55000 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues nilovg Hello Joop, thanks, but can you not give a shorter summary for Kh Sujin. This is too long for a question. Thank you, Larry. I would like the Q. to Kh Sujin to be more concise. I discussed with Lodewijk the social issue. He is afraid that if one gets caught up in too much reasoning, one loses contact with daily life. He said: social life is all over the suttas, and also the Jatakas, they are very important for the application of the teachings in daily life. I remember that you have some reservations about them. He thinks that social life has to be emphasized all the time and I hope you and Howard will continue reminding us. I had an example. I was just writing that by understanding the five khandhas, he is not vexed by the worldly conditions of gain and loss, praise and blame, honour and dishonour, bodily ease and misery. I discussed with Lodewijk that this concerns our life with our fellow beings very much. You will not blame others for misfortune, understanding kamma and vipaaka. If one, instead of having a sour face can take everything with patience and equanimity it is very agreeable for others too. We should not underestimate this aspect. Nina. op 23-01-2006 23:48 schreef Joop op jwromeijn@...: > > Emptiness or voidness (sunyatta in sanskriet) is in Mahayana not > especially empty of self; more it's empty of everything; 55001 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues nilovg Dear Htoo, the number of perfections is only the way they are classified. Indeed, they can be classified as six, then more than one come under one name. This is in the Commentary to the Cariyapitaka, as translated by Ven. Bodhi. Buddha nature: they think of the accumulation of perfections. As far as I understand, all beings must help saving others. Nina. op 23-01-2006 21:52 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@...: > While Theravadan disciple says there are 10 perfections, Mahayana > would say there are 6 paramita. > > I wanted to know 'Buddha-nature' what Mahayana say it is present in > all beings. But when I asked I did not received enough information > to work over that 'Buddha-nature'. > 55002 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fear & Hatred: same mindstate? nilovg Hi Anthony, op 24-01-2006 05:47 schreef Antony Woods op antony272b@...: > I've been taught that fear and hatred are both dosa (aversion). ------------ N: Yes, but there are many shades and degrees of them and they take different objects. --------- > A: However it seems that people who are afraid receive a lot more > compassion than people who are angry. -------- N: The Buddha had compassion for people with defilements, no matter what defilements, coarse or more subtle. All defilements are rooted in ignorance. Therefore he showed the way to eradicate all defilements. Knowing that anger and fear are both dosa is a good beginning. --------- > A: I appreciate the dangers of hatred but I worry a lot and it would wake > me up if I learned about the dangers of worry, the dangers that worry > has in common with hatred (e.g. ugliness ) ------ N: It is good to see the disadvantages of worry. If not, you will only accumulated more conditions for worry. Worry is actually the cetasika that is kukkucca, and this always accompanies citta rooted in dosa. It is regret about good deeds not done, and bad deeds that were done. But when we use worry in conventional sense it may be thinking with aversion. When we worry we think of ourselves, but if we reflect on the many opportunites of kusala in daily life, it will help to have more kusala cittas. Such as consoling others who grieve, saying the right words, kind speech, appreciation of others' good deeds. Very simple things, but important. Being a good listener is also helpful for others, it is a way of kusala. Kusala is good for yourself and for others, for our social life! Nina. > > Thanks / Antony. > 55003 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. nilovg Hi Larry, dependence, this gives the relation between dhammas, the dhamma that is paccaya, the condiiton, the dhamma that is condiitoned by it. As to asabhaava, see ruupakkhandha, it has a different meaning: produced ruupas and unproduced ruupas. Ruupa that is not concrete matter. Nina. op 24-01-2006 07:27 schreef LBIDD@... op LBIDD@...: > I can see how a formation of conditions could be characterized as > asabhava. So the question is, is dependence a characteristic? 55004 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Principle difference , ultimate realities. nilovg Hi TG, op 23-01-2006 22:13 schreef TGrand458@... op TGrand458@...: > I use 'underlying' like -- the mattress is underlying the blanket. Or > Ignorance is underlying suffering. Is that a usage you would not technically > or > aesthetically approve of? Thanks in advance. ------ N: Hard to answer, because underlying can be seen in different ways. And so is suffering. In D.O. we can see it thus: ignorance is the cause of the dukkha that is being in the cycle. To return to paramattha dhammas, I have an idea. What, if we, after Bgk, discuss first what they are in concreto: citta, cetasika and rupa, leaving aside for now nibbaana. This means: we need to know more of the three conditioned ones. To begin with rupa, we can discuss how we experience it. Giving many examples. Then citta and cetasika. Finally we can return to the meaning of paramattha dhammas. I myself know them only from hearsay and from what I have read. It is important to get deeper into them, even necessary for the development of satipatthana. As Htoo says: < When paramattha dhamma are seen there will not be any more problem on what is true and what is not true in nature.> But if you are not inclined to discuss this, it is all right with me. Nina. 55005 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 1/24/06 10:04:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > Hallo Howard, Larry, Htoo > > Howard: "To the best of my understanding, "Buddha Nature" is the > potential for complete awakening in all sentient beings, nothing more > and nothing less. It is equivalent to the mind being only > adventitiously defiled, but inherently luminous as stated in the Pali > suttas. > > Although I like the basic optimistic attitude behind "Buddha Nature" > and although I like the idea that everything is easy, I'm afraid that > there is something more (to say) than "nothing more and nothing less" -------------------------------------- Howard: I don't have the idea that anything is easy! And I certainly don't think that the adventitiousness of defilements makes awakening easy. It only makes it *possible*! --------------------------------------- > The concept Tathāgatagarbha (Womb of the Tathāgata) has a rich > history, only a part of it is important in our (Theravada-based) > discussion. > See for example a quote of an essay by Stewart McFarlane (below) > about it ------------------------------------------- Howard: There certainly are substantialist meanderings to be found in Mahayana, as there are in Theravada. But the notion of Buddha nature as I understand it and as I described it is based in the Pali suttas, and it has no substantialist aspect to it. ------------------------------------------ > > Metta > > Joop > =================== 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) 55006 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:51am Subject: Visuddhimagga, Ch XIV, 226 and Tiika nilovg Vis. Ch XIV, 226 Intro: This section refers to the four kinds of nutriment, aahaara, that are a condition for other dhammas. One kind is physical nutriment and three are mental nutriments. They are: physical nutriment, contact (phassa cetasika), volition (manosañcetanå which is cetanå cetasika) and consciousness (viññåna). These kinds of nutrition are conditions that maintain and support the growth and development of the conditioned dhammas. In this section physical nutrimient is dealt with and in the following sections the three mental nutriments will be dealt with. Nutritive essence (ojå) present in food that has been taken suffuses the body and then new rúpas can be produced. As we have seen, nutrition is one of the four factors which produces rúpas of the body, the other three being kamma, citta and temperature.The nutritive essence which, because of the support of external nutritive essence, produces new rúpas of the body also supports and maintains the groups of rúpas produced by kamma, citta and temperature. The Visuddhimagga refers in this section to the perversities, and in particular to seeing as beautiful what is foul. The perversities can be eradicated by insight. In this connection the Visuddhimagga deals with the three kinds of pariññas, full understanding. In the course of the development of insight three kinds of full understanding can be discerned: full understanding of the known, ñaata pariñña, which begins at the first stage of insight, when the difference between the characteristics of naama and of ruupa are clearly discerned. This pariñña is paññãa that applies the knowledge gained at the first stage of insight. Full understanding as investigation, tiira.na pariñña, begins at the fourth stage of insight (or the first stage of principal insight), when the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa is realized. Full understanding as abandoning, pahaana pariñña, begins at the stage of insight which is knowledge of dissolution, bhanga ñaana, up to Path knowledge when enlightenment is attained. From knowledge of dissolution on, detachment from naama and ruupa grows. ----------- Text Vis.: And in particular, one who sees internal materiality as foul (ugly) fully understands nutriment consisting of physical nutriment. ------- N: Internal materiality refers to the ruupas of one¹s own body. The Tiika explains that the five khandhas of grasping should be seen as foul, asubha, because they are the basis of the impurity of defilements. It states that the four Applications of Mindfulness lead to the abandoning of the four perversities, vipallaasas, of saññaa, citta and wrong view, di.t.thi. These four are: seeing what is impermanent as permanent, what is dukkha as happiness, what is non-self as self, what is foul as beautiful. The Tiika explains that the khandhas, beginning with ruupakkhanda, which are the object of satipa.t.thaana, should be seen as foul and so on. He is not vexed by the khandhas because of thorough understanding. The person who develops insight (vipassako) does not experience suffering in misfortune, let alone the arahats. They are also in the future not afflicted by the khandhas. The Tiika explains the expression of the Vis. , Œone who sees internal materiality as foul (ugly) fully understands nutriment consisting of physical nutriment¹, as follows: because of the words, by the origin of nutrition there is the origin of ruupa, he abandons attachment (chandaraaga) to the body, and also attachment to nutrition that is the origin of the ruupas of the body. This is pahaana pariñña, full understanding of abandoning (the third pariññaa begining at knowledge of dissolution). Comprehending the ruupas of his own body and nutriment which is the condition for it, is full understanding of the known, ñaata pariñña (the first pariñña). The contemplation of the arising and falling away of ruupas is the application of full understanding of investigation, tiira.na pariñña (the second pariñña). ---------- Text Vis.: He abandons the perversion [of perceiving] beauty in the foul (ugly), --------- Tiika: Thus, because one is accomplished in the three pariññas, the vipallaasas are destroyed and therefore, he said: He abandons the perversion [of perceiving] beauty in the foul. N: He has to develop insight up to enlightenment, so that the perversions are abandoned at the successive stages of enlightenment. The sotaapana has abandoned all perversions connected with wrong view, but he has not abandoned the perversions of citta and saññaa that see dukkha as happiness and the foul as beautiful. He has not eradicated sense desire. ------------ Text Vis.: he crosses the flood of sense desire, he is loosed from the bond of sense desire, he becomes canker-free as regards the canker of sense desire, he breaks the bodily tie of covetousness. ------ N: The non-returner has eradicated sense desire. Sense-desire has been classified in different groups of defilements, as flood (ogha), as yoke or bond (yoga), as canker, aasava, as bodily tie (abhijjhaakaayagantha). ------- Text Vis.: he breaks the bodily tie of covetousness, abhijjhaakaayagantha. --------- N: The bodily tie of covetousness, abhijjhaa, comprises all kinds of covetousness, all degrees of lobha, be they gross or subtle. They are a tie which binds us to the cycle of birth and death. The Tiika states that in this connection sensedesire is referred to. --------- Text Vis.: He does not cling with sense-desire clinging. -------- N: Conclusion: Through the development of insight dhammas are realized as impermanent, dukkha and anattaa. What arises and falls away immediately is not beautiful, but paññaa has to be developed further so that it leads to complete detachment from all dhammas. Even the sotaapanna who has eradicated all wrong views has not eradicated sense desire. The non-returner who has attained the third stage of enlightenment has eradicated sense desire and he has abandoned the perversity that sees what is foul as beautiful. We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, Ch VII, the Great Chapter, § 63, Child¹s Flesh) about parents who were with their child in the jungle. Since there was no food and they would have to die of hunger, they slew their child and ate its flesh, not for pleasure, from indulgence, for personal charm or plumpness. They took it in order not to die and to be able to cross the jungle. We then read that the Buddha said to the monks: ŒEven so, monks, I declare should solid food be regarded. When such food is well understood, the passions of the five senses are well understood. When the passions of the five senses are well understood, the fetters do not exist bound by which the ariyan disciple could come again to this world.¹ In this section we are reminded of the danger of the perversities. Only when right understanding of dhammas as they appear through the six doorways is developed, will there be an end to the perversities. Eventually we shall not be misled by them anymore. ******* Nina. 55007 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:21am Subject: Sabhava Denied in the Pitakas? Was -- Principle difference between... TGrand458@... Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, All Thanks again Larry for the reference. I'm confused now because it was my impression that sabhava was being translated as "own characteristic" and that "own characteristics" were aspects that Abhidhamma practitioners were trying to pay attention to. Now it turns out that the one reference to the term in the entire Suttas is merely denying "own characteristics." No wonder I'm uncomfortable with the term and outlook. Please let me know if I have totally misunderstood something. TG In a message dated 1/23/2006 11:46:02 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: TG: "Do you happen to know which text is meant by the following... In the Pitakas the word "sabhava" seems to appear only once (Ps.ii,178). Is it the Patisambhidamagga?" Hi TG, Yes, p.357,par.5: "Born materiality is void of individual essence". I think a better trans. for sabhava, in this case, would have been "independent arising". It is a different usage than that in Visuddhimagga. There materiality is sabhava. It could be argued that the "born" adds a host of conditions that make it asabhava. Larry 55008 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 6:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sabhava Denied in the Pitakas? Was -- Principle difference between... upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and all) - In a message dated 1/24/06 1:33:43 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, All > > > Thanks again Larry for the reference. I'm confused now because it was my > impression that sabhava was being translated as "own characteristic" and > that > "own characteristics" were aspects that Abhidhamma practitioners were > trying > to pay attention to. > > Now it turns out that the one reference to the term in the entire Suttas is > > merely denying "own characteristics." > > No wonder I'm uncomfortable with the term and outlook. Please let me know > if I have totally misunderstood something. > > TG > ====================== The Patisambhidhamagga was a relatively late addition to the canon, AFAIK, possibly around the same period that Mahayana was using Sanskrit 'svabhava' to mean "own being," which, BTW, as I understand it, is the literal syntactic meaning of the term. In any case, what I think was denied in the Patisambhidhamagga was own being. Perhaps the Theravadin terminological usage changed in response to that. (I don't know when using 'sabhava' as 'lakkhana' came into use, or by whom.) 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) 55009 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg]Q. Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 215 and Tiika. nilovg Hi Sarah, upadana khandhas only at moment of clinging. But The Dhsg has upadaaniya, which means: liable to clinging, can be objects of clinging. On the other hand, I know that when we read text we can misunderstand words if we do not relate them to this moment. About the ayatanas, I do not know whether or how this is misleading. I do not mind to change it. Nina. op 24-01-2006 12:47 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: > .... > S: The way K.Sujin explains upadana khandha is a little different, I > think, from your comment here and some of BB’s you quote. As I mentioned > before, she stresses that upadana khandha refers to only the khandha which > is the object of clinging at the present moment. As we always point out, > the teachings always come back to this moment and what can be known now. > If there is awareness of a khandha or it is not experienced at all, I > don’t believe these are included in upadana khandha. They are not ‘clung > to’ now or subject to cankers now. > > When the Buddha stressed the difference between khandha and upadana > khandha, I don’t think it was just to make the point that the lokuttara > cittas (which are not our present concern at all) were not included in the > latter category. I think the meaning is deeper. 55010 From: nina van gorkom Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:01pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. nilovg Dear Selamat, op 24-01-2006 15:00 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@...: > Currently we discussed Matter (Rupa) in relation with the four elements > meditation and application in daily life. It's subtle enough to comprehend. > > Am sorry not often post to the group, because limitation of the bandwidth in > my town. -------- N: Rupa is a good subject. If you like more info, Rob Kirkpatrick's web Abhidhamma.org. has some articles written by me on this subject:The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena. This is the link: I am sorry that you have trouble with internet connection. Then I could mail some parts to you. I translated Khun Sujin's Book a Survey of Paramattha Dhammas. If you like a copy, let me know and it will be sent from Bangkok. If you could just mention your address again. It may be useful for your group. I post now part of my article following here. How is Ibu Tetty Tjiomas, is she still in good health? Nina. Chapter 1 The Four Great Elements Rupas do not arise singly, they arise in units or groups. Each of these groups is composed of different kinds of rupa. There are four kinds of rupa, the four ³Great Elements² (Maha-bhuta rupas), which have to arise together with each and every group of rupas, no matter whether these are of the body or materiality outside. The types of rupa other than the four Great Elements depend on these four rupas and cannot arise without them. They are the following rupas: the Element of Earth or solidity the Element of Water or cohesion the Element of Fire or heat the Element of Wind (air) or motion Earth, Water, Fire and Wind do not in this context have the same meaning as in conventional language, neither do they represent conceptual ideas as we find them in different philosophical systems. In the Abhidhamma they represent ultimate realities, specific rupas which each have their own characteristic. The Element of Earth (in Pali: pathavi dhatu), which has been translated into English as ³solidity² or ³extension², has the characteristic of hardness or softness. It can be directly experienced when we touch something hard or soft. We do not have to name the rupa designated by ³Element of Earth² in order to experience it. It is an element which arises and falls away; it has no abiding substance, it is devoid of a ³self². It may seem that hardness can last for some time, but in reality it falls away immediately. Rupas are replaced so long as there are conditions for them to be produced by one of the four factors of kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition (See Introduction. This will be explained further on.). The hardness which is experienced now is already different from the hardness which arose a moment ago. We used to think that a cushion or a chair could be experienced through touch. When we are more precise, it is hardness of softness which can be experienced through touch. Because of association and remembrance of former experiences we can think of a cushion or chair and we know that they are named ³cushion² or ³chair². This example can remind us that there is a difference between ultimate realities and concepts we can think of but which are not real in the ultimate sense. Viewing the body and the things around us as different compositions of rupas may be a new outlook to us. Gradually we shall realize that rupas are not abstract categories, but that they are realities appearing in daily life. I shall quote the definitions of the different rupas given by the commentaries, the ³Visuddhimagga² and the ³Atthasalini². These definitions mention the characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause or immediate occasion (The Atthasalini explains these terms in Book I, Part II, Analysis of Terms, 63.) of the rupas which are explained. The ³Visuddhimagga² (XI, 93) (See also Dhammasangani, § 648 and Atthasalini II, Ch III, 332.) gives, for example, the following definition of the rupa which is the earth element or solidity: ...The earth element has the characteristic of hardness. Its function is to act as a foundation. It is manifested as receiving (As will be explained, it receives the other rupas it arises together with since it is their foundation.)... As to the proximate cause, I shall deal with that later on. Each reality has its own individual characteristic by which it can be distinguished from other realities. Solidity has hardness (or softness) as characteristic, the fire element has heat as characteristic. Such characteristics can be experienced when they appear. As to function, rupas have functions in relation to other rupas or in relation to nama. Solidity acts as a foundation, namely for the other rupas it arises together with in a group, that is its function. Smell, for example, could not arise alone, it needs solidity as foundation. It is the same with visible object or colour which can be experienced through the eyesense. Visible object or colour needs solidity as foundation or support, it could not arise alone. Solidity which arises together with visible object cannot be seen, only visible object can be seen. As regards manifestation, this is the way a reality habitually appears. Solidity is manifested as receiving, it receives the other rupas it arises together with since it acts as their foundation. With regard to the proximate cause, according to the ³Visuddhimagga² (XIV, 35) each of the four Great Elements has the other three as its proximate cause. The four Great Elements arise together and condition one another. At first the definitions of realities may seem complicated but when we have studied them we shall see that they are helpful for the understanding of the different realities, and this includes understanding of the way they act on other realities and the way they manifest themselves. The study of realities is a foundation for the development of direct understanding, of seeing things as they really are. ***** Nina. 55011 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Htoo, > the number of perfections is only the way they are classified. Indeed, they > can be classified as six, then more than one come under one name. This is in > the Commentary to the Cariyapitaka, as translated by Ven. Bodhi. > > Buddha nature: they think of the accumulation of perfections. As far as I > understand, all beings must help saving others. > Nina. > op 23-01-2006 21:52 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > While Theravadan disciple says there are 10 perfections, Mahayana > > would say there are 6 paramita. > > > > I wanted to know 'Buddha-nature' what Mahayana say it is present in > > all beings. But when I asked I did not received enough information > > to work over that 'Buddha-nature'. ------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, Thanks for your kind answer and reply. With respect, Htoo Naing > 55012 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:06pm Subject: Re: Bangkok trip htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Dear Thailand travellers, > I just confirmed my booking to arrive in Bangkok on Sunday February 5 > and leave on Feb. 9. Looking forward to seeing many dsg members! > Robert ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Robert, I wish I could come and I were there at the meeting. :-< | With regards, Htoo Naing 55013 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:24pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > HI< Larry & Htoo - ====================== > To the best of my understanding, "Buddha Nature" is the potential for > complete awakening in all sentoent beings, nothing more and nothing less. It > is equivalent to the mind being only adventitiously defiled, but inherently > luminous as stated in the Pali suttas. > > With meta, > Hward -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Howard, I have reply this to Joop's post. I agree your points. With respect, Htoo Naing 55014 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:22pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues htootintnaing Dear Joop, Howard, Larry, Nina and all, Thanks Howard for your explanation. I think you do not contradict and it is like my opinion. Thanks Joop for your quote. Buddha is a Paa.li word. The root word is 'Bu' which means 'to know'. Citta has the character of knowing. Budha is 'wise being'. Buddha is uncomparable wisest being ever exists. Buddha-nature is there in citta. But I would not use that term. With respect, Htoo Naing --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: Hallo Howard, Larry, Htoo Howard: "To the best of my understanding, "Buddha Nature" is the potential for complete awakening in all sentient beings, nothing more and nothing less. It is equivalent to the mind being only adventitiously defiled, but inherently luminous as stated in the Pali suttas. Although I like the basic optimistic attitude behind "Buddha Nature" and although I like the idea that everything is easy, I'm afraid that there is something more (to say) than "nothing more and nothing less" The concept Tathāgatagarbha (Womb of the Tathāgata) has a rich history, only a part of it is important in our (Theravada-based) discussion. See for example a quote of an essay by Stewart McFarlane (below) about it Metta Joop 55015 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:33pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Alone with Dhamma, Ch 3, no 6 htootintnaing Dear Nina, Thanks for your beautiful reply on satipatthaana. Once one really touches satipatthaana then he will come to know what is not satipatthaana. Yes, the field is very wide. When we talk on moment I always say that one has to exit from 4th ruupa jhaana if he has to step on Noble Eightfold Path. When in absorption it is not satipatthaana. Why? There is no seeing on anicca, dukkha, anatta on what is attending as the object of ruupa jhaana is not naama or ruupa. So to see naama one has to exit from ruupa-jhaana. At the exit he retrospect what has just happened and there he sees that it is ruupa-jhaana citta. It has such and such cetasikas and all are fleeting, anicca and so they are dukkha. They cannot be controlled and they are anatta. With respect, Htoo Naing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Htoo, > In the texts it may sometimes seem that the subject is paññatti, but if one > understands what the object of satipatthaana is, there is not such > confusion. See below. > op 23-01-2006 21:59 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > I read in Myanmar very well regarding Satipatthaana. But when > > I posted on 'foulness' I was thinking that someone might see > > the matter as it is not satipatthaana if it is on 'name, concept, > > pannatti'. > > > > In one of my post I wrote there are 261 contemplation on body. 15 > > for breathing, 15 for posture, 63 for daily activities, 99 for body > > part like teeth, hair, nail, bone etc, 15 for body-element and 54 > > for foulness. > > > > While contemplating on hair, nail, teeth, skin.. > > > > well this is the area where paramattha lovers may make problem. > --------- > N: No problem. The field (gocara) of satipatthana is very wide. We may > reflect on foulness, or a person may attain jhana with this subject, it is > all included as the field of satipatthana. One can reflect on foulness, and > then also the citta that reflects can be object of mindfulness. It has > conditions, without the teachings one would not reflect on this in the right > way. Or jhanacitta, also this is a conditioned dhamma. > Long ago Kh Sujin gave a very impressive lecture about the objects of > satipatthana, using the Milinda Panhaa. For a long time I could not find > this text, since the text deals with memory, but actually sati is referred > to. It is Book 3, Ch 7. One may remember with sati dukkha or sukha in the > past. I was so touched by Howard's story, the happiness because of a > beautiful baby, and then the dukkha because of its handicaps. There can be > sati when one remembers sukha and dukkha, so that it is understood that it > is not self who remembers. > Also when looking up texts, remembering numbers can be the object of sati, > otherwise there is an idea of self who does so. Arithmatic or calculation > are mentioned in this text. It is relaly daily life isn't it? > Another example, I see an old man who looks similar to my late father and > then I have metta and karuna. Also such moments can be object of > mindfulness. > Nothing is excluded from the field of mindfulness, and the more we realize > the many opportunities for sati, the less obstructions for sati there are. > We can see that it really can arise in daily life. > Nina. > 55016 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues upasaka_howard Hi, Htoo - In a message dated 1/24/06 3:32:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, htootintnaing@... writes: > Buddha-nature is there in citta. But I would not use that term. > ======================= Nor I! ;-) 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) 55017 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 0:54pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 636 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Sa`nkhara paccayaa vi~n~naanaa'. Sa`nkhaara here is kamma-formation. It is action. This action is committed by a citta and that citta has sankhaara-kkhandhaa while the citta itself is vi~n~naana-kkhandhaa. In the above linkage there are two separate dhammas. They are sankhaara and vinnaana. Sankhaara is naama dhamma and there is no ruupa dhamma in sankhaara. Likewise in vinnaana there is naama dhamma only. Vinnaana does not contain any ruupa dhamma. Sankhara and vinnaana are both naama dhamma. This linkage or relation is between naama and naama. The first is sankhaara-kkhandhaa. And it support vinnaana which is vinnaanakkhandhaa. Here khandhaa have to be clearly understood. Otherwise there would arise confusion. Sankhaara paccayaa vinnaana. Sankhaara is sankhaarakkhandha. Among dhamma of sankharakkhandhaa cetanaa cetasika is the leader and it is the culprit of all action. This has been explained in cetasika section of Dhamma Thread in round about Dhamma Thread (080) to (120). Vinnaana above is citta. It is vinnaanakkhandhaa. The sankhaara (cetanaa) that would give rise to result are grouped into three namely apunnaabhisankhaara, punnaabhisankhaara and anenjaabhisankhaara. This cetana is formation. Because it forms kamma as soon as it arise. But it cannot give rise to effect as soon as it arise even though it work as sahajaata-kamma-paccaya. The vinnaana that results from sankhaara is vipaaka citta. There are 36 vipaaka cittas. 32 vipaaka cittas are lokiiya vipaaka cittas and 4 vipaaka cittas are lokuttaraa vipaaka cittas. Lokuttaraa vipaaka cittas are not the result of apunnaabhisankhaara or punnaabhisankhaara or anenjaabhisankhaara. It is the result of magga citta and magga citta conditions phala citta to arise as vipaaka citta. This vipaaka is very very immediately or even instantaneously. That is as soon as magga-kusala citta passes away lokuttaraa vipaaka citta which is phala citta arises arises instantaneously. This is known as 'Akaaliko' of The Dhamma Attributes. This link is not in Dependent Origination. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 55018 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:44pm Subject: Re: dependence. lbidd2 Hi Nina and all, This is how I see it. The first insight knowledge is clear seeing of the sabhava of nama and rupa. The second insight knowledge is clear seeing of cause and effect. This latter is similar to seeing impermanence in that impermanence is asabhava. Cause and effect (dependence) is asabhava. But this is not a concept in the ordinary sense because it is an insight knowledge. One can actually experience it in a profound way. Because it is asabhava this experience is characterized as "emptiness". Furthermore, because it is asabhava we have the non-arising of the arising. This is not a paradox because sabhava is necessary for asabhava. Dependence is a formation of conditions. So the non-arising of the arising is the non-arising of the _whole_ of the various arisings which are individually sabhava. Feeling is only feeling, but feeling depends on various other dhammas. This dependence is the emptiness of the whole of feeling and its conditions because that whole is asabhava. I think the question Joop wants you to ask is, is dependence a general characteristic like impermanence? And if so, is dependence asabhava? This relates specifically to the second insight knowledge and seeing that "just as a fire that burns dependent on logs is reckoned as a log fire...so also a consciousness that arises dependent on eye and forms is reckoned as an "eye-consciousness". Three dhammas are reckoned as one dhamma. That makes a whole. In the "Lump of Foam Sutta" SN22,95 the Buddha makes the same point with regard to feeling (vedana) and says that is how we should understand its hollowness. I am understanding "hollowness" the same as "emptiness". And I am saying this hollowness is asabhava and therefore non-arising. This is a subtle but profound insight knowledge that depends on _both_ sabhava and asabhava. There is no asabhava without sabhava. No whole without parts. The non-arising of the arising is the middle way. Larry 55019 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 6:43pm Subject: Vism.XIV,227 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 227. One who sees feeling as pain fully understands nutriment consisting of contact. He abandons the perversion of perceiving pleasure in the painful. He crosses the flood of becoming. He is loosed from the bond of becoming. He becomes canker-free as regards the canker of becoming. He breaks the bodily tie of ill will. He does not cling with rites-and-ritual clinging. ***************************** 227. vedana.m dukkhato passanto phassaahaara.m parijaanaati, dukkhe sukhanti vipallaasa.m pajahati, bhavogha.m uttarati, bhavayogena visa.myujjati, bhavaasavena anaasavo hoti, byaapaadakaayagantha.m bhindati, siilabbatupaadaana.m na upaadiyati. 55020 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n... scottduncan2 Dear Howard, "I'm writing now because Scott is relatively new to the Dhamma, and I care for him and for his not losing a full perspective on Dhamma practice." Thank you very much for the kind sentiment, Howard. Very humbling. Sincerely, Scott. 55021 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 9:04pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, (Ananda) rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > >. And thus it > seems that the Buddha must have taught not just those with but little dust in > their eyes, but those who were - somehow - near perfect already. (Man, one > wonders how Ananda ever made it!) > ----------------------------------------- Dear Howard, You had a question about Ananda and how he was able to make it. In the Digha Nikaya Atthakatha (Sunmagala-vilasini),in the section elucidating the Mahididana sutta, it explains the basis for Ananda attaining the first path of sotapanna, and why he was able to comprehend dependent origination: I use Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of Mahadidana sutta: """The Venerable Ananda had been endowed with the aspiration to become a Buddha's personal attendant for 100,000 aeons. In the ocean there is a fish called Timirapingala, 500 yojannas long...This fish might say "theey are always saying that this ocean is deep. How can it be so deep? [At times] I can't even find enough water to cover my back. For the Timirapingala, with its vast body the ocean might be shallow, but it cannot be called shallow for the smaller fish. Similarly, for the elder Ananda, with his vast knowledge, dependent arising might appear clear, but it cannot be called clear for others. {then continues with more similes for two paragraphs] .... Dependent arising, though deep, appeared clear to the Venrable Ananda for four reasons: 1) Because he was endowed with decisive supporting conditions from the past. 2)because of his digence in study. 3. Because he was already a stream enterer. 4. Because he was highly learned. 1: The venerable Ananda's endowment with decisive supporting condition (upannisaya paccaya) from the past began when the Buddha Padumuttara was living in the world. This took place 100,000 aeons ago. At that time Ananda was teh Buddhas younger half brother named Sumana. On one occasion he supportted the Buddha Padumuttara and a Sangha of 100,000 bhikkhus during teh annual three months rain residence. At the end of the period he offered food and robes to the Sangha and dedicated the merit to becoming the personal attanedant of a future Buddha. ...Following this he continued to perform meritorius deeds through the succeeding lifeteimes until in the present life, he went forth under the Buddha Gotama and became established in stream entry..... 2. Diligence in study refers to repeatedly studying [the texts]under revered teachers, listening to [explanations of theri meaning], questioning [about knotty points] and retaining in mind[the texts and their meaning]. 3.. 4. For those who are highly learned, the delimitation of mentality- materiality (nama rupa parichedda) becomes as evident as a bed and chair in a small room illuminated by a lamp, and the venerable Anada was chief in those who are highly learned. Because of his great learning dependent arising, though deep apeared clear to him."" end quote. Robertk 55022 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 9:18pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 366- Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 (e) sarahprocter... 5Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== [Ch22 -Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 contd] We read in the Kindred Sayings (II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, Chapter 5, §52, Grasping, Upådåna): * "While staying at Såvatthí the Exalted One said:– In him, monks, who contemplates the enjoyment that there is in all that makes for grasping, craving grows. Grasping is conditioned by craving. Becoming is conditioned by grasping. Birth is conditioned by becoming. Decay-and-death is conditioned by birth. Grief, lamentation, suffering, sorrow, despair come to pass. Such is the uprising of this entire mass of ill." * The Buddha then uses a simile of a bonfire which keeps on burning so long as it is supplied with fuel. If there is no fuel the fire will become extinct. become extinct. We read further on: * "Even so in him who contemplates the misery that there is in all that makes for grasping, craving ceases, and hence grasping ceases, becoming, birth, decay-and-death, and sorrow cease. Such is the ceasing of this entire mass of ill." * We want to go on living and experiencing objects through the senses, this is beyond control. However, the Buddha’s words about the impermanence of all conditioned things, about decay and death, can remind us of what life really is: only fleeting phenomena. The other three ways of clinging are forms of wrong view. As regards clinging to wrong view (diììhupådåna), this comprises clinging to false views about kamma and the result of kamma, and to other speculative theories. As regards clinging to wrong practice, when someone takes the wrong practice for the right practice there are no conditions for the development of right understanding of realities and thus wrong view cannot be eradicated. Wrong practice is also one of the “ties”, as we have seen. ***** (Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 to be continued) Metta, Sarah ====== 55023 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:28pm Subject: Htoo (1) - lizards and doorways too..... sarahprocter... Hi Htoo, Yes, it would be so nice if you could join us one day for live discussions. Meanwhile, perhaps you can listen to some of the recordings. I haven’t written to you here for a while and now it’s just to give some brief comments on your ‘stored up’ posts I’ve set aside before we go on our trip.(As usual, no special order at all): .... 1.Firstly, many thanks for all your feedback on the ‘Cetasikas’ threads. ..... 2. You refer (#54971) in your post to Nina to your Satipatthana series of threads and how ‘someone might see the matter as it is not satipatthana if it is on ‘name, concept, pannatti’ with regard to the foulness section. To be honest, I hope one day you revise this whole set of posts. They contain such excellent material, but I think they miss the main point of satipatthana: being aware of the present reality regardless of the activity or contemplation. It’s no a question of any special focus on any of the 261 body contemplations etc which you enumerate, but of being aware of namas and rupas whilst following any activity or thought process whatsoever. Ken H started to have a good discussion with you on this topic and it seemed to stop abruptly. I hope you’ll both continue it for everyone’s benefit. ..... 3. In #52856, you mention as origins of craving under: a) eye cakkhu pasada (eye-sensitivity) cakkhu vatthu (eue-base) cakkhu dvara (eye-door) .... S: What is cakkhu dvara if it’s not cakkhu pasada? .... Then you mention under: b) visual object ruupa (visual object) vanna (colour) form (form/shape/figure) light .... S: Do you mean these are aspects of visual object or what? .... 4. In #52228 you paraphrase the Buddha’s last words to Ananda about how the Dhamma Vinaya will be his teacher. You stress that he did not say ‘Sutta’ or ‘Abhidhamma’ etc. I was confused with your meaning. Do you or do you not understand Dhamma Vinaya as referring to the Tipitaka? .... 5 In #53550 you were discussing painful bodily feeling with Larry. You suggested when there is dosa, ‘there will be unease in his or her body. Then it can be said there is body-consciousness of painfulness’. .... S: I think it’s important to understand that unpleasant or painful bodily feeling is a NAMA. It is mental. At that moment as you know, there is no dosa, but the dosa follows immediately in the sense and mind door processes with the javana cittas. What is experienced through the body are merely the tangible objects – solidity, temperature and motion. Actually, I may have misunderstood what you wrote here as I know you understand all these details. Then you suggest ‘buddhaanussati may also be applied. It is a bhavanaa.’ However, when there is an idea of ‘applying’ a special contemplation in this way, I think it’s more likely to be motivated by an idea of self and not any kind of bhavanaa. It’s different when there are conditions to just reflect on buddhaanussati naturally. .... 6. In #54294 at the end, you mention that ‘when we are trying to develop samatha and we cannot attain what we want then there arises displeasure. This is not in connection with sensuous matters.’ .... S: I think that anytime there is attachment followed by aversion regardless of the object of our clinging (here concepts regarding samatha or tranquility), then it is definitely sensuous clinging and aversion that we’re talking about. The same applies to your next example when you refer to pleasure conncected with concentration or tranquility. Of course, it may be siilabbatupaadaana, for example, but if it’s not one of the 3 clingings with wrong views, then it’s bound to be kaamupaadaana (sensuous clinging) as I understand. Have I misunderstood? .... 7. You often refer to Pothila, Tucha Pothila. We read (Dhp A, 20, 7) how he could recite the entire Tipitaka and commentaries to date. But, as we know, knowing and reciting texts is not the same as developing higher wisdom. This account is also the one I think Nina was referring to when she mentioned the ‘lizard story’ to TG perhaps. The seven year old novice who helped him humble his pride gave him the example of the six holes of the ant-hill and how in order to catch the lizard, five of these sense doorways need to be closed, leaving only the mind doorway. Again we have to consider the Pali words and meaning of ‘meditate’. I like this story very much as well. More to consider, I think. We can see what an obstacle pride can be if it’s not seen for what it is. (to be contd) Metta, Sarah ======= 55024 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:39pm Subject: Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n... buddhatrue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott Duncan" wrote: > > Dear Howard, > > "I'm writing now because Scott is relatively new to the Dhamma, and I > care for him and for his not losing a full perspective on Dhamma > practice." > > Thank you very much for the kind sentiment, Howard. Very humbling. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Hi Scott (and Howard), It will be for your benefit to listen to the input of Howard, and then decide for yourself. If you become familiar with the suttas you will see that Ken H. doesn't have any basis for his interpretation of the dhamma. Actually, if you become familiar with the Abhidhamma as presented by scholars other than K. Sujin and Nina, you will also fail to find a basis for Ken H's assertions. Put simply, satipatthana without jhana is too weak to rid the mind of defilements, and jhana without satipatthana is too sublime/ephemeral to rid the mind of defilements. One should practice both to truly follow the Buddha's path. Metta, James 55025 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 10:43pm Subject: Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n~na kenhowardau Hi Scott, You wrote: -------------------- > Might I please have the reference from the Visudhimagga to which you are referring? I have understood, as you note, that jhana "follows on" from out of a broader set of conditions. I am curious as to the rarity of the experience, which you are asserting. -------------------------------------- I was discussing this subject with Matheesha late last year, and my inexpert comments were as follows: KH: > > In the Visuddhimagga at XII 8, we read, "Now the kasina preliminary work is difficult for a beginner, and only one in a hundred or a thousand can do it." I am not sure what is meant by, "one in a hundred or a thousand." I assume it means "one in somewhere between a hundred and a thousand." Also, I think this is referring to a hundred or a thousand *of those who aspire to jhana* - not of the population in general. The Visuddhimagga continues; "The arousing of the sign is difficult for one who has done the preliminary work, and only one in a hundred or a thousand can do it." KH: As I read this, the number of aspiring jhana students has already been reduced to one in ten thousand or a million, and jhana has still not been reached. Vis: "To extend the sign when it has arisen and reach absorption is difficult and only one in a hundred or a thousand can do it." KH: So, of those students who set out to develop jhana, one in a million or one in a thousand million (or one in somewhere between a million and a thousand million) actually attain it. And that was said in ancient times - when there was a comparatively large number people with 'only a little dust in their eyes' and with any reasonable hope to attaining jhana. Corrections welcome. > > I'll admit my commentary on the commentary was not of great worth - considering I didn't know what was meant by, "One in a hundred or a thousand." You might agree with James who responded: J: > > Only one in a hundred or a thousand can do it?? So which is it? One hundred or one thousand? Buddhaghosa should have taken a statistics class! Do you realize what a big difference there is between the number: 100 and the number: 1000??? This extrapolation by Buddhaghosa is pointless and useless. > > -------------------------------- S: > To me, a basic learner, you put it forth that jhana experience is nigh on unattainable (well you don't quite say it that way but you do make a strong statement). I don't think that jhana is something you get out of a cereal box (and I am not hearing you to be saying that I do) but I do not have the sense that it is as rare as you say. One is taught to cultivate jhanas in the overall process of meditation practise. If I have misunderstood the relative ease of attainment of jhana as a preliminary to further practise - meditative or otherwise - I'd be happy to learn more. > ---------------------------------- I am always happy to discuss it, although most of my information comes second hand from other DSG contributors. The Useful Posts folder in our Files section is a great resource: have you seen it yet? Basically, jhana is an attainment that is (or was) available outside the Buddha's dispensation. If doesn't offer an end to suffering, but it does offer a temporary release. That release can take the form of countless aeons in the Non-material Sphere. So it is not bad, but it is not permanent. I think (not sure) the Buddha was making a comparison to jhana (the previous pinnacle of human achievement) when he announced he had found the way to "final release" from dukkha. It makes me wonder; why would anyone follow the ancient way of jhana when the Buddha's way of satipatthana is available? I don't know the answer except to say that if a person already has the necessary accumulated tendencies for jhana then he can do both. But if he doesn't - well, it seems to me he has his priorities mixed up. Or maybe he is under the impression that jhana is necessary for enlightenment. Many modern-day Buddhists deny the way of the Sukkavipassaka (one who attains by bare insight) but I think you will find that the vast majority of ariyan disciples (even in the Buddha's lifetime) attained in this way. (There is plenty on this in Useful Posts.) ------------------------------ HK: > > "Any idea of waiting for a "suitable object" (such as jhana or some other kusala dhamma) betrays a lack of understanding of the Buddha's teaching: the past has gone forever and the future has never existed - there is only the present moment." ..... S: > It is my humble understanding that, when the conditions are right, jhana can arise. ---------------- Well yes, but the conditions for jhana are in some ways more restrictive than the conditions for satipatthana. As you know, there are five hindrances that prevent the arising of jhana. Satipatthana has only one hindrance - ignorance of the Dhamma. I don't mean to imply that ignorance is easily overcome: the Dhamma it is profoundly deep and difficult, but why add to the difficulty? This post is getting a bit long so I might leave it now and send the rest later. But first I will give you the other references you asked for: -------------- KH: > > I prefer to know the Dhamma where it lists the factors for enlightenment. They are 1) association with wise friends, 2) hearing the Dhamma, 3) wisely considering the Dhamma, and 4) applying knowledge of the Dhamma to the present moment.(Sorry, no reference but I can find it for you if you like.)" ..... S: > Yes please, Ken (on the reference). -------------- I have cut and pasted the following from - you guessed it - Useful Posts: > >Jon >Here are a couple of sutta references: Conditions necessary for the development of insight: AN IV, 246 (Trans: NDB 91) The Growth of Wisdom "These four things, O monks, are conducive to the growth of wisdom. What four? Association with superior persons, hearing the good Dhamma, proper attention and practice in accordance with the Dhamma. These four things are conducive to the growth of wisdom." Conditions necessary for the attainment of enlightenment: SN LV, 5 Sotapattisamyutta (Trans: CDB 55.05) "Bhikkhus, these four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the realization of the fruit of stream-entry. What four? Association with superior persons, hearing the true Dhamma, careful attention, practice in accordance with the Dhamma. These four things, when developed and cultivated, lead to the realization of the fruit of stream-entry."< ***** > > Then there is this one I found in another post by Jon (to Tep): Jon: > I would say there is a direct connection between an 'earnest interest in the teachings' and the arising of a moment of insight. Consider the following from the Kitagiri Sutta MN 70 (MLDB, Nanamoli/Bodhi trans): <> Ken H 55026 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:12pm Subject: Htoo (2) - avijja, moha and more sarahprocter... Hi Htoo, 8. In #53068 you were talking about the 8 path factors. You rightly suggest that only at moments of lokuttara do all the 8 path factors arise together and only then ‘become full-strength’. You suggest at other times ‘they may not even be eight parts and instead there might be just five parts or less’. Can we rephrase this last sentence and say that ‘at other moments of satipatthana, there won’t ever be eight path factors arising: there will be five path factors or six if right speech, right livelihood or right action arises.’? .... 9. In #53712 you asked which cittas are more powerful with regard to the akusala vipaaka. (I think Nina may have responded but I’m not sure now). As I understand, ignoring other factors, a) unprompted is stronger than prompted, b) with wrong view is stronger than without wrong view, c)I believe I’ve read/heard that with dosa is stronger than with lobha .... 10. In #53714 you and Nina were discussing the difficult point concerning inferior and superior vatthus, physical bases and the feelings connected with these and then the example of the feelings when eating different dishes. It may be quite wrong, but I understood the inferior and superior to refer to say the strength of eye-base. Someone may have good eye-sight and another weak eye-sight. This will affect eye-cosnciousness and associated feelings etc. Perhaps the example of the eating or coarse and refined food is given as a simile or metaphor only. (We can bring it up in Bkk. – good question) .... 11. In #54574, Cetasikas thread, you wrote that ‘some people are inclined to think that they must first of all become devoided of wrong-view, before they can begin to develop anything that right.’ This would be a kind of wrong view in itself!! People don’t understand that wrong view and right view both arise momentarily and can follow each other:-). .... 12. In #54689, I’m not keen on the first part. Firstly, I don’t think we can say that ‘beings are committing kamma almost all the time’. Also, I don’t think we can say ‘avijjaa is a form of moha’. The Abhidhamma texts make it clear that avijjaa and moha are synonyms used in different contexts. So, it doesn’t make sense to say ‘those jhaanalaabhii are not free from avijjaa even though they may be free from moha’. ..... 13. In #54788, more confusion as I read it on moha and avijjaa. You refer to when ‘one does kusala’ there isn’t knowledge of the 4NT and this is avijjaa but there is no moha. The avijjaa in D.O. being referred to in this post refers to past avijjaa which conditioned kamma. Without avijjaa conditioning the round of samasara, there would be no kusala kamma patha. It doesn’t mean there is ignorance at that moment of kusala. So when you say that when performing kusala, there’s no understanding of the 4NT and that this is avijjaa, I don’t think this is quite right. .... 14 In #54555, I got a bit lost in your explanations to Howard about the 4 right efforts. You wrote that ‘not arisen kusala are magga kusala. They are sotapatti and above magga.’ What about any not arisen kusala? For example, even for a sotapanna, wholesome states need to continually arise?? Maybe I’ve misunderstood you. I also question the way you refer to ‘when one is exactly doing satipatthana’ and ‘so the exertion is to arise sotapati magga or higher magga...’ etc. It all sounds very much like a Self to me....but perhaps it’s just a way of expression for you. (to be contd) Metta, Sarah ======= 55027 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:33pm Subject: Htoo (3) - last of the ambush posts:-) sarahprocter... Hi Htoo, 15. You wrote to Tep in #54629 that you ‘will be anywhere to help anyone’ etc and how if your ‘services are used or not used’ it’s not a problem. I think this shows what a good friend you are to us all. I appreciated your comments and reminders. As you say, someone or some people may think we’re not fit to talk to or might not like our expressions, but if we are just friendly to anyone regardless, we learn a little more about the meaning of ‘kalyana mitta’ without any expectations at all, just trying to help when we can. ..... 16 in #54645, more on moha and avijja. Yes, they are used in different contexts only. You say ‘just sitting and thinking will not be pa.tipatti’, but I’m not sure that anyone has ever suggested ‘sitting and thinking’ is pa.tipatti:-). You go on to refer to ‘non-practising’, ‘non-doing’ which are ‘appa.tipatti avijjaa’. I get the idea again that you see pa.tipatti in terms of activities or appearances,all with ‘someone doing something’ but perhaps you’d elaborate. You also go on to say that ‘any avijjaa will lead to formation of kamma through sa’nkhaara or fabrication or kamma-formation.....give rise to effects.’ I agree that it is ‘because of avijjaa, sa’nkhaara have been committted’, but not all avijjaa leads to kamma bringing results. Perhaps you mean that until all avijjaa is completely eradicated, the conditions will be there for becoming and for sa’nkhaara or kamma to be committed. ..... 17. Back to Cetasikas and your comment at the end of #54642, you say ‘when the real sense of frightening in these dhamma arise then there will be possible that the way to depart them would be searched’. I take it you mean understanding the ‘frightfulness’ of these dhammas rather than feeling frightened which would of course be a kind of dosa. I mention this because many people think it’s good to be frightened and that this is a kind of understanding. ..... S: That’s it for this round. I’m appreciating your D.O. posts – should be a good series. I always enjoy your comments on other threads, like the ‘Cetasikas’ too. I learn a lot from your writing and your friendly attitude. I apologise for ‘hibernating’ and then coming out with ‘ambush’ posts as James once called them. It’s never intended that way:-/ Metta, Sarah ======= 55028 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:35am Subject: Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 2 nilovg Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 2 In this Commentary the word ³sankhåra-nimitta², the nimittas, signs or mental images, of conditioned dhammas, is used. When we were returning from the Bodhitree walking up the long stairways, a friend asked Acharn Sujin about this term. Nimitta has different meanings in different contexts. The nimitta or mental image in samatha refers to the meditation subject of samatha. We also read in some texts that one should not be taken in by the outward appearance of things (nimitta) and the details. However, the term sankhåranimitta has a different meaning as I shall explain further on. Acharn Sujin emphasized that whatever we read in the texts about nimitta should be applied to our life now. ³What we read is not theory² she often explains. We read in the ³Mahåvedallasutta² (Middle Length Sayings, no 43), about freedom of mind that is ³signless², and we read that there are two conditions for attaining this: ²non-attention (amanåsikåra) to all ³signs² and attention to the signless element². The Commentary states that the signs, nimittas, are the objects such as visible object, etc. and that the signless is nibbåna. The signless liberation of mind is explained in a way that clearly connects it with the fruition of arahantship: lust, hatred and delusion are declared to be "sign-makers" (nimittakarana), which the arahant has totally abandoned. When we read about object (årammana) as a sign, we should remember that this is not theory. An object is what citta experiences at this moment. When the rúpa that is the eyebase has not fallen away yet and colour or visible object impinges on it, there are conditions for the arising of seeing. If there were no citta which sees visible object could not appear. When we asked Acharn Sujin whether the impression or sign (nimitta) of a dhamma is a concept or a reality she answered: ³These are only words. If we use the word concept there is something that is experienced by thinking. We should not just know words, but understand the reality that appears right now. There is not merely one moment of experiencing visible object, but many moments arising and falling away. When right understanding arises we do not have to use any term.² ****** Nina. 55029 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. nilovg Hi Larry, thanks. The use of sabhava and asabhava here is above my understanding. I have to take a deep breath now to continue our Tiika Visuddhimagga marathon. Nina. op 25-01-2006 02:44 schreef LBIDD@... op LBIDD@...: > > This is how I see it. The first insight knowledge is clear seeing of the > sabhava of nama and rupa. 55030 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:10am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hello Joop, > thanks, but can you not give a shorter summary for Kh Sujin. This is too > long for a question. > Hallo Nina, Larry, all Nina, I will try to give a shorter summery for Sujin, and with an introduction. I read it aloud for myself: 2 minutes, that's not to long? The quotes of Dhammanu Sutta and Heart Sutra can be skipped if you want. BTW 1, Lodewijk's remarks on being social. To me "being social" and "thinking" (about the Teachings) is not an antithesis. Even in conventional language an individual doesn't exist, there is (again: in conventional language) a set of relations between individuals, plus matter of course. A question (that doesn't need an answer): We know that what's in conventional language called an individual, in fact is only five khandha; but how many khandha is two interacting individuals: five, or six, or ten? You thought I have some reservations about the Jataka's; no, it's less deep, I simply don't have the talent of liking fantastic stories. BTW 2, I will try to react seperately to Larry's message #54018; on this moment I only can say: this is not about my question. Larry is making a technical Abhidhamma discussion (I know you don't like this term) of the Mahayana term "sunyata" ============================================= Mrs Sujin. Many Theravadins coming from countries that are not Buddhistic converted themselves as an adult. Most times they first are vague interested in Buddhism in general, study different traditions (Tibetan, Zen, Theravada, etc). And finally many of them make a choice of one of those without totally rejecting the other traditions. DSG has participants who define themselves as mainly Theravadin but like also the profoundness of some (not all) Mahayana-ideas; from one of them I have a question and two subquestions. The main question is: WHAT CAN WE (THERAVADINS) LEARN FROM MAHAYANA ? (So NOT questions like: "what are the differences between Theravada and Mahayana" or "how can Theravada/Abhidhamma be explained to Mahayanists" or "what is wrong in Mahayana" ?) ============================================= One of the terms that's many times used in Mahayana texts is that of EMPTINESS. The work of Nagarjuna is often quoted, based on the Kaccayanagotta Sutta (SN 12:15) Emptiness or voidness (sunyatta in sanskriet) is in Mahayana not especially empty of self; more it's empty of everything; it's more more "anicca" than "anatta". A much quoted and recited text in Mahayana culture is the Heart Sutra; especially the core "Form is emptiness; emptiness also is form; etc." (Of course "form" = "rupa"). (A longer quote of it: "… seeing the five skandhas to be empty of nature. Form is emptiness; emptiness also is form. Emptiness is no other than form; form is no other than emptiness. In the same way, feeling, perception, formation, and consciousness are emptiness. Thus, Shariputra, all dharmas are emptiness. There are no characteristics. There is no birth and no cessation. There is no impurity and no purity. There is no decrease and no increase. Therefore, Shariputra, in emptiness, there is no form, no feeling, no perception, no formation, no consciousness; no eye, no ear, no nose, no tongue, no body, no mind; no appearance, no sound, no smell, no taste, no touch, no dharmas, no eye dhatu up to no mind dhatu, no dhatu of dharmas, no mind consciousness dhatu; no ignorance, no end of ignorance up to no old age and death, no end of old age and death; no suffering, no origin of suffering, no cessation of suffering, no path, no wisdom, no attainment, and no non-attainment.) First subquestion: DON'T YOU THINK, MRS SUJIN, THAT ANICCA AS ONE OF THE CENTRAL DOCTRINES IN THERAVADA CAN BE ENRICHED BY THE EMPHASIS ON EMPTINESS IN MAHAYANA ? ============================================= Another topic is that of compassion. In Mahayana "KARUNA" is primarely something else as a cetasika; it's a basic attitude for helping other beings, especially on the spiritual path. Referring to AN VII-64, the stereotype that Mahayanists are primarely concerned with the welfare and salvation of others; and that Theravadin who is solely concerned with striving for his own salvation, is not correct. The second subquestion therefore is: IT'S CLEAR FROM THE DHAMMANNU SUTTA (AN VII-64) THAT THE BUDDHA WANT US (THERAVADINS) TO BE SOCIAL. PEOPLE WHO ARE ONLY INTERESTED IN THEIR OWN LIBERATION, THEIR OWN GETTING AN ARAHANT, SHOULD BE CRITICIZED. DON'T YOU THINK WE CAN LEARN FROM MAHAYANA ABOUT THIS POINT ? (Dhammaññu Sutta: "… Of two people who practice the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, having a sense of Dhamma, having a sense of meaning - - one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others, and one who practices for his own benefit but not that of others -- the one who practices for his own benefit but not that of others is to be criticized for that reason, the one who practices for both his own benefit and that of others is, for that reason, to be praised.) Metta Joop 55031 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:12am Subject: Re: dependence. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Hi Nina and all, > > This is how I see it. The first insight knowledge is clear seeing of the > sabhava of nama and rupa. The second insight knowledge is clear seeing > of cause and effect. This latter is similar to seeing impermanence in > that impermanence is asabhava. Cause and effect (dependence) is > asabhava. But this is not a concept in the ordinary sense because it is > an insight knowledge. One can actually experience it in a profound way. Hallo Larry, Nina, all In your message two terms are put: asabhava and dependence I knew the term "sabhava" but it is not really a part of my 'inner dictionary': of course a dhamma has a property, and one cetasika for example has another property or properties than another cetasika; like in physics an electron has other properties than a muon. That's not a very profound point, I thought. But after your message (especially because "asabhava" was new to me) I did some research on asabhava. But first the term "dependence". You say literally that "cause and effect"="dependence"="a formation of conditions". I do not understand this and I do not know how to link this with the Abhidhamma as for example explained in the Abhidhammata Sangaha (with guides of Bhikkhu Bodhi). Then the terms "sabhava" and "asabhava". For this moment I have no opinion, only some facts about the use of the terms. In "The Dhamma Theory; Philosophical Cornerstone of the Abhidhamma" by Y. Karunadasa, a famous Srilankan Abhidhamma-professor. Only some short quotes, but this essay is really a "must read" for every DSG-member. www.abhidhamma.org/dhamma_theory_philosophical_corn.htm Metta Joop "… This influence is to be seen in the post-canonical exegetical literature of Sri Lanka where, for the first time, the term sabhava (Skt svabhava) came to be used as a synonym for Dhamma. Hence the recurrent definition: "Dhammas are so called because they bear their own nature" (attano sabhavat dharenti ti dhamma). Now the question that arises here is whether the Theravadins used the term sabhava in the same sense as the Sarvastivadins did. Did the Theravadins assume the metaphysical view that the substance of a Dhamma persists throughout the three phases of time? In other words, does this amount to the admission that there is a duality between the Dhamma and its sabhava, between the bearer and the borne, a dichotomy, which goes against the grain of the Buddhist doctrine of anattá? This situation has to be considered in the context of the logical apparatus used by the Abhidhammikas in defining the Dhammas. This involves three main kinds of definition. The first is called agency definition (kattu-sadhana) because it attributes agency to the thing to be defined. Such, for example, is the definition of citta (consciousness) as "that which thinks" (cinteti ti cittat). The second is called instrumental definition (karana-sadhana) because it attributes instrumentality to the thing to be defined. Such, for example, is the definition of citta as "that through which one thinks" (cinteti ti etena cittat). The third is called definition by nature (bhava-sadhana) whereby the abstract nature of the thing to be defined is brought into focus. Such, for example, is the definition," The mere act of thinking itself is citta (cintanamattam eva cittat)." The first two kinds of definition, it is maintained, are provisional and as such are not valid from an ultimate point of view. … It is in the context of these implications that the definition of Dhamma as that which bears its own nature has to be understood. Clearly, this is a definition according to agency (kattu-sadhana), and hence its validity is provisional. From this definition, therefore, one cannot conclude that a given Dhamma is a substantial bearer of its qualities or "own-nature." The duality between Dhamma and sabhava is only an attribution made for the convenience of definition. For in actual fact both terms denote the same actuality. Hence it is categorically stated that apart from sabhava there is no distinct entity called a Dhamma, and that the term sabhava signifies the mere fact of being a Dhamma. If the Dhamma has no function distinct from its sabhava, and if Dhamma and sabhava denote the same thing, why is the Dhamma invested with the function of bearing its own-nature? For this implies the recognition of an agency distinct from the Dhamma. This, it is observed, is done not only to conform with the inclinations of those who are to be instructed, but also to impress upon us the fact that there is no agent behind the Dhamma. The point being emphasized is that the dynamic world of sensory experience is not due to causes other than the self-same Dhammas into which it is finally reduced. It is the inter-connection of the Dhammas through causal relations that explains the variety and diversity of contingent existence and not some kind of trans-empirical reality, which serves as their metaphysical ground. …. Now this commentarial definition of Dhamma as sabhava poses an important problem, for it seems to go against an earlier Theravada tradition recorded in the Patisambhidamagga. This canonical text specifically states that the five aggregates are devoid of own-nature (sabhavena-sunnat). Since the Dhammas are the elementary constituents of the five aggregates, this should mean that the Dhammas, too, are devoid of own-nature. What is more, does not the very use of the term sabhava, despite all the qualifications under which it is used, give the impression that a given Dhamma exists in its own right? And does this not amount to the admission that a Dhamma is some kind of substance? The commentators were not unaware of these implications and they therefore took the necessary steps to forestall such a conclusion. This they sought to do by supplementing the former definition with another, which actually nullifies the conclusion that the Dhammas might be quasi-substances. This additional definition states that a Dhamma is not that which bears its own-nature, but that which is borne by its own conditions (paccayehi dhariyanti ti dhamma). Whereas the earlier definition is agent-denotation (kattusadhana) because it attributes an active role to the Dhamma, elevating it to the position of an agent, the new definition is object-denotation (kamma-sadhana) because it attributes a passive role to the Dhamma and thereby downgrades it to the position of an object. What is radical about this new definition is that it reverses the whole process which otherwise might culminate in the conception of Dhammas as substances or bearers of their own-nature. What it seeks to show is that, far from being a bearer, a Dhamma is being borne by its own conditions. … In point of fact, in the technical terminology of the Abhidhamma, the term Dhamma is sometimes used in a wider sense to include anything that is knowable. In this sense, not only the ultimate realities -- the Dhammas proper -- but also the products of mental interpretation are called Dhammas. To distinguish the two, the latter are called asabhava-dhammas, i.e. Dhammas devoid of objective reality. The use of this term in this wider sense is reminiscent of its earlier meaning as shown in the Pali Nikáyas, where it is used in a very general sense to include all cognizable things on the empirical level. However, there is this situation to be noted: Although both Dhammas and concepts (pannattis or asabhava-dhammas) constitute the content of knowledge, it is into the Dhammas that the content of knowledge can be finally analyzed. Thus there is a close parallelism between the Dhammas on the one hand and the contents of knowledge on the other. That is to say, the ultimate irreducible data of cognition are the subjective counterparts of the ultimate irreducible data of objective existence." 55032 From: "Joop" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:23am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > Dear Joop, Howard, Larry, Nina and all, > > Thanks Howard for your explanation. I think you do not contradict > and it is like my opinion. Thanks Joop for your quote. > > Buddha is a Paa.li word. The root word is 'Bu' which means 'to know'. > > Citta has the character of knowing. Budha is 'wise being'. Buddha is > uncomparable wisest being ever exists. > > Buddha-nature is there in citta. But I would not use that term. > > With respect, > > Htoo Naing Hallo Htoo It's OK that you do not use the term. But the reason it was used was: what does it mean in Mahayana-tradition. Metta Joop 55033 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, (Ananda) upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 1/25/06 12:07:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: > Dependent arising, though deep, appeared clear to the Venrable Ananda > for four reasons: > 1) Because he was endowed with decisive supporting conditions from the > past. > 2)because of his digence in study. > 3. Because he was already a stream enterer. > 4. Because he was highly learned. > ======================= My memory might be faulty on this, Robert, but I seem to recall the Buddha replying "Not so" to this, correcting Ananda, and saying that dependent origination does not even *appear* clear. In any case, my mention of Ananda in my post to Ken and Scott was a humorous aside, and not a major thrust of my post. The major thrust of my post was that if one starts out with the attitude that Buddhist practice is beyond all but those already well advanced on the path and that all we can do is study, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that we will make no headway in this lifetime. But there is an urgency, and we all will be foolish to take an attitude that aeons are required and so all we can do is study. We should do *all* that we can do. At the bottom I copy the Utthana Sutta in which the Buddha tries to shake us out of a do-nothing attitude. It is a wake-up call that I think we should heed. With metta, Howard ____________________________ Sn II.10 Utthana Sutta Initiative Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu Alternate translation: Ireland Thanissaro PTS: Sn 331-334 Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. Copyright © 2000 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 2000 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. Get up! Sit up! What's your need for sleep? And what sleep is there for the afflicted, pierced by the arrow, oppressed? Get up! Sit up! Train firmly for the sake of peace, Don't let the king of death, - seeing you heedless - deceive you, bring you under his sway. Cross over the attachment to which human & heavenly beings, remain desiring tied. Don't let the moment pass by. Those for whom the moment is past grieve, consigned to hell. Heedless is dust, dust comes from heedlessness has heedlessness on its heels. Through heedfulness & clear knowing you'd remove your own sorrow. ________________________________ /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) 55034 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:01am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: Dear Joop, I think Miss Sujin is right rather than Mrs Sujin. With Metta, Htoo Naing 55035 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:15am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 637 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Vi~n~naana paccayaa naama-ruupam'. Consciousness as a supporting condition conditions mentality- materiality. Because of consciousness 'mentality-materiality' has to arise. There are 19 vipaaka cittas or resultant consciousness that can function as linking consciousness or rebirth consciousness or pa.tisandhi citta. These 19 cittas are a) 1 ahetuka akusala-vipaaka santira.na citta (4 woeful realms) b) 1 upekkha ahetuka kusala-vipaaka santira.na citta ( human mostly) c) 8 mahaavipaaka cittas ( human realm and 6 deva realms) d) 5 ruupavipaaka cittas ( 15 ruupa brahmaa realms) e) 4 aruupavipaaka cittas (4 aruupa brahmaa realms) ------ ++19 pa.tisandhi cittas These 19 cittas are dead sure the result of sankhaara and those sankhaara again are the result of avijjaa. When these 19 citta arise as patisandhi cittas there have to arise naama-ruupa if the cittas are first 15 cittas and there will arise just 4 vipaaka naamakkhandhaa in case of latter 4 aruupavipaaka cittas. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 55036 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:39am Subject: Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n~na kenhowardau Hi again Scott, Back to our discussion: -------------------------------- S: > It is also my sense that jhana prepares for and accompanies wisdom meditation. I agree that longing for a past jhana experience misses the point, as does waiting for the next one. ---------------------------------- I am glad we agree on the important issues. The only possible objects for satipatthana are the realities (paramattha dhammas) that are arising in the present moment. Who cares whether those objects are kusala or akusala - it is too late to change them. ---------------------------------- . . . S: > I would say that setting the conditions for jhana, through sila and diligence in meditation, will simply allow jhana to arise. ------------------------------------- That sounds right to me: I think it would be fair to say that sila and kusala effort are among the conditions for jhana. But, of course, we are talking about conditioned dhammas here, not about concepts. Sila is not, for example, helping an old lady to cross the street. That is a concept. Concepts are things that we seemingly control, whereas dhammas are fleeting phenomena that come and go in a trillionth of a second and which no one could reasonably expect to control. That is what we always have to remember when talking about Dhamma practice (or anything that is ultimately real) - it is a matter of conditioned dhammas, not of concepts. ------------------------------------------------------------ <. . .> S: > Satipatthana is "the" way, or "one" way, or part of the practise leading to "enlightenment?" ------------------------------------------------------------ I think it is "the one way leading to enlightenment." It is true that some monks - especially in the time of the Buddha - practised jhana as well as satipatthana but I think jhana could be called part of their way only if it was used as a vehicle for enlightenment. That is, only if the practitioner was skilled enough to emerge from jhana and immediately take of one of the jhana factors as an object of insight. ------------ S: > We may be discussing different sets of practise. Do you see bhavana and satipatthana as able to coincide in an overall practise? ------------ I take it you are using 'bhavana' to refer to samatha, or jhana. Actually, there are two kinds of bhavana - samatha and vipassana. Satipatthana is a kind of vipassana (the mundane kind). So my answer is yes, it is theoretically possible (and in earlier times it was actually possible) to practice samatha and vipassana in tandem (as I have attempted to describe above). ---------------------------------- . . . S: > Are satipatthana and patipatti equivalent? ----- ---------------------------- Yes, I believe so. They both refer to putting the teaching into practice. (And I believe they refer to the last of the 'four factors for enlightenment' we were talking about earlier. ---------------- S: > Is bhavana also patipatti? ---------------- You are referring to jhana and I think perhaps it can be called part of the practice (patipatti) when it is developed as a vehicle for vipassana. Otherwise, I would say no it isn't. Jhana-citta takes a concept as its object and so it cannot know a nama, or a rupa, as it truly is - anicca, dukkha and anatta. Therefore it is not part of Dhamma practice. (Howard and James might take exception to that, but that's is the way I understand it.) ----------------------------------------------- S: > Thank you for a very interesting discussion, Ken <. . .> ----------------------------------------------- And thank you, Scott. Please don't feel obliged to reply to this post, I know you are involved in other threads. But any comments you might care to make will be appreciated. Ken H 55037 From: "nanapalo" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 7:07am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. nana_palo@... Dear Nina, anumodana for your kindness. Sure the book will be usefull for us. My address is: jl. CITY NO. 9A BOGOR 16123 JAWA BARAT - INDONESIA Mrs Tetty Tjiomas is still in good health, but her eyes cannot see well. Every Sunday i met her at our Vihara. She still learns and applies Abhidhamma in her daily lives. Discussion with me while we met at Vihara. For recollection, i always give her audio Buddha Dhamma Compact Disc (not Abhidhamma) because i have not any audio CD regarding Abhidhamma. Recently she reads your "Cetasikas" book (her daughter reads it for her) everyday. I think She will be happy hearing you on good health also. Anumodana for posting me your "The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena" I will use it for our discussion every Saturday. kind regards, selamat -----Original Message----- From: nina van gorkom [mailto:vangorko@...] Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 3:01 AM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. Dear Selamat, op 24-01-2006 15:00 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@...: > Currently we discussed Matter (Rupa) in relation with the four elements > meditation and application in daily life. It's subtle enough to comprehend. > > Am sorry not often post to the group, because limitation of the bandwidth in > my town. -------- N: Rupa is a good subject. If you like more info, Rob Kirkpatrick's web Abhidhamma.org. has some articles written by me on this subject:The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena. This is the link: I am sorry that you have trouble with internet connection. Then I could mail some parts to you. I translated Khun Sujin's Book a Survey of Paramattha Dhammas. If you like a copy, let me know and it will be sent from Bangkok. If you could just mention your address again. It may be useful for your group. I post now part of my article following here. How is Ibu Tetty Tjiomas, is she still in good health? Nina. Chapter 1 The Four Great Elements Rupas do not arise singly, they arise in units or groups. Each of these groups is composed of different kinds of rupa. There are four kinds of rupa, the four ³Great Elements² (Maha-bhuta rupas), which have to arise together with each and every group of rupas, no matter whether these are of the body or materiality outside. The types of rupa other than the four Great Elements depend on these four rupas and cannot arise without them. They are the following rupas: the Element of Earth or solidity the Element of Water or cohesion the Element of Fire or heat the Element of Wind (air) or motion Earth, Water, Fire and Wind do not in this context have the same meaning as in conventional language, neither do they represent conceptual ideas as we find them in different philosophical systems. In the Abhidhamma they represent ultimate realities, specific rupas which each have their own characteristic. The Element of Earth (in Pali: pathavi dhatu), which has been translated into English as ³solidity² or ³extension², has the characteristic of hardness or softness. It can be directly experienced when we touch something hard or soft. We do not have to name the rupa designated by ³Element of Earth² in order to experience it. It is an element which arises and falls away; it has no abiding substance, it is devoid of a ³self². It may seem that hardness can last for some time, but in reality it falls away immediately. Rupas are replaced so long as there are conditions for them to be produced by one of the four factors of kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition (See Introduction. This will be explained further on.). The hardness which is experienced now is already different from the hardness which arose a moment ago. We used to think that a cushion or a chair could be experienced through touch. When we are more precise, it is hardness of softness which can be experienced through touch. Because of association and remembrance of former experiences we can think of a cushion or chair and we know that they are named ³cushion² or ³chair². This example can remind us that there is a difference between ultimate realities and concepts we can think of but which are not real in the ultimate sense. Viewing the body and the things around us as different compositions of rupas may be a new outlook to us. Gradually we shall realize that rupas are not abstract categories, but that they are realities appearing in daily life. I shall quote the definitions of the different rupas given by the commentaries, the ³Visuddhimagga² and the ³Atthasalini². These definitions mention the characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause or immediate occasion (The Atthasalini explains these terms in Book I, Part II, Analysis of Terms, 63.) of the rupas which are explained. The ³Visuddhimagga² (XI, 93) (See also Dhammasangani, § 648 and Atthasalini II, Ch III, 332.) gives, for example, the following definition of the rupa which is the earth element or solidity: ...The earth element has the characteristic of hardness. Its function is to act as a foundation. It is manifested as receiving (As will be explained, it receives the other rupas it arises together with since it is their foundation.)... As to the proximate cause, I shall deal with that later on. Each reality has its own individual characteristic by which it can be distinguished from other realities. Solidity has hardness (or softness) as characteristic, the fire element has heat as characteristic. Such characteristics can be experienced when they appear. As to function, rupas have functions in relation to other rupas or in relation to nama. Solidity acts as a foundation, namely for the other rupas it arises together with in a group, that is its function. Smell, for example, could not arise alone, it needs solidity as foundation. It is the same with visible object or colour which can be experienced through the eyesense. Visible object or colour needs solidity as foundation or support, it could not arise alone. Solidity which arises together with visible object cannot be seen, only visible object can be seen. As regards manifestation, this is the way a reality habitually appears. Solidity is manifested as receiving, it receives the other rupas it arises together with since it acts as their foundation. With regard to the proximate cause, according to the ³Visuddhimagga² (XIV, 35) each of the four Great Elements has the other three as its proximate cause. The four Great Elements arise together and condition one another. At first the definitions of realities may seem complicated but when we have studied them we shall see that they are helpful for the understanding of the different realities, and this includes understanding of the way they act on other realities and the way they manifest themselves. The study of realities is a foundation for the development of direct understanding, of seeing things as they really are. ***** Nina. 55038 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues nilovg Hallo Joop, Thanks, this is much better. I shall try to convey it to Kh Sujin. Nina. op 25-01-2006 14:10 schreef Joop op jwromeijn@...: > > Nina, I will try to give a shorter summery for Sujin, and with an > introduction. > I read it aloud for myself: 2 minutes, that's not to long? > The quotes of Dhammanu Sutta and Heart Sutra can be skipped if you > want. 55039 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:13am Subject: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! TGrand458@... Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, Ken H, James, Sarah, All I'm re-posting this because, after a day, it got no significant response. (Original post below.) According to the information Larry provided, the term "sabhava" appears 5 times in the suttas...in the Patisambhidamagga pg. 357 English trans. Each of the 5 times the text says that each one of the aggregates (khandas) are "void of sabhava." It says "born aggregates are void of sabhava." That means "arisen aggregates are void of 'own characteristic'." Which means -- "Presently occurring khandas are void of 'own characteristic'." This is amazing information considering many in this group consider paying attention to sabhava (own characteristic) is the heart and sole of their practice. Now ... it turns out the Nikayas didn't consider "own characteristic" even important enough to mention it once. And the Patisambhidamagga, the commentary closest commentary to the Suttas IMO, actually mentions "own characteristic" and denies that there is such a thing. If the "realities" -- the 5 khandas -- are void of "own characteristic," what indeed is it that folks who think they are being mindful of "own characteristic" are being mindful of ??? The answer apparently isn't "realitiy." They may be being mindful of the present, but apparently their interpretation is a misunderstanding of it. Looking forward to reading where I've gone wrong. :-) TG Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, All Thanks again Larry for the reference. I'm confused now because it was my impression that sabhava was being translated as "own characteristic" and that "own characteristics" were aspects that Abhidhamma practitioners were trying to pay attention to. Now it turns out that the one reference to the term in the entire Suttas is merely denying "own characteristics." No wonder I'm uncomfortable with the term and outlook. Please let me know if I have totally misunderstood something. TG 55040 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, (Ananda) nilovg Hi Howard, thanks for the quote. To me it is a good reminder not to be forgetful of the dhamma appearing at this moment now. There always is some dhamma or other, sound, feeling, thinking, whatever appears. Only one at a time through one doorway. Nina. op 25-01-2006 15:03 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > Cross over the attachment > to which human & heavenly beings, > remain desiring > tied. > Don't let the moment pass by. > Those for whom the moment is past > grieve, consigned to hell. 55041 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! nilovg Hi TG, Sabhava: its meanings depends on the context. BTW Howard, The Patisambidhamagga is part of the Khuddhaka Nikaya, and as such it is not a later Co. It is ascribed to Sariputta. I feel no need to debate this, it is best to study the work and then see for oneself. Returning to sabhava, there is a foornote , and another meaning is given here: void of individual essence: it is not arising of itself, sayam eva uppaado. Or: own arising. Then he explains: Because of existence in dependence on conditions it is ...void of individual essence. That is all. It shows that we have to be careful in what context it is said. Those who develop satipatthana indeed did not need so many words, it was all clear in the Buddha's time. Nina. op 25-01-2006 19:13 schreef TGrand458@... op TGrand458@...: According to the information Larry provided, the term > "sabhava" appears 5 times in the suttas...in the Patisambhidamagga pg. 357 > English trans. Each of the 5 times the text says that each one of the > aggregates (khandas) are "void of sabhava." It says "born aggregates are > void of > sabhava." That means "arisen aggregates are void of 'own characteristic'." > Which means -- "Presently occurring khandas are void of 'own > characteristic'." > > This is amazing information considering many in this group consider paying > attention to sabhava (own characteristic) is the heart and sole of their > practice. > 55042 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 0:10pm Subject: Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, Ken H, James, Sarah, All > > I'm re-posting this because, after a day, it got no significant response. > (Original post below.) According to the information Larry provided, the term > "sabhava" appears 5 times in the suttas...in the Patisambhidamagga pg. 357 > English trans. Each of the 5 times the text says that each one of the > aggregates (khandas) are "void of sabhava." --------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear TGrand, Once there was an old member. He used to count how many time words appear in suttas. Example words are vipassanaa, jhaana, tanhaa. I do not think frequency is related to importance. With Metta, Htoo Naing 55043 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 0:28pm Subject: Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! rjkjp1 --- Dear TG, This has been discussed at length on dsg. It comes up every few years. The commentary to the Patisambhidhimagga explains that it was said in a particular context. If you like I can give it all the text- about a page. Take me awhile to type it out. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, Ken H, James, Sarah, All > > I'm re-posting this because, after a day, it got no significant response. > (Original post below.) According to the information Larry provided, the term > "sabhava" appears 5 times in the suttas...in the Patisambhidamagga pg. 357 > English trans. Each of the 5 times the text says that each one of the > aggregates (khandas) are "void of sabhava." It says "born aggregates are void of > sabhava." That means "arisen aggregates are void of 'own characteristic'." > Which means -- "Presently occurring khandas are void of 'own characteristic'." > > This is amazing information considering many in this group consider paying > attention to sabhava (own characteristic) is the heart and sole of their > practice. > > Now ... it turns out the Nikayas didn't consider "own characteristic" even > important enough to mention it once. And the Patisambhidamagga, the > commentary closest commentary to the Suttas IMO, actually mentions "own > characteristic" and denies that there is such a thing. > > If the "realities" -- the 5 khandas -- are void of "own characteristic," > what indeed is it that folks who think they are being mindful of "own > characteristic" are being mindful of ??? The answer apparently isn't "realitiy." They > may be being mindful of the present, but apparently their interpretation is > a misunderstanding of it. > > Looking forward to reading where I've gone wrong. :-) > > TG > > > > Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, All > > > Thanks again Larry for the reference. I'm confused now because it was my > impression that sabhava was being translated as "own characteristic" and > that > "own characteristics" were aspects that Abhidhamma practitioners were > trying > to pay attention to. > > Now it turns out that the one reference to the term in the entire Suttas is > merely denying "own characteristics." > > No wonder I'm uncomfortable with the term and outlook. Please let me know > if I have totally misunderstood something. > > TG > > 55044 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:01pm Subject: Re: Htoo (1) - lizards and doorways too..... htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Hi Htoo, Yes, it would be so nice if you could join us one day for live discussions. Meanwhile, perhaps you can listen to some of the recordings. I haven't written to you here for a while and now it's just to give some brief comments on your `stored up' posts I've set aside before we go on our trip.