyone enjoys or benefits from live (or internet) discussion. I think it's the questioning, being questioned and careful considering which is important. Certainly Lodewijk considers and questions what he hears a lot. No rule about the 'format' it takes! Lodewijk, I hope you'll continue to add your well-considered comments to the list anytime, as you did for Phil R) Metta, Sarah (brought up as a WASP in 'Old' England, as you'd say, Phil. Now living in Hong Kong) ======== 53920 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 4:01am Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG sarahprocter... Hi Charles D, --- Charles DaCosta wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > Boy, I can see how it is useful, at times, to get rid of the old stuff > already addressed. I got a little lost but I think we are on the same > page. ... S: Please can you summarise 'the same page' conclusions as you see them and let me know where you got lost. I think it's an important thread that goes to the heart of the teachings, but no problem if you're ready to put it aside for now. ... > > The only points are labels and objects. We have to be careful when > mixing > them. It is good to ask what is really meant by a label because they are > often misleading, like the time I say "TREE" when I meant, "STOP, we are > crashing into something that is harder than I am." ... S: :-)lol..... Learning the right labels is what we're all used to doing in life. Learning and directly knowing what the realities are is what we're just beginning to learn about, thanks to the Teachings of the Buddha. .... .... > I am traveling to Hong Kong some time early next year. I think my > teacher is > trying to find a good cheap flat for me for 3 weeks. Do you know of any? .... S: Not really. Try 'The Wesley' hotel for good views of demonstrations in central H.K. or 'Silvermine Bay Hotel' on Lantau island if you wish to escape from them. Both have reasonably priced short-term flat-type arrangements I believe. Pls ask me anything else off-list. We'll look forward to meeting you and if it's after our visit to Bangkok in February, will be able to give you a copy of 'Survey' if it hasn't been sent out. Metta, Sarah ========= 53921 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 6:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: >Hallo Jon > >Best to end this thread by some short remark: > >Jon: "I'm still not sure exactly what you mean by 'ethics'. It seems >you include dana, but in the texts the two are always treated as >different heads of kusala, as far as I know." > >Joop: I'm afraid the gap between us is too big. >I started this part of the thread by stating that you could not >translate "right livelihood" as one of the aspects of the NEP in >a "moment". I asked you if you could translate "live livelihood" to a >cetasika; I think you didn't. > > I know you'd like to end this thread, but I'd just like to clarify an apparent misunderstanding. What I meant to say in my earlier posts was that, to my understanding, 'right livelihood' refers to the cetasika of that name that has the function of restraining from wrong speech or action in the course of one's work or livelihood. >When I talk of 'ethics' , it's about ethical behavior. Without the >behavioral aspect thinking about ethics is useless. >And at the behavioral level I combine the three (sila) aspects of the >NEP, the Five precepts and other ethical points like giving dana >without problems. > > On my reading, the teachings are to be understood at a deeper level than the behavioural one, in that the ethical quality of a person's behaviour depends on the ethical quality of the accompanying mental state. All aspects of kusala spoken of by the Buddha (dana, sila and bhavana) concern mind-states rather than behaviour, in my view. >That brings me back to the original question of Tep: ethics, that is >ethical behavior, is needed for panna and samadi. > > Each kind of kusala supports all the other kinds of kusala. It would be pointless for anyone to think that panna could be developed in isolation as it were, without the support of dana, sila and samatha. On the other hand, there is no specific level of dana, sila or samatha that is a prerequisite to the development of panna at the present moment. Jon 53922 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 6:19am Subject: The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard - I think the main point of your reply is the following: >Howard: Do you believe that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is the Buddha word? If I'm not mistaken, you do not. Should those who do then question your saddha in the Buddha? Would that be appropriate? Please seriously consider that. Tep: I know your trust in the Buddha is unshakable too. I like your honest and straightforward explanation about your saddha in the Buddha versus your doubt about the Abhidhamma-pitaka as the Buddha's words. Of course, they are not his words (unlike the suttas); but I never doubt that the third basket was not based on the Buddha's words. I agree with those who say that the Dhamma in the Abhidhamma-pitaka was the work of the greatest Genious Buddha. However, the Abhidhamma books are words of others and yet many abhidhammikas I know have problems confusing those words with the Buddha's. On the other hand, I do not blame you for having less saddha in the great Arahant Sariputta than mine. I just want to caution you, a hard-to- find Dhamma friend, to refrain from doubting so much before going through a thorough study of the Patisambhidamagga -- it is a real treasure. Happy holidays ! Yours truly, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Tep - > (snipped) > Howard: > I have studied it, Tep, and I have found considerable value in it. But > I have not studied it thoroughly. Overall, it is not my cup of tea, not like > the rest of the Sutta Pitaka. That may well be my deficiency - I don't claim > otherwise. 53923 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 7:21am Subject: Anatta and neuroscience jwromeijn Hallo all Not that it surprised me but more and more neuroscience comes to the same conclusion as the Dhamma: the 'self' is an illusion Here some Amazon-information about the (what I heard) best neurophilosophical book about it Metta Joop Being No One : The Self-Model Theory of Subjectivity by Thomas Metzinger Paperback: 711 pages Publisher: The MIT Press (September 1, 2004) ISBN: 0262633086 Book Description According to Thomas Metzinger, no such things as selves exist in the world: nobody ever had or was a self. All that exists are phenomenal selves, as they appear in conscious experience. The phenomenal self, however, is not a thing but an ongoing process; it is the content of a "transparent self-model." In Being No One, Metzinger, a German philosopher, draws strongly on neuroscientific research to present a representationalist and functional analysis of what a consciously experienced first-person perspective actually is. Building a bridge between the humanities and the empirical sciences of the mind, he develops new conceptual toolkits and metaphors; uses case studies of unusual states of mind such as agnosia, neglect, blindsight, and hallucinations; and offers new sets of multilevel constraints for the concept of consciousness. Metzinger's central question is: How exactly does strong, consciously experienced subjectivity emerge out of objective events in the natural world? His epistemic goal is to determine whether conscious experience, in particular the experience of being someone that results from the emergence of a phenomenal self, can be analyzed on subpersonal levels of description. He also asks if and how our Cartesian intuitions that subjective experiences as such can never be reductively explained are themselves ultimately rooted in the deeper representational structure of our conscious minds. Finally.The monster can be tamed. This book is very hard to review. There are many reasons for this. One is that I may be biased: I think this may be the most important book written about consciousness in the last couple of decades. Then there is the fact that the book is enormous in scope, (and not far in size either- it is 650 pages long), brilliantly written and argued, and succeeds in doing something few other related books do. Reading this book makes you feel that consciousness has been explained. It makes you feel that the monster has been tamed, that progress can be made, that those who believe there can be no sensible exxplanation for consicousness are just wrong. Now in reality, it is not obvious that consciousness HAS been explained. But one feels like it has. And this is why I think this book is superior to Daniel Dennetts ¨Consicousness explained¨, arguably the book regarded as the most significant and influential philosophical contribution in the field. After reading Dennett, few believed consicousness had been explaied. Even few felt like it had. This book is unique, and I believe it is a matter of time until its impact is made apparent. Metzinger wanted to show that the self can be explained in subpersonal terms, using representational analysis. He quickly noticed that since Selves are usually consicous entities, that he would first have to do this for consciousness. Imagine that. Having to explain consicousness to try to explain the self. And so, the book could be seen as divided in two. First, a theory of consicousness, and second, a theory of the self. I am by far more impressed with the former, although undoubtedly the latter is extremely interesting as well. Before proposing a number of theorethical entities supposed to play the explanatory role, Metzinger carefully analyses the conceptual tools necessary to understand the problem, and formulate solutions. Thus, he analyses the concepts of representation, mental model, phenomenal presentation, etc. His account is also almost completely positive; that is, he almost does not stop to defend his ideas, or to analyse other philosphical theories. He focuses on arguing step-by step for a conceptual edifice that may lead to the explanation of phenomenal states in terms of non-phenomenal objective relations. This part of the book alone seems to me to be one of the strongest formulations of a representational theory of mental states. Metzinger, then, is able to answer the question of what makes a mental state a conscious state. He argues that mental states have representational, and these states can have phenomenal content if the representational states meet some constraints. Consciously experienced content is content of an active phenomenal model, and phenomenal contents are all representational. The various constraints are the conditions that the representational content must meet in order for it to be a phenomenal content. Examples of these constraints are globality (integration into a global whole), activation in a window of presence, transparency. The constraints are what makes these ideas powerful. Metzinger analyses the constraints in representational, phenomenological, information-processing, functional and neural-implementation terms. He gives what could be seen as necesary and sufficient conditions for a mental state to be a consicous state. He presents a theory of consicousness. And a very sensible, conceptually simple, naturalistic, and powerful one. After doing this, he shows how his analysis can acomodate some abnormal phenomenons like blindsight, agnosia, and neglect. He then does much of the same last steps with the problem of the self. He defines concepts like subjectivity, self-hood, self-models. Then he proposes theorethical entities like the phenomenal self model, or the phenomenal model of the intentianality relation, to try to show how the conscious self might emerge. Here too metzinger argues that self content must meet some constraints to be considered phenomenal self content. He also tests his constructs against cases like anosognosia, multiple persoality, lucid dreams. In sum, Metzinger deals with everything from mental representation, to content, qualia, subjectivity, intentionality, self, and does it in carefully ordered and convincing ways. Metzinger is a philosopher, and the theory is mostly philsophical. But few philsophers include such careful empirical and neurobiological observations. Few philosophers have such knowledge of the extensive literature. Few are as convinced of the central role that scientific objective theorethizing must play. I must repeat that it is in no way evident that consciousness is explained in Metzingers book. But if there is a book that will set the conceptual framework that leads to such an explanation, it is this one. It is virtually imposible to explain his ideas concisely, and to understand them one has to follow his discussion completely. Therefore, I can do not much but to recomend that anyone interested in consicousness read this book. The book is quite technical and it is fairly long, however I believe that this should not stop the lay reader. The book is in my opinion simply too important. I have reviewed close to 100 books now, most of them on consicousness. I have said on numerous times that such or such a book is a must read. This one is the one I think more closely matches that description. 53924 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 7:21am Subject: Re:sati and focussing matheesha333 Hi Nina, > > M: Moments of insight are very short, and very rare. Moments of direct > > experiencing maybe much more common. One doesnt always lead to the > > other. > ----- > N: direct experiencing: what type of citta experiences directly, that is the > question. M: What does the abhidhamma say in this matter? > ------- > M: You mentioned about rebirth consciousness M: The bit you posted didnt seem like what i read recently from you. But let me get to the matter im interested in: is there anything we can know about rebirth consciousness and that whole process, which can be infered from what we are experiencing now - or is it completely different? > M what amount of dhamma does one need > to know, to > understand tilakkana? > ------ > N: One need to know all types of realities that appear through the six > doors, in daily life. In the process during which enlightenment is attained, > the dhamma that appears is realized as impermanent, or dukkha or anattaa. > Each person is different, and it cannot be said how many dhammas are known > as they truly are in the case of this or that person. Even arahats are > different, they have accumulated different degrees of pañña, but all of them > have eradicated all defilements. M: Yes, differnt people do understand to different degrees. Especially if you want to teach someone else, you need to know a lot more than otherwise. Someone my understand very well, but not have the words to express what s/he has experienced. But to get back to my question: how much does one have to understand/experience to understand tilakka - I think one at least needs to see arising and passing away of dhammas. I think this is a very significant nana/insight because it has been mention in the diigajanu (vyaggapajja) sutta as a definition for panna, which is a sermon to a lay person and seeing impermanance (accepting impermamance in everything -on faith or wisdom) has been mentioned as something which will mean atleast at the point of death, a person will become a sotapanna. This might be the easiest (possibly the most unsure) way of becoming a sotapanna! It also possibly involves keeping precepts very well as well. This is an area which seems to have received little attention, but is very important to us as buddhsts. metta Matheesha 53925 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 7:20am Subject: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi Joop > Hallo Jon Your remarks are to much a challenge to end this thread now, so here I go again. Jon: "What I meant to say in my earlier posts was that, to my understanding, 'right livelihood' refers to the cetasika of that name that has the function of restraining from wrong speech or action …" Joop: that's a surprise to me: "right speech" ((sammá-vácá) is something else as "right livelihood" (sammá-ájíva), as far as I know. Jon: "On my reading, the teachings are to be understood at a deeper level than the behavioural one, in that the ethical quality of a person's behaviour depends on the ethical quality of the accompanying mental state. All aspects of kusala spoken of by the Buddha (dana, sila and bhavana) concern mind-states rather than behaviour, in my view." Joop: Let's look at the word "deeper". It's a concept, not a ultimate reality. As a concept it's in fact a spatial metaphore; that something (for example the five khandas) has levels and that one level is at the surface and an other or several are under that surface; and that under the surface is deeper=more important=more essential that on the surface. Is it a correct concept? I think that that's not the case: why should the "ethical quality of a person's behaviour" be less essential than "the ethical quality of the accompanying mental state." Has the Buddha stated that? I think not " 'A monk was sick with dysentery', records a passage in the Pali Canon (forgot where), 'and lay fouled in his own urine and excrement.' The Buddha came to his lodging and asked why no one was taking care of him. 'The other monks don't care for me', he replied, 'because I do nothing for them.' Buddha and his attendent Ananda washed the monk, lifted him up, and laid him on a bed. …" My personal view is even that an ethical mental state is worthless (and can easily get hypocrit) when it's not tranlated in ethical behavior. Your view is idealistic (in the philosophical meaning of that word) and reductionistic because you only talk about nama and (because behavior is nama+rupa) neglect rupa. Metta Joop 53926 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 7:22am Subject: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? buddhistmedi... Hi, all - The five faculties are summarized as follows : 1.The faculty of conviction(saddhindriya) is the noble disciple's saddha in the Buddha ('Indeed, the Blessed One is worthy and rightly self-awakened, consummate in knowledge and conduct, well-gone, an expert with regard to the world, unexcelled as a trainer for those people fit to be tamed, the Teacher of divine and human beings, awakened, blessed.') 2.The faculty of persistence(viriyindriya) is the noble disciple's right effort(samma-vayama). 3.The faculty of mindfulness(satindriya) is the noble disciple's four foundations of mindfulness(samma-sati). 4.The faculty of concentration(sammadhindriya) is the noble disciple's right concentration(samma-samadhi)or the four rupa-jhanas. 5.The faculty of discernment(pannindriya) is the noble disciple's right view(samma-ditthi) [Ref. SN.XLVIII.10: Indriya-vibhanga Sutta — Analysis of the Mental Faculties ] Tep: The faculty of conviction, the faculty of persistence, the faculty of mindfulness, and the faculty of concentration "are not firm as long as noble knowledge has not arisen in a noble disciple" [SN.XLVIII.52 Paragraph 72 in "Wings to Awakening"]. ................................... Tep: The "development and pursuit of" the faculty of concentration and the faculy of discernment ends effluents(asava) and leads to Nibbana ('Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for the sake of this world.') [SN.XLVIII.46] .................................... Tep: SN 48.50 (Aapana sutta) is a dialogue about the five faculties (Indriya) between the Buddha and the great Arahant Sariputta. We learn that great conviction(saddha) in the Buddha in a "noble disciple" would condition his persistence (effort, viriya) for abandoning unwholesomeness (akusala dhamma) and undertake wholesomeness (kusala dhamma). That persistence is the faculty of persistence. A very important consequence is that the faculty of mindfulness will also be established in the noble disciple, as stated in the following excerpt of this sutta. Ven. Sariputta: "It is indeed to be expected, venerable sir, that a noble disciple who has faith and whose energy is aroused will be mindful, possessing supreme mindfulness and discretion, one who remembers and recollects what was done and said long ago. That mindfulness of his, venerable sir, is his faculty of mindfulness." Tep: Following the establishment of the faculty of mindfulness(Satipatthana) is more rewarding : the other two faculties are then aroused in the Noble Disciple. "With a noble disciple who has conviction, who is resolute and persistent, and whose mindfulness is established ('tuned'), it may be expected that- making it his object to let- he will attain concentration and singleness of mind. Whatever concentration he has, is his faculty of concentration. "With a noble disciple who has conviction, who is resolute and persistent, whose mindfulness is established, and whose mind is rightly concentrated, it may be expected that he will discern: 'From an inconceivable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating and wandering on. The total fading and cessation of ignorance, of this mass of darkness, is this peaceful, exquisite state: the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' Whatever discernment he has, is his faculty of discernment. Tep: The contemplation of the "peaceful, exquisite state: the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding" is known as viraganupassana (or viraga-sanna). But it is not the end yet; the end is when the noble disciple realizes the dhammas by himself, i.e "dwell touching" it. "And so this convinced noble disciple, thus striving again and again, recollecting again and again, concentrating his mind again and again, discerning again and again, becomes thoroughly convinced: 'Those phenomena that once I had only heard about, I here and now dwell touching them with my body and, through discernment, I see them clear through.' Whatever conviction he has, is his faculty of conviction. Tep: I am not sure what phenomena(dhammas) the noble disciple experiences in the above passage. I would guess that they are the 37 dhammas in the bodhipakkhiya ('requisites of enlightenment') group. What is your thought? Another question: What is the significance of "noble disciple" in this sutta? Why not just "monk" ? As always, please feel free to point out any errors I have made, and also feel free to correct me. Thanks. Respectfully, Tep ============ 53927 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 7:46am Subject: The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard - Again, a typo -- just one -- should be removed from the previous post : > but I never doubt that the third basket was not based on the Buddha's > words. The bad word is "not" and after its removal the above line is : "..but I never doubt that the third basket was based on the Buddha's words." Thanks. Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > > Hi, Howard - > > I think the main point of your reply is the following: > > >Howard: > Do you believe that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is the Buddha word? If I'm > not mistaken, you do not. Should those who do then question your 53928 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 3:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 12/25/05 9:23:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > > Hi, Howard - > > I think the main point of your reply is the following: > > >Howard: > Do you believe that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is the Buddha word? If I'm > not mistaken, you do not. Should those who do then question your > saddha in the Buddha? Would that be appropriate? Please seriously > consider that. > > > Tep: I know your trust in the Buddha is unshakable too. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you. Yes, truly! ------------------------------------------- > > I like your honest and straightforward explanation about your saddha > in the Buddha versus your doubt about the Abhidhamma-pitaka as the > Buddha's words. Of course, they are not his words (unlike the suttas); > but I never doubt that the third basket was not based on the Buddha's > words. > > --------------------------------------------- Howard: Well, I certainly agree with that, i.e. *based* on the Buddha's words, with the disclaimer that there are some points of difference. It is a truly amazing work, but very much taking second place to the suttas for me. -------------------------------------------- I agree with those who say that the Dhamma in the > > Abhidhamma-pitaka was the work of the greatest Genious Buddha. > However, the Abhidhamma books are words of others and yet many > abhidhammikas I know have problems confusing those words with the > Buddha's. ------------------------------------------ Howard: I see a difference in content as well, but the core is common, and I have gained much from Abhidhamma. ------------------------------------------ > > On the other hand, I do not blame you for having less saddha in the > great Arahant Sariputta than mine. I just want to caution you, a hard-to- > find Dhamma friend, to refrain from doubting so much before going > through a thorough study of the Patisambhidamagga -- it is a real > treasure. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Much in the suttas comes from Sariputta, especially, I think, in the Samyutta Nikaya, and have incredible respect for that great arahant, second only to the Buddha. As to the Patisambhidamagga, I thank you for pointing out what a treasure it is. This encourages me to put in more work with it. (I do unfortunately find perusing it to be "work"! ;-) --------------------------------------- > > > Happy holidays ! ---------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks! You, too! :-) --------------------------------------- > > > Yours truly, > > > Tep ===================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 53929 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 8:45am Subject: Re: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? matheesha333 Hi Tep, M: You inspired me to do a search on the five faculties and learn a bit more about them. However the harvest is poor this time! > Tep: I am not sure what phenomena(dhammas) the noble disciple > experiences in the above passage. I would guess that they are the 37 > dhammas in the bodhipakkhiya ('requisites of enlightenment') group. > What is your thought? > M: I think the sutta you chose limits the definition of what the faculty of mindfulness is. The one below gives more: And what is the faculty of mindfulness? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is mindful, highly meticulous, remembering & able to call to mind even things that were done & said long ago. He remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called the faculty of mindfulness. [§§29-30] M: From the same sutta, I think the dhammas which he saw are the ones below (he certainly would see the 37 factors as well): And what is the faculty of discernment? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is discerning, endowed with discernment of arising & passing away -- noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress. He discerns, as it is actually present: 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' This is called the faculty of discernment. [§§184-240] -- SN XLVIII.10 Tep:> Another question: What is the significance of "noble disciple" in this > sutta? Why not just "monk" ? M: Because of the nature of the question: § 74. The Buddha: Tell me, Sariputta: A disciple of the noble ones who is thoroughly inspired by the Tathagata, who has gone solely to the Tathagata [for refuge], could he have any doubt or uncertainty concerning the Tathagata or the Tathagata's teachings? M: The other important thing i picked up about the five faculties is that the time taken to realize depends on it (..and also that the five faculties seem dependant on the five powers): Here, bhikkhus, a certain one abides reflecting loathsomeness in the body, loathsomeness in food, detachment from all the world, seeing impermanence in all determinations and the perception of death is thoroughly established in him. He abides relying on these five powers of a trainer- Such as the powers of faith, shame remorse, effort and wisdom. The five faculties of faith, effort, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom are sharp in him as a result he realizes the destruction of desires quickly with successive leading. Bhikkhus, to this is said the difficult means and quick realization. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara2/4-catukkanipata/017-patipadavaggo-e.htm M: Perhaps most importantly... Again Sàriputta, the bhikkhu should reflect are the five mental faculties developed in me? When reflecting if the bhikkhu knows the five mental faculties are not developed in me, he should arouse effort to develop the five mental faculties. When reflecting if the bhikkhu knows the five mental faculties are developed in me, he should abide joyful and happy training in those thoughts day and night. http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- Nikaya/Majjhima3/151-pindapataparisuddhi-e.htm metta Matheesha 53930 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 9:17am Subject: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard - I am grateful to your true understanding of my friendly intention concerning the Patisambhidamagga. If you are interested, we may find it very fruitful to review this "real treasure" together -- just a proposal that you may want to consider for 2006. Thanks for being a kind person (as TG said ), otherwise I might get "slapped" at or "asked to leave" this group again. {:->)} Regards, Tep ======= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Tep - > > In a message dated 12/25/05 9:23:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, > tepsastri@y... writes: > > > > > Hi, Howard - > > > > I think the main point of your reply is the following: > > > > >Howard: > > Do you believe that the Abhidhamma Pitaka is the Buddha word? If I'm > > not mistaken, you do not. Should those who do then question your > > saddha in the Buddha? Would that be appropriate? Please seriously > > consider that. > > > > > > Tep: I know your trust in the Buddha is unshakable too. > > ------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Thank you. Yes, truly! > ------------------------------------------- > > > > > I like your honest and straightforward explanation about your saddha > > in the Buddha versus your doubt about the Abhidhamma-pitaka as the > > Buddha's words. Of course, they are not his words (unlike the suttas); > > but I never doubt that the third basket was not based on the Buddha's > > words. > > > > > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Well, I certainly agree with that, i.e. *based* on the Buddha's words, > with the disclaimer that there are some points of difference. It is a truly > amazing work, but very much taking second place to the suttas for me. > -------------------------------------------- > I agree with those who say that the Dhamma in the > > > Abhidhamma-pitaka was the work of the greatest Genious Buddha. > > However, the Abhidhamma books are words of others and yet many > > abhidhammikas I know have problems confusing those words with the > > Buddha's. > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > I see a difference in content as well, but the core is common, and I > have gained much from Abhidhamma. > ------------------------------------------ > > > > > On the other hand, I do not blame you for having less saddha in the > > great Arahant Sariputta than mine. I just want to caution you, a hard- to- > > find Dhamma friend, to refrain from doubting so much before going > > through a thorough study of the Patisambhidamagga -- it is a real > > treasure. > > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > Much in the suttas comes from Sariputta, especially, I think, in the > Samyutta Nikaya, and have incredible respect for that great arahant, second > only to the Buddha. As to the Patisambhidamagga, I thank you for pointing out > what a treasure it is. This encourages me to put in more work with it. (I do > unfortunately find perusing it to be "work"! ;-) > --------------------------------------- > > > > > > > Happy holidays ! > > ---------------------------------------- > Howard: > Thanks! You, too! :-) > --------------------------------------- > > > > > > > Yours truly, > > > > > > Tep > ===================== > With metta, > Howard > 53931 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 10:23am Subject: Re: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? buddhistmedi... Hi, Matheesha - I am thankful for your wonderful extension and discussion of the Five Faculties, Part I. It was not a poor harvest at all ! >M: I think the sutta you chose limits the definition of what the faculty of mindfulness is. The one below gives more: And what is the faculty of mindfulness? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is mindful, highly meticulous, remembering & able to call to mind even things that were done & said long ago. He remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves --ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called the faculty of mindfulness. Tep: Yes. The above sutta give the full definition. ................. >M: From the same sutta, I think the dhammas which he saw are the ones below (he certainly would see the 37 factors as well): And what is the faculty of discernment? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is discerning, endowed with discernment of arising & passing away -- noble, penetrating, leading to the right ending of stress. He discerns, as it is actually present: 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' This is called the faculty of discernment. [SN XLVIII.10] Tep: It makes sense, the phenomana that are also experienced are the four noble truths (then the other dhammas in the bodhipakkhiya group are also developed). ................. >M: The other important thing i picked up about the five faculties is that the time taken to realize depends on it (..and also that the five faculties seem dependant on the five powers): ...[AN 2.4] Tep: The idea about "time" implies that we both reject the assumption of a "single moment" of development. Also, the 37 bodhipakkhiya dhammas are being developed concurrently over time. Tep: Thank you for MN 151 (Pindapataparisuddhi sutta). The crucial sentences of this sutta to me are the following. "... if the bhikkhu knows the five mental faculties are not developed in me, he should arouse effort to develop the five mental faculties" and "if the bhikkhu knows the five mental faculties are developed in me, he should abide joyful and happy training in those thoughts day and night". This sutta tells me that reviewing of 'progress' of the dhamma helps induce a stronger effort (viriya) that, in turn, makes stronger faculties (bala). Warm regards, Tep ===== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > M: You inspired me to do a search on the five faculties and learn a > bit more about them. However the harvest is poor this time! > (snipped) > > M: Perhaps most importantly... > > Again Sàriputta, the bhikkhu should reflect are the five mental > faculties developed in me? When reflecting if the bhikkhu knows the > five mental faculties are not developed in me, he should arouse > effort to develop the five mental faculties. When reflecting if the > bhikkhu knows the five mental faculties are developed in me, he > should abide joyful and happy training in those thoughts day and > night. > > http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima- > Nikaya/Majjhima3/151-pindapataparisuddhi-e.htm > 53932 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 11:42am Subject: Re: Ethical considerations jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > Dear santa Joop, Dear Connie What a lot of compliments in one message: being a saint, stubborn and disagreeable, I liked them all but humble only accept being stubborn. But also the content makes me say: thanks for it. Also for the information about aadaana. Connie: " They should be regarded as the mind's aversion to wrongdoing." CMA, Guide to II.6 Is that more to your liking?" Joop: That's halfway, the other half is: the mind tendency in gooddoing. Connie: "Belief is conditioned and there is no changing it just because we would like to think this or that. I would like to believe any number of things, but just can't. And who else would be able to change my mind when even I can't? Joop: I have some problems with this (wellknown) way of reasoning, because what is a condition and what isn't? Is the fact you liked to chang not a condition itself. And is your meeting me (virtual of course) not a condition that can change? Connie: "Maybe talking about 'human nature' makes it seem like it is some lasting thing. Not to put words in your mouth, but I'm reminded of the Mahayana's "Buddha Nature", the inherent or fundamental 'nirvana' or 'enlightenment' in each sentient being" Joop: You are an intelligent scholar; yes I had "Buddha Nature" in my mind, a concept I like but is incorrect: we have no inner nature at all, not Buddha nature and no evil nature. Connie: " But I'm rambling again, so let's just move back to "Perfections" quoting the "Commentary to the Basket of Conduct": <<2. Virtue (siila) has the characteristic of composing (siilana); co- ordinating (samaadhaana) and establishing (pati.t.thana) are also mentioned as its characteristic. Its function is to dispel moral depravity, or its function is blameless conduct; its manifestation is moral purity; shame and moral dread are its proximate cause.>> Is that acceptable?" Joop: That's acceptable; and I like rambling, especially the way you do. Connie: "Connie: What superior interpretation could there be than to learn Paa.li and let the texts speak to us on their own terms as long as we still need words? You keep on STUBBORNLY talking about Westerners and re-interpretation and I keep remembering "Points of Controversy", Book XXI, 1 "Of our Religion" which is one of my favorites, so I will quote the whole thing here: …. Joop: This I used "interpretation" in a innocent way, meaning: "explanation". But in another way you are right because (in other messages). I state that the Tipitaka can be interpreted in another way than the commentaries do, for example taking some texts not literal but metaphorical. Theravada is re-interpreted again and again in the last 25 centuries, for example by Buddhaghosa); but the core, the real important liberating message of the Buddha is unchanged. Connie: "I have plenty more to say, but this is too long and disjointed already." Joop: Please do, unless you were planning even more important activities Metta Joop 53933 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. nilovg Hi Sukin and Larry, op 25-12-2005 03:23 schreef Sukinder op sukinder@...: > I however took Larry's question to be a statement about ditthi (the more > gross levels) and actually in general, it is also that I like to discuss more > about this. Often we forget when we talk about other dhammas that > understanding them has to be "right", i.e. to have "right view" of those > dhammas. This is why this must always be stressed. ------ N: Larry's short questions help us to consider the Dhamma more. There was a time that he put them almost daily to me, and they are always much appreciated. Now Larry is very busy with kusala works. Off line we are working at Pali English of Ch 17 Visuddhimagga, and Larry does the greater part in dividing the paras and put the numbers on. ------ S: Nina, you suggested to me a couple of weeks ago that I encourage Mr. > Knowing the new participant at our Saturday discussions, to join DSG. > He says that he has a kind of 'reaction' towards the T.V. and monitor > screen.. ------ N: I rejoice in his interest, give him my best regards. Lodewijk also dislikes computers and monitors. But if he has a question maybe you could transfer this to me. Nina. 53934 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Q. Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 6 nilovg Hi Phil, op 25-12-2005 07:12 schreef Phil op philco777@...: > >>> When there is bhavanga-citta, life-continuum, >>> realities do not appear, but why is it that, after the bhavanga- >> citta has >>> fallen away, realities do appear, is that not amazing? >> >> Yes, it is! Fascinating. Miraculous. And without the Buddha, we >> would have never known about it. ------ I like your paraphrasing. It helps to know details about the duration of rupas which is longer than namas. Then we understand that when the eyebase arises and the visible object impinges on it last long enough so that a process of cittas that experience visible object can occur. This association of dhammas is amazing. ------ Ph: "The painter takes his picture for > something important, and even so the citta of the ordinary person, > who is not an ariyan, takes the sense objects which are only rupas > for beings, people or self; for a thing which exists, and he will > continue to do so in each new life." > > It made me think of how we are conditioned to have so much > interest in people, in their stories, in their characters, in their > appearance. .... Objects that give rise to > enthusiasm will increasingly be paramattha dhammas rather than > concepts, I assume. ------ N: As I said to Howard, it is so down to earth that we are citta, cetasika and rupa. I am reading now to Lodewijk for our evening reading: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka. This was written in my pre-internet time. So it is not on line, but in Bgk at the Foundation they have printed copies English/Thai. If you like I can get one for you in Febr. I also wrote Sri Lanka Revisited, and this is not online and not printed, only typewritten. For now we are involved in the Sri Lanka history: King Devanampiyatissa, and Sanghamitta who brought a shoot from the Bodhitree to Sri Lanka. Nina. **** Nina. > > We are so deeply conditioned to enjoy people. Deep deep conditions > that make aspirations for enlightenment seem a bit hypocritical to > me sometimes. I think we play at seeking detachment even while we > are revelling in all our attachments. Sorry, just a bit dubious > about the whole Noble Dhamma Enterprise these days. > > Phil 53935 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. nilovg Hi Howard, re Patisambhidamagga, you mentioned suññatta and sabhaava, but I did not keep your post. My eye just fell on the Co. to M.N. no 43, Mahaavedallasutta: suññataa cetovimutti is identified with insight into the voidness of selfhood in persons and things. As I see it, suññatta means anattaa. Also, sabhaava is frequently used in the Visuddhimagga, meaning: own characteristic (remember our many discussions with Michael). I do not see the use of these two notions as particularly used in the Patisambhidamagga. Suññaata is also used in the M.N. as discussed before. One may have doubts about Abhidhamma Pitaka as spoken by the Buddha to the devas. Doubts may assail a worldling about all sorts of things, and that is very human, we all have that at times. Doubt is a cetasika arising with citta rooted in ignorance. It is a reality that can be realized as a conditioned nama. I am just reminded by the Cetasikas study corner: There may be doubts about names, stories, etc, but let us remember the ultimate realities of citta, cetasika and rupa. It does not matter how we name them, but understanding of them can grow. In this way doubt can be overcome. We may be mystified by what our personality really is, but in fact it is citta, cetasika and rupa which arise and fall away. What appeals to me is that the Abhidhamma is so down to earth and verifiable. It is a great blessing that the Buddha taught about citta, cetasika and rupa. Nina. op 24-12-2005 16:08 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > But it isn't a certainty, is it, that the Patisambhidamagga was > created by him? Is it possible that some of it came from him, and some not? Is > it > possible that none did? Similarly, is it a certainty that the Abhidhamma > Pitaka was spoken by the Buddha to devas, and then repeated to Sariputta, who > further taught it to the Sangha? 