#62600 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 4:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rob K's forum on Mindfulness of Breath. no 2 kelvin_lwin Hi Jon, > The Buddha had the highest degree of these special > kinds of knowledge, and his great disciples also had these, but in a > lesser degree. Arahats had different degrees of knowledge, and some > arahats were without these. > > Breath had to be developed to the degree that the fourth jhaana could be > attained. There had to be masteries of jhaana (enter and emerge at will, > etc.) and then jhaana could be a base for insight, but still all the > stages of insight had to be developed. Kel: Let's see, I think whatever Nina wrote about discriminations is misleading. Look following: XII 2. supernormal power described as "Having been one, he becomes many', etc., he must achieve the eight attainments in the each of the eight kasinas ending with the white kasina. <-- read, not breath He must also have complete control of his mind in the following fourteen ways: (i) in the order of the kasinas (ii) in the reverse order of the kasinas, (iii) in the order and reverse order of the kasinas (iv) in the order of the jhanas (v) in the reverse order of the jhanas (vi) in the order of the reverse order of the jhanas (vii) skipping jhanas (viii) skipping kasinas (ix) skipping jhanas and kasinas (x) transpoisition of factors (xi) transposition of object (xii) transposition of factors and object, (xiii) definition of factors and (xiv) definition of object. 11. It is only in Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas, chief disciples, etc., who have vast previous endeavour behind them, that this transformation by supernormal power and other such special qualities as the discriminations are brought to success simply with the attainment of Arahantship and without the progressive course of development kind just described. Kel: I read this to mean they already practiced using eight kasinas enough in previous lives to re-obtain the discrimations. It doesn't have anything to do with breath object, I'm afraid. There were also great disciples who get the powers as soon as they meet Buddha anyway before they become Arahants. - Kel #62601 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 5:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rob K' forum. So long in the cycle. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, Howard and all, > > Op 20-aug-2006, om 6:34 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > > It says beginner, beginner means > > beginner. What do you not understand about beginner? The passage > > isn't for anyone of any special talents or background, it is for the > > beginner. > ----------- > James, as I get it from the texts, he is a beginner, but still with > special talents or background. So when you, Jon and Sarah refer to yourselves as 'beginners' what you really mean is that you are advanced? Sorry, you can't have it both ways. An arahat has to begin. So, this is > encouraging. > > I hope things will be clearer as my quotes from Rob's forum continue. > The subject of mindfulness of breathing is far more intricate than > one would think. Nonsense. When you misquote the texts you can make anything seem intricate. It is not simply following one's breathing, because > the question is: how does one follow it? You don't 'follow it'. You simply put your attention on the sensation of the breath entering and exiting the nostrils. The Vism. explains all about it. It is not so intricate. Is there pa~n~naa? > With Azita I would say, keep on asking when things are not clear. We > should not blindly follow what the Buddha said but find out for > ourselves. I know that this is your opinion also. > > When Lodewijk and I were on our trip we discussed another point of > yours, which is connected with this one above. I really don't see the connection with this new topic to mindfulness of breath. How are they connected???? > You become discouraged when you hear that the way to the end of the > cycle is very long. Excuse me, I don't become discouraged; I become irriatated because that isn't what the Buddha taught. I am so used to these texts and I had not > realized that they may be discouraging. Who is discouraged?? What is this all about? This seems to be a non-issue. So I thought that perhaps > more explanation is necessary. Or maybe you just want to change the subject? ;-)) > We have been in this cycle already for aeons, because of ignorance > and craving. These are deeply rooted latent tendencies that can > condition the arising of all kinds of unwholesomeness, unexpectly, > unforeseeably. We may be surprised ourselves. When we consider more > our latent tendencies we shall be more convinced that it takes ages > to get rid of defilements. > When you read the Psalms of Brothers and Sisters (Thera- theriigathaa) > you see that they had traversed aeons of past lives before they > finally could attain arahatship. This makes no sense. We have ALL already traversed aeons of past lives, so we could all be ripe for enlightenment in this lifetime. Who knows? This is a silly subject, I think. No one knows and it is ridiculous to bring it up. > Lodewijk said that he used to feel like you, but now he does not find > it depressing that it will take aeons to develop understanding. I never found it depressing!! What are you talking about? Why would I find a non-issue depressing?? When > we pay attention to our task at this moment, there is no worry about > the future ahead of us. I think that we have to be grateful to have > met the Dhamma and this is our island. > Lodewijk added another point. There is of course a danger of > complacency when we say: it will take aeons. We may think: O, well, > it takes aeons, and there may be a lack of urgency to develop > understanding right now. Howard is always so concerned about this > point. Lodewijk also said, it is not easy to find a balanced outlook, > because human nature, in conventional sense, is inclined to continue > to stick to sensual desires. Yes, of course, there can be complacency. Just see the Buddha's Fire Sermon to combat complacency. He likes watching T.V., enjoys good > meals and wine, etc. > I remarked that it is through understanding that a balance can be > found. Certainly not through forcing oneself, because at such a > moment it is again self, self that is doing something. > This morning I listened to a Thai session. Kh. Sujin said that one > is not lazy when listening to the Dhamma. She also said that the more > one listenes the more one sees that the Dhamma is not easy to > understand. Again, this is not discouraging. One comes to see the > subtlety of the dhamma. Kh. Nipat remarked that listening is not just > hearing, it is also rightly considering, and this means considering > the reality appearing right now. Then there is no ignorance, no > clinging. Each time of listening is useful, there is a little more > understanding. If we want to have a great deal of understanding, we > are not without attachment, and then the time in the cycle will > become even longer. > For your encouragement I have no idea why you believe I am discouraged; I haven't written anything to suggest such a thing. Actually, at the moment, I am very encouraged. I live in a Buddhist country with many resources available; I have a teacher friend who is a practicing Theravada Buddhist; and I live within walking distance of a huge Buddhist temple filled with very kind monks and nuns. I am not discouraged about the Buddha's path or about my practice at the moment. I would like to quote from Kh. Sujin's > Perfections, but in a separate post, otherwise this post is too long. > Nina. Metta, James #62602 From: Ken O Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scott 's question and more! ashkenn2k Hi Kelvin Only those with wisdom is considered paramis http://www.abhidhamma.org/Paramis-%20perfections%20of%20insight.htm#ii <> Cheers Ken O #62603 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:38 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 54 nilovg Dear friends, Seeing is not the same as thinking of what is seen. The citta which pays attention to the shape and form of something and knows what it is, does not experience an object through the eye-door but through the mind-door; it has a different characteristic. When one uses the word ``seeing'' one usually means: paying attention to the shape and form of something and knowing what it is. However, there must also be a kind of citta which merely sees visible object, and this citta does not know anything else. What we see we can call ``visible object'' or ``colour''; what is meant is: what appears through the eyes. When there is hearing, we can experience that hearing has a characteristic which is different from seeing; the citta which hears experiences sound through the ears. Only in being aware of the different characteristics of realities and investigating them over and over again, will we come to know them as they are. People may think that there is a self who can see and hear at the same time, but through which door can the self be experienced? The belief in a self is wrong view. Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and the experience of tangible object through the bodysense do not arise without conditions; they are the results of kamma. Eyesense, earsense, smelling-sense, tasting- sense and bodysense are rúpas which are produced by kamma, they are the corporal result of kamma. Only the mental result of kamma is called vipåka, and thus only citta and cetasika (mental factors arising with the citta) can be vipåka. Rúpa is not vipåka. The Buddha taught that everything which arises must have conditions for its arising. When we see something unpleasant there must be a condition for it: it is the result of akusala kamma. Akusala vipåka cannot be the result of kusala kamma. Seeing something pleasant is kusala vipåka; this can only be the result of kusala kamma. The vipåkacitta which arises when there is the experience of an unpleasant or pleasant object through one of the five senses is ahetuka. At that moment there are no akusala hetus (unwholesome roots) or sobhana hetus (beautiful roots) arising with the citta. ****** Nina. #62604 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:42 am Subject: Letters from Nina 35. nilovg Dear friends, Namas and rupas are realities which can be experienced without there being the need to call them by a name or to think about them. Hearing is hearing for everybody, everywhere. We can give hearing another name, but the reality is the same. Sound is sound for everybody, everywhere. We can give sound another name but the reality is the same. Attachment is attachment for everybody, aversion is aversion for everybody. We can change their names, but the realities are the same. There can be only one moment of consciousness at a time and it experiences one object. We may be inclined to think that namas can last for a while. We may believe that thinking, for example, can last for some time. What we take for a long moment of thinking are in reality many moments and they think of only one object at a time. Seeing is another moment of consciousness and it experiences only one object: that which appears through the eyes, visible object. After seeing there can be thinking of what we have seen, or there can be hearing; these are all different moments. The Buddha taught that only one nama or rupa can be known at a time, when it appears through one of the six doors. We may understand this in theory, but now we have to prove this through the practice. This is not easy since we cling to our own ideas about reality. ****** Nina. #62605 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 7:52 am Subject: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breath, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, this is a continuation of a quote from Rob K's forum: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14581 Nina van Gorkom writes: Dear L and R. Ep, Thank you for your input. There are many things to consider in the passage you quoted. As we can see, the right conditions for jhana and for vipassana have to be developed, nothing arises automatically. I would like to go back somewhat in this section on breathing. I shall make use of what I wrote in my Book "The World in the Buddhist Sense". We should note that there is a division into four sections of four clauses each in this sutta which, in the Visuddhimagga, are marked from I-XVI. I noticed that Larry and Rob Ep were already dealing with the third tetrad, group of four, but now we could start with the first tetrad. Some tetrads deal with calm, some with vipassana, as we shall see. First I quote the sutta. The sutta (K V, Book X, Ch 1, §1,) states: QUOTE It has been described by the Blessed One as having sixteen bases thus: And how developed, bhikkhus, how practised much is concentration through mindfulness of breathing both peaceful and sublime, an unadulterated blissful abiding, banishing at once and stilling evil unprofitable thoughts as soon as they arise? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty place, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, established mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. (I) Breathing in long, he knows , I breathe in long; or breathing out long, he knows I breathe out long. (II) Breathing in short, he knows I breathe in short²; or breathing out short, he knows I breathe out short. (III) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing the whole body; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing the whole body. (IV) He trains thus I shall breathe in tranquillizing the bodily activity; he trains thus I shall breathe out tranquillizing the bodily activity. (V) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing happiness; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing happiness. (VI) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing bliss; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing bliss. (VII) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing the mental formation; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing the mental formation. (VIII) He trains thus I shall breathe in tranquillizing the mental formation; he trains thus I shall breathe out tranquillizing the mental formation. (IX) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing the (manner of) consciousness. (X) He trains thus I shall breathe in gladdening the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out gladdening the (manner of) consciousness. (XI) He trains thus I shall breathe in concentrating the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out concentrating the (manner of) consciousness. (XII) He trains thus I shall breathe in liberating the (manner of) consciousness; he trains thus I shall breathe out liberating the (manner of) consciousness. (XIII) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating impermanence; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating impermanence. (XIV) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating fading away; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating fading away. (XV) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating cessation; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating cessation. (XVI) He trains thus I shall breathe in contemplating relinquishment²; he trains thus I shall breathe out contemplating relinquishment. ******** Nina #62606 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 4:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samadhi sutta SN 35.99 upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Matheesha, and Kel) - In a message dated 8/20/06 1:30:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@... writes: > Hi Howard (and Mateesha) > > Thanks for coming in on this thread. The reason I didn't post my own > views on the questions I asked of Mateesha is that I was interested to > hear what Mateesha had to say about certain aspects of his approach that > remain a problem for me (and besides I think my views are pretty well > known to members already ;-)). So if you don't mind I'll raise the same > questions with you. > > > Howard: > Jon, in this post of yours and in the last one you ask questions of > Matheesha but don't provide your own answers. For me the answers are > clear: > Concentration *should* be intentionally developed as it is an important > condition for the development of wisdom. (When the Buddha says "do this", > as in "develop concentration", he is urging the taking of an intentional > action.) > > Jon: > These comments relate I think to the sutta passage that reads: > "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns things as they > actually are present." > > My question on this is, What is the development of concentration referred > to in the sutta quote? I think you would say it is something that > precedes the moment of actual insight into presently arising dhammas > (discerning of things as they actually are present). > ---------------------------------- Howard: Actually, no, that is not what I had primarily in mind. That momentary heightened concentration is not something that one specifically works on creating, but it is a result in part of what I *do* mean by developing concentration. What I was referring to is what I attempted to go into later in my post, and which you quote below, namely: "And in the context of the development of samadhi, I view the "samadhi" as referring not only to momentary focus of attention, but to a generally concentrated mind - a mind that has been trained to typically pay sharp attention [I wrote "intenion"] at most times and which has been calmed by jhana practice. I view the development of samadhi to refer to a process of conditioning the mind, making it a more fit tool for investigation of dhammas." (BTW, the Buddha often spoke of jhanic attainment making the mind malleable and a fit tool for investigation of dhammas.) --------------------------------------------- In your view, is it> > samatha or is it some other (and if so what) mind-state. > ------------------------------------------- Howard: Please see the foregoing. ------------------------------------------ An example would> > help. > > Howard: > As for concentration being a requisite for wisdom - one of several, of > course - do you not recall the post I copy at the end? A post that you and > I seemed to be on agreement with regard to? > > Jon: > I of course accept the sutta passage quoted above (and the one at the > end), but for reasons explained at length in other posts with Mateesha I > see it as referring to the samadhi that arises together with insight. ----------------------------------------- Howard: I do not, because I am not thinking of samadhi as you are. Again, please see what I wrote above. -------------------------------------- Do> > you remember the sutta I quoted from AN IV's? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: No, sorry - I don't. --------------------------------------------- > > Howard: > As for how samadhi is developed, in addition to the many suttas in which > the Buddha urges secusion and practice with the jhanas, there is all the > detailed discussion by Buddhaghosa of meditation practice. (And > Buddhaghosa wasn't a modern man confused about "meditation", he was the > compiler of the commentarial tradition as it has come down to us.) > > Jon: If you are referring to the 'Samadhi' section (Part II) of the Vism, > please see my recent post commenting on the significance of the passage > from Ch III quoted by Kel that reads: > > "The method of developing the kind of concentration associated with > the noble paths mentioned under that 'of two kinds of mundane and > supramundane', etc. is included in the method of developing > understanding (Ch XXII); for in developing [path] understanding that > is developed too. So we shall say nothing separately [here] about > how that is to be developed." > > As I read that passage it's saying that the samadhi associated with > vipassana is developed along with the development of vipassana itself. > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/62533) -------------------------------------------- Howard: I really don't get your point. My point is that Buddhaghosa went into much detail on how one should, ever so conventionally, intentionally take steps to cultivate concentration and calm, and a concomitant point is that "formal" meditation is alive and well in the Theravada tradition as reported by him. Kel has provided much of that material. ------------------------------------------ > > Howard: > And in the context of the development of samadhi, I view the "samadhi" > as referring not only to momentary focus of attention, but to a generally > concentrated mind - a mind that has been trained to typically pay sharp > intenion at most times and which has been calmed by jhana practice. I view > the development of samadhi to refer to a process of conditioning the mind, > making it a more fit tool for investigation of dhammas. > > Jon: > Yes, but the essential question to consider is whether, according to the > recorded teachings, the arising of insight is (or is not) possible without > any special 'training' in samadhi. If some special training is said to be > necessary, what is the minimum level of such training? ----------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know what the minimum level required is. I suspect it is very high for the higher paths. I do indeed believe that a mind trained in samadhi is required for insights sufficient to lead to any degrees of awakening. I find the concensus of the suttas clear on that. (You know: Looking at the suttas "as a whole"? LOL!) -------------------------------------- > > To my understanding, the main and indispensable conditions for the arising > of insight in this lifetime, as found in the recorded teachings, are (a) > having developed insight in previous lifetimes > ------------------------------------- Howard: How? ------------------------------------ , and (b) having heard,> > understood and reflected on the teachings on insight in this lifetime and > related what has been understood to the present moment. -------------------------------------- Howard: I agree that that is an important condition, though I do NOT see the necessity for such hearing, understanding, and reflecting to be a current-lifetime matter. (Case in point: The Buddha had not heard the Dhamma in the lifetime in which he attained awakening. There was no one, in fact, for him to hear it from.) --------------------------------------- > > > Howard: > A prior post of mine showing concentration as requisite for insight: > > Jon: > In the sutta passage you quote, concentration is given as one of several > relevant factors (the ones preceding it being Virtuous ways of conduct, > Non-remorse, Gladness, Joy, Serenity and Happiness) and is not singled out > for any particular emphasis. So are we to read this as suggesting the > need for some special training in these other factors also? ---------------------------------------- Howard: It is not a matter of a bag of "several relevant factors". A *sequence* of factors was involved, with each factor in the sequence "providing a basis for" the next - the terminology used in A VI, 50. The order isn't accidental. In A X,1 each factor is said to have the next as "benefit and reward". Something, BTW, pointed out in the next sutta, A X,2, will be appreciated by you!, namely that the arising of each subsequent factor requires no act of will for its arising (as in "May such and such arise in me"), bu arises by natural law in one in whom the previous factor is in place. But that, of course, is a good news/bad news story for you Jon, because in addition to showing that will is not involved at the separate steps (the good news), it IS a sequential process (the bad news). ----------------------------------------- > > Jon > > ===================== With metta, Howard #62607 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 4:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/20/06 1:34:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@... writes: > Hi Howard > > Howard: > In part of the PTI article on kamma, there is the follwing > difficult-to-read material: > > Jon: > I think you mean 'kammatthaana', not 'kamma'? -------------------------------------- Howard: That makes sense. "Kamma" is what appeared on my screen, and that did perplex me. ------------------------------------- > > I agree that in the context of the development of jhaana it is recommended > that one proceed by placing oneself under a teacher. However, this is a > rather special case, and in any event is not a hard and fast rule. > > Howard: > These subjects of meditation are given as 38 at DhsA 168 (cp. Cpd. 202), > as 32 (dvatti?s' akara -- k°) at Vism 240 sq., as 40 at Vism 110 sq. (in > detail); > as pañca -- sandhika at Vism 277; some of them are mentioned at J i.116; > DhA i.221, 336; iv.90; -- °? anuyuñjati to give oneself up to meditation > Sasv 151; PvA 61; > -- °? ugga?hati to accept from his teacher a particular instrument of > meditation Vism 277 sq. (also °assa uggaho &ugga?hana); KhA 40; DhA i.9, > 262; > iv.106; PvA 42; -- °? katheti to teach a pupil how to meditate on one of > the k° DhA i.8, 248, 336; PvA 61; -- °? adasi DhA iv.106; °ga?hati J > iii.246; Vism 89; °acikkhana instruction in a formula of exercise DhsA > 246; °dayaka the giver of a k -- ??h° object, the spiritual adviser and > teacher, who must be a kalya?amitta (q. v.), one who has entered the Path; > > > I particularly draw your attention to the last clause: "the spiritual > adviser and teacher, who must be a kalya?amitta (q. v.), one who has > entered the Path" It is my understanding of the usage of the term that the > kalyanamitta is typically advanced, at least in comparison to oneself. > > Jon: > Again, I think this is limited to the context of the development of jhana. --------------------------------------- Howard: I believe that in general it is a requirement that a kalyanamitta be more "advanced" in the Dhamma than oneself. --------------------------------------- > > Jon > > ====================== With metta, Howard #62608 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 4:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rob K' forum. So long in the cycle. upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 8/20/06 8:16:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > I have no idea why you believe I am discouraged; I haven't written > anything to suggest such a thing. Actually, at the moment, I am > very encouraged. I live in a Buddhist country with many resources > available; I have a teacher friend who is a practicing Theravada > Buddhist; and I live within walking distance of a huge Buddhist > temple filled with very kind monks and nuns. I am not discouraged > about the Buddha's path or about my practice at the moment. > ========================== I must tell you, James, that upon reading this I welled up with great happiness for you - so much so that I seriously amazed myself! What a wonderful life transition you have made! May you fare well!! :-) With metta, Howard #62609 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 9:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher scottduncan2 Dear Jon, I've been thinking about this a lot. J: "The teachings speak often of the value of association with the right person (as one of the factors for developing insight), but not of formally putting oneself under a teacher. To my understanding, the right person' is anyone from whom one hears the teachings explained in a way that helps understanding of the true dhamma to arise." I think "association with" is what I am seeking, and not a formal "putting [myself] under a teacher." I think that you (and all respondents) have helped me clarify this. As an aside, this thinking of needing "a teacher" in a formal way seems to have been an aspect of a sort of stereotypic veneer with which "Buddhism" as a monolithic entity of first-encounter is finished. I mean that one has to cut through a lot of material in an attempt to find what is essential in the whole of the Buddha's message. There is much that is held up as essential which, upon examination, is not. I think "finding a teacher" was one such thing that I had yet to realise was not as it seemed. And I've felt this veneer come away bit by bit. J: "Well for many people things turned out that way, that at some stage they learnt much from a particular person who may be a recognised 'teacher'. But that sort of thing happens as much by force of circumstances as for any other reason. Then there are those like Han Tun who have never had a close association with a particular person." Going by the above criteria, that is "things turned out that way," I've already found a very rich source of good Dhamma association here. Coming into association with you and all has been solely based on a "things turned out that way" basis. It's strange, in a way, but it seems to me that there is such a very good fit with what is discussed as Dhamma here and a sense that "it feels right." I don't quite get this, since how can one thing in a whole lot of things, all of which are new, seem more right than another thing. I don't really worry about this either, since I can't really control the sense that this feels right while that doesn't. I guess I can study to determine the data that would constitute the why. J: "If there's someone available in your neighbourhood, by all means spend time with him ;-)). No question about that." I think I will meet with the Venerable. I want to see what I can learn from him. He made clear what he is and is not interested in. There may be topics which I will just steer clear of, although this bothers me and likely suggests a bit of a poor fit. I'll see how "things turn out." J: "I just meant as someone genuinely interested in the teachings and thinking of formally putting himself under a teacher. All of us are people who have a whole lot to learn." Yeah. This whole thing has made a shift in the energy I seem to have for Dhamma study. I seem to suddenly, more or less, have less energy in meeting with one person, and more energy in just trying to get more involved wherever I can, including here. J: "I was referring to the same kind of things others have mentioned. If one's chosen teacher is not receptive to certain areas of discussion or study, or disapproves of contact with certain persons, it can put one in an invidious position." This is true, and, for instance, if a person with whom one might associate has, for some reason, taken a stand against Abhidhamma despite years invested in its learning, this would definitely influence the way that person explains things. One ought, of course, to find out what went in to such a turn, but it would create an untenable situation from the start given that two see such an important thing differently. Sorry, post too long. Thanks, Jon. Scott. #62610 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:21 am Subject: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, all - Last night a friend was asking me about Buddhism. In giving him a thumbnail sketch, I included the definition of a Buddha as a person who has attained full awakening but has done so only after aeons of developing certain perfections enabling him to be able to reintroduce the Dhamma into a world in which the knowledge of it is completely missing. I mentioned that it is believed that there have been many buddhas prior to the buddha who lived 2500 years ago, and that recurringly in the future buddhas will arise to reintroduce the Dhamma. He questioned the basis for this last. Specifically he asked "Since there is no historical record or indication of Buddhism ever having been a part of the knowledge of humanity prior to that presentation 2500 years ago, why should we presume that it ever was in existence as a body of knowledge earlier than that, and why should we presume that it will ever happen again after Buddhism dies out?" This got me to wondering as to the claimed mechanism for this reintroduction. What conditions are known that *guarantee* that there will be future Buddhas? What if, for example, no one should choose to take a bodhisatta vow? Why is it not possible that once the Dhamma dies out, it will fail to be reintroduced? It seems that this idea of an ever-repeating cyclical appearance of new Buddhas is given as a matter to be accepted on faith, without any mechanism discussed as justification. Inasmuch as the Buddha himself (I believe!) spoke of this process of repeated introduction of the Dhamma, I cannot just dismiss it as "religious belief." I seek, instead, a natural mechanism for it. Any ideas, folks? With metta, Howard #62611 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 10:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Scott 's question and more! kelvin_lwin Hi KenO, > Only those with wisdom is considered paramis Kel: really? I see the following in your link and there's more in developing parami section: iv) WHAT IS THEIR SEQUENCE? Here "sequence" means sequence of teaching. This sequence is rooted in the order in which the paramis are initially undertaken, which in turn is rooted in the order in which they are investigated.3 The quality which is investigated and undertaken at the beginning is taught first. Therein, giving is stated first, for giving assists (the development of) virtue and is easy to practise. Giving accompanied by virtue is abundantly fruitful and beneficial, so virtue is stated immediately after giving. Virtue accompanied by renunciation... renunciation by wisdom ... wisdom by energy ... energy by patience ... patience by truthfulness ... truthfulness by determination ... determination by loving-kindness ... and loving- kindness accompanied by equanimity is abundantly fruitful and beneficial; thus equanimity is stated immediately after loving- kindness. Equanimity is accompanied by compassion and compassion by equanimity. (Someone may ask:) "How can the bodhisattvas, the great compassionate ones, look upon living beings with equanimity?" Some teach when it is necessary to do so." But others say: "They do not show equanimity towards living beings (as such), but towards the offensive action;, performed by beings." Another method (of explaining the sequence) may be given: (1 ) Giving is stated at the beginning: (a) because it is common to all beings, since even ordinary people practise giving; (b) because it is the least fruitful; and (c) because it is the easiest to practise. <---- (2) Virtue is stated immediately after giving: (a) because virtue purifies both the donor and the recipient; (b) to show that, while giving benefits others virtue prevents the affliction of others; (c) in order to state a factor of abstinence immediately after a factor of positive activity, and (d) in order to show the cause for the achievement, of a favourable state of future existence right after the cause for the achievement of wealth.4 - Kel #62612 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 10:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Scott 's question and more! kelvin_lwin Hi KenO, > < specific fruits of the paramitas, is the condition for the paramis. > And the same pair is a condition for the resolution as well.>> Kel: Now, to your original quote. It only says the fruits of paramitas are conditioned by wisdom and compassion, not the actual acts of paramis. Let's get the context straight here, this section is talking about requirements to be considered Bodhisatta. Begins like this: Link: Like the aspiration, great compassion (mahakaruna) and skilful mans (upayakosalla) are also conditions for the paramis. Therein, "skilful means" is the wisdom which transforms giving (and the other ten virtues) into requisites of enlightenment. Through their great compassion and skilful means, the Great Men devote themselves to working uninterruptedly for the welfare of others without any concern for their own happiness and without any fear of the extremely then, nature, is such that they are able to promote the welfare and even on occasions when they are merely seen, heard of, or recollected, (since even the sight, report, or thought of them) inspires confidence. Through his wisdom the bodhisattva perfects within himself the character of a Buddha, through his compassion the ability to perform the work of a Buddha. Kel: He uses wisdom to transforms all the paramis into requisities for enlightenment as a Buddha. Then the part you quoted is given about giving fruits for Buddhahood. Just in case, you think they're the two are the only conditions, just read the paragraphs following your quote. I don't see how your conclusion is valid, honestly. Link: The four factors -- zeal, adroitness, stability, and beneficent conduct -- are likewise conditions for the paramis. Because they Serve as the basis for the arising of Buddhahood, these factors are called "grounds for Buddhahood" (buddhabhumiyo). Herein, zeal" (ussaha) means energy in striving for the requisites of enlightenment. "Adroitness" (ummanga) is wisdom in applying skilful means to the requisites of enlightenment. "Stability" (avatthana) is determination, an unshakeable determination of the will. "Beneficent conduct" (hitacariya) is the development of loving-kindness and compassion. Another set of conditions is the six inclinations -- the inclinations towards renunciation, solitude. non-greed non-hatred non-delusion and escape. For bodhisattvas, seeing the fault in sense pleasures and in household life, incline to renunciation. Seeing the fault in company, they incline to solitude. Seeing the faults in greed, hatred, and delusion, they incline to non-greed, non-hatred, and non-delusion. Seeing the fault in all the realms of existence, bodhisattvas incline to escape. Therefore these six inclinations of bodhisattvas are conditions for the paramis. For the paramis do not arise without seeing the danger in greed, etc., and the superiority of non-greed, etc. The inclination to non-greed, etc., is the slanting of the mind towards relinquishing, etc., because of the superiority of non-greed, etc. So too, for bodhisattvas striving for enlightenment, the inclination towards each of the ten paramis is a condition for the practice of each. For bodhisattvas, through their inclination towards giving, see the fault in its opposite, i.e. in stinginess, and therefore fulfil the perfection of giving. Through their inclination towards virtue, they see the fault in moral depravity, and therefore fulfil the perfection of virtue. Through their inclination towards renunciation, they see the fault in sense pleasures and in household life; through their inclination towards knowing things as they really are, they sec the faults in ignorance and perplexity; through their inclination towards energy, they see the fault in laziness; through their inclination towards patience they see the fault in impatience; through their inclination towards truthfulness, they see the fault in deceptive speech, through their inclination towards determination, they see tic fault in lack of determination; through their inclination towards loving-kindness, they see the fault in ill-will; and through their inclination towards equanimity, they see the danger in the vicissitudes of the world Thus they fulfil the perfection of renunciation and the other perfections down to equanimity. In this way, the inclination towards giving and the other nine virtues, by bringing about the achievement cry' ad the paramis, serves as their condition. #62613 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:12 am Subject: Re: Discussions at the Foundation contd (a) kelvin_lwin Hi again Sarah, Thanks to KenO, I just found my source for Bodhisatta wisdom development. The wisdom born of meditation may be divided into two groups. The first comprises the mundane direct knowledges, together with their accessories; namely, the knowledge of the modes of psychic power, the knowledge of the divine ear-element, the knowledge of penetrating other minds, the knowledge of recollecting past lives, the knowledge of the divine eye, the knowledge of kammic retribution, and the knowledge of the future.23 The second comprises the five purification -- purification of view, purification by overcoming doubt, purification by knowledge and vision of what is and what is not the path, purification by knowledge and vision of the way, and purification by knowledge and vision. The first four of these are mundane, the last is supramundane. After acquiring through study and interrogation a knowledge of the phenomena such as the aggregates, etc., constituting the soil of wisdom, he should establish himself in the two purifications constituting its roots, purification of virtue and purification of mind, and then accomplish the five purifications just mentioned which constitute the trunk of wisdom. Since the method for accomplishing these, along with the analysis of their objective sphere, is explained in complete detail in the Visuddhimagga, it should be understood in the way given there.24 Only in that work the explanation of wisdom has come down for beings seeking the enlightenment of disciples. But here, because it is intended for the great bodhisattvas, it should be explained making compassion and skilful means