(As usual, no special order at all): .... 1.Firstly, many thanks for all your feedback on the `Cetasikas' threads. ..... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: You know time constraint. I love many series here by Rob M, Nina, you and many other. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. You refer (#54971) in your post to Nina to your Satipatthana series of threads and how `someone might see the matter as it is not satipatthana if it is on `name, concept, pannatti' with regard to the foulness section. To be honest, I hope one day you revise this whole set of posts. They contain such excellent material, but I think they miss the main point of satipatthana: being aware of the present reality regardless of the activity or contemplation. It's no a question of any special focus on any of the 261 body contemplations etc which you enumerate, but of being aware of namas and rupas whilst following any activity or thought process whatsoever. Ken H started to have a good discussion with you on this topic and it seemed to stop abruptly. I hope you'll both continue it for everyone's benefit. ..... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Abruptly? I do not think both Ken H and I are to stop abruptly. The reason may be unrelated to discussion per se. Maybe because of my time sharing. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. In #52856, you mention as origins of craving under: a) eye cakkhu pasada (eye-sensitivity) cakkhu vatthu (eue-base) cakkhu dvara (eye-door) .... S: What is cakkhu dvara if it's not cakkhu pasada? .... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Cakkhu pasada is a ruupa. When it opens for the way it is door. When it carries on its head it is vatthu or base. Actually it is ruupa. So it does not mixed with naama like craving. By no means craving's origin is cakkhu pasada. But what I say was literally. If there is no eye (cakkhu pasada) there is no naama related to eye. This includes craving. So I said craving originates from cakkhu. I will repeat that there are 10 places that craving may arise. 1. cakkhu 2. ruupa 3. cakkhuvinnaana 4. cakkhu-sam-phassa 5. cakkhu-sam-phassajaa-vedanaa 6. ruupa-sannaa 7. ruupa-sa`ncetanaa 8. ruupa-tanhaa 9. ruupa-vitakko 10. ruupa-vicaaro The first three are replaced with other 15 dhaatus or elements. It maybe the problem of wording that I used. I directly copied from mahaasatipatthaana sutta. Tanhaa is tanhaa and cakkhu pasada is cakkhu pasada. I understand your question. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Then you mention under: b) visual object ruupa (visual object) vanna (colour) form (form/shape/figure) light .... S: Do you mean these are aspects of visual object or what? .... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: :-)) synonyms. Close meaning. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. In #52228 you paraphrase the Buddha's last words to Ananda about how the Dhamma Vinaya will be his teacher. You stress that he did not say `Sutta' or `Abhidhamma' etc. I was confused with your meaning. Do you or do you not understand Dhamma Vinaya as referring to the Tipitaka? .... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I am a Tipitaka lover. :-)) Actually this message had to be put at a specific site rather than DSG. I mean it was not for DSG because DSG do not have the problem with Tipitaka. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 In #53550 you were discussing painful bodily feeling with Larry. You suggested when there is dosa, `there will be unease in his or her body. Then it can be said there is body-consciousness of painfulness'. .... S: I think it's important to understand that unpleasant or painful bodily feeling is a NAMA. It is mental. At that moment as you know, there is no dosa, but the dosa follows immediately in the sense and mind door processes with the javana cittas. What is experienced through the body are merely the tangible objects – solidity, temperature and motion. Actually, I may have misunderstood what you wrote here as I know you understand all these details. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Maybe my message went wrong. You are right. At that time I just changed 'sensation' as 'consciousness'. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Then you suggest `buddhaanussati may also be applied. It is a bhavanaa.' However, when there is an idea of `applying' a special contemplation in this way, I think it's more likely to be motivated by an idea of self and not any kind of bhavanaa. It's different when there are conditions to just reflect on buddhaanussati naturally. .... -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: I will write down in my note book about 1. idea of 'applying' 2. idea of *doing* (of Sukin) 3. idea of *sitting* 4. idea of 'self' --------------------------------------------------------------------- 6. In #54294 at the end, you mention that `when we are trying to develop samatha and we cannot attain what we want then there arises displeasure. This is not in connection with sensuous matters.' .... S: I think that anytime there is attachment followed by aversion regardless of the object of our clinging (here concepts regarding samatha or tranquility), then it is definitely sensuous clinging and aversion that we're talking about. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: It is from mahasatipa.t.thaana sutta. I do know what you are talking. Dosa always hold sensuous thing. But check the sutta, please. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The same applies to your next example when you refer to pleasure conncected with concentration or tranquility. Of course, it may be siilabbatupaadaana, --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: No. Definitely not. You are completely wrong here. It is not siilabbataparaamaasa. If you say this it might be misunderstanding on jhaana-sukha. --------------------------------------------------------------------- for example, but if it's not one of the 3 clingings with wrong views, then it's bound to be kaamupaadaana (sensuous clinging) as I understand. Have I misunderstood? .... ------------ Htoo: Yes. You have truely misunderstood. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 7. You often refer to Pothila, Tucha Pothila. We read (Dhp A, 20, 7) how he could recite the entire Tipitaka and commentaries to date. But, as we know, knowing and reciting texts is not the same as developing higher wisdom. This account is also the one I think Nina was referring to when she mentioned the `lizard story' to TG perhaps. The seven year old novice who helped him humble his pride gave him the example of the six holes of the ant-hill and how in order to catch the lizard, five of these sense doorways need to be closed, leaving only the mind doorway. Again we have to consider the Pali words and meaning of `meditate'. I like this story very much as well. More to consider, I think. We can see what an obstacle pride can be if it's not seen for what it is. (to be contd) Metta, Sarah ======= -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Pride kills. There are people who showed pride in sublime way. I do have pride (conceit). But I am humble. With Metta, Htoo Naing 55045 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! upasaka_howard Hi, TG - Yes, I have a copy of the PTSM, and, as I recall [I'm not checking at the moment], you are quite right. Sabhava is denied. (I do wonder, though, whether even he discussing of sabhava in the PTSM might not be a response to Mahayana criticism of Theravada.) With metta, Howard In a message dated 1/25/06 1:53:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Hi Larry, Nina, Howard, Charles, Ken H, James, Sarah, All > > I'm re-posting this because, after a day, it got no significant response. > (Original post below.) According to the information Larry provided, the > term > "sabhava" appears 5 times in the suttas...in the Patisambhidamagga pg. 357 > English trans. Each of the 5 times the text says that each one of the > aggregates (khandas) are "void of sabhava." It says "born aggregates are > void of > sabhava." That means "arisen aggregates are void of 'own characteristic'." > > Which means -- "Presently occurring khandas are void of 'own > characteristic'." > > This is amazing information considering many in this group consider paying > attention to sabhava (own characteristic) is the heart and sole of their > practice. > > Now ... it turns out the Nikayas didn't consider "own characteristic" even > important enough to mention it once. And the Patisambhidamagga, the > commentary closest commentary to the Suttas IMO, actually mentions "own > characteristic" and denies that there is such a thing. > > If the "realities" -- the 5 khandas -- are void of "own characteristic," > what indeed is it that folks who think they are being mindful of "own > characteristic" are being mindful of ??? The answer apparently isn't > "realitiy." They > may be being mindful of the present, but apparently their interpretation > is > a misunderstanding of it. > > Looking forward to reading where I've gone wrong. :-) > > TG > /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) 55046 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:18pm Subject: Re: Htoo (2) - avijja, moha and more htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Hi Htoo, 8. In #53068 you were talking about the 8 path factors. You rightly suggest that only at moments of lokuttara do all the 8 path factors arise together and only then `become full-strength'. You suggest at other times `they may not even be eight parts and instead there might be just five parts or less'. Can we rephrase this last sentence and say that `at other moments of satipatthana, there won't ever be eight path factors arising: there will be five path factors or six if right speech, right livelihood or right action arises.'? .... ------------------------------------------ Htoo: True. -------------------------------------------- 9. In #53712 you asked which cittas are more powerful with regard to the akusala vipaaka. (I think Nina may have responded but I'm not sure now). As I understand, ignoring other factors, a) unprompted is stronger than prompted, b) with wrong view is stronger than without wrong view, c)I believe I've read/heard that with dosa is stronger than with lobha .... ------------------ Htoo: Agree. ------------------ 10. In #53714 you and Nina were discussing the difficult point concerning inferior and superior vatthus, physical bases and the feelings connected with these and then the example of the feelings when eating different dishes. It may be quite wrong, but I understood the inferior and superior to refer to say the strength of eye-base. Someone may have good eye- sight and another weak eye-sight. This will affect eye-cosnciousness and associated feelings etc. Perhaps the example of the eating or coarse and refined food is given as a simile or metaphor only. (We can bring it up in Bkk. – good question) .... ----------------------------------- Htoo: Thanks Sarah. Now I am much more clearer than Nina has explained me. -------------------------------------------------------------- 11. In #54574, Cetasikas thread, you wrote that `some people are inclined to think that they must first of all become devoided of wrong-view, before they can begin to develop anything that right.' This would be a kind of wrong view in itself!! People don't understand that wrong view and right view both arise momentarily and can follow each other:-). .... ----------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Good. So you first clean wrong-view (ditthi) first and then you try to achieve sotapatti magga naana? ----------------------------------------------------------------- 12. In #54689, I'm not keen on the first part. Firstly, I don't think we can say that `beings are committing kamma almost all the time'. ---------- Htoo: Again this will end up with arguement on kamma-patha. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Also, I don't think we can say `avijjaa is a form of moha'. The Abhidhamma texts make it clear that avijjaa and moha are synonyms used in different contexts. So, it doesn't make sense to say `those jhaanalaabhii are not free from avijjaa even though they may be free from moha'. ..... ----------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Alara Kalama and Udaka Ramaputta were both jhaanalaabhii. They were reborn in aruupa brahma bhuumi. Avijja paccaya sankhaara, sankhaara paccayaa vinnaanaa,... -------------------------------------------------------------------- 13. In #54788, more confusion as I read it on moha and avijjaa. You refer to when `one does kusala' there isn't knowledge of the 4NT and this is avijjaa but there is no moha. The avijjaa in D.O. being referred to in this post refers to past avijjaa which conditioned kamma. Without avijjaa conditioning the round of samasara, there would be no kusala kamma patha. It doesn't mean there is ignorance at that moment of kusala. So when you say that when performing kusala, there's no understanding of the 4NT and that this is avijjaa, I don't think this is quite right. .... --------------------------- Htoo: Why? Do they know FANT when they do kusala? -------------------------------------------------------------------- 14 In #54555, I got a bit lost in your explanations to Howard about the 4 right efforts. You wrote that `not arisen kusala are magga kusala. They are sotapatti and above magga.' What about any not arisen kusala? For example, even for a sotapanna, wholesome states need to continually arise?? Maybe I've misunderstood you. ------------------------------------- Htoo: You truely misunderstood me. ------------------------------------- I also question the way you refer to `when one is exactly doing satipatthana' and `so the exertion is to arise sotapati magga or higher magga...' etc. It all sounds very much like a Self to me....but perhaps it's just a way of expression for you. (to be contd) Metta, Sarah ======= ----------- Htoo: Ha ha. Maybe I am self breeder. You are self-destroyer. Are you now free of 'self'? You will answer 'self' does not exist from the start. Ha ha. With much respect, Htoo Naing 55047 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:29pm Subject: Re: Htoo (3) - last of the ambush posts:-) htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Hi Htoo, 15. You wrote to Tep in #54629 that you `will be anywhere to help anyone' etc and how if your `services are used or not used' it's not a problem. I think this shows what a good friend you are to us all. I appreciated your comments and reminders. As you say, someone or some people may think we're not fit to talk to or might not like our expressions, but if we are just friendly to anyone regardless, we learn a little more about the meaning of `kalyana mitta' without any expectations at all, just trying to help when we can. ..... ---------------------------------------------------- Htoo: The deeper the wisdom the clearer the picture of dhamma. Kalayana mitta is not ubiquitous. -------------------------------------------------------------------- 16 in #54645, more on moha and avijja. Yes, they are used in different contexts only. You say `just sitting and thinking will not be pa.tipatti', but I'm not sure that anyone has ever suggested `sitting and thinking' is pa.tipatti:-). ------------------- Htoo: :-)) Pariyatti Pa.tipatti Pa.tivedha The first is 'Pari' which seem to be for Parikamma or preparation. The other two are Pa.ti. You know Pa.tigha. You know patti, aapatti etc. You know vedha. ------------------------------------------------------------------ You go on to refer to `non-practising', `non-doing' which are `appa.tipatti avijjaa'. I get the idea again that you see pa.tipatti in terms of activities or appearances,all with `someone doing something' but perhaps you'd elaborate. You also go on to say that `any avijjaa will lead to formation of kamma through sa'nkhaara or fabrication or kamma-formation.....give rise to effects.' I agree that it is `because of avijjaa, sa'nkhaara have been committted', but not all avijjaa leads to kamma bringing results. Perhaps you mean that until all avijjaa is completely eradicated, the conditions will be there for becoming and for sa'nkhaara or kamma to be committed. ..... -------------------------------- Htoo: Appa.tipatti avijjaa, micchaapa.tipatti avijjaa are there in ancient texts. Avijjaa --> sankhaara. I did not say sankhaara- results. -------------------------------------------- 17. Back to Cetasikas and your comment at the end of #54642, you say `when the real sense of frightening in these dhamma arise then there will be possible that the way to depart them would be searched'. I take it you mean understanding the `frightfulness' of these dhammas rather than feeling frightened which would of course be a kind of dosa. -------------------------------- Htoo: This is high. I mean 'sa.mvega'. ----------------------------------------------------- I mention this because many people think it's good to be frightened and that this is a kind of understanding. ..... S: That's it for this round. I'm appreciating your D.O. posts – should be a good series. I always enjoy your comments on other threads, like the `Cetasikas' too. I learn a lot from your writing and your friendly attitude. I apologise for `hibernating' and then coming out with `ambush' posts as James once called them. It's never intended that way:-/ Metta, Sarah ======= ---------------------------- Htoo: Thank you very much Sarah. Please do not take my laugh Ha ha seriously. I think Sukin took it. With deepest respect, Htoo Naing 55048 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 1/25/2006 12:59:40 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Returning to sabhava, there is a foornote , and another meaning is given here: void of individual essence: it is not arising of itself, sayam eva uppaado. Or: own arising. Then he explains: Because of existence in dependence on conditions it is ...void of individual essence. TG: This is what I've been saying all along...because of DO, there is no such thing as "own characteristic" and the term should be dropped. The term is self-view oriented. That is all. It shows that we have to be careful in what context it is said. Those who develop satipatthana indeed did not need so many words, it was all clear in the Buddha's time. Nina. TG: Maybe they just needed the right words. No more, no less. TG 55049 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/25/2006 1:36:48 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: Dear TG, This has been discussed at length on dsg. It comes up every few years. The commentary to the Patisambhidhimagga explains that it was said in a particular context. If you like I can give it all the text- about a page. Take me awhile to type it out. Robert Hi Robert The source seems unmistakably clear to me. Context is clear to me. Statement is clear to me. Sure, I wouldn't mind reading the commentary but don't go to too much trouble. As you may know, I am much more suspicious of commentaries as they are "someone down the lines" opinion. TG 55050 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/25/2006 1:16:29 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, htootintnaing@... writes: Dear TGrand, Once there was an old member. He used to count how many time words appear in suttas. Example words are vipassanaa, jhaana, tanhaa. I do not think frequency is related to importance. With Metta, Htoo Naing Hi Htoo Naing I think you missed the whole point of the post. TG 55051 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. lbidd2 Hi Joop, Here's your question to me: J: "But first the term "dependence". You say literally that "cause and effect"="dependence"="a formation of conditions". I do not understand this and I do not know how to link this with the Abhidhamma as for example explained in the Abhidhammata Sangaha (with guides of Bhikkhu Bodhi)." L: "Cause and effect" refers to the insight knowledge of cause and effect. This is the knowledge that sees the conditions of a dhamma, e.g., the conditions of eye-consciousness are, at least, eye and visible object. This is the nature of dependent arising. Dhammas arise dependent on conditions, in other words, dependent on other dhammas. By "a formation of conditions" I mean a collection of dhammas that is taken as a whole. With the insight knowledge of cause and effect we see directly that a dhamma is dependent on other dhammas. For example, we may see eye-consciousness dependent on eye and visible data as a whole, a collection of conditions. All wholes are without own nature, they are asabhava ("a" = "without" or "not"). That is a way of saying a whole is not a single undivided experience. Ultimately, it is not any experience at all. It is emptiness. For example, a tree is not an experience and Joop is not an experience. Joop is a dependently arisen emptiness. A collection of dhammas that adds up to zero. An eye-consciousness *is* an experience, but, as a collection of eye, visible data, and eye-consciousness, it is a whole. So it both is and isn't an experience. An interesting question is, is dependence-on-conditions a general characteristic like impermanence? In other words, is eye-consciousness's dependence on eye and visible data part of what it is to be eye-consciousness, part of eye-consciousness's own nature (sabhava)? Is the insight knowledge of cause and effect with regard to eye-consciousness the experience of no-eye-consciousness, empty eye-consciousness, hollow eye-consciousness? Maybe we could say this insight knowledge is like seeing in another dimension. At first we see only two dimensions; then we see in three dimensions. And there are 14 more dimensions. Larry ps: I think a good place to start is with A. Sujin's "Concept And Reality". You won't find anything about this in "Abhidhammata Sanghaha". 55052 From: "Charles" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:41pm Subject: Re: the Bogor group. to Cherry. cherry_avium Thank you for the information Mr. Selamet, Unfortunately, I'm working on Saturday, and it's rather far from my place to Bogor (I'm living in Tangerang). Maybe someday ... :-) or maybe there would be an indonesian abhidhamma online group in the future. I surely will be very happy to join :D. I hope your dhamma study group can always be better and expanding. Charles G. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nanapalo" wrote: ks. > Every Saturday morning 7.30 am-9.15 am, we have a coffee morning and > discussion on Abhidhamma in daily life. You are welcome to join at Jalan > Belitung No. 2 Bogor. Feel free to contact me 0812.110.8290 (Selamat > Rodjali). Or if you have time in the afternoon, we have 3 other Dhamma > discussions: > 2 pm - 3.30 pm > 4 pm - 5.30 pm > 6 pm - 7.30 pm > the last three discussions are at our centre (Dhamma Study Group Bogor), at > Jl. Suryakencana No. 258 Bogor (in front of BCA Gang Aut Bogor). 55053 From: "Charles" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:04pm Subject: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG cherry_avium Hi Sarah, Thank you for the answer. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott < sarahprocterabbott@y...> wrote: > So one moment thinking about a concept, but immediately that thinking can > be the object of awareness. If the thinking is for example a dosa-citta (hate), then at the time awareness arise, then the dosa citta has ceased. Isn't then the "now" is the awareness citta while the dosa-citta is past ? Or should I take "now" as the series of bhavanga, manodvara citta, santirana, and so on (I'm sorry, I do not remember the series :P), then the first javana that arise could be the dosa-citta, and the following javanas become the awareness citta :D I'm also thinking about the purpose of satipatthana, in this case cittanupassana. I think one of the purpose of the cittanupassana is to see the arising and passing away of the citta. But if the object is really the currently arising consciousness, then its passing away has not come. To know the passing away of the consciousness the object should be the previous object. The problem mainly arise because when I try to be aware of my mind, the object is always the previously done action. If I try to be aware of the present action, then it should be the awareness itself, which at the time I try to be aware of it, is itself a past consciousness. In the case of bodily movement, I can aware at the time the movement arise. 55054 From: "Charles" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:12pm Subject: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > N: Sati of satipatthana is aware of nama and rupa, and it does not think. > But in between thinking can arise, kusala thinking of the Dhamma one heard, > reflection with kusala citta. > Nina. Hi Nina, Thank you for your answer :] I would take satipatthana as sati and panna cetasikas that accompanying the arising citta then. In the case of akusala citta, can there be sati and sampajjana arise at the same time the akusala citta arise ? 55055 From: "Charles" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some questions about kamma cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles DaCosta" wrote: > The main difference is as follows. To Hindus, bad karma yields punishment > (by the gods or the forces of life). To Buddhist, bad karma conditions to > mind in a way that makes it easier to suffer; it clouds the mind making it > harder to permanently end suffering. Hi Charles D. Thank you for your answer. I actually believe that kamma and vipaka is a natural law, and not the logical consequence of action. Therefore when we smile at somebody, and get a smile back, the latter smile is the result of out past action while our smile itself will give its result later. But I'm not sure myself on this. 55056 From: Suchamda D Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 9:49pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. dhammasurya Dear Mr.Selamat Rodjali, I am also in Indonesia, Semarang, and would like to have the copy of copy of this book for further study of Abhidhamma. Can you contact me directly to my email? I will give you my address, and will change the cost. Thankyou, Suchamda Dhammasurya On 1/25/06, nanapalo wrote: > <...> 55057 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:51pm Subject: Guarding the Doors of the 6 Senses ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Any Self-Control starts with Guarding the 6 Doors of the Senses!!! Bhikkhus by possessing three qualities, one lives full of pleasure & joy in this very life, and one has also laid a solid foundation for eliminating the mental fermentations... What are these three advantageous qualities? One guards the doors of the senses, One is moderate in eating, and One is devoted to wakefulness... And how, Bhikkhus, does one guard the doors of the senses? Seeing a form with the eye, one does neither get caught by any of the general features, nor does one become obsessed with any particular detail of this form... Hearing a sound with the ear, one does neither get caught by any of the general features, nor does one become infatuated with any particular detail of this sound... Smelling a smell with the nose, one does neither get caught by any of the general features, nor does one become as if possessed by any particular detail of this smell... Tasting a taste with the tongue, one does neither get caught by any of the general features, nor does one become as if gripped by any particular detail of this taste... Touching a thing with the body, one does neither get caught by any of the general features, nor does one become as if fixated by any particular detail of this thing... Thinking a thought with the mind, one does neither get caught by any of the general features, nor does one become as if immersed in any particular detail of this mental state... Since, if one leaves the sense ability of the eye, ear, nose, tongue, body & mind uncontrolled, evil detrimental states of lust and discontent might invade the mind, one practises control of the senses, one guards the senses, one holds back the senses, one keeps in check the senses... Imagine, Bhikkhus, a horse-wagon, which yoked to two full-blooded horses, was standing ready with whip and goad, on even ground at a crossroads. Any clever tamer of horses could mount it, and, taking the reins in his left hand and the goad in his right, he could drive away and return by whatever way he wanted, whenever he wanted, being in complete control of his direction... Similarly here, the Bhikkhu trains in guarding these six senses, trains in controlling them, trains in taming them, trains in pacifying them. It is in this way, Bhikkhus, that a Bhikkhu possess the advantageous mental quality of the ability to guard the six doors of the senses... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [176-7] Section 35: The 6 Senses. Salayatana. The Horse-Wagon. Rato 239. 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 !!! <....> 55058 From: "Leo" Date: Wed Jan 25, 2006 11:17pm Subject: Re: Mahayana and social issues leoaive Hi I was reading different literature on India and different sects. My view on that is like that: Mahayana is Sanskrit based suttas, Theravada is Pali or Magadha (Ancient Bihar language) At the time of Gotama Buddha Sanskrit was used for spiritual level. Many bramins were using that. Mahabharata and other ancient spiritual books were written in Sanskrit. So at that time it was language for bramins (spiritual class) and kings were using too all over India. Now the problem is, Sanskrit language letters looks like sticks or hooks on a bottom, other side many asketics were using it too. In order to make those sticks and hooks look small, Buddha made suttas long. And even jhanas long (they have eight) where in theravada there are four and other are made as contemplation. Pali language is more rounded and no sticks or hooks, so sutta made in any way. Because it is conditional relationship, in that case is the same. Mahayana is talking about emptiness, I guess it was one of the main question of different heretics, asketics and so on. Buddha told that by emptiness he means the one is not here. It is like if I am not in Thailand, there is emptiness of me there. My mind and body is not there. Mahayana is good to read too, for now many sutta and sutras looks like remains of Buddha teaching, so it might be that some good instruction will appear there too. Since kings were using that, it might be that they recorded it close to original. I think both good to read, and accept if that is kind. Theravada has some strange parts and mahayana too. But sometimes one can explain other, that is good. Like mahayana tells on forest: forest free from immoral and predators around is good, where in Theravada I did not see that. It could be lost or something else. Other side: Four Applications of Mindfullness is more complete in Theravada (exept forest), but Mahayana says very shorltly about that. ( I did not see long sutra on that). Interesting that they both talk about meditation Jhana/Dhyana and forest in some degree. That is my view on that. With metta Leo 55059 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:12am Subject: Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 3 nilovg Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 3 She repeated that there is the impression of visible object right now. She said: ³It is this moment.² Visible object impinges on the eyesense and after it has fallen away, what is left is the impression or sign, nimitta of visible object. It seems that visible object lasts for a while, but in reality it arises and falls away. Acharn Sujin used the simile of a torch that is swung around. In this way, we have the impression of a whole, of a circle of light. We know that seeing arises at this moment, but we cannot pinpoint the citta which sees, it arises and falls away very rapidly and another moment of seeing arises. We only experience the ³sign² of seeing. The notion of nimitta can remind us that not just one moment of seeing appears, but many moments that are arising and falling away. Also visible object is not as solid as we would think, there are many moments arising and falling away which leave the sign or impression of visible object. Visible object that was experienced by cittas of a sense-door process has fallen away; sense-door processes and mind-door processes of cittas alternate very rapidly. Visible object impinges again and again and seeing arises again and again. When their characteristics appear we cannot count the different units of rúpa or the cittas that see, they arise and fall away; the impression of what is seen and of the seeing appears. Acharn Sujin said: ³No matter whether we call it nimitta or not, it is appearing now. Whatever appears is the sign or nimitta of the dhamma that arises and falls away.² We cling to what appears for a very short moment, but is does not remain. It is the same with saññå, there is not one moment of saññå that marks and remembers, but countless moments, arising and falling away. Thus, we can speak of the nimitta of each of the five khandhas: of rúpa, of feeling, of saññå, of sankhårakkhandha, of consciousness. There are nimittas of all conditioned dhammas that appear at this moment, arising and falling away extremely rapidly. Seeing arising at this moment sees visible object. We notice visible object and while we notice it, we have a vivid impression of it, but it has just fallen away. Seeing falls away but extremely shortly after it has fallen away another moment of seeing arises that experiences visible object. It arises again and again and in between one notices that there is seeing, or, if there are the right conditions a citta with sati can arise that is mindful of its characteristic. However, mindfulness of seeing arises after seeing has fallen away, not at the same time as seeing. ***** Nina. 55060 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. nilovg Dear Selamet, Connie will try to send you The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena as an attachment. If you cannot open this, let me know, and I send all by different Emails. Next week I go to Thailand for about three weeks, Kind regards, Nina op 25-01-2006 16:07 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@...: > Anumodana for posting me your "The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena" > I will use it for our discussion every Saturday. 55061 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nilovg Hi Cherry, Note Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 3 and no 4 where it is explained that when the object of sati is dosa, the dosa has just fallen away in a preceding process. All javana cittas in one process have the same object, and they are the same type of citta. Nina. op 26-01-2006 06:04 schreef Charles op cherry_avium@...: If the thinking is for example a dosa-citta (hate), then at the time awareness arise, then the dosa citta has ceased. Isn't then the "now" is the awareness citta while the dosa-citta is past ? 55062 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. nilovg Dear Suchamda, if you give me your address the Survey of Paramattha dhammas will be send to you from Bgk. Is this the book you mean? I cannot reach you personallyon your Email address. Nina. op 26-01-2006 06:49 schreef Suchamda D op dhammasurya@...: > Dear Mr.Selamat Rodjali, > I am also in Indonesia, Semarang, and would like to have the copy of copy > of this book for further study of Abhidhamma. Can you contact me directly to > my email? I will give you my address, and will change the cost. > > Thankyou, > Suchamda Dhammasurya 55063 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:37am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear Joop, > I think Miss Sujin is right rather than Mrs Sujin. > Dear Htoo Joop: Perhaps rightest is to say: five khandhas. A question to you, as I asked Nina. There is no right answer, I think, it's more or less a (home made) Zen-like koan: We know that what's in conventional language called an individual, in fact is only five khandhas; but how many khandhas is two interacting individuals: five, or six, or ten? Metta Joop 55064 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:39am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependence. jwromeijn Hallo Larry, and TG (at the end) Now I understand what you meant. Larry: "All wholes are without own nature, they are asabhava" Joop: Of course, that socalled 'wholes' are concepts, pannatti. And in the discussions Theravada-Mahayana the question is: is a seperate dhamma (=experience) asabhava or sabhava. As far as I understand, Theravada (at least the Budhaghoasa-Sujin branch of it) say: sabhava; and Mahayana: it is asabhava, empty. Larry: " ps: I think a good place to start is with A. Sujin's "Concept And Reality". You won't find anything about this in "Abhidhammata Sanghaha" Joop: I already did, some explanations of her are very clear. But I have two problems with topics like "sabhava" and "accumulations": - what are the Sutta sources for some statements? - if there are not Sutta sources, it still can theoretically be correct, but is it? And did you like the Wheel-essay of Karunadasa I recommended you? It gives a good histrory of the evolution of the term "sahhava". Something for TG too! www.abhidhamma.org/dhamma_theory_philosophical_corn.htm Metta Joop PS Some years ago I had big problems with my eyes (with half a year in between): a "ablatio retina". All the liquid was sucked out of my eye-bulb and then the retina was lasered. In the weeks afterward the air in my eye-bulb was replaced in a natural way slowly again by liquid. That weeks I had "hollow eye-consciousness" 55065 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some questions about kamma sarahprocter... Hi CharlesG (Cherry), --- Charles wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Another questions about kamma. I hope you don't mind with too many > questions :D > > 1. Is the vipaka cittas a kamma-vipaka (or is it caused by kamma or > caused by citta?) .... S: Vipaka cittas are the results of kamma (cetana cetasika) arising in the javana processes of cittas. See 'Useful Posts' under 'vipaka' and 'kamma'. Also Nina's book 'Conditions' on Zolag website under 'kamma condition' .... > > 2. If someone does a crime and get arrested, is this the law of kamma > (many many people think it is), or in other words, is the (unpleasant) > sense objects the man senses (because of being arrested) caused by > the kamma of doing the crime. .... S: Conventionally we may say the getting arrested is a result of kamma, but it's not accurate at all. As you suggest, vipaka really refers to the experiencing of unpleasant sense objects during life (after rebirth consciousness, itself vipaka, along with following bhavanga cittas). We don't know what deeds will bring what results (except in general as the Buddha described, eg some deeds leading to results in hell planes etc). So in fact, the man who is arrested may be experiencing pleasant sense objects, whilst another one sitting at home in front of his TV may be experiencing unpleasant ones. In truth, the different sense and mind door processes follow each other so quickly and vipaka cittas are so brief. Most of what we take for being unpleasant results of kamma are in fact following mind door processes with aversion instead. This is why the Abhidhamma helps a lot. .... I usually think that the kamma done is > not strong enough to give its result immediately :P ... S: We can't tell most the time. Not all cetana with the javana cittas will give any result...it just accumulates until it's 'completed actions'. I hope others will continue to respond to all your good questions when we also go away soon. If I don't speak to you before that, I look f/w to doing so when we get back. (I still have some old threads I need to tidy up and respond to first:D). Keep chipping in! Metta, Sarah p.s Conditioned dhammas but not destined!! Not controlled and not out of control.....Predictable (by a Buddha) and yet what occurs now, will affect those predictions....Seems impossible to affect and yet awareness can develop and be aware of present dhammas and wisdom can know that all the thinking about causality and destiny is just thinking:). ===== 55066 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG sarahprocter... Hi CharlesG (Cherry), I have a few moments.... --- Charles wrote: > If the thinking is for example a dosa-citta (hate), then at the time > awareness arise, then the dosa citta has ceased. ... S: Strictly speaking, yes. However its characteristic can appear or be the object of the immediately following mind door cittas wprocess awareness. .... >Isn't then the "now" > is the awareness citta while the dosa-citta is past ? ... S: Again, strictly speaking - yes.* ... > Or should I take "now" as the series of bhavanga, manodvara citta, > santirana, and so on (I'm sorry, I do not remember the series :P), .... S: Now refers to the present javana cittas with awareness which experience presently the characteristic of that dosa (just fallen away). .... > then the first javana that arise could be the dosa-citta, and the > following javanas become the awareness citta :D .... S: :D Impossible. You're very sharp with your comments:-)). Different processes of javanas. .... > I'm also thinking about the purpose of satipatthana, in this case > cittanupassana. I think one of the purpose of the cittanupassana is > to see the arising and passing away of the citta. But if the object > is really the currently arising consciousness, then its passing away > has not come. To know the passing away of the consciousness the > object should be the previous object. .... S: Yes, impossible to be aware of the citta with which the awareness is arising. It's the characteristic, the true 'quality' of the citta just fallen away, but it appears as 'present object'. It's actually only a 'theory' problem, because in practice, when sati is aware of a citta, such as seeing consciousness, its quality is known at that instant. No idea about present or a split instant past. ..... > The problem mainly arise because when I try to be aware of my mind, > the object is always the previously done action. .... S: This is different - it's thinking with attachment:D. Trying to be aware will never lead to awareness. ... >If I try to be aware > of the present action, then it should be the awareness itself, which > at the time I try to be aware of it, is itself a past consciousness. > In the case of bodily movement, I can aware at the time the movement > arise. .... S: This is not satipatthana. It's thinking about concepts of bodily movements and awareness. Cittas and other dhammas arise and pass away so quickly. It's quite useless to 'try' and be aware of them. By understanding more about dhammas as conditioned, not self and reflecting on what is and is not awareness, slowly awareness and understanding will develop without anyone trying. I greatly appreciate your keen consideration of all these points. Metta, Sarah *(See these posts in U.P.: Navattaba (Not so Classifiable) objects 32619, 52960) 55067 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG nilovg Hi Cherry, See my other post and Alone with Dhamma series, as mentioned. Akusala citta can be object of sati when that citta has just fallen away. Its characteristic can be understood, because the different processes of cittas succeed one another as in a flash. It seems that it is all at the same time because it happens so fast. Nina. op 26-01-2006 06:12 schreef Charles op cherry_avium@...: > In the case of akusala citta, can there be sati and sampajjana arise > at the same time the akusala citta arise ? 55068 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some questions about kamma nilovg Hi Cherry, We cannot know which kamma brings which result, and it is of no use to try to find out. It leads to endless speculation and distracts from understanding the present reality. It is the field of the Buddha's wisdom only. Nina. op 26-01-2006 06:26 schreef Charles op cherry_avium@...: > Therefore when we smile at somebody, and get a smile back, the latter > smile is the result of out past action while our smile itself will > give its result later. But I'm not sure myself on this. 55069 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Htoo (1) - amisa and niramisa. nilovg Dear Htoo and Sarah, Sarah, here the reference is to displeasure that is not worldly, not amisa, namely, niramisa (not fleshly). We find this distinction explained in some suttas and in the Commentaries and also in the Netti. Such attachment and aversion that arise in connection with jhana are not as coarse as those that pertain to sense objects. In fact, the Co to the Yamaka delas with them and explains that when those more subtle forms of lobha and dosa arise and then fall away, they are not accumulated as latent tendency, anusaya. Text: 'Therefore, in this case, though aversion arises together with unhappy feeling, it is not the latent tendency of aversion. It does not perform its own function as such, it is negligable.' Nina. op 25-01-2006 22:01 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@...: > 6. In #54294 at the end, you mention that `when we are trying to > develop samatha and we cannot attain what we want then there arises > displeasure. This is not in connection with sensuous matters.' > .... > S: I think that anytime there is attachment followed by aversion > regardless of the object of our clinging (here concepts regarding > samatha or tranquility), then it is definitely sensuous clinging and > aversion that we're talking about. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Htoo: It is from mahasatipa.t.thaana sutta. I do know what you are > talking. Dosa always hold sensuous thing. But check the sutta, > please. 55070 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:27am Subject: Re: Q. Alone with Dhamma, Ch 2, no 2 philofillet Hi Nina > > Ph: I am still reading and reflecting on suttas from SN 35 every > > morning. There are so many I would like to praise here, but I think > > everyone has access to them. > ------ > N: Such a pleasure if you praise them! Even we have access to these suttas, > I like to hear you. I have so many I want to write/ask about, I don't know where to start. Now it turns out that our computer is going in to the shop on Saturday, so it'll wait until your back. Just to mention now, though, without the exact references on hand: What is purpose of living the holy life - to know that suffering that is inherent in the eye and visible forms, ear sense and sounds etc and the other ayatanas. This is explicitly stated in one sutta. And in another, what is the origination of the mass of suffering? Again, the eye sense and visible form, etc. It is good that we have a Dhamma friend like Acharn Sujin that reminds us again and again to reflect on, study, investigate that which is appearing through the six doors. Much, much more to come on the glorious Salayatanna Samyutta. It doesn't look like we'll have children, but if one appears it shall be named SN 35, whether boy or girl!!! > Ph: I think you will be covering ayatanas > > in the Vism series in a few months (?) so I am looking forward to > > that. > -------- > N: Alas no. Our lives are short, and so Larry and I think that after my Bgk > stay we start with Ch 17, which may take more than two years. > But you and I can still discuss Ch 15. Ph: I'll discuss ayatanas with you through the suttanta, I guess. And the Abhidhamma sources, of course. > N: Detachment, alobha, arises with each kusala citta. But there are degrees > of it. Detachment can grow as understanding grows. Ph: Good to be reminded that detachment is a paramattha dhamma. I tend to think in conventional terms about it. But that can be helpful too, at times. But now it can begin when > listening and reflecting that there is no self who controls. > Whatever we experience is conditioned already, we cannot change it or exert > control over it. But it is not always easy to apply this. > This morning, during our walk, I was reflecting on feeling that is like a > bubble of water, breaking up immediately. Unpleasant feeling is likely to > arise when hearing harsh speech. Is feeling still like a bubble of water to > us? Hard to take at times. We go on reflecting with unpleasant feeling about > an event. But the texts are a good exhortation. Ph: When we cling to these unpleasant events it is a reminder that we are clinging to the khandas and having too much interest in self. Moments of alobha, adosa arise fairly often to help us let go of concern about silly things connected to our self-story. This is not kusala of the degree of bhavana, I think, but kusala that is the type that accumulates? Yes, I wanted to ask about that again, though Sarah explained it to me some months back. I heard that there is metta, for example, that is of the degree of bhavana, but in most cases the kind of metta that arises in daily life is just due to accumulations, it accumulates but is not bhavana. Something like that. Is that right? > I will miss our weekly Dhamma chats, I will be away from febr 2- 20. But you > are also away then? > Nina. We'll be in Canada from Feb 20-March 2. You know, there is still a *slim* possibility of going to Thailand! Any day now I will here whether I won a cash prize in a story contest I entered. It is possible, it's a good story! See you here again in March, Nina. Thanks as always for all your support and encouragement. Phil 55071 From: "Charles" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:22am Subject: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG cherry_avium Thanks Nina, very clear answer, Maybe I should take the meaning of 'now' like explained in the Bhaddekaratta sutta "And how is one not taken in with regard to present qualities? There is the case where a disciple of the noble ones who has seen the noble ones, is versed in the teachings of the noble ones, is well-trained in the teachings of the noble ones, does not see form as self, or self as possessing form, or form as in self, or self as in form." (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/majjhima/mn-131-tb0.html) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Cherry, > Note Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 3 and no 4 where it is explained that when > the object of sati is dosa, the dosa has just fallen away in a preceding > process. All javana cittas in one process have the same object, and they are > the same type of citta. > Nina. 55072 From: "Charles" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:28am Subject: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > Hi Cherry, > See my other post and Alone with Dhamma series, as mentioned. > Akusala citta can be object of sati when that citta has just fallen away. > Its characteristic can be understood, because the different processes of > cittas succeed one another as in a flash. It seems that it is all at the > same time because it happens so fast. > Nina. Hi Nina, Thank you. Your answer is in accordance with the Abhidhamma. I have the same opinion, but I asked the question because current satipatthana practice seems like teaching to be aware of things as they arise. But it would be contradictory in case of akusala citta to arise at the same time with the satipatthana consciousness. 