53936 From: "matheesha" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 2:00pm Subject: Re: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? matheesha333 Hi Tep, It's interesting that sati has this twofold division - into memory and mindfulness. Any thoughts about this? > Tep: The idea about "time" implies that we both reject the assumption > of a "single moment" of development. M: Well the sutta reads slow development, fast development etc, the satipattaana sutta talks of 7 years of less and it is said to be the gradual path. I guess there is no escaping it. I guess the confusion arise because there many single moments, all spread out over the time of development. Tep:This sutta tells me that > reviewing of 'progress' of the dhamma helps induce a stronger effort > (viriya) that, in turn, makes stronger faculties (bala). M: I think it is important to know how much akusala is remaining, and how much of the 37 factors for enlightenment have been developed (by observing how often they arise). However it is probably not useful to know whether you have achieved this stage or that stage. metta Matheesha 53937 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 3:19pm Subject: Re:Q. Dhamma in Cambodia, Ch 14, no 6 philofillet Hi Nina > I am reading now to Lodewijk for our evening reading: Pilgrimage in Sri > Lanka. This was written in my pre-internet time. So it is not on line, but > in Bgk at the Foundation they have printed copies English/Thai. If you like > I can get one for you in Febr. Happily, I have a copy - thanks to the generosity of a very good Dhamma friend. It is such an attractive book, my favourite colour, forest green, with the Singalese (is that a language?) text on the facing pages - I have been saving it (clinging to it) for dark days. Just now I opened it to see what I would find. (It's fun to do that, open a book at random and see what one lands on.) I found this: "When we hear harsh words, the characteristic of sound appears. We do not hear words. We remember the meaning of words and that is not hearing. We think of the words with displeasure and thus the problem is within us, not within the sound or the other person." This is the kind of thing that I was mentionning to Howard the other day, that helps me to prevent getting in quarrels these days. The harsh sound is akusla vipaka, it is arising due to my own kamma. With a little bit of understanding, there needn't be new akusala kamma spun on by unwise attention to the words. Your books have helped me understand so many things that make daily life experience very rich, Nina. Of course the credit goes to the Buddha. Phil 53938 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 2:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 12/25/05 12:18:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > > Hi, Howard - > > I am grateful to your true understanding of my friendly intention > concerning the Patisambhidamagga. If you are interested, we may find > it very fruitful to review this "real treasure" together -- just a proposal > that > you may want to consider for 2006. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Thank you, Tep! That is a very kind offer. :-) Let me work on it alone for a while, though - it will be slow going, because I find it very dry and very difficult. If you don't mind, from time to time, however, I would like to avail myself of your knowledge of the work, and also Nina's and Sarah's and others with good knowledge of it. ----------------------------------------- > > Thanks for being a kind person (as TG said ), otherwise I might > get "slapped" at or "asked to leave" this group again. {:->)} ----------------------------------------- Howard: I certainly find that unlikely! ----------------------------------------- > > > Regards, > > > Tep ======================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 53939 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 2:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/25/05 3:02:02 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > I am just reminded by the Cetasikas study corner: there > is mental rigidity, there is not the wieldiness of mind which is necessary > for the understanding of realities. Doubt is to be considered as a “danger > for attainment; when there is doubt it is impossible to apply oneself to > mental development.> > There may be doubts about names, stories, etc, but let us remember the > ultimate realities of citta, cetasika and rupa. It does not matter how we > name them, but understanding of them can grow. In this way doubt can be > overcome. > ======================= Nina, there are all sorts of things that can be believed or doubted. What some consider as obviously believable, others consider to be obviously doubt worthy. Some things *should* be doubted, while some deserve unconditional belief. The problem is to see which is which. It is for each of us to look and see and decide. I don't think that one should decide for another what they should doubt or not. I have enormous confidence in almost all of what has been purported to be the Buddha's Dhamma, because of my own examination of it and my testing of it. And as a result, the Buddha has my heart. But when I am not yet convinced that a work is the word of the Buddha I will hold the assumption of authorship in abeyance. And when a teaching strikes me as radically different from what I already see is the Buddha's teaching, I will doubt it and hold it in abeyance. Certainly not all that is claimed by people to be the word of the Buddha is in fact that, and not all teachings attributed to the Buddha should be accepted as true. I believe, for example, that most if not all of the Mahayana Sutras fail to be the word of the Buddha, though much of it is perfectly in accord with the Buddhadhamma. But some would tell me that such a view on my part shows that I have sceptical doubt and that I lack saddha (or Shraddha, in Sanskrit)! I would pay no attention to such Mahayanists. There is a great temptation to think that what one believes must be correct, and that those who disbelieve it are foolish or misguided, and are beset my mental rigidity. Never does one consider himself/herself to be rigid, only others. ;-) I think that a good attitude to hold as to belief (per se) is always "I could be wrong". I hold that attitude. Moreover, I think that such an attitude is a form of relinquishment, of letting go, of not clinging to view. 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) 53940 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 5:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. TGrand458@... In a message dated 12/25/2005 8:38:05 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Nina, there are all sorts of things that can be believed or doubted. What some consider as obviously believable, others consider to be obviously doubt worthy. Some things *should* be doubted, while some deserve unconditional belief. The problem is to see which is which. It is for each of us to look and see and decide. I don't think that one should decide for another what they should doubt or not. I have enormous confidence in almost all of what has been purported to be the Buddha's Dhamma, because of my own examination of it and my testing of it. And as a result, the Buddha has my heart. But when I am not yet convinced that a work is the word of the Buddha I will hold the assumption of authorship in abeyance. And when a teaching strikes me as radically different from what I already see is the Buddha's teaching, I will doubt it and hold it in abeyance. Certainly not all that is claimed by people to be the word of the Buddha is in fact that, and not all teachings attributed to the Buddha should be accepted as true. I believe, for example, that most if not all of the Mahayana Sutras fail to be the word of the Buddha, though much of it is perfectly in accord with the Buddhadhamma. But some would tell me that such a view on my part shows that I have sceptical doubt and that I lack saddha (or Shraddha, in Sanskrit)! I would pay no attention to such Mahayanists. There is a great temptation to think that what one believes must be correct, and that those who disbelieve it are foolish or misguided, and are beset my mental rigidity. Never does one consider himself/herself to be rigid, only others. ;-) I think that a good attitude to hold as to belief (per se) is always "I could be wrong". I hold that attitude. Moreover, I think that such an attitude is a form of relinquishment, of letting go, of not clinging to view. With metta, Howard This was rather thoughtfully and beautifully put! 53941 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Dec 25, 2005 11:53pm Subject: Re: Planarian Worms and unique streams of consciousness rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Dear Robert, > > hmm hmmmm .... what sort of rebirth is this? I would have > expected there to have been the normal process - whatever is > necessary for a being to be reborn as a Planarian Worm ... maybe > eggs or live births. But this was merely cutting a part off an > adult worm ... not the way they usually, naturally, reproduce. I > thought there were only a few Planes of Existence where beings > were 'spontaneously reborn'. Does this mean that the animal realm > here is one of those? Somehow, I had assumed that it was Deva and > Hell realms .... > > metta > Chris > _______ Dear Christine, In the texts there are rare cases of even humans being bron spontaneously - eg the boy who was born on a lotus leaf. But the plantanium worm is not spontaneous becuase there is already rupa present as one of the conditions- in a spontaneous birth the rupa is produced at the same time as the life begins. I've always considered them as evidence that the heart base cannot be in the brain, so I haven't thought that it posed any problem for Buddhist theory. The experiments with the worms find that: ""If you cut the head off of a trained planarian worm, once it grows back the worm will be able to run mazes as effectively as before, yet if a worm is cut in half (so that each half grows back another half-worm, resulting in two worms) only one of the resultant worms will have retained the training. This shows that memory in worms is located somewhere other than its head."" http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=826389 It also poses other problems for "scientific" beliefs Newswise — This lab exercise is simple—although not necessarily for the squeamish. http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/515969/ For many decades, scientists have been carrying out versions of this experiment and banging their heads against the wall trying to understand the result. It turns out that you can cut off a planarian slice as small as 1/279th of the animal and have it turn into a complete adult. (That finding, by the way, comes from Thomas Hunt Morgan, who gave up on planarian regeneration studies in frustration and turned to his pioneering work in the genetics of fruit flies.) Biology's major model organisms aren't much help either, declares Alejandro Sánchez Alvarado, Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator and professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the University of Utah. (Reddien worked as a postdoc in Sánchez Alvarado's lab before arriving at Whitehead this year.) ++++++ Thus - at least as I see it- we have a simple case of rebirth, a new being arising where the rupa is suitable for that type of birth, no problem for Buddhist theory. Robertk 53942 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:05am Subject: Re: Planarian Worms and unique streams of consciousness christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" > Dear Christine, > In the texts there are rare cases of even humans being bron > spontaneously - eg the boy who was born on a lotus leaf. > But the plantanium worm is not spontaneous becuase there is already > rupa present as one of the conditions- in a spontaneous birth the > rupa is produced at the same time as the life begins. > > I've always considered them as evidence that the heart base cannot > be in the brain, so I haven't thought that it posed any problem for > Buddhist theory. The experiments with the worms find that: ""If you > cut the head off of a trained planarian worm, once it grows back the > worm will be able to run mazes as effectively as before, yet if a > worm is cut in half (so that each half grows back another half- worm, > resulting in two worms) only one of the resultant worms will have > retained the training. This shows that memory in worms is located > somewhere other than its head."" > http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=826389 > > It also poses other problems for "scientific" beliefs > > Newswise — This lab exercise is simple—although not necessarily for > the squeamish. > http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/515969/ > For many decades, scientists have been carrying out versions of this > experiment and banging their heads against the wall trying to > understand the result. It turns out that you can cut off a planarian > slice as small as 1/279th of the animal and have it turn into a > complete adult. (That finding, by the way, comes from Thomas Hunt > Morgan, who gave up on planarian regeneration studies in frustration > and turned to his pioneering work in the genetics of fruit flies.) > Biology's major model organisms aren't much help either, declares > Alejandro Sánchez Alvarado, Howard Hughes Medical Institute > investigator and professor of neurobiology and anatomy at the > University of Utah. (Reddien worked as a postdoc in Sánchez > Alvarado's lab before arriving at Whitehead this year.) > ++++++ > Thus - at least as I see it- we have a simple case of rebirth, a new > being arising where the rupa is suitable for that type of birth, no > problem for Buddhist theory. > Robertk Hello RobertK, Thanks Rob.It is such a comfort to have good friends in the dhamma to turn to when puzzled to the point of doubt arising. Much appreciation. metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 53943 From: nina Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:54am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 210 nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 210 Text Vis. 210: This should also be understood of perception etc., associated with any kind of feeling ----------- N: All the different classifications of the khandha of feeling also pertain to saññaakkhandha (remembrance), sa.nkhaarakkhandha (activities or formations) and viññaa.nakkhandha (consciousness). Citta and cetasikas that arise together are intimately connected, they condition one another by way of association-condition, sampayutta paccaya. Thus, also citta and the other accompanying cetasikas, apart from feeling, can be classified as past, future or present, as internal or external, as gross or subtle, as inferior or superior, and as far or near. The five khandhas arise and fall away, never to return. ------ [D. CLASSES OF KNOWLEDGE OF THE AGGREGATES] Text Vis.: Having understood this, again as regards these same aggregates: Knowledge of aggregates is classed (1) as to order, and (2) distinction, ------- N: As to distinction (visesato), this refers to the classification as khandhas and as khandhas of clinging (upaadaanakkhandha) as the Tiika states. (3) as to neither less nor more, --------- N: As to the expression, not too many, nor too little (anuunaadhika): the Tiika states: because there are five khandhas. ------------ Text Vis. :(4) and likewise as to simile, (5) and twice as to how to be seen, ---------- N: As to the expression, twice as to how to be seen, this refers to the classification in brief and in detail. -------- Text Vis.: (6) and as to good for one seeing thus-- This is the way of exposition that a wise man should rightly know. ------ N: In the following sections, all these classifications will be explained. **** Nina. 53944 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination nilovg Hi Howard, op 26-12-2005 04:04 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: about the Path of Discrimination: > Thank you, Tep! That is a very kind offer. :-) Let me work on it alone > for a while, though - it will be slow going, because I find it very dry and > very difficult. If you don't mind, from time to time, however, I would like to > avail myself of your knowledge of tthe work, and also Nina's and Sarah's and others with good knowledge of it. ------ N: Yes, the trouble is the English translation which makes it difficult to access, as we discussed before. Glad to be of any help any time. BTW of course I do not think that I have to decide what you should doubt or not doubt. If you doubt about rupas such as life faculty, I will not tell you: do not doubt. How could I? On the other hand, for myself, I cannot say during my whole life, 'maybe I am wrong'. I learn about citta and mental factors, I find that I can verify several of them and I cannot say: maybe I am wrong. I discussed this with Lodewijk and he remarked that one can also say this with conceit, making it appear that one is unprejudiced, objective. I think that each person should find out for himself what his citta is like at a particular moment. The cetasika doubt that wavers is akusala and it needs the cure of understanding. It is doubt that has unwieldiness and rigidity of mind. Some people doubt about the term cetasikas, since this is not in the Suttas. But the notion is there: the good and bad roots, the jhanafactors, the factors of enlightenment. What else are they but factors arising with citta, they do not arise alone, in the void, without citta. Nina. 53945 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 2:26am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. matheesha333 Hi Howard, Nicely put! I was wondering - what would you do if you came across something which you feel the buddha said, but was clearly wrong :-) regards Matheesha 53946 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 3:20am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 343- Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[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;-) ========================================== [Ch20 - Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)] Doubt is different from ignorance, moha, which does not know realities. But when there is doubt there is also moha which accompanies all akusala dhammas. When doubt accompanies the akusala citta, there cannot be determination (adhimokkha) which is “sure about the object”, neither can there be “wish-to-do” (chanda) which “searches for the object” and wants it(1). The proximate cause of doubt is “unwise attention” to the object which is experienced at that moment. We read in the Gradual Sayings (Book of the Ones, Chapter II, §5) that the Buddha said to the monks: * "Monks, I know not of any other single thing of such power to cause the arising of doubt and wavering, if not already arisen; or, if arisen, to cause its more-becoming and increase, as unsystematic attention. In him who gives not systematic attention arises doubt and wavering, if not already arisen; or, if arisen, it is liable to morebecoming and increase." * When one performs dåna, observes síla, studies Dhamma or is mindful of nåma and rúpa, there is no opportunity for doubt, because during such moments there is “wise attention”. *** 1) See Chapter 9 and Chapter 12. ***** Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[[to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 53947 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:06am Subject: Re: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? buddhistmedi... Hi, Matheesha - The dhammas in the five faculties "dominate and shape everything we do feel and think" as observed by Edward Conze: "Spiritual progress depends on the emergence of five cardinal virtues — faith, vigor, mindfulness, concentration and wisdom. The conduct of the ordinary worldling is governed by his sense-based instincts and impulses. As we progress, new spiritual forces gradually take over, until in the end the five cardinal virtues dominate and shape everything we do feel and think. These virtues are called, in Sanskrit and Pali, indriya, variously translated by faculties, controlling faculties, or spiritual faculties.(1) The same five virtues are called powers (bala) if emphasis is on the fact that they are 'unshakable by their opposites'. " (1) The word indriya is derived from the Vedic god Indra, the ruler of the gods in the ancient pantheon. Hence the word suggests the idea of dominance or control. [The Way of Wisdom The Five Spiritual Faculties by Edward Conze] ...................... >M: > It's interesting that sati has this twofold division - into memory > and mindfulness. Any thoughts about this? > Tep: Please elaborate more on the "twofold division". Which sutta are you referring to? ........................ > > Tep: The idea about "time" implies that we both reject the > assumption of a "single moment" of development. > > M: Well the sutta reads slow development, fast development etc, the > satipattaana sutta talks of 7 years of less and it is said to be the > gradual path. I guess there is no escaping it. > > I guess the confusion arise because there many single moments, all > spread out over the time of development. > Tep: Yes, that is a very subtle understanding. The very many moments of knowledge(nana) are "spread out over the time of development". In the same token, there are many pixels of colors on our computer screens. The totality of pixels constitutes the image that we are seeing (in that moment). ........................... > > Tep:This sutta tells me that > reviewing of 'progress' of the dhamma helps induce a stronger > effort (viriya) that, in turn, makes stronger faculties (bala). > > M: I think it is important to know how much akusala is remaining, > and how much of the 37 factors for enlightenment have been developed (by observing how often they arise). However it is probably not useful to know whether you have achieved this stage or that stage. > Tep: Agreed. Our discussion has been smooth, but it should not be too surprising. Warm regards, Tep ======== 53948 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:21am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. buddhistmedi... Hi, Matheesha - You wrote: >Matheesha: > > I was wondering - what would you do if you came across something which you feel the buddha said, but was clearly wrong :-) > Can you give a few examples first? Regards, Tep ======= 53949 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:26am Subject: Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. buddhistmedi... Dear Howard - Thank you for the following words of golden wisdom. > Howard: There is a great temptation to think that what one believes must be correct, and that those who disbelieve it are foolish or misguided, and are beset my mental rigidity. Never does one consider himself/herself to be rigid, only others. ;-) I think that a good attitude to hold as to belief (per se) is always "I could be wrong". I hold that attitude. Moreover, I think that such an attitude is a form of relinquishment, of letting go, of not clinging to view. > Thank you. With that "attitude" you and I can discuss any subject. Regards, Tep ============ 53950 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:39am Subject: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination buddhistmedi... Hi, Howard - I am thankful to you for accepting my invitation for partnership in reviewing and exchanging our understandings of the Patisambhidamagga( Path of Discrimination ). The fact that I have read the book before does not mean that I clearly understand everything in the Path of Discrimination. I am very much like a snell who is climbing up a steep and slippery wall : It makes a progress up two feet one day, then the next day it may slip down one and a half feet, or even further down. Warm regards, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Tep - > > In a message dated 12/25/05 12:18:17 PM Eastern Standard Time, > tepsastri@y... writes: > > > > > Hi, Howard - > > > > I am grateful to your true understanding of my friendly intention > > concerning the Patisambhidamagga. If you are interested, we may find it very fruitful to review this "real treasure" together -- just a proposal that you may want to consider for 2006. > > ------------------------------------------ > Howard: > Thank you, Tep! That is a very kind offer. :-) Let me work on it alone for a while, though - it will be slow going, because I find it very dry and very difficult. If you don't mind, from time to time, however, I would like to avail myself of your knowledge of the work, and also Nina's and Sarah's and others with good knowledge of it. > ----------------------------------------- > (snipped) 53951 From: Vijita Teoh Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:17am Subject: Samatha & Vipassana vijitateoh Dear Rob & all, Sadhu for your lenghty elaboration with the reference to the sutta. Frankly, I prefer to be a lurker, but for the sake of Buddhadhamma I may write a few lines. Moreover, I knew my weakness in explaining an issue, especially, with reference to the sutta. I agree that both Samatha & Vipassana being practised together, no matter what method they use, either at the begining stage or advance level. I have a collection of Nikayas but I'm not serious in studying them. Actually, I like the pratical aspect of approach to Dhamma-meditation. I also find Abhidhamma very complex with so many references to Visudhimagga & other sources. Whatever it may be, Buddha had taught us his practical discoveries through meditation & his administration of Buddhism. With metta, Vijita Teoh 53952 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 3:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 12/26/05 4:55:13 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > op 26-12-2005 04:04 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > about the Path of Discrimination: > >Thank you, Tep! That is a very kind offer. :-) Let me work on it alone > >for a while, though - it will be slow going, because I find it very dry and > >very difficult. If you don't mind, from time to time, however, I would like > to > >avail myself of your knowledge of tthe work, and also Nina's and Sarah's > and > others with good knowledge of it. > ------ > N: Yes, the trouble is the English translation which makes it difficult to > access, as we discussed before. Glad to be of any help any time. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Thank you! :-) --------------------------------------- > > BTW of course I do not think that I have to decide what you should doubt or > not doubt. > If you doubt about rupas such as life faculty, I will not tell you: do not > doubt. How could I? On the other hand, for myself, I cannot say during my > whole life, 'maybe I am wrong'. I learn about citta and mental factors, I > find that I can verify several of them and I cannot say: maybe I am wrong. ------------------------------------------ Howard: There are some things that one has directly seen and which one is very confident are so. However, have there not been times that you have apparently seen quite directly that things are a certain way, only to discover later that you were in error? That has happened to me. So, for me it is a matter of a range of confidence. Of some things I am *very* confident. I have no serious doubt that hardness, sights, sounds, tastes, smells, etc have arisen and do arise. I also have no serious doubt that everything that arises, ceases. I do not believe that I will ever see these as errors. But could I be wrong? Of course I could be wrong. It is truth, it is reality, that must be the highest standard, and I must always be prepared to sacrifice present certainty on the altar of truth. It is a defilement to cling to anything, even including what seems to be self-evidently true. Clinging to views is a subtle and difficult problem to overcome it seems to me. A "true believer" in the Dhamma will accept it as incontrovertible truth because "the Buddha said so." But that isn't what the Buddha wanted. The Buddha said to come and see. In coming and seeing, I have gained a confidence, a saddha, in the Dhamma that is extremely powerful. But only when I have achieved all that the Buddha's path can bring, will that confidence be replaced by an absolute knowing. Then, but only then, will there be no basis for saying "I could be wrong." ----------------------------------------------------- > I discussed this with Lodewijk and he remarked that one can also say this > with conceit, making it appear that one is unprejudiced, objective. I think > that each person should find out for himself what his citta is like at a > particular moment. ----------------------------------------------------- Howard: Sure. Conceit is usually present. But as I look into my own thoughts on this matter, I don't see that as a determining factor. I am very wary of accepting claims on the primary basis of faith and authority. I very much fear the conceit associated with certainty of belief. When I say that I could be wrong, it is because I realize that I indeed could be, and not because of some subtle, back-door conceit or false modesty. I'm unwilling to pretend to myself that I really know for sure. I do not know for sure, and if I delude myself into thinking I do, I will first be in big trouble. ;-) ---------------------------------------------------- > The cetasika doubt that wavers is akusala and it needs the cure of > understanding. It is doubt that has unwieldiness and rigidity of mind. > Some people doubt about the term cetasikas, since this is not in the Suttas. > But the notion is there: the good and bad roots, the jhanafactors, the > factors of enlightenment. What else are they but factors arising with citta, > they do not arise alone, in the void, without citta. > Nina. > > ========================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 53953 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 3:50am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 12/26/05 5:29:29 AM Eastern Standard Time, dhammachat@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Nicely put! > > I was wondering - what would you do if you came across something which > you feel the buddha said, but was clearly wrong :-) ------------------------------------------ Howard: Well, I'll probably cross that bridge when (and if) I come to it. But what I suspect I'd do because of the termendous confidence I have in the Buddha is the following: 1) I'd investigate further as to whether I might not be wrong in my feeling that the Buddha said it, 2) I'd consider the possibility that what is so clear to me might well be false and that I should examine the matter further, and 3) If I couldn't resolve the issue, I'd hold it in abeyance. But I'm not worried about such a scenario as regards core Dhamma. (As to references along the lines of the Mount Meru cosmology and such, well, I just don't care, considering such matters to be of extreme unimportance.) ------------------------------------------------ > > regards > > Matheesha > ========================= 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) 53954 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 3:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 12/26/05 9:40:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, tepsastri@... writes: > I am very much like a snell who is climbing up a steep and slippery > wall : It makes a progress up two feet one day, then the next day it may > slip down one and a half feet, or even further down. > ====================== ;-)) 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) 53955 From: "Larry" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:12pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Larry (and Sukin) - > > In a message dated 12/24/05 10:25:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, > LBIDD@w... writes: > > > > > Hi Sukin, > > > > Merry Christmas. My only agenda was to investigate the conventional > > sense of self. For example, for me, self certainly seems to be lasting, > > and it is bound up with a vague and somewhat incoherent sense of agency > > (control) and independence, which goes with it. But there is also > > something else which I can only call 'personality'. This is what > > identifies me as uniquely me. It seems to be unchanging throughout the > > years somewhat like certain characteristic features of my face. But I > > can't tie it directly to the khandhas. Nimitta (sign) seems like it > > might be close, but that's not really it. I'm not trying, necessarily, > > to explain this in abhidhamma terms, but rather to simply understand > > it. What I'm looking for is what exactly I really believe is my self. > > > > I know this goes against everything you believe in, but do you think > > you could bring yourself to look at your own experience and investigate > > your own sense of self? I would be particularly interested if you can > > find this mysterious 'personality', or something similar. > > > > Larry > > > ======================== > I think that what you are doing, your introspective searching for what > is the basis for your sense of self, may be a very useful and powerful thing > to do. > The matter of personal identity is quite mysterious and subtle and > hard to see. Intensive, effortful looking is a kind of koan approach, it seems to > me, an approach which attempts to avoid discursive thinking and to directly > see. It is the sort of approach that I think, for some people, can well result > in a shattering insight into the unreality of identity and the truth of > anatta. But it is also an approach that, if carried out as required, is very, very > hard - extraordinarily demanding and exhausting, and which could be dangerous, > I think, unless one is quite stable psychologically and already has acquired > considerable equanimity. > > With metta, > Howard > Hi Howard, Thanks for your remarks. I agree this exercise could be very powerful and profound, but at this point I'm just approaching it as a kind of test of the teachings. This is sort of a common sense, quasi scientific investigation of what 'self' means. On an ordinary level it seems rather straight forward what impermanence and suffering are. But anatta is much more difficult because, I think, 'self' isn't so obvious. I agree with the Buddha that a sense of permanence or lastingness is essential. It makes perfect sense to me to say, on some level, I am always the same, day after day, year after year, in any situation. Why this is, I don't know. I don't think this is simply a belief, but I could well be wrong. I don't think there is the sense that like or dislike are permanent or lasting. When I say, "I am hungry" I don't mean, "I am hunger". Also, as I mentioned before, it seems to me that a sense of the personal (whatever that may mean) has to be included in what makes a 'self'. An impersonal sense of permanence doesn't seem to really qualify as self. However, this is all very murky; anything you might see would be most welcome. Can you describe your sense of self? Larry 53956 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 8:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/26/05 4:13:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for your remarks. I agree this exercise could be very powerful > and profound, but at this point I'm just approaching it as a kind of > test of the teachings. This is sort of a common sense, quasi > scientific investigation of what 'self' means. On an ordinary level > it seems rather straight forward what impermanence and suffering are. > But anatta is much more difficult because, I think, 'self' isn't so > obvious. I agree with the Buddha that a sense of permanence or > lastingness is essential. It makes perfect sense to me to say, on > some level, I am always the same, day after day, year after year, in > any situation. Why this is, I don't know. I don't think this is > simply a belief, but I could well be wrong. > -------------------------------------- Howard: I also don't think it is simply a belief. In fact, I don't have that belief, not at all. but the *sense* (or seeming) of a lasting core is there. More about *how* that seems to me a little later in this post. ------------------------------------- I don't think there is > > the sense that like or dislike are permanent or lasting. When I > say, "I am hungry" I don't mean, "I am hunger". ----------------------------------------- Howard: Nor I. ---------------------------------------- Also, as I mentioned > > before, it seems to me that a sense of the personal (whatever that > may mean) has to be included in what makes a 'self'. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Definitely! -------------------------------------- An impersonal > > sense of permanence doesn't seem to really qualify as self. ---------------------------------------- Howard: Well, at least not in the soul or person sense. But, more generally, there is the business of fixed identity. ----------------------------------------- > However, > this is all very murky; anything you might see would be most welcome. > Can you describe your sense of self? ----------------------------------------- Howard: Mine takes the form of Sati's error. The operation of awareness (vi~n~nana) is present at all times. (If ever absent, how would that be known?! ;-) So it seems to take on the perspective of a screen-for-experience - something permanent on which a stream of experience rolls along. But I think the screen metaphor is poor. A better one would be to liken it to a dynamic light. And I think that the elements of experience are, themselves, luminous, with the dualistic, hard separation of knowing from known a basic cognitive error. But it is an error that I am besotted with! ------------------------------------------ > > Larry > > ===================== 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) 53957 From: "Larry" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:43pm Subject: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Larry (and Howard), > op 23-12-2005 22:34 schreef Larry op LBIDD@w...: > > In your own experience, do you think clinging is you? > ------- > N: Good you insist. > In my whole life there has been and is clinging after seeing, hearing, etc. > and countless times we do not know this. As soon as we think about or define > what was seen, the citta is akusala when the objective is not dana, sila or > bhavana. > As Howard said, there are no clear demarcations in our experiences. That is, > so long as there is no paññaa that sees things as they are. I am glad Howard > brought up this point. > Thus, we believe that we still see, but already we cling while defining. > There seems to be a compact mass of dhammas. We fail to analyze the whole > into different elements. > We read in Visuddhimagga XIV, 213:< for there are those > people who, while teachable, have fallen into assuming a self among the > five aggregates owing to failure to analyze them; and the Blessed One is > desirous of releasing them from the assumption by getting them to see > how the [seeming] compactness of mass [in the five aggregates] is > resolved> > To return to your Q: you?>, I can answer the second half: I am so used to clinging to all the > objects, this clinging (this mass of seeing and clinging, hearing and > clinging) is as it were belonging to myself. But as to experience: this is > not experienced by insight. > Nina. > Hi Nina, I agree experience isn't usually seen with insight, and when it is a quite different view is seen. But there has to be at least an ordinary level of understanding, otherwise this stuff makes no sense at all. A sense of self is very powerful and pervasive, but I wonder if this ordinary level of understanding 'self' is lacking. We don't seem to look at it, even on a conventional level. We cry "me, me, me", "I, I, I", but we never question what that means. Are these just words or do they refer to something we consider to be real. Please tell me the answer. Can you tell me? Yes, tell me. Convey to me the answer. I am the place that lacks the answer. Me over here. Me. Larry 53958 From: "Larry" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 2:08pm Subject: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. lbidd2 Nina: "Now Larry is very busy with kusala works." Hi Nina, Larry isn't busy; he's just running out of ideas, and he's lazy. Nina is the one who is busy with kusala works. Larry 53959 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Nina) - In a message dated 12/26/05 4:44:18 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > We don't > seem to look at it, even on a conventional level. We cry "me, me, > me", "I, I, I", but we never question what that means. Are these just > words or do they refer to something we consider to be real. Please > tell me the answer. Can you tell me? Yes, tell me. Convey to me the > answer. I am the place that lacks the answer. Me over here. Me. ====================== Excellent, Larry. You've conveyed the sense of self beautifully with this! Interestingly, I think, this leads me to recall one of the epithets that Judaism uses for God - it is 'ha Makom', which means "the place." 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) 53960 From: "Larry" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 2:23pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Can you describe your sense of self? > > ----------------------------------------- > Howard: > Mine takes the form of Sati's error. The operation of awareness > (vi~n~nana) is present at all times. (If ever absent, how would that be known?! ;-) > So it seems to take on the perspective of a screen-for-experience - something > permanent on which a stream of experience rolls along. But I think the screen > metaphor is poor. A better one would be to liken it to a dynamic light. And I > think that the elements of experience are, themselves, luminous, with the > dualistic, hard separation of knowing from known a basic cognitive error. But it > is an error that I am besotted with! > ------------------------------------------ Hi Howard, Thanks for this. Another question, if I may, what does 'personal' mean? Is it just subtle clinging, or something else? I'm asking from the point of view of a stranger who walks up to you and asks. And for that matter, what does 'impersonal' mean? Larry 53961 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 10:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 12/26/05 5:24:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for this. Another question, if I may, what does 'personal' > mean? Is it just subtle clinging, or something else? I'm asking from > the point of view of a stranger who walks up to you and asks. And for > that matter, what does 'impersonal' mean? > > Larry > ==================== At first consideration, this question seems hard to answer. But as I ponder it, it seems to be as follows: There appears to be a self. What that self allegedly is nobody seems able to say exactly, but it appears to exist, and it seems to be a lasting identity underlying all those things we associate with it. Whatever is associated with "the self" as that self or as belonging to it is "personal." But all those things with which we associate this "I", when examined closely, are not it, and don't belong to it! Not any one of them is "me" or "mine". Exactly that is what it means for them to be impersonal - they are neither me nor mine. The operations of being aware, of recognizing/characterizing, of feeling (as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral), of producing emotion and of thinking, and all the rupic content of experience, when examined closely are seen be just what they are, and that is neither me nor mine. When we come to see that nothing whatsoever is me or mine, then what can this "I" be that nothing is or belongs to? It becomes the epitome of nothingness. It reminds me of the zero of mathematics, or the empty set: Nothing at all, and yet the basis for whole apparent enchilada. 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) 53962 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 3:39pm Subject: [dsg] The Atomized, Digitized, Re: The Path Of Discrimination buddhistmedi... Hi, Nina (and Howard) - I found your reply to Howard fascinating !! >Nina: > On the other hand, for myself, I cannot say during my > whole life, 'maybe I am wrong'. I learn about citta and mental factors, I > find that I can verify several of them and I cannot say: > maybe I am wrong. > I discussed this with Lodewijk and he remarked that one can also say this with conceit, making it appear that one is unprejudiced, objective. I think that each person should find out for himself what his citta is like at a particular moment. > Tep: During my whole life I had not yet known anyone who never said 'maybe I am wrong' (at least once)! So, Nina, you are the only exception. {:-<) I would like to ask you to kindly explain two things for me. 1. Your error-free method being used to verify citta and mental factors. 