58400 From: "Phil" Date: Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:01pm Subject: Re: Q. Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 72. Part I, and Tiika. philofillet HI Larry > We are in the middle of discussing the formations link, and will be > discussing all 24 conditions in order to understand the conditional > relationship. Nina just finished the third one, predominance condition. > Then we will look at how ignorance is a condition for formations. Then > continue on with the rest of the dependent arising. So the paccayas are discussed within the context of two links of D.O, is that right? > The Vism. treatment of dependent arising is very detailed, incorporating > everything we learned in ch. XIV regarding the khandhas. It might be > helpful to follow along with either a copy of Vism. or Abhidhammattha > Sangaha. Ph: OK. Even if you don't understand everything (or anything), I would > recommend reading it any way. Little bits and pieces will sink in and > begin to make sense eventually. Ph: Yes, things sink in gradually, when the time is right for them to sink in. Can't force it, I feel. Also, any question is helpful for > everyone. If you don't understand, keep asking questions. And if you get > lost, we can review. Ph: OK thanks Larry. Phil 58401 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Apr 25, 2006 9:52pm Subject: What is Nibbana ... ??? bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: The Absolute, the Ultimate Release of the Beyond!!! A wandering friend once asked the great disciple: Friend Sariputta, Nibbana, Nibbana is it said !!! What is this Nibbana ??? The destruction of Greed, the destruction of Hate, & the destruction of Confusion! This, friend, is called Nibbana … But, friend, is there a method, is there a way to reach this Nibbana? There is indeed a method, friend, yes there is indeed a way to reach Nibbana! What, friend, is then this method, what is then that way to reach Nibbana? It is, friend, simply the completion of this Noble 8-fold Way, which is: Right View, Right Motivation, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Awareness, & Right Concentration. This is undeniably the very method, friend, surely the sole way to reach this Nibbana! Oh excellent is this unique method, friend, exquisite is this one way to reach Nibbana! This –in itself- is enough for me, friend Sariputta, to begin the endeavour … !!! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [251] section 38:1 Questions on Nibbana ... 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 !!! <....> 58402 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:39pm Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 429- mindfulness/sati (k) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch26 - mindfulness/sati continued) The cetasika sati, mindfulness, is different from what is meant by mindfulness in conventional language. Someone may think that he is mindful when he directs his attention to what he is doing or to what is going on around him. That is not the characteristic of sati in the development of insight. Sati of vipassanå is, as we have seen, mindful of a nåma or a rúpa which appears, without there being a thought of self who makes a particular effort or who is directing the attention to an object. Also sati is only a type of nåma, not self. ***** (Ch26 - mindfulness/sati to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 58403 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:36pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? sarahprocter... Hi Phil. Very witty indeed:-);-). Like the following: --- Phil wrote: > Yes, for now there is less clinging to want to try to prove other > people wrong, and therefore fewer aversive cittas arising in > response to contrary views. That could end by the time I finish > writing this sentence because we can never tell where conditions > will lead us but so far it looks like I will be able to finish this > sentence without feeling aversion and yes it still looks that way so > let me put a period now. .... >It is > the person's understanding of the moment that counts for me, and > there is no way whatsoever to know that by reading his words. There > are many ways to prove one's ignorance of Dhamma, but to prove one's > true and deep understanding? Not so easy. It is in the citta, and we > don't see into other people's cittas. For example, once you praised > me for having equanimity that you hadn't seen before because I > didn't lash out at you for the "crying baby" post of yours. Well, in > fact, I was seething with hatred even as I posted my measured > response, the purpose of which was to demonstrate that I was wise > enough not to be bothered, i.e all about mana, lobha - not really > equanimity. We never know the other's citta - never, never, never. > Not really. .... > But I have to put in a word of warning, as well, for all of > us. "30 years" has no ultimate meaning in Dhamma. It could very well > be 30 years of accumulating wrong understanding, couldn't it?@iI > don't mean this about you, just talking in principle.) > > I've cooked for 30 years, I guess, and I certainly haven't > improved. I have the accumulated tendency to add a lot of salt, > because it gives my mouth instant gratification irregardless of what > it does for my longterm health. ..... S: I'm sure Tep and others will appreciate the style too, even if they don't all agree with all your points. Thanks, with more lobha than metta as I sign off for sure:-)) Sarah ====== 58404 From: "robmoult" Date: Tue Apr 25, 2006 10:57pm Subject: Re: It isn't me! / ... the Abhidhamma The Anatta Fence robmoult Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" > wrote: > I do not go into > > differentiating between "early" Suttas vs. "late" Suttas as this is a > > slippery slope. > > Hi RobM (and Geoff) > > You place alot of credence on the historians' approach to Dhamma until > you reach the Suttanta and thereafter it becomes "a slippery slope". > > I wonder where the slippery slope truly begins? ===== From what I have read, the differentiation between "early" Suttas vs. "late" Suttas is based solely on linguistic analysis (I have a couple of books on the subject). Even the linguists admit that there is a fair margin for error in this approach, especially because the Suttas were maintained as an oral tradition for 500 years before being written down. The historians' approach of separating the Abhidhamma from the Suttana is based on referencing other source documents (i.e. the Mahayana tradition version of the First Council makes no mention of the reciting of the Abhidhamma). ===== > > Geoff doesn't share your reluctance in this regard and he is convinced > that there is not a trace of the Buddha's teachings in the Abhidhamma > pitaka. ===== I fear that he is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. ===== > > Within the sutta pitaka, how do you comprehend talk of devas and > yakkhas and the earthquake and thunder that marked the Buddha's > parinibbana and the inability to light his funeral pyre? Literal? > Figurative? Mythical? ===== I have no problem with talk of Devas, Yakkhas, Petas, etc. The Buddha talked about them frequently and there is an entire collection of Peta stories in the Kuda Nikaya. Earthquake, thunder and inability to light the funeral pyre are closer to the mythical side, in my opinion. ===== > > Cheeky questions but I would be interested to learn how you and Geoff > suggest we approach reading and interpreting the Tipitika. It seems > your (RobM's) approach is very much a hybrid, whereas Geoff's is more > uniform. > ===== Metta, Rob M :-) 58405 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 25, 2006 11:24pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Off Topic Requests: Your Chant/Meditation/Prayer Please sarahprocter... Dear Chuck (Charles T), It's very nice to hear from you after what seems like a long time. I remember that you used to visit a temple in Thailand regularly and I'm glad you've told us about your pending ordination. Which temple will this be at? I remember we missed you before when we were in Bangkok. Perhaps another time. --- Charles Thompson wrote: > Hence, my two requests: > > 1. to adaquately learn and to chant the required Pali chants and > > 2. to be able to properly kneel on my toes... > .... S: I'm sure you'll do your very best. I sympathise with both these difficulties :-). If you have a chance, please keep in touch with us and share any of your reflections on the dhamma. Metta, Sarah ======= 58406 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 0:45am Subject: Re: [dsg] Off Topic Requests: Your Chant/Meditation/Prayer Please nilovg Dear Chuck, yes, I remember we missed you. I appreciate your oncoming ordination. Perhaps this can be of help : sound files of thirty basic Pali words pronounced by Venerable Mettavihari on my website for the convenience of those new to Pali. 600 words in MP3 format can be found in the files section of this group. Nina. 58407 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 0:52am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 72. Part I, and Tiika. nilovg Hi Larry, Trying to send again: As the Tiika emphasizes: there is only one factor at one time (ekakkha.ne) foremost ( je..t.thaka), there is not more than one chief at a time, how could that be? Thus, your question: this means: citta is the predominant factor at that moment. At another moment it may be chanda. You are thinking of rupa produced by citta, but that need not be confusing. Rupa can originate, as you know, from kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. When we say citta, we do not separate citta from its accompanying cetasikas. Nina. op 26-04-2006 01:33 schreef LBIDD@... op LBIDD@...: > Hi Nina, > > Thanks for your reply regarding citta as conascent predominance > condition. Am I understanding correctly that when citta is a conascent > predominance condition for consciousness produced rupa one of the other > four (citta, chanda, viriya, vimamsa) is also a conascent predominance > condition? > > Larry > 58409 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:25am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: mettaa, I egberdina Hey Phil, I am very glad that neither of us has a rapier anymore :-) > > it can arise more often and become more powerful. We should not > think that > > we can have a great deal of mett¡¦immediately > > Ph: Yes, lots all be careful about this! It feels very pleasant to > *think* about metta, but is it metta? Well, at least there is > harmlessness when we think about metta, so there is adosa I guess, > which is ...metta. So I don't know. If you are inclined to discuss it, do you think there is a difference between these two statements? We should not think that we can have a great deal of metta immediately. We should not think that we can be very careful immediately. Or put another way. what is the difference between a reminder about metta, and a reminder about being careful? Why do you accept that a reminder about metta may not work it's magic, but a reminder about being careful will? -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58410 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:44am Subject: Re: mettaa, I philofillet Hi Herman > I am very glad that neither of us has a rapier anymore :-) Me too. It's nice to feel that I can participate here without feeling hatred towards people. Hopefully that has passed, but who knows. It's all about unpredictable cittas. > If you are inclined to discuss it, do you think there is a difference > between these two statements? > > We should not think that we can have a great deal of metta immediately. > We should not think that we can be very careful immediately. I think we can be careful about avoiding really gross forms of akusala. So we can through intentional decisions prevent ourselves from sliding into gross akusala kamma patha, to a certain extent. For example, I know that if I look at pornography, it will increasing the likelihood of my being propelled into cheating on my beloved wife, so I don't do it. (Except when I do do it.) > Or put another way. what is the difference between a reminder about metta, > and a reminder about being careful? Why do you accept that a reminder about > metta may not work it's magic, but a reminder about being careful will? Your post may be a reminder to me to remind myself when going out on my bicycle to be careful because there is a likelihood that I will find myself angered by a driver's recklessness. I know that I have accumulated great hatred towards and fear of cars and drivers. (Perhaps because I saw my dog killed before my eyes by a speeding driver when I was a kid? Who knows.) If I remind myself about that before going out every time, there is a better likelihood that I won't get into a horrible fight. But I don't remind myself very often - I think I should. When I do remind myself before going out and I do come across a reckless driver, there is less of a lashing out of anger. A more patient response has been conditioned in a pretty intentional way. It is not metta, but it is not hatred and violence. On the other hand, I won't sit and think of dangerous drivers as the "difficult person" and practice metta toward them as I used to. I value metta as a conditioned nama that arises beyond our control (but is conditioned for further arising when we are aware of it and appreciate its importance) and don't believe at this point that sitting and wanting to have it will make it arise. But it works for other people, so that's cool. I prefer to remind myself (when the reminding myself happens, that is conditioned too) that anything that happens through the sense doors is vipaka - that seems to be sufficient these days to have a certain helpful detachment from stories about people doing me wrong. And there are moments of metta for reckless drivers, compassion and so on. And moments of hatred as well. That can't be helped. It has been accumulated and will happen whether I like it or not. Phil 58411 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:51am Subject: Re: Ajahn Chah's Unconditioned Mind matheesha333 Hello Goeff, The cessation of perception and feeling (sannavedaita nirodha) is the same as nibbana as shown below. Nibbana is the same as where there is no arising and passing away. Everything which arises, arises because they are conditioned to arise by something else. Every arisen thing passes away because they are impermanent. When conditions for arising are not there, there is no arising. They pass away and remain that way. M: this sutta shows that nirodo=nibbana (not the same as enlightenment of an arahath) "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non- perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & feeling. And, having seen [that] with discernment, his mental fermentations are completely ended. So by this line of reasoning it may be known how Unbinding is pleasant." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an09-034.html M: sutta showing that arising and passing away incompatible with nibbana. For the supported there is instability, for the unsupported there is no instability; when there is no instability there is serenity; when there is serenity there is no inclination: when there is no inclination there is no coming-and-going; when there is no coming-and- going there is no decease-and-uprising; when there is no decease-and- uprising there is neither "here" nor "beyond" nor "in between the two." Just this is the end of suffering. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/udana/ud8-04a.html M: Another sutta to show the ending of all perceptions in nibbana. There is, bhikkhus, that base where there is no earth, no water, no fire, no air; no base consisting of the infinity of space, no base consisting of the infinity of consciousness, no base consisting of nothingness, no base consisting of neither-perception-nor-non- perception; neither this world nor another world nor both; neither sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say there is no coming, no going, no staying, no deceasing, no uprising. Not fixed, not movable, it has no support. Just this is the end of suffering. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/udana/ud8-01a.html metta Matheesha --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sunnaloka" wrote: > > Hi Matheesha, > > Thank you for replying. I think that "an unconditioned state" refers > to the nonarising of ignorance and the other kilesas. If that is what > you are saying then I agree completely. But I don't see any Suttanta > evidence for the necessary cessation of all conditioned phenomena in > order to experience the deathless (unconditioned). Such cessation, is > of course, experienced in the highly refined state of concentration > called "cessation of feeling and perception." 58412 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:15am Subject: Re: It isn't me! / ... the Abhidhamma The Anatta Fence icarofranca Hi Rob!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > From what I have read, the differentiation between "early" Suttas > vs. "late" Suttas is based solely on linguistic analysis (I have a > couple of books on the subject). Even the linguists admit that there > is a fair margin for error in this approach, especially because the > Suttas were maintained as an oral tradition for 500 years before > being written down. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Take for example the Atthakapali - one of the oldest Sutta´s collections on Tipitaka...perhaps the older! Its focus is on Ethical perspective - Kama Sutta, Pasura Sutta, etc - with some regards on meditation technique only at the last - Sariputta Sutta. At other hand we got the very popular Dhammapada: its structure and thematic focus is entirely different - its a treatise, very alike the chinese "Tao Teh king" or "Confucius´ "Analects" and a good translation of the title - Dhammapada - could be "Religious Aphorisms" ( James irked at such choice of erudite words, but I think it´s so good as any other one!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The historians' approach of separating the Abhidhamma from the > Suttana is based on referencing other source documents (i.e. the > Mahayana tradition version of the First Council makes no mention of > the reciting of the Abhidhamma). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Hey Rob: could you please provide some bibliographical reference about such Mahayana texts about the First Council ? Mettaya, Ícaro 58413 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:28am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ajahn Chah's Unconditioned Mind matheesha333 Hi Larry > I agree that the experience of nibbana is not, as an experience, a state > of cessation of all conditioned phenomena. But I would say the > experience of nibbana is an _experience_ of a state of cessation of all > conditioned phenomena. To put it crudely, I imagine it is like looking > at something else, or better yet, understanding and tasting a different > kind of dhatu. M: I think it is good to consider the reversal of the DO (which is causation exemplified) where the irradication of avijja leads to finally irradication of suffering. Importantly also leading to irradication of perception. But the arahath carries with him stuff from the past which also give rise to perception (body,mental bits not affected by the climb to arahathood). So being an arahath doesnt mean you are blind to the world. But he is able to experience this state of complete cessation of perception. with metta Matheesha 58414 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:41am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhaatukathaa, Elements icarofranca Hi, mahavamsic Larry! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > I think you have it. Now all you need is some predominance conditions > (adhipati-paccaya). > > Larry --------------------------------------------------------------------- Object Adhipati-Paccaya or conascent Adhipati-Paccaya ? You see, depending of one or other you will get an entirely different set of javanas, cittas, cetasikas and so on... and it must make a fair match with my Red tartan scarfe! Mettaya, Ícaro 58415 From: "ericlonline" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:09am Subject: Really Real things ericlonline Hi All, Geoff has gotten a few of you thinking about these really real things. Here is a post from another group about the same topic. Enjoy! ----------- > Hi Brian, > > I think that what Greg is saying is that nothing > really exists in duality, not the ego, nor brains, > nothing. Nothing truly exists which has a separate, > being or reality of its own. > > Vedanta agree with this, somewhat. It > does hold that there is an empirical reality, > although upon examination, it falls apart. ===And there's nothing empirical or phenomenal that doesn't fall apart under scrutiny. This is the import behind the "whole lion" Zen phrase. So when various approaches talk about what exists and what doesn't, they are often reductive, and hence partial. They reduce one phenomenal thing to another, and stop. They reduce the world and human activity to their chosen end-point - to ego, to thought, chemistry, whatever. To stop there is to have the lion come crashing in through the window. It's to paint one's self into a corner. The point is not that "my ultimate substance is more existant than yours." It's not a matter of molecules trumping thoughts, or Berkeley kicking Skinner's butt. Rather, it's that the very concept of separate phenomenal existence is unwarranted. Full stop. It's OK to use an existence notion in a pragmatic everyday way, like "Honey, where are the car keys? They seem to have vanished!" But to really think that something exists by itself, separately, inherently, independently - this is the root of suffering. So, to stop taking notions and questions of existence seriously is one of the most profound keys to peace. Skillful paths, like advaita and Madhyamika, which I am familiar with, don't bear down on all of phenomenality at once. Rather, when you get into their detailed and meditative teachings in detail, you find that they choose an obvious and intuitive starting point, something that most people can relate to. And they proceed to chip away at one's conception of existence. Little by little, so as not to be too scary, and not to foster nihilism. Until at some point they confront the notion of existence itself. 58416 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:06am Subject: a "happy" proposition onco111 Hi All, On the radio the other day Denis Prager commented that we have a moral obligation to be happy. His point was two-fold. First, happy people do far more to make others happy than do unhappy people. Second, in many ways general day-to-day happiness and misery are determined by the way one looks at the world (acute mourning, mental illness, and severe privation notwithstanding). Is he right? Does he go too far? Not far enough? Dan 58417 From: "ericlonline" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] the fourth tetrad of the anapanasatisutta. ericlonline Hi Nina, Thanks for the info! metta --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Eric, > Can I be of help? > See whether you can use it. 58418 From: "ericlonline" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:14am Subject: Really Real Things - The Brain ericlonline Hi All, Another good post from Greg. He is one person who has been able to effectively navigate Vedanta and Buddhism IMHO. Here is a bit more from him for those interested. http://www.nonduality.com/goode.htm ---------------- > Joyce: How's about a bit of Madhyamikan > analysis on "brain"? Or start with "body". Greg: We can go right for the brain, since this seems to be brain and existence day at NDP! In Madhyamika, suffering is a result of the conception of inherent existence. The stickiest thing we think exists inherently is the self. But trying to investigate its inherent existence is more subtle and emotionally charged than doing the investigation about other objects, such as teacups and chariots. So you begin by doing the other objects first. So we can do the brain. It's called ultimate analysis or analytical meditation. Its goal is to refute the object called inherent existence, thus eliminating the psychological notional/feeling complex of inherent existence. So the purpose of the meditation is to reduce the conception of inherent existence of the brain. There are several steps 1. Try to get a really strong sense of the inherent existence of the brain. How it exists by itself. Existing by itself means (i) existing independently of all its components (ii) existing independently of all causes and conditions (iii) existing independently of all awareness If we look into our naive sense of existence, this is just how we think things do exist. In the West, this kind of thinking was inherited from Plato via Judeo-Christian culture and Kant, Locke, and more recently, science. We think that aspects in (i)-(iii) are tangential to the real brain. These are relations to the brain but not the brain in and of itself. This kind of inherent existence is the opposite of dependent arising. 2. Try to get a sense of the entailment. That is, see how if it exists like we think, then it should be findable, identifiable. If it is not findable, then it doesn't exist in the way we think. 3. Look very hard for the brain apart from all the aspects in (i)- (iii). In other words, we look for the brain, not the frontal lobe. We look for the brain, not the blood vessels leading in and out of the brain. We look for the brain, not the sight/feeling/idea/concept of the brain. There are very thoroughgoing methods of doing this, like Chandrikirti's Chariot meditation. 4. We fail to find the brain untouched by anything in (i)-(iii). 5. Our sense of inherent existence of the brain, which depended upon the notion that the brain truly existed apart from (i)-(iii), is shattered. We see that there is nothing to the brain *other than* dependent arisings. When we see this about the self, then itc coming and going, birth, old age and death, will not seem like a violation of the order of the universe. Comings and goings won't be an outrage or unfair or a suffering thing. But rather natural, peaceful, in the manner of all things.... 58419 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition upasaka_howard Hi, Dan - In a message dated 4/26/06 11:11:12 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: > Hi All, > On the radio the other day Denis Prager commented that we have a moral > obligation to be happy. His point was two-fold. First, happy people do > far more to make others happy than do unhappy people. Second, in many > ways general day-to-day happiness and misery are determined by the way > one looks at the world (acute mourning, mental illness, and severe > privation notwithstanding). Is he right? Does he go too far? Not far > enough? > > Dan > ====================== He happens to be an Orthodox Jew. Though he isn't a Chassidic Jew, he might be influenced by Chassidism which puts much stock in including a joyousness as part of ones religious performance, and also a "philosophical" and accepting attitude towards what befall one. As for being unhappy rather than the opposite, I think it is certain that a deep-seated, genuine happiness is only to the good. And I do think that it is a moral "good" for oneself and others be be a person who has such a base of genuine happiness. But as for the idea of "Let me be happy," well, that's just amusing to me! Wishing won't do it nor will thinking that it is morally right. However, I do think there are conditions that one can bring about that will cultivate a base of genuine happiness. From one perspective, that is what the Dhamma is about. 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) 58420 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:59am Subject: Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) sunnaloka Hi Ken, I see that we share very little common ground over and above the fact that we both are sincere in our going for refuge in the Three Jewels. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" wrote:There is > no endeavour I would want less to be associated with. G: This being the case there is little use in our engaging on this subject. If you believe that the complete and utter cessation of all awareness is what the Buddha taught as the goal of Dhamma-vinaya, and that appeals to you, then by all means carry on. I personally do not consider Ajahn Thanissaro to be an eternalist, as he does not propose the permanence of any conditioned phenomena. But of course, we can agree to disagree on that as well. Metta, Geoff. 58421 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:06am Subject: metta 3. nilovg Dear friends, taken from Kh. Sujin's book on Metta: Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] the fourth tetrad of the anapanasatisutta. nilovg Hi Howard, As I understand, all four Applications of Mindfulness are directed to vipassanaa. I gave you an example previously of foulness, that is included in the first one. Also to those who applied themselves to samatha it was explained: nothing is excluded, do not forget that there are naama and ruupa as objects of mindfulness and direct understanding. Also jhaanacitta is not excluded, nor is daily life, whatever activity you engage in: there are naama and ruupa within you and around you: they can be objects of right understanding. Your birthday is aroubd this time. Best wishes also to your family from Lodewijk and me, and lots of Dhamma in the years to come. Nina. op 25-04-2006 22:22 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > This is similar to the way that I anayzed the four foundations of > mindfulness. My thought was that it began with conventional meditation > objects, > moved on to a mix of conventional and ultimate, or as I prefer to say, > figurative and literal, and with the 4th foundation dealing solely with > paramattha > dhammas (and their inrelationships). 58423 From: nina van gorkom Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) nilovg Hi Tep, op 25-04-2006 20:16 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: N: But citta can experience them only one at a time, because citta cannot > experience more objects at the same time. > ...................... > > Tep: The coming together of nama and rupa as a person at the moment of > seeing can cause pleasure and attachment to arise; seeing nama and > rupa one at a time as "separate" can cause disappearance of pleasure > and attachment to the pleasurable object. > > Today I while I was walking around the block I saw a young woman > walking and talking on a cell phone. In that very moment while I was > "seeing" her good figure and nice-looking young skin, I also heard her > musical and lovely voice -- all these coming together to define a > beautiful woman. The next moment after my contemplation of this > "pleasurable object" as being nothing but the "coming together" of > separate body parts and voice, the perception of beautiful woman > dissolved. ----------- N: I appreciate it that you considered Dhamma while seeing a beautiful woman. Even pleasure and attachment can be realized as conditioned naamas. These are different from visible object, a ruupa that can only be seen, but it is, as you know, not easy to penetrate those different characteristics by insight knowledge. But even understanding intellectually that there are different objects, such as sound, thinking of voice, visible object, thinking of woman, can help to be less involved with concepts. Phil gives a good reminder that even such considering is conditioned. He refers to dosa: < I prefer to remind myself (when the reminding myself happens, that is conditioned too) that anything that happens through the sense doors is vipaka - that seems to be sufficient these days to have a certain helpful detachment from stories about people doing me wrong.> Tep, examples from daily life are helpful as Dhamma topic for discussion. I appreciate it! Nina. 58424 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:31am Subject: Re: [dsg] the fourth tetrad of the anapanasatisutta. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/26/06 2:10:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > As I understand, all four Applications of Mindfulness are directed to > vipassanaa. ------------------------------------ Howard: I believe that is the ultimate directionof thr practice, but it isn''t where the practice begins. Step by step one gets closer and closer to the paramattha dhammas, but it is a progression as I read it. ----------------------------------- I gave you an example previously of foulness, that is included> > in the first one. Also to those who applied themselves to samatha it was > explained: nothing is excluded, do not forget that there are naama and ruupa > as objects of mindfulness and direct understanding. Also jhaanacitta is not > excluded, nor is daily life, whatever activity you engage in: there are > naama and ruupa within you and around you: they can be objects of right > understanding. ------------------------------------ Howard: Underlying everything we *seem* to be observing is what we *actually* are observing, but it requires step by step progress to get past that seeming. ------------------------------------- > Your birthday is aroubd this time. Best wishes also to your family from > Lodewijk and me, and lots of Dhamma in the years to come. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Thank you, Nina, and Lodewijk also! :-) Yes, it was yesterday. (I'm a stubborn Taurean!! ;-) I hope that you and Lodewijk also have many more happy, healthy, Dhamma-filled years together! ------------------------------------ > Nina. > ================= With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 58425 From: "Charles Thompson" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Off Topic Requests: Your Chant/Meditation/Prayer Please dhammasaro Good friend Nina van Gorkom, very sincere thanks for the web site reference. It indeed is a great help. metta (maitri), Chuck >From: nina van gorkom >Reply-To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >To: >Subject: Re: [dsg] Off Topic Requests: Your Chant/Meditation/Prayer Please >Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:45:54 +0200 > >Dear Chuck, >yes, I remember we missed you. I appreciate your oncoming ordination. >Perhaps this can be of help : > > sound files of thirty basic Pali words pronounced by Venerable >Mettavihari on my website for the convenience of those new to Pali. > > > >600 words in MP3 format can be found in the files section of this group. > > >Nina. 58426 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:30pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 72. Part I, and Tiika. lbidd2 Hi Nina, I think I see where I was going wrong. Citta can be a conascent condition for the arising of rupa at the same time as viriya, for example, is a predominant conascent condition. Correct? Larry 58427 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ajahn Chah's Unconditioned Mind lbidd2 Hi Matheesha, Thanks for your response and I agree with everything you wrote. The only thing I would add is that the arahant is still subject to akusala kamma vipaka. Angulimala comes to mind, and I think the Buddha mentioned something about a back pain. The interface between consciousness and nibbana is hard to fathom. Larry ----------------- M: "I think it is good to consider the reversal of the DO (which is causation exemplified) where the irradication of avijja leads to finally irradication of suffering. Importantly also leading to irradication of perception. But the arahath carries with him stuff from the past which also give rise to perception (body,mental bits not affected by the climb to arahathood). So being an arahath doesnt mean you are blind to the world. But he is able to experience this state of complete cessation of perception." 58428 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:47pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhaatukathaa, Elements lbidd2 Icaro: "Object Adhipati-Paccaya or conascent Adhipati-Paccaya ? You see, depending of one or other you will get an entirely different set of javanas, cittas, cetasikas and so on... and it must make a fair match with my Red tartan scarfe!" Hi Icaro! Viriya for the rocket! Larry 58429 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:44pm Subject: Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) ken_aitch Hi Geoff, Just to be clear, I'd like to rephrase my "no association" comment. I certainly wasn't ruling out friendship with Thanissaro's students. I meant to say; if there was a plan to surreptitiously change the Buddha's 'no self' doctrine into a 'self' doctrine, then I would not want to be seen as a party to that plan. I am sure you feel the same in your way. You strongly believe that the ancient Theras fraudulently inserted contradictory teachings into the Pali Canon. What greater slander against the Triple Gem and crime against humanity could there be? If I felt that way, I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with the name 'Theravada.' That said; I see no reason why we can't have useful discussions. Each of us feels vindicated in our opinions, and each of us knows what the other is talking about. On previous occasions where Thanissaro supporters have taken part in DSG discussions, they have refused to say either, "There is a self" or, "There is no self" and they have refused to say, "There are only dhammas and all dhammas are without self." This has inevitably led to farcical, frustrating breakdowns in communication. Had they revealed their allegiances, we would have realised they believed in an eternal (or non-temporal) soul but could not say so (or even think along those lines) for fear of triggering "stress" in their meditation practices. We could have found areas of common ground and had productive, sensible discussions. For a start, we could discuss the difference between parinibbana, eternal-life and annihilation. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sunnaloka" wrote: > > Hi Ken, > > I see that we share very little common ground over and above the fact > that we both are sincere in our going for refuge in the Three Jewels. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" > wrote:There is > > no endeavour I would want less to be associated with. > > G: This being the case there is little use in our engaging on this > subject. If you believe that the complete and utter cessation of all > awareness is what the Buddha taught as the goal of Dhamma-vinaya, and > that appeals to you, then by all means carry on. > > I personally do not consider Ajahn Thanissaro to be an eternalist, as > he does not propose the permanence of any conditioned phenomena. But > of course, we can agree to disagree on that as well. > 58430 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 3:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) indriyabala Hi, Nina - I know whenever you write to me, there is always something important to be considered. [ And I always pay special attention to your messages.] >N: >I appreciate it that you considered Dhamma while seeing a beautiful woman. Even pleasure and attachment can be realized as conditioned naamas. Tep: Thank you very much, Nina. Yes. Pleasure and attachment can be contemplated as conditioned naamas. However, I think it is also useful to be aware of the dhammas in the present moment as "separate" in order to avoid attachment to the "coming together" of naamas and ruupas. "I exhort you, monks: All fabrications are subject to decay. Bring about completion by being heedful." [SN VI.15 Parinibbana Sutta] ......... >N: >These are different from visible object, a ruupa that can only be seen, but it is, as you know, not easy to penetrate those different characteristics by insight knowledge. But even understanding intellectually that there are different objects, such as sound, thinking of voice, visible object, thinking of woman, can help to be less involved with concepts. Tep: True. Seeing a visible ruupa with right understanding (which penetrates "those different characteristics by insight knowledge") is much more advanced. However, the understanding that immediately sees "these dhammas (voice, body, femininity) are separate" should be more refine than intellectual understanding (book knowledge, not experiential). What is your thought? ..................... >N: Tep, examples from daily life are helpful as Dhamma topic for >discussion. I appreciate it! Tep: Thank you, Nina. I also like your examples from daily life in other posts. Sincerely, Tep ========= --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, > op 25-04-2006 20:16 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > (snipped) > Phil gives a good reminder that even such considering is conditioned. He refers to dosa: > < I prefer to remind myself (when the reminding myself happens, that is conditioned too) that anything that happens through the sense doors is vipaka - that seems to be sufficient these days to have a certain helpful detachment from stories about people doing me wrong.