the forerunners. One further distinction must also be made: here insight (vipassana) should be developed only as far as purification by knowledge and vision of the way, without attaining purification by knowledge and vision. Note: 25 25. Purification by knowledge and vision is the supramundane wisdom of the four noble paths. Because this purification issues in the realization of nibbana, the bodhisattva-aspirant must stop short of this attainment so that his realization of nibbana will coincide with his perfect enlightenment. - Kel #62614 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 12:06 pm Subject: Re: Buddhas kelvin_lwin Hi Howard, Perhaps the problem is how you or him are thinking about the Buddhas and where they arise in terms of location. > that there have been many buddhas prior to the buddha who lived 2500 years ago, > and that recurringly in the future buddhas will arise Kel: They can be concurrent Buddhas as long as their sphere of influence (10 thousand world-systems) don't overlap. There's only limited number for each system and there might not be any Buddhas. That's why we're said to be very fortunate to be in a world with 5 Buddhas arising. In the next cycle, I don't think there's any guarantee there will be Buddha arising. But there should be a Buddha on some system somewhere and if your paramis are ripen, you'll go there. > is no historical record or indication of Buddhism ever having been a part of > the knowledge of humanity prior to that presentation 2500 years Kel: There was always people who were looking for a way out of suffering. There's no shortage of that, some will find it on their own and that's how you get uncountable Paccekabuddhas. If you accept that there was innumerable Buddhas in the past then if there was one out of gazillion, you still get innumerable number of people who want to try the Bodhisatta jig. Sheer number of beings is probably a good argument, just look at ants and insects. > Buddhas? What if, for example, no one should choose to take a bodhisatta vow? Kel: Point to the nearest Mahayanist? :P .. There is usually whole group that has to make vows tho, not just Buddha. The chief and great disciples also create a sasana. > I seek, instead, a natural mechanism for it. Kel: I surmise that beings of higher thinking ability always look for answers. We just need one lucky winner to start the wave that will lead to more? - Kel #62615 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 12:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Ven. Cunda's Advice jwromeijn --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Joop, Hallo Sarah, (and others interested in a picture of me) Many thanks for your message. Of course it's not the first time yopu write the kind of things you do now, but to me it's this time very clear, although I don't agree with everything S: "When you say 'I had do DO', what do you mean by this "I"? J: There it is again. And as I said before: anatta is evident to me, I think because I always had a weak ego, have hardly need for fighting it (my problem is more anicca because I have a big ontological need) And as a answer: the "I" here was used conventional, as the Buddha did many times. S: … I see the path of 'trying' and 'doing' by trying to will certain states or practice along the path as hopeless. When there is awareness/mindfulness of a dhamma appearing now, there is right effort or viriya already without any special trying or expectation or self getting in the way. J: I think you change viriya (effort) in something else than effort; I don't have a english dictionary but 'effort' without trying in no effort. > J (a week ago)> Another point that surprises me that you so easy say "we agree there > are only ever the present dhammas now" Are you forgotten the > discussions (for example with me) about "accumulations". Is'nt it > better to say: there are present dhammas plus accumulations? .... S: I believe my original post and this comment was mainly addressed to Howard. No, I haven't forgotten our many good discussions, Joop. However, I thought I also wrote several messages to indicate that accumulations also refer to present dhammas now. Thinking now is an accumulation. Likes and dislikes now are accumulations now as well. They are all present dhammas. J: No misunderstanding: I do believe that 'accumulations' exist: without them there is no 'kamma' But 'accumulations' exist longer than the present moment. So I think the relation between conventional and ultimate realities is more complex than I assume you have. To quote Nagarjuna: "Without a foundation in the conventional truth The significance of the ultimate cannot be taught Without understanding the significance of the ultimate Liberation is not achieved" (The fundamental wisdom of the middle way, XXIV-10) Metta Joop BTW Good news for you and everybody who wanted to see a picture of me This summer I was to a Abhidhamma study retreat with the Burmse scholar-monk U Nandamala and somebody made pictures. I uploaded one and it did give itself the title 8636 mannen #62616 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, Kel - In a message dated 8/20/06 3:12:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kelvin_lwin@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Perhaps the problem is how you or him are thinking about the > Buddhas and where they arise in terms of location. > > >that there have been many buddhas prior to the buddha who lived > 2500 years ago, > >and that recurringly in the future buddhas will arise > > Kel: They can be concurrent Buddhas as long as their sphere of > influence (10 thousand world-systems) don't overlap. There's only > limited number for each system and there might not be any Buddhas. > That's why we're said to be very fortunate to be in a world with 5 > Buddhas arising. In the next cycle, I don't think there's any > guarantee there will be Buddha arising. But there should be a > Buddha on some system somewhere and if your paramis are ripen, > you'll go there. -------------------------------------- Howard: I'm not sure that is to be found in the Pali suttas. Is it? But my question wasn't of the possibility of Buddhas arising but of the necessity. -------------------------------------- > > >is no historical record or indication of Buddhism ever having been > a part of > >the knowledge of humanity prior to that presentation 2500 years > > Kel: There was always people who were looking for a way out of > suffering. There's no shortage of that, some will find it on their > own and that's how you get uncountable Paccekabuddhas. If you > accept that there was innumerable Buddhas in the past then if there > was one out of gazillion, you still get innumerable number of people > who want to try the Bodhisatta jig. Sheer number of beings is > probably a good argument, just look at ants and insects. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, I've thought of the "infinite-time explanation", but that bothers me. Since we have all lived forever (with no known beginning), we must have encountered infinitely many Buddhas, we must have practiced for an infinitely long time, and we all must be enlightened already! (But, of course, we are not.) ------------------------------------------- > > >Buddhas? What if, for example, no one should choose to take a > bodhisatta vow? > > Kel: Point to the nearest Mahayanist? :P .. There is usually > whole group that has to make vows tho, not just Buddha. The chief > and great disciples also create a sasana. ------------------------------------------- Howard: Vows are a dime a dozen. One has to make that vow seriously, and I believe it must be made to a Buddha, and, in any case, one must perservere indefinitely with powerful right effort. ------------------------------------------ > > >I seek, instead, a natural mechanism for it. > > Kel: I surmise that beings of higher thinking ability always look > for answers. We just need one lucky winner to start the wave that > will lead to more? ---------------------------------------- Howard: This and other things that you have said do make sense. But they constitute a probabilistic argument and do not provide evidence for *necessity*. I'm afraid this matter is not yet convincing to me, but I do appreciate your efforts. What I do think is of primary importance, though, is what the Buddha said to the effect that whether Buddhas arise or not, the Dhammic truths are just that - truths! The tilakkhana, the four noble truths, dependent origination, all that, is TRUE! ----------------------------------------- > > - Kel > ========================= With metta, Howard #62617 From: "sukinder" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:57 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Photos of August 2006 discussions sukinderpal Dear Nina, I am not good at doing this, due to never taking notes and having not so good recall. But I think Sarah will, if she has not already done it. Metta, Sukin _____ Dear Sukin, very nice, seems an interesting discussion with Ven. Dhammanando and Rob. Could you report? Nina. Op 19-aug-2006, om 17:17 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven: > All, > > Just uploaded 3 photos of today's discussions. They were taken with a > mobile telephone, therefore the quality is not so good. > > Metta, > Sukin. > > > #62618 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 9:41 pm Subject: Re: Buddhas rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kelvin_lwin" wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > Perhaps the problem is how you or him are thinking about the > Buddhas and where they arise in terms of location. > > > that there have been many buddhas prior to the buddha who lived > 2500 years ago, > > and that recurringly in the future buddhas will arise > > Kel: They can be concurrent Buddhas as long as their sphere of > influence (10 thousand world-systems) don't overlap. ====== Dear Kel I am pretty sure this idea is not from ancien Theravada, is it now a belief in Burma? Robert #62619 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rob K' forum. So long in the cycle. buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 8/20/06 8:16:02 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > buddhatrue@... writes: > > > I have no idea why you believe I am discouraged; I haven't written > > anything to suggest such a thing. Actually, at the moment, I am > > very encouraged. I live in a Buddhist country with many resources > > available; I have a teacher friend who is a practicing Theravada > > Buddhist; and I live within walking distance of a huge Buddhist > > temple filled with very kind monks and nuns. I am not discouraged > > about the Buddha's path or about my practice at the moment. > > > ========================== > I must tell you, James, that upon reading this I welled up with great > happiness for you - so much so that I seriously amazed myself! What a > wonderful life transition you have made! May you fare well!! :-) Well, gee, thanks! Your sympathetic joy is much appreciated, as well as your kind words. Metta, James #62620 From: "Joop" Date: Sun Aug 20, 2006 11:47 pm Subject: Re: Buddhas jwromeijn Hallo Howard, Kel, Robert, all Perhaps you can say something like: It's was a part of the pre-buddhistic culture in Indiato have a cyclic view on cosmology. In the process of appearing and disappearing of Buddha's and buddhasasana this idea was used. Like many modern christians state that part of the Bible (for example the book Genesis) sould not be understood literal but metaphorical), modern buddhists think the same about this stories in the Suttas. It can be seen as part of mythology, not of history of mankind. This modern metaphorical view doesn't make the teachings of the Buddha less valuable. Compare, when really asked , that the Buddha remained silent about questions on history Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > Last night a friend was asking me about Buddhism. In giving him a > thumbnail sketch, I included the definition of a Buddha as a person who has > attained full awakening but has done so only after aeons of developing certain > perfections enabling him to be able to reintroduce the Dhamma into a world in which > the knowledge of it is completely missing. I mentioned that it is believed > that there have been many buddhas prior to the buddha who lived 2500 years ago, > and that recurringly in the future buddhas will arise to reintroduce the > Dhamma. He questioned the basis for this last. Specifically he asked "Since there > is no historical record or indication of Buddhism ever having been a part of > the knowledge of humanity prior to that presentation 2500 years ago, why should > we presume that it ever was in existence as a body of knowledge earlier than > that, and why should we presume that it will ever happen again after Buddhism > dies out?" > This got me to wondering as to the claimed mechanism for this > reintroduction. What conditions are known that *guarantee* that there will be future > Buddhas? What if, for example, no one should choose to take a bodhisatta vow? > Why is it not possible that once the Dhamma dies out, it will fail to be > reintroduced? It seems that this idea of an ever-repeating cyclical appearance of > new Buddhas is given as a matter to be accepted on faith, without any mechanism > discussed as justification. Inasmuch as the Buddha himself (I believe!) spoke > of this process of repeated introduction of the Dhamma, I cannot just dismiss > it as "religious belief." I seek, instead, a natural mechanism for it. Any > ideas, folks? > > With metta, > Howard > #62621 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:44 am Subject: Re: Theravada and Dzogchen ~ Small boat, Great Mountain ~ Amaro Bhikkhu jwromeijn Hallo Christine, all As promised, a review of the ebook 'Small boat, great mountain' It's a series of dhamma-talks in which describes Amaro Bhikkhu about his teachers Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Sumedho. And in which he compares his Theravada with parts of Mahayana. It was especially the latter that made me read the book, I thought vipassana and dzogchen were compared; but that is done now and then and a little superficial, without theory and especially without instructions. The reason was it were dhamma-talks, and in a (meditation) retreat such talks doing good work, but not in dhamma-study at home. And perhaps I should be content because discussions between buddhist traditions are rare and this is one of the rare ones. But there must be better ones. Maybe it's the style I don't like. "Right speech" is abstaining from foolish babble; and this talks are not foolish at all, they are spiritual, they are explaining Theravada to Mahayanists; but still they are babbling. But Christine, did you have a special reason for asking comments on this book? Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine Forsyth" wrote: > > Hello all, > > I was wondering about opinions on this book in which the similarities > between Theravada and Dzogchen are discussed. It is available as > a .pdf "Small Boat, Great Mountain ~ Therava-dan Reflections on the > Natural Great Reflection" by Amaro Bhikkhu. > I'd be interested to hear anyone's thoughts on this. > http://www.abhayagiri.org/index.php/main/book/138/ > > metta > Christine > ---The trouble is that you think you have time--- > #62622 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:06 am Subject: the Perfections, wisdom. nilovg Dear friends, The topic of discussion has been on the perfections, and in particular wisdom, to be developed by Bodhisattas. Since I am revising Kh Sujin's book on the Perfections, I shall now and then quote part of it. May it help the discussions. Here we see that all perfections are necessary. From the perfection of wisdom: < We read in the “Khuddhaka Nikåya” in the Commentary to the “Basket of Conduct”, the “Conduct of Yudañjaya”, about the beginning of the development of paññå during the life the Bodhisatta was young Yudañjaya 1 : In the life when the Bodhisatta was Yudañjaya, he was the eldest son of the King and had the rank of the viceroy. He fulfilled every day mahå-dåna 2, the giving of an abundance of gifts. One day when he visited the royal park he saw the dewdrops hanging like a string of pearls on the tree-tops, the grass-tips, the end of the branches and on the spiders’ webs. The prince enjoyed himself in the royal park and when the sun rose higher all the dewdrops that were hanging there disintegrated and disappeared. He reflected thus: “These dewdrops came into being and then disappeared. Evenso are conditioned realities, the lives of all beings; they are like the dewdrops hanging on the grass-tips.” He felt a sense of urgency and became disenchanted with worldly life, so that he took leave of his parents and became a recluse. From this story we can learn that people have different degrees of understanding. We may see dew drops hanging on grass-tips, but who has paññå to the degree of causing a sense of urgency and disenchantment when he compares his own life with the evanescent dew? We read: “The Bodhisatta realized the impermanence of the dewdrops and made this predominant in accumulating a sense of urgency and disenchantment; it arose once and then became a condition leading to its arising very often.” When right understanding with a sense of urgency arises we should not let it pass by without paying attention to it. We should reflect on the conditions for this sense of urgency so that it can arise more often. The thought of death and impermanence can be a condition for further developing the perfections. The Commentary to the “Conduct of Yudañjaya” explains about the beginning of paññå in that life of the Bodhisatta. We read: By offering mahå-dåna before he retired from the world and by his giving up of the kingdom he fulfilled the perfection of giving. By his restraint in action and speech he fulfilled the perfection of síla. By his going forth from worldly life and by his attainment of jhåna he fulfilled the perfection of renunciation. In that life paññå began to develop by wise consideration of impermanence and in that way he finally attained the higher powers (abhiññås), and the paññå which could distinguish the dhammas that were beneficial from those that were not beneficial for the development of generosity and other ways of kusala, and this was the perfection of paññå. By energy for the accomplishment of what was beneficial in all his undertakings he fulfilled the perfection of energy. By patience associated with paññå (ñåùa khanti) and by endurance (adhivasana khanti) he fulfilled the perfection of patience. By not speaking wrongly, deviating from what he had promised, he fulfilled the perfection of truthfulness. By his unshakable determination in all that he undertook and observed, he fulfilled the perfection of determination. By the power of the divine abiding of loving-kindness, thinking only of the benefit of all beings, he fulfilled the perfection of loving kindness. By his evenmindedness towards beings’ contrary behaviour, and by the divine abiding of equanimity, he fulfilled the perfection of equanimity. These are the ways by which he fulfilled the ten perfections. The perfection of paññå is essential for the development of the other perfections in the right way. We should remember that the goal of the development of the perfections is paññå which penetrates the four noble Truths. Since its development to that degree takes an endlessly long time, paññå, in its turn, is also dependent on the other perfections. We can notice in this life that someone who has developed the perfections will be inclined to listen to the Dhamma, whereas someone who has not developed the perfections does not see the benefit of the development of paññå and does not want to listen to the Dhamma. Even though there is still opportunity to listen to the true Dhamma he is not interested in listening.