2. The method you have used to find out what your citta is like at a particular moment. I hope you don't say, "there is no method". Your unpredjudiced, objective answers will be very valuable for me. Thanks. Sincerely, Tep 53963 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:46pm Subject: When there is impatience, where is metta? philofillet Hi Nina and all I'd like to share some thoughts on these questions that I found in the first page text of "Pilgrimage in Sril Lanka.": "Do we really pratice the Buddhas teachings in our daily life?" Practice may arise, but most of the time there is thinking with pleasant mental objects about practicing the Buddha's teaching. Does this thinking with pleasant mental objects about practicing the Buddha's teaching condition real practice? It may, as long as we don't confuse it with the real thing. "Aren't we often forgetful?" Of course we are. The Buddha taught in one of his first three discourses that the world is burning with delusion, aversion and greed. Only the noble disciple, the ariyan, develops "revulsion" (nibidda?) that leads to lasting detachment from this suffering state. Now the question that I am really interested in. "When we are impatient, where are the metta and karuna that the Buddha taught?" Well, they are not there, they cannot be there, and that's the way of reality. Thinking that there should be metta and karuna all the time can only lead to imitation metta and karuna. When there are conditions for metta and karuna, they will arise, and only then. Wanting to have metta and karuna because impatience, or aversion, or conceit or whatever other akusala state is unpleasant (and dangerous) is *not* a condition for having metta. Understanding the akusala states as anatta, as nama, is kusala, and whenever there is kusala, there is adosa. This adosa is akin to metta, of course - the same thing? So it is by understanding that there are conditions for metta, not by wanting more metta. That is really important to understand, in my opinion. Yesterday we were doing some year-end banking and shopping. Busy, crowded sidewalks. I was feeling irritable and impatient, and thinking of the above question. Where is the metta? Well, I knew it wasn't there, but at least I was thinking about it. A man in front of us stamped out his cigarette butt on the sidewalk then let loose a great cloud of smoke that eveloped Naomi's head. Hatred arose. And then I thought of the above question, and there was a letting go of the hatred. Was it loving-kindness? No, I had not friendly feeling for the man. Was it adosa, letting go of hatred? Possibly. More likely it was rooted in lobha. The hatred was an unplesant mental state, and lobha for a more pleasant state moved me to one. I'm not sure. No way to know. I am not feeling metta very often these days and quite a lot of hostility, also when I come to DSG. That's the way it goes. Escaping from this unpleasant situation by trying to generate metta is just a form of escape. Perhaps I will reflect on the dangers of akusala and the benefits of kusala. But if I do so because I think I need a fix, I will just be doing more replacing unpleasant mental objects with pleasant ones and that is not following the Buddha's teaching. Knowing the realities (paramattha dhammas) that are arising is the only way. Thanks for letting me have a little ramble. Phil 53964 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. matheesha333 Hi Howard, Tep, and others.. H: 1) I'd investigate further as to whether I might not be > wrong in my feeling that the Buddha said it, 2) I'd consider the possibility > that what is so clear to me might well be false and that I should examine the > matter further, and 3) If I couldn't resolve the issue, I'd hold it in abeyance. M: Reasonable approach. I agree the core remains without any controversy. Tep asked me to give some examples. I read a sutta in the AN about the buddha sasana lasting 500 years according to the buddha. I'm not sure if this is the case and if it is only the commentaries which say 5000 years. Joop brought this up recently as well. Do you know anything more about this? metta Matheesha 53965 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 4:56pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo buddhistmedi... Hi, Larry (and Howard)- You wrote Howard the following: > > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for your remarks. I agree this exercise could be very powerful > and profound, but at this point I'm just approaching it as a kind of > test of the teachings. This is sort of a common sense, quasi > scientific investigation of what 'self' means. On an ordinary level > it seems rather straight forward what impermanence and suffering are. > But anatta is much more difficult because, I think, 'self' isn't so > obvious. I agree with the Buddha that a sense of permanence or > lastingness is essential. It makes perfect sense to me to say, on > some level, I am always the same, day after day, year after year, in > any situation. Why this is, I don't know. I don't think this is > simply a belief, but I could well be wrong. I don't think there is > the sense that like or dislike are permanent or lasting. When I > say, "I am hungry" I don't mean, "I am hunger". Also, as I mentioned > before, it seems to me that a sense of the personal (whatever that > may mean) has to be included in what makes a 'self'. An impersonal > sense of permanence doesn't seem to really qualify as self. However, this is all very murky; anything you might see would be most welcome. > Can you describe your sense of self? > Tep: I know you did not ask me the above question. :-)) My sense of self is the perception that I am central to everything that is going on, internal and external. This self or 'atta' of mine is "the same, day after day, year after year, in any situation", exactly like what you said. It doesn't seem to get old, although the body is clearly ageing. The "I am hungry", "I want this", "I don't want that", etc. are just some consequences of such "personal" identity that always conditions craving and grasping. The grasping , in turn, strengthens the self belief. This is known as 'atta-vadupadana', the clinging to the personality- belief. "What is the clinging to the personality-belief? The 20 kinds of ego- views with regard to the groups of existence (s. sakkaya-ditthi): these are called the clinging to the personality-belief" (Dhs.1214-17). Here at DSG we had discussions before about 'self' and 'personality views' . The following posts help define the terms quite clearly. #17573 "How does one or many self-view/s arises? In Cullavedalla Sutta (MN 44), it is mentioned there 20 types of personality view which connected to the 5 agg. And we divide each agg in 4 types, therefore we have 20 types. For e.g in the material agg. 1) one regards material form is self, i.e. the body isthe self or the self is the body. 2) one regards the self as the possessor of the material form– here the non-material which is the mind (the other 4 agg)regarded as self. This non-material self (`I') is one thing and material form is another thing. Therefore the self (`I') is the owner of the material form. 3) one regards material form as in a self - The concept of self here is also maintained in the relation to the other four non-material agg. The holder of this view will maintained that material form is one thing, the non-material self is the other; that material form exist `in' this non-material self. [This will be more clear if you see it see it from the mind basis, for e.g. the feeling: feeling is one thing, the non-feeling self – the other 4 agg - is another. The feeling exists `in' this non-feeling self]. Illustration - imagine of a fried egg with sunny side up, the material form is the yolk and the egg white is the self. 4) one regard the self as in material form - material form is one thing, the non-material self is the other; that self exist `in' this material form. The self is the yolk and the egg white is the material form." [#25393] --- yu_zhonghao wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > As I understand it: > Personality view is not the view that "people actually exist". > However, both the views "people actually exist" and "people actually > don't exist" are speculative views, just like the views "there is > self" and "there is no self." Tep: Sarah then quoted a key sutta that explains how ignorance conditions the self view and thoughts (sankhara khandha). > Samyutta Nikaya XXII.47 > Samanupassana Sutta > Assumptions > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/sn22-047.html .... The sutta continues with: "Now, there is the intellect, there are ideas (mental qualities), there is the property of ignorance. To an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person, touched by experience born of the contact of ignorance, there occur (the thoughts): 'I am,' 'I am thus,' 'I shall be,' 'I shall not be,' 'I shall be possessed of form,' 'I shall be formless,' 'I shall be percipient (conscious),' 'I shall be non-percipient,' or 'I shall be neither percipient nor non-percipient.' ............... Tep: Well, Larry, there are other "useful" posts too : 30039, 33111, 33698, 34076, 45470, 50092, 5228. But I haven't read them yet. I am not sure what you think of the above -- does it answer your question? Regards, Tep ======= 53966 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:01pm Subject: Re: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? matheesha333 Hi Tep, > >M: > > It's interesting that sati has this twofold division - into memory > > and mindfulness. Any thoughts about this? > > > > Tep: Please elaborate more on the "twofold division". Which sutta are > you referring to? > ........................ M: Well it is not a formal division but a division in meaning: And what is the faculty of mindfulness? There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, is mindful, highly meticulous, remembering & able to call to mind even things that were done & said long ago. He remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings in & of themselves... the mind in & of itself... mental qualities in & of themselves --ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. This is called the faculty of mindfulness. M: The above talks of two things as sati - memory and mindfulness. Most suttas seem to talk of the latter, but some do use the former as well. I wondered if this was the influence of scholar monks, but im not convinced by that explanation. I suppose we could argue that if we had good mindfulness in the past, we would have very good memory of it now. I also remember another sutta where someone asks the buddha why some people forget what they have learnt -and the buddha replies it is because of the 5 hindrences. If the 5 hindrences are present there would be little mindfulness, and subsequently, memory. metta Matheesha 53967 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:27pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo matheesha333 Hi Larry, Butting in - it seems you have pinpointed atleast a few things you consider to be your 'self'. L: It makes perfect sense to me to say, on > some level, I am always the same, day after day, year after year, in > any situation. Why this is, I don't know. I don't think this is > simply a belief, but I could well be wrong. I don't think there is > the sense that like or dislike are permanent or lasting. When I > say, "I am hungry" I don't mean, "I am hunger". Also, as I mentioned > before, it seems to me that a sense of the personal (whatever that > may mean) has to be included in what makes a 'self'. M: Self to me is the the belief that I, the person exists. He seems to be the one doing the sensing; the one deciding, the one moving, the one who is conscious. I am the base of everything i do. I use 'I' in my thinking and refer to myself. This is the self view. There is also a feeling, which i consider to be me. The feeling of myself inhabiting me. This is possibly the avijja in my thinking which needs to be slowly wiped out (apart from the self view). I would possibly need to stop using thoughts using the term I (not sure about this). I get hurt if someone insults me. My pride is hurt. If someone does better and i am envious. If someone steals something which belongs to me there is suffering. This suggests that im attached to myself and things which are considered 'mine'. Hope that's useful. metta Matheesha 53968 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:29pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. buddhistmedi... Hi, Matheesha - > Matheesha: Tep asked me to give some examples. I read a sutta in > the AN about the buddha sasana lasting 500 years according to the > buddha. I'm not sure if this is the case and if it is only the > commentaries which say 5000 years. Joop brought this up recently as well. Do you know anything more about this? > Tep: I think I can say a few words about the "500 years life of the Buddha-sassana". For sure, it does not mean that the beginning of the next Buddha Era already began 500 years after the Buddha's Parinibbana. The following Web site provides a good answer for your question. http://Dhammapada.Buddhistnetwork.com Tep: Let's focus on the following two paragraphs that I extracted from the above Web site: Nikayas is also known as Agama Sutras in the Mahayana Buddhism Nowadays, the Buddha's teachings are often referred to as Tipitaka or Tripitaka (Three Treasuries), although they were called "Dhamma- Vinaya" by the Buddha in the discourses. In Maha parinibbána Sutta (Digha Nikáya Sutta 16) & Anguttara Nikáya Sutta 4.180, the Buddha specifically refers to Dhamma as the Suttas (discourses). Vinaya is the disciplinary code of monks and nuns. In the Nikáyas, it is also implied that the Suttas are "Saddhamma" which means "true Dhamma". In Anggutarra Nikaya 8.51,(Refer also to The First Sangha Council-The Thera Mahakassapa has made the blessed Buddha's message to endure 500 years - from the Mahavamsa book) the Buddha warned that the true Dhamma would remain unadulterated for 500 years after his passing into Nibbána. Thereafter, it will become very difficult to distinguish the true teachings from the false. Why? Because although many of these later books contain a lot of Dhamma, some adhamma (i.e. what is contrary to the Dhamma) are added here and there. These alterations scattered throughout these texts are only noticeable if one is sharp and very well versed in the earliest suttas. Otherwise, one would find it very difficult to distinguish the later books from the earlier ones. [end excerpt] Tep: The important words here are "the true Dhamma would remain unadulterated for 500 years after his passing into Nibbána". Indeed, there have been people who are fond of adulterating the true Teachings by writing books that "contain a lot of Dhamma, some adhamma (i.e. what is contrary to the Dhamma) are added here and there". And, sadly, the Internet has assisted them in spreading out the "alterations" at an exponential rate. Regards, Tep ======= 53969 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:44pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. matheesha333 Hi Tep, everyone Excellent. Much merit to you for that post. Thats one problem solved. The other is the bigger one. What makes you so sure that rebirth exists? metta Matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > 53970 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:05pm Subject: Re: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? buddhistmedi... Hi, Matheesha - There are several meanings for the Pali word 'Sati'. [PTS Dictionary:] Sati = memory, recognition, consciousness, D I.180; II.292; Miln 77--80; intentness of mind, wakefulness of mind, mindfulness, alertness, lucidity of mind, self--possession, conscience, self-- consciousness D I.19; III.31, 49, 213, 230. [end quote] Tep: Although the several meanings are confusing, we can see that memory and recognition are part of Sati, in addition to mindfulness and alertness. Pure (i.e. extreme) Abhidhammists probably disagree. >Math. : I suppose we could argue that if we had good mindfulness in the past, we would have very good memory of it now. I also remember another sutta where someone asks the buddha why some people forget what they have learnt -and the buddha replies it is because of the 5 hindrences. If the 5 hindrences are present there would be little mindfulness, and subsequently, memory. Tep: True, good memory is dependent on mindfulness and good mindfulness reinforces memory. How can one be mindful of something if s/he does not remember the characteristics and/or information about that object? But pure Abhidhammists may say, "you are wrong again. Right understanding conditions Sati". Hindrances do not affect memory, I think. They only make us forgetful/careless and losing focus during those moments while we are "intoxicated". Thank you for answering the question. Regards, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > > > > >M: > > > It's interesting that sati has this twofold division - into > memory > > > and mindfulness. Any thoughts about this? > > > (snipped) 53971 From: "Tep Sastri" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:14pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. buddhistmedi... Hi, Matheesha - You asked one of the most asked questions : "What makes you so sure that rebirth exists?" My answer is imple : the Buddha said so in the Paticcasamuppada. For example, see DN 15. "If one is asked, 'Is there a demonstrable requisite condition for birth?' one should answer, 'There is.' "If one is asked, 'From what requisite condition does birth come?' one should say, 'Birth comes from becoming as its requisite condition.' Warm regards, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Tep, everyone > > Excellent. Much merit to you for that post. Thats one problem solved. > > The other is the bigger one. What makes you so sure that rebirth exists? > > metta > > Matheesha > > 53972 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 6:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 Hi Howard, Re what is personal and impersonal, well said. It does make sense that what is thought to be associated with self or to be self is personal, and what is seen not to be so is impersonal. Larry 53973 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:24pm Subject: Re: When there is impatience, where is metta? gazita2002 Hello Phil, I'm glad you're still around, I do enjoy reading your posts. When I read this one, I thought of the Dvedhavitakka Sutta, which I discovered only this morning. Here the Buddha is speaking to the Bhikkhus, in Jeta's Grove, at Savatthi. (this is one of my favourite places on the pilgrimage last year to India) "Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while I was still only an unenlightened Bodhisatta, it occurred to me: 'suppose that I divide my thoughts into 2 classes. I set on one side thoughts of sensual desire, thoughts of ill-will, thoughts of cruelty, and I set on the other side thoughts of renunciation, thoughts of non-ill will, and thoughts of non-cruelty. As I abided thus, diligent, ardent and resolute, a thought of sensual desire arose in me. I understood thus: 'this thought of sensual desire has arisen in me. This leads to my own affliction, to others affliction, and to the affliction of both; it obstructs wisdom, causes difficulties, and leads away from Nibbana.' When I considered: 'this leads to my own affliction,' it subsided in me; when I considered: 'this leads to others affliction,' it subsided in me; when I considered: 'this leads to the affliction of both,' it subsided in me; when I considered: 'this obstructs wisdom, causes difficulties, and leads away from Nibbana,' it subsided in me. Whenever a thought of sensual desire arose in me, I abandoned it , removed it, did away with it." It goes thro ill-will and cruelty the same way. The Buddha also states: "Bhikkhus, whatever a bhikkhu frequently thinks and ponders upon, that will become the inclination of his mind. if he frequently thinks and ponders upon thoughts of sensual desire (ill-will, cruelty) he has abandoned the thought of renunciation (metta, karuna) to cultivate the thought of sensual desire (ill-will, cruelty) and then his mind inclines to thoughts of sensual desire (ill-will, cruelty)." --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Nina and all > > I'd like to share some thoughts on these questions that I found > in the first page text of "Pilgrimage in Sril Lanka.": > Now the question that I am really interested in. > ....snip.... > "When we are impatient, where are the metta and karuna that the > Buddha taught?" > > Well, they are not there, they cannot be there, and that's the way > of reality. Thinking that there should be metta and karuna all the > time can only lead to imitation metta and karuna. When there are > conditions for metta and karuna, they will arise, and only then. > Wanting to have metta and karuna because impatience, or aversion, or > conceit or whatever other akusala state is unpleasant (and > dangerous) is *not* a condition for having metta. Understanding the > akusala states as anatta, as nama, is kusala, and whenever there is > kusala, there is adosa. This adosa is akin to metta, of course - the > same thing? azita: I know we can't make the wholesome thoughts happen, however when I read the above sutta, I felt quite confident that just the knowing that these unwholesome ststes can be 'turned around' by some degree of understanding. For example, when we begin to speak unkindly about someone, there may be conditions for remembering that unkind words cause 'afflictions' to oneself, to another, to both, and then we 'bite our tongue' and don;t continue with the unkindness. > > So it is by understanding that there are conditions for metta, not > by wanting more metta. That is really important to understand, in my > opinion. azita; totally agree on this. > > Yesterday we were doing some year-end banking and shopping. Busy, > crowded sidewalks. I was feeling irritable and impatient, and > thinking of the above question. Where is the metta? ...... > I am not feeling metta very often these days and quite a lot of > hostility, also when I come to DSG. That's the way it goes. Escaping > from this unpleasant situation by trying to generate metta is just a > form of escape. Perhaps I will reflect on the dangers of akusala and > the benefits of kusala. But if I do so because I think I need a fix, > I will just be doing more replacing unpleasant mental objects with > pleasant ones and that is not following the Buddha's teaching. > Knowing the realities (paramattha dhammas) that are arising is the > only way. > > Thanks for letting me have a little ramble. > > Phil Ramble on as much as u like, Phil Patience, courage and good cheer, Azita 53974 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 Tep: "My sense of self is the perception that I am central to everything that is going on, internal and external." Hi Tep, Thanks for coming in. This is another good point. And thanks for the reminder of the formula "form (etc.) is self, or self possesses form, or self is in form, or form is in self". It would seem that if self isn't defined as something specific, such as form, it can be defined by its attributes, whatever is mine. The sense of not changing, not aging, and so forth, even while recognizing that some serious aging is happening is an interesting question. I think it goes along with the sense of being the center of everything. Is this due to a quality of consciousness as light or clarity? If so, how are we to "see through" the illusion of permanence of point of