> > > Tep, examples from daily life are helpful as Dhamma topic for discussion. I > appreciate it! > > Nina. > 58431 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 4:21pm Subject: Re: What is Nibbana ... ??? ... What else? indriyabala Hi, Ven. Samahita - --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Bhikkhu Samahita" wrote: > > Friends: > The Absolute, the Ultimate Release of the Beyond!!! > > A wandering friend once asked the great disciple: > > Friend Sariputta, Nibbana, Nibbana is it said !!! > What is this Nibbana ??? > The destruction of Greed, the destruction of Hate, & the destruction of Confusion! > This, friend, is called Nibbana … Are there other ways to describe Nibbana ? Sincerely, Tep ====== 58432 From: "sukinder" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 0:43pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) sukinderpal Hi Geoff, I got busy and couldn't respond to your post sooner. ---------------------------------- Sukin: > I think Larry gave what I consider to be one of the best and most > relevant replies I've seen anywhere. I think if there was a willingness on your part to learn, you would have. But it seems that you are more interested in finding fault and arguing. G: Ouch! Not to worry, I am only interested in ascertaining the Dhamma-vinaya. I am not here to argue, merely to offer an alternative interpretation of certain key points. Moreover, I have been a member of DSG for over a year, and never do I join in meaningless argumentation -- even when I read completely invalid refutations of statements by teachers such as Ajahn Thanissaro and Ajahn Chah (Ajahn Chah explicitly stated that the true nature of citta is unconditioned, for example). Sukin: Sorry for that. There is always a better way to say things, and I didn't. Actually, one of the thoughts that entered my mind when I read your original posts was about TG. I remembered how sometime back, all of a sudden he wrote a few posts criticizing the commentarial interpretation of the Dhamma. But with him, instead of being upset, I had very good feelings. I thought that in spite of his difference of opinion, he had not voiced any opposition, but continued discussions in a gentlemanly way. Your posts seemed to have come out of the blue and so it appeared antagonistic to me. But now I see that I was wrong. :-) I am happy to hear that you have been reading the posts all this while. I assume therefore that you will continue to be reading them, because I really feel that my position is right and yours is wrong and so you might learn something in the future. ;-) The reason why I reacted with regard to Larry's response was because I sincerely believed that it was an opportunity for you to reevaluate and come to correctly understand the Abhidhamma and commentarial perspective. Once you saw that the Abhidhamma is about understanding the present moment, and that it is possible to see it in a way that it does not conflict with the Suttas, then you might have a change of mind about it. You may not end up agreeing with everything, for example the vinnana anidassana part, but at least you can discuss this without being so biased. I am never interested in the historical aspect of things. And trying to prove or disprove the validity of some Dhamma ideas through scholarly interpretations does not make any sense to me. The test of Dhamma is the understanding of experiences as dhatu, as khandha and so on. If at the expense of this one becomes interested in arguing ideas in the abstract, then one misses the point of Dhamma study and practice. Larry's response to you seems to me to be one coming from the former, whereas your original posts seem to be with the latter attitude. Similarly, when you judged the commentarial position as being nihilistic based on the 'vinnana anidassana' argument, I think this is missing the point. 'Self-view' and thus 'wrong-view' is better understood in relation to experiences in the present moment. Whether the citta of an arahatta ceases at parinibbana or not may not be as important as whether at this moment there is self-view or not. If there is, and one leans towards eternalism, then the idea of 'no cittas anymore at parinibbana' would seem threatening. Likewise the opposite position. So I'd like to ask you, what bearing does the idea of an 'unconditioned citta' have on your Dhamma study and practice? Is the idea that Nibbana is in fact a 'state of mind' attractive to you? If so why? If not, then are you positing two different unconditioned dhammas? Just these come to mind right now. I would like to send this off while I can. Metta, Sukinder Ps: Thank you for the two Suttas, always good to read them. 58433 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 5:44pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ajahn Chah's Unconditioned Mind matheesha333 Hi Larry > Hi Matheesha, > > Thanks for your response and I agree with everything you wrote. The only > thing I would add is that the arahant is still subject to akusala kamma > vipaka. Angulimala comes to mind, and I think the Buddha mentioned > something about a back pain. The interface between consciousness and > nibbana is hard to fathom. > M: Yes you are right. As long as the body exists there will be experiencing of physical pain. However there is no mental anguish as a result of the pain, in the mind of an arahath. Even that pain will cease, never to arise in pari-nibbana where the elements are scattered in the death of an enlightened one. So this is the real deal, the ultimate, in pain releaving! with metta Matheesha 58434 From: LBIDD@... Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:06pm Subject: Vism.XVII,73 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 73. (4), (5) A state that assists by being proximate is a 'proximity condition". A state that assists by being contiguous is a 'contiguity condition'. The explanation of this pair of conditions is very diffuse, but substantially it is this:12 the regular order of consciousness begins thus, mind element is proximate (next) after eye-consciousness, mind-consciousness element is proximate (next) after mind element, and this is established only by each preceding consciousness, not otherwise; consequently, a state that is capable of arousing an appropriate kind of consciousness proximate (next) to itself is a proximity condition. Hence it is said: 'Proximity condition: eye-consciousness and the states associated therewith are a condition, as proximity condition, for mind element and for the states associated therewith' (P.tn.1,2). ------------------------ Note 12. 'Proximity and contiguity conditions are not stated in accordance with the distinction between making occur and giving opportunity, as the absence and disappearance conditions are: rather they are stated as the causes of the regular order of consciousness [in the cognitive series]' (Pm. 585). ********************** 73. anantarabhaavena upakaarako dhammo anantarapaccayo. samanantarabhaavena upakaarako dhammo samanantarapaccayo. ida~nca paccayadvaya.m bahudhaa papa~ncayanti. aya.m panettha saaro, yo hi esa cakkhuvi~n~naa.naanantaraa manodhaatu, manodhaatuanantaraa manovi~n~naa.nadhaatuutiaadi cittaniyamo, so yasmaa purimapurimacittavaseneva ijjhati, na a~n~nathaa, tasmaa attano attano anantara.m anuruupassa cittuppaadassa uppaadanasamattho dhammo anantarapaccayo. tenevaaha ``anantarapaccayoti cakkhuvi~n~naa.nadhaatu ta.msampayuttakaa ca dhammaa manodhaatuyaa ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m anantarapaccayena paccayo''tiaadi (pa.t.thaa0 1.1.4). 58435 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:16pm Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition ken_aitch Hi Dan, This is an easy one. Or is it a trick question? :-) ------------ D: > On the radio the other day Denis Prager commented that we have a moral obligation to be happy. His point was two-fold. First, happy people do far more to make others happy than do unhappy people. Second, in many ways general day-to-day happiness and misery are determined by the way one looks at the world (acute mourning, mental illness, and severe privation notwithstanding). Is he right? Does he go too far? Not far enough? ------------- I think he is wrong in so far as he believes in a self that should or should not do certain things (be happy, be unhappy, look at the world in a prescribed way). Inevitably, unhappiness will occur (the happiness of attachment will condition the unhappiness of separation) and when it does guilt and recrimination will follow - "What a miserable failure I am that I cannot take Denis Prager's simple advice!" It will be even worse for Denis Prager who can't take his own simple advice. Let's hope he doesn't resort to public denial and fake happiness. From the Dhamma, we learn about the urgency to do good, to avoid doing evil and to purify the mind. That urgency is felt only when there is right view (either of the difference between kusala and akusala, or of the conditioned nature of dhammas). Ultimately, no other sense of urgency is of any use. Ken H 58436 From: "indriyabala" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:40pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? indriyabala Hi, Phil (Sarah, Joop, Nina ...) - Your post (#58396) was skilfully written (in regard to your use of words) and it put me at my wits' end. {:-|) No doubt why Sarah appreciates your style and wit: >S: >Hi Phil. >Very witty indeed:-);-). Like the following: ... ...(snipped) >I'm sure Tep and others will appreciate the style too, even if they >don't all agree with all your points. >Thanks, with more lobha than metta as I sign off for sure :-)) Tep: Did reading Phil's message cause more lobha in your citta, Sarah? Perhaps, my message below may help de-lobha you. {:>)) .................. Ph: p.s having trouble to find time to do all I want to do here, Tep, so will as I often do offer you the last word, if you'd like. Tep: Below is my "last word", per your request ! ................................................................................\ ........ -- Ph: Yes, I do feel superior for appreciating "abhi". Tep: So you may have an extreme view in the "abhi" : 'only this is right, all others are not'. ................ -- Ph: People who insist on the predominance of suttas are rather ruthless in rejecting even tenderly offered opinions of those who place faith in abhidhamma. There is a lot of belittling and condescending that goes on, subtly or not, on all sides. Tep: So they both have micchaa-ditthi and micchaa-vaacaa. ............... -- Ph: There are many ways to prove one's ignorance of Dhamma, but to prove one's true and deep understanding? Not so easy. It is in the citta, and we don't see into other people's cittas. ... For example, once you praised me for having equanimity that you hadn't seen before because I didn't lash out at you for the "crying baby" post of yours. Well, in fact, I was seething with hatred even as I posted my measured response, the purpose of which was to demonstrate that I was wise enough not to be bothered, i.e all about mana, lobha - not really equanimity. Tep: Right, it is in "the citta". Right, "we" do not have that ability to "see into other people's cittas". My apologies for having caused you the hatred! ............... -- Ph : "30 years" has no ultimate meaning in Dhamma. It could very well be 30 years of accumulating wrong understanding, couldn't it? Tep: Yes, it could. Or, it could have been the other way around. How can you tell? It is in the citta. :-)) .............. -- Ph : I think there can be the same tendency [ Tep's note: Phil was referring to his lousy cooking skill, despite some 30 years of experience] with suttas, leaping out with eagerness to understand them in a way that suits our taste (ie views). So the commentaries would help to sober us up a little ... Tep: Let me answer you by means of analogy. My wife did not take more than 20 years to cook great Thai foods!! She used to depend on some cook-book instructions (analogous to sutta commentaries) during the first 5 years in which she was learning how to cook. Nowadays she can cook almost any Thai foods all by herself (standing on her own two feet with confidence-- no more a "crying baby"). ............ -- Ph : Again, I say that in principle. I have no way of knowing your cittas. You have said that I assume too much and it might seem that I am always labelling people as ignorant but based on my understanding of the "burning" sutta, the all (ayatanas) are burning with lobha, dosa and moha, and only the ariyans are free from that. ... ... I find it a very sobering sutta, but I am interpreting it in the way that suits my views, perhaps. Tep: No educated Buddhists I know need the great burning sutta [SN XXXV.28 : Adittapariyaya Sutta] to tell them that "only the arahants are free from lobha, dosa, and moha". For example, they know that the Anaagaamii is free from 'dosa', but not free from 'maana'. ............. -- Ph : I teach English as a second language and there is a term "fossilized errors" referring to the errors long time learners make that have become uncorrectable due to having become so deeply entrenched. T: There are two things that need clarification here!! Are the "uncorrectable errors" permanent -- i.e. 'nicca' ? Since you have said that you "don't see into other people's cittas", then how could you say it affirmatively for all "long-time" learners (no exception, whatsoever)? Best wishes, Tep === --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi Tep > > > Thank you for acknowledging the fact that we have different > > preferences, and also for your (formally?) encouraging words. > (snipped) > Whew, babble concluded, and no aversion detected. > > In fact, I will even write.... > > ....metta > > Phil! > > p.s having trouble to find time to do all I want to do here, Tep, > so will as I often do offer you the last word, if you'd like. > > p.p.s another metaphor to warn about the danger of having too much > confidence in one's own understanding. I teach English as a second > language and there is a term "fossilized errors" referring to the > errors long time learners make that have become uncorrectable due to > having become so deeply entrenched. Again, I say that in principle, > not about Tep. > 58437 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:54pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Chah's Unconditioned Mind sunnaloka Hi Matheesha, I would suggest that the experience of cessation of perception and feeling is a conditioned experience of the unconditioned because it is brought about through a highly refined state of concentration. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" > The cessation of perception and feeling (sannavedaita nirodha) is the same as nibbana as shown below. Nibbana is the same as where there is no arising and passing away. > Everything which arises, arises because they are conditioned to arise by something else. Every arisen thing passes away because they are impermanent. When conditions for arising are not there, there is no arising. They pass away and remain that way. > > M: this sutta shows that nirodo=nibbana (not the same as > enlightenment of an arahath) > > "Furthermore, there is the case where a monk, with the complete > transcending of the dimension of neither perception nor non- > perception, enters & remains in the cessation of perception & > feeling. And, having seen [that] with discernment, his mental > fermentations are completely ended. So by this line of reasoning it > may be known how Unbinding is pleasant." G: I agree completely that this is the conditioned experience of Nibbana as stated above, but dukkha-nirodha is not the same as sannavedanna-nirodha and can be cognized (Nibbana-nana) in any instant free of kilesa. This is an unconditional experience of the unconditioned. Also, I would suggest that Nibbana can never be experienced as an object because unconditioned experience doesn't reify any subjective/objective duality. > M: sutta showing that arising and passing away incompatible with > nibbana. > > For the supported there is instability, for the unsupported there is > no instability; when there is no instability there is serenity; when > there is serenity there is no inclination: when there is no > inclination there is no coming-and-going; when there is no coming-and-going there is no decease-and-uprising; when there is no decease-and-uprising there is neither "here" nor "beyond" nor "in between the two." Just this is the end of suffering. G: Yes, but I interpret this sutta statement to refer to the abandoning of all sanna and all dualistic sensory vinnana. > M: Another sutta to show the ending of all perceptions in nibbana. > > There is, bhikkhus, that base where there is no earth, no water, no > fire, no air; no base consisting of the infinity of space, no base > consisting of the infinity of consciousness, no base consisting of > nothingness, no base consisting of neither-perception-nor-non- > perception; neither this world nor another world nor both; neither > sun nor moon. Here, bhikkhus, I say there is no coming, no going, no > staying, no deceasing, no uprising. Not fixed, not movable, it has no support. Just this is the end of suffering. G: Again I interpret this passage to refer to the abandoning of sanna and dualistic sensory vinnana. I am aware that my interpretations are very different from the commentarial tradition, and I just posted here to see what members had to say. Thank you for your thoughtful replies. Metta, Geoff. 58438 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:36pm Subject: Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) sunnaloka Hi Ken, My critique of the commentarial understanding that the existential status of an arahant after death is the utter and complete cessation of all consciousness whatsoever is based on the fact that this is not explicitly stated in the Suttanta. I of course, interpret all statements of cessation of consciousness to be referring to conditioned consciousness, and the mention of vinnana anidassana being without end, allows one to to infer unconditioned consciousness. Furthermore, when directly asked about the status of an arahant after death the Buddha gave his "does not apply" statement to all four possibilities. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" wrote: > Just to be clear, I'd like to rephrase my "no association" comment. > I certainly wasn't ruling out friendship with Thanissaro's students. > > I meant to say; if there was a plan to surreptitiously change the > Buddha's 'no self' doctrine into a 'self' doctrine, then I would not > want to be seen as a party to that plan. G: Completely understood. :-) > You strongly believe that the ancient Theras fraudulently inserted contradictory teachings into the Pali Canon. What greater slander against the Triple Gem and crime against humanity could there be? If I felt that way, I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with the name 'Theravada.' G: Naw, it's not so much that they were intentionally fraudulent, in my opinion they had just lost sight of the meaning and clung to the words. Moreover, I consider the Theras at the first council to be original Theravada and the members of the third council and the commentarial tradition that follows to be Abhidhammika Theravada, one of the eighteen sects of early sectarian Buddhism. > That said; I see no reason why we can't have useful discussions. > Each of us feels vindicated in our opinions, and each of us knows > what the other is talking about. G: We each have a very different paradigm of Dhamma-vinaya, and thus we would disagree on many, many points. I don't see much value in any extended debate really. I have no intention of changing anyone's mind, I merely post once in a long while to hear a few critiques of what I have to say, and decide for myself if any have merit -- and there is no better place to hear critiques of my critiques regarding the Abhidhammika view than to post here at DSG. :-) > On previous occasions where Thanissaro supporters have taken part in > DSG discussions, they have refused to say either, "There is a self" > or, "There is no self" and they have refused to say, "There are only > dhammas and all dhammas are without self." This has inevitably led > to farcical, frustrating breakdowns in communication. > > Had they revealed their allegiances, we would have realised they > believed in an eternal (or non-temporal) soul but could not say so > (or even think along those lines) for fear of triggering "stress" in > their meditation practices. We could have found areas of common > ground and had productive, sensible discussions. G: I will go on record as saying that there is no self. Unconditioned consciousness in no way posits the existence of an eternal self as all subjective/objective reification has ceased with the experience of the unconditioned. > For a start, we could discuss the difference between parinibbana, > eternal-life and annihilation. G: I am more than willing to hear what you have to say in this regard Ken. Metta, Geoff. 58439 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:13pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Are concepts impermanent? egberdina Hi Rob M, Howard and all, > We were due to be in the hospital for my wife's > > surgery, but it has been put back for an hour, so I can answer your > > questions now. > > ===== > > After sending this message, I will spend some time radiating metta to > you and your wife. > > > > Thank you for your kind thoughts. The surgery went well, and Vicki is in good spirits. A few more days and she should be home again. -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58440 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: mettaa, I egberdina Hi Phil, > I think we can be careful about avoiding really gross forms of > akusala. So we can through intentional decisions prevent ourselves > from sliding into gross akusala kamma patha, to a certain extent. > For example, I know that if I look at pornography, it will > increasing the likelihood of my being propelled into cheating on my > beloved wife, so I don't do it. (Except when I do do it.) I think that reminders, heard with an open and receptive mind, can propel us from whatever gross or subtle level we are at to a more subtle level of understanding. I think your example of pornography is a good one, and I accept what you are saying. But it doesn't stop there. For some, a reminder to avoid pornography would be useful as a literal reminder. For others a reminder to avoid pornography would be a reminder that pornography happens in the mind, and so to guard the mind. In that guarded state it is quite possible to watch all the intricate details of a mass orgy without any interest whatsoever, let alone even the slightest twitch in the groinal region :-) -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58441 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:29pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Chah's Unconditioned Mind matheesha333 Hi Goeff, > I would suggest that the experience of cessation of perception and > feeling is a conditioned experience of the unconditioned because it is > brought about through a highly refined state of concentration. M: Cessation of perception and feeling cannot be brought about by concentration. This was why the Buddha was not satisfied by his former teachers. It requires removal of fetters of craving and aversion (ie- an anagamin at least) which give rise to even the subtle sensory phenomena of the 8th jhana. This removal is possible only through the insight path. I dont agree that there can be a conditioned experience of the unconditioned. That suggests object subject duality as you rightly mentioned. Perhaps you were suggesting a conditioned experiencing of an enlightened mind, which is what I believe what Ajhan Chah was talking about. G: ...but dukkha-nirodha is not the same as > sannavedanna-nirodha and can be cognized (Nibbana-nana) in any instant > free of kilesa. This is an unconditional experience of the > unconditioned. M: What is dukka ..in short the five aggregates. Why are they dukka? Because they are impermanent; arising and passing away. This was the same reason the buddha wasnt happy even with the 8th jhana. For there to be dukka nirodha arising and passing away has to cease, starting from the ceasing of avijja ...all the way down to cessation of dukkha as in the DO. I feel what you might be reffering to as dukka-niroda is simply the ending of suffering, as in the mind of an arahanth. > > > M: sutta showing that arising and passing away incompatible with > > nibbana. > > > > For the supported there is instability, for the unsupported there is > > no instability; when there is no instability there is serenity; when > > there is serenity there is no inclination: when there is no > > inclination there is no coming-and-going; when there is no > coming-and-going there is no decease-and-uprising; when there is no > decease-and-uprising there is neither "here" nor "beyond" nor "in > between the two." Just this is the end of suffering. > > G: Yes, but I interpret this sutta statement to refer to the > abandoning of all sanna and all dualistic sensory vinnana. M : Why do you feel it is important to abandon sanna. An arahath has no concept of what is going on around him, and has only 4 aggregates? :) How about abandoning a self completely to the point that he IS the surronding envioronment he is experiencing. He is not just part of the picture, but IS the picture. There is just continous experiencing. His story has come to an end way before his death. Years of peace, awaiting final dissolution of the aggregates/experiencing. with metta Matheesha 58442 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:41pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition onco111 Hi Howard, Yes, he is an orthodox Jew but an adept moral thinker. I think we can learn some Dhamma from people of all stripes. > H: As for being unhappy rather than the opposite, I think it is certain that a deep-seated, genuine happiness is only to the good. And I do think that it is a moral "good" for oneself and others be be a person who has such a base of genuine happiness. I agree. And the sentiment is fully in line with the spirit of "purify the mind". > H: But as for the idea of "Let me be happy," well, that's just amusing to me! Wishing won't do it nor will thinking that it is morally right. Well put! I think part of his point is that if we think if happiness is a moral obligation, then the question for the unhappy is more along the lines of "What am I doing wrong?" rather than "What is making me unhappy?" Typically, the answer to the latter would be that there is some set of external conditions that we don't like, while the answer to the former might well be that we are making our happiness contingent on external conditions. With the latter, we become more and more attached to the quest for changing external conditions rather than on purifying the mind so that our happiness properly associated with our reaction to external conditions rather than the conditions themselves. Isn't this just namarupaparicchedañana, viz. understanding that the state of mind is quite distinct from the quality of the external conditions, understanding that happiness or unhappiness hinges on reaction to sense object rather than to sense object itself? As for the effectiveness of "let me be happy", I agree that that would be impotent, as would wishing it were true. However, wouldn't it be liberating to a certain degree to properly identify suffering as nama rather than rupa, as one's own internal responsibility rather than putting the responsibility on others or on some set of unmet physical conditions? And couldn't this help cultivate detachment and pass the Kalama Sutta test? > H: However, I do think there are conditions that one can bring about that will cultivate a base of genuine happiness. From one perspective, that is what the Dhamma is about. I think Denis Prager would agree. In particular, I think he argues that a world view (miccha ditthi) that (i) believes happiness is found via pleasure, or (ii) that finds it in any sense wholesome to obsess about "those terrible other people who do such-and-such bad things" is a recipe for unhappiness and is immoral (dosa). Metta, Dan 58443 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 9:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition egberdina Hi Dan, On 27/04/06, Dan D. wrote: > > Hi All, > On the radio the other day Denis Prager commented that we have a moral > obligation to be happy. His point was two-fold. First, happy people do > far more to make others happy than do unhappy people. Second, in many > ways general day-to-day happiness and misery are determined by the way > one looks at the world (acute mourning, mental illness, and severe > privation notwithstanding). Is he right? Does he go too far? Not far > enough? An interesting topic to think about. My two cents worth are as follows. I think worthwhile happiness and obligation are mutually exclusive. I think that obligation is a source of anxiety. There is always an undercurrent of anxiety in any situation where it is known that there are expectations. It is for this reason that worthwhile happiness has seclusion / solitude as a pre-requisite. -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58444 From: "Andrew" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:02pm Subject: Re: It isn't me! / ... the Abhidhamma The Anatta Fence corvus121 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > From what I have read, the differentiation between "early" Suttas > vs. "late" Suttas is based solely on linguistic analysis (I have a > couple of books on the subject). Even the linguists admit that there > is a fair margin for error in this approach, especially because the > Suttas were maintained as an oral tradition for 500 years before > being written down. > > The historians' approach of separating the Abhidhamma from the > Suttana is based on referencing other source documents (i.e. the > Mahayana tradition version of the First Council makes no mention of > the reciting of the Abhidhamma). Hi RobM Thanks for your comments. To me, 'linguistic analysis' and 'historical analysis' are not so different in kind. Here in Australia, historical analysis is topical and heated as professional historians are revising the national history (particularly with regard to the indigenous peoples). There is alot of heated debate amongst professional and academic historians. Only the other day, I heard one on the radio assert that, from an historian's perspective, things didn't happen if there is no evidence subsisting that they did happen (even if commonsense would suggest to us that they *must* have happened)! I think I agree with Sukin that the historian's search and the Dhamma student's search are two very different things. I fear that failing to realise and acknowledge this can condition loss of faith in the Teachings and confusion. That doesn't mean to say that we hoodwink ourselves into believing (or saying we believe) things we don't understand in the Teachings, but rather that we acknowledge our lack of understanding and gently put them aside for another time. As you say in your post, the Buddhist tradition was oral for some 5 centuries. To me, that means that words were relayed in 'chantable' and 'memorisable' form, rather than in the form of a court transcript where someone's precise words and context can be checked mechanically. There is scope for much subjectivity in the study of Dhamma - an argumentative historian's picnic, one might say. That is why I am attracted by what I see as the DSG approach - take the key teachings and interpret everything else in the light of those key teachings. Makes sense to me. Nice chatting with you, Rob. Best wishes Andrew T 58445 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:02pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) egberdina Hi Ken, You wrote about Mr Preger "I think he is wrong in so far as he believes in a self that should or should not do certain things (be happy, be unhappy, look at the world in a prescribed way)." and about BT Ah, yes, but we see things differently. I have to wonder, why would > an eternalist (such as BT must truly be) want to infiltrate the > Buddhist world and re-define the Dhamma as just another eternalist > religion? As if there weren't enough of them already! > > In order to carry out his mission, BT has to discredit the ancient > commentaries, recommend that the Abhidhamma Pitaka be ignored, deny > the ultimate reality of dhammas and their characteristics > (especially anatta, of course) and give new translations to 'dukkha' > and other keywords. I find it lamentable in the extreme. There is > no endeavour I would want less to be associated with. You seem to strongly believe in BT's self. What does that make your thinking, if not very confused? -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58446 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:11pm Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition onco111 Hi Ken H, It's great to hear from you again. > K: This is an easy one. Or is it a trick question? :-) No trick question. I just think it is an interesting proposition to contemplate. Prager sees a distinction between happiness and pleasure. I believe he also sees a link between somanassa and kusala (and not the phony "kusala" of the famous, but mythical, Auntie Fern). In Buddhism, isn't development of kusala a moral obligation? Just because it is not so easy as we'd like to believe does not make it any less of an obligation, does it? > I think he is wrong in so far as he believes in a self that should > or should not do certain things (be happy, be unhappy, look at the > world in a prescribed way). I agree that that view of a self is wrong. But I don't think it's necessary to assume that that is what he thinks (although it could very well be!). Many of the Buddha's words could be read (wrongly, in my opinion) in the same "should or should not do", "be happy" way that you are reading Mr. Prager's words. I think simple models like Prager's proposition are wonderful reminders of how little power we have to conjure 'happiness' or kusala. > Inevitably, unhappiness will occur (the happiness of attachment will > condition the unhappiness of separation) and when it does guilt and > recrimination will follow - "What a miserable failure I am that I > cannot take Denis Prager's simple advice!" A definite danger! Very easy to mis-read Buddha's words that way too-- as advice rather than describing insight. I don't have much idea of Mr. Prager's depth of insight, but I don't see that it is necessary to read his words as prescriptive or "advice". But was he offering advice on what-to-do or simply pointing out that dosa is akusala? If the latter, what a wonderful, Buddhist message from an Orthodox Jew who most likely doesn't know a hill of beans about BuddhaDhamma. > K: It will be even worse for Denis Prager who can't take his own simple advice. If he really is offering advice and if he really can't take his own advice, I agree that it would be "even worse". But on the surface, I don't think we can make judgments about either of those. > K: Let's hope he doesn't resort to public denial and fake happiness. I know little about the man, but he has always seemed content and warm the few times I've listened to his radio show. > From the Dhamma, we learn about the urgency to do good, to avoid > doing evil and to purify the mind. That urgency is felt only when > there is right view (either of the difference between kusala and > akusala, or of the conditioned nature of dhammas). Ultimately, no > other sense of urgency is of any use. I agree. I also think that the wisdom that distinguishes between kusala and akusala and the wisdom that sees the conditioned nature of dhammas is not unique to Buddhism. Metta, Dan 58447 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:23pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition onco111 Hi Herman, Now THAT is an interesting take on the question--as I would expect, coming from you. > Hugo: An interesting topic to think about. My two cents worth are as follows. I think worthwhile happiness and obligation are mutually exclusive. I think that obligation is a source of anxiety. There is always an undercurrent of anxiety in any situation where it is known that there are expectations. It is for this reason that worthwhile happiness has seclusion / solitude as a pre-requisite. I'm not at all convinced that there's "always" anxiety when there are expectations, but I agree that expectations and thinking about "meeting obligations" very often generate anxiety. Buddha and Howard's "ancient Jewish reformer" also made exhortations to, e.g., do good; avoid evil; purify the mind. Do you think these exhortations coming from respected authorities also inevitably create anxiety? Doesn't it depend on how you read them? E.g., as advice to the great and powerful "I", or as a mirror to reflect the prominence of our own akusala? As for a seclusion/solitude pre-requisite, do you mean physical seclusion or a mental seclusion from the anxiety-born-of-expectation? Metta, Dan 58448 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! paulgrabiano... Hi Larry, You Wrote: What do you think > Descartes meant by "think"? Words running through the mind? How do I > tell the difference between my thoughts and your thoughts? I'm not an expert on Descartes, but in more recent Western psychology and philosophy it is pretty much accepted that my thoughts and your thoughts or anyone else's thoughts are about as separate as things get. What is not separate, however, is the mind's relationship to the world. Most of the interesting philosophy of mind in the West accepts that the mind is dependent upon the world. Some, following Kant and others posit that there is a conscious capacity to think that comes before the mind's relationship to matter, but in this case, they would still see the particulars of thinking arising only through the mind's relation to the world. This is not quite the same thing that Descartes had in mind, however. I think Descartes understood thinking in the Intellecutalist sense as something that finds its own cause and justification in itself or in relation to God. Descartes was not so much concerned about how the mind related to matter. Buddhism teaches something quite different from Descartes, I think. In Buddhism mind and matter are in a constant and vital relationship to one another. Mind states arise in dependence upon the five senses bases and the heart base (I've always taken this as meaning the brain and other components of the nervous system in the body, but I wonder if anyone else might know more about this?) which in turn arise in dependence upon the attributes of matter (rupa). Dependent arising points to the fact that nothing in our daily life and in our thinking happens without conditions. Mind states can not arise without the conditions of the sense bases and matter first being present. Particular mind states do not arise without there being particular past and present conditions for there arising. Thinking, then, is not just words; it is what happens when mind and matter arise together. I have a blind friend who lost complete use of his sight before he was 3 months old. He has no recollection of visual stimulation or visual images. In this case, his eye base cannot be a condition for seeing. The light that collides with and spreads out from the matter in the world does not impinge upon his eye base and sight cannot occur. Interestingly, he truly has no idea what a visual image is. When he listens to a novel or hears someone speak his mind does not visualize a setting sun dipping behind the horizon or lush red of an apple. Instead, his mind translates all visual imagery into feeling. In this sense, thinking is very tricky. It may seem like Words and Visual, for example are almost the same thing. But, studies of the mind and Buddhist teachings show that our thinking (the particular kind of thinking we do every day) is always dependent upon certain factors. Words are concepts which have their conditions in the arising of nama and rupa, but they are not in themselves nama (mind states) and rupa (physical matter). If thinking is words running through the mind, it is only this in the conventional sense. There is so much more about the mind and its relation to matter that needs to be understood. Descartes thought that thinking preceded the mind's relationship with the world, but what is thinking if not the feelings, sights, sounds, smells, and tastes that arise in dependence upon the sense bases and in dependence upon mind states? The mind at any moment can only "think" in relation to very particular past and present conditions. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: <...> > Hi Paul, > > I think you know a lot more about Descartes than I do. What do you think > Descartes meant by "think"? Words running through the mind? How do I > tell the difference between my thoughts and your thoughts? <...