55073 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Parallel Processing, rupas. philofillet Hi Scott > I was wondering about whether the > Abhidhamma deals with this whole aspect of the thread - parallel > processing outside of or beyond processing. My guess is no, and all > the theories being propounded are simply other interesting theories. I meant to write last week that I was very impressed by the way you approached this issue - listening to and discussing Howard's (I think) theory, respectfully asking about it, considering it and then deciding that it was indeed just an "interesting theory" as you say above. That's beyond me. I simply reject people's ideas if they don't mesh with my understanding of Dhamma. You have the stuff to be a Dhamma discussion superstar!!! I will probably always be the type who just drops mana/lobha loaded comments then dashes away, but who knows!?! Phil 55074 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 2:48am Subject: Re: Alone with Dhamma, Ch 3, no 6 philofillet Hi Nina and all > The contemplation of foulness can lead one to a deeper way of contemplation, > the realization of impermanence. This is the development of insight. > > We read in the Theragathå, Canto CXVIII, Kimbila, that the Buddha, in order > to stir him, conjured up a beautiful woman in her prime, and showed her to > him passing to old age. This is interesting. Last week I was helped a lot by a sutta in SN, not on hand at the moment so will have to paraphrase. A king came to one of the venerables and asked him how the black-haired bhikkhus manage to keep to the path without giving in to lust. The venerable mentionned the first method - thinking of the woman as one's sister, daughter, mother etc. The king though that one can still lust under such a contemplation. Then the venerable went into the contemplation of the body, of foulness. And the king said that even when one contemplates the body, one can find it beautiful. And then the venerable talked about considering the ayatanas, how objects that are desirable etc, when welcomed and delighted in, can lead to calamity. And the king was deeply impressed with this. Said that if he were to go into his harem with mindfulness of this kind, he would be safe. All this is a very rough paraphrase. I agree with the king. As it happens, I was dealing with one of the cyclical arisings of temptation that beset me about twice a year, it seems. Reflecting on this sutta was enough to knock it right out of my system, it seems! (Though of course it will re- arise, due to conditions.) Of course, as we discussed when you posted the series on distracting thoughts, different forms of guidance for different people at different times. I will always remember hearing about your lunch with Lodewijk when you enjoyed talking about the foulness of the body or contemplation of death or something like that as the waiters buzzed around, you had such a good time. Phil 55075 From: "Charles" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:04am Subject: [dsg] Re: Mahayana and social issues cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > We know that what's in conventional language called an individual, in > fact is only five khandhas; but how many khandhas is two interactin > individuals: five, or six, or ten? I think wisdom sees from different aspects If the are two puzzles with five colors There's only one in the sense of puzzle There're two in the sense of location There're five in the sense of color There're ten by considering the same color and different location There're 25 by combination of (color + location) 55076 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:09am Subject: [dsg] Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n... kenhowardau Hi Howard, Thanks for this message, and my apologies for the delay in replying. In your final paragraph you write: ----------------------------------- > Ken we've had this out before - many times. I don't actually have any serious hope of getting you to reconsider. I'm writing now because Scott is relatively new to the Dhamma, and I care for him and for his not losing a full perspective on Dhamma practice. I am writing here and now to express my opinion for Scott's sake that your take on the Dhamma is, well, let's say "not the norm." > ------------------------------------- You may have given up on me, but I have not given up on you. As I see it, yours is a case of 'so near and yet so far!' :-) You say in this post, "Yep. That's when everything happens - now," but I don't think you quite believe it. If you did believe it, you would be on my side - trying to coax fellow Dhamma students into a dry, soulless world of presently arisen conditioned dhammas. :-) Back to near the beginning of your post: ---------------------------------- KH: > > I learned that > > the things we think are practised by living beings are actually > practised by fleeting, conditioned, impersonal namas and rupas. --------- Howard: Okay, so? ----------------------------------- So everything has to be seen from an entirely new perspective. ---------------------------------------------- H: > (Of course, the fleeting, conditioned, impersonal namas and rupas don't really practice anything. Saying that they do is to oddly mix levels of speech.) ----------------------------------------------- I would say yes and no to that. Yes, it would be odd to say, 'It is not I but dhammas that walk to the shop and buy a bottle of milk.' But no, it is not odd to say, 'It is not I but dhammas that condition the arising, and perform the functions, of jhana.' ---------------------------- KH: > > Jhana, like any other reality, will arise when the conditions for its > arising are present. It will not arise when "I" decide it should. ---------- Howard: > Likewise, writing an email post won't occur when "you" decide it should, but only when trillions of specific conditions, including acts of cetana in your mindstream. ----------------------------- Is that strictly correct or is it a case of oddly mixing levels of speech? Whenever, for the sake of convention, we accept the existence of people and emails I think we must also accept the existence of free will. Otherwise we might find ourselves saying, "I would like to write an email but the trillions of specific conditions are not present." ------------------------ H: > But we *call* that "your deciding to write and your doing so". ------------------------- Yes, and that is fine in the illusory world of people, emails and free will, but we were talking about jhana-citta and the conditions for its arising, which is very different. ---------------------------------------- KH: > > > Learning a little more Abhidhamma (in particular from the > Visuddhimagga) I found that the conditions for jhana were > extraordinarily rare - about as rare as the conditions for > enlightenment. ------------- Howard: > Really! And the source for that is exactly what? ----------------------------------------- Sorry, I don't have a reference for "about as rare as the conditions for enlightenment." That's just a dim memory of something I've read here. But you will have seen by now the Visuddhimagga reference I gave to Scott. Do you have any comments on it? --------------------------------- H: > (It sure was silly, then, for the Buddha, in his suttas, to have again and again and again urged his monks and nuns to practice jhana. That silly Buddha! Or perhaps all those many references indicate that the Sutta Pitaka is terribly corrupted, and thank God (I mean the ancient commentators) that we have the Abhidhamma to give us the straight Buddha word! ----------------------------------- Please quote a sutta where the Buddha tells everyone to practice jhana - or, failing that, where he tells every monk and nun to practise jhana. Howard, in your efforts to paint the "strictly Abhidhamma perspective" in a bad light - and save new members from being led astray - I think you do other members an injustice. You give the impression they have given no answers to your objections. But on the many occasions on which you have raised these objections, someone has, almost always, pointed out, for example, the two meanings of "jhana." In many cases the sutta term translated as "practise jhana" should actually be translated as "develop the mind." Also, it has been pointed out that different suttas were directed at different audiences. If the Buddha urged some audiences to practise jhana, that doesn't mean he urged every audience to do so. And what about the lay disciples? Hasn't it been repeatedly explained - with references - that lay disciples (almost without exception) were not advised to practice jhana? If bare vipassana was suitable for them then it was suitable for various monks and nuns as well (they were not a separate species). -------------------------------------------- KH: > > Basically, I think we can say jhana is possible for > people who have "mastered" morality (and not even for all of them). ------------- Howard: MASTERED it, you say! Complete mastery is required first? So, no reciprocity? (Man, one wonders how Ananda ever made it!) It would seem that the jhanas are only for the likes of Superman and other comic book heros! > ------------------------------------------ Yes, I think the people suited to jhana were so extremely exceptional that it is very hard think of anyone more exceptional. Superman doesn't come close! :-) Robert K's reply to this post gave us an idea of just how exceptional Ananda was. -------------------------- KH: > > Strictly speaking, the Dhamma is practised only in moments of > satipatthana (patipatti), but there is also <. .> a lesser degree of > practice - right intellectual understanding (pariyatti). ---------- Howard: > And also meditating, guarding the senses, attending to what is occurring at any moment, and turning the mind towards lovingkindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. The entire practice as laid out by the Buddha. --------------------------- There you go again, refusing to believe your own words: "Yep. That's when everything happens - now." I, and people who know a lot more than I do, continually tell you that "meditation" and "guarding the senses," as taught by the Buddha, refer to a fleeting moment of consciousness. We won't give up on you, Howard! :-) Ken H 55077 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:18am Subject: Acharn Sujin on the natural development of sati philofillet Hi all Here is a brief transcript of a section of a talk I enjoy hearing, Acharn Sujin on the development of sati in daily life, natural, without clinging to results: "Right awareness is very natural, as seeing now, or hearing now, or touching now. Because after seeing usually there is the thinking, the process of thinking arises after seeing, usually. But sati can arise instead of thinking. When there are enough conditions for sati to arise. For example, in a day there must be many moments of touching, tangible objects appear many times. But there is no awareness, no studying, no beginning of understanding tangible object as just a reality. There is touching, the citta experiences softness or hardness, usually it is like that. Usually it is like that, but when awareness arises it is a little bit more than that, just a little bit, which follows, or which is there studying the characteristic by itself, and sati also falls away, and it can arise again, or it does not arise again, at will, it depends on conditions no matter it arises again or not. So one begins to understand the very natural awareness which follows the seeing, hearing, tasting, touching. Very natural, with detachment, that there is no desire to have it again, more and more, so it is the very, very long time or long way to go for the development of satipatthana. In Pali the word is "jira-gala-bhavana." Jira is long, and gala is time, and bhavana is development. It takes time. Very very long time. But it knows, it can understand reality, beacuse there are realities now. So it just depends on conditions whether sati arises." Phil p.s Sarah or Jon or Nina or whoever else brings up topics in Bangkok, I have no particular questions for Acharn Sujin but please thank her for me for her wonderful talks and perhaps say... ....please talk about how sati can arise after moments of seeing, hearing, tasting, touching in daily life. (ie more of the above) ....in one talk Kom says he is bothered when he sees his teacher (A. Sujin) bothered by beggars in India. And Acarn Sujin says again and again, "just understand, just understand." I wonder if she could talk about how understanding helps us with dosa in daily life. Perhaps someone could phrase that in a way that gets her talking about it. Thanks! 55078 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:31am Subject: Phil - sorry, I've lost your thread to which I'm replying sarahprocter... Hi Phil, I started writing this a few days ago and was interrupted. Seeing your name reminded me this reply was lurking in 'drafts'. You wrote to Nina (and all) on seeing and visible object.... --- Phil wrote: > Ph; What you've written is exactly what I would have expected > Acharn Sujin say, but the interesting thing it is she herself who > was insisting on this point in a talk. I wonder if I can explain > what I heard, what I can recall. > > There is always so much seeing. And so much to think about based > on the seeing. When we have seen visible object and conceptualized a > person, we can think back on it, do more conceptualizing, > proliferate, grasp the sign, welcome it, find delight in it. (this > is not what A. Sujin said, exactly) But when there is hardness, for > example, can we think back on it and proliferate on it? > > Also, there is so much seeing, all the time. More than hearing, > more than smelling. Any time our eyes our open there is seeing. That > cannot be said about hearing, smelling, tasting etc to the same > degree. > > So it was something to do with that. Does it ring a bell? .... S: Yes. When I questioned whether it really was true that most people have most problems with seeing and visible object she also indicated how this is the doorway most people ask about. No detachment most the time, but we get lost in the long stories about what is seen, giving it so much importance, really thinking we see people and things. As you say, seeing arises so very, very often, more than the other kinds of sense door experiencing. We’re ‘overwhelmed’ by what is seen time and again. This is why it’s always given first. Without detachment, no awareness or understanding either - it's the opposite of attachment which is what usually arises as soon as we open our eyes. When you have time, also look at posts saved under ‘Visible Object & Seeing’ in U.P. ... > > Now whether it is useful to reflect on this or not, I don't know. > But since Acharn Sujin stressed it, I find myself reflecting on it. > > Would anyone else who heard that talk like to add some thoughts on > what Acharn Sujin was getting at there? .... S: I’d like to add that people are always trying to find out more about the visible object, give it different names, look at the particles in it or something, but visible object is just visible object, that which is seen at this very moment. When there’s awareness of it, there’s no idea of particles, groups, aspects, shapes or forms. Just that rupa which is seen for an instant and then gone. Similarly, seeing consciousness is just that nama which experiences visible object for an instant. It’s an element which arises, which exists momentarily performing its function of experiencing. When there’s awareness of it, it’s apparent it’s just a nama, no self at all. .... Change of topic – I appreciated your Saturday night fever flurry of posts as usual. As for the ‘doing metta meditation’, is there really anthing that can be done? Isn’t it an illusion to think there is a ‘doing’ at this time, even if metta happens to arise?: I thought these (and many other) comments you wrote (to Nina) were very good in #54558 P: “There is always seeing. There are not always troublesome people to deal with or wonderful people for whom we can sense attachment, or conditions for dana or sila, but there is always seeing, always hearing, always touching. The ayatanas are arising constantly, and sparking proliferation when there is not right understanding, when there is unwise atteniton. And there is unwise attention. Moha and lobha leap up after every moment of seeing, with rare, rare exceptions. But we begin to know what's going on, and that's the first step.” ... S: Yes, never mind if people (or we) are anyway at all by conditions. Slowly there can be the development of detachment through the development of understanding of realities. You refer in another post to the salayatana samyutta and how we can reflect on how ‘eye base and visible object arise to condition seeing consciousness’ etc which is very true, but I think the emphasis when discussing the ayatanas is how these very ayatanas all have to arise and ‘meet’ together. It’s the balancing act of the various inner and outer ayatanas at anytime which distinguishes wakefulness from deep sleep when there is no experience through the senses. One other comment to pick up while I’m talking to you – you mention in #53912 that “objects that give rise to enthusiasm will increasingly be paramattha dhammas rather than concepts, I assume”. This is interesting. I think that most of what we consider to be enthusiasm in daily life is simply lobha, don’t you? If lobha for concepts about paramattha dhammas replaces lobha for other subjects, it’s still lobha of course! When there’s awareness and understanding of paramattha dhammas, it may of course be with with or without wholesome piti (joy/enthusiasm). Anyway, will chat more after our return. Meanwhile, I look forward to reading any or your rantings, rambles or other reflections as usual:). Have a good trip to Canada. Your family will be very glad to have you, I’m sure, and all your accumulations for brahma viharas will be very apparent. Metta, Sarah p.s planning to load the rest of the ‘Erik series’ in the next day or so at least – perhaps you can listen or download until you get a cd.... ======= 55079 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: Htoo (1) - amisa and niramisa. htootintnaing Dear Nina, Thanks for your explanation. It is clear. With respect, Htoo Naing --------------------------------------------------------------------- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Htoo and Sarah, > Sarah, here the reference is to displeasure that is not worldly, not amisa, > namely, niramisa (not fleshly). We find this distinction explained in some > suttas and in the Commentaries and also in the Netti. Such attachment and > aversion that arise in connection with jhana are not as coarse as those that > pertain to sense objects. > In fact, the Co to the Yamaka delas with them and explains that when those > more subtle forms of lobha and dosa arise and then fall away, they are not > accumulated as latent tendency, anusaya. > Text: 'Therefore, in this case, though aversion arises together with unhappy > feeling, it is not the latent tendency of aversion. It does not perform its > own function as such, it is negligable.' > Nina. > op 25-01-2006 22:01 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@y...: > > > 6. In #54294 at the end, you mention that `when we are trying to > > develop samatha and we cannot attain what we want then there arises > > displeasure. This is not in connection with sensuous matters.' > > .... > > S: I think that anytime there is attachment followed by aversion > > regardless of the object of our clinging (here concepts regarding > > samatha or tranquility), then it is definitely sensuous clinging and > > aversion that we're talking about. > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > Htoo: It is from mahasatipa.t.thaana sutta. I do know what you are > > talking. Dosa always hold sensuous thing. But check the sutta, > > please. > 55080 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:40am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 638 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Vi~n~naana paccayaa naama-ruupam'. There is no doubt that pa.tisandhi cittas or linking consciousness or rebirth consciousness directly support mentality-materiality or naama-ruupa. Let us see in each case of 19 patisandhi cittas. a) ahetuka akusala-vipaaka santiira.na citta This citta is rootless consciousness (ahetuka). It is a resultant consciousness or vipaaka citta. That is the result of sa`nkhaara in the past. The sa1nkhaara was unwholesome or akusala. Its name santiira.na means 'investigating'. Santiira.na citta is investigaing consciousness. But here it functions as linking consciousness. Citta is consciousness or vinnaana. This consciousness is the result of akusala sankhaara, which again was supported by avijjaa or ignorance. As it is a linking consciousness it links the previous life's final consciousness or cuti citta and the current life 2nd consciousness or the first life-continuing consciousness. But the current life here is an individual who is at one of 4 woeful planes of existence. So the mentality-materiality or naama-ruupa that is supported by this consciousness 'ahetuka akusala-vipaaka santirana citta' is mind and body of an individual of one of 4 woeful planes of existence or woeful realm. These 4 woeful realms are 1. hell (niraya) 2. animal (tiracchaana) 3. hungry ghost (peta) 4. demon (asurakaaya) These are for easy understanbility. But what vinnaana conditions is naama-ruupa which is different from what people will think in their conventional sense. At the very moment of patisandhi there has to arise hadaya vatthu. The linking consciousness has to based on that ruupa. Naama here is patisandhi citta itself and their associated cetasikas or mental factors. They are 4 vipaaka naamakkhandhaa. Ruupa is hadaya vatthu or hadaya ruupa or heart-base. This is vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 55081 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Htoo (1) - amisa and niramisa. sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Htoo), --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Dear Htoo and Sarah, > Sarah, here the reference is to displeasure that is not worldly, not > amisa, > namely, niramisa (not fleshly). We find this distinction explained in > some > suttas and in the Commentaries and also in the Netti. Such attachment > and > aversion that arise in connection with jhana are not as coarse as those > that > pertain to sense objects. .... S: Thanks for these comments and the terms amisa and niramisa. However, I read Htoo's comments carefully before writing and in particular with regard to his comments about when we are 'trying to develop samatha etc'. I do not believe that when we 'try' to develop samatha or jhana in our daily lives that such trying has anything at all to do with the very refined attachment and aversion in connection with jhana that you refer to, i.e the non-sensuous clinging. I believe that what we experience at such times is ordinary (coarse) sensuous clinging. I think you have picked up on his reference to non-sensuous clinging which he suggests arises at such times, whereas I was picking up on his reference to 'trying' to develop samatha and jhana which is not the way to develop detachment from sensuous objects or calm as I understand. Metta, Sarah p.s Nina, in the other post where I was commenting on upadana khandha, it was to references to this (khandha as object of clinging) that my comments were directed - i.e not all dhammas, but just that which is the object of clinging now. Also on ayatanas, I don't have the wording in front of me, but I was rather surprised to see dhammayatanas translated as mental objects in particular. Perhaps we just have to point out that these refer to cetasikas, subtle rupas and nibbana. ============= 55082 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Htoo (1) - amisa and niramisa. sarahprocter... p.s Htoo, Thanks for all your feedback....I'll get back to some of these threads after our trip. many thanks for all the good humour and smiles and for taking all my comments in good 'spirit'...:-)) It's always good to talk to you. Metta, Sarah ========= 55083 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Parallel Processing, rupas. scottduncan2 Dear Phil, "I meant to write last week that I was very impressed by the way you approached this issue - listening to and discussing Howard's (I think) theory, respectfully asking about it, considering it and then deciding that it was indeed just an "interesting theory" as you say above. That's beyond me. I simply reject people's ideas if they don't mesh with my understanding of Dhamma. You have the stuff to be a Dhamma discussion superstar!!! I will probably always be the type who just drops mana/lobha loaded comments then dashes away, but who knows!?!" Thank you very much for your kind words! Not loaded at all with "mana/lobha," as you suggest you are wont to do. I remain in need of much instruction, being unaware of much and hungry for more. Sincerely, Scott. 55084 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:12am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 227 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 227 Intro: In this section the mental nutriment of contact (phassa cetasika) is dealt with. Contact is a cetasika which contacts the object so that citta and the accompanying cetasikas can experience that object. Without contact citta and cetasikas could not experience any object. Thus, contact supports them, it is a mental nutriment for them. It accompanies each citta and it conditions citta and the accompanying cetasikas by way of åhåra-paccaya, nutriment-condition. It also conditions rúpa produced by citta and cetasikas by way of nutriment-condition. The mental nutriments can be considered according to the method of the Pa.t.thaana (Conditional Relations) and according to the method of the Dependent Origination. Because of contact there is feeling and because of feeling craving, because of craving clinging and this leads to the process of becoming and rebirth in the cycle of birth and death. ----------- Text Vis.: One who sees feeling as pain fully understands nutriment consisting of contact. -------- N: The Tiika refers to the texts that state: contact conditions feeling. ----------- Text Vis.: He abandons the perversion of perceiving pleasure in the painful. ------- N: As was stated before, feeling is not free from intrinsic dukkha (unpleasant bodily feeling, unhappy mental feeling), dukkha in change, and dukkha inherent in all conditioned realities. The Tiika explains that in abandoning desire (chandaraaga) for feeling he also abandons desire for the nutriment that is contact which is a condition for feeling, by thorough understanding it. What is said before with regard to the thorough understanding of physical nutritiment should be applied to thorough understanding of the nutritiment that is contact, the Tiika explains. As we have seen in the case of physical nutriment, insight must be developed and as one becomes accomplished in the three pariññas, the vipallaasas are destroyed. The perversion of perceiving pleasure (sukha) in the painful (dukkha) is destroyed when arahatship is reached. -------- Text Vis.: He crosses the flood of becoming. -------- N: The Tiika explains that one desires rebirth on account of happy feeling. By giving up clinging to feeling one crosses the flood of clinging to rebirth (bhavogha). The arahat has no desire for any kind of happiness, no desire for rebirth. ---------- Text Vis.: He is loosed from the bond of becoming. He becomes canker-free as regards the canker of becoming. -------- N: Desire for rebirth has been classified in different groups of defilements, as flood (ogha), as yoke or bond (yoga), as canker, aasava. The arahat is free from all defilements. -------- Text Vis.: He breaks the bodily tie of ill will. He does not cling with rites-and-ritual clinging. ------ N: The non-returner who does not cling to pleasant sense objects has also eradicated dosa, aversion, but he has not eradicated all kinds of clinging. The sotaapanna has lobha and dosa but he has eradicated wrong view and wrong practice which is rites-and-ritual clinging. The Tiika adds that because of one¹s wish for abundant happiness in a happy rebirth one wants to be purified by living as a cow. Because of one¹s wish for happy feeling one clings to such wrong practice. There are different degrees of seeing the disadvantage of happy feeling, and the ariyans become more detached from it as successive stages of enlightenment are attained. The arahat has completely abandoned the perversity of seeing happiness in what is dukkha. ****** Conclusion: We should see the disadvantages of contact by fully understanding it. In "Kindred Sayings" (II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, Ch VII, the Great Chapter, § 63, Child¹s Flesh, the disadvantages and dangers of the three kinds of mental nutriment are explained. With regard to the mental nutriment that is contact, we read about a simile of a cow which stands with a sore hide leaning against the wall. The creatures who live there bite her. The same happens when she leans against a tree and no matter where she stands she will be bitten. We read: ŒEven so do I declare that the food which is contact should be regarded. When such food is well understood, the three feelings are well understood. When the three feelings are well understood, I declare that there is nothing further which the ariyan disciple has to do.¹ When contact is fully understood, feeling is well understood, because feeling is rooted in contact. We may be attached to a pleasant sound, such as the sound of music. Contact that arises with hearing contacts that sound. We like pleasant feeling that arises on account of what we hear and we want to have it again and again. However, feeling does not last, it has no core, it has been compared to a water bubble that breaks up immediately. If we are forgetful of feeling, attachment will arise many times and in this way we accumulate it as a latent tendency, the latent tendency of sense desire (raaganusaya). Feeling arises at this moment and if there can be awareness of it we shall understand that it arises because of its proper conditions. The disadvantages of contact and feeling can be understood only very gradually, and when arahatship is reached there will be thorough understanding of their disadvantages. ***** Nina. 55085 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 1/26/06 6:10:48 AM Eastern Standard Time, kenhowa@... writes: > You say in this post, "Yep. That's when everything happens - now," > but I don't think you quite believe it. If you did believe it, you > would be on my side - trying to coax fellow Dhamma students into a > dry, soulless world of presently arisen conditioned dhammas. :-) > ====================== This " ... I don't think you quite believe it. If you did believe it, you would be on my side ... " brought a smile to my face, Ken. It reminds me of an offlist conversation I've been having with a certain monk who disbelieves in "rebirth," preferring (IMO) Buddhadasa to the Buddha! Whenever I insist that the Buddha indeed taught of multiple "lifetimes" and, more precisely, that the flow of experience continues beyond the death of the body, he insists that I am an eternalist and substantialist who clings to "Hindu superstitions"! LOL! Ken, I believe exactly what I say I believe. 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) 55086 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:43am Subject: [dsg] Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > > > > > Hi Robert > > The source seems unmistakably clear to me. Context is clear to me. > Statement is clear to me. Sure, I wouldn't mind reading the commentary but don't go > to too much trouble. As you may know, I am much more suspicious of > commentaries as they are "someone down the lines" opinion. > > TG > > >_______ Dear Tg, I managed to find a letter by Venerable Dhammanando where he had copied out the passage: MAHANAMA ON "MATERIALITY IS EMPTY WITH REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL ESSENCE" (from the Saddhammappakaasinii, Su––akathaa-va.n.nanaa) Tattha 'jaata.m ruupan' ti paccuppanna.m ruupa.m. Here [i.e. in the passage he is commenting on] 'born [or 'arisen'] materiality' is the materiality [existing in] the present. [elsewhere he explains that it refers to materiality at the moment of stasis -- thiti -- in between arising and dissolution] FIRST GLOSS 'Sabhaavena su––an' ti ettha saya.m bhaavo sabhaavo, sayameva uppaado' ti attho. 'Empty regarding individual essence': here individual essence is 'essence by itself'; arising just of itself is the meaning. [Here Mahanama appears to take 'empty regarding sabhaava' as being denial of a false conception of sabhaava, namely a sabhaava which is its own cause. The 199 dhammas lack such a sabhaava] SECOND GLOSS Sato vaa bhaavo sabhaavo, attatoyeva uppaado' ti attho. Paccayaayattavuttittaa paccaya.m vinaa sayameva bhaavo, attato eva vaa bhaavo etasmi.m natthiiti sabhaavena su––a.m, sayameva bhaavena, attato eva vaa bhaavena su––anti vutta.m hoti. Or, individual essence is own essence; arising solely by itself. Because of existence in dependence on conditions there is in it no essence by itself or essence of its own, thus it is 'empty regarding individual essence'. What is meant is that it is empty of essence by itself or of its own essence. [This is simply the corollary to the first gloss, being the denial of a sabhaava that is not dependent on other conditions] THIRD GLOSS Atha vaa sakassa bhaavo sabhaavo. Pathaviidhaatuaadiisu hi anekesu ruupaaruupadhammesu ekeko dhammo para.m upaadaaya sako naama. 'bhaavo' ti ca dhammapariyaayavacanameta.m. Ekassa ca dhammassa a––o bhaavasan.khaato dhammo natthi, tasmaa sakassa a––ena bhaavena su––a.m, sako a––ena bhaavena su––oti attho. Tena ekassa dhammassa ekasabhaavataa vuttaa hoti. Or else it is the essence that it itself has; for each single dhamma among the various dhammas beginning with the earth principle is itself, and 'essence' is a figurative term for dhamma; and each single dhamma does not have any other dhamma called an 'essence', therefore it is empty of any essence other than itself: the meaning is that it itself is empty of another essence. Hence what is meant is that a single dhamma has a single individual essence. [If I understand this correctly, any given dhamma is empty of the sabhaavas that would characterize other dhammas, but is not empty of whatever makes it what it is. Karuna, for example, is empty of the quality of promoting cruelty but is not empty of the quality of allaying suffering] FOURTH GLOSS Atha vaa 'sabhaavena su––an' ti su––asabhaaveneva su––a.m. Ki.m vutta.m hoti? Su––asu––ataaya eva su––a.m, na a––aahi pariyaayasu––ataahi su–– anti vutta.m hoti. Or alternatively 'empty regarding individual essence' is to be taken as empty through having emptiness as its individual essence. What is meant? What is meant is empty owing to emptiness-as-emptiness and not empty according to some other implicated emptiness. ['Emptiness-as-emptiness' is the first of the 25 emptinesses, described thus: "Eye is empty of self or what belongs to self, or of what is permanent or stable or eternal or not subject to change. Ear...nose...tongue...body...mind is empty of self or what belongs to self, or of what is permanent or stable or eternal or not subject to change." The reference is to the nature common to all dhammas, as opposed to the specific nature that makes a dhamma whatever it is. 'Implicated emptiness' refers to the fact that every dhamma is by its nature empty of any characteristic that would make it something other than what it is. E.g. "Past formations are empty of future and presently arisen formations. Future formations are empty of past formations...etc."] WRONG UNDERSTANDING OF "MATERIALITY IS EMPTY WITH REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL ESSENCE" Sace pana keci vadeyyu.m "sako bhaavo sabhaavo, tena sabhaavena su–– an" ti. Ki.m vutta.m hoti? Bhaavoti dhammo, so para.m upaadaaya sapadena visesito sabhaavo naama hoti. Dhammassa kassaci avijjamaanattaa "jaata.m ruupa.m sabhaavena su––an" ti ruupassa avijjamaanataa vuttaa hotiiti. But if someone should say: "Own essence is individual essence; it is empty of that individual essence. What is meant? A dhamma is called an 'essence'; that [essence] is distinguished by the prefix 'individual' in comparison with any other and is thus called 'individual essence'. Because of the non-existence of any dhamma whatever it is the non-existence of materiality that is expressed by the words 'born materiality is empty regarding individual essence'." [Mahanama does not specify whom he has in mind who might say such a thing. The claim as it stands is not clearly attributable to any Buddhist school that I know of. However, the anonymous author of the 'Clarifier of the Meanings of Knotty Terms in the Path of Discrimination' (Patisambhidaamaggamuulaganthipadatthavannanaa) expands on the above, adding the words 'in the highest sense' (paramatthato). So if he is right, then the wrong interpretation would appear to be a Mahayanic one, namely, that owing to emptiness of sabhaava, in the highest sense dhammas do not exist] FIRST REFUTATION Eva.m sati "jaata.m ruupan" tivacanena virujjhati. Na hi uppaadarahita.m jaata.m naama hoti. Nibbaana–hi uppaadarahita.m, ta.m jaata.m naama na hoti, jaatijaraamara.naani ca uppaadarahitaani jaataani naama na honti. Tenevettha "jaataa jaati sabhaavena su––aa, jaata.m jaraamara.na.m sabhaavena su––an" ti eva.m anuddharitvaa bhavameva avasaana.m katvaa niddi.t.tha.m. [snip Nyanamoli's trans. as it doesn't seem to make any sense. I'll post a new translation when I have time. Or perhaps someone else would like to have a go at it] SECOND REFUTATION Yadi uppaadarahitassaapi "jaatan" tivacana.m yujjeyya, "jaataa jaati, jaata.m jaraamara.nan" ti vattabba.m bhaveyya. Yasmaa uppaadarahitesu jaatijaraamara.nesu "jaatan" tivacana.m na vutta.m, tasmaa "sabhaavena su––a.m avijjamaanan" ti vacana.m avijjamaanassa uppaadarahitattaa "jaatan" tivacanena virujjhati. [ditto] THIRD REFUTATION Avijjamaanassa ca "su––an" tivacana.m he.t.thaa vuttena lokavacanena ca bhagavato vacanena ca –aayasaddaganthavacanena ca virujjhati, anekaahi ca yuttiihi virujjhati, tasmaa ta.m vacana.m kacavaramiva cha.d.ditabba.m. And the word 'empty' for what is non-existent contradicts both worldly usage and the Blessed One's usage above, and also the words of the books of logic and linguistics; and it contradicts many logical arguments. Therefore that assertion should be discarded like rubbish. "Ya.m, bhikkhave, atthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, ahampi ta.m atthiiti vadaami. Ya.m, bhikkhave, natthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, ahampi ta.m natthiiti vadaami. Ki–ca, bhikkhave, atthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, yamaha.m atthiiti vadaami? Ruupa.m, bhikkhave, anicca.m dukkha.m vipari.naamadhamma.m atthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, ahampi ta.m atthiiti vadaamii" tiaadiihi anekehi buddhavacanappamaa.nehi. In many passages in the Buddha-word such as this: "Bhikkhus, what sages in the world say is not, of that too I say that it is not; what sages in the world say is, of that too I say that it is....Sages in the world say of impermanent, painful and changeable materiality that it is, and I too say of it that it is." Anekaahi ca yuttiihi dhammaa sakakkha.ne vijjamaanaa evaati ni.t.thamettha gantabba.m. And in many logical arguments [it is demonstrable that] dhammas exist in their own moments. Thus should this [abovementioned assertion] be refuted. * * * * * * * * * Robertk * 55087 From: "nanapalo" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:29am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. nana_palo@... Dear Nina, Connie, anumodana. Have a nice Dhamma Trip to Thailand. kind regards, selamat -----Original Message----- From: nina van gorkom [mailto:vangorko@...] Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2006 3:13 PM To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. Dear Selamet, Connie will try to send you The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena as an attachment. If you cannot open this, let me know, and I send all by different Emails. Next week I go to Thailand for about three weeks, Kind regards, Nina op 25-01-2006 16:07 schreef nanapalo op nana_palo@...: > Anumodana for posting me your "The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena" > I will use it for our discussion every Saturday. 55088 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. Alone with Dhamma, Ch 2, no 2 nilovg Hi Phil, I look at your letters first, because Saturday your computer is away. op 26-01-2006 11:27 schreef Phil op philco777@...: > Ph: When we cling to these unpleasant events it is a reminder > that we are clinging to the khandas and having too much interest in > self. Moments of alobha, adosa arise fairly often to help us let go > of concern about silly things connected to our self-story. This is > not kusala of the degree of bhavana, I think, but kusala that is the > type that accumulates? .... I heard that there is metta, for example, > that is of the degree of bhavana, but in most cases the kind of > metta that arises in daily life is just due to accumulations, it > accumulates but is not bhavana. ------ N: Kusala accumulates any way, whatever kind arises. Bhavana includes also studying realities with awareness. This can and should be in daily life. For instance you know when pure metta arises and when there is lobha, in disguise of metta. Don't we learn all the time from such experiences in daily life? That is the way understanding develops, that is bhavana. Nina. 55089 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Alone with Dhamma, Ch 3, no 6 nilovg Hi Phil, op 26-01-2006 11:48 schreef Phil op philco777@...: Last week I was helped a lot by a sutta in > SN, not on hand at the moment so will have to paraphrase. A king > came to one of the venerables and asked him how the black-haired > bhikkhus manage to keep to the path without giving in to lust. ... And > then the venerable talked about considering the ayatanas, how > objects that are desirable etc, when welcomed and delighted in, can > lead to calamity. --------- N: As I wrote in Vis. 226: Thus, only at the third stage of enlightenment sense desire is eradicated. It is good to consider that what arises and then falls away has no beauty, where is the beauty one would like to dwell on? But this becomes more convincing when insight is developed. -------- > Ph: I will always remember hearing about your lunch with Lodewijk when > you enjoyed talking about the foulness of the body or contemplation > of death or something like that as the waiters buzzed around, you > had such a good time. ------- N: Now you make me laugh. Think of the contrast, foulness and a delicious meal. ***** Nina. 55090 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Acharn Sujin on the natural development of sati nilovg Hi Phil, wonderful, thank you. op 26-01-2006 12:18 schreef Phil op philco777@...: ....There is touching, the citta experiences > softness or hardness, usually it is like that. Usually it is like > that, but when awareness arises it is a little bit more than that, > just a little bit, which follows, or which is there studying the > characteristic by itself, and sati also falls away, and it can arise > again, or it does not arise again, at will, it depends on conditions > no matter it arises again or not. So one begins to understand the > very natural awareness which follows the seeing, hearing, tasting, > touching. Very natural, with detachment, that there is no desire to > have it again, more and more, -------- N: I know this is a hot issue here, some people say, but life is short and it is so urgent to have sati arise more often. I understand this argument, but when one wants sati, there is lobha. It is so urgent, but nobody can force the arising of sati, however much one sees the urgency of it. Sati can arise naturally when we think of others instead of our own development. Here is Joop's social issue, if you have followed this thread. --------- Ph: so it is the very, very long time or > long way to go for the development of satipatthana. In Pali the word > is "jira-gala-bhavana." Jira is long, and gala is time, and bhavana > is development. ----- N: It is spelled this way: Cira is long, kala is time. --------- Ph: It takes time. Very very long time. But it knows, it > can understand reality, beacuse there are realities now. So it just > depends on conditions whether sati arises." -------- N: If one thinks that this is not true, one should reflect on the D.O. For how long have we accumulated ignorance? Some people strongly object, saying that this is discouraging, that we should not say this. But it is reality, we should accept this. Besides, if one is mindful of the present reality, no time to worry about the future, wondering, how long it will be. --------- Ph: p.s Sarah or Jon or Nina or whoever else brings up topics in > Bangkok, I have no particular questions for Acharn Sujin but please > thank her for me for her wonderful talks and perhaps say... > > ....please talk about how sati can arise after moments of seeing, > hearing, tasting, touching in daily life. (ie more of the above) ---------- N: I will tell her. She will say that there can never be enough listening. In the suttas we read that even arahats spoke to each other about Dhamma. The Buddha asked the monks : what was your topic? It should be Dhamma or the ariyan silence. In Thai we say: sonthana dhamma, dhamma conversation. We have it, and it is not debating or arguing, not complicated, just reminding. Like we have now at this moment, that is why I enjoy this. When traveling in India, Kh Sujin used to ask us: did you talk about dhamma? It is also good before one goes to sleep. ------- Ph: ....in one talk Kom says he is bothered when he sees his teacher > (A. Sujin) bothered by beggars in India. And Acarn Sujin says again > and again, "just understand, just understand." I wonder if she could > talk about how understanding helps us with dosa in daily life. ---------- N: She says, people always want to get rid of dosa. But all namas and rupas are the field of insight. We should know clinging, because that conditions dosa, and any other dhamma that appears. Alone with Dhamma, no 4 has something about dosa, clinging to my dosa. I also wrote about the beggars, considering kamma and vipaaka, being in such condition is the result of kamma. When we see them as our children our attitude changes. We used to say to each other: over there, there are my children. It helps. Just now I am reminded of feelings because I listen to a Thai lecture on satipatthana. If we do not understand feeling, indifferent feeling included, we never realize the four noble Truths, she said. We always talk about hardness, but what about feeling? Have a good trip to Canada. **** Nina. 55091 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Htoo (1) - amisa and niramisa. nilovg Hi Sarah, B.B. made his own notes and also quoted the Co. The Co says something interesting: the Buddha mentioned the khandhas of grasping for the sake of insight (I do not have it in front of me now). This points to the present moment, and to what you just mentioned. Ayatanas, I only copied Nyanatiloka, which is not always precise. Nina. op 26-01-2006 14:10 schreef sarah abbott op sarahprocterabbott@...: > p.s Nina, in the other post where I was commenting on upadana khandha, it > was to references to this (khandha as object of clinging) that my comments > were directed - i.e not all dhammas, but just that which is the object of > clinging now. 55092 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:30am Subject: Roses and Thorns christine_fo... Hello all, An interesting observation made by a friend who is a Tibetan Lama when discussing the tendency nowadays to wish to fit the attainment of Nibbana into a Short Course within a busy life in the modern world. He was amazed that people can look at the example of the Buddha or other great Buddhist Saints and Teachers and imagine there is some way around the sacrifice, hard work and renunciation required to get to the goal. He recalled that his old Sufi teacher used to say of naive students: "They expect to be greeted by smiling Masters happily conducting them on their way to Enlightenment." In the Sufi tradition they had a saying to cover that: "roses, roses, oh..... thorns, thorns!" I do notice a tendency in myself to unconsciously believe that because 'this time' I am hearing the Teachings, that *surely* on the 'straight line graph of existence' I must be closer to the Goal. And then I think of stories I have heard of some beings, aeons ago, who were bhikkhus in the Sasana of a Buddha and who *still* havn't attained - just wandered from life to life to life to life to life. This seems to fill me (simultaneously) with an urge to Learn, Practice, Do-something, Make it happen ... and a 'what's the use of any particular effort' feeling/thought. metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 55093 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:49am Subject: Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs christine_fo... Hello all, I would be very interested to hear of any scripture in the Pali Canon or any of the ancient commentaries, or the ancient scriptures of any Buddhist Tradition, mentioning that crystalising changes in the bones after cremation is a sign of Arahantship. Doesn't this belief, rather, seem confined within one tradition from one country? i.e. Thailand. (Do those on the India trip remember when we were allowed to see the remains of the Buddha - the fragement of bone and the ashes? I do not recall any unusual appearances there). Thoughts? metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- 55094 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:20am Subject: Re: [dsg] Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs nilovg Hi Christine, No, the Ven. Sumena said: here are the bones and some ashes. It looked like ordinary bone pieces. And you can see the same at the Foundation. Nina. op 26-01-2006 19:49 schreef Christine Forsyth op cforsyth1@...: > Do those on the India trip remember when we were allowed to see the > remains of the Buddha - the fragement of bone and the ashes? I do not > recall any unusual appearances there 55095 From: "Charles" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 11:36am Subject: Re: Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > I would be very interested to hear of any scripture in the Pali Canon > or any of the ancient commentaries, or the ancient scriptures of any > Buddhist Tradition, mentioning that crystalising changes in the bones > after cremation is a sign of Arahantship. Hi, I do not have any reference, only want to add the question (Oups : D) Whether meditation can promote the lahutadiekadasakalapa ? Maybe the crystalization is only the side effect of heat (utu). 