view created by ever arising clarity? Larry 53975 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 2:34pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 12/26/05 7:52:52 PM Eastern Standard Time, dhammachat@... writes: > Tep asked me to give some examples. I read a sutta in > the AN about the buddha sasana lasting 500 years according to the > buddha. I'm not sure if this is the case and if it is only the > commentaries which say 5000 years. Joop brought this up recently as > well. Do you know anything more about this? > ======================= No, I don't. It's not the sort of topic I pay much attention to. One thought though: With the advent of the printing press, and the internet, perhaps there has been bestowed an extension! ;-) 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) 53976 From: LBIDD@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 7:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo lbidd2 Matheesha: "Self to me is the the belief that I, the person exists. He seems to be the one doing the sensing; the one deciding, the one moving, the one who is conscious. I am the base of everything i do. I use 'I' in my thinking and refer to myself. This is the self view. There is also a feeling, which i consider to be me. The feeling of myself inhabiting me. This is possibly the avijja in my thinking which needs to be slowly wiped out (apart from the self view). I would possibly need to stop using thoughts using the term I (not sure about this). I get hurt if someone insults me. My pride is hurt. If someone does better and i am envious. If someone steals something which belongs to me there is suffering. This suggests that im attached to myself and things which are considered 'mine'." Hi Matheesha, All good points, especially the one about self being the doer. Is there a logic to doership? If an action is manifested by something that is me or mine (e.g. body, mind) then "I" must be the doer? Is that how it works? What do you mean by the feeling of me? This occurred to me also, but I couldn't sort it out. I tried to back into it by looking at an occasion when I didn't feel like myself, but this didn't get me anywhere either. Another characteristic of self is the sense of being cut off from others. I think this ties in to what you said about pride and being hurt by insults. However, I don't think this sense of being cut off is exactly conceit. What do you make of it? Larry 53977 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 10:26pm Subject: Re: When there is impatience, where is metta? philofillet Hi Azita (and Nina at the end) > I'm glad you're still around, I do enjoy reading your posts. Thanks. Me too. More lobha, more mana, so much, so much... > When I read this one, I thought of the Dvedhavitakka Sutta, which > I discovered only this morning. > > Here the Buddha is speaking to the Bhikkhus, in Jeta's Grove, at > Savatthi. (this is one of my favourite places on the pilgrimage last > year to India) I like listening to the talk from last year in which you all seem to be strolling around this grove. I can hear birds, and footsteps crunching on leaves. These little details make for even more clinging to the talks. > > "Bhikkhus, before my enlightenment, while I was still only an > unenlightened Bodhisatta, it occurred to me: 'suppose that I divide > my thoughts into 2 classes. I set on one side thoughts of sensual > desire, thoughts of ill-will, thoughts of cruelty, and I set on the > other side thoughts of renunciation, thoughts of non-ill will, and > thoughts of non-cruelty. > > As I abided thus, diligent, ardent and resolute, a thought of > sensual desire arose in me. I understood thus: 'this thought of > sensual desire has arisen in me. This leads to my own affliction, to > others affliction, and to the affliction of both; (big snip ) arose in me, I abandoned it , > removed it, did away with it." > > It goes thro ill-will and cruelty the same way. > > azita: I know we can't make the wholesome thoughts happen, however > when I read the above sutta, I felt quite confident that just the > knowing that these unwholesome ststes can be 'turned around' by some > degree of understanding. > For example, when we begin to speak unkindly about someone, > there may be conditions for remembering that unkind words > cause 'afflictions' to oneself, to another, to both, and then > we 'bite our tongue' and don;t continue with the unkindness. Phil: Yes, I find the Buddha's discourses can be such strong condition for letting go of akusala, at least for a moment. And the neat thing is that sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. It's uncontrollable. We begin to appreciate the anattaness of it all, and we thereby begin to take a few baby steps in the direction of liberation. > Ramble on as much as u like, Phil Thanks, I will. > > Patience, courage and good cheer, Not a day goes by that I don't think of these words. It's not fun feeling grouchy, but there can be conditions for patience and courage even when there isn't good cheer! Talking to you makes me feel a little bit more cheerful, I must say. But it's not metta. I read in Nina's chapter on the Cetasika of adosa that a test is, would we miss the person if they were no longer there? If the answer is yes, it is attachment, not metta. I think I got that right. Correct me if I'm wrong, Nina. Phil 53978 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 10:30pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. matheesha333 Hi Howard, H: It's not the sort of topic I pay much attention to. One > thought though: With the advent of the printing press, and the internet, > perhaps there has been bestowed an extension! ;-) M: :)) I think it would be good to remind myself that super powers are not the path. This is not what the buddha was about. metta Matheesha 53979 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 10:51pm Subject: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo matheesha333 Hi Larry, L:> All good points, especially the one about self being the doer. Is there > a logic to doership? If an action is manifested by something that is me > or mine (e.g. body, mind) then "I" must be the doer? Is that how it > works? Desire arises to eat something ('my desire'). Then there is intention ('I'm going to eat now...'), then the action of eating ('im eating'). It's simply wrong interpretation of what is going on isnt it? It's actually desire-->intention-->action. 'I' is an an addition over and above what is happening. Is it possible to suppress the feeling/sense of self and just move your finger? L:> What do you mean by the feeling of me? This occurred to me also, but I > couldn't sort it out. I tried to back into it by looking at an occasion > when I didn't feel like myself, but this didn't get me anywhere either. M: Some people do have such experiences - known as depersonalisation - where they feel unreal and insubstantial. Usually in psychiatric conditions, extreme anxiety etc! Well, if you focus your awareness on this central feeling of 'me' in your mind/body you will feel the feeling of me (the knower). If you keep focusing it will also fade away as it is impermanent. L:> Another characteristic of self is the sense of being cut off from > others. I think this ties in to what you said about pride and being hurt > by insults. However, I don't think this sense of being cut off is > exactly conceit. What do you make of it? M: Feeling of being cut off.. It seems to be a complex emotion. There is a subtle craving for connection (to the 'other'). Then there is aversion towards oneself, and possibly conceit in the form of lower estimation of oneself. Then this is a good example of how ignorance and use of 'self' in thinking can bring suffering and why dropping the self is one step in the path to the cessation of suffering. Larry I think i should add..anatta is probably not something you can reason away. I feel the way forward is to actually focus in real time what you consider to be the self. metta Matheesha 53980 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:07pm Subject: Re: When there is impatience, where is metta? buddhatrue Hi Phil (and Azita), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > Now the question that I am really interested in. > > "When we are impatient, where are the metta and karuna that the > Buddha taught?" > > Well, they are not there, they cannot be there, and that's the way > of reality. Thinking that there should be metta and karuna all the > time can only lead to imitation metta and karuna. When there are > conditions for metta and karuna, they will arise, and only then. > Wanting to have metta and karuna because impatience, or aversion, or > conceit or whatever other akusala state is unpleasant (and > dangerous) is *not* a condition for having metta. I think that Azita has given you some really good input on your post- with support from the suttas. I would also like to re-emphasize what Azita has had to say. Negative thoughts need to be seen for what they are until they stop. That is the power of mindfulness. Negative thoughts cannot be `vanquished' with the cultivation of metta, and that approach is antithetical to the Buddha's intentions. For some reason you often think of the `generation of metta' in terms of a coping mechanism- like metta is supposed to be a salve to stop the pain of negative feelings. Furthermore, you believe that anyone who tries to cultivate metta, rather than waiting for it to arise spontaneously, does the cultivation for that very reason. This is viewing the process from your perspective and is also classic projection. The cultivation of metta begins when the hindrances are suppressed, not in order to suppress the hindrances. For example, the Metta Sutta begins with: This is to be done by one skilled in aims who wants to break through to the state of peace: Be capable, upright, & straightforward, easy to instruct, gentle, & not conceited, content & easy to support, with few duties, living lightly, with peaceful faculties, masterful, modest, & no greed for supporters. Do not do the slightest thing that the wise would later censure. Therefore, it should be seen that the cultivation of metta is not a means to end negative thoughts and feelings. Those negative thoughts and feelings should be suppressed somewhat prior to the cultivation of metta (which is done through samatha/jhana meditation, btw). Also, Phil, you write, "I am not feeling metta very often these days and quite a lot of hostility, also when I come to DSG." This demonstrates to me that you believe metta cannot be generated if one has any negative thoughts or feelings, but that isn't true. One doesn't need to be a saint or a Buddha/Arahant to practice metta. As the Metta Sutta goes on to state: Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. "Let him not deceive another nor despise anyone anywhere. In anger or ill will let him not wish another ill." Notice Phil that this doesn't say "Don't ever have anger or irritation" it says, to paraphrase "If you have anger or irritation, don't wish for another to suffer." So, lately you have been in a pissy mood. So what?? Have you been wishing for others to suffer because of your pissy mood? If so, then you are not practicing metta; if not, then you are practicing metta. If you don't wish for others to suffer, even though you are suffering inside, then you are practicing restraint and metta, as far as I see it. Just some things to consider. Metta, James 53981 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 0:51am Subject: Re: When there is impatience, where is metta? philofillet Hi James > Just some things to consider. Some interesting points, thanks James. I tend to make blanket statements about metta - I'll try to keep an open mind and reflect on what you've quoted. Phil 53982 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:03am Subject: Re: An Interview With Htoo sukinderpal Hi Larry, You wrote: > Merry Christmas. My only agenda was to investigate the conventional > sense of self. For example, for me, self certainly seems to be lasting, > and it is bound up with a vague and somewhat incoherent sense of agency > (control) and independence, which goes with it. But there is also > something else which I can only call 'personality'. This is what > identifies me as uniquely me. It seems to be unchanging throughout the > years somewhat like certain characteristic features of my face. But I > can't tie it directly to the khandhas. Nimitta (sign) seems like it > might be close, but that's not really it. I'm not trying, necessarily, > to explain this in abhidhamma terms, but rather to simply understand > it. What I'm looking for is what exactly I really believe is my self. Sukin: As I said to Joop, we all think differently. And I believe that we arrive at being interested in the Dhamma by asking different questions, getting different answers and questioning those, on and on in our own characteristic way. This will go on as long as we are still taken in by any 'conceptual' view of what Dhamma is, and becomes less as our understanding grows firm in the conviction that all that we need to know and which can "really" be known with panna, is the paramattha dhammas of this moment. I might have appreciated your way of thinking more had I in the past also asked the same questions, and perhaps I would have been able to give you a more satisfactory answer. Admittedly I have always been too lazy to pursue any particular line of reasoning and I do appreciate that someone can have the determination strong enough to pursue a particular line of enquiry to its conclusion. And it may also be as Herman (where is he?!) once said that there is a tendency to regurgitate theory, and so any illusion of knowing may prevent further enquiry. But this does not always have to be, as one of the most important reminders in correct theory itself, is that even *this* can be known as a conditioned dhamma. Besides I truly believe that "pariyatti" *is* the condition for "patipatti", which is satipatthana. In fact I perceive that pursuing lines of enquiry as you suggest to usually be conditioned by lobha, whereas a moment of correct intellectual understanding, does not appear to be so. It comes with a degree of detachment which I think is a necessary part of the correct development of panna all the way. It feels tempting to test out and to attempt directly experiencing of the various dhammas, like hardness, heat, anger, thinking and to determine what is 'self'. Who doesn't want to know more or understand better?! However when we "do" it at the very thought of doing it, it is *not* the kind of knowing which is a moment of satipatthana. Neither can it be called Cintamaya panna for example, because even this has the present dhamma as object, in this case, "the thinking about "doing"". I think it is important to remember that pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha, these all have the present dhamma as object. If what you perceive as 'self' manifests and appears to any of these levels of panna, well and good. But this is not what is happening in the exercises that you are recommending. As to your not being able to pin point and directly tie your experiences to the fact of the khandhas, isn't it better to attribute this to plain ignorance? The fact that there seems to be a sense of personal identity extended through time; I understand that sanna marks every moment of our experience and all the time there is thinking after every sense and mind door process. So the memories of experiences conditioned by ignorance of this life time must necessarily produce such sense of self, mustn't it? After all, we don't remember and have a sense of being who or what we were in previous lives, do we? I think ultimately we can pin point any such experience to the fact of the three papancas, namely, tanha, mana and ditthi. ====================================== Larry: > I know this goes against everything you believe in, but do you think > you could bring yourself to look at your own experience and investigate > your own sense of self? I would be particularly interested if you can > find this mysterious 'personality', or something similar. Sukin: If and when there are conditions for such looking, I'll let you know. As of now I value more the development of pariyatti, seeing the efficacy of this over any intentional "finding out". On the other hand, if it were natural to me to enquire in such a way, I might have 'just done it'. ;-) Sorry if I have disappointed you and caused any frustration. Metta, Sukin. 53983 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 0:43am Subject: Leaving Wrong View ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: How to reduce, eliminate & leave behind Wrong View ??? Then a certain Bhikkhu approached the Blessed One and asked him: Venerable Sir, how should one know & see, for leaving any wrong view, for eliminating any belief in an ego, for overcoming all 'self'-making ? Bhikkhu, when one knows and sees any eye, form, eye-consciousness, eye-contact, & feeling arised caused by eye-contact as impermanent, when one knows and sees this, that wrong view, that belief in an ego, that making up of a self, is overcome, eliminated and all abandoned... Bhikkhu, when one knows & sees any ear, sound, ear-consciousness, ear-contact, & any feeling arised caused by ear-contact as transient, when one knows and sees this, that wrong view, that belief in an ego, that making up of a self, is overcome, eliminated and all abandoned... Bhikkhu, when one knows & sees any nose, smell, nose-consciousness, nose-contact, & any feeling arised caused by nose-contact as temporary, when one knows and sees this, that wrong view, that belief in an ego, that making up of a self, is overcome, eliminated and all abandoned... Bhikkhu, when one knows & sees any tongue, taste, tongue-consciousness, tongue-contact, & feeling arised caused by tongue-contact as short-lived, when one knows and sees this, that wrong view, that belief in an ego, that making up of a self, is overcome, eliminated and all abandoned... Bhikkhu, when one knows & sees any body, touch, body-consciousness, body-contact, & feeling arised caused by body-contact as ephemeral, when one knows and sees this, that wrong view, that belief in an ego, that making up of a self, is overcome, eliminated and all abandoned... Bhikkhu, when one knows & sees any mind, thought, mind-consciousness, mental-contact, & feeling arised caused by mind-contact as momentary, when one knows and sees this, that wrong view, that belief in an ego, that making up of a self, is overcome, eliminated and all abandoned... Source: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [147-148] Section 35: On The 6 Senses. The Overcoming of Wrong View!: 165-167. 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 !!! <....> 53984 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:09am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 344- Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[n] 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;-) ========================================== [Ch20 - Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)] We read in the Middle Length Sayings (I, no. 2, All the cankers) that the Buddha, when he was near Såvatthí, in the Jeta Grove, spoke to the monks on the means of controlling all the cankers. He spoke about unwise attention and about various kinds of doubt, pertaining to the past, the future or the present, which may arise when there is no wise attention. We read about doubt: * "In these ways he is not wisely attending: if he thinks, “Now, was I in a past period? Now, was I not in a past period? Now, what was I in a past period? Now, how was I in a past period? Now, having been what, what did I become in a past period?...." * We read the same about doubt pertaining to the future and doubt pertaining to the present. When doubt is accumulated there can be doubt about many different subjects. We read in the Dhammasangaùi (§1004) that there can be doubt about the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, the Discipline, the past or the future or both, the “Dependant Origination” (1). The Atthasåliní (II, Book II, Part II, Chapter I, 354, 355) explains as to doubts about the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, that one may doubt about the qualities of the Buddha or about the characteristic marks of his body(2), that one may doubt whether there is attainment of enlightenment, whether there is nibbåna, or whether there are people who can attain enlightenment. As to doubt about the past and the future, this doubt can concern the “khandhas”, the “dhåtus” (elements) and “åyatanas” (twelve bases) in the past and in the future. *** 1) Book of Analysis, Chapter 17, §915. 2) A Buddha has 32 bodily marks. See Dialogues of the Buddha III, no. 30. ***** Sloth(thiina), Torpor(middha) and Doubt(vicikicchaa)[[to be contd] Metta, Sarah ====== 53985 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What are the five faculties in the ariyans? nilovg Hi Matheesha, Knowing that you do astudy on the five indriyas and balas, I thought of you when reading suttas in K.S. Mahaavagga, Indriyasamyutta. I think you have B.B. translation? see p. 1670, no 9, Analysis. I compared the Thai Co and B.B. gives notes. Sometimes lokuttara indriyas are referred to like concentration here: it has nibbaana (release) as object. It is said that sati together with paññaa is strong. Here you also see the connection of sati with remembrance. The Pali sarati means to recollect. If you think of sati as non-forgetfulness you see the connection. Moreover: firm remembrance of Dhamma is the proximate cause of sati. As to the sambojjhhangas, B.B. in his notes, p. 1901, explains that there are the stages of development: initial arousal, maturation, culmination. I think that they develop together, as insight develops, not in isolation. Nina. op 27-12-2005 02:01 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...: >>> It's interesting that sati has this twofold division - into > memory >>> and mindfulness. Any thoughts about this? 53986 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experiences as self, ha Makom. nilovg Hi Howard (and Larry), A neighbour who is a pastor and very good at Hebrew happened to pop in, and I asked him about ha Makom. He said: Jerusalem was the place where the Jews felt safe, and also Elohim is a safe refuge. He had read that also Amsterdam was the place where they were safe. The self seems very safe and secure to us! Nina. op 26-12-2005 23:11 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > Excellent, Larry. You've conveyed the sense of self beautifully with > this! Interestingly, I think, this leads me to recall one of the epithets that > Judaism uses for God - it is 'ha Makom', which means "the place." 