> 58449 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:18pm Subject: The 4 Divine Doors ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What are the four factors of Stream-Entry leading to Nubbin? Buddha once explained: Here, householder, the Noble Disciple possesses confirmed confidence & conviction in the Buddha in this way: Worthy, honourable & perfectly self-Enlightened is the Buddha! Consummated in knowledge and behaviour, totally transcended, expert in all dimensions, knower of all worlds, unsurpassable trainer of those who can be tamed, both teacher & guide of gods and humans, blessed, exalted, awakened & enlightened is the Buddha !!! He possesses confirmed confidence in the Dhamma in this way Perfectly formulated is this Buddha-Dhamma, visible right here & now, immediately effective, timeless, inviting each and everyone to come and see for themselves, inspect, examine & verify. Leading each and everyone through progress towards perfection. Directly observable, experiencable and realizable by each intelligence... He furthermore possesses confirmed confidence in the Sangha in this way: Perfectly training is this Noble Sangha community of the Buddha's disciples: The right way, the true way, the good way, the direct way! Therefore do these eight kinds of individuals, four Noble pairs, deserve both gifts, self-sacrifice, offerings, hospitality & reverential salutation with joined palms, since this Noble Sangha group of the Buddha's disciples, is an unsurpassable & forever unsurpassed Field of Merit, in this world, for this world, to honour, give to and support ... He possesses the Morality esteemed by the Noble ones: Unbroken, untorn, unspotted, unmottled, freeing, praised by the clever, natural, leading to mental concentration, to absorption... These are the 4 factors of Stream-Entry that a Noble Disciple possess !!! Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book II [69] section 12:41 The five Fears ... 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 !!! <....> 58450 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:18pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Grabianowski" wrote: > Dependent arising points to the fact that nothing in our > daily life and in our thinking happens without conditions. Dear Paul, I suggest to be careful about this view as it may lead to fatalism. Ciao, Fabrizio 58451 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 0:05am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Grabianowski" > wrote: > > Dependent arising points to the fact that nothing in our > > daily life and in our thinking happens without conditions. > > Dear Paul, > > I suggest to be careful about this view as it may lead to fatalism. Given the silence I try to articulate this point myself. First of all we should note the Buddha just said that everything conditioned is impermanent. The simile is with a man that says that in the case of rain you may get wet if you do not bring an umbrella. Of course he might tell this sentence even while the sun is shining - perhaps in that case he would just be a bit gloomy... To the contrary the Buddha actually mentioned the unconditioned element: Nibbana. He even stressed this position by saying that if an uncreated, unconditioned element did not exist His own Teaching would be meaningless. 58452 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] the fourth tetrad of the anapanasatisutta. nilovg Hi Howard, op 26-04-2006 20:31 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: >> As I understand, all four Applications of Mindfulness are directed to >> vipassanaa. > ------------------------------------ > Howard: > I believe that is the ultimate directionof thr practice, but it isn''t > where the practice begins. Step by step one gets closer and closer to the > paramattha dhammas, but it is a progression as I read it. > ----------------------------------- N: Certainly, each development is gradual. But the fact that breathing is included in the first Application of Mindfulness gives it a new dimension. I can quote the last part of the first tetrad: (IV) He trains thus ³I shall breathe in tranquillizing the bodily activity²; he trains thus ³I shall breathe out tranquillizing the bodily activity², at that time, monks, the monk is faring along contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly conscious (of it), mindful (of it) having put away the covetousness and dejection in the world. I say, monks, that of bodies, this is (a certain) one, that is to say breathing-in and breathing-out. That is why, on that occasion, monks, the monk is faring along contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly conscious (of it), mindful (of it) having put away the covetousness and dejection in the world. In the word commentary to the above quoted sutta the Visuddhimagga (VIII, 223-226) mentions with regard to the first tetrad (group of four clauses, marked I-IV) of the sutta the different stages of insight-knowledge which are developed after emerging from jhåna. We read: < On emerging from the attainment he sees that the in-breaths and out-breaths have the physical body and the mind as their origin; and that just as, when a blacksmith¹s bellows are being blown, the wind moves owing to the bag and to the man¹s appropriate effort, so too, in-breaths and out-breaths are due to the body and the mind. Next he defines the in-breaths and out-breaths and the body as materiality, and the consciousness and the states associated with the consciousness as the immaterial... Having defined nama-rupa in this way, he seeks its condition...> The Visuddhimagga then mentions all the different stages of insight (Visuddhimagga VIII, 223 -225). We then read: This is in reference to the first tetrad and this is included in the Application of Mindfulness of the Body. Nina. 58453 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 72. Part I, and Tiika. nilovg Hi Larry, op 27-04-2006 00:30 schreef LBIDD@... op LBIDD@...: > Hi Nina, > > I think I see where I was going wrong. Citta can be a conascent > condition for the arising of rupa at the same time as viriya, for > example, is a predominant conascent condition. Correct? -------- N: Yes, now we have to consider that there are several types of conditions operating at the same time. Citta is conascent condition for the ruupas it produces and which arise at the same time. Viriya can be predominant conascent condition for the accompanying citta and cetasikas and also for the ruupa produced by citta. Nina. 58454 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) nilovg Hi Tep, op 27-04-2006 00:53 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: >> N: >> I appreciate it that you considered Dhamma while seeing a beautiful > woman. Even pleasure and attachment can be realized as conditioned naamas. > > Tep: Thank you very much, Nina. Yes. Pleasure and attachment can be > contemplated as conditioned naamas. However, I think it is also useful > to be aware of the dhammas in the present moment as "separate" in > order to avoid attachment to the "coming together" of naamas and ruupas. ------- Yes, when we think of a whole of a person thinking is a reality, but person is a concept. T: True. Seeing a visible ruupa with right understanding (which > penetrates "those different characteristics by insight knowledge") is > much more advanced. However, the understanding that immediately sees > "these dhammas (voice, body, femininity) are separate" should be more > refined than intellectual understanding (book knowledge, not > experiential). What is your thought? > ..................... N: Dhammas (or paramattha dhammas) that appear can be considered one at a time by understanding of the level of pariyatti and this is helpful. One begins to understand that voice is not a dhamma, but sound is. Usually it seems that we know at once what kind of sound appears, such as sound of woman talking or sound of traffic. However, the citta that hears sound, does not think of the quality of sound or its source, it merely hears sound. Sound is a paramattha dhamma, voice is not. Voice is a concept that is the object of thinking. I am just pondering over your phrase: to avoid attachment to the "coming together" of naamas and ruupas. I find it hard to add anything to that. You probably mean: all the conceptual thinking about a beatiful woman who speaks with a lovely voice. There are many naamas and ruupas appearing and also thinking of concepts. It is hard to try to separate them. It depends which object is object of such or such citta. Who can tell? I am just considering (with the Visuddhimagga text) the fixed order of cittas, citta niyama. It reminds me that nobody can change the order in which cittas arise. The adverting-consciousness adverts already to an object before we can do anything about it. The object may be enticing or it may be not. The process of cittas takes its regular course. When there are conditions for understanding it arises and it can be developed. Nina. 58455 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:36am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 430- mindfulness/sati (l) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch26 - mindfulness/sati continued) When there is mindfulness of a nåma or rúpa which appears, direct understanding of that reality can at that moment be developed. When we learn a subject such as mathematics or history, we study books and try to understand the subject we study. In order to understand realities we have to investigate or “study” them, but that is not study through thinking, it is the development of direct understanding of realities. When a reality such as sound appears and there is mindfulness of it, its characteristic can be “studied” or investigated, just for an extremely short moment. In that way it can be known as it is: a conditioned reality which does not belong to anyone. The word “study” can remind us that there should be mindfulness of realities again and again, until they are known as they are. Full understanding cannot be achieved within a short time. ***** (Ch26 - mindfulness/sati to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 58456 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > The process of cittas takes its regular course. When there are > conditions for understanding it arises and it can be developed. Dear Nina, as a matter of fact it is in the javana phase soon after the rootless citta of investigation (being it the fruit of a wholesome kamma or not) that we have the option of choosing which citta with roots to apply: whether one of the 12 unwholesome (8 rooted in greed, 2 in adversion, and 2 in delusione proper) or 9 wholesome (8 beutiful cittas with two or three roots and the smile production one). The javana phase will in its turn be followed by the registration phase that may either be a rootless citta of the investigation kind (either pleasant or unpleasant according to quality of the investigation preceding the javana) or a beautiful citta with the same roots as the past javana. Both of those latter cittas we have again no control upon. Ciao, Fabrizio 58457 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 3:55am Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition ken_aitch Hi Dan, ------------------ <. . .> D: > Prager sees a distinction between happiness and pleasure. I believe he also sees a link between somanassa and kusala (and not the phony "kusala" of the famous, but mythical, Auntie Fern). ------------------- I am out of my depth here, Dan. I don't know the difference between happiness and pleasure that you are referring to. Is it a simple matter of wholesome pleasant feeling versus unwholesome pleasant feeling? --------------------------- D: > In Buddhism, isn't development of kusala a moral obligation? Just because it is not so easy as we'd like to believe does not make it any less of an obligation, does it? ---------------------------- Is there a cetasika that could be called 'moral obligation?' Right view can be described as a sense of urgency (to do good, avoid evil and purify the mind) but, apart from that, I would think there was no kusala sense of obligation. --------------------------------------------- . . . D: > I agree that that view of a self is wrong. But I don't think it's necessary to assume that that is what he thinks (although it could very well be!). ---------------------------------------------- It probably is what he thinks, but I am sure he also has thoughts of kindness, generosity and wisdom. They would be in separate moments, of course - thoughts of self do not arise in kusala cittas. Kindness and generosity are common to people of all faiths and philosophies, and I suppose eternity believers are as likely as anyone to have the wisdom that knows true kusala from false kusala. However, you seem (later) to be saying they can also know the nature of conditioned dhammas. How could that be, when their religion teaches the opposite of such ideas? -------------------------------- D: > Many of the Buddha's words could be read (wrongly, in my opinion) in the same "should or should not do", "be happy" way that you are reading Mr. Prager's words. I think simple models like Prager's proposition are wonderful reminders of how little power we have to conjure 'happiness' or kusala. -------------------------------- I missed that part. I thought he was saying, "You are obliged to be happy!" ---------------- <. . .> D: > But was he offering advice on what-to-do or simply pointing out that dosa is akusala? If the latter, what a wonderful, Buddhist message from an Orthodox Jew who most likely doesn't know a hill of beans about BuddhaDhamma. ---------------- Ah, yes, I see what you mean. He could have known that the development of goodness depended on understanding, not on commands (and obligations). It is unlikely, though, that he knew goodness was a conditioned dhamma, independent of a controlling self, which is a pity because that sort of knowledge is by far the most effective in mental development. "It is more important to know the difference between nama and rupa than it is to know the difference between kusala and akusala." (K Sujin) ---------------------------- <. . .> D: > I also think that the wisdom that distinguishes between kusala and akusala and the wisdom that sees the conditioned nature of dhammas is not unique to Buddhism. ---------------------------- According to my understanding, the former is not unique, but the latter is. Any inkling we (Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike) have of conditionality must have come indirectly from a Buddha (or perhaps directly in a former lifetime). I think conditionality is "unheard" outside a Buddha's sasana: ""This is the Noble Truth of Suffering." Thus, O Bhikkhus, with respect to things unheard before, there arose in me the eye, the wisdom, the knowledge and the light." (Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta) Ken H 58458 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) ken_aitch Hi Herman, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Ken, > > You wrote about Mr Preger > > "I think he is wrong in so far as he believes in a self > and about BT > > Ah, yes, but we see things differently. I have to wonder, why would > > an eternalist (such as BT must truly be) want to infiltrate the > > Buddhist world and re-define the Dhamma as just another eternalist > > religion? > > You seem to strongly believe in BT's self. What does that make your > thinking, if not very confused? > ----------- Is that your way of saying I am judgemental and opinionated? You would be right, unfortunately, but what has it got to do with belief in self? Ken H 58459 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:16am Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" wrote: > I think conditionality is "unheard" outside a Buddha's sasana: To the contrary, that is quite a refrain in any tradition: Christianity and Judaism have God as the cause for anything; ; jainist have kamma; positivists have matter; Induist have Brahma; fatalists have chance. What is special of the Buddhasasana (or at least more clear, as any spiritual tradition, to me, has it at its core) is the prescription that something free from conditions exists and expecially that is attainable by everyone without the need of any exterior help. 58460 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:28am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhaatukathaa, Elements icarofranca Hi Larry Rocketeer!!! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Viriya for the rocket! > > Larry --------------------------------------------------------------------- This question about the Adhipata-Paccaya has other remarkable signature: a note on conditioning-conditioned at a quasi-grammatical style, that it´s very interesting. This is a XVIth spanish poem about it: (By Juan Del Enzina,XVI siècle) Whoever rules and whoever is ruled Without wisdom Can only be badly ruled. Badly ruled is he who is not prudent Because everythinkg goes wrong; And to rule perfectly is To know how to command wisely; Whoever rules and whoever is ruled without wisdom Can only be badly ruled (In Spanish) El que rige y el regido Sin saber mal regidos pueden ser. Mal rige quien no es prudente porque todo va al revés, y el perfeto regir es saber mandar sabiamente; qu´el regido y el rigente sin saber mal regidos pueden ser. This question about the conditioning/conditioned (or ruling/ruled) paccayas can be studied in details at Abhidhamma Sangaha, chapter VIII,11 to 28! Mettaya, Ícaro 58461 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 0:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition upasaka_howard Hi, Dan - In a message dated 4/27/06 12:43:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: > Hi Howard, > Yes, he is an orthodox Jew but an adept moral thinker. ---------------------------------- Howard: ;-) I didn't mean to imply a 'but'! "Some of my best friends are Jews!" LOLOL! (And some are even orthodox. :-) ---------------------------------- I think we can > > learn some Dhamma from people of all stripes. ---------------------------------- Howard: I completely agree. In fact, somewhere the Buddha said something to the effect that wherever certain topics are taught [I forget which, exactly], whatever the source might be, it should be considered his Dhamma. -------------------------------- > > >H: As for being unhappy rather than the opposite, I think it is > certain that a deep-seated, genuine happiness is only to the good. > And I do think that it is a moral "good" for oneself and others be be > a person who has such a base of genuine happiness. > > I agree. And the sentiment is fully in line with the spirit > of "purify the mind". ------------------------------------- Howard: Yep! ------------------------------------- > > >H: But as for the idea of "Let me be happy," well, that's > just amusing to me! Wishing won't do it nor will thinking that it is > morally right. > > Well put! > > I think part of his point is that if we think if happiness is a moral > obligation, then the question for the unhappy is more along the lines > of "What am I doing wrong?" rather than "What is making me unhappy?" > Typically, the answer to the latter would be that there is some set > of external conditions that we don't like, while the answer to the > former might well be that we are making our happiness contingent on > external conditions. With the latter, we become more and more > attached to the quest for changing external conditions rather than on > purifying the mind so that our happiness properly associated with our > reaction to external conditions rather than the conditions > themselves. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Right you are, and well said. :-) ----------------------------------- Isn't this just namarupaparicchedañana, viz. > > understanding that the state of mind is quite distinct from the > quality of the external conditions, understanding that happiness or > unhappiness hinges on reaction to sense object rather than to sense > object itself? --------------------------------- Howard; Yes, good. --------------------------------- > > As for the effectiveness of "let me be happy", I agree that that > would be impotent, as would wishing it were true. However, wouldn't > it be liberating to a certain degree to properly identify suffering > as nama rather than rupa, as one's own internal responsibility rather > than putting the responsibility on others or on some set of unmet > physical conditions? And couldn't this help cultivate detachment and > pass the Kalama Sutta test? ----------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, liberating, empowering, and encouraging. ------------------------------------------ > > >H: However, I do think there are conditions that one can bring > about that will cultivate a base of genuine happiness. From one > perspective, that is what the Dhamma is about. > > I think Denis Prager would agree. In particular, I think he argues > that a world view (miccha ditthi) that (i) believes happiness is > found via pleasure, or (ii) that finds it in any sense wholesome to > obsess about "those terrible other people who do such-and-such bad > things" is a recipe for unhappiness and is immoral (dosa). ------------------------------------------- Howard: Interesting. A natural Dhammist! ------------------------------------------- > > Metta, > > Dan > ====================== 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) 58462 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:56am Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? jwromeijn Hallo Tep (Phil, Sarah, Nina, …) Although I don't know exactly why you adressed me in your message I will respond. "Skilfull" or 'skillfull" or "skilful" or 'skillful": I never understand the logic of such english words (still more bizar than phonetical Pali) But I like the concept "skilfull" - upaya. Some buddhist prefer Sutta and some prefer Abhidhamma, so it's very wise of the Buddha that het made compose both Pitakas (about the Vinaya I have no opinion). I'm not so stable (is being stable kusaloa or akusala?) in my preference. On our short walking hollidays I had to carry my luggage and I only took one book with me, of course a buddhistic one: the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra: very witty and very skilfull. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > > Hi, Phil (Sarah, Joop, Nina ...) - > > Your post (#58396) was skilfully written (in regard to your use of > words) and it put me at my wits' end. {:-|) > No doubt why Sarah appreciates your style and wit: > > >S: > >Hi Phil. > >Very witty indeed:-);-). Like the following: ... ...(snipped) > >I'm sure Tep and others will appreciate the style too, even if they > >don't all agree with all your points. > > >Thanks, with more lobha than metta as I sign off for sure :-)) > > Tep: Did reading Phil's message cause more lobha in your citta, Sarah? > Perhaps, my message below may help de-lobha you. {:>)) > .................. > > Ph: p.s having trouble to find time to do all I want to do here, Tep, > so will as I often do offer you the last word, if you'd like. > > Tep: Below is my "last word", per your request ! > > .................................................................... .................... > > > -- Ph: Yes, I do feel superior for appreciating "abhi". > > Tep: So you may have an extreme view in the "abhi" : 'only this is > right, all others are not'. > ................ > -- Ph: People who insist on the predominance of suttas are rather > ruthless in rejecting even tenderly offered opinions of those who > place faith in abhidhamma. There is a lot of belittling and > condescending that goes on, subtly or not, on all sides. > > Tep: So they both have micchaa-ditthi and micchaa-vaacaa. > ............... > > -- Ph: There are many ways to prove one's ignorance of Dhamma, but to > prove one's true and deep understanding? Not so easy. It is in the > citta, and we don't see into other people's cittas. ... For example, > once you praised me for having equanimity that you hadn't seen before > because I didn't lash out at you for the "crying baby" post of yours. > Well, in fact, I was seething with hatred even as I posted my measured > response, the purpose of which was to demonstrate that I was wise > enough not to be bothered, i.e all about mana, lobha - not really > equanimity. > > Tep: Right, it is in "the citta". Right, "we" do not have that ability > to "see into other people's cittas". My apologies for having caused > you the hatred! > ............... > > -- Ph : "30 years" has no ultimate meaning in Dhamma. It could very > well be 30 years of accumulating wrong understanding, couldn't it? > > Tep: Yes, it could. Or, it could have been the other way around. How > can you tell? It is in the citta. :-)) > .............. > > -- Ph : I think there can be the same tendency [ Tep's note: Phil was > referring to his lousy cooking skill, despite some 30 years of > experience] with suttas, leaping out with eagerness to understand them > in a way that suits our taste (ie views). So the commentaries would > help to sober us up a little ... > > Tep: Let me answer you by means of analogy. > My wife did not take more than 20 years to cook great Thai foods!! She > used to depend on some cook-book instructions (analogous to sutta > commentaries) during the first 5 years in which she was learning how > to cook. Nowadays she can cook almost any Thai foods all by herself > (standing on her own two feet with confidence-- no more a "crying baby"). > ............ > > -- Ph : Again, I say that in principle. I have no way of knowing your > cittas. You have said that I assume too much and it might seem that I > am always labelling people as ignorant but based on my understanding > of the "burning" sutta, the all (ayatanas) are burning > with lobha, dosa and moha, and only the ariyans are free from that. > ... ... I find it a very sobering sutta, but I am interpreting it in > the way that suits my views, perhaps. > > Tep: No educated Buddhists I know need the great burning sutta [SN > XXXV.28 : Adittapariyaya Sutta] to tell them that "only the arahants > are free from lobha, dosa, and moha". For example, they know that the > Anaagaamii is free from 'dosa', but not free from 'maana'. > ............. > > -- Ph : I teach English as a second language and there is a term > "fossilized errors" referring to the errors long time learners make > that have become uncorrectable due to having become so deeply entrenched. > > T: There are two things that need clarification here!! Are the > "uncorrectable errors" permanent -- i.e. 'nicca' ? Since you have > said that you "don't see into other people's cittas", then how could > you say it affirmatively for all "long-time" learners (no exception, > whatsoever)? > > > Best wishes, > > > Tep > === > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > > > > Hi Tep > > > > > Thank you for acknowledging the fact that we have different > > > preferences, and also for your (formally?) encouraging words. > > (snipped) > > > Whew, babble concluded, and no aversion detected. > > > > In fact, I will even write.... > > > > ....metta > > > > Phil! > > > > p.s having trouble to find time to do all I want to do here, Tep, > > so will as I often do offer you the last word, if you'd like. > > > > p.p.s another metaphor to warn about the danger of having too much > > confidence in one's own understanding. I teach English as a second > > language and there is a term "fossilized errors" referring to the > > errors long time learners make that have become uncorrectable due to > > having become so deeply entrenched. Again, I say that in principle, > > not about Tep. > > > 58463 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:59am Subject: Re: Psychological Issues (was: A great debate on Scholars & Meditators ? ) jwromeijn Hallo James, Good to tell me this about you. I will not give any psychological comment, only say: hope it makes things more bearrable. With metta and karuna Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Sarah and Joop (and All), > > I am going to address something that is somewhat OT, but I hope to > relate it back to Buddhism. > > I was somewhat embarrassed by this exchange: > > Sarah: p.s I assure you that few people would like to see us > moderating threads and issuing further guidelines. Ask James OFF- > LIST for his valued opinion for a start:)lol,l0l! > > Joop: I did send today my request off-list to the mods although > generally speaking I prefer transparancy in decision-making and thus > in on-list proposals (so I don't ask James; no reason to be afraid). > > I know that I deserve such banter and ribbing because I can be a > real handful sometimes. Joop, I think that the moderators of this > group have done a great job and have shown me great kindness. I was > kicked out of different Buddhist groups by the moderators, but Jon > and Sarah have been very patient with me. > > Due to my recent anxiety and mood-swings from having Dalmatian > puppies coming and going out of my apartment, I have started to take > the anti-depressant Zoloft. This medication has helped to balance > my emotions considerably. > > One would think that with my meditation background and experience I > wouldn't have such emotional outbursts, but there are some things > that cause such deep damage to a person that meditation alone won't > help. I was a victim of childhood emotional abuse. My natural > mother abandoned me and my step mother didn't want me. The > emotional abuse in my household was so severe that my brother and > sister both turned to drugs and subsequently died. Here is some > information I found off the Internet: > > "The consequences of emotional child abuse can be serious and long- > term. Many research studies conclude that psychopathologic symptoms > are more likely to develop in emotionally abused children. These > children may experience a lifelong pattern of depression, > estrangement, anxiety, low self-esteem, inappropriate or troubled > relationships, or a lack of empathy." > > I am going to stay on the Zoloft and seek some counselling/therapy > (I wonder if Dr. Phil would come to Cairo?? ;-)) > > So, to bring this back to Buddhism, there are some psychological > issues which Buddhism can't address. If one is very damaged > psychologically, he/she needs to deal with those issues before any > real progress can be made on the Buddha's path. > > Metta, > James > 58464 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:02am Subject: [dsg] Re: How to radiate metta jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Joop, > >... > S: As I tried to indicate in this thread and in another one, accumulations > refers to all cittas and cetasikas which are conditioned by so many > factors. So, to keep it simple, let's say that all these cittas and > cetasikas above are 'accumulated' (with the possible exception of the > lokuttara cittas??). > > As I've said before, add what you like and call it Joop's revised list:-). > > Metta, > > Sarah Hallo Sarah You must be right but still my conclusion is: Everything that occurs is either an ultimate or a conceptual reality. Is not a ultimate reality for two reasons: - is is not arsing and falling away within some milli-seconds - is does not occur on the list of 89/121 cittas+52 cetasikas+28 rupas+1 nibbana So it must be a concept. Or it belongs to a third class of realities, together with 'kamma' Metta Joop 58465 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:03am Subject: Kind of khandhas? Was: Re: It isn't me! / ... the Abhidhamma The Anatta Fence jwromeijn Dear Tep After a week I don't have really new ideas about the remark of Bhikkhu Bodhi Tep: "Are mundane and supramundane the two states of the khandhas? Further, if you can, please explain what you understand about mundane khandhas versus supramundane khandhas. BTW Who invented these terms? Joop: I cannot explain: I asked about it. And if there is one thing about what I can fullhearted use the mantra 'this is not mine, this I am not, this is not my atta', then it's about the invention of these terms: I just quoted BB and expressed my surprise. (Yes, a mantra, I think this expression is used too much in DSG, so much that it gets empty. And, as I said before, anatta is evident to me, my 'theme' is more anicca) I think it's in the Suttas where the distinguishment mundane - supramundane is made. Tep: "Oh, one more thing : conventionmal versus paramattha is KenH's terminology, not mine!" Joop: I know the terminology of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha; don't you agree with the theory of the two truths, as explained there (and in many others Abhidhamma-texts)? You must have seen RobM's remark about it. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Dear Tep > > When I'm back I try to respond. 'Try' because I ddon't have strong > opinions, just curious open mind (on this topic) > > And yes I'm attached, even addicted to my computer > > Metta > > Joop > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" > wrote: > > > > > > Hi, Joop (KenH, Howard)- > > > > About Bhikkhu Bodhi's explanation on the khandhas, you kindly asked > > "Any comments?" Yes, I do have some. > > > > First, let's again look at his explanation : > > > > >BB (his guide to par. 35, p. 286): > > >The four mental aggregates of the supramundane plane are not > > aggregates of clinging because they entirely transcend the range of > > clinging; that is, they cannot become objects of greeds or wrong > views. > > > > Tep: I understand the reason why the Buddha said the five khandhas > > were "aggregates of clinging". It is because clinging on these > > khandhas cannot avoid dukkha ["In short, the five clinging- > aggregates > > are dukkha". DN 22]. I do not think it is useful for us, who still > > have clinging(upadana), to worry about the supramundane plane right > > now. We should wisely learn from the Buddha and contemplate often on > > the Teachings to attain the right view 'this is not mine, this I am > > not, this is not my atta', the sooner the better. > > > > "And what are the five clinging-aggregates? > > > > "Whatever form — past, future, or present; internal or external; > > blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near — is clingable, > > offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that > > is called form as a clinging-aggregate. > > > > "Whatever feeling — past, future, or present; internal or external; > > blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near — is clingable, > > offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that > > is called feeling as a clinging-aggregate. > > > > "Whatever perception — past, future, or present; internal or > external; > > blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near — is clingable, > > offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental fermentation: that > > is called perception as a clinging-aggregate. > > > > "Whatever (mental) fabrications — past, future, or present; internal > > or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near — are > > clingable, offer sustenance, and are accompanied with mental > > fermentation: those are called fabrications as a clinging- aggregate. > > > > "Whatever consciousness — past, future, or present; internal or > > external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near — is > > clingable, offers sustenance, and is accompanied with mental > > fermentation: that is called consciousness as a clinging- aggregate. > > > > "These are called the five clinging-aggregates." [SN XXII.48, > Khandha > > Sutta] > > ............................ > > > > >Joop: > > >That was new to me: four of the five (not the material experienced > > aka rupa) khandhas have two "states". Of course mundane versus > > supramundane is not the same as conventional versus paramattha but > > still Tep (and KenH) seems not to be totally correct. > > > > Tep: Are mundane and supramundane the two states of the khandhas? > > Further, if you can, please explain what you understand about > mundane > > khandhas versus supramundane khandhas. BTW Who invented these > terms? > > > > Oh, one more thing : conventionmal versus paramattha is KenH's > > terminology, not mine! > > .................. > > > > >Joop: > > > Starting tomorrow I live five days without computer, making a > > long distance walk. > > > > Tep: Isn't that dependence on computers a kind of attachment? I > guess > > it is. > > > > > > Karuna, > > > > > > Tep > > ====== > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > > > > > Hallo Tep, KenH, all > > > > > > > > > Tep: > Metta is metta and only metta is metta, there is no "other > > > metta". Are there "conventional khandhas" and "ultimately real > > > khandhas"? Does that make sense? Khandhas are khandhas whichever > way > > > you look at them. > > > > > (snipped) > > > 58466 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:05am Subject: A great debate on Scholars & Meditators ? [was: [dsg] Re: How to radiate metta jwromeijn Hallo Sarah, Christine, Rob, James, all On this moment I have not enough energy to continue my proposal. Perhaps later and perhaps I make first a review of already posted messages of the last years about 'meditation' (occurring and not occurring in U.P) Metta Joop 58467 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:08am Subject: On spice and paradoxes [ was: [dsg] Re: Beliefs jwromeijn Hallo Sarah, Larry The question is: who is afraid of paradoxes. I'm not. Even when I know this term does not occur in the Suttas (one can say "the middle way" is in a way a paradox but is not good to discuss about words) Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Joop, > ... > I'll be happy to discuss any suttas with you on your return to see if > there really is a paradox. Often such paradoxes arise because of our very > limited understanding. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ====== > 58468 From: "Joop" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition jwromeijn Hallo Herman, Dan, all He is not right. We don't have moral obligations others than of the kind mentioned in the Noble Eightfold Path. We are free to be happy or unhappy Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Dan, > > On 27/04/06, Dan D. wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > On the radio the other day Denis Prager commented that we have a moral > > obligation to be happy. His point was two-fold. First, happy people do > > far more to make others happy than do unhappy people. Second, in many > > ways general day-to-day happiness and misery are determined by the way > > one looks at the world (acute mourning, mental illness, and severe > > privation notwithstanding). Is he right? Does he go too far? Not far > > enough? > > > > An interesting topic to think about. My two cents worth are as follows. I > think worthwhile happiness and obligation are mutually exclusive. I think > that obligation is a source of anxiety. There is always an undercurrent of > anxiety in any situation where it is known that there are expectations. It > is for this reason that worthwhile happiness has seclusion / solitude as a > pre-requisite. > > > > > -- > Kind Regards > > > Herman > > > There is ego, but not a self who has it. > (Hofman H. 2005) > 58469 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 1:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition upasaka_howard Hi, Fabrizio - In a message dated 4/27/06 7:19:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, f.bartolomucci@... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" > wrote: > >I think conditionality is "unheard" outside a Buddha's sasana: > > To the contrary, that is quite a refrain in any tradition: > Christianity and Judaism have God as the cause for anything; ; jainist > have kamma; positivists have matter; Induist have Brahma; fatalists > have chance. > > What is special of the Buddhasasana (or at least more clear, as any > spiritual tradition, to me, has it at its core) is the prescription > that something free from conditions exists and expecially that is > attainable by everyone without the need of any exterior help. > > ==================== I believe the distinction between the conditionality of the Dhamma and the causality to be found elsewhere is quite significant. The Buddha's conditionality is not that of substantialist, causal powers, but of necessary, regular, objective, impersonal, and lawful arising in the sense of mere "when this is, that is" and "when this arises, that arises," and the reverse of these. This, I think, may be the chief distinction. The Buddha taught conditionality instead of causality, avoiding substantialism and self-nature - avoiding substantive connections in the realm of relations. Throughout the Dhamma emptiness/not-self is central. The Buddha's teaching on conditionality also emphasizes that events occur whenever, and only whenever, a group of several specific events come together, that multiple conditions are required for there to be "results," and that multiple conditions result. But this is secondary. The main distinction is the element of anatta found in the Buddha's teachings on conditionality. And conditionality, especially as regards the conditioned arising and cessation of dukkha (paticcasamupada), is central to the Buddhadhamma, and that is not found in its fullness elsewhere. 