55096 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:34pm Subject: Re: Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" 1@b...> wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > I would be very interested to hear of any scripture in the Pali > Canon > > or any of the ancient commentaries, or the ancient scriptures of any > > > Buddhist Tradition, mentioning that crystalising changes in the > bones > > after cremation is a sign of Arahantship. > > Hi, I do not have any reference, only want to add the question (Oups : > D) > > Whether meditation can promote the lahutadiekadasakalapa ? > > Maybe the crystalization is only the side effect of heat (utu). -------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Charles, Nina, Christine and others, Good point. I do not think scripture says anything on these changes. But once the Buddha did say to do memorial (ceti) with regard to certain arahats' bone remains. Charles maybe right. It might well be side effect of meditation. Because to have these changes arahats have to have 8 jhaana-samapatti and abhinnaa. Just before they do parinibbana they foresee the benefits of leaving bone remains to be distinct from others. Thailand is not the only one. Myanmar have frequent occasions that certain monks when died there were bone remain that were miraculous. More unusual is that there are also muscle remains, blood remains along with bone remains. If westerers were to have let known they would try to test whether these remains were muscle tissues or not, blood tissues or not, bone tissues or not. Because of this there might arise the problems of stealing on these remains. There are 4 canines in all human beings. When the Buddha did parinibbana there left 4 canine teeth. One of them is in China. Once this canine was invited to Myanmar and there arranged strict security not only from Myanmar government but also from persons concerned with keeping the remains. With Metta, Htoo Naing 55097 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Christine, > No, the Ven. Sumena said: here are the bones and some ashes. It looked like > ordinary bone pieces. And you can see the same at the Foundation. > Nina. > op 26-01-2006 19:49 schreef Christine Forsyth op cforsyth1@b...: > > > Do those on the India trip remember when we were allowed to see the > > remains of the Buddha - the fragement of bone and the ashes? I do not > > recall any unusual appearances there ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Nina, I do not think the scripture says anything on these changes. But there are many arahats. Not all arahats leave their bone remains to have special miracle. With Metta, Htoo Naing 55098 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:41pm Subject: Re: Roses and Thorns htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > An interesting observation made by a friend who is a Tibetan Lama ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dear Christine, May I copy this message and put it at another list? With regards, Htoo Naing 55099 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:08pm Subject: Re: Roses and Thorns christine_fo... Hello Htoo, I have no objection whatsoever to your copying any posts of mine (or parts thereof)- I hope it is a stimulus for discussion. metta Chris ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" > wrote: > > > > Hello all, > > > > An interesting observation made by a friend who is a Tibetan Lama > ------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > Dear Christine, > > May I copy this message and put it at another list? > > With regards, > > Htoo Naing > 55100 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:09pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 639 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Vi~n~naana paccayaa naama-ruupam'. There are 19 patisandhi cittas or linking consciousness. All these 19 cittas are vinnaana and they are direct result of sa`nkhaara. In the previous post one citta has been explained. Vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. Ahetuka akusala-vipaaka santira.na citta which is a vinnaana as a supporting condition there have to arise naama-ruupa or mentality-materiality. In the previous post it has been explained that because of this citta one has to be reborn in one of 4 woeful planes of existence and they are hell, animal, hungry ghost, and demon. But dhamma is not like as people would think in conventional way. That is it is not like 'a person dies and he or she is reborn in another plane'. Because there is no person from the start. Vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupa. Because of that akusala-vipaaka patisandhi citta there arise naama that are linking consciousness and its associated mental factors that are 10 mental factors. These are 4 vipaaka naamakkhandhaa. Ruupa here is kammaja ruupa or material-born-of-kamma called hadaya vatthu. There also are other ruupa at linking moment. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 55101 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 9:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! TGrand458@... Hi Robert K Appreciate the feedback. Really long post but I'll make some comments below... In a message dated 1/26/2006 7:46:06 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: Dear Tg, I managed to find a letter by Venerable Dhammanando where he had copied out the passage: MAHANAMA ON "MATERIALITY IS EMPTY WITH REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL ESSENCE" (from the Saddhammappakaasinii, Su--akathaa-va.n.nanaa) Tattha 'jaata.m ruupan' ti paccuppanna.m ruupa.m. Here [i.e. in the passage he is commenting on] 'born [or 'arisen'] materiality' is the materiality [existing in] the present. [elsewhere he explains that it refers to materiality at the moment of stasis -- thiti -- in between arising and dissolution] TG: Pretty OK so far, but I would say there is no moment of stasis. FIRST GLOSS 'Sabhaavena su--an' ti ettha saya.m bhaavo sabhaavo, sayameva uppaado' ti attho. 'Empty regarding individual essence': here individual essence is 'essence by itself'; arising just of itself is the meaning. [Here Mahanama appears to take 'empty regarding sabhaava' as being denial of a false conception of sabhaava, namely a sabhaava which is its own cause. The 199 dhammas lack such a sabhaava] TG: The above is a "self-serving" comment. The Patisambhidamagga does not mention a denial of "false sabhava," it flatly denies sabhava. The above comment is the start of the perversion of the Buddha's teaching IMO. It claims there is "real" sabhava. This is a flat contradiction of the Patisambhidamagga. Going down this road, we can start making the Buddha's teaching anything we want. SECOND GLOSS Sato vaa bhaavo sabhaavo, attatoyeva uppaado' ti attho. Paccayaayattavuttittaa paccaya.m vinaa sayameva bhaavo, attato eva vaa bhaavo etasmi.m natthiiti sabhaavena su--a.m, sayameva bhaavena, attato eva vaa bhaavena su--anti vutta.m hoti. Or, individual essence is own essence; arising solely by itself. Because of existence in dependence on conditions there is in it no essence by itself or essence of its own, thus it is 'empty regarding individual essence'. What is meant is that it is empty of essence by itself or of its own essence. [This is simply the corollary to the first gloss, being the denial of a sabhaava that is not dependent on other conditions] TG: The above is OK. THIRD GLOSS Atha vaa sakassa bhaavo sabhaavo. Pathaviidhaatuaadiisu hi anekesu ruupaaruupadhammesu ekeko dhammo para.m upaadaaya sako naama. 'bhaavo' ti ca dhammapariyaayavacanameta.m. Ekassa ca dhammassa a--o bhaavasan.khaato dhammo natthi, tasmaa sakassa a--ena bhaavena su--a.m, sako a--ena bhaavena su--oti attho. Tena ekassa dhammassa ekasabhaavataa vuttaa hoti. Or else it is the essence that it itself has; for each single dhamma among the various dhammas beginning with the earth principle is itself, and 'essence' is a figurative term for dhamma; and each single dhamma does not have any other dhamma called an 'essence', therefore it is empty of any essence other than itself: the meaning is that it itself is empty of another essence. Hence what is meant is that a single dhamma has a single individual essence. TG: Here's a problem. "Each single dhamma" is only a conceptual framework of states. There is no such thing as an "each single dhamma." States do not function as single states. Thinking of them in this way is a problem and tending toward self-view. [If I understand this correctly, any given dhamma is empty of the sabhaavas that would characterize other dhammas, but is not empty of whatever makes it what it is. Karuna, for example, is empty of the quality of promoting cruelty but is not empty of the quality of allaying suffering] TG: This is not good. This view lacks insight into Dependent Arising Principles. Nothing has its "own characteristic." For example... Karuna does not arise by itself. It arises due to conditions and is a amalgamation of those supporting conditions. Arisen Karuna is a state teeter-tottering in and out based on supporting conditions. It is not "own" state. Karuna has a quality, yes; but a dependent quality. It does not have "its own" quality....much less "its own characteristic" ... much less an "individual essence." It just has a dependently derived quality. The issue is not whether or not state arise. The issue is whether states have "own characteristics." FOURTH GLOSS Atha vaa 'sabhaavena su--an' ti su--asabhaaveneva su--a.m. Ki.m vutta.m hoti? Su--asu--ataaya eva su--a.m, na a--aahi pariyaayasu--ataahi su-- anti vutta.m hoti. Or alternatively 'empty regarding individual essence' is to be taken as empty through having emptiness as its individual essence. What is meant? What is meant is empty owing to emptiness-as-emptiness and not empty according to some other implicated emptiness. TG: This is Alice in Wonderland cubed. Now it is trying to say that -- it has "individual essence" of emptiness. No can do! Emptiness means -- No-self. What he is saying is that -- its "individual essence" is "no-self." I don't think so! Contraction in terms. Emptiness, understood, establishes that there is "no individual essence." ['Emptiness-as-emptiness' is the first of the 25 emptinesses, described thus: "Eye is empty of self or what belongs to self, or of what is permanent or stable or eternal or not subject to change. Ear...nose...tongue...body...mind is empty of self or what belongs to self, or of what is permanent or stable or eternal or not subject to change." The reference is to the nature common to all dhammas, as opposed to the specific nature that makes a dhamma whatever it is. 'Implicated emptiness' refers to the fact that every dhamma is by its nature empty of any characteristic that would make it something other than what it is. E.g. "Past formations are empty of future and presently arisen formations. Future formations are empty of past formations...etc."] TG: The above comment is not correct. All states are fully empty period! It is not just that they are empty of "something else" as implied in the above comment. They of course are empty of something else in addition to being empty of self. Reading the whole chapter on Emptiness in the Patisambhidamagga makes this clear. By making a point of states being empty of "something else," the commentator wishes to encourage the view that states are not empty of themselves. Remember...emptiness was directly defined by the Buddha as meaning "no-self." Don't let someone use the term "empty" or "emptiness" in a way to fool you. This is being done by folks to cling onto states as "being selves." Whether or not the folks doing it even realize it. It is grasping! WRONG UNDERSTANDING OF "MATERIALITY IS EMPTY WITH REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL ESSENCE" Sace pana keci vadeyyu.m "sako bhaavo sabhaavo, tena sabhaavena su-- an" ti. Ki.m vutta.m hoti? Bhaavoti dhammo, so para.m upaadaaya sapadena visesito sabhaavo naama hoti. Dhammassa kassaci avijjamaanattaa "jaata.m ruupa.m sabhaavena su--an" ti ruupassa avijjamaanataa vuttaa hotiiti. But if someone should say: "Own essence is individual essence; it is empty of that individual essence. What is meant? A dhamma is called an 'essence'; that [essence] is distinguished by the prefix 'individual' in comparison with any other and is thus called 'individual essence'. Because of the non-existence of any dhamma whatever it is the non-existence of materiality that is expressed by the words 'born materiality is empty regarding individual essence'." TG: This is so convoluted I'm not sure I can follow the logic (if there is any). Its a major dodge at any rate. Fact of the mater is ... "born materiality is empty regarding individual essence" as the patisambhidamagga says. Its a very straightforward statement and doesn't need the "Olympian gymnastics" to try to interpret it... Or "re-interpret it" in this case. [Mahanama does not specify whom he has in mind who might say such a thing. The claim as it stands is not clearly attributable to any Buddhist school that I know of. However, the anonymous author of the 'Clarifier of the Meanings of Knotty Terms in the Path of Discrimination' (Patisambhidaamaggamuulaganthipadatthavannanaa) expands on the above, adding the words 'in the highest sense' (paramatthato). So if he is right, then the wrong interpretation would appear to be a Mahayanic one, namely, that owing to emptiness of sabhaava, in the highest sense dhammas do not exist] TG: This is stuff written by folks who don't understand Dependent Arising Principles. They do not understand how something cannot have "its own characteristic" and still arise. These folks need to spend more time on understanding Dependent Arising Principles, and less time trying to see each and every little things as have "its own characteristic." FIRST REFUTATION Eva.m sati "jaata.m ruupan" tivacanena virujjhati. Na hi uppaadarahita.m jaata.m naama hoti. Nibbaana-hi uppaadarahita.m, ta.m jaata.m naama na hoti, jaatijaraamara.naani ca uppaadarahitaani jaataani naama na honti. Tenevettha "jaataa jaati sabhaavena su--aa, jaata.m jaraamara.na.m sabhaavena su--an" ti eva.m anuddharitvaa bhavameva avasaana.m katvaa niddi.t.tha.m. [snip Nyanamoli's trans. as it doesn't seem to make any sense. I'll post a new translation when I have time. Or perhaps someone else would like to have a go at it] SECOND REFUTATION Yadi uppaadarahitassaapi "jaatan" tivacana.m yujjeyya, "jaataa jaati, jaata.m jaraamara.nan" ti vattabba.m bhaveyya. Yasmaa uppaadarahitesu jaatijaraamara.nesu "jaatan" tivacana.m na vutta.m, tasmaa "sabhaavena su--a.m avijjamaanan" ti vacana.m avijjamaanassa uppaadarahitattaa "jaatan" tivacanena virujjhati. [ditto] THIRD REFUTATION Avijjamaanassa ca "su--an" tivacana.m he.t.thaa vuttena lokavacanena ca bhagavato vacanena ca -aayasaddaganthavacanena ca virujjhati, anekaahi ca yuttiihi virujjhati, tasmaa ta.m vacana.m kacavaramiva cha.d.ditabba.m. And the word 'empty' for what is non-existent contradicts both worldly usage and the Blessed One's usage above, and also the words of the books of logic and linguistics; and it contradicts many logical arguments. Therefore that assertion should be discarded like rubbish. TG: This is wrong!!! Did this guy ever read Suttas??? How about Majjhima Nikaya "Shorter Discourse on Voidness" where the Buddha refers to a present experience as void of a whole slew of experiences that aren't present or not existing in that place. "Ya.m, bhikkhave, atthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, ahampi ta.m atthiiti vadaami. Ya.m, bhikkhave, natthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, ahampi ta.m natthiiti vadaami. Ki-ca, bhikkhave, atthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, yamaha.m atthiiti vadaami? Ruupa.m, bhikkhave, anicca.m dukkha.m vipari.naamadhamma.m atthisammata.m loke pa.n.ditaana.m, ahampi ta.m atthiiti vadaamii" tiaadiihi anekehi buddhavacanappamaa.nehi. In many passages in the Buddha-word such as this: "Bhikkhus, what sages in the world say is not, of that too I say that it is not; what sages in the world say is, of that too I say that it is....Sages in the world say of impermanent, painful and changeable materiality that it is, and I too say of it that it is." Anekaahi ca yuttiihi dhammaa sakakkha.ne vijjamaanaa evaati ni.t.thamettha gantabba.m. And in many logical arguments [it is demonstrable that] dhammas exist in their own moments. Thus should this [abovementioned assertion] be refuted. TG: This comment seems to have no evidence supporting it. Certainly not the Buddha's quote above. * * * * * * * * * Robertk * Hi Again Robert I appreciate the opportunity to respond to these points. I didn't hold back anything so there would be no mistakes to my viewpoint. TG 55102 From: Eddie Lou Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Parallel Processing, rupas. We should not be filled with "mana/lobha" ... eddielou_us Hi, everyone, IMHO, we should try to avoid "mana/lobha" because I think these are against some of the fundamental teachings of Buddha. Metta, Eddie Scott Duncan wrote: Dear Phil, "I meant to write last week that I was very impressed by the way you approached this issue - listening to and discussing Howard's (I think) theory, respectfully asking about it, considering it and then deciding that it was indeed just an "interesting theory" as you say above. That's beyond me. I simply reject people's ideas if they don't mesh with my understanding of Dhamma. You have the stuff to be a Dhamma discussion superstar!!! I will probably always be the type who just drops mana/lobha loaded comments then dashes away, but who knows!?!" Thank you very much for your kind words! Not loaded at all with "mana/lobha," as you suggest you are wont to do. I remain in need of much instruction, being unaware of much and hungry for more. Sincerely, Scott. 55103 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:35pm Subject: Re: Q. Alone with Dhamma, Ch 2, no 2 philofillet HI Nina > ------ > N: Kusala accumulates any way, whatever kind arises. Bhavana includes also > studying realities with awareness. This can and should be in daily life. For > instance you know when pure metta arises and when there is lobha, in > disguise of metta. Don't we learn all the time from such experiences in > daily life? That is the way understanding develops, that is bhavana. Again, thinking of something that Acharn Sujin said in a talk, a technical point about metta being of the degree of bhavana at some times and just accumulating at other times. Something like that. Sarah posted about it soon after you all got back from India so perhaps I will go and have a look at it. Probably not. It can wait until the next time that talk rolls around in my ipod. It's not important for me to try to figure it out. It happens, that's all. If I start thinking "this is not bhavana, it's just accumulating" or "perhaps this is bhavana" there will just be more lobha. Never mind! :) Phil 55104 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Parallel Processing, rupas. We should not be filled with "mana/lobha" ... philofillet Hi Eddie > IMHO, we should try to avoid "mana/lobha" because I think these are against some of the fundamental teachings of Buddha. Putting mana/lobha together like that was just a lazy shorthand by me because I was rushing to write some posts quickly. (As I am now.) Of course they are separate cetasikas. Both akusala, and both just about as prevalent for us worldlings as water is for fish. But different cetasikas. Phil p.s if you have any doubts about the prevalence of lobha, please read the Buddha's third discourse, "Burning" (SN 35:28), in which he teaches that "the all" (defined as the ayatanas, the sense bases of eye and visible form, ear and sound etc) are burning with the fire of lust, the fire of hatred, the fire of delusion. Lust is lobha. Sometimes translated as greed, or desire. Best to stick with lobha. 55105 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Parallel Processing, rupas. We should not be filled with "mana/lobha" ... philofillet Hi again Eddie > Best to stick with lobha. Also best to stick with "mana" rather than the usual translation, conceit, because in Dhamma mana is not only thinking oneself better, but comparing oneself in anyway, thinking oneself important in any way. Much, much broader and more prevalent than what we think of as "conceit." Phil 55106 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:48pm Subject: Re: Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs philofillet Hi Chris > (Do those on the India trip remember when we were allowed to see the > remains of the Buddha - the fragement of bone and the ashes? I do not > recall any unusual appearances there). Interesting you bring this up cuz yesterday I heard Acharn Sujin talking about this, about how everytime she sees the relic there is only visible form with trying to make out the details, without trying to think about is it real or not, etc. I wondered how she can just see visible form everytime (in addition to predicting that she would just see visible form next time as well) but I let that drop and took it as a lesson that sometimes it is best not to get caught up in thinking about that sort of thing too much. Is it real, or not, and so on. Phil 55107 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:51pm Subject: Re: Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs philofillet Hi again typo fix >I heard Acharn Sujin > talking about this, about how everytime she sees the relic there is > only visible form WITHOUT trying to make out the details.. Phil 55108 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:57pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Alone with Dhamma, Ch 3, no 6 philofillet Hi NIna > N: Now you make me laugh. Think of the contrast, foulness and a delicious > meal. Yes, humourous, but an important point. We find delight in the senses in daily life, that is natural, but we don't seek delight, and we don't lost delight or find suffering when there are sobering contemplations as well. An example of how the Dhamma goes against the ways of the world. If you brought up death at a dinner party, usually, how unwelcome you would be. For example, once watching a very good Japanese movie called "the Funeral", which shows what goes on over several days when someone dies, including both a drunken banquet and going to the crematorium to pick out the bones from the ashes...but my mother got angry and refused to watch the movie with us, not wanting death brought into the house. But of course, it always is.... Just getting in a little last bit of babbling before the computer goes away (and you go away)... Phil 55109 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:16pm Subject: To Sarh (1) Re: Phil - sorry, I've lost your thread to which I'm replying philofillet Hi Sarah > I started writing this a few days ago and was interrupted. Seeing your > name reminded me this reply was lurking in 'drafts'. I think writing drafts in Word is what leads to the massively long posts, Sarah! Poor Tep, to be hit with four of them at once! :) If you wrote "live" on the reply page, never knowing when the page might freeze and a post might be lost, ah, Sarah, that is really living on the edge.... :) > > So it was something to do with that. Does it ring a bell? > .... > S: Yes. When I questioned whether it really was true that most people have > most problems with seeing and visible object she also indicated how this > is the doorway most people ask about. Ph: But usually what people ask the most about indicates that there is the most lobha there - usually. But in this case, it seems that Acharn Sujin herself was stressing the point. No detachment most the time, but we > get lost in the long stories about what is seen, giving it so much > importance, really thinking we see people and things. Ph: For example, she said if someone says there is a bottle and describes it, and you actually see it, which gives rise to more thinking about it. But after hearing that I wondered which would...not so clear I'd say. Do you remember one talk where a woman says that being in Myanmar or Thailand (forget which) and seeing signs written in a foreign language that she doesn't understand means there is less proliferation. People shot that one down, but I think she was right. We proliferate so much on words. So hearing the words describing a bottle might lead to more proliferation than seeing the object. But never mind. Just babbling. Really babbling now, getting in a last spurt before the computer goes. As you say, seeing > arises so very, very often, more than the other kinds of sense door > experiencing. We're `overwhelmed' by what is seen time and again. This is > why it's always given first. Without detachment, no awareness or > understanding either - it's the opposite of attachment which is what > usually arises as soon as we open our eyes. > > When you have time, also look at posts saved under `Visible Object & > Seeing' in U.P. OK. And at some point I will want to discuss something that always pops up for me. The Buddha teaches that visible form, sound, mental objects etc give rise to proliferation, but when you think about how little seeing there is of visible object, the form only, or sound, it seems that all the proliferation comes from mental objects. So while visible form and seeing are always mentionned first in the ayatanas, it seems to me that %99.99 of what is going on for is is mental object and mind. I'd like to ease into discussing that difficult topic when everyone is back. Maybe. Who knows what lobha will motivating me to want to discuss in a month from now? > .... > Change of topic – I appreciated your Saturday night fever flurry of posts > as usual. As for the `doing metta meditation', is there really anthing > that can be done? Isn't it an illusion to think there is a `doing' at this > time, even if metta happens to arise?: I don't think it's really metta, but there are techniques I can use at will that make me feel less-stressed and aversion-filled. I only use them at times when the stress is really bad, when I sense I could get into an ugly fight. It is cheating, perhaps, but it relievese the intense stress and perhaps helps to keep me out of trouble. This is something I use once or twice a month or so. It is not really metta, it is just an emotion sweetening technique. Alas, the way metta meditation is taught by modern practitioners is pretty much the same thing. The other day I thought of something I loved, which you might remember. I was listening to Acharn Sujin talk while Naomi was bopping around the room, listening to some crappy pop on her (now my, she upgraded to a Nano) ipod Shuffle. Just when Acharn Sujin said "when there is metta..." Naomi, singing along with Britney Spears sang "...DO SOMETHING!" And this is so true. The point about metta is not trying to have more, it is to appreciate it when it arises, and conditions permitting, do something to be friendly and helpful. But this just happens, can't be controlled. I write a lot about Naomi and we are getting a digital camera so I will try to upload a picture of us goofing off as we always are. Lost of laughs. (Fights few and far between now for some reason.) I will send off this part one before the computer freezes. Phil 55110 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:39pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. lbidd2 Joop: "But I have two problems with topics like "sabhava" and "accumulations": - what are the Sutta sources for some statements? - if there are not Sutta sources, it still can theoretically be correct, but is it?" Hi Joop, The only sutta source for sabhava is in Patisambhidamagga, as we have discussed. My personal interpretation of that instance is that the "born" in "born materiality is void of sabhava" is significant. As I tried to explain I think that "born" implies conditions and the combination of conditions creates a whole, which is void of sabhava. It makes no sense at all to say materiality has no nature. That would completely contradict the intention of satipatthana. Accumulation is stored up kamma. There is no good way of accounting for how kamma works. In many suttas the Buddha said something like, because of a certain volition in a past life, a certain kamma result arises in a subsequent life. "Accumulation" is just a concept to help us understand that process, but no one really knows. It's not an object of satipatthana. Sabhava is precisely the object of satipatthana. If "sabhava" bothers you on philosophical grounds, ignore it. The main thing is precise experience of the 5 khandhas. You also asked about Karunadasa. I found him hard to follow, but if he agrees with me, I like him. Larry 55111 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 0:52pm Subject: CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggregates!!!! TGrand458@... Hi All One correction. The Patisambhidamagga is not denying "own characteristic" (sabhava) in just the 5 aggregates... it is denying it in all 201 states listed on pages 10 -- 12. This includes the 5 aggregates, the 18 elements, all jhanas (including the immaterial states), all Brahmaviharas, and Nibbana. In short...every possible state. TG 55112 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:46pm Subject: Vism.XIV,228 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 228.One who sees perception and formations as not-self fully understands nutriment consisting of mental volition. He abandons the perversion of perceiving self in not-self. He crosses the flood of views. He is loosed from the bond of views. He breaks the bodily tie of interpretation (insistence) that 'This is the truth'. He does not cling with self-theory clinging. ***************************** 228. sa~n~na.m sa"nkhaare ca anattato passanto manosa~ncetanaahaara.m parijaanaati, anattani attaati vipallaasa.m pajahati, di.t.thogha.m uttarati, di.t.thiyogena visa.myujjati, di.t.thaasavena anaasavo hoti. ida.msaccaabhinivesakaayagantha.m bhindati, attavaadupaadaana.m na upaadiyati. 55113 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:10pm Subject: To Sarah (2) Re: Phil - sorry, I've lost your thread to which I'm replying philofillet Hi again Sarah > I thought these (and many other) comments you wrote (to Nina) were very > good What a coincidence! I thought they were very good too! (There is always so much lobha and mana....) > > P: "There is always seeing. There are not always troublesome people to > deal with or wonderful people for whom we can sense attachment, or > conditions for dana or sila, but there is always seeing, always hearing, > always touching. Ph: I have Jill (?) to thank for this, she brought it up during India 2004. There is always seeing, always hearing, always opportunity for satipatthana to develop. never mind if people (or we) are anyway at all by conditions. > Slowly there can be the development of detachment through the development > of understanding of realities. You refer in another post to the salayatana > samyutta and how we can reflect on how `eye base and visible object arise > to condition seeing consciousness' etc which is very true, but I think the > emphasis when discussing the ayatanas is how these very ayatanas all have > to arise and `meet' together. There are many aspects to the ayatanas. One that is very helpful for me is the sense restraint aspect, the way reflecting on ayatanas in even a conventional way can condition the temporary abandonment of certain akusala proliferation. And reduce the probability of akusala kamma patha, unwholesome "evil" acts (as B.Bodhi translates it in some suttas.) That is one aspect. Oh, there are so many fascinating aspects to the ayatanas. I won't go into it now. I will be on this topic for years to come, I suspect. It's the balancing act of the various inner > and outer ayatanas at anytime which distinguishes wakefulness from deep > sleep when there is no experience through the senses. I don't get this, but that's ok. I'm not in reflecting mode at the moment, as you can tell. > > One other comment to pick up while I'm talking to you – you mention in > #53912 that "objects that give rise to enthusiasm will increasingly be > paramattha dhammas rather than concepts, I assume". > > This is interesting. I think that most of what we consider to be > enthusiasm in daily life is simply lobha, don't you? If lobha for concepts > about paramattha dhammas replaces lobha for other subjects, it's still > lobha of course! What???? Lobha related to Dhamma study!! How is that possible. It's all CHANDA, didn't you know???? haha of course, so much lobha. But I find a promising development.I have much less attachemnt to my little pocket notebooks, to my books. There is no need to study Dhamma in the morning (though I usually do) to have a day full of Dhamma. Again, the understanding that there is always seeing, always hearing and therefore always the opportunity for satipatthana to develop, conditions permitting... What I do take care about and have posted about here is when the word "should" is used. For example, this from p.24 of the Survey of Paraqmattha Dhammas: "When we have studied paramattha dhammas and understood what they are, we should investigate the paramattha dhammas that are appearing so that we can realize the true nature of their characteristics." That "should" is not right, I think. We may, we might, we can, but not we should, I think. It is not a method that should be followed, the conditions for consideration of paramattha dhammas might lead to consideration of paramattha dhammas, but if we do it intentionally, as the above paragraph might seem to be urging us to do, we are no better off than if we were sitting on a cushion trying to have sati intentionally. Of course it is just one paragraph, and we know better, but as I've said to Nina in the past, I always think we should be careful about the way we use the word "should" when it comes to kusala. >When there's awareness and understanding of paramattha > dhammas, it may of course be with with or without wholesome piti > (joy/enthusiasm). Yes. But I am also still a bit confused about whether piti is not just a jhana factor. In any case, I don't think about it. I really do believe now that it is best not to think about metta, karuna, piti, or any other beautiful cetasika. I think thinking about them just guarantees that they will slide off the plate and be replaced with lobha. But who knows. That's the way I see it now. > p.s planning to load the rest of the `Erik series' in the next day or so > at least – perhaps you can listen or download until you get a cd.... I tried to have a listen a couple of weeks ago but there were technical issues. (ie I was too stupid to know how to open the file.) I am dubious about this Erik series. If he is a fellow who doesn't accept the paramattha dhamma theory, doesn't accept Abhidhamma, I personally feel there is no point listening to a discussion focussed on his views. This is what I've said before, but what is the point in discussing if we're not on the same page? I think for some people there can be a fruitful path without Abhidhamma, and that's great. I wish them well. But if one person accepts the dhamma theory and one doesn't it seems to me that it ends up with the person who does accept it having to try to defend it and explain why it is true even though it doesn't feature explicitly in suttas, etc. What's the point? Life is short. I am still in favour of discussing Dhamma with people who are on the same page. Wishing others well, but not getting caught up in debates based in trying to convince others that Abhidhamma *is* the Buddha's teaching etc. On the other hand, if Erik is a fellow who appreciates Abhidhamma, but practices methodic meditation, for example, it would be worthwhile to hear him out. That's the way I see things now. Also, if he went to Bangkok knowing in advance that he disagreed with Acharn Sujin and wanting to prove that he is right and she is wrong, I think it would be ...yes, you got it... dojo busting and therefore bad manners. That's the way I see things now. I know in the suttas there are scenes of bhikkhus debating Dhamma outside gathering places or whatever but at my nascent stage of developing understanding I say non merci, mes amis. But what a lot of silly writing when I haven't even heard it yet! Certainly looking forward to India 2005. Yum yum!!! OK, have a great trip Sarah, and everyone. Talk to you again in March. Phil 55114 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:06pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggregates!!!! lbidd2 Hi TG, In Ps. "sabhava" means "independent nature"; in Vism. "sabhava" means "particular nature". Notice the context. Larry 55115 From: "dhammasurya" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 6:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: the Bogor group. Rupa. dhammasurya Hi Nina, I have given my name and address in your mailbox. I think it is better to give it in private message. Thankyou for your kindness. Best Regards, Suchamda --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Suchamda, > if you give me your address the Survey of Paramattha dhammas will be send to > you from Bgk. Is this the book you mean? > I cannot reach you personallyon your Email address. > Nina. > op 26-01-2006 06:49 schreef Suchamda D op dhammasurya@g...: > > > Dear Mr.Selamat Rodjali, > > I am also in Indonesia, Semarang, and would like to have the copy of copy > > of this book for further study of Abhidhamma. Can you contact me directly to > > my email? I will give you my address, and will change the cost. > > > > Thankyou, > > Suchamda Dhammasurya > 55116 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 7:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] To Sarh (1) Re: Phil - sorry, I've lost your thread to which I'm replying sarahprocter... Hi Phil (& Tep), Thx for your responses and comments - yes, will look f/w to 'talking' more on return. --- Phil wrote: If > you wrote "live" on the reply page, never knowing when the page > might freeze and a post might be lost, ah, Sarah, that is really > living on the edge.... :) ... S: I assure you that almost all my posts are written on the reply page and unfortunately I have lost a good many by living on the edge in this way:-/. When I remember or am interrupted or have an occasional bit of good sense, I go to word drafts which I always recommend to others (after it took me 3yrs+ on DSG plus a lot of lost posts to find out about it!!). My posts to Tep probably were too long (though the 'massively long' you referred to was only 2 pages each max, shorter than many, many others here, I assure you - I print them all out, so I can give all the scores anytime:-). Perhaps it was the density of the 'gems' you and he were referring to:-). I'll try to mend my ways in future nonetheless and will be glad if anyone can give Tep any assistance in recovery mode!I've already apologised to him for any over-kill. I really appreciate discussions with him and all and any of his 'massivley long' input too. Metta, Sarah ====== 55117 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 8:53pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 367- Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 (f) 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;-) ========================================== [Ch22 -Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 contd] Clinging to personality belief is a form of wrong view which arises when one firmly believes that the five khandhas are “self”. We can think of concepts such as “body” or “mind” but there may not necessarily be wrong view. However, the latent tendency of wrong view has not been eradicated so long as one has not become a sotåpanna. We all have accumulated personality belief and when there are conditions it can arise. Someone may cling with wrong view to the rúpa-kkhandha, he may take the body for self. When one becomes older and suffers from sickness, it is obvious that the body changes, but there may still be clinging to an idea of the body which belongs to a “self”. What is taken for “my body” consists of different rúpas which arise and fall away. When we are walking, standing, sitting or lying down, it is not “my body” which can be directly experienced, there are only different elements, rúpas, such as hardness, softness, heat or cold, and these can be experienced one at a time. When mindfulness arises it can be aware of one reality at a time and in this way right understanding can develop and the wrong view of self can eventually be eradicated. ***** (Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 to be continued) Metta, Sarah ====== 55118 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 3:54pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/26/2006 8:07:05 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, In Ps. "sabhava" means "independent nature"; in Vism. "sabhava" means "particular nature". Notice the context. Larry Hi Larry Are you saying that a Sutta term became distorted and misused in the Visuddhimagga? At any rate, I don't think it matters. 'Individual essence,' 'independent nature,' 'own characteristic,' or 'particular nature' are easily translations of the same term. 