> ****** Nina. #62623 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:19 am Subject: Tranquillity = Passaddhi bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What is the Tranquillity Link to Awakening? The Tranquillity Link to Awakening (passaddhi-sambojjhanga) has the characteristic of peace, and the function of stilling, which manifests as absence of restless trembling. Stillness of feeling, perception and mental construction is the factor that induces bodily Tranquillity. Stillness of consciousness itself induces mental Tranquillity. The proximate cause of Tranquillity is the satisfaction within Joy! The resulting effect of Tranquillity is the bliss within Happiness! The Buddha once said: What mental fermentations (asava) should be overcome by development? If a Bhikkhu by careful & rational attention develops the Tranquillity Link to Awakening based on seclusion, based on disillusion, based on ceasing, and culminating in cool relinquishment, then neither can mental fermentation, nor any fever, nor any discontent ever arise in him. MN2 [i 11] In one who is joyous, the body becomes calm & the mind becomes calm. The Tranquillity Link to Awakening emerges right there. He develops it, & for him it goes to the culmination of its development. MN118 [iii 85] CALMED Calm is his thought, calm is his speech, and calm is his deed, who, truly knowing, is wholly freed, perfectly tranquil and wise. Dhammapada 96 CONTENT The one who eliminates discontent, tearing it out by the roots, utterly cuts it out, such one spontaneously becomes absorbed in the calm of tranquillity both day & night. Dhammapada 250 COMPOSED The one who is tranquil in movement, calmed in speech, stilled in thought, collected & composed, who sees right through & rejects all allurements of this world, such one is truly a 'Peaceful One'. Dhammapada 378 Further inspirations on the calming & soothing quality of Tranquillity: Feeding Tranquillity http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Tranquillity.htm Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. #62624 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 8/21/06 2:48:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > Hallo Howard, Kel, Robert, all > > Perhaps you can say something like: > > It's was a part of the pre-buddhistic culture in Indiato have a > cyclic view on cosmology. > In the process of appearing and disappearing of Buddha's and > buddhasasana this idea was used. > Like many modern christians state that part of the Bible (for example > the book Genesis) sould not be understood literal but metaphorical), > modern buddhists think the same about this stories in the Suttas. It > can be seen as part of mythology, not of history of mankind. > This modern metaphorical view doesn't make the teachings of the > Buddha less valuable. > Compare, when really asked , that the Buddha remained silent about > questions on history > > Metta > > Joop > ======================== Yes, I've thought of that, Joop, and of the necessary appearance of new buddhas possibly being a Buddhist carrying forward of the Hindu notion of avatars. However, if I'm not mistaken there are suttas in which the Buddha references this idea, and, unless those suttas are spurious, I would be reluctant to readily view this as just mythology. One matter I would hope some folks here could shed some light on is exactly what the Buddha himself is reported to have said on this issue. With metta, Howard #62625 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scott 's question and more! ashkenn2k Hi Kel k: Everyone could practise kusala but why does some practise become Buddha, some not, it is due to perfection of paramis. It is wisdom and kusala and not kusala alone. Hence it is called perfection. A Bodhisattva could learn wisdom from paccekeBuddhas or Buddhas or the arisen of accumulated panna. A Bodhisattva could have become enlighted at the moment when listen to a Buddha teaching but it did not arise because of the perfection of paramis. He would have become enlighted by the 2nd stanza or 3rd stanza or the 4th stanza. Cheers Ken O #62626 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scott 's question and more! ashkenn2k Hi Kelvin Oops did not know you have another mail. I thought your original question why there is a need for wisdom in paramis. Definitely there are other factor but these other factors can be practise by all other ascetics. The main gist is that why some become Buddhas, others not. Cheers Ken O #62627 From: Ken O Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 6:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas ashkenn2k Hi Howard the necessity is compassion. The percusor is the helping beings to be liberated. The perfection is through wisdom. The Wheel of Dhamma could only be turned by the arisen of Buddha. Only then numerous beings could be liberated. Hence there always be Bodhisattvas and there is always be Buddhas. Regarding questions like infinite etc or whether all beings will be enlighted, Buddha dont answer these type of questions, so I also dont know :-) Cheers Ken O #62628 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:04 am Subject: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breath, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, continuation of Nina's post: 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 that those who develop both jhåna and vipassanå should, after the jhånacitta has fallen away, be aware of nåma and rúpa, clearly know their different characteristics and develop all stages of insight (Visuddhimagga VIII, 223 and following). It depends on the accumulated wisdom whether the different stages of insight can be realized within a short time or whether they are developed very gradually during a long period of time. After he has thus reached the four noble paths in due succession and has become established in the fruition of arahatship, he at last attains to the nineteen kinds of Reviewing Knowledge, and he becomes fit to receive the highest gifts from the world with its deities. It is evident that only those who had accumulated great wisdom could attain jhåna with mindfulness of breathing as meditation subject, and then attain arahatship. The Visuddhimagga carefully describes the development of jhana, of the jhanafactors which counteract the hindrances. Someone may wonder how we can know that jhana is attained, could it not happen that someone takes for jhana what is a trance but not jhana? This is a matter of panna. Panna and sati are necessary. When there is panna there is no doubt. Panna should know when the citta is kusala and when akusala, and this not in theory, but right at the moment it appears. Panna should know the different jhanafactors which are cetasikas, and not merely in theory. Take the jhanafactors piti, rapture, and sukha, pleasant feeling. In daily life and in the lower stages of jhana they arise together, but can they be clearly distinguished? Only panna can do this. It is trhe same in the case of vitakka and vicara, applied thinking and discursive thinking. They usually arise together, but, in the development of jhana panna should be able to distinguish them. After emerging from jhana one should know with insight all nama and rupa that appear. All stages of insight have to be developed, beginning with tender insight, distinguishing the characteristic of rupa from the characteristic of nama. How could otherwise the arising and falling away of nama and rupa, impermanence be realized? As I wrote before, one should also have mastery of jhana (Vis. IV, 131). One should be able to attain jhana and emerge from it at any time, in any place. Next time I shall go to the following tetrads ************** Nina. #62629 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:14 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 55 nilovg Dear friends, Seeing-consciousness, hearing-consciousness and the other sense- cognitions which experience a pleasant object or an unpleasant object through the corresponding sense-doors are ahetuka vipåkacittas. There are two kinds of ahetuka vipåka experiencing an object through each of the five sense-doors: one is akusala vipåka and one is kusala vipåka. Thus there are five pairs of ahetuka vipåkacittas which arise depending on the five sense-doors. There are also other kinds of ahetuka vipåkacitta which will be dealt with later on. The ten ahetuka vipåkacittas which are the five pairs are called in Påli: dvi- pañca-viññaa.na (two times five vi~n~naa.na). Summing them up they are: 1 Seeing-consciousness (cakkhu-vi~n~naa.na, ``cakkhu'' means eye): akusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling (upekkhå): kusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling. 2 Hearing-consciousness (sota-vi~n~naa.na, ``sota'' means ear): akusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling: kusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling. 3 Smelling-consciousness (ghåna-vi~n~naa.na, ``ghåna'' means nose): akusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling :kusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling. 4 Tasting-consciousness (jivhå-vi~n~naa.na, ``jivhå'' means tongue): akusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling: kusala vipåka, accompanied by indifferent feeling. 5 Body-consciousness (kåya-vi~n~naa.na, ``kåya'' means body): akusala vipåka, accompanied by painful bodily feeling (dukkha- vedanå): kusala vipåka, accompanied by pleasant bodily feeling (sukha- vedanå). The ahetuka vipåkacittas which see, hear, smell and taste are invariably accompanied by indifferent feeling, upekkhå, no matter whether they are akusala vipåka or kusala vipåka. The citta which dislikes the object may arise afterwards. This citta is ``sahetuka'', with hetus (roots), and it is accompanied by unpleasant feeling. Or the citta which likes the object may arise; this citta which is also ``sahetuka'', with roots, may be accompanied by pleasant feeling or by indifferent feeling. We are inclined to think that the dvi-pañca- vi~n~naa.nas, such as seeing or hearing, can occur at the same time as like or dislike of the object, but this is not so. Different cittas arise at different moments and the feelings which accompany the cittas are different too; these realities arise each because of their own conditions and they are non-self. ***** Nina. #62630 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:17 am Subject: Letters from Nina 36 nilovg Dear friends, Once I was having lunch with Khun Sujin, my good friend in the Dhamma, in a Chinese restaurant in Bangkok. I was served a duck's foot and when I looked at it I had aversion. Khun Sujin said: 'Just taste it, try it, without paying attention to the shape and form'. I tasted it without paying attention to the shape and form. The taste was good. At that time I did not understand yet the full meaning of Khun Sujin's lesson, but she wanted to show me that the experience through the eyes is one thing, and the experience through the tongue quite another thing and thus another reality. We join all the different experiences together and we think, 'I am eating a duck's foot'. Duck's foot is a concept of a 'whole' we form up in our mind, but it cannot be directly experienced through one of the six doors. We think of concepts time and again, but we should not forget that there are also realities which can be experienced, one at a time. For example: there is the experience of visible object, there is visible object, there is attention to the shape and form and this is different from seeing, there is aversion, there is tasting, the experience of flavour, there is flavour, there is thinking of the flavour. ****** Nina. #62631 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ven. Cunda's Advice jwromeijn Hallo Sarah One remark I forgot to make in my message 62615 S: > several messages to indicate that accumulations > also refer to present dhammas now. Thinking now is an accumulation. > Likes and dislikes now are accumulations now as well. > They are all present dhammas. > My remark is: what exactly is that 'refer' of you. It's a vague expression. Is it 'smells like'? Is it 'equals'? Is it 'touches'? Is 'refer' an ultimate or a conventional word? 'Accumulations' (are) 'present dhammas' is an contradictio in terminis. Metta Joop #62632 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:15 am Subject: Re: Theravada and Dzogchen ~ Small boat, Great Mountain ~ Amaro Bhikkhu buddhatrue --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" wrote: > > Hallo Christine, all > > As promised, a review of the ebook 'Small boat, great mountain' > It's a series of dhamma-talks in which describes Amaro Bhikkhu about > his teachers Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Sumedho. Hi Joop, I read this booklet also. However, I think I appreciated it more than you have. I liked the spontaneous style of the prose. After all, Amaro Bhikkhu did all of the talks extemporaneously- they can't really be expected to be highly structured. I especially liked all of the anecdotes he told and how he was so confessional and honest about his trials and tribulations along the path. But, I do agree with you that it isn't really much of a comparison between Theravada and Dzogchen, so the booklet isn't presented properly in the introduction. I was especially wanting to see an exploration about the two types of consciousness which seem to be presented in the suttas- consciousness which is impermanent and consciousness which is unbounded and timeless. Amaro really didn't address this subject as much as I was lead to believe by the introduction, but it is a very difficult subject to clearly define. It might be beyond the scope of words to explain. So, my final impression is that the booklet is worth reading, though it is very long. Thanks, Christine, for providing the link!! ;-)) Metta, James Ps. Thanks for providing your picture. It is nice to see you! #62633 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:29 am Subject: Re: Buddhas buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: One matter I would hope some folks here > could shed some light on is exactly what the Buddha himself is reported to > have said on this issue. I don't have my Tipitaka any longer but I remember that there is a sutta toward the beginning of the Digha Nikaya which addresses this issue. The Buddha describes the past Buddhas, how many disciples they had, and how they each achieved enlightenment. I believe he also mentions something about the future Buddha. It is a very long sutta and it isn't on ATI. If you have the DN, look it up toward the beginning of the collection. Metta, James #62634 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas nilovg Hi Howard, James, Diigha Nikaaya, sutta 26, War, Wickedness and Wealth. It is also said somewhere else (commentary? or Jataka?) that once Devadatta will be a Buddha. NIna. Op 21-aug-2006, om 16:29 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > I believe he also > mentions something about the future Buddha. It is a very long sutta > and it isn't on ATI. If you have the DN, look it up toward the > beginning of the collection. #62635 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, nina (and James) - In a message dated 8/21/06 10:46:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, James, > Diigha Nikaaya, sutta 26, War, Wickedness and Wealth. > One named Metteyya, Arahant, Fully Awakened...> > It is also said somewhere else (commentary? or Jataka?) that once > Devadatta will be a Buddha. > NIna. > ======================== Thanks, Nina! I'll look at it. :-) With metta, Howard #62636 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 8/21/06 10:30:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > One matter I would hope some folks here > >could shed some light on is exactly what the Buddha himself is > reported to > >have said on this issue. > > I don't have my Tipitaka any longer but I remember that there is a > sutta toward the beginning of the Digha Nikaya which addresses this > issue. The Buddha describes the past Buddhas, how many disciples they > had, and how they each achieved enlightenment. I believe he also > mentions something about the future Buddha. It is a very long sutta > and it isn't on ATI. If you have the DN, look it up toward the > beginning of the collection. > > Metta, > James > > > ======================== Thank you. :-) I'll look in the DN. As to what the sutta says, if it is just a reporting about past Buddhas and the next one, I have no problem with that. Presumably the Buddha recalled the latter and knew the current Bodhisatta - if one believes that kind of thing. (I suspend final judgement, but I accord tentative belief.) But what I'm interested in, in this thread, is the matter of the alleged inevitability of recurring appearances of Buddhas. (I do assent to the great probability.) With metta, Howard #62637 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina 36 upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/21/06 10:20:45 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Dear friends, > > Once I was having lunch with Khun Sujin, my good friend in the > Dhamma, in a > Chinese restaurant in Bangkok. I was served a duck's foot and when I > looked at it I had aversion. Khun Sujin said: 'Just taste it, try it, > without paying attention to the shape and form'. I tasted it without > paying attention to the shape and form. The taste was good. At that > time I did not understand yet the full meaning of Khun Sujin's > lesson, but she wanted to show me that the experience through the > eyes is one thing, and the experience through the tongue quite > another thing and thus another reality. > > We join all the different experiences together and we think, 'I am > eating a duck's foot'. Duck's foot is a concept of a 'whole' we form > up in our mind, but it cannot be directly experienced through one of > the six doors. We think of concepts time and again, but we should not > forget that there are also realities which can be experienced, one at > a time. For example: > > there is the experience of visible object, > > there is visible object, > > there is attention to the shape and form and this is different from > seeing, > > there is aversion, > > there is tasting, the experience of flavour, > > there is flavour, > > there is thinking of the flavour. > > ****** > Nina. ============================= What you point out above is all correct. We also shouldn't lose sight, however, of the importamce of the concept of "duck's foot". There is a sense in which that foot was very real to the duck, for in order to obtain that foot for the meal, the duck was killed. With only the sight, taste, smell, etc as separate realities, where would that important fact stand? :-) With metta, Howard #62638 From: "Joop" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhas jwromeijn Hallo Howard, James, Nina, Kel, all H: "… what I'm interested in, in this thread, is the matter of the alleged inevitability of recurring appearances of Buddhas. (I do assent to the great probability.)" The answer I have found on your question now will create new problems (with me and possibbly with you). The inevitability is named "cosmic order" (niyama) ! Cf THE NIYAMA-DIPANI (The Manual of Cosmic Order) by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw (www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL04.html) A quote from the first paragraph " Him who became perfect by the cosmic order, him who taught that law, him the Refuge thus honouring I shall now expound that Law. The expression 'became perfect by the cosmic order' means that this order includes laws of cosmic order for Buddhas, whereby the state of Buddhahood is completely brought to pass and achieved. These laws bring about the attainment of Bodhi by the great Bodhisats--namely, the ten perfections, each of three stages, the five great renunciations, the threefold duty, and at the end of the days, the grappling, while on the Bodhi-seat, with the law of causality, and the perceiving, while in jhana-concentration with controlled respiration, the genesis and evanescence of the five aggregates of individuality. By these things the Buddhas win Buddhahood, hence such matters are called the things of the cosmic order for Buddhas. Hereby we indicate that not by chance or accident do Buddhas become perfect." This essay has many Sutta-references but I did not find one on the existence of niyama itself. Fascinating, isn't it? Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, James - > > In a message dated 8/21/06 10:30:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, > buddhatrue@... writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > One matter I would hope some folks here > > >could shed some light on is exactly what the Buddha himself is > > reported to > > >have said on this issue. > > > > I don't have my Tipitaka any longer but I remember that there is a > > sutta toward the beginning of the Digha Nikaya which addresses this > > issue. The Buddha describes the past Buddhas, how many disciples they > > had, and how they each achieved enlightenment. I believe he also > > mentions something about the future Buddha. It is a very long sutta > > and it isn't on ATI. If you have the DN, look it up toward the > > beginning of the collection. > > > > Metta, > > James > > > > > > > ======================== > Thank you. :-) I'll look in the DN. > As to what the sutta says, if it is just a reporting about past > Buddhas and the next one, I have no problem with that. Presumably the Buddha > recalled the latter and knew the current Bodhisatta - if one believes that kind of > thing. (I suspend final judgement, but I accord tentative belief.) But what I'm > interested in, in this thread, is the matter of the alleged inevitability of > recurring appearances of Buddhas. (I do assent to the great probability.) > > With metta, > Howard #62639 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 6:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, Joop (and all) - In a message dated 8/21/06 1:14:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > Hallo Howard, James, Nina, Kel, all > > H: "… what I'm interested in, in this thread, is the matter of the > alleged inevitability of > recurring appearances of Buddhas. (I do assent to the great > probability.)" > > The answer I have found on your question now will create new problems > (with me and possibbly with you). > The inevitability is named "cosmic order" (niyama) ! > Cf THE NIYAMA-DIPANI (The Manual of Cosmic Order) > by Mahathera Ledi Sayadaw (www.ubakhin.com/ledi/MANUAL04.html) > > A quote from the first paragraph > " Him who became perfect by the cosmic order, him who taught that > law, him the Refuge thus honouring I shall now expound that Law. > The expression 'became perfect by the cosmic order' means that this > order includes laws of cosmic order for Buddhas, whereby the state of > Buddhahood is completely brought to pass and achieved. These laws > bring about the attainment of Bodhi by the great Bodhisats--namely, > the ten perfections, each of three stages, the five great > renunciations, the threefold duty, and at the end of the days, the > grappling, while on the Bodhi-seat, with the law of causality, and > the perceiving, while in jhana-concentration with controlled > respiration, the genesis and evanescence of the five aggregates of > individuality. By these things the Buddhas win Buddhahood, hence such > matters are called the things of the cosmic order for Buddhas. Hereby > we indicate that not by chance or accident do Buddhas become > perfect." > > This essay has many Sutta-references but I did not find one on the > existence of niyama itself. > > Fascinating, isn't it? > > > Metta > > Joop > ========================== I'm not at all impressed by what you quoted. (No aspersion on you, of course!) If it is saying that Buddhas arise due to a cosmic law, I say that amounts to saying they arise because they arise! To say that Buddhas must arise because there is a cosmic law that makes that so is empty of content, and moreover it is contrary to the conditionality taught by the Buddha. Buddhas arise because there are sentient beings who accomplish all that is needed for them to accomplish in order for them to become Buddhas. To say that this is inevitable because some cosmic law guarantees it is typical religious superstition lacking in any legitimate content. If, on the other hand, all this is saying is that if people accomplish certain ends, then they will become Buddhas, that also says nothing of any import. The question is why MUST there always be people who DO accomplish those things. So, again, I consider the quoted material to appear to say something, but actually to say nothing at all. With metta, Howard #62640 From: "matheesha" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 11:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhas matheesha333 Hi Howard, H: Buddhas arise > because there are sentient beings who accomplish all that is needed for them to > accomplish in order for them to become Buddhas. To say that this is > inevitable because some cosmic law guarantees it is typical religious superstition > lacking in any legitimate content. M: I would like to suggest something. Maybe the problem is not that it is religious superstition, but rather the view that everything which exists can be explained by the (rational) sciences that we hold as common knowledge. Well, what if something was not readily 'knowable' by rational thinking or western sciences? It would be a blank space in the collective human knowledge. Or would it? Imagine there was a rationally thinking being but born on an asteroid belt without any gravity. It you told it that on some planets things fall to the ground, and this was a law of nature, he would try to rationalise it, failing which, claim it a superstitious belief! We dont know the mechanisms behind buddhas coming into being. Maybe we cant know, it is beyond our range of knowledge. However that doesnt mean it is not true. Maybe it is simply that as long as there is suffering, as long as there is wisdom, the interaction of these two elements is the creation of the buddhist path. Just as long as there is hunger, there will be the search for food. As for not having any known memory of past buddhas, we have to remember that the times referred to are vast and that the belief is that this universe gets wiped out and reforms, so that no memory can survive. Faling all, is a little saddha a fearful thing? ;-). with metta Matheesha #62641 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, Matheesha - In a message dated 8/21/06 2:57:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, dhammachat@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > > H: Buddhas arise > >because there are sentient beings who accomplish all that is > needed for them to > >accomplish in order for them to become Buddhas. To say that this > is > >inevitable because some cosmic law guarantees it is typical > religious superstition > >lacking in any legitimate content. > > M: I would like to suggest something. Maybe the problem is not that > it is religious superstition, but rather the view that everything > which exists can be explained by the (rational) sciences that we > hold as common knowledge. > > Well, what if something was not readily 'knowable' by rational > thinking or western sciences? It would be a blank space in the > collective human knowledge. Or would it? > > Imagine there was a rationally thinking being but born on an > asteroid belt without any gravity. It you told it that on some > planets things fall to the ground, and this was a law of nature, he > would try to rationalise it, failing which, claim it a superstitious > belief! > > We dont know the mechanisms behind buddhas coming into being. Maybe > we cant know, it is beyond our range of knowledge. However that > doesnt mean it is not true. > > Maybe it is simply that as long as there is suffering, as long as > there is wisdom, the interaction of these two elements is the > creation of the buddhist path. Just as long as there is hunger, > there will be the search for food. > > As for not having any known memory of past buddhas, we have to > remember that the times referred to are vast and that the belief is > that this universe gets wiped out and reforms, so that no memory can > survive. > > Faling all, is a little saddha a fearful thing? ;-). > > with metta > > Matheesha > ============================ Matheesha, it seems to me that you are saying that there is more to know than we know, and I would agree that this is unquestionably true. The thing about Buddhas, though, is a bit more straightforward I'd say. A Buddha is, first of all, an arahant, and the conditions that need be met for a sentient being to become an arahant have been pretty much laid out by the Buddha, and they are quite reasonable and understandable, it seems to me, though of course, tremendously demanding. Secondly, one who becomes a buddha, it has been taught, must have vowed (to a Buddha, I believe) to strive for buddhahood, which means that s/he must, over many lifetimes, master 10 perfections (just six for the underachieving Mahayanists ;-) prior to attaining full awakening. So, that has all been laid out fairly clearly, and, of course, the goal of buddhahood is radically more demanding than even that of "mere" arahanthood. It is seems likely, though, at least to me, that among the people who have trained under a Buddha, a number will make remarkable progress, will have the propensity for the bodhisatta "career", will take a bodhisatta vow, and will indeed, go on to satisfy all the conditions needed to eventually become Buddhas. Reasonable, but not certain. Thus, I frankly do think that it is likely that there will never arise a time at which no more buddhas will arise in the world. But that is just my belief, and it is a belief in an overwhelming likelihood as opposed to an absolute certainty. The questions remaining are twofold: 1) Did the Buddha in any sutta say that regardless of how the triple world develops, there will always, of necessity, be sentient beings who successfully embark upon the bodhisatta enterprise, so that future buddhas are always guaranteed to arise, and 2) If so, did he explain what conditions make that a necessity. If the absolute certainty was proclaimed by the Buddha, I would be very interested in knowing where that is recorded, and what reasons if any he gave for it, precisely so that I don't need to fall back on mere belief or hope or faith in unknown cosmic principles. The Dhamma, after all, is to be seen here and now. With metta, Howard #62642 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:39 pm Subject: Re: Buddhas kelvin_lwin Hi RobK, > I am pretty sure this idea is not from ancien Theravada, is it now a > belief in Burma? If you're sure then I probably just misunderstood it. I don't know what is the belief in Burma is. I'll have to ask my teacher to clarify. - Kel #62643 From: connie Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:59 pm Subject: too distracted nichiconn Dear Nina, Scott, other leaf eaters, with thanks for metta (the bread of life) to go with the whine (dukkha), I'd like to give you Aanandajoti's translation of the UDDHATASUTTA [ www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/TT-index.htm ] but will go with Strong's version [ www.sacred-texts.com/bud/udn/udn4.htm ] and the Commentary. After, I'll try to be more restrained and serve smaller portions, but it ain't easy. peace, c. 2. Thus have I heard. On a certain occasion the Blessed One dwelt at Kusinara, in the Upavattana, the Sâl forest of the Mallas. Now at that time there lived, not far from the Blessed One, a great number of Bhikkhus in huts set up in the forest. They were puffed up, proud, fickle, garrulous, loose in their talk, thoughtless, without knowledge, unrestrained, scatter-brained and sensuous. And the Blessed One beheld these Bhikkhus living in huts set up in the forest, puffed up, fickle, garrulous, loose in their talk, thoughtless, without knowledge, unrestrained, scatter-brained and sensuous. And the Blessed One, in this connection, on that occasion, breathed forth this solemn utterance: "He who keeps not watch over his body, Who is under the spell of false doctrines, Who succumbs to sloth and torpor, Such a one passes into the power of the Tempter. But he who keeps watch over his mind, Whose sphere is right thoughts, Who sets ever before him right doctrine, Who knows the 'rise and set' of things, Who overcomes sloth and torpor, That Bhikkhu escapes from all states of punishment." ============ Masefield's translation of Dhammapaala's Commentary on that Exalted Utterance: p598 2. Distracted In the second: : in the city of the Malla kings named Kusinaaraa. : for as with Anuraadhapura's Thuupaaraama, so was Kusinaaraa's park in the south-western quarter. As the path entering the city from the Thuupaaraama via its southern gate veered to the north after going along heading eastwards, so was the row of saalas from that park one to veer to the north after going along heading eastwards, as a result of which it came to be called the "Upavattana" - in that Upavattana, the saala grove of the Maala kings. : the hut had been constructed at the place covered with trees and bushes not far from that row of saalas, with reference to which "Were staying in the forest hut" was said. Those monks were, however, those in whom calm assessment was absent, those who spurned energy, those dwelling negligently, for which reason "Distracted" and so on was said. Herein: They were "distracted" due to their minds being uncalm on account of an abundance of distraction. Conceit, since it is like a reed (na.la) due to its being void, is na.la; they were "hollow" (unna.laa) since they were those with a puffed up (uggato) na.la, with conceit so called, meaning they were those of puffed up, void conceit. They were "fussy" on account of their being endowed with fussiness as regards ornamentation of bowl and robe and so on, or alternatively on account of their finickiness. The were "raucous" (mukharaa) since they were by mouth (mukhena) grating (kharaa) on account of their being of harsh speech. They were "of scattered speech" (viki.n.navaacaa) since they were those of scattered (viki.n.na), confounded, speech (vaacaa) on account of an abundance of temporal talk. They were "of vapid mindfulness" since for them mindfulness was vapid, had perished, meaning they were those in whom mindfulness was wanting, those dwelling in (a state of negligence). They were "inattentive" on account of the absence of attentiveness in every way possible. [239] They were "unconcentrated" since they were not concentrated on account of the absence of any concentrating of the mind even for the mere time taken during one pull at the cow's udder. They were "with their minds careering about" due to their resembling a careering deer on account of their own nature being that of cupidity. There were "of conspicuous faculties" through being those whose faculties were uncontrolled on account of their failing to restrain the faculties that have mind as their sixth. Fathoming this matter (etam attha.m viditvaa): coming to know of this dwelling in negligence, by way of distraction and so on, on the part of those monks. To this Udaana (ima.m udaana.m): gave rise to this Udaana explaining the perils and advantages with respect to dwelling in (a state of) negligence and dwelling in (a state of) diligence respectively. Herein: Being unguarded (arakkhitena): being unwarded (aguttena) due to the absence of the guard that is mindfulness. As a result of body (kaayena): as a result of that body consisting of the six consciousnesses - for it is as a result of the occurrence of covetousness and so on (that arise), upon seeing a sight-object by way of eye-consciousness, by way of one's seizing upon the general appearance and details therein (that one goes under Maara's sway) due to the door of (such) consciousness being unguarded by mindfulness. This same is the method also in the case of ear consciousness and so forth. So it was with reference to the unguarded state of that body consisting of the six consciousnesses that he said "As a result of body being unguarded". Some, however, state the meaning to be the kaayena (as a result of body (? per se); (yet) mindfulness has to be construed (therewith even for them, on account of their construing the meaning in the same manner stated. Other read aarakkhitena cittena (as a result of mind being unguarded); (yet) the meaning, even for them, is of the same manner stated. As a result of being slain by wrong view (micchaadi.t.thihatena): as a result of being polluted through adherence to that which is false such as eternalism and so on. As a result of being overcome by sloth and torpor (thiinamiddhaabhibhuutena): as a result of being engulfed by sloth whose charcteristic mark is that of indisposition on the part of the mind and by torpor whose characteristic mark is that of indisposition on the part of the body, the connecting being with that kaayena (as a result of body), or alternatively with that cittena (as a result of mind). One goes under Maara's sway (vasa.m Maarassa gacchati): one enters upon the sway of all the Maara, beginning with the Defilement-Maara and so on, (that is to say,) the obligation to act in accordance with his desires, meaning one does not get beyond their range. For the Lord, having by means of this verse indicated the cycle opening with his reproach of those monks dwelling in (a state of) negligence, viz. "Those whose minds are wholly unguarded through the absence of the guard that is mindfulness, being those who are held in the grip of the inversions by way of 'It is permanent' and so on as a result of unmethodical understanding due to the absence of insight that constitutes the root-cause of paying methodical attention, to the absence of the initiation of energy where the performance of that which is skilled is concerned, do not raise their heads from the cycle that is sa.msaara", next utters the second verse commencing "Therefore one should become one whose mind is guarded" so as to indicate the absence of that cycle. Herein: Therefore one should become one whose mind is guarded (tasmaa rakkhitacitt' assa): since the one whose mind is not guarded, as one who is obliged to act in accordance with Maara's desires, is still within sa.msaara, therefore one should become one whose mind is guarded by way of guarding, by way of blocking, the faculties that have mind as their sixth, with the restraint that is mindfulness. For when the mind is quarded [240] the faculties of eye and so on are themselves guarded. One whose pasturage is right deliberation (sammaasa"nkappagocaro): since the one whose pasturage is wrong deliberation, in seizing divers wrong viewpoints upon unmethodically deliberating in this way and that, becomes one who is obliged to act in accordance with Maara's desires due to his mind having been slain by wrong view, therefore one should, by paying methodical attention when performing one's work, become one whose pasturage is right deliberation in the form of deliberation with respect to renunciation and so on - one should make right deliberation associated with the jhaanas and so forth alone the place of one's mind's occurrence. The one who has set to the fore right view (sammaadi.t.tipurekkhaaro): the one whose wrong viewpoint has been shake off due to his pasturage being that of right deliberation, having come to know rise and fall, having attained knowledge of rise and fall after investigating arising and cessation with respect to the five upaadaanakkhandhas in their in all fifty modes, as he comprehends the formations after initiating vipassanaa as one previously intent on morality and concentration in the same manner stated after setting to the fore, after giving precedence to, quite before anything else, right view whose characteristic mark is that of (knowledge that) one's deed are one's own, and whose characteristic mark, due to which same, is that of knowledge of things as they really are, thereafter eagerly practicing vipassanaa by way of contemplation of dissolution and so on - let that monk, who has overcome sloth and torpor, so let that monk, that one in whom the aasavas have been destroyed, that one in whom the defilements have been broken up (bhinnakileso) in their entirety on account, first of all, of the abandonment of the defilements that were to be slain by the lower paths, and on account of the abandonment, through their extirpation by means of the ariyan path attained (by him), of sloth and toropor that arise in thought-arising accompanied by greed (but) dissociated from (wrong) view - as well as conceit and so on that are united with (such sloth and torpor) - forsake, abandon, on account of the root-cause of becoming having been annihilated, all bad destinies that are reckoned as bad destinies due to their link with the threefold dukkha, meaning let him become established in that which is diametrically opposed to them, in nibbaana. The exposition of the second sutta is concluded. #62644 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 3:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhas buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard, James, > It is also said somewhere else (commentary? or Jataka?) that once > Devadatta will be a Buddha. Actually, the Buddha said in a sutta that Devadatta, even though he was reborn in the hell realm, will be eventually be reborn as a Silent Buddha. (Can't find it right now though :-(. Metta, James #62645 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 7:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina 36 ken_aitch Hi Howard, You wrote to Nina: ------------ What you point out above is all correct. We also shouldn't lose sight, > however, of the importamce of the concept of "duck's foot". There is a sense > in which that foot was very real to the duck, for in order to obtain that foot > for the meal, the duck was killed. With only the sight, taste, smell, etc as > separate realities, where would that important fact stand? :-) ------------- No offence intended, but I think it stands under the heading of Tiracchana-katha: (Buddhist Dictionary:)'low talk', lit. 