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) 58470 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition egberdina Hi Dan, On 27/04/06, Dan D. wrote: > > Hi Herman, > Now THAT is an interesting take on the question--as I would expect, > coming from you. :-) > Hugo: An interesting topic to think about. My two cents worth are > as follows. I think worthwhile happiness and obligation are mutually > exclusive. I think that obligation is a source of anxiety. There is > always an undercurrent of anxiety in any situation where it is known > that there are expectations. It is for this reason that worthwhile > happiness has seclusion / solitude as a pre-requisite. > > I'm not at all convinced that there's "always" anxiety when there are > expectations, but I agree that expectations and thinking > about "meeting obligations" very often generate anxiety. Buddha and > Howard's "ancient Jewish reformer" also made exhortations to, e.g., > do good; avoid evil; purify the mind. Do you think these exhortations > coming from respected authorities also inevitably create anxiety? I do not consider these exhortations to be about social obligations. These exhortations are made realising that immutable law of the mind - as you sow so shall you reap. If there were no consequences of action then there would be no grounds for anxiety. But because there are consequences of action, realising that is certainly a wellspring of anxiety. A sociopath is not anxious about their behaviour, but one who comes to realise they are and have been busily laying the foundations for a guaranteed future hell may well have the odd panic attack :-) Doesn't it depend on how you read them? E.g., as advice to the great > and powerful "I", or as a mirror to reflect the prominence of our own > akusala? Please say a little more about this if what I wrote doesn't cover it. > As for a seclusion/solitude pre-requisite, do you mean physical > seclusion or a mental seclusion from the anxiety-born-of-expectation? I think the two can mutually condition each other. The currency of society is language. If you are in a place, physically or mentally, where you are driven (obliged) to talk, or think, you are not in a place of solitude. -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58471 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 1:49am Subject: Weekend Break in Posting upasaka_howard Hi all - Just in case I forget to mention it, I'll mention it now: I will likely be doing no posting from Friday evening through Sunday evening, because I will be attending a "commuter meditation retreat" in Manhattan (NY City) lead by Bhante Gunaratana. There'll be an introduction and some meditating Friday evening followed by all-day meditation sessions on Saturday and Sunday (from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 pm), and while at home Friday and Saturday evenings I'm going to try to maintain as much "internal seclusion" as possible, avoiding TV, reading, and computer, and maybe meditating some more on my own. I also may not get to post on Sunday evening either for other reasons. So no posts addressed to me after daytime on Friday are likely to get answered until next week. 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) 58472 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:52am Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) indriyabala Hi, Nina - You have been helpful as a good Dhamma friend, thanks. The pondering of the dhammas (at the paramattha and concepts levels) and the considering of 'citta niyam' have positively influenced my thinking (and better understanding). There are a few things I would like to ask you to further discuss-- whenever you have time. >N: One begins to understand that voice is not a dhamma, but sound is. Sound is a paramattha dhamma, voice is not. Voice is a concept that is the object of thinking. T: While you say voice is a concept, not a paramattha dhamma, I say voice is the "coming together" of sound, ear, ear-consciousness and perception that follows. Instead of the term "object of thinking", can I say voice is the object of perception? ...................... >N: I am just pondering over your phrase: to avoid attachment to the "coming together" of naamas and ruupas. I find it hard to add anything to that. You probably mean: all the conceptual thinking about a beatiful woman who speaks with a lovely voice. Tep: I am sorry for the term "coming together". The example above shows that concepts (here, 'voice') result from the coming together of paramattha dhammas -- just like the coming together of molecules forms a compound. The action "coming together of the dhammas" is mental -- the mental formations. But this explanation may not be right to you with respect to the Abhidhamma standards. So please advise. ................. >N: There are many naamas and ruupas appearing and also thinking of concepts. It is hard to try to separate them. It depends which object is object of such or such citta. Who can tell? Tep: Now it is clear to me why you found it hard to understand the word "separate". To me, "separate" is opposite to "formations" (or coming together). Simply by not paying attention to 'nimitta' and 'anubyañjana' we can see the occurring dhammas as "separate". ................. >N: >The adverting-consciousness adverts already to an object before we can do anything about it. The object may be enticing or it may be not. The process of cittas takes its regular course. When there are conditions for understanding it arises and it can be developed. T: That is the most interesting part of your post ! I believe that such belief probably obstructs one's practice (patipada) according to the Buddha. No, we cannot do anything about the "adverting-consciousness", and we don't have to -- just leave it alone. The goal of the Buddhist's practice is the cessation of dukkha, and the practice is according to the Noble Eightfold Path which has nothing to do with citta niyam. This may sound (to some uninstructed readers) like a rejection of the Abhidhamma, but I know you do not think like that. Sincerely, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Hi Tep, (snipped) > N: Dhammas (or paramattha dhammas) that appear can be considered one at a time by understanding of the level of pariyatti and this is helpful. One begins to understand that voice is not a dhamma, but sound is. Usually it seems that we know at once what kind of sound appears, such as sound of woman talking or sound of traffic. However, the citta that hears sound, does not think of the quality of sound or its source, it merely hears sound. > Sound is a paramattha dhamma, voice is not. Voice is a concept that is the object of thinking. > I am just pondering over your phrase: to avoid attachment to the "coming together" of naamas and ruupas. I find it hard to add anything to that. You probably mean: all the conceptual thinking about a beatiful woman who speaks with a lovely voice. (snipped) 58473 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:03am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) nilovg Dear Fabrizio. op 27-04-2006 11:43 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op f.bartolomucci@...: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom > wrote: >> The process of cittas takes its regular course. When there are >> conditions for understanding it arises and it can be developed. > F: as a matter of fact it is in the javana phase soon after the rootless > citta of investigation (being it the fruit of a wholesome kamma or > not) ------- N: After vo.t.thapanacitta, determining-consciousness, a kiriyacitta in a sense-door process, or mind-door adverting-consciousness, a kiriyacitta in a mind-door process. Kiriyacitta is neither cause nor result. -------- F:that we have the option of choosing which citta with roots to > apply:whether one of the 12 unwholesome (8 rooted in greed, 2 in > adversion, and 2 in delusione proper) or 9 wholesome (8 beutiful > cittas with two or three roots and the smile production one). -------- N: Cittas run extremely fast, it is more complex than one would think. Whether kusala citta or akusala citta arises depends on wise attention or unwise attention to the object, and that is dependent on several other factors: the place where one lives (favorable if one can hear Dhamma), the persons one associates with (favorable if they help one to understand Dhamma), one's former accumulations of kusala or akusala, and as you see, what is past is past, how could we control the past. But no need to feel helpless, you have heard the Dhamma, you see the benefit of kusala already, kusala has been set in motion already and all the cittas roll on, roll on, nobody can stop them. One citta is immediately succeeded by the next citta, citta upon citta upon citta, that is life. Sometimes there are conditions for akusala citta sometimes for kusala citta. There are many akusala cittas in a day (wrong choice but no person who chooses), but still, understanding of dhammas can be developed and that is kusala. -------- F: The > javana phase will in its turn be followed by the registration phase .... Both of those latter cittas we have again no control upon. ______ All of them cannot be owned, they have no possessor. Nina. 58474 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) egberdina Hi Ken, ----------- > > Is that your way of saying I am judgemental and opinionated? You would > be right, unfortunately, but what has it got to do with belief in self? You seem to credit BT with somehow being the creator and owner of the views he puts forward. Don't views arise conditionally? Just like your particular views? -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58475 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:06am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I believe the distinction between the conditionality of the Dhamma and > the causality to be found elsewhere is quite significant. The Buddha's > conditionality is not that of substantialist, causal powers, but of necessary, > regular, objective, impersonal, and lawful arising in the sense of mere "when this > is, that is" and "when this arises, that arises," and the reverse of these. > This, I think, may be the chief distinction. The Buddha taught conditionality > instead of causality, avoiding substantialism and self-nature - avoiding > substantive connections in the realm of relations. Throughout the Dhamma > emptiness/not-self is central. > The Buddha's teaching on conditionality also emphasizes that events > occur whenever, and only whenever, a group of several specific events come > together, that multiple conditions are required for there to be "results," and that > multiple conditions result. But this is secondary. The main distinction is > the element of anatta found in the Buddha's teachings on conditionality. And > conditionality, especially as regards the conditioned arising and cessation of > dukkha (paticcasamupada), is central to the Buddhadhamma, and that is not found > in its fullness elsewhere. > > With metta, > Howard Hi Howard, thanks for your stressing of the difference between conditionality and causality. In fact the difference between the two words is more in the agent than in the action. So causality implies the existence of an entity causing something while causality does not: so this part is very connected to the doctrine of anatta you mentioned later. I agree with you on the fact that the multi-conditionality is not the main focus of the Buddha teaching, at least in doctrinal terms, but has an important encouraging value as people are nto urged to get rid of all conditions but rather of just of whcihever one. This directly opposes the Jainist doctrine one need to exaust all his kamma before reachin liberation and his captured by following observation: "If you run away from the sun for years and changed your mind you do not need to make all the way back but you have just to turn". Yet you may be aware of the fact anatta does not mean a self does not exist. This view has not been endorsed by the Buddha as it naturally leads to the doctrine of the moral inefficacy of actions. Incidentally our friends in the Christian tradition find themselves in the same high waters when having to integrate the allmighty power of God and free will. Ciao, Fabrizio 58476 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:23am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition nilovg Dear Fabrizio, could I add: the core of Buddhism: the development of understanding of all conditioned dhammas, which is actually the development of the eightfold Path, so that the unconditioned dhamma, nibbaana, can be attained? The Bodhisatta Sumedha understood: conditioned dhammas arise and fall away, and since these are conditioned, there must also be an uncondiitoned dhamma. So he went in search of the truth. Nina. op 27-04-2006 13:16 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op f.bartolomucci@...: > What is special of the Buddhasasana (or at least more clear, as any > spiritual tradition, to me, has it at its core) is the prescription > that something free from conditions exists and expecially that is > attainable by everyone without the need of any exterior help. 58477 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > F: as a matter of fact it is in the javana phase soon after the rootless > > citta of investigation (being it the fruit of a wholesome kamma or > > not) > ------- > N: After vo.t.thapanacitta, determining-consciousness, a kiriyacitta in a > sense-door process, or mind-door adverting-consciousness, a kiriyacitta in a > mind-door process. Kiriyacitta is neither cause nor result. The javana phase is causal and investigation is a fruit. Of course adverting is functional. > -------- > F:that we have the option of choosing which citta with roots to > > apply:whether one of the 12 unwholesome (8 rooted in greed, 2 in > > adversion, and 2 in delusione proper) or 9 wholesome (8 beutiful > > cittas with two or three roots and the smile production one). > -------- > N: Cittas run extremely fast, it is more complex than one would think. > Whether kusala citta or akusala citta arises depends on wise attention or > unwise attention to the object, and that is dependent on several other > factors: the place where one lives (favorable if one can hear Dhamma), the > persons one associates with (favorable if they help one to understand > Dhamma), one's former accumulations of kusala or akusala, and as you see, > what is past is past, how could we control the past. Exactly it is because cittas run fast that any of those conditions you mentioned advert an extremely high number of cittas: actually there is no material phenomena that produces just pleasant or unpleasant rootless cittas. Also there is no connection between pleasentness and wholesolness or even supramiundane cittas: someone could be pushed to the Dhamma following an unpleasant body-consciousness (perhaps a broken leg), someone other by a pleasant eye-consciousness (perhaps the viewing of a monk) or any combination thereoff. > But no need to feel helpless, you have heard the Dhamma, you see the benefit > of kusala already, kusala has been set in motion already and all the cittas > roll on, roll on, nobody can stop them. One citta is immediately succeeded > by the next citta, citta upon citta upon citta, that is life. > Sometimes there are conditions for akusala citta sometimes for kusala citta. > There are many akusala cittas in a day (wrong choice but no person who > chooses), but still, understanding of dhammas can be developed and that is kusala. Well... thanks for the encouragement :-) > F: The > > javana phase will in its turn be followed by the registration phase > .... Both of those latter cittas we have again no control upon. > ______ > > All of them cannot be owned, they have no possessor. I already talked in another posting of this point. I would be happy to hear a comment by you on my remarks there. Ciao, Fabrizio 58478 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:33am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) egberdina Hi Tep, ...................... > > Tep: The coming together of nama and rupa as a person at the moment of > seeing can cause pleasure and attachment to arise; seeing nama and > rupa one at a time as "separate" can cause disappearance of pleasure > and attachment to the pleasurable object. > > Today I while I was walking around the block I saw a young woman > walking and talking on a cell phone. In that very moment while I was > "seeing" her good figure and nice-looking young skin, I also heard her > musical and lovely voice -- all these coming together to define a > beautiful woman. The next moment after my contemplation of this > "pleasurable object" as being nothing but the "coming together" of > separate body parts and voice, the perception of beautiful woman > dissolved. Yes, I understand and accept this. There is no craving for "beautiful woman" when "beautiful woman" is not seen. But is there craving for voice, hair, skin? Craving is not uprooted by analysis into components, no matter how spontaneous. Why, some of my best friends crave the existence of parramattha dhammas :-) -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58479 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:54am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition upasaka_howard Hi, Fabrizio - In a message dated 4/27/06 9:09:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time, f.bartolomucci@... writes: > Yet you may be aware of the fact anatta does not mean a self does not > exist. This view has not been endorsed by the Buddha as it naturally > leads to the doctrine of the moral inefficacy of actions. > =================== The Buddha was very careful in how he said various things to specific people, keeping in mind the effect of his words. There are several ways in which explicitly teaching "there is no self" could have ill effect, one of which is a harmful fearfulness that could result, another is the illogical conclusion that immoral actions are just fine, and another of which is inculcating belief as a substitute for coming to directly see what is what. However, there are some few places in which the Buddha explicitly said that there is no self that is identical with any khandhic element or any group of them or anything outside of them. Moreover, he did explicitly teach that all dhammas are not-self, and putting that together with "the all" consisting of nothing but the khandhas (as in the Sabba Sutta), it is a simple inference that there is no self to be found anywhere. So as far as I'm concerned the Buddha taught not only "not self' but also "no self". 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) 58480 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:14am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > So as far as I'm concerned the Buddha taught not only "not > self' but also "no self". It is just a dangerous view, not a wrong one. If you can manage it while holding a firm moral ethics there is no particular problem 58481 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 3:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition upasaka_howard Hi, Fabrizio - In a message dated 4/27/06 10:22:49 AM Eastern Daylight Time, f.bartolomucci@... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > >So as far as I'm concerned the Buddha taught not only "not > >self' but also "no self". > > It is just a dangerous view, not a wrong one. If you can manage it > while holding a firm moral ethics there is no particular problem > > > ==================== Ah, yes, I understand. And I agree - there are dangers involved. 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) 58482 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:28am Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition onco111 Hi Ken, Comments interspersed... > I am out of my depth here, Dan. I don't know the difference between > happiness and pleasure that you are referring to. Is it a simple > matter of wholesome pleasant feeling versus unwholesome pleasant feeling? I am talking about a distinction between somanassa and kusala (with somanassa or upekkha) or between akusala citta (with somanassa and lobha) and kusala citta. > --------------------------- > D: > In Buddhism, isn't development of kusala a moral obligation? > Just because it is not so easy as we'd like to believe does not make > it any less of an obligation, does it? > ---------------------------- > > Is there a cetasika that could be called 'moral obligation?' Right > view can be described as a sense of urgency (to do good, avoid evil > and purify the mind) but, apart from that, I would think there was no > kusala sense of obligation. I read his "moral obligation" as Jewish language for the simple idea that happiness (sobhana cetasikas) needs to be present in order to be called "moral" (kusala). Unhappiness (dosa) is immoral (akusala). In Buddhist language, his proposition is a tautology, but in pop culture it is scandalous. > K: Kindness and generosity are common to people of all faiths and > philosophies, and I suppose eternity believers are as likely as anyone > to have the wisdom that knows true kusala from false kusala. However, > you seem (later) to be saying they can also know the nature of > conditioned dhammas. How could that be, when their religion teaches > the opposite of such ideas? I'm not convinced their religion teaches the opposite. Do you have any examples? On the other hand, I retract that question as silly! Couldn't you find hundreds of examples in Buddhists wrongly understand the nature of conditioned dhammas? Such misunderstandings of the teachings are bound to be quite common in any religion. The question is whether there is any evidence that someone teaches conditioned dhammas in the context and language of that religion. > -------------------------------- > D: > Many of the Buddha's words could be read (wrongly, in my opinion) > in the same "should or should not do", "be happy" way that you are > reading Mr. Prager's words. I think simple models like Prager's > proposition are wonderful reminders of how little power we have to > conjure 'happiness' or kusala. > -------------------------------- > > I missed that part. I thought he was saying, "You are obliged to be > happy!" To fall into the 'moral' category, sobhana cetasikas must be present. Otherwise, the kamma is immoral. As Howard rightly says, wishing to be happy doesn't make us happy. Why not? Because akusala is so prominent. We often even go so far as to justify our akusala as "righteous anger" or "political action" or "being realistic". > ---------------- > <. . .> > D: > But was he offering advice on what-to-do or simply pointing out > that dosa is akusala? If the latter, what a wonderful, Buddhist > message from an Orthodox Jew who most likely doesn't know a hill of > beans about BuddhaDhamma. > ---------------- > > Ah, yes, I see what you mean. He could have known that the development > of goodness depended on understanding, not on commands (and > obligations). > > It is unlikely, though, that he knew goodness was a conditioned > dhamma, independent of a controlling self, Far from being unlikely, I think it is reasonably likely that does know that. I know very little about Orthodox Judaism, but *the* major tenet of Christianity is that goodness cannot arise through a controlling self but ONLY through God. Any time there is the idea that Self can do a good thing, the work is immoral (according to orthodox Protestant Christian doctrine). > <. . .> > D: > I also think that the wisdom that distinguishes between kusala > and akusala and the wisdom that sees the conditioned nature of dhammas > is not unique to Buddhism. > ---------------------------- > > According to my understanding, the former is not unique, but the > latter is. Any inkling we (Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike) have of > conditionality must have come indirectly from a Buddha (or perhaps > directly in a former lifetime). I think conditionality is "unheard" > outside a Buddha's sasana: > > ""This is the Noble Truth of Suffering." Thus, O Bhikkhus, with > respect to things unheard before, there arose in me the eye, the > wisdom, the knowledge and the light." (Dhammacakkappavattana-sutta) I think the Buddha's insight into the NT was clearer and his understanding deeper than Denis Prager's or anyone else's, but I have little doubt that many aspects of conditionality are understood by many outside the dispensation. Metta, Dan 58483 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:36am Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) indriyabala Hi, Herman - I like your follow-up thinking because there are important related issues that have not been crystally clear yet. >Herman: >There is no craving for "beautiful woman" when "beautiful woman" is not seen. But is there craving for voice, hair, skin? Tep: I would say yes, there can be cravings for voice, or hair, or skin of the beautiful woman even after she has left. That craving is caused by memory of the beautiful woman. This recurring of perception (and the craving along with it) may be the reason why we need to practice asubha-saññaa often so that it can effectively chase away the subha-saññaa again and again. ................. >Herman: Craving is not uprooted by analysis into components, no matter how spontaneous. Tep: The analysis into components (undesirable body parts) and not-self elements (dhatus) takes away the basis for craving. When there is no basis for craving, then the root of craving will be destroyed. I have a question for you : suppose the beautiful woman's skin was seen on the body of a fat and ugly woman, would there be craving for "that" skin? ............ >Herman: >Why, some of my best friends crave the existence of parramattha dhammas :-) Tep: Why, do you not think they think "only the paramattha dhammas" do exist? Yours truly, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hi Tep, > (snipped) > > There is no craving for "beautiful woman" when "beautiful woman" is not > seen. But is there craving for voice, hair, skin? > > Craving is not uprooted by analysis into components, no matter how > spontaneous. Why, some of my best friends crave the existence of parramattha > dhammas :-) > > 58484 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:39am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition onco111 Hallo Joop, In a sense, we are free to be "happy" or "unhappy", but a criterion to qualify as "moral" in the Buddhist sense (kusala) or Jewish sense is that unhappiness does not arise. Another way to phrase the "happy" proposition is "dosa is akusala", a perfectly standard Theravada doctrine. Dan P.S. In another sense, we are not "free" to be happy or unhappy. Developing kusala is not a matter of deciding, "Hmmm... I am going to be happy now." --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Herman, Dan, all > > He is not right. We don't have moral obligations others than of the > kind mentioned in the Noble Eightfold Path. > We are free to be happy or unhappy > > Metta > > Joop > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" > wrote: > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > On 27/04/06, Dan D. wrote: > > > > > > Hi All, > > > On the radio the other day Denis Prager commented that we have a > moral > > > obligation to be happy. His point was two-fold. First, happy > people do > > > far more to make others happy than do unhappy people. Second, in > many > > > ways general day-to-day happiness and misery are determined by > the way > > > one looks at the world (acute mourning, mental illness, and severe > > > privation notwithstanding). Is he right? Does he go too far? Not > far > > > enough? > > > > > > > > An interesting topic to think about. My two cents worth are as > follows. I > > think worthwhile happiness and obligation are mutually exclusive. I > think > > that obligation is a source of anxiety. There is always an > undercurrent of > > anxiety in any situation where it is known that there are > expectations. It > > is for this reason that worthwhile happiness has seclusion / > solitude as a > > pre-requisite. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Kind Regards > > > > > > Herman > > > > > > There is ego, but not a self who has it. > > (Hofman H. 2005) > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > 58485 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Weekend Break in Posting nilovg Hi Howard, best wishes for a fruitful retreat. Nina. op 27-04-2006 14:49 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > Just in case I forget to mention it, I'll mention it now: I will > likely be doing no posting from Friday evening through Sunday evening, because > I > will be attending a "commuter meditation retreat" in Manhattan (NY City) lead > by > Bhante Gunaratana. 58486 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:38am Subject: metta 4 nilovg Dear friends, taken from Kh. Sujin's book on Metta: Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:49am Subject: Re: Thank you Descartes daniell@... Hi everyone. I am glad to join this group... So far I have been reading mainly on Tibetan buddhism, so it is interesting to join the discussions here. > I have a blind friend who lost complete use of his sight before he was 3 > months old. He has no recollection of visual stimulation or visual images. > In this case, his eye base cannot be a condition for seeing. The light that > collides with and spreads out from the matter in the world does not impinge > upon his eye base and sight cannot occur. Interestingly, he truly has no > idea what a visual image is. When he listens to a novel or hears someone > speak his mind does not visualize a setting sun dipping behind the horizon As far as I remember, in Hellen Keller's books she writes using sounds, colors, and so on... Though she never saw\heard them! How do you think this can happen? 58488 From: Daniel Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:03am Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition daniell@... Hello all... > D: But was he offering advice on what-to-do or simply pointing out > that dosa is akusala? If the latter, what a wonderful, Buddhist > message from an Orthodox Jew who most likely doesn't know a hill of > beans about BuddhaDhamma. As far as I understand the buddhist view on "ethics", it says in general that one should learn himself to distinguish between kusala and akusala. More specifically, it is to learn to distinguish that mosa, doha, lobha are akusala, and metta, karuna and so forth are kusala. However, I think that we all have unconsciously in us the western point of view that ethics is about following "laws" - laws from the government, laws defined by Kant's categorical imperative, laws given from God, laws given by our parents, the social habbits that are common in our place and so forth... I think that when a westerner comes to buddhism, one thing he needs to do besides trying to identify kusala and akusala states of mind and following the traditional buddhist process of learning, is to deconstruct the old views... Perhaps anyone could tell about his history with this? What was his(hers) proccess of realizing the faults of the previous views? 58489 From: "maitreyi144" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:21am Subject: Meaning of Javana maitreyi144 Dear Dharma Friends, Please can someone help me understand the proper meaning of Javana ? What is the Samnskrit word for Javana? Thank you. In Dharma, ~Maitreyi 58490 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:44am Subject: Re: Weekend Break in Posting onco111 Have a great weekend, Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi all - > > Just in case I forget to mention it, I'll mention it now: I will > likely be doing no posting from Friday evening through Sunday evening, because I > will be attending a "commuter meditation retreat" in Manhattan (NY City) lead by > Bhante Gunaratana. There'll be an introduction and some meditating Friday > evening followed by all-day meditation sessions on Saturday and Sunday (from 9:30 > a.m. to 5:00 pm), and while at home Friday and Saturday evenings I'm going to > try to maintain as much "internal seclusion" as possible, avoiding TV, > reading, and computer, and maybe meditating some more on my own. I also may not get > to post on Sunday evening either for other reasons. So no posts addressed to > me after daytime on Friday are likely to get answered until next week. > > 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) > 58491 From: nina van gorkom Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) nilovg Dear Fabrizio, op 27-04-2006 15:29 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op f.bartolomucci@...: > Exactly it is because cittas run fast that any of those conditions you > mentioned advert an extremely high number of cittas: actually there is > no material phenomena that produces just pleasant or unpleasant > rootless cittas. Also there is no connection between pleasentness and > wholesolness or even supramiundane cittas: someone could be pushed to > the Dhamma following an unpleasant body-consciousness (perhaps a > broken leg), someone other by a pleasant eye-consciousness (perhaps > the viewing of a monk) or any combination thereoff. ------ N: Just an addition to your illustration of how things can happen in life: And why is he pushed to the Dhamma by an event? It was the right time for him, his understanding was maturing. --------- >> F: > All of them cannot be owned, they have no possessor. > > I already talked in another posting of this point. I would be happy to > hear a comment by you on my remarks there. ------- N: Perhaps it is the mail Howard just answered about non-self? Howard answered this very carefully and formulated it very well. You talked about the danger. Yes we can repeat: there is no self, there is no self, and then be heedless as to morality. Of course, it depends on the citta. Akusala citta can find wrong interpretations. It is paññaa that is developed and can penetrate the truth of non-self, but that is a long way. A beginning paññaa can understand intellectually that there are five khandhas and that these are conditioned. At the moment of right understanding, even if it is only intellectual, there is no place for wrong interpretation and heedlesness. Nina. 58492 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:14am Subject: Re: [dsg] Weekend Break in Posting upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/27/06 1:41:12 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > best wishes for a fruitful retreat. > Nina. > ====================== Thank you, Nina! :-) BTW, I've talked at times about setting up conditions to lead to (eventual) good results. In that regard, I've noted (to myself) in the past that a period of time in which I "log" many hours of meditation with little to no distraction between "sittings" but maintaining external and internal silence and ongoing mindfulness between formal meditations is a very "profitable" period. However, due to natural laziness and other defilements, and due to everyday matters that require my attention - especially the former, I am unlikely to put myself through such a period. But by taking the step to sign up for a retreat and then just going there, I put myself in the position of having such a period of meditation and seclusion "forced" on me - voluntarily forced on me. I think this is a decent conventional example of setting up conditions to enable useful goals. 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) 58493 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:15am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Weekend Break in Posting upasaka_howard Thanks, Dan! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 4/27/06 2:01:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: > Have a great weekend, 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) 58494 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:23pm Subject: Re: Weekend Break in Posting buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi all - > > Just in case I forget to mention it, I'll mention it now: I will > likely be doing no posting from Friday evening through Sunday evening, because I > will be attending a "commuter meditation retreat" in Manhattan (NY City) lead by > Bhante Gunaratana. Good luck with you meditation weekend. Actually, 10 or more days would be better, but every little bit helps. :-) Metta, James 58495 From: "icarofranca" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:56pm Subject: Re: Weekend Break in Posting icarofranca Hi Howard! > Just in case I forget to mention it, I'll mention it now: I >will > likely be doing no posting from Friday evening through Sunday >evening, because I > will be attending a "commuter meditation retreat" in Manhattan (NY >City) lead by > Bhante Gunaratana. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Good luck, Howard!!! After this precious Vipassana full session in NY, you will be with full charge to new enterprises and new rethoric battles here at DSG! News insights! A new inspiration! Mettaya, ^_^ Ícaro 58496 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:40am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Weekend Break in Posting upasaka_howard In a message dated 4/27/06 5:26:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Good luck with you meditation weekend. Actually, 10 or more days > would be better, but every little bit helps. :-) > ========================= You're right, but it's a problem to be away that long - for several unimportant reasons. So, I'll make do. Thanks for the good wishes! 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) 58497 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Weekend Break in Posting upasaka_howard Hi, Icaro - In a message dated 4/27/06 6:00:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, icarofranca@... writes: > Good luck, Howard!!! > After this precious Vipassana full session in NY, you will be with > full charge to new enterprises and new rethoric battles here at DSG! > > News insights! A new inspiration! > > Mettaya, ^_^ > > Ícaro > ===================== LOLOL! Yep, I'll be prepared for battle! :-) 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) 58498 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:33pm Subject: Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) ken_aitch Hi Geoff, --------------- <. . .> G: > I of course, interpret all statements of cessation of consciousness to be referring to conditioned consciousness, and the mention of vinnana anidassana being without end, allows one to infer unconditioned consciousness. --------------- I briefly searched for a reference to vinnana anidassana but found nothing relating to the Theravada texts. It seems to be a Mahayana term. Is it what they also call "Buddha-nature?" ------------------------- G: > Furthermore, when directly asked about the status of an arahant after death the Buddha gave his "does not apply" statement to all four possibilities. ------------------------- I can see why you would quote that fact, but it can be explained in ways that entail neither an eternal self nor a non-temporal consciousness. --------------------------------------- <. . .> G: > I consider the Theras at the first council to be original Theravada and the members of the third council and the commentarial tradition that follows to be Abhidhammika Theravada, one of the eighteen sects of early sectarian Buddhism. ---------------------------------------- Were the terms 'vinnana anidassana' and 'Buddha mature" used at the First Council? ------------------------------------------------- <. . .> G: We each have a very different paradigm of Dhamma-vinaya, and thus we would disagree on many, many points. I don't see much value in any extended debate really. -------------------------------------------------- Agreed. :-) ------------------------------ <. . .> KH: > > , we could discuss the difference between parinibbana, > eternal-life and annihilation. G: I am more than willing to hear what you have to say in this regard Ken. ------------------------------ Thank you, I will keep it brief. :-) When the Middle Way is not seen it remains a paradox. That is because the two extremes appear all encompassing - leaving no room for exceptions. * The trick is to understand that, even here and now, there are only dhammas (arising at one of the six doors). Parinibbana is no different; it is no more frightening than the present moment. At parinibbana there are only the death-moment dhammas of an arahant. They are essentially the same as the dhammas that are arising here and now. One difference, admittedly, is that they will not condition new dhammas to follow in their place. But so what? Future dhammas are no more my self than are present dhammas. Ken H * With respect, I think this is where you are going wrong: you think the Middle Way must be non-temporal consciousness. But isn't non-temporal-consciousness belief just eternity belief by another name? 58499 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:36pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? philofillet HI Tep > Your post (#58396) was skilfully written (in regard to your use of > words) and it put me at my wits' end. {:-|) Yes, skillfully using words is pretty meaningless. As we know "skillful" is a common translation for kusala, so in that sense it wasn't likely to be skillful. Well, there might have been moments of skillfulness. The best thing is that I feel friendly to you now (these days.) > Tep: Right, it is in "the citta". Right, "we" do not have that ability > to "see into other people's cittas". My apologies for having caused > you the hatred! Ph: No need to apologize. You meant no harm. It was my cittas at issue. > T: There are two things that need clarification here!! Are the > "uncorrectable errors" permanent -- i.e. 