'Particular nature' is still a problem. The context is a non-factor from anything I've seen so far. Its just used as an excuse to try to justify attachment to the concept. I'll devote a separate post to this matter later. TG 55119 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 9:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Htoo (1) - amisa and niramisa. sarahprocter... Hi Nina, --- nina van gorkom wrote: > Ayatanas, I only copied Nyanatiloka, which is not always precise. .... S: that explains it. The extract you quoted of K.Sujin's was so good, but the footnote which you say you copied from Nyantiloka may not be 'precise' as you suggest. Tn fact, Nyantiloka's dict entry on the ayatanas is not correct. For example, he says that dhammaayata.na are the same as dhammadhaatu and dhammaarammana (hence the use of mind objects for dhammaayata.na as if it were dhammaarammana)*. I've mentioned a few errors in the dict to B.Bodhi. The dict is so good and useful generally. I think it's impossible to change it. Metta, Sarah * for others, plenty on this in U.P. under 'ayatanas' or 'ayatanas and dhatus' or 'ayatanas and arammana'.... ====== 55120 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 TG: "Are you saying that a Sutta term became distorted and misused in the Visuddhimagga?" Hi TG, Of course not. You seem determined to find fault somewhere. Better to look for understanding. Larry 55121 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 4:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/26/2006 10:24:51 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: TG: "Are you saying that a Sutta term became distorted and misused in the Visuddhimagga?" Hi TG, Of course not. You seem determined to find fault somewhere. Better to look for understanding. Larry Hi Larry Yea I'm being a bit snippy. Sorry. But its a very critical point. Its also a little frustrating that some stanch defenders of the term "own characteristic" have become amazingly silent and or no longer feel they need to defend the term ... once a Sutta source is mentioned as denying the existence of such a thing. Seems to me that that's the time defense is most necessary if there's something worth defending. I applaud you and Robert K for standing up for what you think is right. Of course, since I believe the term to be counter the Buddha's teaching, it follows that I would find fault with its use when it claims to present the teachings of the Buddha. TG 55122 From: "dhammasurya" Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:07pm Subject: Sahetuka Akusala Kamavacara Citta dhammasurya Hi All, We know that there are sahetuka (with root) citta and ahetuka (rootless) citta. We also know that there are sahetuka vipaka sobhana citta (beautiful resultant citta with roots). Why don't there a sahetuka akusala vipaka citta in abhidhamma classification? Thankyou. Regards, Daniel 55123 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Jan 26, 2006 10:26pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 TG: "Of course, since I believe the term to be counter the Buddha's teaching, it follows that I would find fault with its use when it claims to present the teachings of the Buddha." Hi TG, Okay. What do you think Ps. means when it says "born materiality is void of sabhava"? Does it mean rupa is not real? There is no rupa? Is born materiality empty of the characteristic "sabhava"? What is "sabhava"? What is "born materiality"? Can you answer based on sutta alone? Larry 55124 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Examination of Bones and Ashes and praise of S.N. to Phil. nilovg Hi Phil and Chris, I have some more reflections. op 27-01-2006 01:48 schreef Phil op philco777@...: I heard Acharn Sujin > talking about this, about how everytime she sees the relic there is > only visible form with trying to make out the details, without trying > to think about is it real or not, etc. I wondered how she can just see > visible form everytime (in addition to predicting that she would just > see visible form next time as well) ------ N: A good lesson not to be exalted about seeing the relics, clinging to 'an unforgettable experience'. This was not the Buddha's intention. Remember the sutta where he said to Vakkali not to cling to his appearance. Who sees the Dhamma sees me, he said. Well, it is right to be aware of visible object and seeing when looking at his bones and ashes. The greatest respect is developing satipatthana. It shows our determination to continue developing it. Phil, now another subject. Let me praise S.N. IV: Kindred Sayings about feelings, § 12 the sky: the diverse winds that blow . Winds dusty, I heard this morning that the defilements are like dust. Feelings caught up with defilements are like the dusty winds. § 14, the guesthouse, the feelimgs are compared to people of all ranks who come from all the quarters. Here worldly (carnal, amisa) and unworldly feelings are mentioned. She said that only the person who develops satipatthana can know about this. My observation: Unworldly pertains to jhana (not what one takes for jhana) and enlightenment. Someone who has attained jhana and emerges from it may regret that the jhanacitta is past. But this is very subtle. § 15, Property. to Ananda. About the three feelings and contact which feeds them. Kh. Sujin said that we do not see the danger of feelings. When feeling is unpleasant we want pleasant feelings. We want it to last and we have unpleasant feeling when it falls away. We always have restlesness so long as we have desire. The complete ceasing of feeling is the highest calm. I am very impressed by the way the Visuddhimagga is ending Ch XIV. Seeing the khandhas as they are leads to the understanding of the four nutriments, and the abandoning of the perversions. It is to be applied at this moment, insight is to be developed. The Vis. emphasizes the three pariññas developed in vipassana. All these texts are not abstract theory. They pertain to this moment. Nina. Nina. 55125 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 1:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Sarah (2) Re: Phil - sorry, I've lost your thread to which I'm replying nilovg Hi Phil, just a few more points, just butting in. op 27-01-2006 03:10 schreef Phil op philco777@... to Sarah: > > It's the balancing act of the various inner >> and outer ayatanas at anytime which distinguishes wakefulness from > deep >> sleep when there is no experience through the senses. > > I don't get this, ------- N: She is referring to the bhavangacittas, when there are no objects impinging on doorways. The bhavangacitta experiences the same object as the rebirth-consciousness, and this is throughout life. ---------- Ph: What I do take care about and have posted about here is when the > word "should" is used. For example, this from p.24 of the Survey of > Paraqmattha Dhammas: "When we have studied paramattha dhammas and > understood what they are, we should investigate the paramattha > dhammas that are appearing so that we can realize the true nature of > their characteristics." ------ N: I should (!) be more careful. But read the whole sentence. If they are not investigated the true nature cannot be realized. So there is a should here :-)) -------- Ph: But I am also still a bit confused about whether piti is not > just a jhana factor. ------- N: Piti is a cetasika always arising, in the case of cittas of the sensesphere, together with somanassa, pleasant feeling. It can be with lobha or with kusala. -------- Ph: at least – perhaps you can listen or download until you get a > cd.... > > I tried to have a listen a couple of weeks ago but there were > tech ical issues. (ie I was too stupid to know how to open the file.) --------- N: Try the control key, extreme left, then you get a little picture on the screen. The technician taught me. With your mouse you go to the location you want to download. ---------- Ph: I am dubious about this Erik series. If he is a fellow who > doesn't accept the paramattha dhamma theory, doesn't accept > Abhidhamma, -------- N: It does not matter. It is worth while anyway to listen to what Kh Sujin answers, I think. She has so much patience in answering people's questions, no matter what these are. She always makes it into a Dhamma lesson for all. Nina. 55126 From: "Leo" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 0:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs leoaive Hi It is interesting about ashes. I beleive it was originally in Sattipathana and Mahasattipathana, since in ancient times it was custom of India. What do you think about it? With Metta Leo 55127 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:25am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependence. icarofranca Hi Larry! Respectfully butting in... >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > > Accumulation is stored up kamma. There is no good way of accounting >for > how kamma works. In many suttas the Buddha said something like, >because > of a certain volition in a past life, a certain kamma result arises >in a > subsequent life. "Accumulation" is just a concept to help us >understand > that process, but no one really knows. It seems to me that "Kamma" buds forth on Accumulation grounds. In this way, the mind object we usually call "Kamma" is embedded in a more generic idea called "Accumulation". One can simply follow his or hers own accumulation, but could be compelled to action by Kamma once in its gears. Just an insight: this idea abou Accumulations and Kamma may be found mainly in the Paticca-Sammupada: our basic ignorance raises accumulations (that are neuter in its core), and the accumulations raise Kamma that compels to actions and can birth, grow and eventually being blocked and extinguished by Dhamma. Mettaya Ícaro 55128 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Examination of Bones and Ashes after Cremation for Signs icarofranca Hi Leo! >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Leo" wrote: > > Hi > It is interesting about ashes. I beleive it was originally in > Sattipathana and Mahasattipathana, since in ancient times it was >custom > of India. > What do you think about it? > > With Metta > Leo >---------------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, since ancient times it was a custom in India the burning of corpses...and one of the ancient mandatory rites of that occasion was the "Sati" ( or Sutee...spelling is not defunct at all!) - the widow were obliged to climb up the bonfire where her husband´s corpse was put on, and be burned with him! Just note that in the "Mahasatipatthana Sutta" the focus is somewhat different - a hint about the end of exotic rites as the "Sati" - the low decay of a corpse is an object of detailed observation and absorption, a meditation Theme and I could dare to say, a true initiation and a portal for the jhanas. Mettaya Ícaro 55129 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > Hi Larry > > Yea I'm being a bit snippy. Sorry. But its a very critical point. Its > also a little frustrating that some stanch defenders of the term "own > characteristic" have become amazingly silent and or no longer feel they need to defend > the term ... once a Sutta source is mentioned as denying the existence of > such a thing. Seems to me that that's the time defense is most necessary if > there's something worth defending. > > I applaud you and Robert K for standing up for what you think is right. > > Of course, since I believe the term to be counter the Buddha's teaching, it > follows that I would find fault with its use when it claims to present the > teachings of the Buddha. > > TG Hallo TG, Larry TG, you are right. It's bizar that a Sutta-quote stating that something is not (or is not) sabhava, is used as a proof of the relevance of the sabhava- concept. As I advised you yesterday, really good information about this concept is given by Karunasasa www.abhidhamma.org/dhamma_theory_philosophical_corn.htm My peronal guess: "sabhava" is not a useful concept, it's even dangerous because it has fundamental different meaningsin different contexts, so that it only can be seen as "ideology" It is not useful because it does not really add something liberating to the Teachings of the Buddha. Metta Joop 55130 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependence. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: >... > Hi Joop, > > The only sutta source for sabhava is in Patisambhidamagga, as we have > discussed. Joop: Is that really a Sutta, spoken by the Buddha? No! I googlec the term and it's not clear who his written it, Nina states that it is ascribed to Sariputta but I think that's a myth. And even Larry:> You also asked about Karunadasa. I found him hard > to follow, but if he agrees with me, I like him. Joop: That sounds pretty arrogant, does not fit in the image I had of you. Perhaps you have deep psychological resistence against trusful historical studies about for example the concept "sabhava", arising long after the passing away of the Buddha. Metta Joop 55131 From: "Charles" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:21am Subject: Re: Sahetuka Akusala Kamavacara Citta cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "dhammasurya" wrote: > resultant citta with roots). Why don't there a sahetuka akusala vipaka > citta in abhidhamma classification? Hi, Because when doing akusala kamma, the mind is unsteady :D. Maybe it's caused by the influence of mohamula citta, that doubt and worry minds. 55132 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:35am Subject: Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n~na scottduncan2 Dear Ken, I'm so sorry to have taken so long to respond. Thank you for the effort in bringing the excerpts from the texts to my attention. ----- "I'll admit my commentary on the commentary was not of great worth - considering I didn't know what was meant by, "One in a hundred or a thousand." You might agree with James who responded: 'J: Only one in a hundred or a thousand can do it?? So which isit? One hundred or one thousand? Buddhaghosa should have taken a statistics class! Do you realize what a big difference there is between the number: 100 and the number: 1000??? This extrapolation by Buddhaghosa is pointless and useless.'" ----- Ken, after considering this I think I will side with James in a way, no disrespect intended. I think this use of "one in a hundred or one in a thousand" is meant to convey a sense that jhana experience is difficult to attain, or even perhaps not for everyone, and not to be taken literally in the exact numerical fashion that informs your stance. I admit that I don't know really when to take something literally or figuratively but in this case it just seems right to go with figurative: jhana is difficult to attain but not impossible. Another thing struck me, though, and that was that I might be too naive, committing a faux-pas by mentioning this experience in the first place. I don't really know the ins and outs of sangha membership and culture (counting you as "sangha"). Perhaps one just doesn't mention personal experience. If this was "bad form," my apologies. ----- "...the conditions for jhana are in some ways more restrictive than the conditions for satipatthana. As you know, there are five hindrances that prevent the arising of jhana. Satipatthana has only one hindrance - ignorance of the Dhamma." I'm sorry that this doesn't quite make sense. I stand to be corrected but I thought that jhana arising suppresses, or eradicates, the hindrances, not that the hindrances prevent jhana from arising. Were this to be the case then indeed, who could ever experience jhana or any kind? Again I understand it that if one takes the care to establish the conditions for jhana, these conditions will simply allow for jhana to arise. Finally, would not jhana absorption fall under "satipatthana?" If the four objects of "intent contemplating, mindfulness, earnest thought, or application of mindfulness," (sati), are body, sensation, mind, and mind-objects, I would say jhana is included. I agree that jhana does not lead to nibbana. Does any one nowadays try to teach this? At any rate, Ken, I must get going for now. Thanks for an interesting conversation. Sincerely, Scott. 55133 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:53am Subject: Why is meditation important in Buddhism htootintnaing 1 ` Why is meditation important in Buddhism' This is a question that is asked a Buddhist. Before this is dealt with we have first to touch what Buddhism means. The second issue what the primary question of this essay is the word `meditation'. So in this essay the word `Buddhism' and the word `meditation' will be explained in view of Theravada Buddhism. These days there are many subjects to learn. Regarding philosophy and religion many subjects are named as something-ism or –ism. Buddhism was founded by a being, who was a live human being like us but the Great One. That man who was the great was called `the Buddha'. As the religion what now called Buddhism was founded by `the Buddha' all his teachings and related studies are called Buddhism. There was only one Buddha at any given time. Therefore Buddhism has to be one and only one Buddhism. The Buddha could foresee all things in connection with his followers and beings in general. That was why He (the Buddha) passed vinaya rules, which is the code of conduct for disciple monks or bhikkhus. When the Buddha passed away (parinibbana) he left a lot of teachings and a lot of rules which are code of conduct. These are called `Dhamma and Vinaya'. Dhamma or teachings of the Buddha were put into three separate groups or three baskets. In Pali' three baskets' is called `Tipitaka'. Ti means three and pitaka means basket. Tipitaka means three baskets. All teachings of that live Buddha were put into Tipitaka. The study of these Tipitaka will help to understand what Buddhism is in real sense. Since the Buddha passing away the disciple monks have been trying to keep teachings in the purest state. 4 months after passing away of the Buddha 500 great disciple monks who were all purest that is who were all arahats did a great meeting. There they compiled all teachings and then these teachings were all put into three baskets called Tipitaka. Up to the third Buddhists Council all these teachings that is Tipitaka were all passed on just by oral tradition or oral citation. For this the disciples had to study by heart and they taught younger generations without any deviation from what the Buddha taught. This keeping purity of teachings is clearly seen only in Theravada Buddhism. Actually there is only one Buddhism. But because of some imitation, distortion, dilution, correction, addition, substraction the original one had to be given as Theravada. Thera means `elder' and vada means `view'. After the third Buddhists Council there arose writing and at fourth Buddhist Council disciple monks tried to write Tipitaka on palm-leaves. Since then Tipitaka has been in written form and there have been less and less disciple monks who can recite all tipitaka by heart. Anyway this tradition that is Theravada Buddhism is the purest and it reflects what the Buddha taught. The Buddha already preached that `what he did not preached has not to be added' and also `what he preached has not to be left out'. In this respect Theravada Buddhism well maintains all the teachings to the purest form. 2 Tipitaka or three baskets of teachings are 1. vinaya pitaka or `code of conduct for monks' 2. suttanta pitaka or sutta or conventional dhamma teachings 3. abhidhamma pitaka or higher dhamma teachings. Again regarding Buddha's teachings or Buddha's Sasana there are three different implications on what a being understand these Tipitaka. Or simply there are three levels of understanding. These three levels of understanding are 1. pariyatti or `studying' [preparatory level] 2. patipatti or `practising' [real practising level] 3. pativedha or `realization' [realization or seen level] Among these three level of understanding patipatti is the topic of interest. Because it also include `meditation'. But without understanding at the level of preparation or pariyatti one cannot go forward to patipatti or practice. Again without patipatti or practice one can never realize Dhamma, which is the ESSENCE of Buddhism. This Dhamma to be realized is NIBBANA. Nibbana is initially explained at the level of pariyatti. That is it can be studied through exploring scriptures of Tipitaka. Nibbana or absolute peace is the goal of all Buddhists if they are true Buddhists. For this goal a Buddhist has to study pariyatti so that he or she can understand what the Buddha taught. And after right studying he or she has to go forth with practice. This practice is wrongly translated as `meditation'. Meditation is an ordinary English word and it does not represent what the Buddha taught in his teachings. The Buddha called it bhavana. Bhavana means `mental cultivation of wholesome deeds'. So if we talk about `meditation' in the setting of Buddhsim especially in Theravada Buddhism it is about bhavana or mental cultivation. Meditation in Buddhism is not like other religions. Meditation in Buddhism is based on `right understanding' or `right view'. If teachings are not properly studied there cannot be right understanding. If there is no right understanding there cannot be right practice or right meditation. Without right practice there will not be realization. Then nibbana will be far far away. So in this respect right practice is crucial in Buddhism. That is why meditation is important in Buddhism. Just for a sample I would show some examples of what is right and what is wrong. Meditation is important. But not all meditation are bhavana that the Buddha taught. Not all sitting still, standing still, lying still are bhavana or mental cultivation of wholesome deeds. Not all citations are bhavana that the Buddha taught. The Buddha taught 1. 5 aggregates or 5 khandha or panca-kkhandha 2. 12 sense-bases or 12 ayatanas 3 3. 18 elements or 18 dhatus 4. 4 Noble Truths or 4 ariya's saccas and many other essential dhamma or teachings. These dhamma can be noticed in our daily life. There are 12 sense- bases. These are the bases for arising of senses. There are 6 senses. They are seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thinking. The bases that these 6 senses have to arise from are 1. eye 2. ear 3. nose 4. tongue 5. body (including head and all body part where touch sensation can be known) 6. mind 1. visual object (colour) 2. auditory object (sound) 3. olfactory object (smell) 4. gustatory object (taste) 5. tactile object (touch) 6. mind object (idea and object of mind) Depending on these 6 pairs or these 12 sense-bases sensation have to arise. Sensation or knowing of these sensation or knowledge of these sensation are 6 kinds. 1. seeing-sensation or seeing-consciousness or eye-consciousness 2. hearing-sensation or hearing-consciousness or ear-consciousness 3. smelling-sensation or smelling-consciousness or nose-consciousness 4. tasting-sensation or tasting-consciousness or tongue-consciousness 5. touching-sensation or touching-consciousness or body-consciousness 6. thinking-sensation or thinking-consciousness or mind-consciousness These 6 sensations or these 6 consciousness never arise without already mentioned 12 sense-bases. Along with these 6 consciousness altogether there are 18 elements. They are element of 1. eye, 2. visual object, 3. eye-consciousness, 4. ear, 5. sound, 6. ear-consciousness, 7. nose, 8. smell, 9. nose-consciousness, 10. tongue, 11. taste, 12. tongue-consciousness, 13. body, 14. touch, 15. body-consciousness, 16. mind, 17. mind-object, 18. mind-consciousness. The whole world is full of these 18 elements. That world is called loka. All these are related to lokiiya citta or mundane consciousness. They will never lead to freeing or liberation of all suffering. They are not nibbana, which is the goal of Buddhists. Nibbana excel all these 18 elements. Nibbana is supramundane. Nibbana is beyond the world. 4 Again the Buddha preached that there are 5 aggregates. They are 1. aggregates of material 2. aggregates of feeling 3. aggregates of perception 4. aggregates of formation 5. aggregates of consciousness. All these 5 aggregates have separate characters. All 12 sense-bases are included in these 5 aggregates. All 18 elements are included in these 5 aggregates. As these aggregates are the chief cause of clinging (attachment) they are also called `5 clinging aggregates'. Eye and visual objects cannot know anything. They are material things or they are rupa. They are rupa khandha or material aggregate or aggregates of material. The same applies to ear and sound, nose and smell, tongue and taste, body and touch. Consciousness is separate aggregate. When we know something there arises consciousness. At any given time there is consciousness. This is true even when we are sleeping. Any consciousness has feeling. It is another aggregate and it is called feeling aggregate. And every consciousness has perception. It is separate aggregate and it is perception aggregate. There are many mental factors that arise with any arising consciousness. Example mental factors that arise with consciousness are happiness, sadness, anger, conceit, attachment, doubt and many others. All these mental factors except feeling and perception are called formation aggregate. Because they altogether form kamma at the time when they arise. As soon as kamma has been form kamma is ready for giving rise to its effect depending on conditions and circumstances. So there are 5 aggregates. Nibbana does not have any aggregate or khandha. Meditation in Theravada Buddhism is to see these 5 aggregates as they are. They do have their own characteristics. To see these characterstics meditation or bhavana has to be done properly. That is why meditation is crucial in Theravada Buddhism. Again the Buddha taught there are 4 Noble Truths. They are 1.the truth of suffering or dukkha, 2. the truth of the cause of suffering or samudaya, 3. the truth of cessation of suffering or nirodha, and 4. the truth of the Path leading to cessation of suffering or magga. To see these 4 truths Buddhists have to meditate or have to do bhavana. To see these 4 truths is not that easy. One has to study respectfully what the Buddha taught so that he or she can understand at theoretical level or at pariyatti level or at preparatory level. After understanding one has to put into practice, which is based on right teaching or right understanding. When meditating there is possibility that Dependent Origination is clearly seen. Dependent Origination is the relationship of things that arise and support yet another thing. Examples are when we see a thing that we like we become attached to that thing and later we cling that thing. Because of attachment or wanting we will be searching what we want. On the way we are searching we all commit what we do not fully understand whether they are good or bad. This is because of ignorance. Ignorance leads to action (formation). Because of action there have to arise consciousness. Because of consciousness there arise mentality-materiality. Because of this there have to arise 6 sense- sensitivity. Because of sense-sensors there have to arise contact. Because of contact there have to arise feeling. Feeling creates craving. Craving creates clinging. Because of clinging there have to arise existence or becoming. Because of existence or becoming then we all have to be born here on this earth in this world. Because we all are born here we all are subject to decay, ageing, meeting many different sorts of suffering while we are living and finally we all have to die. When we die there finishes as a life. But as we have formed many many kamma then those kamma will have to give rise to their effects. Even though we are no more we after death there have to arise separate consciousness, which may be anywhere depending on what we have done before we die in this very life. Leaving next life or these controversial things we can orientate to the practical things here. Meditation helps us to be peaceful even in the middle of suffering. If we understand Dhamma we will be able to face with anything in this world. To understand Dhamma is to study Tipitaka and to practise accordingly as the Buddha taught. What did the Buddha taught as meditation? The Buddha taught four foundations. The Buddha said these 4 foundations are the only way to cleanse the impurities of all beings. It is the only way of overcoming all sorrow and lamentation. It is the only way of extinguishing the fire of suffering and aversion. It is the only way that we can see realities and see Dhamma and reach on the right Path leading to nibbana. And it is the only way of seeing nibbana in real sense. These 4 foundations are called `4 foundations of mindfulness' or `4 satipatthana'. They are 1. mindfulness on `body' [kayanupassana], 2. mindfulness on feeling [vedanaupassana], 3. mindfulness on consciousness [cittanupassana], 4.mindfulness on dhamma or mind- object [dhammanupassana]. Actually these 4 foundations are also called vipassana or satipatthana. It is the Buddha's meditation. It is the method of Buddhists meditation and it is totally different from other religions. As it is the only way leading to the real goal of Buddhism this meditation or vipassana or satipatthana is very very important in Buddhism especially in Theravada Buddhism. This is the valid meditation of Buddhism. As this is another subject this essay will conclude here. I hope all the important points to take into consideration have been included in this simple and easily- readable essay explaining `why is meditation important in Buddhism.' HTOO NAING (25.01.06) 55134 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:10am Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 367- Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 (f) htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom > > http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > > Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) > ========================================== > [Ch22 -Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 contd] > > Clinging to personality belief is a form of wrong view which > arises when one firmly believes that the five khandhas are "self". We can > think of concepts such as "body" or "mind" but there may not necessarily > be wrong view. ------------------------------------- Dear Sarah (and Nina), Just to say Saadhu Saadhu Saadhu! Well done! CTPB --> clinging to personality belief Is that 'attavaadupadaana'? With respect, Htoo Naing 55135 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:26am Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 640 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Vi~n~naana paccayaa naama-ruupam'. There are 19 patisandhi cittas or 19 linking consciousness. One of them has been explained in connection with Dependent Origination. Vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. There are 32 vipaaka cittas or 32 resultant consciousness that are invloved in sankhaara paccayaa vinnaana and so they also invlove in vinnaana paccaya naama-ruupam. Other vinnaana will also be considered later in these posts on Dependent Origination. But as we start with patisandhi cittas which are all vipaaka cittas we will finish with patisandhi cittas or linking consciousness with respect to Dependent Origination. Vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. Ahetuka akusala-vipaaka santira.na citta is the linking consciousness, which is the very first consciousness of any being of 4 woeful realms. When this citta arises it already mean that a being is born in the realm of woeful planes in conventional sense even though there are just naama and ruupa in the ultimate sense. Vinaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. When this vinnaana (ahetuka akusala- vipaaka-santira.na citta) arises it conditions or support naama- ruupam to arise. Naama that arise when this vinnaana happens have been explained in the previous post. Ruupa that arise in connection with this linking consciousness are 1. hadaya ruupa along with other 9 ruupas making vatthu-dasaka-ruupa- kalaapa or the aggregate of materials among which hadaya is the leader. 2. kaaya pasaada ruupa in kaaya-dasaka-ruupa-kalaapa (see in 1) 3. itthatta bhaava ruupa if female or purisatta bhaava ruupa if male in the bhaava-dasaka-ruupa-kalaapa and other many jivita-navaka-ruupa-kalaapa or life-faculty- aggregates. All these ruupa arise all of a sudden because of kamma and not of other reason. These are ruupa that are conditioned by vinnaana. So vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 55136 From: "Charles" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:26am Subject: Re: Why is meditation important in Buddhism cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" < htootintnaing@y...> wrote: > 1 > ` Why is meditation important in Buddhism' Hi, Nice article. A little question. Satipatthana falls off under samma-sati on the eight middle path, but there is also samma-samadhi. Is satipatthana includes both samma-sati and samma-samadhi? But samma-samadhi is explained as the four jhanas, while the satipatthana sutta (I think) do not mention about jhanas. What is the connection between satipatthana and jhana then? 55137 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:46am Subject: Re: Dhamma Thread ( 640 ) htootintnaing Self explanation by Htoo: Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Vi~n~naana paccayaa naama-ruupam'. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Consciousness conditions mentality-materiality. --------------------------------------------------------------------- There are 19 patisandhi cittas or 19 linking consciousness. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Pa.ti means 'again', and sandhi means 'linking'. Liking consciousness or pa.tisandhi citta links 'cuti citta' or 'dying consciousness' of previous life and '1st bhavanga citta' or 'first life-continuing consciousness' in the current life. These 3 moments are very fast. --------------------------------------------------------------------- One them has been explained in connection with Dependent Origination. Vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. There are 32 vipaaka cittas or 32 resultant consciousness that are invloved in sankhaara paccayaa vinnaana and so they also invlove in vinnaana paccaya naama-ruupam. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Sankhaara paccayaa vinnaana = formation conditions consciousness. Vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam=consciousness conditions ment-mater. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Other vinnaana will also be considered later in these posts on Dependent Origination. But as we start with patisandhi cittas which are all vipaaka cittas we will finish with patisandhi cittas or linking consciousness with respect to Dependent Origination. Vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. Ahetuka akusala-vipaaka santira.na citta is the linking consciousness, which is the very first consciousness of any being of 4 woeful realms. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Ahetuka (rootless) akusala (unwholesome) vipaaka (resultant) santira.na (investigating) citta (consciousness). --------------------------------------------------------------------- When this citta arises it already mean that a being is born in the realm of woeful planes in conventional sense even though there are just naama and ruupa in the ultimate sense. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Naama = mind phenomena, ruupa = material phenomena --------------------------------------------------------------------- Vinaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. When this vinnaana (ahetuka akusala- vipaaka-santira.na citta) arises it conditions or support naama- ruupam to arise. Naama that arise when this vinnaana happens have been explained in the previous post. Ruupa that arise in connection with this linking consciousness are 1. hadaya ruupa along with other 9 ruupas making vatthu-dasaka-ruupa- kalaapa or the aggregate of materials among which hadaya is the leader. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Hadaya = heart-base, vatthu = base, dasaka = made of ten kalaapa = aggregate -------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. kaaya pasaada ruupa in kaaya-dasaka-ruupa-kalaapa (see in 1)- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Kaaya = rupa that can convey the sense of touch pasaada = sense-sensitivity --------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. itthatta bhaava ruupa if female or purisatta bhaava ruupa if male in the bhaava-dasaka-ruupa-kalaapa and other many jivita-navaka-ruupa-kalaapa or life-faculty- aggregates. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Itthi + atta = female hood purisa+ atta = male hood bhaava = life, hood jiivita = life faculty navaka = made of nine --------------------------------------------------------------------- All these ruupa arise all of a sudden because of kamma and not of other reason. These are ruupa that are conditioned by vinnaana. So vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Hoping all are clear. >May you be free from suffering. > > With Unlimited Metta, > > Htoo Naing 55138 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:58am Subject: Re: Why is meditation important in Buddhism htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" < > htootintnaing@y...> wrote: > > 1 > > ` Why is meditation important in Buddhism' > Hi, Nice article. A little question. Satipatthana falls off under samma-sati on the eight middle path, but there is also samma-samadhi. Is satipatthana includes both samma-sati and samma-samadhi? But samma-samadhi is explained as the four jhanas, while the satipatthana sutta (I think) do not mention about jhanas. What is the connection between satipatthana and jhana then? --------------------------------------------------------------------- Htoo: Dear Charles Aviam, Sammaa-sati is included in NEP. This means that when magga citta arises at the very same time the individual concern is doing satipatthaana. At the very same time there also is sammaa-sammaadhi. Answer to your question: Is satipatthaana includes both sammaa-sati and sammaa-samaadhi? Answer: Satipatthaana is referred to sati. Charles Avium: 'sammaa-samaadhi is explained as 4 jhaana'. Htoo: There is a long description. It starts with freeing from sensuality down to sukhavihaarii and upekhaavihaarii that is 3rd and 4th jhaana. 4 jhaanas are sammaa-samaadhi. But I would not say if they are absorptive jhaana they are part of NEP of magga citta. Answer to your question: Charles Avium: Q: what is the connection between satipatthaana and jhaana? Answer: Htoo: This will depend on how one defines jhaana. But my view is that if one never attains any of jhaana it is hard to go up to higher knowledge level. With Metta, Htoo Naing 55139 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and TG) - In a message dated 1/26/06 10:07:06 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi TG, > > In Ps. "sabhava" means "independent nature"; in Vism. "sabhava" means > "particular nature". Notice the context. > > Larry > ========================= Larry, I think this is important. A nature or particular nature, in the sense of the quality of a phenomenon, is something actual, but it is not "own". We certainly can distinguish sights from sounds, for example. The quality of sight is utterly different from that of sound. At the same time, every sight and every sound is empty of self. Experience is not a homogeneous unity. At the same time, it does not consist of separate, independent entities, each with *own* being, *own* nature, essence, identity, or self. The nature, and the very existence for that matter, of each phenomenon is *borrowed* from other phenomena, and those conditions on which it depends for its very "life" are equally fleeting and empty of self. What every phenomenon lacks is exactly "itself". This being the case, it was, in my opinion, an enormous gaff to start to use 'sabhava', whose grammatical meaning is clear, to instead mean merely "quality" or "property" or even "nature" (which does have a substantialist flavor). Using 'sabhava' as a synonym for 'lakkhana' is not only confusing, but harmful. That usage has ended up being a disservice to Theravada, I believe. But it isn't too late to scuttle it. With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 55140 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 1/27/06 6:25:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > > Larry:> You also asked about Karunadasa. I found him hard > >to follow, but if he agrees with me, I like him. > > Joop: That sounds pretty arrogant, does not fit in the image I had of > you. Perhaps you have deep psychological resistence against trusful > historical studies about for example the concept "sabhava", arising > long after the passing away of the Buddha. > ====================== Easy, Joop. :-) Larry's not being arrogant. He's just exhibiying a good sense of humor! 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) 55141 From: "Charles" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:16am Subject: Re: Why is meditation important in Buddhism cherry_avium --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "htootintnaing" < htootintnaing@y...> wrote: > Htoo: This will depend on how one defines jhaana. But my view is that > if one never attains any of jhaana it is hard to go up to higher > knowledge level. Hi Htoo, Thank you for your explanation. To me now it seems that samma-sati and samma-samadhi (and the Noble Eightfold Path generally) are actually two different aspects of a same thing. The application of panna with concentration as strong as the factors in jhana applied to the reality of the pancakkhandhas. There any many ways to reach this state, by making concentration as a predominant factor or panna as a predominant factor. Another questions: Is concentration a condition for panna or panna a condition for concentration or this is really a chicken and egg relationship ? Can we make wisdom to develop samadhi ? 55142 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/26/2006 11:33:16 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, Okay. What do you think Ps. means when it says "born materiality is void of sabhava"? Does it mean rupa is not real? There is no rupa? Is born materiality empty of the characteristic "sabhava"? What is "sabhava"? What is "born materiality"? Can you answer based on sutta alone? Larry Hi Larry I'll take then one at a time. 1) "Born materiality" is materiality that has arisen. It is the present state of materiality. It materiality that is not in the future, and not in the past. It is present materiality. 1 & 2 & 3& 4) It means that materiality that has arisen and is in the present, does not have "individual essence" or "own characteristics." This is because all states are dependently structured and have nothing "of themselves." They are empty of self. They do actually arise, but they arise as "outcomes of other conditions" that also arose as "outcomes of other conditions." Hence all things are empty of self and have nothing that could be described as "their own characteristic." 5) Sabhava would mean that something is unique unto itself. This is a type of "entity viewpoint" or "self viewpoint." Both viewpoints are related and the same type of viewpoint. 6) The passage in the Patisambhidamagga can only be understood if "Dependent Arising Principles" are well understood. If that is the case, then, yes, it can be understood "by itself." (Of course in actuality, it takes an innumerable conglomeration of conditions to understand anything.) All of what is said here regarding sabhava applies to the 201 states listed on Pages 10 -- 12 of the Patisambhidamagga. In the case of Nibbana, as it is not a 'condition,' the conditional analysis does not apply, yet it is also void of "own characteristic." TG 55143 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 10:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. Karunadasa. nilovg Hi Joop, Larry is just kidding here :-)) Nina. op 27-01-2006 12:24 schreef Joop op jwromeijn@...: > Larry:> You also asked about Karunadasa. I found him hard >> to follow, but if he agrees with me, I like him. > > Joop: That sounds pretty arrogant, does not fit in the image I had of > you 55144 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 10:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sahetuka Akusala Kamavacara Citta nilovg Dear Daniel, Welcome here. Your question is good. Some time ago Joop also asked a similar question. The Visuddhimagga goes into this. I checked some texts. First about mahaavipaakacittas of the sense sphere: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 100: Vis. text: And while there is no difference in the associated states, the resultant should be understood as passive like the reflection of a face in a looking-glass while the profitable is active like the face. ========================================== N: The Tiika explains the difference between active (ussaaha or with effort) and passive (nirussaaha, without effort). We read: The Tiika states that also because kusala cittas are powerful while they occur, they have the meaning of being active. ------- Thus, the kusala kamma is powerful. Now about akusala kamma, this produces only ahetuka vipaakacitta. Vis. text: -------- N: seeing is vipakacitta, it may be the result of kusala kamma or akusala kamma. As to rebirth-consciousness that is akusala vipaakacitta, there is only one type performing this function and this is santiira.na-citta that is akusala vipaakacitta. N: Akusala vipaakacitta is never accompanied by roots, it is ahetuka, rootless. The Tiika states that he said that akusala vipaaka is rootless, because the nature of vipaaka is not reprehensible; it cannot have the roots of lobha, etc. that are the causes of unwise attention (ayoniso manasikaara), and also because it is akusala vipaaka it cannot be associated with the roots of alobha etc., the cause of what is profitable. Thus, akusala vipaakacitta is not called ahetuka akusala vipaakacitta; the word ahetuka, rootless, is superfluous because it is always without roots. It is without the akusala roots of lobha, dosa, moha, and without the beautiful roots (sobhana hetus) of alobha, adosa and amoha. It is not reprehensible, unprofitable, nor blameless, profitable. In the case of kusala vipaakacittas, the differentiation of sahetuka and ahetuka has to be made, since kusala kamma can produce eight sahetuka vipaakacittas that can be accompanied by the two roots of alobha and adosa, or by three roots, by alobha, adosa and paññaa, and also eight rootless, ahetuka, kusala vipaakacittas. Nina. op 27-01-2006 07:07 schreef dhammasurya op dhammasurya@...: > Hi All, > We know that there are sahetuka (with root) citta and ahetuka > (rootless) citta. > We also know that there are sahetuka vipaka sobhana citta (beautiful > resultant citta with roots). Why don't there a sahetuka akusala vipaka > citta in abhidhamma classification? 55145 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 367- Different Groups of Defilements Part 2 (f) nilovg Dear Htoo, Yes, that is the Pali term for it. atta+vaada+upadaana Nina. op 27-01-2006 15:10 schreef htootintnaing op htootintnaing@...: > clinging to personality belief > > Is that 'attavaadupadaana'? 55146 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:55am Subject: ENTITY associated TERMS vs more NEUTRAL TERMS TGrand458@... Hi All The language we use has a large impact on the way we think about things. Below, three terms are compared with three alternative terms. I suggest that the alternatives are better ways of thinking about conditions and more in line with Dependent Arising Principles... ULTIMATE REALITIES --> better way of thinking = ACTUALITIES OWN CHARACTERISTICS --> better way of thinking = QUALITIES or DISCERNABLE QUALITIES DHAMMAS --> better way of thinking = CONDITIONED STATES Terms on the left promote a substantive outlook. Terms on the right reduce a substantive outlook. Compare the two following sentences. Let's say the subject is -- the 5 aggregates... 1) These Dhammas are Ultimate Realities with [their] Own Characteristics. 2) These Conditioned States are Actualities with Discernable Qualities. Is it obvious how one statement presents a substantive view tainted with a "entity outlook"? ... while the other remains a more neutral expression of the state in question. The latter expression also includes a conditional outlook which is "insightful." "Conditioned State" for dhamma renders dhamma as sankhata. Considering the context I think that is appropriate. Besides "teaching," dhamma principally means "the law of nature" and "state." The law of nature is conditionality or DO. So "conditioned state" makes sense considering the context. Not only does the usage of "dhammas" not clarify what is indicated...it severely muddies what is indicated IMO. TG 55147 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 0:44pm Subject: Re: Why is meditation important in Buddhism htootintnaing --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Charles" wrote: ------ Hi Htoo, Thank you for your explanation. To me now it seems that samma-sati and samma-samadhi (and the Noble Eightfold Path generally) are actually two different aspects of a same thing. The application of panna with concentration as strong as the factors in jhana applied to the reality of the pancakkhandhas. There any many ways to reach this state, by making concentration as a predominant factor or panna as a predominant factor. Another questions: Is concentration a condition for panna or panna a condition for concentration or this is really a chicken and egg relationship ? Can we make wisdom to develop samadhi ? ---------------------------------- Dear Charles Avium, I like your idea on 'predominent'. Myanmar tradition says there are samathayanika and vipassanayanika. Samatha is jhana dominent and vipassana is panna dominent. I understand when you say there are many ways. But it is not like many different path but actually the very same path and the only path. Some walk along the path with 2 feet. Some hop. Some crawl. But the Path is only one and a single one. No other path will lead to nibbana but NEP. CA's Question: 1.Is concentration a condition for panna? Htoo's answer: No. 2. Is pannaa a condition for concentration? Maybe. Pannaa may well be a condition for concentration. 3. Can we make wisdom to develop samaadhi? I think so. At least theoretical wisdom will need to develop samaadhi. With Metta, Htoo Naing 55148 From: "htootintnaing" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 1:15pm Subject: Dhamma Thread ( 641 ) htootintnaing Dear Dhamma Friends, 'Vi~n~naana paccayaa naama-ruupam'. When the linking consciousness or patisandhi citta of being in any of 4 woeful planes of existence[ahetuka-akusalavipaaka-upekkhaa- santira.na-citta] arises there also arise ruupa and naama. This is 'vinnaana paccayaa naama-ruupam'. Ruupa that arise alkong with naama have been discussed in the Dhamma Thread (640). All those ruupa are kaamaja-ruupa-kalaapa or 'aggregate of materials born of kamma'. At that very moment there is no other ruupa arise because they do not have supporting condition while kammaja-ruupa already have conditions for their arising. This means that at the very moment of arising of linking consciousness there is no other ruupa in association with naama apart from kammaja ruupa. May you be free from suffering. With Unlimited Metta, Htoo Naing PS: Any comments are welcome and any queries are welcome. If there is unclarity of any meaning, please just give a reply to any of these posts on Dhamma Thread. Any adding, any correction, any support will be very helpful for all. 55149 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 8:47am Subject: Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA TGrand458@... Hello All The Satipatthana Sutta and its "methodology of truth seeking" are often cited by DSG members as an important work to draw from. I agree. However, there seems to be a notion that the Satipatthana Sutta is only speaking about "direct awareness of present experience." This does not seem to be the case. For example let's look at Mindfulness of the Body. In the Satipatthana Sutta, "The nine Charnel Ground Contemplations are surely not an activity of direct experience. They, in fact, are conceptual contemplations and imaginations about becoming bloated, festered, worm ridden, etc. after the time of death. Sure, back in those days the monks may have gone to a real charnel ground...but the point of the contemplation is to "imagine" ones own body becoming like that of the deceased corpse. Wow! The Buddha is advising conceptual logic as a means of mindfulness!!! Mindfulness is not merely "direct experience." Also in the Mindfulness of Body section the "Foulness of Bodily Parts" is surely a conceptual contemplation meant to disgust one at the "idea" of the bodies state. I doubt very many of the body parts listed are available for "direct inspection" much less the bags of rice, or grain, or millet, etc., that the Buddha suggests comparing the body to. In the "Contemplation of Mind Objects," mindfulness of The Four Noble Truths is also surely a conceptual mindfulness of the knowledge of the states that cause suffering. There are more items that I could point to...but the ones I listed are surely not "direct experiences." To me this means that "mindfulness practice" is much more comprehensive than it is often made out to be. It also shows that -- in the key Sutta that deals with mindfulness, it is not merely the so called "realities" that are being used as objects for mindfulness...it is conceptual knowledge as well. Any comments? TG 55150 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:10pm Subject: [dsg] Re: dependence. Karunadasa. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Joop, > Larry is just kidding here :-)) > Nina. > op 27-01-2006 12:24 schreef Joop op jwromeijn@y...: > > Hallo Larry, Nina, Howard I'm glad to hear Metta Joop 55151 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 10:19am Subject: Re: [dsg] ENTITY associated TERMS vs more NEUTRAL TERMS upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 1/27/06 3:01:01 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Hi All > > The language we use has a large impact on the way we think about things. > Below, three terms are compared with three alternative terms. I suggest > that > the alternatives are better ways of thinking about conditions and more in > line > with Dependent Arising Principles... > > ULTIMATE REALITIES --> better way of thinking = ACTUALITIES > > OWN CHARACTERISTICS --> better way of thinking = QUALITIES or DISCERNABLE > QUALITIES > > DHAMMAS --> better way of thinking = CONDITIONED STATES > > Terms on the left promote a substantive outlook. Terms on the right reduce > > a substantive outlook. > > Compare the two following sentences. Let's say the subject is -- the 5 > aggregates... > > 1) These Dhammas are Ultimate Realities with [their] Own Characteristics. > > 2) These Conditioned States are Actualities with Discernable Qualities. > > Is it obvious how one statement presents a substantive view tainted with a > "entity outlook"? ... while the other remains a more neutral expression of > > the state in question. The latter expression also includes a conditional > outlook which is "insightful." > > "Conditioned State" for dhamma renders dhamma as sankhata. Considering the > > context I think that is appropriate. Besides "teaching," dhamma > principally > means "the law of nature" and "state." The law of nature is conditionality > > or DO. So "conditioned state" makes sense considering the context. > > Not only does the usage of "dhammas" not clarify what is indicated...it > severely muddies what is indicated IMO. > > TG > ======================= I like the thrust of what you say here. However, as for the English rendering of 'dhamma', inasmuch as there is an unconditioned dhamma also, namely nibbana, wouldn't 'phenomenon' be a better choice than 'conditioned state'. Also, the word 'state' suggests he existence of something that is *in* that state [i.e., state of *what*?], a usage which has its own problems. 