53987 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experiences as self. nilovg Hi Larry, op 26-12-2005 22:43 schreef Larry op LBIDD@...: > A sense of self is very powerful and pervasive, but I wonder > if this ordinary level of understanding 'self' is lacking. We don't > seem to look at it, even on a conventional level. We cry "me, me, > me", "I, I, I", but we never question what that means. Are these just > words or do they refer to something we consider to be real. Please > tell me the answer. Can you tell me? Yes, tell me. Convey to me the > answer. I am the place that lacks the answer. Me over here. Me. --------- N: Let me use Phil's example of harsh speech. We can see the difference when the "I" is insulted, important me is insulted, and when there can be a beginning mindfulness, or even right consideration on the level of intellectual correct understanding, that what is heard is only sound, no words. Do you see the difference? This can be more helpful than reasoning and thinking of what that self idea really is. Once I asked: feeling tired, what is that? Answer: clinging to oneself. We are so used to find ourselves important, the praise or blame "we" receive. Once Kh Sujin asked me: is seeing Nina, is hearing Nina? In the Q. of Milinda, King Milinda and Nagasena had a similar discussion: are the headhairs Nagasena. Or: is rupakkhandha, feeling Khandha ...Nagasena? We can come to see that it is unreasonable to believe in a self. Since it is an illusion, why should we spend time to think about what it is? It is better to turn to what is real: nama and rupa or five khandhas. We need all our time to find out more about what is reality. Nina 53988 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Path Of Discrimination, Abhidhamma. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri" wrote: > > Tep: I think I can say a few words about the "500 years life of the > Buddha-sassana". For sure, it does not mean that the beginning of the > next Buddha Era already began 500 years after the Buddha's > Parinibbana. > > The following Web site provides a good answer for your question. > > http://Dhammapada.Buddhistnetwork.com > Hallo Tep, Matheesha, all Some months I did some text-study about the statement of the decline of Buddha Sasana in 500 years, later changed in 5000 years by commentaries. I was specially interested because it has to do with the pessimism nowadays about the state of Theravada in the world; I could not imagine that the Buddha was a pessimist. My "study" was not really complete. A derived interest was who changed it from 500 to 5000 years and why. The "who" was Buddhaghosa or the not longer existing Sinhalese texts he has used. The "why" of Buddhaghosa gave: see for example my messages #52121 and #52125; but I have another argument: A wellknown socialpsychological mechanism is that of reduction of cognitive dissonance; known as "when prophacy failed": the prophacy (that could not have been of the Buddha) was not correct: Buddha Sasana still existed 1,000 years after the passing away of the Buddha, in the time Buddhaghosa lived; that's the reason the trick of making it ten times longer was invented. Tep, I have looked at the site you mentioned (http://dhammapada.buddhistnetwork.com); it is not clear to me who is the compiler of the file ''Disapparance of The Buddha's True Dhamma.htm" and the content is a strange mixture too. And point was new to me: that the "500 years" was not only mentioned (one time) in the Vinya Pitika but also in AN VIII:51. This Sutta does not occur in www.accesstoinsight of Thanissaro and not in the anthology (book) of Bhikkhu Bodhi ; perhaps it is not important enough? I only found with google a German translation ("Die Gründung des Nonnenordens"): it's nearly the same as was is stated in in Vinya Pitika about it. What to think about the text you quoted, Tep? "Thereafter, it will become very difficult to distinguish the true teachings from the false. Why? Because although many of these later books contain a lot of Dhamma, some adhamma (i.e. what is contrary to the Dhamma) are added here and there. These alterations scattered throughout these texts are only noticeable if one is sharp and very well versed in the earliest suttas. Otherwise, one would find it very difficult to distinguish the later books from the earlier ones." The Dhamma is not for anxious and fearful people, and not for pessimistic and fatalistic people; if the Dhamma is true (and It is) than it will comeback even if it seemed to be disappeared. So Tep, I don't agree (yes, here I am again) with your words: Tep: "The important words here are "the true Dhamma would remain unadulterated for 500 years after his passing into Nibbána". Indeed, there have been people who are fond of adulterating the true Teachings by writing books that "contain a lot of Dhamma, some adhamma (i.e. what is contrary to the Dhamma) are added here and there". And, sadly, the Internet has assisted them in spreading out the "alterations" at an exponential rate." First a factual question, because I'm not a Pali-knower: Does "adhamma" really mean "contrary to the Dhamma"? Or does it mean "information not mentioned in the Dhamma and for that reason not liberating and thus not important information"? An example; the evolutionary theory (darwinism) is not mentioned in the Tipitaka, but is it contrary to the Dhamma? I think not. No misunderstanding: there are many pseudo-buddhistic book and internet-texts, popular buddhism; in the same way that there are many silly popular natural-scientific texts ("Quantummechanics for Dummies"); but what does that proof? All this considerations of me are leading to the question: Is it possible (and I think it is) to change the cultural exterior language that was used in North Inda 2500 years ago; and now use other language, other similes and other metaphores to teach the same Dhamma? And in a way that the core message of the Dhamma rests unchanged? Metta Joop 53989 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] An object’s relatedness by Nyanaponika sarahprocter... Dear Antony (& Nina*), It’s always good to hear from you and as usual and I often think of our live discussion together and the ambulance siren we heard with the stories which follow. I meant to respond before now. --- Antony Woods wrote: > Dear Grangoup, > > Nyanaponika Thera wrote in "The Power of Mindfulness": > "Among the characteristic features of any object, physical or mental, > there is one class we often overlook due to hasty or superficial > attention, and therefore needs to be treated separately. This is > the //relatedness// of the object. The object's relatedness extends > back to its past — to its origin, causes, reasons, and logical > precedents; it also extends outward to embrace the total context — its > background, environment, and presently active influences. We can never > fully understand things if we view them in artificial isolation. We > have to see them as part of a wider pattern, in their conditioned and > conditioning nature; and this can be done only with the help of > sustained attention." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nyanaponika/wheel121.html > > Are there any recommended Useful Posts on this topic? .... S: I’m not sure I follow the passage or exactly what you’re asking for, but I thought of your question when I read K.Sujin’s comments in the series Nina has been so helpfully transcribing and sharing from the talks and discussions in Cambodia – it’s a lot of work for sure*: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/53815 Sujin: “When we study the realities of citta, cetasika and rúpa, we should also understand their conditional relations. Several monks have said that they believe that they in this life will never understand the subject of conditions. They read the scriptures including also the teaching on conditions, but they need explanations so that they can grasp the meaning of paccaya, condition, and can gradually understand this subject from the beginning. For example, citta and cetasika must arise together, they are both nåma dhammas that are closely joined and cannot do without each other. However, they are not the same paramattha dhamma, ultimate reality. Citta and cetasika that are conascent, condition one another by way of sampayutta-paccaya, association-condition, because they are both nåma dhammas. Even though nåma dhamma and rúpa dhamma arise and fall away together, their characteristics are different from each other, they cannot be as closely joined as nåma with another nåma. Therefore, nåma and rúpa cannot condition each other by way of association-condition.” As for U.P., you might also find it helpful to look under ‘Arammana’ and ‘Arammana paccaya’ (object condition). Also ‘sa~n~naa’ or perception is very important here. Sanna marks its object at each moment, accumulating and building up a pattern of repeatedly marking certain kinds of objects such as certain kinds of foods we like. Also look under ‘Conditions’ and ask more. I have a feeling that we’re touching on a deep topic and I’d like to understand more of your thoughts on it. By beng aware repeatedly and directly understanding (paramattha) objects appearing, in due course the conditioned and impermanent nature of these dhammas can be known. The conditioning and conditioned nature of dhammas is not anything ‘apart’ from the dhammas in question. But this is not by concentrating or sustained attention as I understand these words. There is manasikara (attention) arising at every moment with every citta – it can be wise or more usually, unwise. Like with concentration, most of our ‘sustained attention’ or focusing on objects is unwise attention. When we look at the ‘wider pattern’ and so on, isn’t this just thinking? (See U.P. on ‘Thinking’) Again, I’m picking up this thread because I don’t think anyone else has, but I don’t think my answers are what you are wishing to hear. I’d be glad if you’d elaborate and let me know why this passage struck you and what you learn from it. Perhaps I’m missing the point. ***** I was also interested in your post and heart-felt comments on the ‘All’ (#53085). As you say, we can easily think we understand about ‘the eye and forms etc’ and that there must be more to the ‘All’, such as the ‘network of friends’ or the ‘suffering in Pakistan’ which you refer to. I believe, however, that the great profundity of the Buddha’s teachings is to point out that ‘the eye and forms etc’ really is All there is and that we really don’t understand this All. Instead we foolishly go on taking objects out of visible objects appearing, out of sounds appearing and so on, conjuring up ideas and fantasies about our network of friends, the suffering around the world and so on. In fact the real suffering is ‘the eye and forms etc’ at this moment that are so useless and impermanent but which we grasp onto and then feel dismayed when they don’t last or arise as we’d wish. If there were no ‘eye and forms’ etc, would there be any ideas of networks of friends, suffering in Pakistan and so on? You also said that you think ‘the All’ is ‘a living participatory reality in which concepts like the suffering in Pakistan are used when it is purposeful to do so’. This is right. The reality is now, the use of concepts is now. It depends when we use such concepts and experience such realities whether there is any awareness and understanding or not. Knowing realities doesn’t mean less concern and compassion for those who are suffering. Life continues as it always has – moments of selfishness and moments of caring for others. The only difference is that we begin to understand ‘the All’ and this takes a lot of honesty and truthfulness too – honesty which sees the presently arising mental states for what they are. Metta, Sarah *Nina, I’ve greatly appreciated the series and to be reminded of the many good points and reminders that K.Sujin gave on that trip. Several times I almost ‘felt’ I was in Cambodia again – the power of sanna of course! We also have some good English recordings from Cambodia (inc. some from the last day of discussions which you missed I think) – we plan to edit and make these available in due course too). .... Sujin (same extract as above): “I have given many lectures about the ³Expositor², the Commentary to the Dhammasangani (Buddhist Psychological Ethics), the first Book of the Abhidhamma. I have given lectures about the twentyfour conditions contained in the Patthåna, the ³Conditional Relations², that is the last Book of the Abhidhamma, so that other people could have understanding of them.” .... S: And those of us who don’t speak Thai are very fortunate to have access to her lectures indirectly as well through your books and articles. In appreciation. ======================================= 53990 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Nadi Sutta: A Lovely and Helpful Metaphor sarahprocter... Hi Howard (Joop & all), I'm enjoying your posts and particularly appreciated your presentation of the Nadi sutta and the extract from TB's translation. --- upasaka@... wrote: > In the following sutta, the Buddha describes the worldling as a > person > being swept along by the river of experience and who, instead of letting > go > to freely move along, smoothly, and without impediment, grasps > frantically and > desperately at what he encounters - the kasa grasses (rupa), kusa > grasses > (vedana), reeds (sa~n~na), birana grasses (sankhara), and trees > (vi~n~nana), all > ungraspable and leading only to hurt and disaster. What a dramatic > picture of > the panic and upset of samsara. > __________________ > SN XXII.93 > Nadi Sutta > The River .... S: Good comments and yes, how very foolish it is to grasp at the khandhas. I looked at BB's translation, but sometimes when it's not given in full, it doesn't carry the same impact I find. (He uses 'the kasa grass, kusa grass, rushes, reeds and trees'. Very similar.) As you say, 'A Lovely and Helpful Metaphor'. ..... You're having an interesting discussion with Nina and others on 'doubt'. As I see it, doubt(vicikiccha) refers to doubt about dhammas or realities, about khandhas appearing right now as we speak. By understanding these dhammas, there is a growing confidence in the Triple Gem as you know and less and less conditions for doubt to arise. I agree that it doesn't refer to doubts about the dates of texts or whether the Buddha or Sariputta or someone else literally uttered the words of a sutta or other text. On a point of Joop's (I think), when we say the words of the Abhidhamma or ancient commentaries are the Buddha's, it doesn't mean that they are all his spoken words. By being in conformity with his teachings, when given by his disciples, they are then considered as the Buddha's words however. The Buddha sometimes gave an outline or a brief detail and this would be elaborated on by these key disciples with their great wisdom. In the same way now, if we say the khandhas are dangerous to grasp like the kusa grass and so on, we are merely using our own words to paraphrase or convey the Buddha's teachings. In this sense, anything we say in conformity with the Truths, with the teaching of the khandhas and so on, are the Buddha's words, not ours, no matter what style we use. Without his teachings, we wouldn't have any idea about khandhas, dhatus or anatta, for example. Nor would we have any idea about the unsatisfactoriness, danger or impermanence of the khandhas. This started as an appreciation of Howard's post on the sutta and has turned into a ramble.... Metta, Sarah 53991 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 4:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right Livelihood of the NEP jonoabb Hi Joop Joop wrote: >Your remarks are to much a challenge to end this thread now, so here >I go again. > >Jon: "What I meant to say in my earlier posts was that, to my >understanding, 'right livelihood' refers to the cetasika of that name >that has the function of restraining from wrong speech or action …" > >Joop: that's a surprise to me: "right speech" ((sammá-vácá) is >something else as "right livelihood" (sammá-ájíva), as far as I know. > > Yes, right livelihood is different from both right speech and right action. When there is wholesome restraint from wrong speech or action in the course of one's livelihood, it is the mental factor of right livelihood that performs that function. Outside of that context, it is the mental factors of right speech and right action that perform those functions. >Jon: "On my reading, the teachings are to be understood at a deeper >level than the behavioural one, in that the ethical quality of a >person's behaviour depends on the ethical quality of the accompanying >mental state. >All aspects of kusala spoken of by the Buddha (dana, sila and >bhavana) concern mind-states rather than behaviour, in my view." > >Joop: Let's look at the word "deeper". It's a concept, not a ultimate >reality. As a concept it's in fact a spatial metaphore; that >something (for example the five khandas) has levels and that one >level is at the surface and an other or several are under that >surface; and that under the surface is deeper=more important=more >essential that on the surface. >Is it a correct concept? I think that that's not the case: why should >the "ethical quality of a person's behaviour" be less essential >than "the ethical quality of the accompanying mental state." Has the >Buddha stated that? I think not > > I could have said 'different' instead of 'deeper'. But I don't think that's the nub of the issue here. I think the nub is that it is implicit in the Buddha's teaching that the ethical quality of an act depends on the ethical quality of the accompanying mental state. Do you see it this way? If not, then what determines the ethical quality of an act, would you say? >" 'A monk was sick with dysentery', records a passage in the Pali >Canon (forgot where), 'and lay fouled in his own urine and >excrement.' The Buddha came to his lodging and asked why no one was >taking care of him. 'The other monks don't care for me', he >replied, 'because I do nothing for them.' Buddha and his attendent >Ananda washed the monk, lifted him up, and laid him on a bed. …" > >My personal view is even that an ethical mental state is worthless >(and can easily get hypocrit) when it's not tranlated in ethical >behavior. >Your view is idealistic (in the philosophical meaning of that word) >and reductionistic because you only talk about nama and (because >behavior is nama+rupa) neglect rupa. > > I don't agree ;-)) To say that that the ethical quality of an act depends on the accompanying mental state is not to talk only about nama and to neglect rupa. Many forms of kusala involve an act of body or speech. Without understanding the crucial importance of the mental state, there will be less kusala in one's acts of speech and body. Jon 53992 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: An Interview With Htoo upasaka_howard Hi, Sukin, Larry, and all (especially Sarah & Jon) - In a message dated 12/27/05 4:07:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, sukinder@... writes: > and it may also be as Herman (where is he?!) ========================= Come to think of it, I wrote Herman a couple weeks ago (at least) and haven't gotten a reply! I do hope all is well. Does anyone know how he is? Please let me know on list or off. 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) 53993 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: experiences as self, ha Makom. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Larry) - In a message dated 12/27/05 4:57:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard (and Larry), > A neighbour who is a pastor and very good at Hebrew happened to pop in, and > I asked him about ha Makom. He said: Jerusalem was the place where the Jews > felt safe, and also Elohim is a safe refuge. He had read that also Amsterdam > was the place where they were safe. > The self seems very safe and secure to us! > Nina. > =========================== Thanks, Nina. :-) That is a very interesting explanation - a refuge. I don't know mainstream Judaism's explanation of the term, but what you have conveyed to us makes much sense. [Another (not contradicting) perspective is that in kabbala and chassidism, Jewish mystical traditions, there is countenanced but one reality, Ha Shem (God, but literally "The Name"), in which all phenomena arise and fall and have their being.] 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) 53994 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 5:08am Subject: Herman (was] Re: An Interview With Htoo) sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Sukin, Joop & other Herman 'fans', --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Sukin, Larry, and all (especially Sarah & Jon) - > > In a message dated 12/27/05 4:07:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, > sukinder@... writes: > > > and it may also be as Herman (where is he?!) > ========================= > Come to think of it, I wrote Herman a couple weeks ago (at least) > and > haven't gotten a reply! I do hope all is well. Does anyone know how he > is? > Please let me know on list or off. .... S: As others are asking too, I'll mention here that we also wrote to Herman a couple of weeks or so ago to see if he'd like a copy of Survey and to check all was well. We also had no reply which was unusual. Joop asked me recently about him and was going to write himself. Joop, did you get a response? He does often take breaks from the list. Hopefully he'll be back soon. Herman, if you're reading this, many of us miss you! Metta, Sarah ========= 53995 From: "Joop" Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 5:18am Subject: Herman (was] Re: An Interview With Htoo) jwromeijn Dear all, I tried to mail Herman a week ago, on a email-adress Sarah gave me; because I want to know too about him, I liked his enthusiastic postings. But got a message of the 'postman' of the provider that this adress doesn't exist. Perhaps any of our Australian friends know something? Otherwise all we can do is think with metta and karuna on him. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Howard, Sukin, Joop & other Herman 'fans', > > --- upasaka@a... wrote: > > > Hi, Sukin, Larry, and all (especially Sarah & Jon) - > > > > In a message dated 12/27/05 4:07:32 AM Eastern Standard Time, > > sukinder@k... writes: > > > > > and it may also be as Herman (where is he?!) > > ========================= > > Come to think of it, I wrote Herman a couple weeks ago (at least) > > and > > haven't gotten a reply! I do hope all is well. Does anyone know how he > > is? > > Please let me know on list or off. > .... > S: As others are asking too, I'll mention here that we also wrote to > Herman a couple of weeks or so ago to see if he'd like a copy of Survey > and to check all was well. We also had no reply which was unusual. Joop > asked me recently about him and was going to write himself. Joop, did you > get a response? > > He does often take breaks from the list. Hopefully he'll be back soon. > > Herman, if you're reading this, many of us miss you! > > Metta, > > Sarah > ========= > 53996 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 7:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: When there is impatience, where is metta? nilovg Hi Phil, Right, attachment conditions aversion when the beloved person or object is not there. Metta is kusala, different from attachment. When we see the benefit of metta there can be conditions for its arising in daily life. Nina. op 27-12-2005 07:26 schreef Phil op philco777@...: > I read in Nina's chapter on the Cetasika of adosa that a test is, > would we miss the person if they were no longer there? If the answer > is yes, it is attachment, not metta. I think I got that right. 53997 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:50am Subject: RE: [dsg] Reality, Objects, Labels, Perception (was: Trees and Anger ) dacostacharles Hi all, This is a copy of a reply to the following thread: "RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG" Now I could also see how useful it would be to change the subject (i.e. may be to "RE: [dsg] Reality, Objects, Labels, Perception (was: Trees and Anger)"). ---------------------------------- "Directly Knowing Realities" Sarah: "... Learning and directly knowing what the realities are is what we're just beginning to learn about ." Charles: "What do you mean by this, learning and directly knowing what the realities are?" Sarah: "" ............................................. C: When I touch a tree, thoughts are experienced (impulses as thoughts). And a lot depends on what the other senses are doing. But I think you are looking for are the labels: "rough hardness." S: I'm not really looking for a label but for your experience. You say that when you touch a tree, thoughts are experienced, but aren't these thoughts on account of what is experienced through the body-sense or touch first of all? In other words, if there were no experience of the 'tangible object' such as the 'rough hardness', would there be any thoughts about that experience? C: What you say is partially true, "these thoughts" are experienced on account of what is coming in from all the gates, and the order may not be important, but the dominate gate will have the most influence. This also means that thoughts about another, seemingly unrelated, object (the mind gate can detect memories from any combination of previous inputs to the sense gates) can be triggered by the current situation; including re-experiencing 'rough hardness' when the object we commonly call tree is at the visual gate and consciousness/perception with a type of recognition is present in the mind. S: "" ............................. C: ... Visible object, is that real? I just call this one "tree." It is real to me because it is a visible object. That is, something the mind can experience through the eye gate (sense organ) at first. No, it is not experienced as emotion at first, but as a picture giving rise to intellect and thus emotion. S: When there is the experience of seeing, the visible object seen is very real. Now we're looking at the computer, the visible object is all that is seen. Usually by 'emotion' we refer to likes and dislikes and as you suggest, these do not arise at the moment of seeing, but follow on afterwards, when there is the recalling, marking and thinking about what has just been seen. I think we agree in our own different words. C: Yes. No, it would be better to say, "the computer is all that is noticed (i.e., attachment too)" instead of "...all that is seen". Ok, but usually the term "emotion" is used to express more than likes and dislikes -- this is more often considered "feelings" in the interms of the 5 aggregates. Yes. S: "" .................................................... C: The same goes for "mad" -- thoughts are experienced (impulses as thoughts), and a lot depends on what the other senses are doing. But I think you are looking for is the label: "anger." S: So anger or 'mad' accompanies the experiencing or thinking about those particular thoughts. In between the 'mad', there are bound to be moments of seeing, hearing and other experiences too. 'Mad' doesn't last either:-). C: Yes, but the time frame is relative unless you do not believe the sub-processes of the mind/body, or of the 5 aggregates (this includes consciousness), can function in parallel. I believe they do function in parallel and therefore a being can remain in a hot hell, e.g. anger/aggression, for many years (even during sleep). S: "" .............................................. S: OK, when there's anger, it has its very own characteristic or nature, regardless of whether there's any thinking about it before or after and no matter what thoughts there are. This is irrespective of the label 'anger'. We could call it anything. C: The same can be said for tree. S: Not quite. The visible object when we look out of the window is real. The hardness/roughness you mentioned when touching the so-called tree is real, but the idea of tree is just a thought about these different experiences. Anger, on the other hand, has its own particular characteristic which definitely arises and passes away and can be known. C: Anger is only a term/label used to represent a sensed object (i.e., a state of mind & body). Tree is only a term use to represent a sensed object (i.e., a object type, another being). Is this where/why you want to consider them different? S:"" .................................................... C: What makes hardness real and not tree? Is it because you consider tactile input real and not visual input? S: Tactile input and visual input are both equally real. But visual input is not a tree, computer, or people -- it is just visual input. (I rather like these terms of yours). As soon as we start defining the visual input and saying it's this or that, it's an idea about the visual input, not just that which is seen. ... what is visual input? Isn't visual input merely visual input or visible data? When we think we see a tree or a person, aren't these concepts or thoughts about the visual input? C: But the same could be said for tactile input. S: Exactly so. Tactile input is just tactile input. Just that which is experienced through the body-sense. This is why K.Sujin is reluctant to talk about details of motion, for example, because immediately there's a story about what is touched rather than being aware of tactile input. C: The problem, with looking at sensory input as just sensory input, is you don't acknowledge the features of the input. By these very features, we differentiate between objects, even objects of the same gate. Being aware of these features is apart of being fully aware. So to stop at "there is motion" is impractical, because you are only partially aware. S: "" .............................................. S: As I said before, I'm very impressed by the comments you're making in this thread. C: Thanks for the compliment, I enjoy being force to think, and this is what you are doing. ............................................................. C: Wait; is your problem really with the label (e.g., "tree") and not the object itself? If so, then keep in mind that "hardness" is also a word or label used for communicating some point, or an idea we have because of what is touched and remembered. S: The problem I have is not so much with any label but with any idea of 'something' in the visible or tangible objects. I agree that 'hardness', 'motion' or even 'colour' can lead people to have ideas of some special 'thing' in the tangible or visible objects. People can hear these words and try to experience just hardness or just motion or just colour, for example. Ignorance can take any words amiss. Even 'tangible object' or 'visible object' - people may have an idea that there is no distinction between different tangible objects or different visible objects because the meaning of 'khanda' is not understood. C: What do you mean by "idea of 'something' in the visible or tangible objects," do you mean an essence? I am not sure what you mean here. S: "" .................................................. C: But even the term sensory object (both visual and tactical) is a label used to describe the reality at the sense gate. So yes, there are lots of ideas, some facts, some fiction, and some are both fact and fiction. S: Very good:-). C: To me, these ideas are not the real problem. We should strive to see these more clearly too. And yet be fully aware of the features of the sensed object, not just the fact that it exists. We also need to know the nature of our relationship to the object. This includes what caused this relationship and what will end this relationship. S: "" ................................................. C: It sounds to me like your real problem is with the labels and the mental stuff the labels trigger, not the object I am now looking at (I call it a tree). S: Yes, no problem with the visual object you're looking at. Certainly you can call it a tree:-). Just know that it's only visual object that's seen and the rest is 'the mental stuff the labels trigger' as you put it. No tree in the visual object itself, but sanna marks the visual object and it then gets identified in this way. C: Features also, you must be aware of the features also. S: "" ............................................................................ ........ S: All 'existence' is a 'mixture' of namas (those 'mental' qualities which can experience objects and rupas (those 'physical' qualities which can never experience objects). C: I am not sure what you mean here, but does it relate to consciousness? Or are you trying to say that sensory input is the only reality? S: I'm saying that the seeing consciousness is nama. The sensory input or visual input, for example, is rupa. Both of these are realities. Anger or 'mad' is another nama, another reality. Thinking is another nama. However the ideas, labels, thoughts of trees and so on are neither namas or rupas. They are concepts. So it is the namas and rupas which are to be known. Not the concepts. C: So thoughts are not real, ideas are not real? S: "" Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta 53998 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 8:57am Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG dacostacharles Hi all, Hi Sarah, This is a copy of a reply to the following thread: "RE: [dsg] Reality, Objects, Labels, Perception " Now I could also see how useful it would be to change the subject, that is why I post it twice. ---------------------------------- "Directly Knowing Realities" Sarah: "... Learning and directly knowing what the realities are is what we're just beginning to learn about ." Charles: "What do you mean by this, learning and directly knowing what the realities are?" Sarah: "" ............................................. C: When I touch a tree, thoughts are experienced (impulses as thoughts). And a lot depends on what the other senses are doing. But I think you are looking for are the labels: "rough hardness." S: I'm not really looking for a label but for your experience. You say that when you touch a tree, thoughts are experienced, but aren't these thoughts on account of what is experienced through the body-sense or touch first of all? In other words, if there were no experience of the 'tangible object' such as the 'rough hardness', would there be any thoughts about that experience? C: What you say is partially true, "these thoughts" are experienced on account of what is coming in from all the gates, and the order may not be important, but the dominate gate will have the most influence. This also means that thoughts about another, seemingly unrelated, object (the mind gate can detect memories from any combination of previous inputs to the sense gates) can be triggered by the current situation; including re-experiencing 'rough hardness' when the object we commonly call tree is at the visual gate and consciousness/perception with a type of recognition is present in the mind. S: "" ............................. C: ... Visible object, is that real? I just call this one "tree." It is real to me because it is a visible object. That is, something the mind can experience through the eye gate (sense organ) at first. No, it is not experienced as emotion at first, but as a picture giving rise to intellect and thus emotion. S: When there is the experience of seeing, the visible object seen is very real. Now we're looking at the computer, the visible object is all that is seen. Usually by 'emotion' we refer to likes and dislikes and as you suggest, these do not arise at the moment of seeing, but follow on afterwards, when there is the recalling, marking and thinking about what has just been seen. I think we agree in our own different words. C: Yes. No, it would be better to say, "the computer is all that is noticed (i.e., attachment too)" instead of "...all that is seen". Ok, but usually the term "emotion" is used to express more than likes and dislikes -- this is more often considered "feelings" in the interms of the 5 aggregates. Yes. S: "" .................................................... C: The same goes for "mad" -- thoughts are experienced (impulses as thoughts), and a lot depends on what the other senses are doing. But I think you are looking for is the label: "anger." S: So anger or 'mad' accompanies the experiencing or thinking about those particular thoughts. In between the 'mad', there are bound to be moments of seeing, hearing and other experiences too. 'Mad' doesn't last either:-). C: Yes, but the time frame is relative unless you do not believe the sub-processes of the mind/body, or of the 5 aggregates (this includes consciousness), can function in parallel. I believe they do function in parallel and therefore a being can remain in a hot hell, e.g. anger/aggression, for many years (even during sleep). S: "" .............................................. S: OK, when there's anger, it has its very own characteristic or nature, regardless of whether there's any thinking about it before or after and no matter what thoughts there are. This is irrespective of the label 'anger'. We could call it anything. C: The same can be said for tree. S: Not quite. The visible object when we look out of the window is real. The hardness/roughness you mentioned when touching the so-called tree is real, but the idea of tree is just a thought about these different experiences. Anger, on the other hand, has its own particular characteristic which definitely arises and passes away and can be known. C: Anger is only a term/label used to represent a sensed object (i.e., a state of mind & body). Tree is only a term use to represent a sensed object (i.e., a object type, another being). Is this where/why you want to consider them different? S:"" .................................................... C: What makes hardness real and not tree? Is it because you consider tactile input real and not visual input? S: Tactile input and visual input are both equally real. But visual input is not a tree, computer, or people -- it is just visual input. (I rather like these terms of yours). As soon as we start defining the visual input and saying it's this or that, it's an idea about the visual input, not just that which is seen. ... what is visual input? Isn't visual input merely visual input or visible data? When we think we see a tree or a person, aren't these concepts or thoughts about the visual input? C: But the same could be said for tactile input. S: Exactly so. Tactile input is just tactile input. Just that which is experienced through the body-sense. This is why K.Sujin is reluctant to talk about details of motion, for example, because immediately there's a story about what is touched rather than being aware of tactile input. C: The problem, with looking at sensory input as just sensory input, is you don't acknowledge the features of the input. By these very features, we differentiate between objects, even objects of the same gate. Being aware of these features is apart of being fully aware. So to stop at "there is motion" is impractical, because you are only partially aware. S: "" .............................................. S: As I said before, I'm very impressed by the comments you're making in this thread. C: Thanks for the compliment, I enjoy being force to think, and this is what you are doing. ............................................................. C: Wait; is your problem really with the label (e.g., "tree") and not the object itself? If so, then keep in mind that "hardness" is also a word or label used for communicating some point, or an idea we have because of what is touched and remembered. S: The problem I have is not so much with any label but with any idea of 'something' in the visible or tangible objects. I agree that 'hardness', 'motion' or even 'colour' can lead people to have ideas of some special 'thing' in the tangible or visible objects. People can hear these words and try to experience just hardness or just motion or just colour, for example. Ignorance can take any words amiss. Even 'tangible object' or 'visible object' - people may have an idea that there is no distinction between different tangible objects or different visible objects because the meaning of 'khanda' is not understood. C: What do you mean by "idea of 'something' in the visible or tangible objects," do you mean an essence? I am not sure what you mean here. S: "" .................................................. C: But even the term sensory object (both visual and tactical) is a label used to describe the reality at the sense gate. So yes, there are lots of ideas, some facts, some fiction, and some are both fact and fiction. S: Very good:-). C: To me, these ideas are not the real problem. We should strive to see these more clearly too. And yet be fully aware of the features of the sensed object, not just the fact that it exists. We also need to know the nature of our relationship to the object. This includes what caused this relationship and what will end this relationship. S: "" ................................................. C: It sounds to me like your real problem is with the labels and the mental stuff the labels trigger, not the object I am now looking at (I call it a tree). S: Yes, no problem with the visual object you're looking at. Certainly you can call it a tree:-). Just know that it's only visual object that's seen and the rest is 'the mental stuff the labels trigger' as you put it. No tree in the visual object itself, but sanna marks the visual object and it then gets identified in this way. C: Features also, you must be aware of the features also. S: "" ............................................................................ ........ S: All 'existence' is a 'mixture' of namas (those 'mental' qualities which can experience objects and rupas (those 'physical' qualities which can never experience objects). C: I am not sure what you mean here, but does it relate to consciousness? Or are you trying to say that sensory input is the only reality? S: I'm saying that the seeing consciousness is nama. The sensory input or visual input, for example, is rupa. Both of these are realities. Anger or 'mad' is another nama, another reality. Thinking is another nama. However the ideas, labels, thoughts of trees and so on are neither namas or rupas. They are concepts. So it is the namas and rupas which are to be known. Not the concepts. C: So thoughts are not real, ideas are not real? S: "" Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta 53999 From: connie Date: Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:08pm Subject: Re: ethical considerations nichiconn Dear Joop, on innocence: "everyone should practice jhaana"... well, so we would if we did, i reckon, but what's real now? feeling... pessimistic, you say. no doubt. again, who cares? maa.na / ego, pride, measure(ment). what is your favorite color? some people want to promote a rainbow for western minds when the buddha has already manifested that gloriously; and the great minds put it down for us in the texts. maybe some lesser minds made up legends. what's with the 500 years? a lifetime is only a single thought moment long. What would it change for you now if the True Dharma Age is ended? What shall we do with whatever relics remain? Historically, the end, even if it is just an idea, has meant major revisions and error creep to say the least. The worms in the belly of the lion. "New Buddhas" arise, and soon there are seven suns in the sky. what distinguishes this western mind from any other? present the dhamma with the way you live your life and any mind would be attracted. or not. i look at my own mind and see so much that is not pleasantly attractive, but evidently i'm attracted to filth... like a pig, AdMired. abstain. Please give me a positive/attractive expression of: << I undertake the training precept of obstention from dancing, sining, music, and contortionist shows. >> Illustrator II: <<< 7. The words are shared by all [ten], and so the following explanation of these words as to the phrasing and the meaning can be understood to be common to all. 8. Firstly, as to the phrasing. It crushes risk (), thus it is abstention (); the meaning is that it abandons risk, eliminates it, does away with it, annihilates it. Or alternatively, a person, with that as instrument, abstains () from risk (), thus, substituting the syallable for the syllable , it is abstention ( and . It ought to be trained in (), thus it is a training (); one proceeds () by that, thus it is a state (); and (resolution of compound); the meaning is that it is the means by which to arrive at training; or else what is meant is that it [that is, the ] is the root, the support, the foundation [for the , or according to the seconed method, as . I completely () take (), thus ; what is meant is that I take [it] with the intention of non-transgression by keeping [it] 'untorn' and keeping [it] 'unmottled' (see A.iv.56, quoted at Vis.Ch.i,$$144-50/pp.51-3). >>> peace, connie