'nicca' ? Since you have > said that you "don't see into other people's cittas", then how could > you say it affirmatively for all "long-time" learners (no exception, > whatsoever)? Ph: no, I wrote quickly - I didn't mean that. Just that we shouldn't assume that applying oneself diligently to Dhamma related practices over so many years will lead to a lot of understanding. Of course it can. (And you say that you relied on commentaries for many years, so that helps.) Just that we shouldn't assume that it always does - that's all. And if wrong understanding *has* been accumulated over a long time (in conventional terms, of course) it will be all the harder to eradicate. In one talk I heard someone say that we are better off not having the Dhamma at all than having heard it and taken it the wrong way. I wouldn't go that far, beacuse even Dhamma that is misunderstood conditions harmlessness, I think. Phil 58500 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:51pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? philofillet Hi again Tep > Ph: You meant no harm. Oops. This is wrong, of course. I have no way of knowing. Phil p.s Sorry about my "last word to you" habit - I have never meant it in an aloof way. It's simply that I don't have time to get involved in ongoing discussions, unfortunately. I wish I did! So will continue to bow out of threads quickly. 58501 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:07pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! lbidd2 Hi Paul, Thanks for your reply. Very interesting. It inspired a few inconsequential thoughts in context: P: "I'm not an expert on Descartes, but in more recent Western psychology and philosophy it is pretty much accepted that my thoughts and your thoughts or anyone else's thoughts are about as separate as things get." L: But they all only arise in 'my' mind. P: "What is not separate, however, is the mind's relationship to the world. L: Agreed. P: "Most of the interesting philosophy of mind in the West accepts that the mind is dependent upon the world. L: But the mind also creates the world. P: "Some, following Kant and others posit that there is a conscious capacity to think that comes before the mind's relationship to matter, but in this case, they would still see the particulars of thinking arising only through the mind's relation to the world. This is not quite the same thing that Descartes had in mind, however. I think Descartes understood thinking in the Intellecutalist sense as something that finds its own cause and justification in itself or in relation to God. Descartes was not so much concerned about how the mind related to matter. L: This is close to what I had in mind. I was trying to fix discursive thinking among the cetasikas. Vitakka and vicara were a possibility, and also ditthi. P: "Buddhism teaches something quite different from Descartes, I think. In Buddhism mind and matter are in a constant and vital relationship to one another. Mind states arise in dependence upon the five senses bases and the heart base (I've always taken this as meaning the brain and other components of the nervous system in the body, but I wonder if anyone else might know more about this?) which in turn arise in dependence upon the attributes of matter (rupa). L: I recently read in the Visuddhimagga that even in the rupa-less plane the rupa of mind base is still necessary, but rupa is not an object of consciousness. P: "Dependent arising points to the fact that nothing in our daily life and in our thinking happens without conditions. Mind states can not arise without the conditions of the sense bases and matter first being present. Particular mind states do not arise without there being particular past and present conditions for there arising. Thinking, then, is not just words; it is what happens when mind and matter arise together. I have a blind friend who lost complete use of his sight before he was 3 months old. He has no recollection of visual stimulation or visual images. In this case, his eye base cannot be a condition for seeing. The light that collides with and spreads out from the matter in the world does not impinge upon his eye base and sight cannot occur. Interestingly, he truly has no idea what a visual image is. When he listens to a novel or hears someone speak his mind does not visualize a setting sun dipping behind the horizon or lush red of an apple. Instead, his mind translates all visual imagery into feeling. In this sense, thinking is very tricky. It may seem like Words and Visual, for example are almost the same thing. But, studies of the mind and Buddhist teachings show that our thinking (the particular kind of thinking we do every day) is always dependent upon certain factors. Words are concepts which have their conditions in the arising of nama and rupa, but they are not in themselves nama (mind states) and rupa (physical matter). If thinking is words running through the mind, it is only this in the conventional sense. There is so much more about the mind and its relation to matter that needs to be understood. Descartes thought that thinking preceded the mind's relationship with the world, but what is thinking if not the feelings, sights, sounds, smells, and tastes that arise in dependence upon the sense bases and in dependence upon mind states? The mind at any moment can only "think" in relation to very particular past and present conditions. L: True, but mind usually thinks _about_ generalities, and this is what we take personally as me and mine. In other words, I think a bunch of nonsense and that is what I am. I think therefore I am. How do you say that in French? "Je pense, est voila, je suis"? Nice talking to you, Larry 58502 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thank you Descartes lbidd2 Daniel: "As far as I remember, in Hellen Keller's books she writes using sounds, colors, and so on... Though she never saw\heard them! How do you think this can happen?" Hi Daniel, My guess is these are words that refer to emotional and physical experiences. What have you been reading in Tibetan Buddhism? Larry 58503 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:20pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Weekend Break in Posting lbidd2 Howard: "I think this is a decent conventional example of setting up conditions to enable useful goals." Hi Howard, It is probably also an example of consciousness as conascent predominance condition. Larry 58504 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:32pm Subject: Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) sunnaloka Hi Ken, Please see DN 11 and MN 49. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" wrote: > I briefly searched for a reference to vinnana anidassana but found > nothing relating to the Theravada texts. It seems to be a Mahayana > term. Is it what they also call "Buddha-nature?" G; The term is stated in the above two suttas. > ------------------------- > G: > Furthermore, when directly asked about the status of an arahant > after death the Buddha gave his "does not apply" statement to all four > possibilities. > ------------------------- > > I can see why you would quote that fact, but it can be explained in > ways that entail neither an eternal self nor a non-temporal consciousness. G: I posit no "eternal self." > Were the terms 'vinnana anidassana' and 'Buddha mature" used at the > First Council? G: If we accept that the two Nikayas containing the term vinnana anidassana were recited at the first council, then yes. I never brought up "buddha nature" sir, you did. I again will say that to my way of thinking we each have a very different paradigm of Dhamma-vinaya, and thus, in any extended discussion we would disagree on many, many points. I don't see much value in any extended debate really. Thank you for your replies. Metta, Geoff. 58505 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:35pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) sunnaloka Hi Sukinder, I realize that I posted out of the blue with little reintroduction and getting to know people again. I should have reintroduced myself before unloading critiques of the commentarial tradition that is the paradigm of choice for many here at DSG. As my understanding of Dhamma-vinaya is very different from the Abhidhammika position, I only post here at DSG to hear some critiques of what I have to say, not to engage in extended debates. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sukinder" wrote: > Sukin: Sorry for that. There is always a better way to say things, and I didn't. G: No problem :-) > I am happy to hear that you have been reading the posts all this while. I assume therefore that you will continue to be reading them, because I really feel that my position is right and yours is wrong and so you might learn something in the future. ;-) G: Indeed! ;-) > Once you saw that the Abhidhamma is about understanding the present moment, and that it is possible to see it in a way that it does not conflict with the Suttas, then you might have a change of mind about it. You may not end up agreeing with everything, for example the vinnana anidassana part, but at least you can discuss this without being so biased. G: I have no intention of trying to change your mind regarding the Abhidhamma. If it works for you in order to release conditioned dhammas, then that is all good. For me, it presents an illogical and experientially invalid understanding of experience. > The test of Dhamma is the understanding of experiences as dhatu, as khandha and so on. If at the expense of this one becomes interested in arguing ideas in the abstract, then one misses the point of Dhamma study and practice. Larry's response to you seems to me to be one coming from the former, whereas your original posts seem to be with the latter attitude. G: The test of Dhamma is the understanding of the three characteristics regarding dhatu and khandha, etc., and thereby turning away from them and inclining toward the deathless. > Similarly, when you judged the commentarial position as being nihilistic based on the 'vinnana anidassana' argument, I think this is missing the point. 'Self-view' and thus 'wrong-view' is better understood in relation to experiences in the present moment. Whether the citta of an arahatta ceases at parinibbana or not may not be as important as whether at this moment there is self-view or not. If there is, and one leans towards eternalism, then the idea of 'no cittas anymore at parinibbana' would seem threatening. Likewise the opposite position. > So I'd like to ask you, what bearing does the idea of an 'unconditioned citta' have on your Dhamma study and practice? Is the idea that Nibbana is in fact a 'state of mind' attractive to you? G: Sir, it is the only possibility that makes any sense to me. Feel free to conceive otherwise. All such discursive conceptions are fabricated and empty. Metta, Geoff. 58506 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:49pm Subject: Re: Weekend Break in Posting philofillet Hi Larry, Howard, Nina and all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, LBIDD@... wrote: > > Howard: "I think this is a decent conventional example of setting up > conditions to enable useful goals." > > Hi Howard, > > It is probably also an example of consciousness as conascent > predominance condition. Ph: But it could be chanda, right? (Or virya, or vihamsa.) Only one of these can be c.p.c at a time. Do we know which one is c.p.c at any moment? No, the Buddha did, but we don't. That's ok. Shouldn't press too ahrd to try to know which factor is c.p.c because it is beyond our understanding. Re lobha and chanda, this from Nina: "When we create something (art, music etc) there is lobha mula citta attached to the object being created, but lobha is not a predominant factor; the cetasika chanda acts as a predominant factor." This sounds like a very important point, perhaps in line with the "abandon craving through craving" (paraphrase) sutta that has been quoted at DSG a few times. It sounds as though the chanda could override the lobha involved. But then we remember that chanda can be kusala or akusala. I will be posting more about this point on the weekend. Very, very important, I think. Phil 58507 From: "sunnaloka" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 5:45pm Subject: Re: Ajahn Chah's Unconditioned Mind sunnaloka Hi Matheesha, > M : Why do you feel it is important to abandon sanna. An arahath has > no concept of what is going on around him, and has only 4 > aggregates? :) G: My mistake, the arahant has abandoned *clinging* to sanna. :-) > How about abandoning a self completely to the point that he IS the > surronding envioronment he is experiencing. He is not just part of > the picture, but IS the picture. > > There is just continous experiencing. His story has come to an end > way before his death. > > Years of peace, awaiting final dissolution of the > aggregates/experiencing. G: I agree with all of what you say here. Metta, Geoff. 58508 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 3:35pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! paulgrabiano... Dear Ciao, I think you are absolutely right that fatalism is a danger here. It is certainly a central problem in much of Western philosophy and psychology. Escaping fatalism while maintaining a view of an embodied mind is central to Western thought at least since the late 18th century. However, I think Buddhism provides a much better means of escaping the dilemma of fatalism, but only once we realize that the choices we make are non-self. It's only when we realize how much our existence is inscribed in a kammic chain of becoming that we can begin to free ourselves from its worst consequences. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" To: Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 2:18 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Grabianowski" > wrote: >> Dependent arising points to the fact that nothing in our >> daily life and in our thinking happens without conditions. > > Dear Paul, > > I suggest to be careful about this view as it may lead to fatalism. > > Ciao, Fabrizio 58509 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 3:42pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Thank you Descartes paulgrabiano... Hi Daniell, I believe that Helen Keller didn't become deaf and blind until she was almost 2 years old. This might explain how she was able to use sounds and colors. Those who lose their sight even later in life still have many visual memories, I believe. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel" To: Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 9:49 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: Thank you Descartes > Hi everyone. I am glad to join this group... So far I have been reading > mainly > on Tibetan buddhism, so it is interesting to join the discussions here. >> I have a blind friend who lost complete use of his sight before he was 3 >> months old. He has no recollection of visual stimulation or visual >> images. >> In this case, his eye base cannot be a condition for seeing. The light >> that >> collides with and spreads out from the matter in the world does not >> impinge >> upon his eye base and sight cannot occur. Interestingly, he truly has no >> idea what a visual image is. When he listens to a novel or hears someone >> speak his mind does not visualize a setting sun dipping behind the >> horizon > > As far as I remember, in Hellen Keller's books she writes using sounds, > colors, > and so on... Though she never saw\heard them! How do you think this can > happen? 58510 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:38pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? indriyabala --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > Hi again Tep > > > Ph: You meant no harm. > > Oops. This is wrong, of course. I have no way of knowing. > > Phil > > p.s Sorry about my "last word to you" habit - I have never meant it in > an aloof way. It's simply that I don't have time to get involved in > ongoing discussions, unfortunately. I wish I did! So will continue to > bow out of threads quickly. > Hi, Phil - You can have my words of honor that I will always mean "no harm" toward you. Yes, I promise. I hope you will always feel free to discuss the Dhamma with me. There should no last word between us. *_^ . Sincerely, Tep, your dhamma friend. =================== 58511 From: connie Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:41pm Subject: Re: missed ya nichiconn connie: ... i hear there's a milk route. mike: You mean the sitting-cross-legged-on-the-floor route? connie (for days now): har! as a child, i really liked the flying carpet, but lo! Guide 929. Herein, what is the agreed? (Dh.49). This is the agreed. <> ... cheers & best to the roses, then. actually, i was thinking of patience (which i was just now scowling over fixing my mispelling of) and virtue being their own reward on it's own good time... or was it idleness, wondering what one might find to read on the seven lay-overs? Today, it's: Pitaka Disclosure 203. (M.iii,163). 204. Herein, that he is aggressive by body or by speech, this is his state of a "doer of the ill-done". And likewise the false speech he speaks as already demonstrated is his state of a "speaker of the ill-spoken". And that he intends the mental misconduct consisting in ill-will, this is his state of a "cogitator of the ill-cogitated". Since he is possessed of these fool's characteristics, he exists with the three types of pain and grief [correspondingly] born therefrom. And when he has gone to a meeting or gone to an assembly he talks the type of talk born therefrom. And when this tenfold course of unprofitable action beginning with killing breathing things comes into being, with that as source he experiences pain and grief. Furthermore, when he sees a felon who has offended the kind arrested by the king and put to death, then it occurs to him "If the king knew about me, he might have me put to death too (cf. M.iii,163-4), and with that as source [63] he experiences pain and grief. Furthermore (cf. M.iii,164-5), with that as source he experiences pain and grief. 205. Accordingly, the fool's characteristic is the cause, the three [corresponding] kinds of pain born therefrom are the outcome, and that on the dissolution of the body he reappears in hell is the fruit (cf.#198-9). This is expressed in terms of hate. <> where i'm sitting now, i'm off my rocker. peace. 58512 From: connie Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:41pm Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427 nichiconn hi tep&hof-sters, > Herman: > Why, some of my best friends crave the existence of parramattha dhammas :-) Tep: Why, do you not think they think "only the paramattha dhammas" do exist? connie: exist? not-exist? did the teeth run down the middle of the road? laughing. Pitaka Disclosure: 380. (4) Likewise the twenty-two faculties. [Herein,] the twelve faculties, that is, the eye-faculty, ... down to ... the grief faculty, are (5) Suffering. The masculinity faculty and the femininity faculty are a footing for craving. For as soon as the male has to do with women, it then becomes subject to lust in oneself: this is I-making. Being thus lustful, it seeks [an object] externally: this is my-making. Likewise the female. [101] Herein, the pleasure faculty and the joy faculty are subordinate to the masculinity faculty. When the man's ideas of greed have their purport fulfilled, they increase the unprofitable; but if his purport fails to be fulfilled, then the pain faculty occurs in him and the grief faculty, and also hate and a root of unprofit increases. But if he keeps onlooking-equanimity in being, the onlooking-equanimity faculty has parallel occurence with the masculinity faculty, and non-delusion as a root of profit increases. 381. So there are seven faculties, neither more nor less (?), due to assuming an object for defilement, namely feeling of all [five kinds and] the femininity faculty and the masculininty faculty. 382. Herein, the eight faculties, namely the faith faculty (#194) ... down to ... the final-knower faculty (#221) are (5) the way leading to the Cessation of Suffering. 383. Of the twelve [faculties (#380)], the five faculites [beginning with that of the eye] are a footing for lust for sensual desires, the mind faculty is a footing for lust for being, the five faculties [beginning with forms] are a footing for lust for form, and the femininity faculty and masculinity faculty are a footing for the description in terms of creatures. Herein, whatever faculty a Thread, whether verse or [prose], can be made a way of entry by, that is what it can be demonstrated by. <> Yours truly! 58513 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:19pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? philofillet Hi Tep > You can have my words of honor that I will always mean "no harm" > toward you. Yes, I promise. Though you have the accumulated tendency to be a nice person, technically speaking the above is meaningless, isn't it? Isn't it only the ariyan who is beyond harmfulness? The "mean" is cetana, right, which rises and falls away so quickly. How can we feel taht we have guaranteed control over it? I think we have no idea of what evil we are capable of. Again, not saying this about Tep, rather about all of us. Because there are conditions at work that are stronger (and fleeter and slippier) than "us." This is not grounds for hopelessness or fatalism. We can cultivate the wholesome and eradicate the unwholesome, that much is for sure - the Buddha tells us so. But we are not beyond even the most horrible forms of evil, not yet, not anyone of us here. The potential lies lurking...very, very unlikely in most cases, but the potential is still there. Jon, for example, could abandon his long years of abstaining from alcohol *at this very moment* and go carousing in the brothels of Hong Kong, and mug passers-by to get more money to buy the methamphetamines that he could develop a craving for *at this very moment* There is no telling!!!!! Phil 58514 From: "indriyabala" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 7:36pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation,... Upaaya = strategy indriyabala --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Tep (Phil, Sarah, Nina, …) > > Although I don't know exactly why you adressed me in your message I > will respond. > "Skilfull" or 'skillfull" or "skilful" or 'skillful": I never > understand the logic of such english words (still more bizar than > phonetical Pali) > But I like the concept "skilfull" - upaya. > Hello Joop (and other members) - I think because there are American English and United Kingdom English, that's why the various spellings -- the Americans just want to be different, you know -- the 'ego thing'. What do you mean by "upaya" ? There are 'ubaya' and 'upaaya', but there is no 'upaya' in the PTS Dictionary! I like the word 'upaaya' that means "approach; fig. way, means, expedient, stratagem". The Blessed One often advised his monks to employ the best strategy that would facilitate their practice of the Dhamma. But I cannot recall even one English-translation sutta online that talks about upaaya. If you know of any such sutta, I'd appreciate it. Best wishes, Tep ======== > Some buddhist prefer Sutta and some prefer Abhidhamma, so it's very > wise of the Buddha that het made compose both Pitakas (about the > Vinaya I have no opinion). > I'm not so stable (is being stable kusaloa or akusala?) in my > preference. > On our short walking hollidays I had to carry my luggage and I only > took one book with me, of course a buddhistic one: the Vimalakirti > Nirdesa Sutra: very witty and very skilfull. > > Metta > > Joop > > 58515 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:11pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? gazita2002 hello Phil, A very 'sobering' reminder, Phil. Yes, I do believe that given certain conditions, we are capable of any evil deed - maybe not in this life but any time in the future until sotapattimagga has arisen I recall having a conversation with Sarah about this - not the Jon aspect ;-) We were discussing some aspect regarding women's 'undesirable' behaviour and unfortunately I cannot remember the exact sutta that we were talking about, but I do remember more clearly A.Sujin commenting that it was a good reminder for women. A reminder to see just how badly we [and here I include men, and children]can behave given the right conditions to do so. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > Hi Tep > > > You can have my words of honor that I will always mean "no harm" > > toward you. Yes, I promise. > > Though you have the accumulated tendency to be a nice person, > technically speaking the above is meaningless, isn't it? Isn't it only > the ariyan who is beyond harmfulness? The "mean" is cetana, right, > which rises and falls away so quickly. How can we feel taht we have > guaranteed control over it? > > I think we have no idea of what evil we are capable of. Again, not > saying this about Tep, rather about all of us. Because there are > conditions at work that are stronger (and fleeter and slippier) > than "us." This is not grounds for hopelessness or fatalism. We can > cultivate the wholesome and eradicate the unwholesome, that much is for > sure - the Buddha tells us so. But we are not beyond even the most > horrible forms of evil, not yet, not anyone of us here. The potential > lies lurking...very, very unlikely in most cases, but the potential is > still there. > > Jon, for example, could abandon his long years of abstaining from > alcohol *at this very moment* and go carousing in the brothels of Hong > Kong, and mug passers-by to get more money to buy the methamphetamines > that he could develop a craving for *at this very moment* > > There is no telling!!!!! > > Phil > 58516 From: Jaran Jainhuknan Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] �Cetasikas' study corner 430- mindfulness/sati (l) jjnbdal Dear Sarah: > The word "study" can remind us that there should be > mindfulness of > realities again and again, until they are known as they are. > Full > understanding cannot be achieved within a short time. Thanks for good reminder. Why can't 'full understanding' be achieved in short time? Maybe the sentence meant to say 'it takes long time -- several life times as understanding accumulates through different lives -- for full understanding to fully develop'. 'Understanding' should always be a subject of the sentence. (Sorry, a Thai talking about English grammar :">) Best Regards, Jaran 58517 From: "robmoult" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:11pm Subject: Re: It isn't me! / ... the Abhidhamma The Anatta Fence robmoult Hi Andrew, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > > > Within the sutta pitaka, how do you comprehend talk of devas and > > yakkhas and the earthquake and thunder that marked the Buddha's > > parinibbana and the inability to light his funeral pyre? Literal? > > Figurative? Mythical? > > ===== > > I have no problem with talk of Devas, Yakkhas, Petas, etc. The Buddha > talked about them frequently and there is an entire collection of > Peta stories in the Kuda Nikaya. > > Earthquake, thunder and inability to light the funeral pyre are > closer to the mythical side, in my opinion. > ===== Bhikkhu Pesala writes the following: Intelligent people rightly ask, "Why should anyone believe in such realms, since their existence cannot be proved?" The existence of such realms can be known by direct knowledge through very deep concentration like that developed by the Buddha. It can also be logically proved or inferred by a thorough and careful study of the Buddha's teachings, though it cannot be proved by modern science, which relies on measuring material phenomena. It is not yet possible to detect mentality by electronics, though it is possible to tell with some degree of accuracy whether someone is lying. This is done by measuring physical changes caused by emotions like fear or anxiety. These days, those who can gain direct knowledge are very rare. However, an intelligent person can gain firm confidence in the Buddha's teaching by studying the scriptures, or books by learned monks. How do we know about the existence of atoms? No one can see an atom with the naked eye, nor even with the most powerful optical microscope. Electron microscopes can only show the patterns made by atoms on a screen. Anyone with a good knowledge of science will readily accept that these patterns represent individual atoms. However, someone lacking scientific knowledge would find it very hard to understand what atoms were. Before Einstein, no one would have given much credence to the equivalence of matter and energy, or to the curvature of space and time, but these abstruse laws of nature are now widely accepted. It took very considerable effort to convince intelligent people about these strange facts. Many ordinary people cannot appreciate the significance of Einstein's theories, and are completely baffled by them. Those who have neither training in meditation, nor a thorough knowledge of scripture, are ignorant regarding nonhuman realms. Well- educated Buddhists and experienced meditators smile when cynics dismiss such realms and beings as mere superstition. Metta, Rob M :-) 58518 From: "Andrew" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:49pm Subject: Re: It isn't me! / ... the Abhidhamma The Anatta Fence corvus121 Hi RobM Thanks for this interesting quote. Not sure I've come across Bh. Pesala before. Where he says: > Those who have neither training in meditation, nor a thorough > knowledge of scripture, are ignorant regarding nonhuman realms. Well- > educated Buddhists and experienced meditators smile when cynics > dismiss such realms and beings as mere superstition. ... of course, it would be a very poor historian and a very poor scientist who would *not* dismiss this talk of the non-human realms. But in the case of the Dhamma student, I believe that such dismissal would signal the presence of akusala and an absence of saddha. Not to worry, though: if the conditions are right for those to arise, they will. But I think the development of wisdom works against out of hand dismissal of these things (it doesn't work to 'prove' these things according to an historian's or scientist's discipline). Again my point that Dhamma study and history/science are not on the same page. BTW I have met many Western "highly trained meditators" over the years and I don't recall any telling me of encounters with devas or yakkhas or so on. So why does the Venerable Bhikkhu suggest that experienced meditators smile in the face of such cynicism? Best wishes Andrew T 58519 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Weekend Break in Posting lbidd2 Hi Phil, A comment on your following point: L: "Hi Howard, It is probably also an example of consciousness as conascent predominance condition." Ph: "But it could be chanda, right? (Or virya, or vihamsa.) Only one of these can be c.p.c at a time. Do we know which one is c.p.c at any moment? No, the Buddha did, but we don't. That's ok. Shouldn't press too hard to try to know which factor is c.p.c because it is beyond our understanding." L: It isn't beyond our understanding. I'm sure Howard could review his consiousnesses and see what happened. Granted, it is very subtle stuff even on a macro level, but really it's just a matter of sensitizing the mind to what's going on, and understanding the concepts so there is recognition. "Pressing hard" is viriya. "Too hard" of course is a mistake. You are right it could have been any of the four or all of them sequentially. The main point, though, is that this is how things "get done". It adds another dimension to the "to meditate, or not to meditate" debate, which is a spin-off of the 'no control' issue; include in that 'free will' and 'determinism'. Larry 58520 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 8:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] metta 4 paulgrabiano... Hi all, Thanks for the Metta postings Nina. This reminds of how much I've learned from reading Kh. Sujin's book. I ordered a copy of the book about 3 months ago. Metta is something I never emphasized before in my daily studies and practice. In recent months, however, I've taken every chance possible to cultivate an equanimous sense of right thought and action toward others. I'm usually skeptical about these things, but I can truly say that the Buddha was dead on about metta. Recently, a traveler from Rochester who was relocating in Buffalo approached my wife and I and told an elaborate story about how he needed money to buy food to get him through the night so he could begin working at Kentucky Fried Chicken the next day. To my wife's horror, I stood there and listened to the man's story, looking him in directly in the eyes and asking him detailed questions about what he had already told me. Now, all the usual reservations aside (e.g. he could have been a meth addict, he's probably richer than I am, he's a scam artist etc.) I decided that his story was legitimate and I gave him $10. I would never have been able to do this without having studied dhamma. I just decided in that moment that $10 has almost no value wagered against the slight possibility that this man was telling the truth. My wife was angry with me, but I tried to convince her that what I did was correct. Interestingly, the very next day I drove all the way to the university campus and I forgot only to notice that I forgot my wallet. I needed my wallet to resume my Friday study time at a local restaurant (recently my absolutely most productive study time). Going home for my wallet would be way out of the way of my usual routine. Unfortunately, on Fridays there is hardly anyone on campus, and I'm not the type to ask others to borrow money. I just accepted the fact that I would be driving home. However, I had been driving a colleague to the campus about 3 times a week because he was unable to drive himself. As soon as he heard that I lost my wallet, he insisted that I let him lend me money. At first I said no, but later I decided it would be a great help and I went to his office to tell him I would take him up on his offer. By the time I had gotten to his office, he had already sent one of his students to get change for me. I went back to my office and within 5 minutes the student knocked on my office door one floor below his and handed me a nice crisp $10 bill. Needless to say, I went to Pannera to study and write a paper, and I got more work done in 5 hours than I usually do in 2 days. Sure, I will pay him back tomorrow, and this may just seem like a silly coincidence, but I like to think that the $10 is a symbol for and an actual instance of the way metta works. The $10 has no home; it's equanimous in its generosity; it goes always where it is needed and goes elsewhere when it can lighten an otherwise heavy load. It will get you through the toughest times, but it will not want to stick around for too long after those difficult times have ended. Though the situation which prompted me to give the $10 is a bit tricky (at least for my wife), I feel it has brought many kusala cittas. I can't quite figure this thing metta, but I know it's so much more operative and potent than we give it credit for. The Buddha's teachings help us to understood that metta dispels much anger and settles the mind so that many things become possible. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From: "nina van gorkom" To: Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 1:38 PM Subject: [dsg] metta 4 Dear friends, taken from Kh. Sujin's book on Metta: 58521 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 9:56pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition onco111 Herman, Comments interspersed... > > D: I'm not at all convinced that there's "always" anxiety when there are > > expectations, but I agree that expectations and thinking > > about "meeting obligations" very often generate anxiety. Buddha and > > Howard's "ancient Jewish reformer" also made exhortations to, e.g., > > do good; avoid evil; purify the mind. Do you think these exhortations > > coming from respected authorities also inevitably create anxiety? > > > > H: I do not consider these exhortations to be about social obligations. I agree. Moral obligations, though, they are. The social obligation aspect is an "ethics" add-on that goes well with the words, but, ultimately, these are different thing. > H: These exhortations are made realising that immutable law of the mind - as > you sow so shall you reap. If there were no consequences of action then > there would be no grounds for anxiety. But because there are consequences of > action, realising that is certainly a wellspring of anxiety. A sociopath is > not anxious about their behaviour, but one who comes to realise they are and > have been busily laying the foundations for a guaranteed future hell may > well have the odd panic attack :-) > May well indeed. Or not. > D: Doesn't it depend on how you read them? E.g., as advice to the great and powerful "I", or as a mirror to reflect the prominence of our own akusala? > H: Please say a little more about this if what I wrote doesn't cover it. I was just referring to the perennial old dsg bugaboo about descriptive/prescriptive, declarative/imperative, etc. > > D:As for a seclusion/solitude pre-requisite, do you mean physical > > seclusion or a mental seclusion from the anxiety-born-of- expectation? > > > H: I think the two can mutually condition each other. The currency of society > is language. If you are in a place, physically or mentally, where you are > driven (obliged) to talk, or think, you are not in a place of solitude. > Physically, no; mentally, perhaps. I'm thinking of the sutta in which a group of bhikkhus approach the Buddha: "We're concerned about Bhikkhu so-and-so. He won't walk into town with anyone; he won't do chores with anyone; he won't speak to anyone; he won't blah-blah-blah with anyone." Buddha confronts Bhikkhu so-and-so, who replies: "I am practicing solitude and seclusion." Buddha tells him, "So you are. So you are, in a certain sense. But the bhikkhu who is practicing REAL seclusion has his mental states secluded from defilements regardless of the external circumstances." I can't find the sutta now, but it is an interesting one. (Maybe someone can help me with a reference...). Likewise, wouldn't it be possible to be secluded from anxiety even when confronted with the uncomfortable truths of kamma/vipaka or of the moral obligation to be happy? Dan 58522 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:32pm Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition onco111 Hello Daniel, You make some good points. My comments are interspersed... > However, I think that we all have > unconsciously in us the western point of view that ethics is about following > "laws" - laws from the government, laws defined by Kant's categorical > imperative, laws given from God, laws given by our parents, the social habbits > that are common in our place and so forth... Good point. Our preconceived habits of legalistic thinking very much color our understandings of Buddhism and of the world. It is quite difficult to see through the mental fabrication of: "If I do these things, follow these rules, perform these rituals, etc., then I will generate metta/kusala/understanding/liberation, etc." > Daniel: I think that when a westerner comes to > buddhism, one thing he needs to do besides trying to identify kusala and akusala states of mind and following the traditional buddhist process of learning, is to deconstruct the old views... Oh, but how difficult it is! How long of a process! How painful! Many errors and stumbles and surprises. > Daniel: Perhaps anyone could tell about his history with this? What was his(hers) proccess of realizing the faults of the previous views? Ooooh... As for me, my previous views have been altered beyond recognition since I first encountered Buddhism 20+ years ago. How did the process go? Slow, long, difficult, gradual with occasional breakthroughs when "everything" changes in a whirlwind. With those occasional whirlwinds, there is "BOOM!" and a realization that vast chunks of the prior conceptual landscape had come crashing down. Then, flurries of activity to formulate exactly what frameworks crashed down and construction of a new conceptual framework to replace the old. It may seem to go against the nature of Buddhism to build new conceptual frameworks after an old one has come down, but, really, it is the nature of people (enlightened or not) to build conceptual frameworks, and a person who did not build them would be non-functional. Buddha differs from us in that he understood so clearly the distiction between concept and reality and did not cling to either. Metta, Dan 58523 From: Daniel Date: Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:49pm Subject: Re: Re: Thank you Descartes daniell@... Hey Larry, Larry : My guess is these are words that refer to emotional and physical experiences. What have you been reading in Tibetan Buddhism? It might be, but the explanation that she became blind when she was two sounds more plausible... The question is if she used the colors in a correct way, and this I do not remember since I have read that a very long time ago... I have read in Tibetan Buddhism really not much, just books by the Dalai Lama, and "Debate in Tibetan Buddhism" by Daniel Perdue and "The four immesurables, cultivating a boundless heart" by Alan Wallace. I think that the latter two can be interesting for a buddhist from any tradition to read... :) 58524 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! fbartolom Dear Paul, (in passing I note my name is Fabrizio, "ciao" is the italian word for "bye": I thought it was more international than it resulted to be) Please permit me to disagree on your last point. As a matter of fact believing we are part of an immutable process (be it kamma, God will, chance, matter...) is one of the views the Buddha warned us against, according to my opinion. Still I think we are a little stuck on this topic so perhaps you might like to mention some of the behaviours you employ while holding this view that would not be feasible if you did not hold it. Fabrizio --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Paul Grabianowski" wrote: > > Dear Ciao, > > I think you are absolutely right that fatalism is a danger here. It is > certainly a central problem in much of Western philosophy and psychology. > Escaping fatalism while maintaining a view of an embodied mind is central to > Western thought at least since the late 18th century. However, I think > Buddhism provides a much better means of escaping the dilemma of fatalism, > but only once we realize that the choices we make are non-self. It's only > when we realize how much our existence is inscribed in a kammic chain of > becoming that we can begin to free ourselves from its worst consequences. 