'beastly talk', is the name in the sutta-texts for the following: "Talk about kings and robbers, ministers and armies, danger and war, eating and drinking, clothes and dwellings, garlands and scents, relations, chariots, villages and markets, towns and districts, women and heroes, street talks, talks by the well, talk about those departed in days gone by, tittle-tattle, talks about world and sea, about gain and loss" (A.X.69 etc.). It may seem as if tiracchana-katha includes only what we would conventionally regard as low or beastly talk. (That's why I said, "No offence intended.") But I am sure it is any kind of talk that takes our attention away from the presently arisen conditioned reality. It was this latter, non-frivolous, talk that K Sujin and Nina were engaged in at the restaurant (in amongst the tiracchana-katha, of course)) :-) Ken H #62646 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Aug 21, 2006 4:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina 36 upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/21/06 10:08:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > You wrote to Nina: > > ------------ > What you point out above is all correct. We also shouldn't > lose sight, > >however, of the importamce of the concept of "duck's foot". There is > a sense > >in which that foot was very real to the duck, for in order to obtain > that foot > >for the meal, the duck was killed. With only the sight, taste, > smell, etc as > >separate realities, where would that important fact stand? :-) > ------------- > > No offence intended, but I think it stands under the heading of > Tiracchana-katha: > > (Buddhist Dictionary:)'low talk', lit. 'beastly talk', is the name in > the sutta-texts for the following: > > "Talk about kings and robbers, ministers and armies, danger and > war, eating and drinking, clothes and dwellings, garlands and scents, > relations, chariots, villages and markets, towns and districts, women > and heroes, street talks, talks by the well, talk about those departed > in days gone by, tittle-tattle, talks about world and sea, about gain > and loss" (A.X.69 etc.). > > It may seem as if tiracchana-katha includes only what we would > conventionally regard as low or beastly talk. (That's why I said, "No > offence intended.") But I am sure it is any kind of talk that takes > our attention away from the presently arisen conditioned reality. It > was this latter, non-frivolous, talk that K Sujin and Nina were > engaged in at the restaurant (in amongst the tiracchana-katha, of > course)) :-) > > Ken H > ======================== I believe that you are missing my point. There was a group at the time of the Buddha, condemned by him, who taught that a person is just a collection of particles, and putting a sword through someone is just fine, because it is just a matter of one collection of particles going through another. With regard to a duck, there are just sights, sounds, tastes, odors etc. The same is true with regard to all animals and with regard to people. So why, then, is there anything wrong with taking a life? There are no persons, and nothing is personal, so there is no problem with killing. There is no problem with having an animal killed for a monk, no problem, for that matter, with the multiple murders committed by Angulimala. There are no beings, so no one is killed, and that's that - right? Now do you get what I was driving at? With metta, Howard #62647 From: "Christine Forsyth" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:34 am Subject: Re: Theravada and Dzogchen ~ Small boat, Great Mountain ~ Amaro Bhikkhu christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "buddhatrue" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Joop" > wrote: > > > > Hallo Christine, all > > > > As promised, a review of the ebook 'Small boat, great mountain' > > It's a series of dhamma-talks in which describes Amaro Bhikkhu > about > > his teachers Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Sumedho. > > Hi Joop, > > I read this booklet also. However, I think I appreciated it more > than you have. I liked the spontaneous style of the prose. After > all, Amaro Bhikkhu did all of the talks extemporaneously- they can't > really be expected to be highly structured. I especially liked all > of the anecdotes he told and how he was so confessional and honest > about his trials and tribulations along the path. > > But, I do agree with you that it isn't really much of a comparison > between Theravada and Dzogchen, so the booklet isn't presented > properly in the introduction. I was especially wanting to see an > exploration about the two types of consciousness which seem to be > presented in the suttas- consciousness which is impermanent and > consciousness which is unbounded and timeless. Amaro really didn't > address this subject as much as I was lead to believe by the > introduction, but it is a very difficult subject to clearly define. > It might be beyond the scope of words to explain. > > So, my final impression is that the booklet is worth reading, though > it is very long. Thanks, Christine, for providing the link!! ;-)) > > Metta, > James > Ps. Thanks for providing your picture. It is nice to see you! > Hello Joop, James, all, Thank you for your responses. I first posted the question on 11 August - just as a discussion on E-sangha was getting into its stride. We had Dzogchenpas, Mahayanists and Theravadins all discussing the text together - worth a browse, about 150 responses so far - a Dzogchen Loppon (Namdrol) and a Theravadin Bhikkhu (Dhammanando) also joined in and made clarifying contributions: http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php?showtopic=34089 metta Christine #62648 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina 36 ken_aitch Hi Howard, ---------- H: > I believe that you are missing my point. There was a group at the time of the Buddha, condemned by him, who taught that a person is just a collection of particles, and putting a sword through someone is just fine, because it is just a matter of one collection of particles going through another. ------------- You're right; I was missing your point. I wonder if that group had any understanding of the five khandhas as the Buddha taught them, which is very different, of course, from the normal concept of a collection of particles. It is hard to imagine anyone putting a sword between vedana and sanna, for example. :-) ------------------- H: > With regard to a duck, there are just sights, sounds, tastes, odors etc. The same is true with regard to all animals and with regard to people. So why, then, is there anything wrong with taking a life? There are no persons, and nothing is personal, so there is no problem with killing. There is no problem with having an animal killed for a monk, no problem, for that matter, with the multiple murders committed by Angulimala. There are no beings, so no one is killed, and that's that - right? Now do you get what I was driving at? -------------------- Yes thanks, but I see things differently. I think the best way to understand killing is in terms of akusala cetana-cetasikas that have the power to condition countless moments of very undesirable vipaka. Ken H #62649 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:06 am Subject: Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' upasaka_howard Hi, all - For those of you who have any interest in comparative religion I submit the following from a Reform Jewish website, for your consideration. With metta, Howard August 22, 2006 Week 144, Day 2 28 Av 5766  Loving-kindness Shoresh / Root  Core Word chesed Translation Transliteration Hebrew Kindness, love, goodness, benevolence, affections, loving-kindness chesed Acts, deeds of loving-kindness g’milut chasadim One of the high-frequency words in the Jewish lexicon is chesed, which means “ kindness, love, goodness, benevolence, affectionâ€?—all rolled into one. Perhaps the best translation is the old-fashioned but still luminous English word, “ loving-kindness.â€?On the foundations of chesed, the Rabbis built the concept of g’milut chasadim, literally, “the bestowal of loving-kindness,â€? or “acts, deeds of loving-kindness.â€? These are personal acts of human sympathy, performed totally unselfishly, wholly out of goodness, and without ulterior motive. In practicing g’milut chasadim, we neither seek nor expect thanks or reciprocation. Among the acts regarded as g’milut chasadim are honoring one’s parents, restoring peace between disputants, visiting the sick, burying the dead, comforting mourners and generally helping others—all in a spirit of good will and good cheer.The Rabbis regarded acts of loving-kindness as among those things “ which have no fixed measureâ€?—that is, there is no ceiling on g’milut chasadim. Nor is there any ceiling on the number or variety of sympathetic actions human beings can extend to one another. Loving-kindness can be bestowed by anyone, young or old, rich or poor.Old Tobit, the endearing hero of the Book of Tobit (a book that appeared in the Greek translation of our Bible but was omitted from the Hebrew Bible canon), is forever getting into trouble because of his insistence upon burying the Jewish dead. Tobit, a pious and upright man of the tribe of Naftali, lived in exile in Nineveh. In carrying out his exemplary g’ milut chasadim, Tobit risked his own life by defying Assyrian decrees against burial of the Jewish dead. The Book of Tobit tells a heartwarming and charming story. It is a pity that the sages did not include it among the sacred Jewish books in the Tanach.  Adapted from Edith Samuel, Your Jewish Lexicon (New York: UAHC Press, 1982), 34-45. With metta/chesed, Howard P.S. One thing I found particularly interesting from the comparative-religion perspective is the sentence "The Rabbis regarded acts of loving-kindness as among those things “which have no fixed measureâ€?—that is, there is no ceiling on g’milut chasadim." The phrase "no fixed measure" is quite close to "immeasurable"! #62650 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina 36 upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/22/06 6:58:51 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > Yes thanks, but I see things differently. I think the best way to > understand killing is in terms of akusala cetana-cetasikas that have > the power to condition countless moments of very undesirable vipaka. > ===================== Mmm, but speaking conventionally - undesirable for whom? Murder is not undesirable only with respect to the mindstream of the murderer, but also with regard to the mindstream of the victim. :-) Killing is not just a matter of undesirable kammic results within ones own mindstream. Killing is *wrong* - to use an "old fashioned" word. It is not just kammic consequences for ourself that should serve as the basis for action, but consideration for others. If an alleged "Dhammic perspective" obscures this, and I do *not* at all assume that it does for you, then a repositioning of view would be in order. With metta, Howard #62651 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:50 am Subject: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon upasaka_howard Hi, Jon (and Nina and KenH) - Jon the recent discussion with Nina and Ken in messages 62637, 62645, 62646, 62648, and 62650 brings home to me the importance of the interactions among namarupic streams in the moral sphere, and the danger of fixating on a single mindstream. In fixating on (the elements of) a single mindstream, there is the danger of taking the fact of impersonality to an irrational and immoral extreme. Note: No one here has gone to an irrational or immoral extreme with regard to interpersonal relations, but that is due, IMO, not to having adopted a perfect perspective, but to a goodness that triumphs despite having adopted a less-than-perfect perspective. IMO, the single-mindstream view is incomplete, and morally problematical. With metta, Howard #62652 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' nilovg Hi Howard, I read this with interest and appreciation. Kusala is always kusala, it does not matter of what religion. These Rabbis were wise people. I heard Kh Sujin say, that she likes it to listen to other religions on the radio, and to hear what ways of kusala they perform. Nina. Op 22-aug-2006, om 13:06 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > "The Rabbis regarded acts of loving-kindness as > among those things “which have no fixed measure”—that is, there is > no ceiling > on g’milut chasadim." The phrase "no fixed measure" is quite close to > "immeasurable"! #62653 From: "icarofranca" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' icarofranca Hi Nina and Howard! -------------------------------------------------------------------- Kusala is always kusala, -------------------------------------------------------------------- Exact! The hebrew word "Chesed" is well known on that famous Rabinic Lore called "Caballah". "Chesed", or Mercy, Loving-Kindness, etc, is one of the Tree of Life´s Ten Sephirot, or spheres of manifestation - namely, the fourth. The one interested on comparative beliefs will get a true delight on pairing such ideas with some buddhistic classics! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- These Rabbis were wise people. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps. The "Chesed Sphere" is below the three supernal ones - a hint pointing out the idea that Mercy is not so important as the Jewish wisdom... With Metta - and plenty of Chesed, Ícaro #62654 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina 36 nilovg Hi Howard, I also followed your further dialogue with Ken H. Of course, extremes are never any good. You may have noticed that I in the beginning I thought of the duck's leg with aversion. The conventional world. How often in a day do we think in the conventional way? We do not have to learn this, we do already. And then, how often do we think with kusala citta compared to akusala citta? It is easy to notice that akusala citta arises more often than kusala citta. Understanding ultimate realities is more difficult, it is the way the Buddha taught. Now is the time to explain this, and it is against the current of common thought. I used the duck's leg simply as an example to illustrate the world in the ariyan sense. Thinking is one reality but there are also other realities, appearing one at a time through the six doors. This is the beginning of satipa.t.thaana; read on as I shall continue with this example. Satipa.t.thaana or the development of the eightfold Path is the only way leading out of the cycle. During the day we seldom pay attention to the world in the ariyan sense. We are indolent, there is no right effort. Where is the sense of urgency so necessary to develop the Path right now? Read on, read on, tomorrow and after. Nina. Op 21-aug-2006, om 17:55 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > What you point out above is all correct. We also shouldn't lose sight, > however, of the importamce of the concept of "duck's foot". There > is a sense > in which that foot was very real to the duck, for in order to > obtain that foot > for the meal, the duck was killed. With only the sight, taste, > smell, etc as > separate realities, where would that important fact stand? :-) #62655 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas nilovg Hi Howard, I shall now only address the matter of niyama. We should place this term in a wider context. The terms fixed law may be misleading. Some examples may help. The last text is the one you also referred to. niyaama: natural order. Ven. Nyanatiloka explains niyaama: Fixedness of Law regarding all things. There is a fivefold natural order, that governs: 1. temperature, season. 2. plant life. 3. kamma. 4. functions of citta in the processes. 5. certain events occurring in the lives of the Buddhas. N: As regards kamma: akusala kamma produces an undesirable result and kusala kamma produces a desirable result, and this is niyaama, a fixed order of dhammas. It cannot be altered. As regards functions of citta: cittas which experience objects through the senses and the mind-door arise in series or processes of citta. Each of the cittas arising in a process performs its own function. For example, when cittas in the eye-door process experience visible object, seeing-consciousness performs the function of seeing, and shortly afterwards kusala cittas or akusala cittas arise in that process, which perform their own function. There is a certain fixed order of cittas, citta niyama, within a process and this order cannot be altered. The “Gradual Sayings” (I, 285) Ch XIV, §134, Appearance states: The same is said with regard to the nature of dukkha and anattaa. When you think of the order of cittas, you may find it clear that they must have a fixed order. We read in the Middle Length Sayings, sutta 123, that the Bodhisatta's mother dies after seven days of his birth. The reason is that her womb is like a cetiya and this place could not be taken by another being. Diigha Nikaaya, sutta XIV, Mahaapadaanasutta: 'It is a rule, monks... and then we read about all the events concerning the Bodhisatta. It is a rule, in Pali: Dhammataa esaa, these things are natural, dhammataa.... When things are a rule, it also goes for the future. But I do not want to speculate about the future. What I know is that nobody else in the world could think of the four noble truths, of satipa.t.thaana, of the Pa.t.thaana and the Dependent Origination. Nina. Op 21-aug-2006, om 19:45 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > To say that Buddhas must arise > because there is a cosmic law that makes that so is empty of > content, and > moreover it is contrary to the conditionality taught by the Buddha. #62656 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas nilovg Hi James, Yes, under the name of A.t.thissara. See Pali Proper Names I, p. 1110. (is on line). The matter is also addressed in the Questions of Milinda, 111. And in the Co. to the Dhammapada. Nina. Op 22-aug-2006, om 0:27 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Actually, the Buddha said in a sutta that Devadatta, even though he > was reborn in the hell realm, will be eventually be reborn as a Silent > Buddha. #62658 From: "icarofranca" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 6:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Letters from Nina 36 icarofranca Hi Nina! Some extemporaneous thoughts about your post. >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > The conventional world. How often in a day do we > think in the conventional way? We do not have to learn this, we do > already. And then, how often do we think with kusala citta compared > to akusala citta? It is easy to notice that akusala citta arises >more > often than kusala citta. > Understanding ultimate realities is more difficult, it is the way >the > Buddha taught. >--------------------------------------------------------------------- Thinking about the first Discourses of Buddha, the interested reader may perceive the very foundantion of Sammuit-Paramattha dichotomy - the Dhammacakkapakkarana Sutta, for example, where Buddha makes a stand on His own Path - the Aryan attangika Maggo - as a solution for the eternal fight between the extremes. Our usual and conceptual perception of reality is dual, there´s no choice feasible: Vita Januae Mors has the same value of Mors Januae Vita - but on raising the Noble Path Buddha put a new level of understanding about such questions. Only later the idea of Paramattha Sacca as a religious viewpoint, matching out the mundane view of Sammuit-sacca had got more substance on arguments...but their very core is in the beginning of Buddha´s dispensation. indeed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > This is the > beginning of satipa.t.thaana; ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Satipattahna Sutta, the second discourse of Buddha... -------------------------------------------------------------------- > read on as I shall continue with this > example. Satipa.t.thaana or the development of the eightfold Path is > the only way leading out of the cycle. -------------------------------------------------------------------- In this Sutta Buddha states that the Satipatthana is the only way to overcome Lost and dejection, the sure path to the other shore...and this goal may be reached - depending of the Viriya, the Stamina, the energy on mindfulness of the praticioner - from Seven years to Seven days. --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Read on, read on, tomorrow and after. ----------------------------------------- The lemma of a Brazillian English School: READ THINK AND WRITE I could add " Read, think, write AND ACT RIGHTFULLY". With a thinkfully Metta, Ícaro #62659 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - Thank you for the following, Nina. But what I do not see is the referencing of a sutta in which the Buddha indicated the inevitability of the appearance of Buddhas. Inasmuch as that appearance requires that people vow (to a Buddha) to become a Buddha, that they are able to do all that needs to be done to achieve that goal, and that they DO all that needs to be done to achieve it, this seems like a conditional matter rather than an inevitable one. Below you provide < The same is said with regard to the nature of dukkha and anattaa.