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) 55152 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. lbidd2 Hi Joop, Re.a misunderstanding: L: "You also asked about Karunadasa. I found him hard to follow, but if he agrees with me, I like him. Joop: That sounds pretty arrogant, does not fit in the image I had of you." Larry: It was a joke. Haha. Larry 55153 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 Howard: "Using 'sabhava' as a synonym for 'lakkhana' is not only confusing, but harmful." Hi Howard, I disagree. Sabhava is contrasted with the three general characteristics, anicca, dukkha, anatta. Unlike the three general characteristics which are common to all the dhammas in the 5 khandhas, each khandha has a particular characteristic that is common only to that khandha. It's a simple contrast of general and particular. Moreover, I would say sabhava is the object of satipatthana, unlike the confused mishmash of khandhas of ordinary consciousness. Larry 55154 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:00pm Subject: Re: Examination of Bones and Ashes and praise of S.N. to Phil. philofillet Hi Nina Time for a last bit of writing before the computer goes. > Phil, now another subject. Let me praise S.N. IV: Kindred Sayings about > feelings, § 12 the sky: the diverse winds that blow . This is always a helpful sutta. This too shall pass. And I find myself feeling that when there are pleasant feelings as well, which is good. When I first approached the Dhamma, I thought that the point was to be happy all the time, peaceful all the time. That is not the point, not for us at least. > § 15, Property. to Ananda. About the three feelings and contact which feeds > them. Kh. Sujin said that we do not see the danger of feelings. When feeling > is unpleasant we want pleasant feelings. We want it to last and we have > unpleasant feeling when it falls away. I also like the sutta that says that when pleasant feeling is not understood the tendency to lust is present, when unpleasant feeling is not understood, the tendency to hate is present. Clearly shows the danger of feelings that are not understood as conditioned, rising and falling beyond our control just as the various winds do. > We always have restlesness so long as > we have desire. The complete ceasing of feeling is the highest calm. "When the eye is abandoned" etc....Beyond us, of course, but good to know about as long as we don't try to have it for ourselves at this stage. We are far from the ariyans, I think. phil 55155 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:04pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependence. lbidd2 Icaro: "It seems to me that "Kamma" buds forth on Accumulation grounds. In this way, the mind object we usually call "Kamma" is embedded in a more generic idea called "Accumulation". One can simply follow his or hers own accumulation, but could be compelled to action by Kamma once in its gears. Just an insight: this idea about Accumulations and Kamma may be found mainly in the Paticca-Sammupada: our basic ignorance raises accumulations (that are neuter in its core), and the accumulations raise Kamma that compels to actions and can birth, grow and eventually being blocked and extinguished by Dhamma." Hi Icaro, Good to see you. Kamma is volitional consciousness like love, hate, or bewilderment. After it has arisen it is accumulated and can later condition the arising of another volitional consciousness by forming a habit. However, as for as I know, an accumulation is not an object of satipatthana even though we can remember past volitional consciousnesses and recognize habits. I believe a path consciousness is the end of the influence of certain accumulations. Larry 55156 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 1/27/06 4:48:31 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > Hello All > > The Satipatthana Sutta and its "methodology of truth seeking" are often > cited by DSG members as an important work to draw from. I agree. > > However, there seems to be a notion that the Satipatthana Sutta is only > speaking about "direct awareness of present experience." This does not > seem to > be the case. > > For example let's look at Mindfulness of the Body. In the Satipatthana > Sutta, "The nine Charnel Ground Contemplations are surely not an activity > of > direct experience. They, in fact, are conceptual contemplations and > imaginations > about becoming bloated, festered, worm ridden, etc. after the time of > death. > Sure, back in those days the monks may have gone to a real charnel > ground...but the point of the contemplation is to "imagine" ones own body > becoming > like that of the deceased corpse. > > Wow! The Buddha is advising conceptual logic as a means of mindfulness!!! > > Mindfulness is not merely "direct experience." > > Also in the Mindfulness of Body section the "Foulness of Bodily Parts" is > surely a conceptual contemplation meant to disgust one at the "idea" of the > > bodies state. I doubt very many of the body parts listed are available for > > "direct inspection" much less the bags of rice, or grain, or millet, etc., > that > the Buddha suggests comparing the body to. > > In the "Contemplation of Mind Objects," mindfulness of The Four Noble > Truths > is also surely a conceptual mindfulness of the knowledge of the states that > > cause suffering. > > There are more items that I could point to...but the ones I listed are > surely not "direct experiences." To me this means that "mindfulness > practice" is > much more comprehensive than it is often made out to be. It also shows > that > -- in the key Sutta that deals with mindfulness, it is not merely the so > called "realities" that are being used as objects for mindfulness...it is > conceptual knowledge as well. Any comments? > > TG ========================= It has long been a hypothesis of mine that the Satipatthana Sutta suggests a progression from largely, though not exclusively, conceptual contemplation to a culmination in a largely concept-independent, direct discernment of sense-door phenomena (called "contemplation of dhammas," the fourth foundation). The fourth foundation, as I see it, is largely a revisiting of previously contemplated subjects, but now discerning directly the presence, absence, arising, and ceasing of the underlying paramattha dhammas and their interrelationships. (BTW, the translation of 'dhammas' as "mental objects" in the fourth foundation is, IMO, a very poor choice, because all the aggregates, including rupas, are objects of discernment in the fourth foundation of mindfulness.) 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) 55157 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:16pm Subject: Sarah's greatest Hits Volume 1 ( I've lost your thread to which I'm replying philofillet Hi Sarah > My posts to Tep probably were too long (though the 'massively long' you > referred to was only 2 pages each max, shorter than many, many others > here, I assure you - I print them all out, so I can give all the scores > anytime:-). Perhaps it was the density of the 'gems' you and he were > referring to:-). How obnoxious I was in the throes of my rambling! Who knows what will come up, who knows what winds will blow. I hadn't even read the posts but just took it from someone else's comments that they were massively long. My apology. Here are some gems from your Tep 1 thread. There is concentration at each moment, sometimes it's stronger than at other times. Usually it's `wrong' or akusala concentration. Unless there is the development of right understanding of namas and rupas, there will never be the development of the accompanying right concentration which is a path factor. ** The indriyas (faculties), which you refer to, have to develop together. It's not a case of developing one indriya and then another. Phil adds: There is the tendency to think that we should examine our indriya, say "well, I'm a little low on energy, a little low on concentration" and so on, performing a balancing act. Modern teachers teach this, I've seen it from very respected sources. It becomes an exercise in self wanting to control things, obviously. Should be warned against. ** As satipatthana develops, all other concerns (such as those with regard to virtue) take care of themselves – they are clearly seen for what they are. (Phil adds – this reminds me of something very helpful I heard you say, about how as panna develops there will naturally be less concern about where we are, how far we have come on the path, how much sati there is, etc.) ** I particularly appreciated the Patitthita Sutta SN XLVIII 56 which you quoted #53566. It stresses the guarding of the mind `in the midst of mental effluents and their concomitants.' Such guarding has to be with the development of satipatthana, leadig to how `the five faculties are developed and developed well.' It's not a matter of calming or concentrating the mind first with an idea of self that can control, but of developing the right path factors which serve to do the guarding, as I see it. Phil adds: The guarding is beyond our control, but we can sense it developing a little, can't we. It is good to note that in suttas about guarding the sense doors, the Buddha says that one sees, hears etc and THEN the guarding arises. Perhaps it is only in the Vinaya that there is talk of the bhikkhu forcing his eyes etc away from objects, when he keeps his eyes on the ground, the length of one ox or something like that? Phil 55158 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/27/06 6:47:16 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I disagree. Sabhava is contrasted with the three general > characteristics, anicca, dukkha, anatta. Unlike the three general > characteristics which are common to all the dhammas in the 5 khandhas, > each khandha has a particular characteristic that is common only to that > khandha. It's a simple contrast of general and particular. Moreover, I > would say sabhava is the object of satipatthana, unlike the confused > mishmash of khandhas of ordinary consciousness. > > Larry > ====================== What is the quality of hardness other than hardness? There is not one thing which is the hardness and another which is its quality. They are one and the same actually. The point, however, that I am making is that 'sabhava' literally means, not "quality," but "own being" and that pesky 'own' is the problem. Of course, phenomena have, or are, specific qualities, but if there is a real "thing" that has its "own" existence or nature, then it is an independent entity. The word 'own' means "own", and it is an atta-term. What is at the heart of the issue is that there IS NO own being. All existence is utterly dependent or "borrowed," and nothing that lacks own being has own nature. Of course dhammas have (or are) specific qualities, and hardness and visual object are not the same. That isn't disputed. But to point that out by using a word that syntactically means "own being" is harmful, IMO. 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) 55159 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:46pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA lbidd2 Hi TG, I put forth the same arguments to Nina when we went through the Commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta, but she was stedfast in defending the idea that only paramattha dhammas are the objects of satipatthana. One point in her defense is that the Buddha only talks about upadanakhandhas. He doesn't say much about concept, and he never says concept is the object of clinging. Only khandhas are objects of clinging. Perhaps we could say at the actual moment of insight a paramattha dhamma is the object of pa~n~naa, even with a cemetary contemplation. Btw. this is a good commentary with lots of detail. It can be found at ATI and Nina's explanation of the Commentary is in the archives. Larry 55160 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] ENTITY associated TERMS vs more NEUTRAL TERMS TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/27/2006 4:21:16 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: I like the thrust of what you say here. However, as for the English rendering of 'dhamma', inasmuch as there is an unconditioned dhamma also, namely nibbana, wouldn't 'phenomenon' be a better choice than 'conditioned state'. Also, the word 'state' suggests he existence of something that is *in* that state [i.e., state of *what*?], a usage which has its own problems. With metta, Howard Hi Howard You are correct. Phenomena/phenomenon is a better choice. As Nibbana probably does not have discernable qualities, I question whether it can be a phenomena that can be directly experienced. Perhaps it can be directly "not experienced." But that's another hot button issue. LOL TG 55161 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 4:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 TG: "It means that materiality that has arisen and is in the present, does not have "individual essence" or "own characteristics." This is because all states are dependently structured and have nothing "of themselves." They are empty of self. They do actually arise, but they arise as "outcomes of other conditions" that also arose as "outcomes of other conditions." Hence all things are empty of self and have nothing that could be described as "their own characteristic." " Hi TG, What makes you think "sabhava" means "own characteristic" or "own essence"? It literally means "own becoming". Couldn't that be interpreted as independent arising? Where do you get "essence" or "characteristic"? If you say from the translation, then I think you have to include the commentary the translator added to clarify his translation. Secondly, where do you get the notion that dhammas have nothing of themselves? I don't remember reading that in any sutta. When hardness is experienced does hardness have nothing of itself that distinguishes it from feeling? Larry 55162 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 0:00pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/27/2006 5:19:09 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: It has long been a hypothesis of mine that the Satipatthana Sutta suggests a progression from largely, though not exclusively, conceptual contemplation to a culmination in a largely concept-independent, direct discernment of sense-door phenomena (called "contemplation of dhammas," the fourth foundation). The fourth foundation, as I see it, is largely a revisiting of previously contemplated subjects, but now discerning directly the presence, absence, arising, and ceasing of the underlying paramattha dhammas and their interrelationships. (BTW, the translation of 'dhammas' as "mental objects" in the fourth foundation is, IMO, a very poor choice, because all the aggregates, including rupas, are objects of discernment in the fourth foundation of mindfulness.) With metta, Howard Hi Howard Re: "mental objects" as the 4rth contemplation... I think "states" or your term "phenomena" would be better choices. I don't see a progression so much in the Satipatthana Sutta per se. However, someone practicing insight mindfulness should make a progression from the more conceptual, to the more direct, which will lead to the more intuitive. However...the point of the post is to show the Buddha deals with concepts and conceptual contemplation as important tools to develop insight. Not just in other 'outskirt' areas of his teachings...but in a key teaching designed to specifically address mindfulness. TG 55163 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 5:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 Howard: "Of course dhammas have (or are) specific qualities, and hardness and visual object are not the same." Hi Howard, Exactly. That is the meaning of "sabhava". All the other stuff about dependence being a general characteristic I theorized about a few days ago. Where were you then? Larry 55164 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 0:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/27/2006 6:00:38 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, What makes you think "sabhava" means "own characteristic" or "own essence"? It literally means "own becoming". Couldn't that be interpreted as independent arising? Where do you get "essence" or "characteristic"? If you say from the translation, then I think you have to include the commentary the translator added to clarify his translation. Secondly, where do you get the notion that dhammas have nothing of themselves? I don't remember reading that in any sutta. When hardness is experienced does hardness have nothing of itself that distinguishes it from feeling? Larry Hi Larry I believe Nina uses "Own Characteristic" as a translation of sabhava. Correct me if I'm wrong. However, I completely fail to understand the point of your first paragraph. Certainly "own becoming" or "independent arising" would be even more disastrous renderings and would make my point even stronger. To date, I have yet to see any definition of it that contradicts another. From what I can tell, Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary doesn't even bother with a definition of the term. That indicates how important it is in the Suttas I guess. I get the "notion" that dhammas have noting of themselves from the Suttas. "It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self - there is no such possibility." (The Buddha . . . Majjhima Nikaya MLDB, pg. 928, The Many Kinds of Elements, Bahudhatuka Sutta #115) "Venerable sir, it is said, `Empty is the world, empty is the world.´ In what way, venerable sir, is it said, `Empty is the world´?" "It is, Ananda, because it is empty of self and of what belongs to self that it is said, `Empty is the world.´" (The Buddha . . . Samyutta Nikaya CDB, vol. 2, pg. 1163) And of course the reference in the Patisambhidamagga which you pointed out to me which is the headline to the topic. That reference is unmistakably clear. Hardness is distinguishable. But there is nothing of "itself" that makes it so. Here's a quote from Y. Karunadasa... It is only for the purpose of definition and description that things are artificially dissected. In actuality the world given to experience is a vast network of tightly interwoven relations. What I believe this would mean for "hardness" is that "hardness is conditionally generated," but thinking of it as a separate thing is "artificial" and merely done for describing purposes. Hardness is a condition, its empty of anything to be regarded as self, its impermanent, its part-and-parcel of a condition that generates affliction. It should be turned-away-from, rejected, and overcome. TG 55165 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 0:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA TGrand458@... Hi Larry You were originally right and Nina was wrong. Remember the Sutta where the Buddha makes the example of a man who "desires the most beautiful woman in the land"? But he had never seen such a woman. Sounds to me like his clinging/grasping involved concepts. The Buddha uses conceptual devices a lot in teaching insight related issues. These teachings might seem more basic but they are not. They are needed components to teach a proper sense of Dependent Arising Principles. What the Buddha does not deal with are issues of "ultimate realities" vs "concepts" unless one goes out of their way to stretch one or two suttas. Thanks again for the references Larry! TG In a message dated 1/27/2006 6:09:50 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: Hi TG, I put forth the same arguments to Nina when we went through the Commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta, but she was stedfast in defending the idea that only paramattha dhammas are the objects of satipatthana. One point in her defense is that the Buddha only talks about upadanakhandhas. He doesn't say much about concept, and he never says concept is the object of clinging. Only khandhas are objects of clinging. Perhaps we could say at the actual moment of insight a paramattha dhamma is the object of pa~n~naa, even with a cemetary contemplation. Btw. this is a good commentary with lots of detail. It can be found at ATI and Nina's explanation of the Commentary is in the archives. Larry 55166 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 Hi TG, A few thoughts: TG: "However, I completely fail to understand the point of your first paragraph. Certainly "own becoming" or "independent arising" would be even more disastrous renderings and would make my point even stronger." L: The point is one word with two meanings. "Sabhava" doesn't refer to the same thing in Ps. and Vism. It makes perfect, uncomplicated sense to say "born materiality is void of independent arising". How much sense does it make to say "born materiality is void of a distinguishing characteristic"? TG: "I get the "notion" that dhammas have nothing of themselves from the Suttas. “It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self: L: Why is nothing "self"? Because it is dukkha. Why is dukkha dukkha? Because it is impermanent. There is nothing here that says rupa is not self because rupa has no distinguishing characteristic. TG: "Hardness is distinguishable. But there is nothing of "itself" that makes it so." L: What makes it distinguishable, feeling? That's the point. Rupa is not vedana, not sa~n~naa, not sankhara, not vi~n~naa.na, and not a concept. Rupa is rupa, not another khandha, not a mixture of other khandhas, and not a concept. Karunadasa: "It is only for the purpose of definition and description that things are artificially dissected." L: If "artificially dissected" means conceptually analyzed, then I agree. But if "artificially dissected" means one pointed mindfulness then I disagree. Larry 55167 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 6:59pm Subject: [dsg] Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > > > Dear Tg, > I managed to find a letter by Venerable Dhammanando where he had > copied out the passage: > MAHANAMA ON "MATERIALITY IS EMPTY WITH REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL ESSENCE" > (from the Saddhammappakaasinii, Su--akathaa-va.n.nanaa) > > Tattha 'jaata.m ruupan' ti paccuppanna.m ruupa.m. > > Here [i.e. in the passage he is commenting on] 'born [or 'arisen'] > materiality' is the materiality [existing in] the present. > > [elsewhere he explains that it refers to materiality at the moment of > stasis -- thiti -- in between arising and dissolution] > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > TG: Pretty OK so far, but I would say there is no moment of stasis. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dear TG, I am not sure why you object here. I know you rely on sutta sources: Samyutta nikaya Khandhavagga (37(5)Ananda P880 Bodhi translation "the blessed one said to Ananda "if Ananda they were to ask you 'Friend Ananda, what are the things of whcih an arising is discerned,a vanishing is discerned, an alteration of that which STANDS(thitassa annathattam) is discerned? Being asked thus, how would you answer?"endquote [Ananda says the five khandas are those things that have these qualities (of arising, alteration while STANDING and dissolution). endquote The Buddha applauds his answer. I know you also accept that khandhas exist, as we have that clearly stated in the suttas also: Samyutta Nikaya Khandavagga 94(2) Flowers Bodhi page 950 "Form (rupa) that is impermanet, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeing that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS. Perception (sanna)that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS. Sankhara that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS. Vinnana (consciousness) that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS.""endquote So I am not clear on what you base the rest of your criticisms.. Robertk 55168 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 1/27/06 8:10:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: > However...the point of the post is to show the Buddha deals with concepts > and conceptual contemplation as important tools to develop insight. Not > just > in other 'outskirt' areas of his teachings...but in a key teaching designed > to > specifically address mindfulness. > ====================== I think that point is quite correct! 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) 55169 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/27/06 8:08:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Howard: "Of course dhammas have (or are) specific qualities, and > hardness and visual object are not the same." > > Hi Howard, > > Exactly. That is the meaning of "sabhava". All the other stuff about > dependence being a general characteristic I theorized about a few days > ago. Where were you then? > > Larry > ===================== My argument is not with regard to the facts. It is with regard to language use. And I consider 'sabhava' to be a poor choice of synonym for 'lakkhana'. 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) 55170 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 2:51pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... TGrand458@... Hi Larry In a message dated 1/27/2006 7:32:20 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: TG: "However, I completely fail to understand the point of your first paragraph. Certainly "own becoming" or "independent arising" would be even more disastrous renderings and would make my point even stronger." L: The point is one word with two meanings. "Sabhava" doesn't refer to the same thing in Ps. and Vism. It makes perfect, uncomplicated sense to say "born materiality is void of independent arising". How much sense does it make to say "born materiality is void of a distinguishing characteristic"? TG: Now you're using terminology that I am much more comfortable with. I recommended "distinguishable quality" as a acceptable way to refer to phenomena. It reduces the tendency to see phenomena/states as "entities." TG: "I get the "notion" that dhammas have nothing of themselves from the Suttas. âEURoeIt is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self: L: Why is nothing "self"? Because it is dukkha. Why is dukkha dukkha? Because it is impermanent. There is nothing here that says rupa is not self because rupa has no distinguishing characteristic. TG: Nothing is self due to conditionality. I don't understand how the point of the following quote can be misunderstood? But I'll quote it again and add one other... "It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view could treat anything as self - there is no such possibility." (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 928, The Many Kinds of Elements, Bahudhatuka Sutta #115) "All formations are impermanent; all things are not self." (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 322, The Shorter Discourse to Saccaka, Culasaccaka Sutta, #35) All Things is all things. No exceptions. Does the Buddha have to list everything? Can't he just say "all things" and be done with it? TG: "Hardness is distinguishable. But there is nothing of "itself" that makes it so." L: What makes it distinguishable, feeling? That's the point. Rupa is not vedana, not sa~n~naa, not sankhara, not vi~n~naa.na, and not a concept. Rupa is rupa, not another khandha, not a mixture of other khandhas, and not a concept. TG: What makes "hardness" distinguishable are conditions. Not "itself." Karunadasa: "It is only for the purpose of definition and description that things are artificially dissected." L: If "artificially dissected" means conceptually analyzed, then I agree. But if "artificially dissected" means one pointed mindfulness then I disagree. TG: It doesn't quite mean either. It means to separate things and regard them as individual states is technically incorrect and not actuality. It is artificial because it is not real and it is only done so they can be talked about. TG 55171 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:08pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristci" in 5 Aggregates!!!! TGrand458@... Hi Robert K My answer below... In a message dated 1/27/2006 8:01:51 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, rjkjp1@... writes: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > > > Dear Tg, > I managed to find a letter by Venerable Dhammanando where he had > copied out the passage: > MAHANAMA ON "MATERIALITY IS EMPTY WITH REGARD TO INDIVIDUAL ESSENCE" > (from the Saddhammappakaasinii, Su--akathaa-va.n.nanaa) > > Tattha 'jaata.m ruupan' ti paccuppanna.m ruupa.m. > > Here [i.e. in the passage he is commenting on] 'born [or 'arisen'] > materiality' is the materiality [existing in] the present. > > [elsewhere he explains that it refers to materiality at the moment of > stasis -- thiti -- in between arising and dissolution] > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > TG: Pretty OK so far, but I would say there is no moment of stasis. > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Dear TG, I am not sure why you object here. I know you rely on sutta sources: Samyutta nikaya Khandhavagga (37(5)Ananda P880 Bodhi translation "the blessed one said to Ananda "if Ananda they were to ask you 'Friend Ananda, what are the things of whcih an arising is discerned,a vanishing is discerned, an alteration of that which STANDS(thitassa annathattam) is discerned? Being asked thus, how would you answer?"endquote [Ananda says the five khandas are those things that have these qualities (of arising, alteration while STANDING and dissolution). endquote The Buddha applauds his answer. I know you also accept that khandhas exist, as we have that clearly stated in the suttas also: Samyutta Nikaya Khandavagga 94(2) Flowers Bodhi page 950 "Form (rupa) that is impermanet, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeing that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS. Perception (sanna)that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS. Sankhara that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS. Vinnana (consciousness) that is impermanent, suffering and subject to change; this the wise in the world agree upon as existing and I too say it EXISTS.""endquote So I am not clear on what you base the rest of your criticisms.. Robertk TG: My comment was that I believe there is no moment of stasis. I think your Sutta quotes prove the point. Note that the Suttas speak of "ALTERATION while standing." This means they are continuously changing while they remain in a state that is more or less distinguishable as the same object. On the one hand my objection is a minor technical one. On the other hand, if someone thinks states arise with their "own individual characteristic," then my objection is an important one. Since states/phenomena are continuously changing, there is never a moment when they have anything of "themselves." If someone conceptualizes that they persist, even for a billionth of a second, as "the same thing," then they are liable to think that they have "own characteristics" for that billionth of a second. Since they continuously change, there is never a moment when they can be "captured" as having anything of their own. This is yet another way in which conditionality renders things as not having self. Just to clarify, I am in complete agreement with the Suttas that states arise, persist while changing, then cease...or at least "cease being distinguishable for what they were." TG 55172 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 9:37pm Subject: Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n~na kenhowardau Hi Scott, --------------- S: > I think this use of "one in a hundred or one in a thousand" is meant to convey a sense that jhana experience is difficult to attain, or even perhaps not for everyone, and not to be taken literally in the exact numerical fashion that informs your stance. I admit that I don't know really when to take something literally or figuratively but in this case it just seems right to go with figurative: jhana is difficult to attain but not impossible. --------------- There is an old post (# 11565) written by Kom (as he then was - he has since become a monk), which I would like you to read. It answers your questions better than I can. --------------------------------- S: > Another thing struck me, though, and that was that I might be too naive, committing a faux-pas by mentioning this experience in the first place. I don't really know the ins and outs of sangha membership and culture (counting you as "sangha"). Perhaps one just doesn't mention personal experience. --------------------------------- No, I think it is only monks, not lay-Buddhists, who have rules of that sort. Most, if not all, of DSG's meditators have discussed their experiences here from time to time. -------------------------------------------- . . . S: > I stand to be corrected but I thought that jhana arising suppresses, or eradicates, the hindrances, not that the hindrances prevent jhana from arising. Were this to be the case then indeed, who could ever experience jhana or any kind? --------------------------------------------- The hindrances can't stop non-jhana forms of kusala from arising. Satipatthana, for example, can arise immediately after akusala. (So when there is mind with hate, a monk knows there is mind with hate.) But the hindrances can prevent jhana. I will admit it is too complicated for my brain. The texts say that jhana "overpowers the hindrances" (not "eradicates" by the way) so it does seem I was wrong when I said the hindrances were suppressed *prior* to jhana. I think the answer might be that overpowering is not a sudden step: the hindrances are overpowered gradually. It is much the same with vipassana: supramundane Path-consciousness permanently eradicates defilements, but by the time that stage is reached they are virtually eradicated already (by satipatthana). ---------------------------- S: > Finally, would not jhana absorption fall under "satipatthana?" If the four objects of "intent contemplating, mindfulness, earnest thought, or application of mindfulness," (sati), are body, sensation, mind, and mind-objects, I would say jhana is included. ------------------------------ Do you mean jhana is included as an object of satipatthana, or jhana is included as a form of satipatthana? I believe the former can be true, but only if the practitioner has complete mastery over jhana. Mastery over jhana is much rarer than jhana itself. If you look at that Visuddhimagga reference I gave you, mastery comes several one-in- a-hundred-or-a-thousand's further down the line. As for jhana being a form of satipatthana, no, that is not possible. Jhana has a concept as its object. In the context of satipatthana, the term "mind-objects" (dhammayatana) includes only paramattha dhammas. Thanks for continuing the discussion, Scott. I will be interested in your comments on post 11565 if you can get around to it - no hurry. Ken H 55173 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Jan 27, 2006 9:58pm Subject: Moderate in Eating ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Any Self-Control starts with Guarding the 6 Doors of the Senses!!! Bhikkhus by possessing three qualities, one lives in this very life full of pleasure & joy! Furthermore, one has thereby prepared the elimination of the mental fermentations... What are these three advantageous qualities? One guards the doors of the senses, One is moderate in eating, and One is devoted to wakefulness... How is a Bhikkhu moderate in eating? In this, a Bhikkhu, reflecting rationally, eats food neither for the sake of entertainment, nor of infatuation, nor wishing for bodily beauty, but exclusively for the support and maintenance of this body, for ending of discomfort, and for assisting this Noble life, considering: In this way I will now end this old feeling, yet without arousing any new feeling! Thus will I remain healthy, blameless & in comfort... Exactly as one anoints an open wound, only for the purpose of making it heal, or just as one greases an axle only for the sake of easy transport of a heavy load, so does a Bhikkhu, who is moderated in eating, while always reflecting rationally in this way, eat food ... Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [176-7] Section 35: The 6 Senses. Salayatana. The Horse-Wagon. Rato 239. 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 !!! <....> 55174 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 0:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA kenhowardau Hi Larry, I agree with the gist of your message, but I don't think you meant to say the following. ------ > he never says > concept is the object of clinging. Only khandhas are objects of > clinging. ------ Of course concepts (spouse, kids, new car) can be the objects of clinging. But they don't have sabhava, and so they can't be *directly* known as anicca, dukkha and anatta. Glad I'm not the only one to have the occasional brain fade. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Hi TG, > > I put forth the same arguments to Nina when we went through the > Commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta, but she was stedfast in defending > the idea that only paramattha dhammas are the objects of satipatthana. > One point in her defense is that the Buddha only talks about > upadanakhandhas. He doesn't say much about concept, and he never says > concept is the object of clinging. Only khandhas are objects of > clinging. Perhaps we could say at the actual moment of insight a > paramattha dhamma is the object of pa~n~naa, even with a cemetary > contemplation. > > Btw. this is a good commentary with lots of detail. It can be found at > ATI and Nina's explanation of the Commentary is in the archives. > 55175 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:16am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 228 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 228 Intro: In this section the mental nutriment of volition, manosañcetanaa, is dealt with. This is cetanå cetasika, but in the context of nutriment condition it is called manosañcetanaa, mental volition. It accompanies all eightynine types of citta, thus it can be of the jåti which is kusala, akusala, vipaaka or kiriya. It coordinates the tasks of the citta and cetasikas it accompanies, and it maintains and supports them; thus, it conditions them by way of nutriment-condition. It also conditions the rúpa produced by citta by way of nutriment-condition. The mental nutriment which is volition, cetanaa, is also a link in the Dependent Origination. Under this aspect it is cetanaa which is kusala kamma, akusala kamma or "imperturbable" kamma (aaneñja, arúpaavacara kusala), and these are kammas that produce rebirth. ------ Text Vis.228: One who sees perception and formations as not-self fully understands nutriment consisting of mental volition. ------ N: The khandha of saññaa and the khandha of formations, sa.nkhaarakkhandha, are here mentioned together. The Tiika explains the reason: manosañcetanaa, mental volition, is included in sa.nkhaarakkhandha, the khandha of formations, and saññaa accompanies the cetasikas included in this khandha. The Tiika explains that by seeing saññaa and the formations as non-self a person abandons attachment (chandaraaga) to mental volition, and he clearly comprehends (parigga.nhati) and investigates (tiireti) it and thus, it is said that (one who sees perception and formations as not-self) fully understands nutriment consisting of mental volition. The words Œclearly comprehends¹ and Œinvestigates¹, pertain to the development of insight. -------- Text Vis.: He abandons the perversion of perceiving self in not-self. -------- N: The sotaapanna has abandoned this perversion. The Tiika explains that he overcomes all wrong views, such as the wrong view of self (attadi.t.thi) which is the root-cause of all wrong views. --------- Text Vis.: He crosses the flood of views. He is loosed from the bond of views. He breaks the bodily tie of interpretation (insistence) that 'This is the truth'. He does not cling with self-theory clinging. ------ N: Wrong view has been classified as a flood, a yoke (or bond), or a bodily tie. The bodily tie of clinging to the idea of ŒThis alone is truth¹ (idaÿ-saccåbhinivesa) is dogmatism which comprises all kinds of wrong views, such as the belief that there is no kamma and no result of kamma. Self-theory clinging (attavaadupadana) is personality belief. This arises when one firmly believes that the khandhas are self. ---------- Conclusion: In the "Kindred Sayings" (II, Kindred Sayings on Cause, Ch VII, the Great Chapter, § 63, Child¹s Flesh) we read that the Buddha taught a simile of a glowing charcoal-pit to which someone is dragged by two strong men. He wishes to be far from it because if he falls on that heap of charcoal he will have mortal pain and he will die. Evenso should we see the danger of cetanå which produces rebirth. The Commentary to this sutta explains that the charcoal pit represents the cycle of birth and death. The two men represent kusala kamma and akusala kamma. When the two men drag him towards the pit it is like the accumulation of kamma. The pain from falling into the charcoal pit is like the suffering of the cycle. We read in the Sutta that the Buddha said: ŒEven so, monks, I declare that the food which is manosañcetanå (mental volition) should be regarded. When that food is well understood, the three cravings are well understood. When these are well understood, I declare that there is nothing further that the ariyan disciple has to do.¹ The three kinds of craving are craving for sense pleasures, for rebirth and for annihilation. Craving is the root of volition that motivates kamma. There are different degrees of understanding the nutriment that is volition. We are inclined to take volition that motivates good deeds and bad deeds for self. Through mindfulness of whatever dhamma appears there will be less clinging to self. As the Visuddhimagga states: The arahat has understood mental volition to the degree that all clinging is eradicated. For him there is no nutriment for rebirth. There is nothing further to be done. Understanding developed in the course of insight will lead to detachment so that the danger of kamma that produces rebirth gradually will be understood. If there is no awareness of seeing and hearing and clinging to the objects that are experienced one will not understand dhamma as non-self and one will not understand the nutriment of volition that conditions the continuation of life in the cycle of birth and death. ****** Nina. 55176 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 6:42am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... jonoabb Hi TG TGrand458@... wrote: > >In a message dated 1/26/2006 10:24:51 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, >LBIDD@... writes: > >TG: "Are you saying that a Sutta term became distorted and misused in >the Visuddhimagga?" > >Hi TG, > >Of course not. You seem determined to find fault somewhere. Better to >look for understanding. > >Larry > > > >Hi Larry > >Yea I'm being a bit snippy. Sorry. But its a very critical point. Its >also a little frustrating that some stanch defenders of the term "own >characteristic" have become amazingly silent and or no longer feel they need to defend >the term ... once a Sutta source is mentioned as denying the existence of >such a thing. Seems to me that that's the time defense is most necessary if >there's something worth defending. > > For some reason I usually hesitate to come in on your threads, but I think I'm being invited to here, so here goes ;-)). My understanding of sabhava as used in the commentaries is that it refers to the uniqueness of each kind of dhamma. To give a simple example, audible object ('sound') has a uniqueness, as does visible object, as does hearing consciousness, and so on. This uniqueness is not something that is in the eye of the beholder, whether wholly or partly (if this were not the case, then the same dhamma would not appear the same to different individuals even where no ignorance or wrong view was arising). I see it as central to the teaching that dhammas of the same kind appear to panna as just that: dhammas of the same kind. I think so far there would be no disagreement from you? Now whether this uniqueness is properly called a 'characteristic', a 'quality' or something else again is to me not the fundamental issue. However, the texts use the term 'characteristic' and I see no great problem with that. I take it as just a convenient label. There are many terms used in the teachings that really only approximate the dhamma to which they refer. I think the reason for this is the vast gap between the conventional and the 'real'. > I applaud you and Robert K for standing up for what you think is right. > >Of course, since I believe the term to be counter the Buddha's teaching, it >follows that I would find fault with its use when it claims to present the >teachings of the Buddha. > > Can a 'term' be 'counter to the Buddha's teaching'? In the Dhammapada verses there are some references to 'self' that in another context might be considered 'counter to the teachings'. In my view it would be more fruitful to be discussing passages rather than individual terms, and indeed the underlying meaning of the passages rather than their superficial word-meaning. Appreciating your spirited posts on this issue, TG. Jon (standing up to be counted ;-)) 55177 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and TG) - John, I marvel at the calm and ease I detect underlying this post of yours. It seems that the fruit of your India visit remains with you! How really delightful! I insert a brief comment or two in context below. In a message dated 1/28/06 9:43:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: > Hi TG > > TGrand458@... wrote: > > > > >In a message dated 1/26/2006 10:24:51 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > >LBIDD@... writes: > > > >TG: "Are you saying that a Sutta term became distorted and misused in > >the Visuddhimagga?" > > > >Hi TG, > > > >Of course not. You seem determined to find fault somewhere. Better to > >look for understanding. > > > >Larry > > > > > > > >Hi Larry > > > >Yea I'm being a bit snippy. Sorry. But its a very critical point. Its > >also a little frustrating that some stanch defenders of the term "own > >characteristic" have become amazingly silent and or no longer feel they > need to defend > >the term ... once a Sutta source is mentioned as denying the existence of > >such a thing. Seems to me that that's the time defense is most necessary > if > >there's something worth defending. > > > > > > For some reason I usually hesitate to come in on your threads, but I > think I'm being invited to here, so here goes ;-)). > > My understanding of sabhava as used in the commentaries is that it > refers to the uniqueness of each kind of dhamma. To give a simple > example, audible object ('sound') has a uniqueness, as does visible > object, as does hearing consciousness, and so on. This uniqueness is > not something that is in the eye of the beholder, whether wholly or > partly (if this were not the case, then the same dhamma would not appear > the same to different individuals even where no ignorance or wrong view > was arising). I see it as central to the teaching that dhammas of the > same kind appear to panna as just that: dhammas of the same kind. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Sure, even to ordinary folks without special wisdom. (However, I would differ on your use of 'same' in "the same dhamma would not appear the same to different individuals even where no ignorance or wrong view was arising," prefering to use "the corresponding dhamma" to "the same dhamma," because of my phenomenalist perspective. That, of course, isn't the primary matter of discussion here, though.) ----------------------------------------- > > I think so far there would be no disagreement from you? > > Now whether this uniqueness is properly called a 'characteristic', a > 'quality' or something else again is to me not the fundamental issue. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: Not much of a difference. I think that 'characteristic' somewhat more strongly suggests an underlying something-or-other (literal "substance") that *has* the characteristic than does 'quality', but both have that connotation, because people normally apply them to conventional objects. You see, in ordinary usage, conventional objects are what people talk about, and their "properties" or "characteristics" are typically paramattha dhammas! For example, when folks say that a table is hard, they think of the table as a thing and hardness as a characteristic or quality or feature *of* that thing. That's fine conventional usage so long as one understands the reality behind the words, but it is confusing when one extrapolates that usage to paramattha dhammas, looking for *their* qualities, because they *are* their qualities. ------------------------------------------------- > > However, the texts use the term 'characteristic' and I see no great > problem with that. I take it as just a convenient label. There are > many terms used in the teachings that really only approximate the dhamma > to which they refer. I think the reason for this is the vast gap > between the conventional and the 'real'. > > >I applaud you and Robert K for standing up for what you think is right. > > > >Of course, since I believe the term to be counter the Buddha's teaching, it > > >follows that I would find fault with its use when it claims to present the > > >teachings of the Buddha. > > > > > > Can a 'term' be 'counter to the Buddha's teaching'? > ------------------------------------------- Howard: It can be misleading. In the case of 'sabhava', I think it has not only been misleading, but, due to a misunderstanding of how it is used in the commentarial tradition differently from its syntactic meaning, it has provided an opening of a door for opponents of Theravada to walk right through and misrepresent Theravada, whether innocently due to misunderstanding or, in some cases, intentionally. ------------------------------------------- In the Dhammapada > > verses there are some references to 'self' that in another context might > be considered 'counter to the teachings'. > ------------------------------------------ Howard: Yes, that was unfortunate, and it caused confusion. And that was a matter of using 'self' in an everyday, ordinary fashion. But the use of a word like 'sabhava' in a fashion that is novel and contrary to the form of the word is even more serious in its repercussions. ------------------------------------------ In my view it would be more > > fruitful to be discussing passages rather than individual terms, and > indeed the underlying meaning of the passages rather than their > superficial word-meaning. > > Appreciating your spirited posts on this issue, TG. > > Jon > (standing up to be counted ;-)) ========================== 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) 55178 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@a... wrote: > > Hi, Larry - > > In a message dated 1/27/06 8:08:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@w... > writes: > > > Howard: "Of course dhammas have (or are) specific qualities, and > > hardness and visual object are not the same." > > > > Hi Howard, > > > > Exactly. That is the meaning of "sabhava". All the other stuff about > > dependence being a general characteristic I theorized about a few days > > ago. Where were you then? > > > > Larry > > > ===================== > My argument is not with regard to the facts. It is with regard to > language use. And I consider 'sabhava' to be a poor choice of synonym for > 'lakkhana'. > ç Hi Howard, I disagree. This isn't about synonyms. What you object to is the word "own" which is a synonym for "particular". I suspect you object to "particular" on the same grounds as you object to "own", i.e., because it obfuscates the notion of "empty of itself". To analyze this idea of "empty of itself" let's look at the "Lump Of Foam Sutta". Notice how the emptiness of feeling is described. Feeling is combined with its conditions. Feeling itself is not described as empty. The same goes for formations; they are a combination of cetasikas. I will concede that the mirage of perception is empty of itself in the sense that light is empty of water. And the illusion of consciousness is empty of itself in the sense that the hardness experience is empty of earth element. But I don't think this is what you mean by "empty of itself". The only simile that comes close to this idea is rupa as a lump of foam. But notice that the foam is all of one kind, unlike the other similes. A lump of foam is just foam, not also a plantain tree. Of the five similes the lump of foam is the truest to its *own nature*. Larry 55179 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:34am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 Hi TG, Just a couple of comments: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@a... wrote: > > Hi Larry > > In a message dated 1/27/2006 7:32:20 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > LBIDD@w... writes: > > TG: "However, I completely fail to understand the point of your first > paragraph. Certainly "own becoming" or "independent arising" would be > even more disastrous renderings and would make my point even stronger." > > L: The point is one word with two meanings. "Sabhava" doesn't refer to > the same thing in Ps. and Vism. It makes perfect, uncomplicated sense to > say "born materiality is void of independent arising". How much sense > does it make to say "born materiality is void of a distinguishing > characteristic"? > > TG: Now you're using terminology that I am much more comfortable with. I > recommended "distinguishable quality" as a acceptable way to refer to > phenomena. It reduces the tendency to see phenomena/states as "entities." > > > > TG: "I get the "notion" that dhammas have nothing of themselves from the > Suttas. > âEURoeIt is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing > right view could treat anything as self: > > L: Why is nothing "self"? Because it is dukkha. Why is dukkha dukkha? > Because it is impermanent. There is nothing here that says rupa is not > self because rupa has no distinguishing characteristic. > > TG: Nothing is self due to conditionality. I don't understand how the > point of the following quote can be misunderstood? But I'll quote it again and > add one other... > > > "It is impossible, it cannot happen that a person possessing right view > could treat anything as self - there is no such possibility." > (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 928, The Many Kinds of Elements, Bahudhatuka > Sutta #115) > "All formations are impermanent; all things are not self." > (The Buddha . . . MLDB, pg. 322, The Shorter Discourse to Saccaka, > Culasaccaka Sutta, #35) > > All Things is all things. No exceptions. Does the Buddha have to list > everything? Can't he just say "all things" and be done with it? > > > > TG: "Hardness is distinguishable. But there is nothing of "itself" that > makes it so." > > L: What makes it distinguishable, feeling? That's the point. Rupa is not > vedana, not sa~n~naa, not sankhara, not vi~n~naa.na, and not a concept. > Rupa is rupa, not another khandha, not a mixture of other khandhas, and > not a concept. > > > TG: What makes "hardness" distinguishable are conditions. Not "itself." L: Conditions are _other_ dhammas. It is incoherent to say one khandha is another khandha or a combination of other khandhas. Feeling conditions desire but feeling doesn't control or influence the essential nature of desire. However, feeling and desire *do* form a compact whole in which it is difficult to distinguish between the two. That is where satipatthana comes in. > > > Karunadasa: "It is only for the purpose of definition and description > that things are artificially dissected." > > L: If "artificially dissected" means conceptually analyzed, then I > agree. But if "artificially dissected" means one pointed mindfulness > then I disagree. > > > > > TG: It doesn't quite mean either. It means to separate things and regard > them as individual states is technically incorrect and not actuality. It is > artificial because it is not real and it is only done so they can be talked > about. L: That is what I would call conceptual analysis. But the more important question is what about mindfulness? Doesn't mindfulness single out one kind of dhamma for particular attention? Is the purpose of mindfulness "definition and description"? Larry 55180 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... upasaka_howard Hi, Larry - In a message dated 1/28/06 10:26:00 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I disagree. This isn't about synonyms. What you object to is the word "own" > which is a > synonym for "particular". I suspect you object to "particular" on the same > grounds as you > object to "own", i.e., because it obfuscates the notion of "empty of > itself". --------------------------------------- Howard: No, I have no objection to 'particular'. In fact, I like the word, because I believe that everything is, in fact, particular. :-) -------------------------------------- > > To analyze this idea of "empty of itself" let's look at the "Lump Of Foam > Sutta". Notice how > the emptiness of feeling is described. Feeling is combined with its > conditions. Feeling > itself is not described as empty. > ------------------------------------- Howard: I'd say it is. What is said with regard to feeling is exactly the following: - - - - - - - Now suppose that in the autumn - when it's raining in fat, heavy drops - a water bubble were to appear & disappear on the water, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him - seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it - it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a water bubble? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any feeling that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him - seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it - it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in feeling? - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------------------------- The same goes for formations; they are a combination of > > cetasikas. I will concede that the mirage of perception is empty of itself > in the sense that > light is empty of water. And the illusion of consciousness is empty of > itself in the sense > that the hardness experience is empty of earth element. But I don't think > this is what you > mean by "empty of itself". The only simile that comes close to this idea is > rupa as a lump > of foam. But notice that the foam is all of one kind, unlike the other > similes. A lump of > foam is just foam, not also a plantain tree. Of the five similes the lump of > foam is the > truest to its *own nature*. > > Larry > > ========================= Well, Larry, we sure do disagree on this one! ;-)) 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) 55181 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:48am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA lbidd2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi Larry, > > I agree with the gist of your message, but I don't think you meant to > say the following. > > ------ > > he never says > > concept is the object of clinging. Only khandhas are objects of > > clinging. > ------ > > Of course concepts (spouse, kids, new car) can be the objects of > clinging. But they don't have sabhava, and so they can't be > *directly* known as anicca, dukkha and anatta. > > Glad I'm not the only one to have the occasional brain fade. :-) > > Ken H Hi Ken, That's exactly what I meant. I don't understand it myself but it is the case that upadanakhandhas are the only objects of clinging in the suttas. Notice Vism.XIV,218: "And this is the extreme limit as the basis for the assumption of self and what pertains to self, that is to say, the five beginning with materiality." This is about self clinging but I think it would apply to any clinging. Perhaps the key word is "basis". We might say the basis of any concept is a reality. There is no concept of a car without visible data, etc. Or there might be another meaning. I'm still thinking about it. Any ideas? Larry 55182 From: "Larry" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:55am Subject: Re: CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... lbidd2 Larry: "To analyze this idea of "empty of itself" let's look at the "Lump Of Foam Sutta". Notice how the emptiness of feeling is described. Feeling is combined with its conditions. Feeling itself is not described as empty." ------------------------------------- Howard: I'd say it is. What is said with regard to feeling is exactly the following: - - - - - - - Now suppose that in the autumn - when it's raining in fat, heavy drops - a water bubble were to appear & disappear on the water, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him - seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it - it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a water bubble? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any feeling that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him - seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it - it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance Hi Howard, You're right. I was thinking of the commentary. I assume you disagree with that. Larry 55183 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 A... upasaka_howard In a message dated 1/28/06 10:59:20 AM Eastern Standard Time, LBIDD@... writes: > > Larry: "To analyze this idea of "empty of itself" let's look at the "Lump Of > Foam > Sutta". Notice how > the emptiness of feeling is described. Feeling is combined with its > conditions. Feeling > itself is not described as empty." > > ------------------------------------- > Howard: > I'd say it is. What is said with regard to feeling is exactly the > following: > - - - - - - - > Now suppose that in the autumn - when it's raining in fat, heavy drops - a > water bubble were to appear &disappear on the water, and a man with good > eyesight were to see it, observe it, &appropriately examine it. To him - > seeing > it, observing it, &appropriately examining it - it would appear empty, void, > without substance: for what substance would there be in a water bubble? In > the > same way, a monk sees, observes, &appropriately examines any feeling that is > past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or > sublime; far or near. To him - seeing it, observing it, &appropriately > examining it - it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what > substance > > Hi Howard, > > You're right. I was thinking of the commentary. I assume you disagree with > that. > > Larry > ====================== I haven't seen the commentary, Larry. But I don't tend to look for commentary on what seems straightforwardly clear. When I am confused by a sutta I look for further clarification (from various sources). 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) 55184 From: "Charles" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:20am Subject: Formed views cherry_avium The view that "formations is impermanent" but without direct knowledge to the real impermanence of formations then it is either based on other people's words, or someone's thinking, or just view. Therefore it is formed, or based on something formed. What is formed will cease. Therefore the view will cease too. What is formed and cease is not to be relied on. The same applies to the view that "formations is unwanted" and that "things are not self". "Now this view has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated. Whatever has been brought into being, is fabricated, willed, dependently originated, that is inconstant. Whatever is inconstant is stress. This venerable one thus adheres to that very stress, submits himself to that very stress." AN.X.93 There are these types of Dhamma - pariyatti dhamma, to be learned - patipati dhamma, to be practiced - pativedha dhamma, to be realized The knowledge about anicca, dukkha, anatta, are these included in the pariyatti or pativedha dhamma ? When people that have not realized the pativedha dhamma talking about it, is it a knowledgeable talk or simply talking about views ? And views, aren't they based on ignorance, because they are lacking confidence that comes from real understanding ? 55185 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 9:26am Subject: Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n~na scottduncan2 Dear Ken, I appreciate the dialogue. I don't really know enough to contribute well, unfortunately, but it is a chance to learn. Consider the following: In the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (Narada) Buddhaghosa is cited as stating: "Jhaana is so called because it thinks closely of an object or because it burns those adverse things (hindrances - niivara.nas)." Narada later notes, "jhaana is meant [as] wilful concentration on an object." He states, "the five factors vitakka, vicaara, piiti, sukha, ekagataa collectively found in appanaa consciousness, constitute what is technically known as jhaana." To me this suggests that jhaana is a state of consciousness. In the Nyanatiloka dictionary (sometimes inaccurate as I read recently within these fora)the state of jhaana consciousness is "one of full alertness and lucidity." Also, "in its widest sense (as one of the 24 conditions paccaya) denotes any even momentary or weak absorption of mind, when directed on a single object." Would this state of alertness not arise no matter what the focus? In Abhidhamma in Daily Life, Nina writes of jhaanacitta: "at the moment of jhaana one is freed from sense impressions and freed from the defilements which are bound up with them;" and,"are not kamavacara cittas, they are of another plane of consciousness." You state that "jhana has a concept as its object." What do you mean exactly? Again from Abhidhamma in Daily Life: ". . . jhaanacittas do not have as their object, visible object, sound, or any other sense door impression. Jhaanacittas arise in a process of cittas experiencing a meditation subject through the mind door." Which of the "mind objects" are paramattha dhammas and which are not? I do need some help here. Citta is a paramattha dhamma. Jhaanacitta is citta. Jhaanacitta is a paramattha dhamma. Is "meditation subject through the mind door" a paramattha dhamma? I would guess so (since I'd guess it would be nama) but I don't know. This is part of my problem in this dialogue, I think, that being my imprecise use of the term "jhaana." I could definitely stand some correction here for sure. As regards the rarity of jhaana as state of consciousness I'll stick to my earlier view of it, knowing fully well that this is my own inadequate take on it. In AN IX.44 (Pa~n~navimutti Sutta) Ananda outlines entering the ruupa and aruupa jhaanas and in each case includes knowing "through discernment" Discernment is pa~n~na: wisdom, understanding, knowledge, insight. I take this to confirm that entry into jhaana consciousness needs to be accompanied by wisdom, as I believe your are saying as well, Ken. In the Dhammapada, 372: "There is no jhaana for one with no discernment, No discernment for onewith no jhaana, but with both jhaana and discernment: he's on the verge of unbinding." In AN IV.170 (Yuganaddha Sutta), four paths are outlined. One is "insight preceded by tranquility;" two is "tranquility preceded by insight;" three is tranquility in tandem with insight; and four is a difficult passage regarding something I don't quite understand involving "control over the corruptions of insight leading to the path being born in one." (This latter is beyond me, I'm afraid.) At any rate, again, jhaana needs accompaniment by insight (vipassana). As far as my opinion on the post you referred me to, I guess I can see where you get your opinions from. I see that post as containing opinions as well. I guess I worry that too much can be made of talking about the rarity of things when they may not be rare and, then, discouragement can arise which would prevent a person from the pursuit of the goal. Enough for now though, Ken. Sincerely, Scott. 55186 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 10:33am Subject: RE: [dsg] Trees and Anger (was Re: Did Buddhaghosa (formal) meditate? (Was: Reasons for staying on DSG dacostacharles Hi Sarah, Sorry for taken so long to get back to you, things have been a little hectic. --------------------- C: So thoughts are not real, ideas are not real? S: The thinking about ideas is real. But the ideas or thoughts or concepts about what has been seen, heard, smelt, tasted and touched are not real. If there’s no thinking about them, they’re not experienced in any way. They don’t arise or fall. Only the thinking does. There can be awareness of the characteristic of thinking, but not of an idea. C: What is an idea; I always considered it a thought. Sentence 1 and 2 contradict unless you are keying on the present (thinking) vs. the past (thoughts). Are you saying that what ever is not experienced can not real? S: “…” .... Charles: "What do you mean by this, learning and directly knowing what the realities are?" S: Take thinking or seeing or hearing or visible object or sound now – they have characteristics, there can be awareness of them when they appear, one at a time. At that moment, no other ‘world’, no other dhamma appears or can be known. This is in contrast to ideas. C: How is this in contrast to ideas? S: “…” ..... 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 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. This is because the mind gate can detect memories from any combination of previous inputs to the sense gates. S: This is wise considering, but it’s not the direct awareness of those dhammas appearing. Even when we think along the right tracks like this, there can be awareness of that thinking (regardless of the ideas involved) and this direct awareness is most useful. Then gradually we can begin to learn the difference between direct awareness of realities and thinking about realities. C: Why is it important to learn the difference between direct awareness of realities and thinking about realities? S: “…” .... S: In terms of direct awareness, it doesn’t much matter how we label the various dhammas (realities), but the point we’re discussing here is to understand what is experienced when we look at a computer and what can be directly known. Yes, the visible object is real, so is the thinking about it and so is the attachment. There can be awareness of any of these realities now when they appear. C: By “direct awareness,” do you mean full attention? When you say, “…understand what is experienced when we look at a computer and what can be directly known,” are you trying to say we need to separate, or know the difference between, the thought about an object from the perception of the object? S: “…” .... 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: This is just thinking about ideas. When there’s growing awareness of anger, it gradually becomes evident that it doesn’t last a ‘finger-snap’. When it seems to last a long time, it’s just a story about anger. In between there’s seeing, hearing, attachments and all sorts of other realities arising and falling away. C: Are you talking about the emotion anger, or the awareness of anger? There is some truth to what you are saying. It is really a question of attachment. If the attachment to the anger is stronger than perception and the other things that arise, then your “finger snap” can take … (what ever, including forever in a realm). S: "…" .... 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: We can use the term anger to represent many states as you suggest, but when the actual reality of anger arises and is mad or even just mildly irritated or frustrated with anything, it has a characteristic, a quality that can be recognized and known. There can be direct awareness of this state without any name or label. Tree on the other hand is a label which represents something thought about. It’s a concept about a concept. Test it out now: how is ‘tree’ experienced? C: For humans and most other animals, Via Seeing, Touching, smelling, tasting, hearing, and thinking. S: "…" .... 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: When there’s no awareness (like all day long:)), we’re busy paying attention to the features of the input, differentiating between objects and building up long stories on account of these features and details. We don’t need any assistance in this. We’re experts already. The Buddha reminded us again and again not to be overwhelmed by these features and lost in the stories about them, but to ‘guard’ the doorways by being aware of the realities appearing such as the visual input and so on as they are. When there’s awareness of a reality, such as visual input (or visual object), the awareness is aware of that reality just as it is. Each reality has its own characteristic (no two visual objects are the same), but at that moment of awareness, there’s no paying attention or conceptualising about the details. This doesn’t mean it’s impractical or that we will suddently stop thinking. No. It just means we won’t be so ‘overwhelemed’ by the objects, we won’t be ‘imprisoned’ by them, but they’ll be known for what they are – mere passing rupas (and namas) of no importance or value. C: OK I think I know where you are going now... .... S: I think your questions in this thread and comments are excellent, Charles. Thank you. C: I thank you! ......... 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: If we have an idea that ‘tree’ or ‘computer’ is in the visible object, then it’s just an idea about visible object, not just the characteristic of just that which is seen. C: Are you trying to say "see w/o labeling, analysis, or recognition. S: "…" .... 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: This is all thinking about the object, features, about relationships, causes and so on. It’s Ok, but by thinking and thinking in this way, there will never be the development of satipatthana which is not thinking, but direct awareness of the realities appearing now as we speak. C: So, it sounds like you want to block the aggregates of memory, feelings, and intellect. Do you? S: "…" .... > C: Features also, you must be aware of the features also. S: In conventional language, we are aware of the features and details of what is experienced all day long....but this is not ‘sati’ or the awareness of realities. It is the attending to and thinking about details, about the colours, about the beauty, about the marks of what has been experienced. Usually we’re lost in these details, lost in our dream worlds. Here are some relevant references on paying attention or not to nimitta anubya~njana (signs and details) which Jon gave in an old post here: .... Jon (#9070) <<(2) Restraint of the senses (indriya-samvara-síla). "Whenever the monk perceives a form with the eye, a sound with the ear, an odour with the nose, a taste with the tongue, an impression with the body, an object with the mind, *he neither adheres to the appearance [J: nimitta?] as a whole, nor to its parts [J: anubyanjana?]*. And he strives to ward off that through which evil and unwholesome things, greed and sorrow, would arise, if he remained with unguarded senses; and he watches over his senses, restrains his senses" (M 38).>> Visudhimagga I, 42, 54 At I, 42, a discussion of ‘Virtue as restraint of sense faculties’: <<‘On seeing a visible object with the eye, he apprehends *neither the signs nor the particulars* through which, if he left the eye faculty unguarded, evil and unprofitable states of covetousness and grief might invade him, he enters upon the way of its restraint, he guards the eye faculty, he undertakes the restraint of the eye faculty. … [and so on for the other sense doors] …’ (M.i, 180) [This] is virtue of restraint of the sense faculties.>> At I, 54, an explanation of the 2 terms: <<”Apprehends neither the signs”: he does not apprehend the sign of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. “Nor the particulars”: he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot , smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name ‘particular (anubya~njana)’ because of its particularising ( anu bya~njanato) defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there.>>.................................................................... ........ C: Boy, in a nut-shell, are you trying to say the following. "Attachment arises from sensual contact. Sensual contact is a problem when memories, feelings, intellect, and motivations begin to add to the object sensed. Therefore, be careful less they arise and add to the object, thus priming the mind for suffering." If so, your way of expressing this is confusing, and when I read the suttra references, I think I understand what you are getting at. Throwing in the concept, "realities," clouds the real issue of knowing when you are "becoming..." S: "…" Best Regards, Charles A. DaCosta <....> 55187 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA nilovg Hi TG, Yes there is something in what you say. The concepts we think of such as corpses are a means to bring us back to the present reality. Any thing can be a reminder for us not to be forgetful. The field of satipatthana is very wide. Nina. op 27-01-2006 22:47 schreef TGrand458@... op TGrand458@...: > To me this means that "mindfulness practice" is > much more comprehensive than it is often made out to be. It also shows that > -- in the key Sutta that deals with mindfulness, it is not merely the so > called "realities" that are being used as objects for mindfulness...it is > conceptual knowledge as well. 55188 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA nilovg Hi TG, Of course we cling also to concepts. Nina op 28-01-2006 02:52 schreef TGrand458@... op TGrand458@...: > > You were originally right and Nina was wrong. Remember the Sutta where the > Buddha makes the example of a man who "desires the most beautiful woman in > the land"? But he had never seen such a woman. Sounds to me like his > clinging/grasping involved concepts. 55189 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:08am Subject: Re: [dsg] ENTITY associated TERMS vs more NEUTRAL TERMS nilovg Hi TG, But nibbaana is the fourth paramattha dhamma and it is not a conditioned but an unconditioned dhamma. What about using just the Pali terms? As Htoo said, the more simple terms are not too hard. They can be learnt. Nina. op 27-01-2006 20:55 schreef TGrand458@... op TGrand458@...: > Compare the two following sentences. Let's say the subject is -- the 5 > aggregates... > > 1) These Dhammas are Ultimate Realities with [their] Own Characteristics. > > 2) These Conditioned States are Actualities with Discernable Qualities. > 55190 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Formed views nilovg Hi Cherry, I like thinking over your question. Pariyatti is more than book knowledge, it is considering dhammas that appear now. By pariyatti one is only beginning to understand a little about the characteristics of nama and rupa. Patipatti is satipatthana, awareness of nama and rupa, the development of insight in stages. In the course of insight understanding of the three characteristics is developing. Confidence in the dhamma grows. Pativedha is the direct realization of the truth. Then confidence becomes unshakable. Nina. op 28-01-2006 17:20 schreef Charles op cherry_avium@...: > The knowledge about anicca, dukkha, anatta, are these included in the > pariyatti or pativedha dhamma ? When people that have not realized > the pativedha dhamma talking about it, is it a knowledgeable talk or > simply talking about views ? And views, aren't they based on > ignorance, because they are lacking confidence that comes from real > understanding ? 55191 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Never enough about knowing nama from rupa, eh? ( was Atta -sa~n~na nilovg Dear Scott, Ken will answer most points. I just butt in for a point or two. Jhanafactors can also be taken in a wider sense. specific cetasikas performing their functions while accompanying citta, also citta of the sense sphere, even akusala citta. They condition citta by way of jhana-paccaya.Here we touch on the meaning of thinking closely of an object. Also the pathfactors that can also be taken in a wider sense and condition citta by way of magga-paccaya. We can also view jhana as bhavana, mental development. There are two types: jhana in the sense of absorption concentration, and this has as subject one of the meditation subjects which are concepts. Or it can mean: contemplation of the three lakkhanas. This last distinction has been dealt with in the Commentaries. Nina. op 28-01-2006 18:26 schreef Scott Duncan op scduncan@...: > "Jhaana is so called because it thinks closely of an object or because > it burns those adverse things (hindrances - niivara.nas)." Narada > later notes, "jhaana is meant [as] wilful concentration on an object." > 55192 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:12am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and TG) - In a message dated 1/28/06 2:12:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi TG, > Of course we cling also to concepts. > Nina > ======================= Indeed. And to say that we "think about something" can be quite true without any implication that there *is* such a something. Someone may, for example, think about unicorns, Harry Potter, and Superman. Not only is there no unicorn, no Harry Potter, and no Superman, but there is even no *unique* mental phenomenon that is "the" idea of a unicorn, Harry Potter, or Superman, and yet it is quite true that we can and do "think about these" quite easily. [I use unicorns, Harry Potter, and Superman as examples, because they make the case clear. But I could truly have just as well used Howard Wasserman, Nina Van Gorken or the tree in my garden!] 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) 55193 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 0:22pm Subject: Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 4 nilovg Alone with Dhamma, Ch 4, no 4 People are wondering how one can be mindful of anger, dosa. Mindfulness that accompanies kusala citta cannot arise at the same time as anger that accompanies akusala citta. Anger, dosa, arises and falls away and other processes of citta with dosa arise again. In between, sati can be aware of its characteristic, just as in the case of seeing that has fallen away. Awareness of dosa is different from thinking of: ³I have dosa, there is dosa.² But also such thinking can arise in between. Understanding can develop in considering the characteristics of the dhammas that appear and there is no need to think: ³It has fallen away², or, ³This is remembrance². We have to face akusala with courage and sincerity, otherwise we shall always cling to an idea of ³my dosa², or ³my lobha². Wrong view has to be eradicated first, before lobha and dosa can be eradicated. I quote what Acharn Sujin said at an earlier occasion: ²When akusala arises it can remind us of the truth about our accumulations and this is the way to develop paññå. Ignorance conditions more akusala and paññå conditions kusala.² People may be distressed when they notice akusala, but at the moment of understanding the citta is kusala, it is free of disturbance. Some people may believe that they have to apply energy and perform specific actions so that they have less akusala cittas and more moments of mindfulness. Listening and considering are conditions for the arising of insight. But there are other conditions stemming from the past: kusala in the past conditions our interest at this moment to consider and investigate realities. This process has been set in motion already, there is not a person who could regulate this. Nobody can create conditions for the arising of sati. Acharn Sujin asked several times: ³Can you create hardness now?² Nobody can create anything, because dhammas arise because of their own conditions. Hardness is the rúpa that is solidity or the Element of Earth. This rúpa arises and falls away all the time in splitseconds. If someone says: create hardness now, it is impossible, it has already arisen and fallen away and then there is a new hardness in another group of rúpas. It is present with every group of rúpas, it supports other rúpas in that group. It arises with sound, with visible object, with any other type of rúpa. All of them arise because there are the right conditions. It may seem that one can create sound, but without the right conditions it is impossible. It is the same with sati and paññå, which are sobhana cetasikas. Nobody can create them. We are not a creator, master or owner of any dhamma. **** Nina. 55194 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:41am Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... TGrand458@... Hi Jon In a message dated 1/28/2006 7:43:28 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: For some reason I usually hesitate to come in on your threads, but I think I'm being invited to here, so here goes ;-)). TG: I can only figure that your hesitation is due to wisdom. ;-) My understanding of sabhava as used in the commentaries is that it refers to the uniqueness of each kind of dhamma. To give a simple example, audible object ('sound') has a uniqueness, as does visible object, as does hearing consciousness, and so on. This uniqueness is not something that is in the eye of the beholder, whether wholly or partly (if this were not the case, then the same dhamma would not appear the same to different individuals even where no ignorance or wrong view was arising). I see it as central to the teaching that dhammas of the same kind appear to panna as just that: dhammas of the same kind. I think so far there would be no disagreement from you? TG: Well I partly agree and I partly disagree. Phenomena exhibit distinguishable qualities. Qualities are not "in" the object" or phenomena, but qualities are exhibited by conditions. Those qualities/conditions are continually changing. Within certain limitations, those qualities will probably appear similarly to human beings. But, what I might find to be a soft jacket, someone else might find to be a hard jacket. Someone else might find it a repulsive phenomena, I might find it an attractive phenomena. I might think a certain temperature is hot, someone else might think the same temperature is cold. The conditons/qualities of the mind perceiving are also at play. Contact (phassa) intergrates all the factors/qualities involved in that contact. Such qualities do not "stand alone." This is one Principle of Conditionality. Now whether this uniqueness is properly called a 'characteristic', a 'quality' or something else again is to me not the fundamental issue. However, the texts use the term 'characteristic' and I see no great problem with that. I take it as just a convenient label. There are many terms used in the teachings that really only approximate the dhamma to which they refer. I think the reason for this is the vast gap between the conventional and the 'real'. TG: If the writers on this subject would have merely used the term "characteristic," I would have never commented on it. There seems to me to be a subtle attempt to describe "dhammas" as things that exist unto themselves. Hence "own characteristic." "Own characteristic" was already a softening from "individual essence." Although I prefer "quality," I can live with "characteristic." Again, the terms don't bother me nearly as much as what I see as a subtle viewpoint of seeing things with their own essence. This viewpoint runs counter to conditionality insight IMO. The way "dhammas," ultimate realities," and own characteristics" are used in conjunction with each other reinforces my feeling. Its actually a larger issue than what's been addressed so far but one thing at a time. > I applaud you and Robert K for standing up for what you think is right. > >Of course, since I believe the term to be counter the Buddha's teaching, it >follows that I would find fault with its use when it claims to present the >teachings of the Buddha. > > Can a 'term' be 'counter to the Buddha's teaching'? In the Dhammapada verses there are some references to 'self' that in another context might be considered 'counter to the teachings'. In my view it would be more fruitful to be discussing passages rather than individual terms, and indeed the underlying meaning of the passages rather than their superficial word-meaning. TG: Well, a term can be used in a way to counter the meaning of the Buddha's teaching. When the Dhammapada uses the term "self" in a translation, it doesn't bother me in the slightest because I detect no sense that the Dhammapada is trying to say that states have their "own characteristics," "individual essence," etc. I get no sense that the Dhammapada is trying to state a "reality judgement." I take it that the Dhammapada is just talking about an individual human being for sake of communication. When the term "own characteristic" is being used, it IS being used to make a judgement about ultimate reality. Therefore its standard of accuracy must reach a much higher level and is subject to more critical scrutiny IMO. Appreciating your spirited posts on this issue, TG. Jon (standing up to be counted ;-)) TG: Thanks Jon. Appreciate the comments. They force me to re-evaluate things more than you might think. TG 55195 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA TGrand458@... In a message dated 1/28/2006 12:10:17 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG, Yes there is something in what you say. The concepts we think of such as corpses are a means to bring us back to the present reality. Any thing can be a reminder for us not to be forgetful. The field of satipatthana is very wide. Nina. Hi Nina I thought viewing or reflecting on corpses was meant to highlight impermanence and suffering and to detach the mind from states. The Buddha explains (paraphrasing)...understand that your body will become like this, that it will achieve this (bloated, festered, etc.) state. This to me seems to be a "present mindfulness of imaginary states." TG 55196 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:28pm Subject: Re: [dsg] CORRECTION -- SUTTA source DENIES "Own Characteristic" in 5 Aggre... jonoabb Hi Howard Thanks for coming in here. I've been enjoying reading your posts on this thread. upasaka@... wrote: >Hi, Jon (and TG) - > > John, I marvel at the calm and ease I detect underlying this post of >yours. It seems that the fruit of your India visit remains with you! How really >delightful! > > Kind of you to say so. Come to think of it, I've noticed a certain mellowness in your own posts of late, Howard. Could be the fruit of retirement (semi-retirement in my case)? ;-)) >>My understanding of sabhava as used in the commentaries is that it >>refers to the uniqueness of each kind of dhamma. To give a simple >>example, audible object ('sound') has a uniqueness, as does visible >>object, as does hearing consciousness, and so on. This uniqueness is >>not something that is in the eye of the beholder, whether wholly or >>partly (if this were not the case, then the same dhamma would not appear >>the same to different individuals even where no ignorance or wrong view >>was arising). I see it as central to the teaching that dhammas of the >>same kind appear to panna as just that: dhammas of the same kind. >> >> > >------------------------------------------ >Howard: > Sure, even to ordinary folks without special wisdom. > Well I'm not so sure about this. Without some understanding of the teachings at a more-than-intellectual level, the experiencing of visible object as just visible object or sound as just audible object, as distinct from paying attention to shape and form (people and things), will not occur. To my understanding, the experiencing that comes from directing one's attention to these dhammas is not in fact the experiencing of the dhammas (that is to say, that what is being attended to in that situation is not in fact a dhamma). >(However, I would >differ on your use of 'same' in "the same dhamma would not appear the same to >different individuals even where no ignorance or wrong view was arising," >prefering to use "the corresponding dhamma" to "the same dhamma," because of my >phenomenalist perspective. That, of course, isn't the primary matter of >discussion here, though.) >----------------------------------------- > > Yes, I think your comment applies regardless of whether one's perspective is phenomenalist or not. To be more precise, I should have said: "(if this were not the case, then dhammas of the same kind would not appear the same to different individuals even where no ignorance or wrong view was arising)". >>I think so far there would be no disagreement from you? >> >>Now whether this uniqueness is properly called a 'characteristic', a >>'quality' or something else again is to me not the fundamental issue. >> >> > >------------------------------------------------- >Howard: > Not much of a difference. I think that 'characteristic' somewhat more >strongly suggests an underlying something-or-other (literal "substance") that >*has* the characteristic than does 'quality', but both have that connotation, >because people normally apply them to conventional objects. You see, in >ordinary usage, conventional objects are what people talk about, and their >"properties" or "characteristics" are typically paramattha dhammas! For example, when >folks say that a table is hard, they think of the table as a thing and hardness >as a characteristic or quality or feature *of* that thing. That's fine >conventional usage so long as one understands the reality behind the words, but it >is confusing when one extrapolates that usage to paramattha dhammas, looking >for *their* qualities, because they *are* their qualities. >------------------------------------------------- > > Yes, but there is no getting away from the use of conventional language to talk about dhammas, and the potential for 'confusion' that you mention here applies to each and every reference to dhammas. Even 'sound' for the dhamma that is experienced by hearing consciousness is potentially 'confusing' because it is so far from the reality of audible object. We use it because it is a convenient label. But it is open to just the same objection as the use of 'characteristic' for the uniqueness we are now talking about. To me such objections are not to the point, and are a distraction from the main task. >>Can a 'term' be 'counter to the Buddha's teaching'? >> >> >------------------------------------------- >Howard: > It can be misleading. In the case of 'sabhava', I think it has not >only been misleading, but, due to a misunderstanding of how it is used in the >commentarial tradition differently from its syntactic meaning, it has provided an >opening of a door for opponents of Theravada to walk right through and >misrepresent Theravada, whether innocently due to misunderstanding or, in some >cases, intentionally. >------------------------------------------- > > Yes, I understand your concern on this, but I truly think it is misplaced. In my view this sort of thing will happen regardless of how carefully terms are chosen. There is no way of speaking about dhammas that leaves no opening for wrong view to misrepresent the teachings. It happened in the time of the Buddha, and it has happened ever since.;-)) > In the Dhammapada > > > >>verses there are some references to 'self' that in another context might >>be considered 'counter to the teachings'. >> >> >------------------------------------------ >Howard: > Yes, that was unfortunate, and it caused confusion. And that was a >matter of using 'self' in an everyday, ordinary fashion. But the use of a word >like 'sabhava' in a fashion that is novel and contrary to the form of the word >is even more serious in its repercussions. >------------------------------------------ > > Yes, but even if we were to all agree that 'sabhava' was not a good choice, we still need to be discussing what it is that the commentators were talking about in using that term, namely, the uniqueness of dhammas as classified in the suttas. So what's the point of discussing whether or not it was a good choice (and what term do we use instead)? Jon PS Gung Hei Fat Choi! to all (the Chinese New Year begins today) 55197 From: "Joop" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:34pm Subject: [dsg] Re: dependence. jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@w... wrote: > > Hi Joop, ... > > Larry: It was a joke. Haha. > > Larry > Larry, this has been a great help to me Thanks Joop 55198 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Mindfulness Conceptualizations of the SATIPATTHANA SUTTA kenhowardau Hi Howard, Before I read this paragraph of yours, it had never occurred to me (as it evidently has to you) that "mental objects" could be taken to mean, "objects comprised of mentality." I have always assumed (correctly as it turns out) the term to mean, "objects cognisable by the mind." --------------------- H: > (BTW, the translation of 'dhammas' as "mental objects" in the fourth foundation is, IMO, a very poor choice, because all the aggregates, including rupas, are objects of discernment in the fourth foundation of mindfulness.) --------------------- I believe the fourth foundation includes all possible objects of satipatthana that do not fall into one of the other three foundations. The Pali word is "dhammanupasana," which means contemplation of "paramattha dhammas cognisable by the mind," as distinct from "dhammarammana-anupapasana," which (if there is such a word) would mean "contemplation of everything (paramattha-dhammas and pannatti-dhammas) cognisable by the mind". Ken H 55199 From: LBIDD@... Date: Sat Jan 28, 2006 4:44pm Subject: Vism.XIV,229 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV 229. On who sees consciousness as impermanent fully understands nutriment consisting of consciousness. He abandons the perversion of perceiving permanence in the impermanent. He crosses the flood of ignorance. He is loosed from the bond of ignorance. He breaks the bodily tie of holding to rites and rituals. He does not [cling with false-] view clinging. *************************** 229. vi~n~naa.na.m aniccato passanto vi~n~naa.naahaara.m parijaanaati, anicce niccanti vipallaasa.m pajahati, avijjogha.m uttarati, avijjaayogena visa.myujjati, avijjaasavena anaasavo hoti, siilabbataparaamaasakaayagantha.m bhindati, di.t.thupaadaana.m na upaadiyati.