58525 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:08am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Ah, yes, I understand. And I agree - there are dangers involved. That is why the Buddha in His wonderful compassion offered us the beautiful gift of the Precepts. 58526 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:16am Subject: Re: Meaning of Javana fbartolom Dear Maitreyi, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "maitreyi144" wrote: > > Dear Dharma Friends, > > Please can someone help me understand the proper meaning of Javana ? > > What is the Samnskrit word for Javana? Actually there is no clear translation for Javana and in fact this is one of the terms (like kamma, citta, bhavanga, jhana, cetasika, nibbana...) usually left untranslated in books. If you are interested I may try to explain its meaning. No idea about the Sankscrit word but, anyway, I believe Sankscrit versions of words most times are misleading . Fabrizio 58527 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ŒCetasikas' study corner 427, Pitaka Disclosure: 380 nilovg Dear Connie, thank you very much. I just received the Pitaka Disclosure. I am very happy you quote from it. Faculties are only elements, here the connection with the Dhaatukathaa. Nina. op 28-04-2006 03:41 schreef connie op connieparker@...: > Pitaka Disclosure: 380. (4) Likewise the twenty-two faculties. 58528 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] �Cetasikas' study corner 430- mindfulness/sati (l) nilovg Dear Jaran, I am very glad you are posting here. Thank you for elaborating on the accumulation of understanding, taking a long time. Nina. op 28-04-2006 05:10 schreef Jaran Jainhuknan op jjnbdal@...: > Why can't 'full understanding' be achieved in short time? Maybe > the sentence meant to say 'it takes long time -- several life > times as understanding accumulates through different lives -- > for full understanding to fully develop'. 'Understanding' should > always be a subject of the sentence. (Sorry, a Thai talking > about English grammar :">) 58529 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Weekend Break in Posting nilovg Hi Howard, these days I am considering the Abhidhamma book of the Elements. This reminds me that everyone should find out what is beneficial for him, he should find his own way. Whatever we think, plan or do, there are just conditioned elements. You have very special accumulations due to Jewish mysticism, and what is your way could not be prescibed for everyone. It must be difficult to sit for so long, physically and mentally, but for you this may be no problem. You have tendencies to laziness, as you say, but also firmness in overcoming this. Which one wins? It is interesting to see that there are many conditioning factors leading to such or such outcome. We do not know all the different accumulated conditions. Nina. op 27-04-2006 22:14 schreef upasaka@... op upasaka@...: > BTW, I've talked at times about setting up conditions to lead to > (eventual) good results. 58530 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meaning of Javana nilovg Dear Maitreyi, Looking it up in PED: sskt java: speed. javati: to run. But there is another stem, javana: readiness, impulse. It could be translated as impusion or going. No matter how we tyranslate it, they are usually seven javanacittas, which are, in the case of non-arahats, kusala or akusala. During the javanacittas there is new accumulation of good or bad tendencies, and also these cittas can motivate kamma through body, speech or mind. They are cittas which are cause and can produce results later on. Nina. op 27-04-2006 18:21 schreef maitreyi144 op maitreyi144@...: > > Please can someone help me understand the proper meaning of Javana ? > > What is the Samnskrit word for Javana? 58531 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition nilovg Dear Fabrizio, op 28-04-2006 09:08 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op f.bartolomucci@...: > That is why the Buddha in His wonderful compassion offered us the > beautiful gift of the Precepts. ------- N: Not as rules that should be followed. Paññaa developed through satipa.t.thaana is the condition to see their benefit and to enable one to observe them. There are many degrees of observing them, and the sotaapanna who has eradicated the wrong view of self will never transgress the five precepts. Nina. 58532 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:31am Subject: Rejection of Abhidhamma - Slippery Slopes sarahprocter... Hi AndrewT, RobM, Geoff & all, --- Andrew wrote: > Hi RobM (and Geoff) > > You place alot of credence on the historians' approach to Dhamma until > you reach the Suttanta and thereafter it becomes "a slippery slope". > I wonder where the slippery slope truly begins? .... S: A good question and I have a few more slippery slope questions for RobM & Geoff:-). 1. It seems that many of your arguments to indicate that none of the Abhidhamma was recited at the First Council is based on a rejection of the accounts of the First Council given in the ancient commentaries, such as in the commentary to the Vinaya, the commentary to the Dhammasangani and so on. Also, of course, you're rejecting the accounts given in the oldest historical accounts (eg the Mahavamsa) and instead relying on modern historical accounts. Yet, you (and many modern scholars) use the same ancient commentaries to understand the Abhidhamma (eg commentary to the Vibhanga as RobM mentioned) or to get detail when it suits. This truly seems rather a slippery one. ***** 2. You seem to rely on the fact that Mahayana texts exclude the Abhidhamma from their accounts of the First Council. What would happen if you found that some of the Mahayana sources do say the Abhidhamma was recited at the First Council? This is from Geiger’s introduction to his translation of the 'Mahavamsa' (PTS). The Mahavamsa is the very ancient chronicle of Sri Lanka which gives details of the First Council in conformity with the commentaries above: "Among the Northern Buddhist sources dealing with the first Council I mention the Mahavastu. Here, in agreement with the southern tradition Kasyapa is given as the originator of the coucil, the number of the bhiksus taking part is stated to be 500 and the place the aptaparna grotto near Rajagrha. "There is, besides, an account in the second volume of the Dulva, the Tibetan Vinaya of the Sarvastivadin sect. The fixing of the canon took place, according to this source, in the following order: 1) Dharma, by Ananda; 2)Vinaya, by Upali; 3)Matrka (i.e.Abhidarma) by Mahakasyapa himself..... "Fa-hian and Hiuen-thsang also mention the First Council. The former gives the number of the bhiksus a 500, the latter as 1,000; the former speaks in a general way of ‘a collection of sacred books’, the latter expressly mentions also the redaction of the Abhidharma by Mahakasyapa." ***** to be contd Metta, Sarah ======= 58533 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:38am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rejection of Abhidhamma - Slippery Slopes sarahprocter... Dear Friends, contd. 3. You've made various comments about different styles of different texts In the Abhidhamma Pitaka and between these and the suttas and so on. Isn't this just as true of different parts of the Suttanta? If instead, we appreciate that the key is in the uniformity of meaning or Dhamma taught, then these problems don't arise. The different styles of texts and details (and many other points raised) are clearly addressed in the commentaries. For example at the end of the chapter in the Bahiranidana (introductory chapter to the Sammantapaasaadikaa.,Vinaya commentary, translated by N.A, Jayawickrama, PTS),it says: ..... "Thus, this word of the Buddha which is uniform in sentiment taken as a whole (without division), and consists of such divisions as the Dhamma and the Vinaya in the divisions such as those into two and so forth, has been laid down as, "This is the Dhamma and this is the Vinaya, these are the first, intermediate, and final sayings of the Buddha, these are the Vinaya, Sutta, and Abhidhamma Pitakas, these are the Nikayas from Digha to Khuddaka, these are the nine angas commencing with sutta and these are the 84,000 Units of the Dhamma," was rehearsed together by the assembly of self-controlled monks with Mahakassapa as their leader verily observing this distinction. "And not only this, but other divers distinctions in compilation to be met in the three Pitakas, such as the stanzas containing lists of contents, the arrangement into chapters, noting down the repetitions, and the classification into kindred sections of ones, twos, and so forth, that into groups of kindred topics, and into group of fifties and so forth, have been determined when it was rehearsed together in seven months.." ***** 4. Geoff recently quoted from the 'Alagadduupama Sutta'. The simile of the snake starts with these lines (Nanamoli/Bodhi translation). "Here, bhikkhus, some misguided men learn the Dhamma - discourses, stanzas, expositions, verses, exclamations, sayings, birth stories, marvels, and answers to questions - but having learned the Dhamma, they do not examine the meaning of those teachings with wisdom." So what is included here within the Dhamma are (from the Pali): "sutta, geyya, veyyakarana, gatha, udana, itivuttaka, jataka, abbhutadhamma, and vedalla." In other words, these are the same 9 angas as mentioned above in the commentary to the Vinaya. The same list is given in many other suttas. Before we reject the Abhidhamma as being included in the 'Dhamma Vinaya', shouldn't we consider what these terms refer to, especially if this is a sutta being used to help make the point? In fact, in this classification, the Abhidhamma is included in the veyyakarana. All the Pitakas are included in the 9 angas as clarified in the point above. To elaborate further on the meaning of Dhamma Vinaya and two-fold and three-fold classifications as Geoff has been referring to this topic. From the same section of the commentary to the Vinaya: "How is it twofold as the dhamma and the vinaya? All this, in its entirety, is reckoned as the dhamma and the Vinaya. Herein the Basket of the Discipline is the Vinaya, the rest of the word of the Buddha is the Dhamma. Hence was it stated: “Let us, friends, rehearse the Dhamma and the Vinaya,” and: I shall question Upali on the Vinaya and Ananda on the dhamma.” Thus it is twofold as the Dhamma and the Vinaya.’..... A little later we read: "How is it threefold according to the Pitakas? Indeed, all this, in its entirety, has the three divisions as the Vinaya-pitaka, the suttantapitaka, and the Abhidhammapitaka. Therein, having brought together all that has been both rehearsed and not at the First convocation, both Patimokkha, the two Vibhanga, the 22 Khandhaka, and the 16 Parivara, it is called the Vinayapitaka. "The collection of the 34 suttas beginning with Brahmajala called the Dighanikaya, that of 152 suttas beginning with Mulapariyaya called the Majjhimanikaya, that of 7,762 suttas beginning with Oghataranasutta called the Samyuttanikaya, that of 9.557 suttas beginning with the Cittapariyadanasutta, called the Anguttaranikaya, and the Khuddakanikaya consisting of the 15 works: Khuddakapatha, Dhammapada, Udana, Itivuttaka, Suttanipata, Vimanavatthu, Petavatthu, Thera and Therigatha, Jataka, Niddesa, Patisambhida, Apadana, Buddhavamsa, and Cariyapitaka, are called Suttantapitaka. Dhammasangani, Vibhanga, dhatukatha, Puggalapannatti, Kathavattu, Yamaka, and Patthana constitute the Abhidhammapitaka." ***** S: Of course, there is a lot more detail yet. Flimsy evidence? It depends how one reads it and what one places reliance on - such fine detail as given by the ancient commentators or modern historical scholarship. .... to be contd. Metta, Sarah ======== 58534 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:56am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rejection of Abhidhamma - Slippery Slopes sarahprocter... Dear Friends, contd (last part!!) 5. As we know, often the Buddha gave a sutta in concise language and left one of his chief disciples to elaborate. So should these commentaries by Ananda, Sariputta, Mahakaccayana and others be excluded from the Sutta Pitaka? What about such commentaries that were in the Sutta Pitaka and were then taken out and put in other sections, such as the Sacca Vibhanga which was put in the Abhidhamma Pitaka? Or what about entire commentaries that have always been incorportate with the suttas themselves? Again Malalasekera in 'The Pali Literature of Ceylon' elaborates on this theme: "When later the text of the canon came to be compiled, arranged, and edited, some of the expositions found their way into the Pitakas and were given a permanent place therein. Thus we have the Sangiti-suttanta of the Digha Nikaya, ascribed to Sariputta and forming a complete catechism of terms and passages of exegetical nature. Such was also the Sacca-vibhanga (an exposition of the four Noble Truths) of the Majjhima, which later found its proper place in the second book of the Abhidhamma-Pitaka, and also the Madhu-pindika-sutta of Maha-Kaccayana, included in the Majjhima Nikaya. "It sometimes happened that for a proper understanding of the text, explanations of a commentarial nature were quite essential; and in such cases the commentary was naturally incorporated into the text and formed part of the text itself.......Then there is the Niddesa, a whole book of commentary on texts now included in the Sutta-nipata; and there are passages clearly of a commentarial nature scattered throughout the Nikayas." ***** Of course, the slippery slope line of thinking goes on forever. Geoff, you said you don't see much of the Buddha's insight in the Abhidhamma and therefore it’s not surprising that you don't consider the Abhidhamma to be 'Dhamma Vinaya'. Only when there's an appreciation of the 'conformity of sentiment' in the Pali Canon as carefully preserved by the Theravada tradition will there be any real confidence that perhaps the ancient commentators may have known and expounded accurately according to the sentiment of 'Buddha vacana'. ***** Rob, finally, on the question of whether Anuruddha was the first to start an Abhidhamma treatise with the fourfold divisions of paramattha dhammas and so on, Malalasekera refers to various sources in 'The Pali Literature of Ceylon' to give more detail about the commentaries compiled by Buddhadatta, as mentioned in the introduction to CMA. He was a contemporary of Buddhaghosa's according to accounts of a meeting between them. One of Buddhadatta's main works was the 'Abhidhammaavataara' in which the Abhidhamma commentary is summarised. Both compilers drew their material from the same sources. Buddhadatta 'opens his scheme with the fourfold division of the Compendium: mind, mental properties, material quality, and Nibbana.' So, neither the content nor the structural style of the Abhidhamma as given by Anuruddha in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha were new as I understand. According to Malalasekera 'the work ('Abhidhammaavataara') has been held in high esteem from ancient times and is extensively used both in Ceylon and in Burma'. ('This and the Ruupaaruupavibhaaga form two of the nine classical summaries of the Abhidhamma in Burma.) Many thanks for all your detailed posts. I'll look forward to further comments as usual:). Metta, Sarah p.s For those relatively new to the list, more detail, see 'Useful Posts' in the files under: 'Vinaya Commentary', 'Abhidhamma-origins', 'Dhamma Vinaya', 'Buddhavacana (Word of the Buddha)', 'Councils' and much more. ====================== 58535 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] �Cetasikas' study corner 430- mindfulness/sati (l) sarahprocter... Hi Jaran (JJ), So good to know you're following along. Hope all's going well in Singapore?? --- Jaran Jainhuknan wrote: > Dear Sarah: > > > The word "study" can remind us that there should be > > mindfulness of > > realities again and again, until they are known as they are. > > Full > > understanding cannot be achieved within a short time. > > Thanks for good reminder. > > Why can't 'full understanding' be achieved in short time? Maybe > the sentence meant to say 'it takes long time -- several life > times as understanding accumulates through different lives -- > for full understanding to fully develop'. 'Understanding' should > always be a subject of the sentence. (Sorry, a Thai talking > about English grammar :">) ..... S: Good comments. I don't think the problem is with the grammar but the meaning can be misconstrued. The same thought occurred to me. Of course, if the understanding has been sufficiently developed, full understanding can be attained or can manifest right now. How about re-introducing yourself here a little or telling us about your dhamma studies and so on these days? Look forward to more gems:-). Metta, Sarah ========= 58536 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:06am Subject: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 431- mindfulness/sati (m) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, 'Cetasikas' by Nina van Gorkom http://www.vipassana.info/cetasikas.html http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Questions, comments and different views welcome;-) ========================================== (Ch26 - mindfulness/sati continued) As we have seen in the definition of the Atthasåliní, “guarding” is a manifestation of mindfulness. Through mindfulness the six doors are guarded. When there is no mindfulness after having seen visible object through the eyes, there is bound to be attachment, aversion and ignorance on account of the object. We are absorbed in the objects which are experienced through the six doors. When mindfulness arises there is no akusala citta on account of the object which is experienced and thus the doorways are guarded. The Atthasåliní compares mindfulness with a doorkeeper. ***** (Ch26 - mindfulness/sati to be contd) Metta, Sarah ====== 58537 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:46am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Please don't run away yet, DAN 1.ii sarahprocter... Hi Dan, (& Erik [with a 'k'] just in case you're reading*). --- "Dan D." wrote: <..> > If a master teacher tells you something that draws your attention to > a presently arising citta or even to an honest-to-goodness awareness > of a citta in the past, a lesson is learned. If instead, you hear > more and more theory and cling to a conceptual model and crave a > deeper intellectual understanding and think that real understanding > somehow arises from that conventional cultivation of theoretical > understanding, how does that really differ from sitting in a corner, > eyes close, directing the attention to such-and-such object in the > hopes that real understanding will somehow arise from that > conventional cultivation of attention? .... S: I've never said it does:-) Attachment is attachment. Wrong view is wrong view, no matter the trimmings, as I keep saying. .... >I think Howard is right about > the "conventional" affinity between development of intellectual > understanding and development of a ritual meditation practice. Of > course, thinking so doesn't make it right and I don't yet have time > to express or think through it clearly; when I do, we might be able > have a more fruitful and interesting discussion of the issue. .... S: Again, as I keep saying, it's the citta that counts. We can think about cittas, cetasikas, rupas and nibbana with right view, wrong view, ignorance, plain attachment, aversion, conceit or whatever. I think you're straying into some Dan 'straw man 'arguments here with me:). .... > > S: I'd say it depends on the cittas of the unenlightened person. > There > > could be some firm confidence and sacca ~naa.na in the 4NT even > though one > > is still a worldling. > > Our (worldlings) theoretical understandings of the 4NT are wrong. We > don't know what they are. Yes, we know the words. Yes, we can > formulate the concepts. Yes, we have an "idea" of what they mean, but > we don't really *know*. Ideas about the 4NT are not the 4NT and do > not in any way bring about knowledge of them. Intellectual > understanding is a dead horse--it doesn't go anywhere. .... S: Firstly, there are worldlings and worldlings. For those who have/had developed higher insights, the sacca nana is/was so firm, there was no doubt or misapprehension about the 4NT, even though nibbana has not yet been realised. If you think that it's only with wrong view that you read, consider, discuss or post comments or suttas on the 4NT, then why bother? There'd be no way out. When B.Samahita posted a sutta on nibbana the other day, does it mean it's necessarily posted or read with wrong view? It may be enough to remind us of just how little understanding we have and how much there is to develop. .... > > > S: For another example, we may appreciate the value and importance > of kamma > > to some degree which can be a condition for more understanding > later. This > > is in spite of the fact that there isn't a direct understanding of > > conditions or kamma yet. And so on. > > Appreciate it because someone says it is important? > Appreciate it because we have previously observed "something" which > resonates with what that someone says? > Appreciate it because we have thought about the theory? > Think about the theory because we have an "intuitive" sense (i.e., > have recognized it but haven't formed an adequate description yet) > about the importance? .... S: Again, each to their own. Like Phil mentioned the other day, it can be very useful to reflect on how seeing or hearing now is vipaka, result of kamma. It can be a condition to be less swayed by worldly conditions and to think less in terms of people and things as causing the problems in the world. I find it extremely uplifting and helpful. Slowly, very slowly, it becomes more evident through awareness of dhammas that it's the truth too. .... > > > I agree that usually if we just repeat words about nibbana, it may > well be > > 'wrong theory' - but I wouldn't generalise on it as you've done. It > the > > words are said with kusala cittas, there's nothing 'wrong' with > them. Only > > pa~n~naa can tell of course:). > > Different meanings of "wrong"... If the words are said with kusala > citta, they are morally faultless (i.e., not morally wrong) even > though they are incorrect because what we mean by 'nibbana' is not > the same as what Buddha meant by 'nibbana'. When we say that word, we > don't know what it means. .... S: No, we don't know what it means, but it can still be considered with kusala cittas and at such times, it cannot be said to be incorrect or wrong in any sense. If we mistake such reflection for any kind of realisation, that would be wrong. I agree that it's pretty useless to think much at all about nibbana. ......... > > S: Not necessarily. If we say now that nibbana is the unconditioned > > dhamma, it's 'right'. > > I'm sorry, Sarah, even though I know the words and can say them just > fine, I don't know anything about what 'unconditioned' means. When I > say 'unconditioned', I have no idea what I mean. And you assure me > that I'm right? Now, what exactly is right about it? .... S: It may be the right words with akusala cittas rooted in ignorance or attachment. Or it may be the right words with kusala cittas. As I mentioned, for those who have developed higher insight and for whom there is more and more turning away from conditioned dhammas, more and more understanding of the futility of them, such reflection is more likely to be with kusala cittas. For myself, unless I'm talking to someone like you, I almost never think about nibbana and I don't recall ever having asked K.Sujin or anyone else a question about it. Now, as I write about the topic, there are kusala and akusala cittas arising. As Phil has pointed out, we don't know for others, but if you tell me yours are wrong, fine. .... >An analogy: A > lot of people would argue that working hard at meditation is right > effort. You (Sarah) always ask them what they mean by "meditation" > and "right". If they answer the questions right, you agree with them; > more often, though, they aren't able to satisfy you with their > answers, and you say that what they are saying is wrong because they > don't have an understanding of what 'bhavana' and 'samma vayama' > are. Likewise, if I were to say "nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma" > and an enlightened person were to question me on it, he or she would > have to conclude that I am wrong, that I don't understand nibbana, > that I have the wrong view of nibbana (if I am assuming that what I > say about it being the unconditioned element is actually correct), > that I have the wrong concept of nibbana, that I am just plain wrong. ..... S: Definitely there would not be direct understanding of it. Whether your comments, thoughts and words were wrong or not would depend on the view behind them. .... > 1. Two right/wrongs--moral/immoral and correct/incorrect. I'm > thinking more about the latter. > 2. Wouldn't it 'wrong view' to take a wrong understanding as right > understanding? .... S: Yes. .... <...> > > Anyway, we've been over this in great detail and you have your own > reasons > > for your comments, I'm sure:-). > > I surely do! Primarily, my reasons are selfish. I want to get this > expressed clearly enough so you can find out where I'm wrong and set > me straight--like you and Robert (and Erik and Martin Luther) did > with me on silabbataparamasa. .... S: Oh....:-/* .... > I just don't have a good understanding of these terms: pariyatti, > patipatti, pativedha. To me they are much more complex than the long > list of "models" I brought up in the previous post. Part of the > problem is that the lines between them seem very fuzzy. Should I be > thinking of them as paramattha? Or conceptual? .... S: They all refer to panna (right understanding)of different degrees which is paramattha, of course. Without the foundation of satipatthana, no satipatthana can develop. .... >Either way, it is very > difficult for me to see clear distinctions between them. If > conceptual, I don't see them as anything but a vague, conventional > description of some generalized process of development of > understanding. If paramattha, then the contextual object > (e.g., "reading") seems to take on much too much importance in the > definitions to make the distinctions useful. .... S: They all refer to understanding of the present dhammas, not anything to do with "reading". Of course, reading and hearing the teachings may be conditions for panna to arise at any of these levels. The difference between pariyatti and patipatti is that pariyatti has concepts as object - right reflection with understanding about dhammas. Patipatti is satipatthana - right understanding of dhammas themselves as objects. ... > > S: Cetasikas are not cittas. They are different dhammas, different > > dhatus. They have different characteristics and different functions > as I > > said. (Of course, in some contexts cittas refer to cittas + > cetasikas but > > we're not talking about that here). > > Of course cetasikas are not cittas, but my shirt is green. I wouldn't > say, "It's a green". It isn't. Shirts and colors are different > things. They each have their own characteristics. Shirts do come in > different colors. Every time there is a shirt, there is color > associated with it. The color is a characteristic of the shirt. .... S: Cittas also have different characteristics like the shirts too. There is citta which sees, citta which hears and so on. Better to use the analogy of a suit. A suit is made up of a jacket and trousers worn together. Both the jacket and trousers have their own particular characteristics, but when they are worn together, they are (usually!!) of the same colour, same cloth. In the same way, cittas and cetasikas have their own characterisitics, but when they arise together, they are of the same jati (i.e kusala, akusala, vipaka, kiriya) and so on. .... > > Pls find me any reference from any text which says that cetasikas > are > > characteristics of cittas. It makes no sense to me?.Am I somehow > missing > > your point? I'm not sure where this is coming from? > > characteristic (n): a distinguishing feature or quality; > > A distinguishing feature of cittas is that they inevitably arise with > a host of cetasikas. BB (CMA intro) describes citta as an "evanescent > cognitive event" and cetasikas as "a constellation of mental factors" > that arise with the citta and exercise specialized tasks. Nyanatiloka > (Bud. Dict.) calls cetasikas "mental concommitants" of cittas. What's > the difference between "concommitant" and "characteristic"? .... S: 'concommitant' means 'arising together with', 'accompanying'. 'Characteristic' means 'particular to'. A pair of trousers 'accompanies' a jacket. It is not a kind of jacket. I think you'll have to give up on this one if that was your best textual example, Dan:-)). Good (and exhausting:-)) to have you around, Dan. *It would be fun to have Erik around again so that I could take a back seat....[Out of curiosity and in brief if it's off-topic, how did Martin Luther come into it?] Metta, Sarah ======= 58538 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:08am Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? buddhatrue Hi Phil (and Tep), Warning Phil: I am going to strongly disagree with you in this post, and write some things which may upset you; if you are not in the right frame of mind, don't read it until later. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > Hi Tep > > > You can have my words of honor that I will always mean "no harm" > > toward you. Yes, I promise. > > Though you have the accumulated tendency to be a nice person, > technically speaking the above is meaningless, isn't it? James: NO!! It is not meaningless!! Tep is following the second factor of the Noble Eightfold Path: Right Resolve (or Right Thought): "And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve." This is a perfect example of what I don't like about the KS philosophy. It's adherents become so brainwashed by it's fatalistic, passive approach that they completely forget the Buddha's teaching! Isn't it only > the ariyan who is beyond harmfulness? The "mean" is cetana, right, > which rises and falls away so quickly. How can we feel taht we have > guaranteed control over it? James: Okay, since we have "no control", let's just throw out the Noble Eightfold Path. There is no way to follow anything, after all. > > I think we have no idea of what evil we are capable of. Again, not > saying this about Tep, rather about all of us. Because there are > conditions at work that are stronger (and fleeter and slippier) > than "us." This is not grounds for hopelessness or fatalism. James: Yes, it most certainly is!! It is the most fatalistic approach to dhamma possible. Phil, this is classic "Double-Speak"- you are saying we have no control and yet it isn't fatalism. Maybe we should define fatalism so that we can get a clearer picture: fatalism n : a philosophical doctrine holding that all events are predetermined in advance for all time and human beings are powerless to change them. No control = powerless to change We can > cultivate the wholesome and eradicate the unwholesome, that much is for > sure - the Buddha tells us so. James: Well, at least you are giving some mouth service to the Buddha's teaching. But we are not beyond even the most > horrible forms of evil, not yet, not anyone of us here. James: Again, double-speak. The potential > lies lurking...very, very unlikely in most cases, but the potential is > still there. James: Ohhh...how sinister. How x-files. ;-)) Who knows what will happen. I may just go out and rob a bank tonight! > > Jon, for example, could abandon his long years of abstaining from > alcohol *at this very moment* and go carousing in the brothels of Hong > Kong, and mug passers-by to get more money to buy the methamphetamines > that he could develop a craving for *at this very moment* > > There is no telling!!!!! James: Yeah, and pigs may fly and president Bush may do the right thing! ;-)) Phil, do you not see how crazy your thinking is? You actually believe that Jon could suddenly become a violent, drug crazed, sex pervert! Sarah had better keep a close eye on him! ;-)) > > Phil > Metta, James 58539 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:09am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: citta nyama, elements. nilovg op 27-04-2006 14:52 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > >> N: One begins to understand that voice is not a dhamma, but sound is. > Sound is a paramattha dhamma, voice is not. Voice is a concept that is > the object of thinking. > > T: While you say voice is a concept, not a paramattha dhamma, I say > voice is the "coming together" of sound, ear, ear-consciousness and > perception that follows. Instead of the term "object of thinking", > can I say voice is the object of perception? > ...................... N: There is perception or saññaa with each citta, with hearing, with thinking. But you are perhaps referring to recognizing. When hearing just now, you do not always at every minute define what is heard, like: this is water sound, this is car sound etc. There can also be moments of experiencing just sound, no further thought about it. In that way we can get used to the characteristic of sound, we can learn the difference between sound and an idea about sound such as thinking of a voice. >> N: I am just pondering over your phrase: to avoid attachment to the > "coming together" of naamas and ruupas. > Tep: I am sorry for the term "coming together". The example above > shows that concepts (here, 'voice') result from the coming together of > paramattha dhammas -- just like the coming together of molecules forms > a compound. The action "coming together of the dhammas" is mental -- > the mental formations. But this explanation may not be right to you > with respect to the Abhidhamma standards. So please advise. > ................. N: The term mental formations, sankhaarakkhandha is used for cetasikas. Voice: it is remembrance of former experiences. I do not see this as coming together. There are so many types of concepts. T: > N: There are many naamas and ruupas appearing and also thinking of > concepts. It is hard to try to separate them. It depends which object > is object of such or such citta. Who can tell? > > Tep: Now it is clear to me why you found it hard to understand the > word "separate". To me, "separate" is opposite to "formations" (or > coming together). Simply by not paying attention to 'nimitta' and > 'anubyañjana' we can see the occurring dhammas as "separate". > ................. N: We could say: just one dhamma through one doorway. Perhaps that is what you mean? T quotes>> The adverting-consciousness adverts already to an object before we can do anything about it. The object may be enticing or it may be not. > The process of cittas takes its regular course. When there are > conditions for understanding it arises and it can be developed. > > T: That is the most interesting part of your post ! I believe that > such belief probably obstructs one's practice (patipada) according to > the Buddha. No, we cannot do anything about the > "adverting-consciousness", and we don't have to -- just leave it > alone. The goal of the Buddhist's practice is the cessation of dukkha, > and the practice is according to the Noble Eightfold Path which has > nothing to do with citta niyama. This may sound (to some uninstructed > readers) like a rejection of the Abhidhamma, but I know you do not > think like that. ***** N: As to what you write about citta niyama, on the contrary, I find that this clarifies our life and the way we act, speech or think. We cannot avoid the regular order of cittas, citta niyama, and because of the succession of cittas without interval, different tendencies are as it were carried on from moment to moment. Citta niyama helps us to see whatever occurs as elements. The whole Book of the Discourse on Elements, Dhaatukathaa, classifies all cittas, cetasikas and ruupas we learnt about in the first Book of the Abhidhamma, the Dhammasangani, as khandhas, aayatanas and elements. This book is a great reminder that we cannot escape elements. Everyone has to find his own way, what is helpful for one person may not for someone else. You find it helpful to analyse what is a compound into separate entities or to develop foulness. I find it helpful to consider (but not with direct understanding yet) that only one object can be experienced at a time. Anyway, this quote from the Pi.taka disclosure can remind us of non-self, no matter what we are doing, with success or not: Nina. 58540 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:21am Subject: Re: a "happy" proposition ken_aitch Hi Dan, I couldn't quite follow your recent conversations with Sarah in which you claimed that intellectual understanding did not lead to direct insight. I suspect there is a connection with this current thread and, therefore, that I won't be able to follow it properly either. ------------------ <. . .> D: > I read his "moral obligation" as Jewish language for the simple idea that happiness (sobhana cetasikas) needs to be present in order to be called "moral" (kusala). Unhappiness (dosa) is immoral (akusala). In Buddhist language, his proposition is a tautology, but in pop culture it is scandalous. I'm not convinced their religion teaches the opposite <. . .> Couldn't you find hundreds of examples in which Buddhists wrongly understand the nature of conditioned dhammas? Such misunderstandings of the teachings are bound to be quite common in any religion. The question is whether there is any evidence that someone teaches conditioned dhammas in the context and language of that religion. -------------- Wasn't the Buddha quite adamant about this? With the sole exception of his Dhamma, any explanation of ultimate reality falls into one of the two extremes. I don't think he added a rider: "except in some cases where that explanation is fully understood." I think it is quite simple: other disciplines can lead to happy rebirths, but only a Buddha teaches conditionality, the knowledge of which eventually leads to release from dukkha. ------------ <. . .> D: > To fall into the 'moral' category, sobhana cetasikas must be present. Otherwise, the kamma is immoral. ------------ Does this suggest to you that Denis Prager has insight into the workings of conditioned dhammas? -------------------- <. . .> KH: > > It is unlikely, though, that he knew goodness was a conditioned dhamma, independent of a controlling self, > > D: > Far from being unlikely, I think it is reasonably likely that does know that. --------------------- Ah, so that answers my previous question. But I can't agree. Who but a Buddha could describe a conditioned dhamma? Other great sages can sometimes come to the conclusion, "Ultimate realities must be very, very short-lived (anicca)," but that is as close as they get, surely.(?) ------------------------- D: > I know very little about Orthodox Judaism, but *the* major tenet of Christianity is that goodness cannot arise through a controlling self but ONLY through God. Any time there is the idea that Self can do a good thing, the work is immoral (according to orthodox Protestant Christian --doctrine). ------------------------- Yes, I have heard something like that. That sort of thinking wavers midway between eternity belief and annihilation belief, but it will always be one or the other: it will never come close to the middle way. ------------------------------------- <. . .> D: > I think the Buddha's insight into the NT was clearer and his understanding deeper than Denis Prager's or anyone else's, but I have little doubt that many aspects of conditionality are understood by many outside the dispensation. --------------------------------------- This is very broad minded of you Dan, but I'm not sure how it helps you to understand the Dhamma. Ken H 58541 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:32am Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation,... Upaaya = strategy jwromeijn Hallo Tep, (and Rob M and Andrew T (at the end)) I seem to have confused you with my spelling. Upaaya - upaya is like skilfull - skillful with the special problem that phonetical words can be written in different ways. And sankrit - pali is nearly the same as american - english (joking) But there is an other and more serious theme. In fact I used the Sanskrit term 'upaya' that is more or less the same as the Pali 'upaaya'. 'Upaya' is most times translated as 'skilfull means' or 'skill in means', or 'expedient means' The idea behind it is that the Buddha used different means to liberate his audience (monks and laypeople), depending on there spiritual development, intelligence, personality-traits etcetera. A useful (or: usefull) essay about it is: 'Nagarjuna and the doctrine of "skillful means" ' by John Schroeder (http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/ew103934.htm) It's mainly a Mahayana concept, important sutras in which it's a central concept are the Vimalakirti Nirdesa Sutra and the Lotus Sutra In the Pali Canon there is the wish of the Buddha (I don't know in which sutta) that the monks speak to their audiences in the own language of the audience. Further: SN XXII.53 has the title 'Upaya Sutta' but is hardly about skilfull means AN II.19, 'Kusala Sutta' is translated as 'Skillful' by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, not a very good idea, I think And there is the well-known idea that the Buddha has used the (mainly) conventional language of the Suttas to teach audiences that likes that kind of languages with many similes etc in it; and that He used the (mainly) ultimate language of the Abhidhamma for other audiences (for example Sariputta and devas, under which His late mother) who can understand this more abstract language. I see a danger in this usage: arrogance; for exemple the Mahayanists who see themselves as superior compared by the "Hinayanist" who are spiritual dummies. And the arrogance of some Abhidhammikas who see Abhidhamma texts for the highbrow monks and Suttas for the less intelligent people. My conclusion: even with this danger and with the fact that it's hardly mentioned in the Pali Canon, 'upaya' is an important topic, also for Theravadins I think: to make the Teaching of the Buddha understandable for audiences in the 21th century, and understandable for people who think more in terms of the natural science than in that of religions like christianity; we need a kind of translation of the Dhamma in modern language, with modern metaphoes and similes. I have discussed with Nina several times about this topic (she did not agree with me) And I don't agree with RobM in his message 58517 in which he defends taking literal myths (my words, Joop) of being like devas, devils, gods and other psychological projections (my words, Joop) of the human mind. Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > Hello Joop (and other members) - > > I think because there are American English and United Kingdom English, > that's why the various spellings -- the Americans just want to be > different, you know -- the 'ego thing'. > > What do you mean by "upaya" ? > > There are 'ubaya' and 'upaaya', but there is no 'upaya' in the PTS > Dictionary! > > I like the word 'upaaya' that means "approach; fig. way, means, > expedient, stratagem". The Blessed One often advised his monks to > employ the best strategy that would facilitate their practice of the > Dhamma. But I cannot recall even one English-translation sutta online > that talks about upaaya. If you know of any such sutta, I'd appreciate it. > > Best wishes, > > Tep 58542 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Hallo Joop, > In a sense, we are free to be "happy" or "unhappy", but a criterion > to qualify as "moral" in the Buddhist sense (kusala) or Jewish sense > is that unhappiness does not arise. Another way to phrase the "happy" > proposition is "dosa is akusala", a perfectly standard Theravada > doctrine. > > Dan > > P.S. In another sense, we are not "free" to be happy or unhappy. > Developing kusala is not a matter of deciding, "Hmmm... I am going to be happy now." > Hallo Dan I did and do not comment on remarks of any theistic relgion And I did not talk about kusala or akusala I only stated: the don't exist a moral obligation to be happy. Not in buddhism, and not in the most protestant variant of Theravada Metta Joop 58543 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:34am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition fbartolom --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Fabrizio, > op 28-04-2006 09:08 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op > f.bartolomucci@...: > > > That is why the Buddha in His wonderful compassion offered us the > > beautiful gift of the Precepts. > ------- > N: Not as rules that should be followed. Paññaa developed through > satipa.t.thaana is the condition to see their benefit and to enable one to > observe them. There are many degrees of observing them, and the sotaapanna > who has eradicated the wrong view of self will never transgress the five > precepts. Dear Nina, I am sorry to notice you also apparently fell into this blunder. Though easily it is forgotten that the audience to whom the Buddha addresed His teachings, expecially with reference to the Paramattha ones like the Satipattana you mentioned, were people that already practiced an immaculate life: be them either already experienced monks or, in some cases, pupils of other ascetic schools, or, as in the case of Anathapindaka, disciples of the Buddha on the verge of death. To other people not bound to a disciplinary code the Buddha's teaching was focused on virtue, not on insight. Thus your view that ethics is a corollary of anatta, a view that I strangely already contradicted when supported by Patricia Genoud at a recent retreat, must be vigorously rejected. Metta, Fabrizio 58544 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 0:35am Subject: Re: [dsg] Weekend Break in Posting upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Phil) - In a message dated 4/27/06 11:57:11 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Phil, > > A comment on your following point: > > L: "Hi Howard, > It is probably also an example of consciousness as conascent > predominance condition." > > Ph: "But it could be chanda, right? (Or virya, or vihamsa.) Only one of > these can be c.p.c at a time. Do we know which one is c.p.c at any > moment? No, the Buddha did, but we don't. That's ok. Shouldn't press too > hard to try to know which factor is c.p.c because it is beyond our > understanding." > > L: It isn't beyond our understanding. I'm sure Howard could review his > consiousnesses and see what happened. Granted, it is very subtle stuff > even on a macro level, but really it's just a matter of sensitizing the > mind to what's going on, and understanding the concepts so there is > recognition. "Pressing hard" is viriya. "Too hard" of course is a > mistake. You are right it could have been any of the four or all of them > sequentially. The main point, though, is that this is how things "get > done". It adds another dimension to the "to meditate, or not to > meditate" debate, which is a spin-off of the 'no control' issue; include > in that 'free will' and 'determinism'. > > Larry > ======================= Larry, you are right: It could be any or even all four. If one examines and reviews any (even brief) period of mentality, especiallyone of planning, with care and honest appraisal, what goes on is complex and changing. Much may be wholesome and balanced (including kusala energy, motivation, and so on), but there is typically mixed in at many moments instances of craving, instances of aversion, instances of pushing too hard (or too little), instances of self-serving motivation, and considerable clinging. But if the primary thrust is a balanced, equanimous chanda aimed at setting up useful conditions, the negative aspects lose much of their influence. In any case - and I really think this is important - if what one ends up doing is being thrust into useful circumstances, in a sense the lead of defiled inclination has been alchemically transformed into gold. Of course, that would not have happened if the elixir of "balanced, equanimous chanda" hadn't been an essential part of the mix. 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) 58545 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meaning of Javana matheesha333 Hi Nina, >N: No matter how we tyranslate it, they are usually seven javanacittas, which > are, in the case of non-arahats, kusala or akusala. During the javanacittas > there is new accumulation of good or bad tendencies, and also these cittas > can motivate kamma through body, speech or mind. They are cittas which are > cause and can produce results later on. M: A little question which might be useful practically.. Does the arising of javana citta coincide with arising of roots of a/kusala or cetana? I'm trying to see if there is anyway by which one can be mindful of these litte critters. Javana has been something elusive for me so far. many thanks in advance with metta, Matheesha 58546 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:48am Subject: Re: Weekend Break in Posting matheesha333 Hi Howard, Much muditha for your retreat! Hope things go smoothly. Laziness has been a problem for me as well. Two things helped me. One was being mindful of laziness arising and then getting rid of it. Not seeing it as something enjoyable as on the longer run it is conunterproductive and the results are not very enjoyable. The other was looking to the roots of my motivation. I noted weakness of my samma ditti (forgetting anal correctness in terminology!) as the first step of the noble eightfold path, and also what drives the rest of the path. I feel I have overcome this to some degree. I feel the retreat will be useful for you! If things go well you might want to go for something a bit longer. :) take care Matheesha > Thank you, Nina! :-) > BTW, I've talked at times about setting up conditions to lead to > (eventual) good results. In that regard, I've noted (to myself) in the past that a > period of time in which I "log" many hours of meditation with little to no > distraction between "sittings" but maintaining external and internal silence and > ongoing mindfulness between formal meditations is a very "profitable" period. > However, due to natural laziness and other defilements, and due to everyday > matters that require my attention - especially the former, I am unlikely to put > myself through such a period. But by taking the step to sign up for a retreat > and then just going there, I put myself in the position of having such a > period of meditation and seclusion "forced" on me - voluntarily forced on me. I > think this is a decent conventional example of setting up conditions to enable > useful goals. > > > With metta, > Howard > > > 58547 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 1:43am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Weekend Break in Posting upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha - Thanks very much for the following! :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 4/28/06 7:49:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, dhammachat@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Much muditha for your retreat! Hope things go smoothly. > > Laziness has been a problem for me as well. Two things helped me. One > was being mindful of laziness arising and then getting rid of it. Not > seeing it as something enjoyable as on the longer run it is > conunterproductive and the results are not very enjoyable. > > The other was looking to the roots of my motivation. I noted weakness > of my samma ditti (forgetting anal correctness in terminology!) as > the first step of the noble eightfold path, and also what drives the > rest of the path. I feel I have overcome this to some degree. > > I feel the retreat will be useful for you! If things go well you > might want to go for something a bit longer. :) > > take care > > Matheesha > /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) 58548 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:07am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meaning of Javana fbartolom Hi Matheesha, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" > M: A little question which might be useful practically.. Does the > arising of javana citta coincide with arising of roots of a/kusala or > cetana? I'm trying to see if there is anyway by which one can be > mindful of these litte critters. Javana has been something elusive > for me so far. Waiting for a feedback from Nina I try to propose my answer to your questions. Yes: javana is the first citta with roots to emerge in a single process of consciousness thus kusala and akusala roots emerge with it. Still, given the rapid flow of consciousness, it is very hard to catch the beginning of a single javana so it may be advisable to behave the way you would if you wanted to tame a horse. First you would spot it - vibration of bhavanga - then you would mount on your own horse - arrest of bhavanga -, then you would set in the direction of the horse - sense consciousness -, get close - receive, aim your rope - investigation - and finally throw your rope at the horse - javana. Cetana, on his part, is one of the universal cetasika thus it appears much before the javana phase. One could consider it like the rope. 58549 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:10am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) nilovg Hi Ken, Suan wrote a very clear explanation about this subject. You may google under Suan. Nina. op 28-04-2006 01:33 schreef ken_aitch op ken_aitch@...: > I briefly searched for a reference to vinnana anidassana but found > nothing relating to the Theravada texts. It seems to be a Mahayana > term. Is it what they also call "Buddha-nature?" 58550 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:29am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition ... Corollary of Anatta indriyabala --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom > wrote: > > > > Dear Fabrizio, > > op 28-04-2006 09:08 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op > > f.bartolomucci@: > > > > > That is why the Buddha in His wonderful compassion offered us > >the beautiful gift of the Precepts. > > ------- > > N: Not as rules that should be followed. Paññaa developed through > > satipa.t.thaana is the condition to see their benefit and to enable one to observe them. There are many degrees of observing them, and the sotaapanna who has eradicated the wrong view of self will never transgress the five precepts. > > Dear Nina, > > I am sorry to notice you also apparently fell into this blunder. > Though easily it is forgotten that the audience to whom the Buddha > addresed His teachings, expecially with reference to the Paramattha > ones like the Satipattana you mentioned, were people that already > practiced an immaculate life: be them either already experienced monks or, in some cases, pupils of other ascetic schools, or, as in the case of Anathapindaka, disciples of the Buddha on the verge of death. > > To other people not bound to a disciplinary code the Buddha's teaching was focused on virtue, not on insight. Thus your view that ethics is a corollary of anatta, a view that I strangely already contradicted when supported by Patricia Genoud at a recent retreat, must be vigorously rejected. > > Metta, Fabrizio > Hi, Fabrizio (Nina, James, Sarah, Chris) - For your information there were several discussions in the past few years about virtues (siila) as the requisite condition for concentration(samadhi) and understanding(paññaa). Indeed there are many suttas (e.g. Kundaliya Sutta SN XLVI.6, Sekha-patipada Sutta MN 53, Sikkha Sutta AN III.88 , etc.) that confirm the siila-samadhi-paññaa basic structure of the Buddha-sassana. Yet, Nina & Co. (i.e. Nina and Sarah and Jon, and other followers of Khun Sujin) keep on insisting that right understanding (that goes hand in hand with not self) comes first. They have contended that purification of virtues and purification of consciousness are the consequence of "right understanding" rather than the requisite condition. So, it seems to me that you might be taking the same (frustrating)route that I have been through. No-one can convince them to change their unshakable views. Just a warning. Yours truly, Tep ====== 58551 From: "Dan D." Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:36am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition onco111 Joop, Kusala/akusala are commonly translated as moral/immoral or faulty/faultless. But since amorality is so popular in the west (presumably because of the common association between morality and silabbataparamasa and with a sterile Kantian-style ethics and with Auntie Fern), other translations are becoming more popular, e.g. wholesome/unwholesome or skilful/unskilful. Dan > I did and do not comment on remarks of any theistic relgion > And I did not talk about kusala or akusala > I only stated: the don't exist a moral obligation to be happy. Not in > buddhism, and not in the most protestant variant of Theravada > > Metta > > Joop > 58552 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Meaning of Javana nilovg Hi Matheesha, yes, the javanacittas are, in the case of non-arahats, rooted in akusala hetus or sobhana hetus. As to cetanaa, this is here akusala or kusala, as it accompanies akusala citta or kusala citta. There is cetanaa with each citta, also with vipaakacitta or kiriyacitta, it coordinates the tasks of the accompanying cetasikas. In the case of akusala cetanaa or kusala cetanaa, it has a double task, apart from coordinating, it intends akusala or kusala and can have the intensity of kamma that will produce vipaaka later on. Nina. op 28-04-2006 13:37 schreef matheesha op dhammachat@...: > M: A little question which might be useful practically.. Does the > arising of javana citta coincide with arising of roots of a/kusala or > cetana? I'm trying to see if there is anyway by which one can be > mindful of these litte critters. Javana has been something elusive > for me so far. 58553 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:59am Subject: FW: [palistudy] new PD pali dictionary site nilovg Hallo Joop. I got this from the Pali list and checked the Dutch. ---------- Van: Yuttadhammo Beantwoord: palistudy@yahoogroups.com Datum: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 18:07:29 +0700 Aan: palistudy@yahoogroups.com Onderwerp: [palistudy] new PD pali dictionary site I would like to draw all of your attentions to a new web site that looks quite promising. It is still not complete, but in the future it might very well be the best Pali resource on the web... please check it out, it is like a wiki: Best wishes, Yuttadhammo 58554 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition nilovg Dear Fabrizio, op 28-04-2006 13:34 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op f.bartolomucci@...: > I am sorry to notice you also apparently fell into this blunder. > Though easily it is forgotten that the audience to whom the Buddha > addresed His teachings, expecially with reference to the Paramattha > ones like the Satipattana you mentioned, were people that already > practiced an immaculate life:.... > > To other people not bound to a disciplinary code the Buddha's teaching > was focused on virtue, not on insight. Thus your view that ethics is a > corollary of anatta, a view that I strangely already contradicted when > supported by Patricia Genoud at a recent retreat, must be vigorously > rejected. --------- N: Also outside the sasana virtue was taught. But the Buddha's teaching was different from all other teachings. He taught to develop siila together with satipa.t.thaana. A higher level of guarding the sense-doors. Sutta Nipaata, vs 1035, to Ajita: <'Whatever streams there are in the world, Ajita', said the Blessed One, 'their restraint is mindfulness. I will tell you the constraint for streams. They are damned by wisdom.'> Nina. 58555 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:59am Subject: Re: [dsg] metta 4 nilovg Dear Paul, thank you for your beautiful story on mettaa, really taken from daily life. Generosity that comes from the heart this was. You were thinking of the other person's needs, wanting to help and that is mettaa. With appreciation, Nina. op 28-04-2006 05:53 schreef Paul Grabianowski op paulgrabianowski@...: > Hi all, > > Thanks for the Metta postings Nina. This reminds of how much I've learned > from reading Kh. Sujin's book. 58556 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:29am Subject: Re: [dsg] Thank you Descartes! paulgrabiano... Dear Fabrizio, I apologize for flubbing up your name in such a silly manner. F: Please permit me to disagree on your last point. As a matter of fact > believing we are part of an immutable process (be it kamma, God will, > chance, matter...) is one of the views the Buddha warned us against, > according to my opinion. I don't think I was suggesting that the round of becoming is immutable (not subject to change). Everything is subject to change. This is why the Buddha warns us against taking the body as self and even moreso taking the mind as self. The mind is like a monkey swinging from tree to tree, unsatisfied and unable to rest on this branch or that branch. > Still I think we are a little stuck on this topic so perhaps you might > like to mention some of the behaviours you employ while holding this > view that would not be feasible if you did not hold it. In most of what I've read in the Pali scriptures about not fallng into views, the Buddha is certainly quite clear that its incorrect to say either that nothing exists or that thing exists eternally. Though, he seems never to say exactly what to believe. I think that it is perhaps because beliefs and views themselves miss the point and are insufficient to understand dhamma. I think the teachings of buddha as they are handed down preserved have are largely concerned with practical applications of thought and action to bring about behaviors so that we will understand what the buddha meant by not holding view. All the rest is in some way falling into views. Taking the Pali scriptures (the words in the texts) too literally as immutable things is perhaps also a falling into views in this sense. Paul 58558 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:07am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition ... Corollary of Anatta fbartolom Dear Tep, > For your information there were several discussions in the past few > years about virtues (siila) as the requisite condition for > concentration(samadhi) and understanding(paññaa). Indeed there are > many suttas (e.g. Kundaliya Sutta SN XLVI.6, Sekha-patipada Sutta MN > 53, Sikkha Sutta AN III.88 , etc.) that confirm the > siila-samadhi-paññaa basic structure of the Buddha-sassana. Yet, Nina > & Co. (i.e. Nina and Sarah and Jon, and other followers of Khun Sujin) > keep on insisting that right understanding (that goes hand in hand > with not self) comes first. They have contended that purification of > virtues and purification of consciousness are the consequence of > "right understanding" rather than the requisite condition. So, it > seems to me that you might be taking the same (frustrating)route that > I have been through. No-one can convince them to change their > unshakable views. > > Just a warning. First of all luckly I am well placed regarding frustration. At my current stage it is a wonder when someone answers to me even once before disappearing. So my situation with Nina is already totally safe. Regarding the position of highlithing samadhi and vipassana over sila that is unfortunately not only a problem with Nina and our other friends. The explanation I gave to myself of this peculiar bias on the part of even the most important teachers is that most of people in the West came to Buddhism by a rejection of the Christian tradition expecially for the moral rules that were integral part of this tradition. So early teachers might have thought that highlighting virtue early would push away many of the newcomers possibly thinking they could introduce virtue at a later stage, what they generally never did. Thus the new view that a specific cultivation of virtue was not needed gradually appeared. Of course the Sublime excluded that case but he also emphasized the individual research. So if someone finds that people skilled in meditation and reading many books become naturally inclined to be kind, generouse and virtuous that would be a great finding that would outpass even the teachings of the Buddha! My own experience, though, is different. 58559 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:07am Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? philofillet Hi Azita > I recall having a conversation with Sarah about this - not the Jon > aspect ;-) Yes, this was the talk that conditioned what I wrote jokingly but truthfully enough - there is no telling. We can certainly cultivate conditions that reduce the likelihood of shocking behaviour, but we can't eliminate the possibility completely - only the ariyan has done that. Phil 58560 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:25am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 73, and Tiika nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 73. Proximity-Condition (Anantara-Paccaya) and Contiguity-Condition (Samanantara-Paccaya) Intro: Anantara (proximity) means: without interval. Anantara and samanantara (contiguity) are different in name, but the same in meaning. The preceding citta is the condition, paccaya, for the arising of the subsequent citta which is the conditioned dhamma (paccayupanna dhamma). It is after the preceding citta has ceased that the subsequent citta arises. "Saÿ"in samanantara can mean right or proper. Citta conditions, after it has ceased, the arising of the subsequent citta, without any interval; each preceding citta is anantara-paccaya for the following citta. Moreover, the preceding citta is samanantara-paccaya for the next citta. Cittas succeed one another in the proper way, in accordance with a fixed order in their subsequent arising. The rebirth-consciousness, for example, is not followed by seeing, but by the first bhavanga-citta in that life. The relation of samanantara-paccaya has been taught in addition to anantara paccaya for the benefit of the listeners who might have misunderstandings. Samanantara is sometimes translated as immediate contiguity. ------- Text Vis.: 73. (4), (5) A state that assists by being proximate is a 'proximity condition¹. A state that assists by being contiguous is a 'contiguity condition'. The explanation of this pair of conditions is very diffuse, but substantially it is this:[12] --------- Note 12 taken from the Tiika: < 'Proximity and contiguity conditions are not stated in accordance with the distinction between making occur and giving opportunity, as the absence and disappearance conditions are...> N: This will be explained later on when we come to absence-condition and disappearance-condition (Vis. XVII, 98, 99). -------- Text Vis.: rather they are stated as the causes of the regular order of consciousness [in the cognitive series]' (Pm. 585).> ------- N: The Tiika adds that people are confused as to the explanation of the texts on proximity-condition and contiguity-condition and do not grasp the essence. As to the regular order of cittas, citta niyama, there is a fixed order of cittas that nobody can change. One citta at a time arises, performs its own function and is then succeeded by the next citta. --------- Text Vis.: the regular order of consciousness begins thus, mind element is proximate (next) after eye-consciousness, mind-consciousness element is proximate (next) after mind element, and this is established only by each preceding consciousness, not otherwise; -------- N: Mind-element, mano-dhaatu, stands for receiving-consciousness, the vipaakacitta that receives visible object, and this conditions by way of proximity-condition the following mind-consciousness element, mano-viññaa.na-dhaatu, which is in this case the vipaakacitta that is santiira.na-citta, investigating-consciousness, and, as the Tiika explains, this conditions the following citta which is determining-consciousness, vo.t.thapanacitta. The text of the Pa.t.thaana (Analytical Exposition of the Conditions, p. 4) mentions this order for each of the five sense-doors. Evenso the rebirth-consciousness follows immediately upon the dying-consciousness, without any break in between. ----------- Text Vis.: consequently, a state that is capable of arousing an appropriate kind of consciousness proximate (next) to itself is a proximity condition. Hence it is said: 'Proximity condition: eye-consciousness and the states associated therewith are a condition, as proximity condition, for mind element and for the states associated therewith' (P.tn.1,2). ------------------------ Conclusion: Our life is an unbroken series of cittas, succeeding one another without interval. The cittas which perform their functions succeed one another in a regular order. The sense-door adverting-consciousness, the first citta which arises in a sense-door process, is conditioned by the last bhavanga-citta arising before the sense-door process starts, by way of proximity-condition and contiguity-condition. The sense-door adverting-consciousness experiences an object different from the object the bhavanga-citta experiences; it adverts to the object which impinges on one of the senses and is then succeeded by one of the the sense-cognitions (dvi-pañca-viññåùa, seeing, hearing, etc.) which experiences that object. There is seeing and hearing time and again, also now. Thus, we know that the conditions of proximity and contiguity still continue. The relations of proximity-condition and contiguity-condition prevail throughout the cycle of birth and death with unbroken continuity. Because of the uninterrupted succession of cittas, past lives condition the present life and evenso the present life will condition future lives. Each citta falls away completely, but it conditions the succeeding citta. Tendencies and inclinations we had in former lives have been accumulated from moment to moment up to the present. Since each citta which falls away conditions the succeeding citta we can accumulate skills, knowledge and wisdom. Because of proximity-condition and contiguity-condition the potentialities one is born with are carried on from moment to moment. Kammas, good and bad deeds, committed in the past are accumulated from moment to moment, from life to life, and they can produce their appropriate results later on, when it is the right time. In the course of life we experience happiness and sorrow, but we could not have such experiences if the rebirth-consciousness had not arisen and if this citta was not succeeded by the following cittas, bhavanga-cittas and cittas arising in sense-door processes and mind-door processes. The fact that there is a regular order of the arising of cittas reminds us that there is no self who could prevent the arising of particular cittas. The adverting-consciousness adverts already to an object before we can do anything about it. The process of cittas takes its regular course. When there are conditions for understanding, it arises and it can develop. ****** Nina. 58561 From: "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:24am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition fbartolom Dear Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > N: Also outside the sasana virtue was taught. But the Buddha's teaching was > different from all other teachings. He taught to develop siila together with > satipa.t.thaana. A higher level of guarding the sense-doors. > Sutta Nipaata, vs 1035, to Ajita: > <'Whatever streams there are in the world, Ajita', said the Blessed One, > 'their restraint is mindfulness. I will tell you the constraint for streams. > They are damned by wisdom.'> Unfortunately your view that the Buddha suggested to develop Sila at the same time with Samadhi and Panna is not rooted in anything in the Canon and so it is technically eretic - of course one would mantain some truths are not captured by the teaching of the Buddha and this position is totally acceptable; even if I do not personally recognize myself in this latter view. In the case instead you keep your practice anchored to the Pali Canon I invite you to quote some sentences of it that support the view that Sila need not be developed before Samadhi and Vipassana (Sathipattana in general). 58562 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:28am Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? philofillet Hi James > Warning Phil: I am going to strongly disagree with you in this post, > and write some things which may upset you; if you are not in the > right frame of mind, don't read it until later. Thanks for the warning. I don't want to get into a debate kind of thing so I expect I will say "let's agree to disagree." > > James: NO!! It is not meaningless!! Tep is following the second > factor of the Noble Eightfold Path: Right Resolve (or Right Thought): > > "And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on > freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness: This is called right > resolve." Ph: You see, we just have to agree to disagree, because my perspective is rooted in abhidhamma. You know very well the way abhidhamma defines right thinking, as the cetasika vitakka (sp?) that strikes the object, helping to condition panna, if I recall correctly. I think for you it is very helpful to find "right resolve" in the eightfold path, but it isn't there for me. We can agree to disagree on that and save a lot of time and energy. > > This is a perfect example of what I don't like about the KS > philosophy. It's adherents become so brainwashed by it's > fatalistic, passive approach that they completely forget the > Buddha's teaching! In every moment of every day there is the potential to abstain from evil and do good. It "arises", that's true, in a conditioned way, but there is nothing passive about the abstaining and doing at the moment it happens - It's right down in the nitty gritty of daily life. You can write down a list of resolutions and keep them to a T - but that is still conditioned, happening beyond "your" control, beccause there is no self to control that sort of thing. That's all. No big deal. Whatever you do is done by conditioned cittas, not by self, that's all. I mean we all know that, right? It doesn't mean we're spinning through life out of control - it just means that we have an understanding of the forces at work. I'll cut ahead. >> The potential > > lies lurking...very, very unlikely in most cases, but the > potential is > > still there. > > James: Ohhh...how sinister. How x-files. ;-)) Who knows what will > happen. I may just go out and rob a bank tonight! Ph: Hmm, I was joking about Jon, but I'm not so sure about you!!! Seriously, I certainly know that the above is very true - it seems perfectly obvious to me. But that's me. Don't sweat it - unless I touched a nerve of recognition! ;) James, you said a couple of weeks ago that I often called you "the challenger." I don't remember that, but I do remember telling you that you needn't be the Buddha's attorney, protecting his teaching against defamation. Don't sweat it! Phil p.s last word to you, if you'd like 58563 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:51am Subject: Re: Weekend Break in Posting philofillet Hi Larry > L: It isn't beyond our understanding. I'm sure Howard could review his > consiousnesses and see what happened. Granted, it is very subtle stuff > even on a macro level, but really it's just a matter of sensitizing the > mind to what's going on, and understanding the concepts so there is > recognition. "Pressing hard" is viriya. "Too hard" of course is a > mistake. I think this is a good reminder for me that we all ahve different accumulations. I love the story about how when you were a kid, taking a bath, you analyzed the nature of the elements or molecules involved, something like that. There was vihamsa, safe to say, active there. So it is natural for you to apply your mind to knotty problems, and for Howard. For me it is not natural, so the point that it is "too hard" comes much sooner and it is wisdom to let things drop. I shouldn't assume that it is that way for everyone. Phil 58564 From: "ericlonline" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 7:55am Subject: Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) ericlonline Hey Ken H & (Geoff), Ken> The trick is to understand that, even here and now, there are only > dhammas (arising at one of the six doors). Parinibbana is no > different; it is no more frightening than the present moment. At > parinibbana there are only the death-moment dhammas of an arahant. > They are essentially the same as the dhammas that are arising here and now. One difference, admittedly, is that they will not condition new dhammas to follow in their place. But so what? Future dhammas are no more my self than are present dhammas. Something for you to consider.. This was said by the Lord... "Bhikkhus, held by two kinds of views, some devas and human beings hold back and some overreach; only those with vision see. "And how, bhikkhus, do some hold back? Devas and humans enjoy being, delight in being, are satisfied with being. When Dhamma is taught to them for the cessation of being, their minds do not enter into it or acquire confidence in it or settle upon it or become resolved upon it. Thus, bhikkhus, do some hold back. "How, bhikkhus, do some overreach? Now some are troubled, ashamed, and disgusted by this very same being and they rejoice in (the idea of) non-being, asserting: 'In as much as this self, good sirs, when the body perishes at death, is annihilated and destroyed and does not exist after death — this is peaceful, this is excellent, this is reality!' Thus, bhikkhus, do some overreach. "How, bhikkhus, do those with vision see? Herein a bhikkhu sees what has come to be as having come to be. Having seen it thus, he practices the course for turning away, for dispassion, for the cessation of what has come to be. Thus, bhikkhus, do those with vision see." 58565 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:27am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition ... Corollary of Anatta indriyabala Hi, Fabrizio - I think your last paragraph says it all : > F: > So if someone finds that people skilled in meditation and reading many books become naturally inclined to be kind, generouse and virtuous that would be a great finding that would outpass even the teachings of the Buddha! > > My own experience, though, is different. > Well said! Indeed, indeed. ... it would be a "great finding" that would belittle the Great Sage's Teachings and ridicule all great efforts of great Ariya-saavakas(noble disciples) who lived their holy lives in renunciation(nekkhamma) and seclusion(viveka). Sincerely, Tep, your Dhamma friend. ================== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Fabrizio Bartolomucci" wrote: > > Dear Tep, > > > For your information there were several discussions in the past few > > years about virtues (siila) as the requisite condition for > > concentration(samadhi) and understanding(paññaa). Indeed there are > > many suttas (e.g. Kundaliya Sutta SN XLVI.6, Sekha-patipada Sutta MN > > 53, Sikkha Sutta AN III.88 , etc.) that confirm the > > siila-samadhi-paññaa basic structure of the Buddha-sassana. Yet, Nina > > & Co. (i.e. Nina and Sarah and Jon, and other followers of Khun Sujin) > > keep on insisting that right understanding (that goes hand in hand > > with not self) comes first. They have contended that purification of > > virtues and purification of consciousness are the consequence of > > "right understanding" rather than the requisite condition. So, it > > seems to me that you might be taking the same (frustrating)route that > > I have been through. No-one can convince them to change their > > unshakable views. > > > > Just a warning. > > (snipped) 58566 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:30am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition jwromeijn Hallo Dan Good that you make ethical behavior one of the central topics. When I think of 'ethics', I think of the Pali word 'sila' And sila is: the Five precepts and the three aspects of the Noble Eightfold Path If you think kusala and akusala is better translated with "moral/immoral" than with 'wholesome/unwholesome': I make no problem as such with that; but to me 'ethics' has to do with a person in relation to other persons and I'm not sure kusala/akusala has also to do with that relation: it's more about phenomena within the person. And I don't know who 'Auntie Fern is, belongs to the american culture I'm afraid? I'm saying this because I think 'be happy!' belongs to that culture to: optimism, positive thinking, bring democracy to Irak. (You see I don't have problems with prejudices) Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Joop, > Kusala/akusala are commonly translated as moral/immoral or > faulty/faultless. But since amorality is so popular in the west > (presumably because of the common association between morality and > silabbataparamasa and with a sterile Kantian-style ethics and with > Auntie Fern), other translations are becoming more popular, e.g. > wholesome/unwholesome or skilful/unskilful. > > Dan > > > I did and do not comment on remarks of any theistic relgion > > And I did not talk about kusala or akusala > > I only stated: the don't exist a moral obligation to be happy. Not in > > buddhism, and not in the most protestant variant of Theravada > > > > Metta > > > > Joop > > > 58567 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:54am Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? indriyabala Hi, James (Phil and interested members) - I still remember well that you once observed that I understood your often-misinterpreted messages and (right) intention behind them better than others. I am glad that I now can say the same about you. Phil wrote earlier : > > Hi Tep > > > You can have my words of honor that I will always mean "no harm" > > toward you. Yes, I promise. > > Though you have the accumulated tendency to be a nice person, > technically speaking the above is meaningless, isn't it? .............. Tep: And you were quick and accurate to respond as follows: James: NO!! It is not meaningless!! Tep is following the second factor of the Noble Eightfold Path: Right Resolve (or Right Thought): "And what is right resolve? Being resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness: This is called right resolve." ............. Tep: It is amazing that at the time I read that Phil's remark I was thinking very much the same as you did. Right. Without a good and firm intention to be wholesome in bodily actions, verbal actions, and mental actions, how could it be possible for anyone to stay away from akusala cetana that leads to akusala kamma? Thanks one hundred times, James, for you clear understanding of the 2nd Path factor and for speaking out for me. Sincerely, Tep, your old pal. ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > Hi Phil (and Tep), > > Warning Phil: I am going to strongly disagree with you in this post, > and write some things which may upset you; if you are not in the > right frame of mind, don't read it until later. > (snipped) 58568 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:33am Subject: metta 5. nilovg Dear friends, This is taken from Kh. Sujin's book on Metta. I read this Sutta to Lodewijk last night and he wants me to read it again. He said we should very slowly read this text so that we get the most out of it. Dear friends, > This is taken from Kh. Sujin's book on Metta. I read this Sutta to Lodewijk > last night and he wants me to read it again. He said we should very slowly > read this text so that we get the most out of it. > > that the Buddha said: > > How ugly is an angry man! > > ======================== Nina, thank you so much for this! I've never seen it before. It is simply wonderful! 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) 58570 From: nina van gorkom Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:57am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition nilovg Dear Fabrizio, op 28-04-2006 16:24 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op f.bartolomucci@...: > In the case instead you keep your practice anchored to the Pali Canon > I invite you to quote some sentences of it that support the view that > Sila need not be developed before Samadhi and Vipassana (Sathipattana > in general). ---------- N: I did not mean this. Kusala siila: this is kusala through body and speech. There are many levels and each level is good. When there is paññaa accompanying siila, it is of a higher level. It can become purer. Read Vis. Ch I, read Patisambhidhaamagga, many ways of classifying siila. <265. Five kinds of virtue. In the case of killing living things, abandoning is virtue, abstention is virtue, volition is virtue, restraint is virtue, non-transgression is virtue. Such virtues lead to non-remorse cognizance, to gladness, to happiness, to tranquillity, to joy, to repetition, to development, to making much of, to embellishment, to the requisite [for concentration], to the equipmment [of concentration], to perfection, to complete dispassion, to fading away of greed, to cessation, to peace, to direct-knowledge, to enlightenment, to nibbaana...> Thus, you see, as also the Vis. explains: lower levels and then higher and higher, even jhaana is siila, even lokuttara cittas are siila. Nina. 58571 From: "Dan D." Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:01am Subject: Another weekend break in posting onco111 Hi All (especially Ken H, Sarah, Joop, and whomever else I owe a response to), I am going to Tacoma, Washington (3.5 hr drive from here) this weekend so won't be able to respond to the issues raised in recent posts adressed to me until Sunday night or Monday or Tuesday. My son is testing for his black belt in karate. Dan 58572 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:31am Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation,... Upaaya = strategy indriyabala Hello Joop - Oh, I see, 'upaya' is a Sanskit term that means skillful means! >Joop: SN XXII.53 has the title 'Upaya Sutta' but is hardly about skilfull means. AN II.19, 'Kusala Sutta' is translated as 'Skillful' by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, not a very good idea, I think. Tep: Right, the first one is about attachment of consciousness to the five aggregates; when the attached citta is associated with delight(nandi), it will "proliferate". The seond Kusala sutta, although not about a strategy either it is very useful. Why is it very useful? Because it is a clear evidence that the Buddha, our Greatest Teacher, assured his monks again that it was "possible" to develop kusala dhammas and that it also was "possible" to abandon akusala dhammas. It is encouraging for people who have saddha in the DHamma and generate desire (chanda) to bring kulasa dhammas to fruition. This evidence is strongly contradicting to the belief of several members of our group. ................. >Joop: >And the arrogance of some Abhidhammikas who see Abhidhamma texts for the highbrow monks and Suttas for the less intelligent people. Tep: I have got the same feeling too, Joop. Thank you very much for the reply. Best wishes, Tep ==== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Tep, (and Rob M and Andrew T (at the end)) > (snipped) > > In the Pali Canon there is the wish of the Buddha (I don't know in > which sutta) that the monks speak to their audiences in the own > language of the audience. > Further: > SN XXII.53 has the title 'Upaya Sutta' but is hardly about skilfull > means > AN II.19, 'Kusala Sutta' is translated as 'Skillful' by Thanissaro > Bhikkhu, not a very good idea, I think > (snipped) > My conclusion: even with this danger and with the fact that it's > hardly mentioned in the Pali Canon, 'upaya' is an important topic, > also for Theravadins I think: to make the Teaching of the Buddha > understandable for audiences in the 21th century, and understandable > for people who think more in terms of the natural science than in > that of religions like christianity; we need a kind of translation of the Dhamma in modern language, with modern metaphoes and similes. > I have discussed with Nina several times about this topic (she did > not agree with me) > (snipped) 58573 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:48am Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition indriyabala Hi, Nina & Fabrizio, Please slowly read your Vism. quote again : >Nina's quote: > Such virtues lead to non-remorse cognizance, to gladness, to happiness, to tranquillity, to joy, to repetition, to development, to making much of, to embellishment, to the requisite [for concentration], to the equipmment [of concentration], to perfection, to complete dispassion, to fading away of greed, to cessation, to peace, to direct-knowledge, to enlightenment, to nibbaana...> >Nina: Thus, you see, as also the Vis. explains: lower levels and then higher and higher, even jhaana is siila, even lokuttara cittas are siila. Tep: This quote describes a development process that is opposite to the model that says "understanding comes first; siila and samadhi cannot arise without right understanding leading the way". This quote actually states that virtues comes first, then non-remorse arises, then gladness, ... concentration, dispassion, ... direct knowledge and enlightenment all result from the very, very first "virtues" having been developed. Warm regards, Tep ======== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, nina van gorkom wrote: > > Dear Fabrizio, > op 28-04-2006 16:24 schreef Fabrizio Bartolomucci op > f.bartolomucci@...: > > > In the case instead you keep your practice anchored to the Pali Canon > > I invite you to quote some sentences of it that support the view that > > Sila need not be developed before Samadhi and Vipassana (Sathipattana > > in general). > ---------- > N: I did not mean this. Kusala siila: this is kusala through body and > speech. There are many levels and each level is good. When there is paññaa > accompanying siila, it is of a higher level. It can become purer. > > Read Vis. Ch I, read Patisambhidhaamagga, many ways of classifying siila. > <265. Five kinds of virtue. > In the case of killing living things, abandoning is virtue, abstention is > virtue, volition is virtue, restraint is virtue, non-transgression is > virtue. (snipped) 58574 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:49am Subject: Re: [dsg] Another weekend break in posting upasaka_howard Hi, Dan - In a message dated 4/28/06 2:02:48 PM Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: > My son is > testing for his black belt in karate. > > ======================== Dan, that's great! :-) It's a big step - bigger than going for the higher-degree black belt ranks. Please wish him all my best and give him my congratulations. I'm a 4th degree black belt in taekwondo. But I did all my taekwondo training between the ages of 43 and 53, and I can tell you for a fact that there's a big difference between being a young-person black belt and an old-goat black belt! LOL! With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 58575 From: "indriyabala" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:01pm Subject: Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427 The Faculties indriyabala Hi, Cunnie (and Herman-ugo) - [Cunning Connie is abbreviated as "Cunnie".] >connie: exist? not-exist? did the teeth run down the middle of the >road? laughing. Tepster: Pardon me? I need a little help here .. teeth down the road ? :-)) ............... Tep: Can you give a little background information of the pitaka disclosure you are quoting from? Thanks. This pitaka disclosure talks about quite a few things: "suffering" that is conditioned by the various "things" like the 22 faculties; the roots of the unprofitables and their support; object for defilement; the cessation of suffering. Questions: In 381 & 382 -- what are the other six faculties besides the faith faculty and the final-knower faculty? Why are they "the way leading to the Cessation of Suffering"? Are they same as the noble eightfold path?? Yours very truly, Tep ====== --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > hi tep&hof-sters, > > > Herman: > > Why, some of my best friends crave the existence of parramattha > dhammas :-) > > Tep: Why, do you not think they think "only the paramattha dhammas" do > exist? > > connie: exist? not-exist? did the teeth run down the middle of the > road? laughing. > (snipped) > 381. So there are seven faculties, neither more nor less (?), due to > assuming an object for defilement, namely feeling of all [five kinds and] the femininity faculty and the masculininty faculty. > 382. Herein, the eight faculties, namely the faith faculty (#194) ... down to ... the final-knower faculty (#221) are (5) the way leading to the Cessation of Suffering. (snipped) > <> > > Yours truly! > 58576 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:44am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? charles.dacosta Hi all, I am trying to use Gmail now and I am having a few challenges; any please bare with me. To avoid be labeled as one of Acharn Sujin's unthinking followers, it would help to do more than quote her, explain what the quote means from your perspective. Then no-one can call you "unthinking". Personally, I think sutta interpretation and reflection are safe, and the faithful following (due to unthinking) of the teachings of any teacher (including non-ariyan). I say this because Truth comes sooner or later whether one is ready or not. It does not care about what you thought, think, or willing to accept. And yes one can always try to remain blind to it but sooner or later you will breakdown and truth will set in. Now, if you are looking for the fastest and easiest way to Truth, it is openness. The real problem for Truth is not whether you are an unthinking follower or a maverick challenging everyone and thing. It is attachment to a view/idea/... the bottom line unwillingness to accept an other, i.e., close-mindedness. Often, it is the thinkers that are the most closed minded. As for conditonality, well, I hope I have just condition you to be more Open to Truth. CharlesD On 4/24/06, indriyabala wrote: > > > Hi, Friend Herman (& Phil)- > > ... > > >Phil : > > It certainly is unfortunate that in a group that was founded in > the light of Acharn Sujin's teaching, referring to her or quoting her > to someone who disagrees with her gets one labelled as being one of > her unthinking followers. I have been told this in many different ways > by differing people at different times over the last two years. And > it's difficult to "defend" oneself and her, because she emphasizes > understanding from the beginning, and detachment, and other people > emphasize a literal interpretation of suttas, irregardless of whether > there are moments of understanding them or not. ... Sutta interpretation and reflection are safe, unlike faithful > following(due to unthinking?) of the teachings of any teachers who > are not ariyan (ariya-savakko). > ................. > > >Herman (#58268): > >We are reminded at various times that everything is due to > conditions. ... I would suggest that conditions are never observed, > they are always inferred. > > Tep: Conditions (see Paccaya Sutta) are ignorance, fabrications, > consciousness, ..., and birth. I would think that they are supposed > to be observed as "dependently co-arisen phenomena: inconstant, > compounded, dependently co-arisen, subject to ending, subject to > passing away, subject to fading, subject to cessation". > ..................... > > Warm regards, > > > Tep > ====== <...> 58577 From: "Charles DaCosta" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:47am Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition charles.dacosta Hi Dan D. Interesting, I will have to give it more thought. CharlesD On 4/26/06, Dan D. wrote: > > Hi All, > On the radio the other day Denis Prager commented that we have a moral > obligation to be happy. His point was two-fold. First, happy people do > far more to make others happy than do unhappy people. Second, in many > ways general day-to-day happiness and misery are determined by the way > one looks at the world (acute mourning, mental illness, and severe > privation notwithstanding). Is he right? Does he go too far? Not far > enough? > > Dan > 58578 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:21pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427- mindfulness/sati (i) egberdina Hi Tep, > I have a question for you : suppose the beautiful woman's skin was > seen on the body of a fat and ugly woman, would there be craving for > "that" skin? > ............ Best way to find out is to try it But I don't see a contradiction in a fat, ugly woman having beautiful skin, or skin that you somehow crave. >Herman: > >Why, some of my best friends crave the existence of parramattha > dhammas :-) > > Tep: Why, do you not think they think "only the paramattha dhammas" do > exist? No, I do think they do think that parramatha dhammas do exist :-) > > -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58579 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:27pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Weekend Break in Posting egberdina Hi Howard, May the silence be with you :-) But by taking the step to sign up for a retreat > and then just going there, I put myself in the position of having such a > period of meditation and seclusion "forced" on me - voluntarily forced on > me. I > think this is a decent conventional example of setting up conditions to > enable > useful goals. Spot on.. -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58580 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? egberdina Hi Phil, > Jon, for example, could abandon his long years of abstaining from > alcohol *at this very moment* and go carousing in the brothels of Hong > Kong, and mug passers-by to get more money to buy the methamphetamines > that he could develop a craving for *at this very moment* > > There is no telling!!!!! That last line sounds to me like a denial of causality. Perhaps you meant there is no telling with absolute certainty? I very much doubt, even do you say it, that you believe that it is totally impossible to predict the future. Let's say Jon does what you speculate as being possible. If there was no way of telling this was going to happen, on what basis would you then say after the fact that it was due to conditions? -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58581 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:50pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Final Post: Attention to Conditions and Refinement ... Too Quick to Judge? egberdina Hi Nina, The Abhidhamma does not > need any defense, it defends itself. > Nina. > > I like the line, but I don't think this is quite true. The Abhidhamma does not defend itself. It is a just ink on paper. It is minds that attack and defend. And minds that attack and defend are in the dark about what is real. Because only what is real requires no defense. The present moment doesn't need defending (it is what it is despite ignorance of it), only views about it do. -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58582 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 3:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: ‘Cetasikas' study corner 427 egberdina Hi the Conster, > connie: exist? not-exist? did the teeth run down the middle of the > road? laughing. And there is just this non-emptiness: that connected with the six sensory spheres, dependent on this very body with life as its condition. (MN121) -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58583 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:15pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? buddhatrue Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: I don't remember that, but I do remember > telling you that you needn't be the Buddha's attorney, protecting > his teaching against defamation. ;-)) At least I have a good client....better than having O.J.! ;-) Metta, James 58584 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:23pm Subject: Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? buddhatrue Hi Tep, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "indriyabala" wrote: > > Thanks one hundred times, James, for you clear understanding of the > 2nd Path factor and for speaking out for me. > You're welcome. And thank you for demonstrating what it means to be a true follower of dhamma. Metta, James 58585 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:55pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Weekend Break in Posting lbidd2 Phil: "I think this is a good reminder for me that we all ahve different accumulations. I love the story about how when you were a kid, taking a bath, you analyzed the nature of the elements or molecules involved, something like that. There was vihamsa, safe to say, active there. So it is natural for you to apply your mind to knotty problems, and for Howard. For me it is not natural, so the point that it is "too hard" comes much sooner and it is wisdom to let things drop. I shouldn't assume that it is that way for everyone." Hi Phil, Well, it's complicated. You're always saying "we can't understand this" but you, more than anyone else here, bring to the group fresh insights into your own mental processes, almost in every email. So something is happening even if you're just sitting back in your chair, looking out the window. On the other hand, you're right. We can't understand anything in the sense of grasping a fact. Whatever panna reveals is impermanent, elusive, and empty. Larry 58586 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 6:12pm Subject: Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) ken_aitch Hi Eric, I enjoyed reading this quote, thank you. It says that, rather than take the eternalist route or the annihilationist route, a bhikkhu sees the presently arisen conditioned dhamma as it truly is. In so doing, he practises satipatthana - the way to enlightenment. I have to wonder why you brought this particular sutta to my attention. Geoff has been saying that parinibbana does not mean final cessation of consciousness: do you interpret this sutta as somehow supporting his view? Ken H > > "Bhikkhus, held by two kinds of views, some devas and > human beings hold back and some overreach; only those with vision > see. > > "And how, bhikkhus, do some hold back? Devas and humans enjoy being, > delight in being, are satisfied with being. When Dhamma is taught to > them for the cessation of being, their minds do not enter into it or > acquire confidence in it or settle upon it or become resolved upon > it. Thus, bhikkhus, do some hold back. > > "How, bhikkhus, do some overreach? Now some are troubled, ashamed, > and disgusted by this very same being and they rejoice in (the idea > of) non-being, asserting: 'In as much as this self, good sirs, when > the body perishes at death, is annihilated and destroyed and does > not exist after death — this is peaceful, this is excellent, this is > reality!' Thus, bhikkhus, do some overreach. > > "How, bhikkhus, do those with vision see? Herein a bhikkhu sees what > has come to be as having come to be. Having seen it thus, he > practices the course for turning away, for dispassion, for the > cessation of what has come to be. Thus, bhikkhus, do those with > vision see." > 58587 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) egberdina Hi Ken, Sorry for butting in. On 29/04/06, ken_aitch wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > I enjoyed reading this quote, thank you. It says that, rather than > take the eternalist route or the annihilationist route, a bhikkhu sees > the presently arisen conditioned dhamma as it truly is. In so doing, > he practises satipatthana - the way to enlightenment. > > I have to wonder why you brought this particular sutta to my > attention. Geoff has been saying that parinibbana does not mean final > cessation of consciousness: do you interpret this sutta as somehow > supporting his view? What view of consciousness do you have? Is not any cessation of consciousness final? Do you posit between consciousnesses that relates one to another and makes them belong together? If so, what is that relation? -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58588 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 9:52pm Subject: Re: [dsg] a "happy" proposition egberdina Hi Dan, > > D:As for a seclusion/solitude pre-requisite, do you mean physical > > > seclusion or a mental seclusion from the anxiety-born-of- > expectation? > > > > > > H: I think the two can mutually condition each other. The currency > of society > > is language. If you are in a place, physically or mentally, where > you are > > driven (obliged) to talk, or think, you are not in a place of > solitude. > > > > Physically, no; mentally, perhaps. I'm thinking of the sutta in which > a group of bhikkhus approach the Buddha: "We're concerned about > Bhikkhu so-and-so. He won't walk into town with anyone; he won't do > chores with anyone; he won't speak to anyone; he won't blah-blah-blah > with anyone." Buddha confronts Bhikkhu so-and-so, who replies: "I am > practicing solitude and seclusion." Buddha tells him, "So you are. So > you are, in a certain sense. But the bhikkhu who is practicing REAL > seclusion has his mental states secluded from defilements regardless > of the external circumstances." I can't find the sutta now, but it is > an interesting one. (Maybe someone can help me with a reference...). > > Likewise, wouldn't it be possible to be secluded from anxiety even > when confronted with the uncomfortable truths of kamma/vipaka or of > the moral obligation to be happy? There is no moral obligation to be happy. But there is action and consequence. And there is the possibility to know this. And there is the possibility to know that action is voluntary, not involuntary. And there is the possibility to know that consequence is involuntary, not voluntary. The thereness of mind (becoming) is given. The laws that govern mind are also given. That is involuntary. But no state of mind is absolutely involuntary. (If it were, then the Dhamma would be a sick joke). And anxiety is a necessary consequence of the voluntary belief that a self has acted succesfully to usurp the way things are. -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58589 From: "Andrew" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:12pm Subject: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition ... Corollary of Anatta corvus121 Hi Fabrizio Welcome to DSG. Tep and you wrote: Tep: They have contended that purification of > > virtues and purification of consciousness are the consequence of > > "right understanding" rather than the requisite condition. Fab: Regarding the position of highlithing samadhi and vipassana over sila > that is unfortunately not only a problem with Nina and our other friends. > > The explanation I gave to myself of this peculiar bias on the part of > even the most important teachers is that most of people in the West > came to Buddhism by a rejection of the Christian tradition expecially > for the moral rules that were integral part of this tradition. Andrew: The issue you are discussing pre-dates Khun Sujin by a long way. Here are some comments by Bhikkhu Dhammapala in Wheel Publication #132/133/134 (1st ed. 1944): "... This shows again how Buddhist Ethics or moral principles, like everything else in Buddhism, are based on a foundation quite different from morality in other religions. Mental development is exactly what is needed for the development of morality. For, "when religion ceases to be wisdom, it becomes superstition overlaid with reasoning" (George Santayana). In other religions good conduct is enough to become a saint: "If ye have love ye have perfected the law," said St Paul to the Ephesians. According to later reformers like Luther, faith alone is enough for salvation. But in Buddhism real virtue is impossible without the foundation of reason. The truth must both be experienced and understood." Do you both agree? Best wishes Andrew PS the Luther reference is for Sarah and Dan (-: 58590 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Apr 28, 2006 10:26pm Subject: Divine Refuge ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: Taking Refuge: A major Winner move for all who are blindfolded!!! The Venerable Mahamoggallana once told a large group of young devas: Advantageous indeed is taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma & the Sangha… Because of taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha some beings here, at the break-up of the body, right after death, are reborn in a divine destination, in a heavenly world. There they surpass the other devas in ten respects: in life span, in divine beauty, in divine happiness, in divine fame, in divine power, and in enjoying divine forms, sounds, odours, tastes, and touchable objects… Advantageous indeed is therefore this taking refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma & the Sangha… Comments: Good to know for all beings who do neither know from where they came, nor what brought them there, and who do neither know, where they are going after death, nor what causes will bring them there! There are 31 levels of existence. Take care! For taking refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha see here: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/sangha/Refuges_&_Precepts.htm Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV [256] section 40:10 On Sakka ... 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 !!! <...> 58591 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 0:45am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) ken_aitch Hi Herman, -------------- KH to Eric: > > > > I have to wonder why you brought this particular sutta to my > > attention. Geoff has been saying that parinibbana does not mean final > > cessation of consciousness: do you interpret this sutta as somehow > > supporting his view? > H: > What view of consciousness do you have? > Is not any cessation of consciousness final? --------------- The five khandhas (including consciousness) arise momentarily, condition the next five khandhas, and then cease - never to be seen again. So yes, cessation is final. There are billions of cessations every second. At parinibbana, no khandhas are conditioned to succeed the present five khandhas, and so there is the final cessation of khandhas. ---------------------- H: > Do you posit between consciousnesses that relates one to another and makes them belong together? If so, what is that relation? ---------------------- There is a rather important typo there. Do I posit a what between consciousnesses? A self? No, I don't think you were asking that. Please try again. Ken H 58592 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:21am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) egberdina Hi Ken, On 29/04/06, ken_aitch wrote: > > Hi Herman, > > -------------- > KH to Eric: > > > > > I have to wonder why you brought this particular sutta to my > > > attention. Geoff has been saying that parinibbana does not mean final > > > cessation of consciousness: do you interpret this sutta as somehow > > > supporting his view? > > > > H: > What view of consciousness do you have? > > Is not any cessation of consciousness final? > --------------- > > The five khandhas (including consciousness) arise momentarily, > condition the next five khandhas, and then cease - never to be seen > again. So yes, cessation is final. There are billions of cessations > every second. > > At parinibbana, no khandhas are conditioned to succeed the present > five khandhas, and so there is the final cessation of khandhas. > > ---------------------- > H: > Do you posit between consciousnesses that relates one to another > and makes them belong together? If so, what is that relation? > ---------------------- > > There is a rather important typo there. Do I posit a what between > consciousnesses? A self? No, I don't think you were asking that. > Please try again. You are quite right on two fronts, it was a typo, and it wasn't self I was going to type. The missing link is the word link :-) Ken H > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58593 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 5:37am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defining 'Mental Phenomena' egberdina Hi Sarah, Howard and countless others, I would appreciate your assistance in the following: > > S: What exactly is experienced when you think 'wetness' is experienced? > > ==================== > Something other than just coldness. I don't know how to answer > "what" > it is. It *seems* to be what we uniquely call "wetness". Of course, there > is > the possibility that it is a combination of tactile experiences > perceptually > summed up (pa~n~natti) as "wetness". But it *seems* to be unique. I am only thinking about the model here, but I am wondering if there are different categories of nama/rupa for eg sound that is heard as a consequence of non-mental, and sound that is hear as a consequence of mental origination. There is sound that depends on the ears, that can be modified by altering the orientation of the ears, by shielding the ears etc, and there is sound that is produced mentally only, like tinnitus, which cannot be altered in a physical way. Are both types of hearing considered the same in the model? -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58594 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 6:00am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Four Great References (Mahapadesa) egberdina Hi Geoff, KenAitch, I am very much appreciating the discussion. > > Please see DN 11 and MN 49. For the interested, a footnote from BT on DN11. *Viññanam anidassanam.* This term is nowhere explained in the Canon, although MN 49 mentions that it "does not partake in the allness of the All" — the "All" meaning the six internal and six external sense media (see SN XXXV.23 ). In this it differs from the consciousness factor in dependent co-arising, which is defined in terms of the six sense media. Lying outside of time and space, it would also not come under the consciousness-aggregate, which covers all consciousness near and far; past, present, and future. However, the fact that it is outside of time and space — in a dimension where there is no here, there, or in between (Ud I.10), no coming, no going, or staying (Ud VIII.1) — means that it cannot be described as permanent or omnipresent, terms that have meaning only within space and time. The standard description of nibbana after death is, "All that is sensed, not being relished, will grow cold right here." (See MN 140and Iti 44.) Again, as "all" is defined as the sense media, this raises the question as to whether consciousness without feature is not covered by this "all." However, AN IV.174warns that any speculation as to whether anything does or doesn't remain after the remainderless stopping of the six sense media is to "complicate non-complication," which gets in the way of attaining the non-complicated. Thus this is a question that is best put aside. -- Kind Regards Herman There is ego, but not a self who has it. (Hofman H. 2005) 58595 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: a "happy" proposition nilovg Hi Tep, it is all more complex. op 28-04-2006 20:48 schreef indriyabala op indriyabala@...: > Please slowly read your Vism. quote again : > >> Nina's quote: >> Such virtues lead to non-remorse cognizance, to gladness, to > happiness, to tranquillity, to joy, to repetition, to development, to > making much of, to embellishment, to the requisite [for > concentration], to the equipmment [of concentration], to perfection, > to complete dispassion, to fading away of greed, to cessation, to > peace, to direct-knowledge, to enlightenment, to nibbaana...> > >> Nina: Thus, you see, as also the Vis. explains: lower levels and > then higher and higher, even jhaana is siila, even lokuttara cittas > are siila. > > Tep: This quote describes a development process that is opposite to > the model that says "understanding comes first; siila and samadhi > cannot arise without right understanding leading the way". --------- N: I never meant to say: siila cannot arise without right understanding. But, for its purification understanding is the condition. It can develop and even samatha and vipassana, even enlightenment are classified under siila by the Visuddhimagga. I foiund that this clarified the point that the Tripartie division of this great work was for teaching purposes, not for telling people: first siila, then samaadhi, then vipassanaa. In fact in one of the paras, the Vis. stated that this order was for teaching purposes. This was in Ch XIV where it explained about 'order' under different aspects, with different examples. Samaadhi in samatha needs paññaa, but paññaa of the level of samatha. Do you remember that we talked about Howard's explanation of the spiral wise development? And you agreed that we could not say: first this then that and take the factors in isolation, if I rightly understood you. When talking about siila we have to deal with many aspects of it, as we did before with MahaaCunda sutta (was it this one or another one?). You just uttered some feelings of frustration about this discussion, but this may not be necessary. At least I hope I can do something about these. ---------- Nina. -------------- This quote > actually states that virtues comes first, then non-remorse arises, > then gladness, ... concentration, dispassion, ... direct knowledge and > enlightenment all result from the very, very first "virtues" having > been developed. 58596 From: nina van gorkom Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Final Post: Attention to Conditions and Refinement ... Too Quick to Judge? nilovg Hi Herman, we see the Abhidhamma differently. I do not see it as just in the book, it is all about the present moment. Nina. op 29-04-2006 00:50 schreef Herman Hofman op hhofmeister@...: > The Abhidhamma does not >> need any defense, it defends itself. >> Nina. >> >> > I like the line, but I don't think this is quite true. The Abhidhamma does > not defend itself. It is a just ink on paper. It is minds that attack and > defend. And minds that attack and defend are in the dark about what is real. > Because only what is real requires no defense. The present moment doesn't > need defending (it is what it is despite ignorance of it), only views about > it do. 58597 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:15am Subject: Re: metta 5. philofillet Hi Nina and all > How ugly is an angry man! His sleep > Is comfortless; with fortune in his hands > He suffers loss; and being full of wrath > He wounds by act and bitter word. Yes, but we cannot choose not to be angry. When we are angry, we can understand that it has come to be because of our accumulations in that department. No need to fret about it. See the angry man who knows he is angry due to conditions! The tension eases and there *is* comfort in panna. What a blessing in disguise when we understand our akusala. Phil 58598 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:19am Subject: [dsg] Re: On conditions, God willing .. Sutta Interpretation, Is It Really Bad? philofillet Hi Nerman > > There is no telling!!!!! > > > > That last line sounds to me like a denial of causality. Perhaps you meant > there is no telling with absolute certainty? Oh, this would only be speculating, as would anything I wrote about the other questions in your post. Of course we know that evil deeds will bear their fruit, but we don't know deeds we have done in past lives and we don't know when the evil deeds we know about in this life will bear fruit. I think this is pretty clear because the Buddha said that to speculate about the workings of kamma is one of the "imponderables" right? So I guess that's what I mean by "there is no telling" Phil 58599 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Apr 29, 2006 7:29am Subject: [dsg] Re: Weekend Break in Posting philofillet Hi Larry > Well, it's complicated. You're always saying "we can't understand this" > but you, more than anyone else here, bring to the group fresh insights > into your own mental processes, almost in every email. Really? That's nice of you to say, but I think it's just a lot of verbal clevery. Honestly, I don't want to be original. I would like to "parrot" (I don't like that word) what Acharn Sujin says again and again and again and reflect on it until it begins to sink in. I think we learn more by repeating what our mentors say and reflecting on it than by forming our own ideas. I know that goes against the famous "rely on yourself" but I believe it. The same goes when I study Japanese or teach English - I find mechanical repetition works wonders. Honestly, I *would* like to be an unthinking follower! I think too much thinking gets us in trouble, honestly I do. So something is > happening even if you're just sitting back in your chair, looking out > the window. Yes, but isn't it closer to the sense doors processes being reflected on, rather than sitting in front of a computer trying to explain how one thinks things work? I think when we post our views or discuss or debate - well, I don't know about you but it feels so much further away from direcly understanding experience than when I'm out doing something, or sitting by the window. I feel posting here just puts up another layer to the thick dome of lobha and moha that keeps me from directly experiencing dhammas. It's fun and I like having friends here and it is good training for being patient and friendly but I feel so much deeper in Dhamma when I am just listening or reflecting. > On the other hand, you're right. We can't understand anything in the > sense of grasping a fact. Whatever panna reveals is impermanent, > elusive, and empty. Yes, but don't we love what panna reveals and hold on to it with delight? There is so much lobha, all the time, all the time, all the time.... Phil