>> I'm familiar with this, and have referred to it myself recently. But this does *not* point to the inevitability of Buddhas. If anything, it points somewhat in the opposite direction. Buddhas do not appear because of a cosmic law. That is more like the Hindu avatar notion. Buddhas appear because capable people willingly make the sacrifice of following the path towards full awakening but putting off that final step until all the perfections needed to be a Buddha are attained. If it is inevitable that there must always be people able and willing to embark upon the road towards Buddhahood and to follow that road to its end, there must be a reason for that. So far, nobody has displayed a sutta in which the Buddha indicates that this is inevitable. That is what I am looking for, along with why that is the case. If there is no such sutta, well, that's okay too. But it is one way or the other. If nobody here knows, well, thats also is okay. :-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 8/22/06 9:22:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > I shall now only address the matter of niyama. We should place this > term in a wider context. The terms fixed law may be misleading. Some > examples may help. The last text is the one you also referred to. > > niyaama: natural order. > > Ven. Nyanatiloka explains niyaama: > Fixedness of Law regarding all things. > There is a fivefold natural order, that governs: > 1. temperature, season. > 2. plant life. > 3. kamma. > 4. functions of citta in the processes. > 5. certain events occurring in the lives of the Buddhas. > > N: As regards kamma: akusala kamma produces an undesirable result and > kusala kamma produces a desirable result, and this is niyaama, a > fixed order of dhammas. It cannot be altered. > > As regards functions of citta: cittas which experience objects > through the senses and the mind-door arise in series or processes of > citta. Each of the cittas arising in a process performs its own > function. For example, when cittas in the eye-door process experience > visible object, seeing-consciousness performs the function of seeing, > and shortly afterwards kusala cittas or akusala cittas arise in that > process, which perform their own function. There is a certain fixed > order of cittas, citta niyama, within a process and this order cannot > be altered. > > The “Gradual Sayingsâ€? (I, 285) Ch XIV, §134, Appearance states: > Tathaagata, this causal law of nature (dhaatudhamma.t.thitataa), this > orderly fixing of things (dhammaniyaamataa) prevails, namely, All > phenomena are impermanent...> > The same is said with regard to the nature of dukkha and anattaa. > > When you think of the order of cittas, you may find it clear that > they must have a fixed order. > > We read in the Middle Length Sayings, sutta 123, that the > Bodhisatta's mother dies after seven days of his birth. The reason is > that her womb is like a cetiya and this place could not be taken by > another being. > Diigha Nikaaya, sutta XIV, Mahaapadaanasutta: 'It is a rule, monks... > and then we read about all the events concerning the Bodhisatta. It > is a rule, in Pali: Dhammataa esaa, these things are natural, > dhammataa.... > When things are a rule, it also goes for the future. But I do not > want to speculate about the future. What I know is that nobody else > in the world could think of the four noble truths, of > satipa.t.thaana, of the Pa.t.thaana and the Dependent Origination. > Nina. > Op 21-aug-2006, om 19:45 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > > >To say that Buddhas must arise > >because there is a cosmic law that makes that so is empty of > >content, and > >moreover it is contrary to the conditionality taught by the Buddha. #62660 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:13 am Subject: Re: too distracted scottduncan2 Dear connie, Thanks for the leaves. The whole extract was great. I very much appreciate the whole passage. With regards to the below: "...right view whose characteristic mark is that of (knowledge that) one's deed are one's own, and whose characteristic mark, due to which same, is that of knowledge of things as they really are,..." I do have questions. Does this have to do with knowing about cause and effect? Conditions? Perhaps kamma/vipaka within one's own sphere? With loving kindness, Scott. #62661 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas nilovg Hi Howard, I understand what you mean. We should be grateful and have a sense of urgency, because there are also periods without a Buddha. The teachings decline and disappear, his relics will come together at the Bodhitree and then also disappear. Nobody in the world will then know about the Dhamma until another Buddha arises. In a sutta (Gradlal Sayings) it is explained that worldsystems evolve and devolve. The niyama goes for the events in the life of a Buddha, once he has arisen. Nina. Op 22-aug-2006, om 15:42 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > So far, nobody has displayed a sutta in which the Buddha > indicates that this is inevitable. #62662 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:26 am Subject: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breathing.no 6. nilovg Dear friends, now we come to the second tetrad, group of four, of the sutta on Mindfulness of Breathing, the Visuddhimagga comments upon: QUOTE V) He trains thus I shall breathe in experiencing happiness; he trains thus I shall breathe out experiencing happiness. (VI) He trains thus Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:49 am Subject: Letters from Nina 37. nilovg Dear friends, Gradually we may learn to distinguish between different realities and recognize them when they appear one at a time. Then we shall come to understand more clearly the difference between realities which can be directly experienced and concepts of 'wholes' we can think of but which do not have characteristics which can be directly experienced. I thought that I could see a duck's foot and I failed to understand that there are only different elements which can be experienced one at a time. Realities which can be directly experienced, one at a time, are called 'absolute realities' or 'ultimate realities' (paramattha dhammas). They are not abstract ideas, they appear all the time in daily life. All realities which arise have to fall away, they are impermanent. We know that people once have to die and that also inanimate things cannot last forever. However, we do not really know that there is impermanence at each moment. A thing such as a cup seems to stay the same for some time, but in reality it consists of physical elements, rupas, which arise and fall away all the time. Rupas are replaced so long as there are conditions for it, a cup at this moment is not the same as a cup a moment ago. In daily life we need conventional realities such as a cup we use for drinking. However, if we pay attention only to conventional realities the impermanence of phenomena will never be directly known and then we will continue to be enslaved to the 'worldly conditions'. ****** Nina. #62664 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 7:54 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily Life 56 nilovg Dear friends, The feeling arising with body-consciousness which experiences tangible object through the bodysense cannot be indifferent feeling; it arises either with painful bodily feeling or with pleasant bodily feeling. When an unpleasant tangible object is experienced the feeling which accompanies the ahetuka vipåkacitta is painful bodily feeling, dukkha-vedanå. When a pleasant tangible object is experienced the feeling which accompanies the ahetuka vipåkacitta is pleasant bodily feeling, sukha-vedanå. Painful bodily feeling and pleasant bodily feeling are nåma which can arise only with the vipåkacitta which experiences an object through the bodysense. Bodily feeling is conditioned by impact on the bodysense. Both bodily feeling and mental feeling are nåma, but they arise because of different conditions and at different moments. For example, we may have pleasant bodily feeling when we are in comfortable surroundings, but in spite of that, we may still be worried and also have moments of ``mental'' unpleasant feeling which accompanies dosa-múla-citta; these feelings arise at different moments and because of different conditions. Pleasant bodily feeling is the result of kusala kamma. The mental unpleasant feeling which arises when we are unhappy is conditioned by our accumulation of dosa (aversion); it is akusala. The whole day there are tangible objects experienced through the bodysense, which is a kind of rúpa. Tangible object can be experienced all over the body, also inside the body, and thus the door of the bodysense can be anywhere in the body. Whenever we touch hard or soft objects, when cold or heat contacts the body, and when we move, bend or stretch, there are unpleasant or pleasant objects experienced through the bodysense. One may wonder whether at each moment there is a bodily impression, pleasant bodily feeling or painful bodily feeling arises. One may notice the coarse bodily feelings, but not the subtle bodily feelings. For example, when something is a little too hard, too cold or too hot, there is painful bodily feeling, dukkha-vedanå, arising with the ahetuka vipåkacitta which experiences the object through the bodysense. One may not notice the subtle bodily feelings if one has not learned to be aware of realities. ****** Nina. #62665 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Photos of August 2006 discussions nilovg Dear Sukin, I understand. I missed one person on the photos: Mr. Knowing. Where is he, any postal address? I still think of him. Nina. Op 21-aug-2006, om 21:57 heeft sukinder het volgende geschreven: > I am not good at doing this, due to never taking notes and having > not so > good recall. #62666 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon nilovg Hi Howard, Cittas that think of persons can alternate with cittas that are mindful of nama and rupa. This is no problem, no contradiction. Sometimes you use the word ongoing mindfulness, but in reality at one moment there is the conventional world and at the next moment the world in the ariyan sense. Quite naturally. Satipa.t.thaana is not the same as concentration for a while on one nama or rupa. I am often thinking of the Elephant's Footprint when I hear contrarious speech: it is just sound impinging on the earsense, it has a cause, not no cause. Praise and blame, honour and dishonour, they change and it depends on kamma what comes to us. As you could read in my Letters, we shall be less enslaved to the worldly conditions through satipa.t.thaana. This can immediately help us in our dealings with others. You speak about a single mindstream and I know what you mean. One can only be aware of the citta in this [one's own] mindstream here and now. Not of another's cittas. But as I said, there are countless moments of thinking of a person and surely this can be done with mettaa and karuna. Your question touches on mindfulness in daily life and misunderstandings that might arise. A very important subject. Nina. Op 22-aug-2006, om 13:50 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > IMO, the single-mindstream view is incomplete, > and morally problematical. #62667 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] too distracted, and renunciation. nilovg Dear Connie, thank you for this text. It refers to the monk who develops jhaana and vipassanaa. The passage about attention while 'performing one's work, become one whose pasturage is right deliberation in the form of deliberation with respect to renunciation...' The pasturage are the four applications of mindfulness. During one's work, that is very suitable for laypeople like us. As to Renunciation, I am just at it with my revision of the Perfections. My turn to make a long quote: We read in the “Jatukaùùimåùavapucchå”, Jatukaùùí’s Questions, of the Cúlaniddesa, “Khuddhaka Nikåya”: “(There is) renunciation, nekkhamma (when there is) seeing, seeing clearly, comparing, considering, developing, so that one clearly understands the right practice, the proper practice, the practice that is an enemy 3, the practice that is beneficial, the practice of Dhamma according to the Dhamma that leads to purity of síla. (There is renunciation, when there is) the guarding of the sensedoors 4 , moderation in eating, the application of energy so that one is alert and awake, sati sampajañña (sati and paññå). (There is renunciation, when there are) the four applications of mindfulness, the four right efforts, the four bases of success, the five spiritual faculties, the five powers, the seven factors of enlightenment, the eight Path factors 5, nibbåna and the practice leading to nibbåna. (When there is renunciation) with happiness, (there is) resistance, a refuge, a protection, no danger, unshakableness, the deathlessness, a dhamma departing from clinging, which is like a thread that fastens. Having seen(all this), there is renunciation with happiness.” It is not easy to see that renunciation means happiness. We should understand that it must be paññå that sees its benefit, that compares and considers the practice, so that one should follow the right and proper practice that opposes attachment and clinging to visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object. One should see the benefit of the practice of Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma and develop the thirtyseven factors of enlightenment. Therefore it must be paññå which understands and knows that renunciation which departs from sense objects is to be achieved by sati-sampajañña, the thirtyseven factors of enlightenment, the attainment of nibbåna and the practice leading to nibbåna, as stated by the Cúlaniddesa. And all this is practised with happiness, which means, that one should see the disadvantage and danger of defilements. One should have an unshakable determination to develop paññå in order to completely eradicate clinging to sense objects. This has to begin by listening and considering the Dhamma so that one first sees the benefit of the practice. One should realize that renunciation means happiness, and this kind of happiness is without a self who seeks enjoyment. We should see that detachment from the sense objects leads to the highest calm and wellbeing. Each of the perfections should be developed together with paññå, otherwise kusala is not of the degree of a perfection. If one does not see the danger of akusala and if one does not realize the benefit of the perfections, they cannot be developed. In that case paññå is too weak to see the benefit of their development. If one’s goal is the realization of the four noble Truths, one should not only develop paññå but also the perfections. Each of the perfections is an important and helpful condition for the realization of the four noble Truths. Some people may wonder why it is necessary to develop day after day the perfections together with satipaììhåna. Someone who has understanding about the development of the eightfold Path knows that sati should be aware of the characteristics of realities that are appearing, and that paññå gradually considers, notices and understands the characteristics of the dhammas that are non-self, as nåma, the reality which experiences, or rúpa, the reality which does not experience. Satipaììhåna cannot arise all the time, but still, the fact that one is developing it, that one has listened to the Dhamma and accumulated understanding of the way of developing satipaììhåna, all these factors are conditions for the arising of a level of sati other than sati of satipaììhåna. This means: sati of the level of all the excellent qualities which are the perfections. ***** Nina. Op 21-aug-2006, om 23:59 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > therefore one should, by paying methodical > attention when performing one's work, become one whose pasturage is > right > deliberation in the form of deliberation with respect to > renunciation and > so on - one should make right deliberation associated with the > jhaanas and > so forth alone the place of one's mind's occurrence. #62668 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:45 am Subject: Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon scottduncan2 Dear Howard, May I please enter into the discussion? H: "...the importance of the interactions among namarupic streams in the moral sphere, and the danger of fixating on a single mindstream. In fixating on (the elements of) a single mindstream, there is the danger of taking the fact of impersonality to an irrational and immoral extreme." Regarding "namarupic streams:" I think that to conceptualise in this way one merely comes up with another term for "self." What say you? (I think you were discussing this way back when I first appeared here, at least it sounds familiar. At the time I think I discussed "reification" with you, in a no doubt lame fashion.) With loving kindness, Scott. #62669 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 8:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 8/22/06 2:47:20 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > May I please enter into the discussion? > > H: "...the importance of the interactions among namarupic streams in > the moral sphere, and the danger of fixating on a single mindstream. > In fixating on (the elements of) a single mindstream, there is the > danger of taking the fact of impersonality to an irrational and immoral > extreme." > > Regarding "namarupic streams:" I think that to conceptualise in this > way one merely comes up with another term for "self." > > What say you? (I think you were discussing this way back when I first > appeared here, at least it sounds familiar. At the time I think I > discussed "reification" with you, in a no doubt lame fashion.) > > With loving kindness, > > Scott. > ========================= The Buddha spoke quite conventionally about people, and their interactions, moral and immoral. There *are* multiple mindstreams, and if we cannot be directly aware of them, we had darn well better be conceptually and conventionally aware of them. But, of course, we ARE aware of them, and to pretend that all we are aware of are "our own" namas and rupas is to live in a dream world, a world of unactualized theory that we delude ourselves into thinking we know. It is indeed a limited knowing to know conceptually, but without that, our not being arahants, we would not know of other beings at all, and the world would be an even more horrendous place than it presently is. BTW, if knowing not-self required the delusion that there are not multiple mindstreams, that would make the Dhamma one sad excuse for a religion or philosophy or way of life! With metta, Howard #62670 From: "pgradinarov" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:44 pm Subject: Re: Letters from Nina, 34 pgradinarov --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > There are two kinds of phenomena in our life: the reality which knows or experiences something, nama, the reality which does not know anything, rupa. > I beg to differ on this point, as the reality that knows is the entire man taken as nama-rupa, rather than the nama only. No samjna, no vedana, no samskara, and no vijnana will be able to know anything about the object if there was no eye, ear, or any other material sense which organs (indriyas) are no less knowers than the already mentioned namas. So the "real" knower is the man as psycho-physical unity (of dharmas). This man may not have its own-being (svabhava) and therefore be called empty, but the same holds of the nama-elements of the anthropological unity Knower. The indriyas (sense-organs) are the external (bahir) instruments of the Knower, while the feelings, etc. are the internal (antar) instruments of knowledge. Even the most developed part of vijnana-skandha, i.e., manas (the proper mind) is an instrument of the Knower rather than the Knower itself. Thus, the answer to the question, Who knows? is not nama, but nama-rupa, the pancaskandhakam we know as Man, "this particular Brahmana" who is the bearer of the burden (Buddha). Best regards, Plamen #62671 From: "matheesha" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:30 pm Subject: Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna matheesha333 Hi Nina,(Jon) >N: I think that there are no thoughts connected with sense objects in > jhaana, because the person who cultivates it sees the danger of sense > impressions. M: The 3 states are kaama, ruupa and aruupa. There are no sensual thoughts (kaama) in rupa and arupa jhana. That is a different matter to saying that no rupa (sense objects) can be experienced in rupa jhana. "Furthermore, quite withdrawn from sensual pleasures, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities, he enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He permeates & pervades, suffuses & fills this very body with the rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal. Just as if a skilled bathman or bathman's apprentice would pour bath powder into a brass basin and knead it together, sprinkling it again & again with water, so that his ball of bath powder -- saturated, moisture-laden, permeated within & without -- would nevertheless not drip; even so, the monk permeates...this very body with the rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal. There is nothing of his entire body unpervaded by rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal. And as he remains thus heedful, ardent, & resolute, any memories & resolves related to the household life are abandoned, and with their abandoning his mind gathers & settles inwardly, grows unified & centered. This is how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body. -Kayagata-sati Sutta M: Now it is possible to actually 'spread' the rapture in this manner and it is an incredible sensation when your whole body is glowing with rapture. To be able to do that one must have some idea of where the body is. I don't think I can find any more evidence for the matter, and it is really a small matter... In arupa jhana there is no sense of sensory objects/rupa. It is interesting to read the kayagatasati sutta further: it speaks of developing the 4 jhanas, and that this is 'how a monk develops mindfulness immersed in the body'. Then it goes on to say... (Fullness of Mind) "Monks, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. Just as whoever pervades the great ocean with his awareness encompasses whatever rivulets flow down into the ocean, in the same way, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. M: So there is this intentional development of jhana, along with spreading of rapture in the body which takes time. This is far from instantaneous arising of samadhi with insight. with metta Matheesha #62672 From: LBIDD@... Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:38 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,96 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga),Ch. XVII 96. (21) A state that, by means of existingness characterized by presence, assists a like state by consolidating it, is a 'presence condition'. A sevenfold summary is laid down for it according to immaterial aggregates, great primaries, mentality-materiality, consciousness and consciousness-concomitants, great primaries, bases, and physical [heart] basis, according as it is said: 'The four immaterial aggregates are a condition, as presence condition, for each other. The four great primaries ... are ... for each other. At the time of descent into the womb mentality and materiality [are a condition, as presence condition,] for each other. States of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants are... for the kinds of materiality originated by consciousness. The four great primaries are ... for derived materiality. The eye base is ... for eye-consciousness element [and for the states associated therewith]. The [ear base ... nose base ... tongue base ...] body base is ... for the body-consciousness element ... The visible-data base [is ... for the eye-consciousness element ... The sound base ... odour base ... the flavour base ...] tangible-data base is a condition, as presence condition, for the mind element and for the states associated therewith. The materiality with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur is a condition, as presence condition, for the mind element, for the mind-consciousness element, and for the states associated therewith' (P.tn.1,6). ******************************** 96. paccuppannalakkha.nena atthibhaavena taadisasseva dhammassa upatthambhakattena upakaarako dhammo atthipaccayo. tassa aruupakkhandhamahaabhuutanaamaruupacittacetasikamahaabhuutaaayatanavatthuvasena sattadhaa maatikaa nikkhittaa. yathaaha ``cattaaro khandhaa aruupino a~n~nama~n~na.m atthipaccayena paccayo, cattaaro mahaabhuutaa, okkantikkha.ne naamaruupa.m a~n~nama~n~na.m. cittacetasikaa dhammaa cittasamu.t.thaanaana.m ruupaana.m. mahaabhuutaa upaadaaruupaana.m. cakkhaayatana.m cakkhuvi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa...pe0... kaayaayatana.m...pe0... ruupaayatana.m...pe0... pho.t.thabbaayatana.m kaayavi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m atthipaccayena paccayo. ruupaayatana.m...pe0... pho.t.thabbaayatana.m manodhaatuyaa ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m. ya.m ruupa.m nissaaya manodhaatu ca manovi~n~naa.nadhaatu ca vattanti, ta.m ruupa.m manodhaatuyaa ca manovi~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa ca ta.msampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m atthipaccayena paccayo''ti (pa.t.thaa0 1.1.21). #62673 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Thanks for letting me in... H: "The Buddha spoke quite conventionally about people, and their interactions, moral and immoral. There *are* multiple mindstreams, and if we cannot be directly aware of them, we had darn well better be conceptually and conventionally aware of them." Okay, but for the sake of argument, and I don't think you've answered my question, one cannot, in my opinion, use the term "multiple mindstreams" as a substitute for "people" and find one's self extracted from the problem of how to account for conventional interactions from the perspective of anatta. We don't need to know, in my opinion, how to better be conceptually and conventionally aware of others - that just comes naturally; we need to know that there are no others and yet somehow cultivate daana and metta and the like in line with this. H: "But, of course, we ARE aware of them, and to pretend that all we are aware of are "our own" namas and rupas is to live in a dream world, a world of unactualized theory that we delude ourselves into thinking we know. It is indeed a limited knowing to know conceptually, but without that, our not being arahants, we would not know of other beings at all, and the world would be an even more horrendous place than it presently is." Well, standard DSG: we are aware of visible object and the like. Or rather, we're not since we think we are aware of other people. I think that it makes sense to call this "limited knowing," but of what does this knowing consist (as to mental factors)? H: "BTW, if knowing not-self required the delusion that there are not multiple mindstreams, that would make the Dhamma one sad excuse for a religion or philosophy or way of life!" I'm still hoping you'd clarify, just to discuss this amiably of course, why the insistence on multiple mindstreams? Yours, hopefully not too obtusely, Scott. #62674 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 8/22/06 6:50:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Thanks for letting me in... > > H: "The Buddha spoke quite conventionally about people, and their > interactions, moral and immoral. There *are* multiple mindstreams, and > if we cannot be directly aware of them, we had darn well better be > conceptually and conventionally aware of them." > > Okay, but for the sake of argument, and I don't think you've answered > my question, one cannot, in my opinion, use the term "multiple > mindstreams" as a substitute for "people" and find one's self > extracted from the problem of how to account for conventional > interactions from the perspective of anatta. We don't need to know, > in my opinion, how to better be conceptually and conventionally aware > of others - that just comes naturally; we need to know that there are > no others and yet somehow cultivate daana and metta and the like in > line with this. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Multiple mindstreams are no less real than the mindstream that is you or is me, to speak conventionally. Actually, 'people' is a darn good word! I used mindstream to get a *little* closer to the sort of speech so loved here! LOL! ------------------------------------------ > > H: "But, of course, we ARE aware of them, and to pretend that all we > are aware of are "our own" namas and rupas is to live in a dream > world, a world of unactualized theory that we delude ourselves into > thinking we know. It is indeed a limited knowing to know conceptually, > but without that, our not being arahants, we would not know of other > beings at all, and the world would be an even more horrendous place > than it presently is." > > Well, standard DSG: we are aware of visible object and the like. Or > rather, we're not since we think we are aware of other people. I > think that it makes sense to call this "limited knowing," but of what > does this knowing consist (as to mental factors)? ------------------------------------------ Howard: I sincerely think we need to know a both levels (if not many levels). We cannot know other people by just knowing "our" namas and rupas. For worldlings, our conceptual apparatus is an ESSENTIAL means of knowledge. ------------------------------------------- > > H: "BTW, if knowing not-self required the delusion that there are not > multiple mindstreams, that would make the Dhamma one sad excuse for a > religion or philosophy or way of life!" > > I'm still hoping you'd clarify, just to discuss this amiably of > course, why the insistence on multiple mindstreams? ----------------------------------------- Howard: If you don't like the term 'mindstream' or 'namarupic stream', by all means substittute 'person'. The point is: There is not just "you". If there were just you, your conversations would be exercises in insanity! It is a separate matter what a so called person is. In fact, it is just a stream of intricately interrelated namas and rupas, forming a recognizable pattern. Only the namas and rupas, interrelated as they are, are real. The viewing of them as a whole is our means of grasping the relational pattern. -------------------------------------- > > Yours, hopefully not too obtusely, > > Scott. > ================== With metta, Howard #62675 From: connie Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:24 pm Subject: Re: too distracted nichiconn "...right view whose characteristic mark is that of (knowledge that) one's deed are one's own, and whose characteristic mark, due to which same, is that of knowledge of things as they really are,..." I do have questions. Does this have to do with knowing about cause and effect? Conditions? Perhaps kamma/vipaka within one's own sphere? dear Scott, << Dhamma is, briefly, "condition" (paccayo). >> so, by kamma condition for one. that sphere? but *kammasakata - spelling? you have shaw's paliwords?: kamati (kam +a) goes; enters into. kaameti (kam + e) craves; desires. kammii (m.) (in cpds.), doing; one who performs or looks after. kamma (nt.) deed; action; job; work saka.ta (m.; nt.) a cart; wagon. Dhp vv1-2 and 'by mind the world is led' (Sn?) anyway, that ownership/heritage. happy haunting, c. *see www.dhammastudy.com/kamma.html #62676 From: connie Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 5:24 pm Subject: Re: too distracted, and renunciation. nichiconn Dear Nina, others for the tree's shade, always back to the foundations :). You quote Perfections: <> In the Meghiya Cy (p579-80) on three*fold pasturage: the support* of a the lovely friend, the guarding* of the senses and <> I look forward to the revised edition, btw, sure to be, as is said <> {Net/Treatise} o, i think that is supposed to be plural. belongings. but the other day, i couldn't read my writing and ended up with "no soul in the broth" for king milander and nagasena. to higher achievements, then. but as Jon said the other day: "Interesting (to me, at least) the emphasis being on a path that leads *out of samsara*, rather than *to nibbana*. I think that is a helpful way to see things. Do we really want to leave here?" [#62441 re Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 93 and Tiika.] Udaana Cy: <> p476 and it is good having lovely help with the doors and all along the way. pp509-11 <>...<> peace, connie "In brief, the destruction of self-love and the development of love for others are the means for the accomplishing of the paaramiis." - Net/Treatise Nina: As to Renunciation, I am just at it with my revision of the Perfections. #62677 From: "pgradinarov" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 12:16 pm Subject: Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited pgradinarov --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > the single-mindstream view is incomplete, and morally problematical. > While the multiple mindstream poses the problem of pre-established intermonadic harmony and composite universal pratiniyama (retribution). Which is as impossible paramarthatah as the chariot of Nagasena; because it can be analyzed into further retributive components and hence cannot be regarded as paramartha-sat. * * * Plamen #62678 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:09 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhas kelvin_lwin Hi Howard, > reason for that. So far, nobody has displayed a sutta in which the Buddha > indicates that this is inevitable. That is what I am looking for, along with why > that is the case. Kel: Pretty sure there is no such sutta and no definitive answer given by Buddha directly. See below for why I think that. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel409.html One was the fact that the Buddha had used the word "bodhisattva" to refer to himself in the period preceding his enlightenment, pushing its scope as far back as his existence in the Tusita heaven before his final descent to earth. The second was the recognition of the multiplicity of Buddhas, which showed the Sakyan Gotama to be, not a unique figure in the cosmic genealogy, but only the most recent member of a series of Buddhas each of whom attains enlightenment, founds a dispensation, and liberates a multitude of beings from the bondage of sa.msaaric suffering. The Diigha Nikaaya mentions by name the six most recent predecessors of the Buddha Gotama (D.ii,2), and predicts as well the advent of Metteyya, the Buddha of the future, who will rekindle the lamp of the true Dhamma after it is extinguished in the dark ages that lie ahead (D.iii,76). These two features jointly implied the existence of "germinal Buddhas" or bodhisattvas toiling to perfect themselves through countless lives in order to reach the summit of supreme enlightenment. The trials and triumphs of the being who became our own Buddha were recorded in the Jaataka tales, relating the bodhisattva's conduct in his previous births. Just when and how the bodhisattva entered upon this course is told in the Buddhava.msa, a late addition to the Sutta Pi.taka, in a story which has become the paradigm for all subsequent developments of the bodhisattva ideal. *** http://ignca.nic.in/jatakint.htm The Introductory chapter of the Jataka Atthakatha presents a list of the twenty-five Buddhas (excluding the Future Buddha: Metteya) ... Sometimes, the tradition also identifies three additional Buddhas, who were born before Dipankara. The names of those Buddhas are Tanhankara, Medhankara and Sarankara. See Buddhavamsa and Jatakatthakatha for details **** http://www.ubakhin.com/uchittin/arimet/INTRODUC.html In the future (ten) Bodhisattas will attain full awakening in the following order: the most honourable (Ariya) Metteyya, (King) Rama, (King) Pasenadi of Kosala, (the Deva) Abhibhu, (the Asura Deva) Dighasoni, (the Brahman) Candani, (the young man) Subha, the Brahman Todeyya, (the elephant) Nalagiri, and (the elephant) Palaleya [from Anagatavamsa] Just as the future Buddha Metteyya became more important for Buddhists as the centuries went by, many of the texts giving infomation about him are fairly late. The Anagatavamsa is said to have been written by the author of the Mohavicchedani, Ashin Kassapa (1160-1230 A.D.)[10] It is very difficult to know how far back information goes when it is given in the Pali commentaries, sub- commentaries, chronicles, and other texts written down after the canon. #62679 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:01 am Subject: eCard from Coffs Harbour (New South Wales) jonoabb Dear All Our flight to Sydney landed at 6:30 am on Monday morning and within an hour or so we were in a car heading for Coffs Harbour, a town/city on the east coast of Australia, north of Sydney. Normally a 6.5 hour drive, it took us closer to 10 hours thanks to stops for meals, swims and rest along the way. Yesterday we had an early start, off to the beach for some swimming and surfing, and by the afternoon we were badly in need of some rest. Today we followed a similar routine, but now feel we are over our jet lag. Good to see all the messages on the list. We hope to start joining in the discussions shortly. Jon #62680 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: too distracted, kamma. nilovg Dear Scott and Connie, saka is own. Kammassakataa ~naa.na: the knowledge that kamma is one's own. -taa makes it a substantivum. A. III, 186. The fact that "we" performed kamma, that we are heirs to kamma. Right view about kamma and vipaaka. You see in the quote: , this points to insight. Kh Sujin explained that from the first stage of insight on, there is this understanding. When we do not know yet what vipaaka is, being ignorant of naama, how can we really understand kamma and vipaaka? Nina. > Op 23-aug-2006, om 2:24 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > "...right view whose characteristic mark is that of (knowledge that) > one's deed are one's own, and whose characteristic mark, due to which > same, is that of knowledge of things as they really are,..." > > I do have questions. Does this have to do with knowing about cause > and effect? Conditions? Perhaps kamma/vipaka within one's own > sphere? #62681 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon nilovg Hi Howard, Just a few thoughts. By being aware of nama and rupa we shall acquire a deeper understanding of what citta is, how it is conditioned. We shall have more understanding of defilements such as conceit or dosa. In this way we can also have a less superficial understanding of other people's minds. We can only be directly aware of 'our own' namas and rupas and this is the way to understand others. Kh Sujin said: be an understanding person. When we understand to what extent our deeds and speech are conditioned we also have more understanding what makes others tick. I quote from Connie: <"In brief, the destruction of self-love and the development of love for others are the means for the accomplishing of the paaramiis." - Net/Treatise> How true. These two items are closely connected. Self love makes it impossible to be openminded to other people's needs. Whatever good deed we do, there are hidden impure motives. By the development of understanding of nama and rupa there will eventually be an improvement, but not to 'my own person'. Nina. Op 23-aug-2006, om 1:04 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Howard: > I sincerely think we need to know a both levels (if not many levels). > We cannot know other people by just knowing "our" namas and rupas. For > worldlings, our conceptual apparatus is an ESSENTIAL means of > knowledge. #62682 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:57 am Subject: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breathing, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, I continue with quotes from Jon: < Howard: ... Mindfulness of breathing as taught in the Anapanasati Sutta and as elucidated upon by many, including, for example, Bhikkus U Silananda and Buddhadasa, is a complete system of meditative practice, but it could also be used in lesser, partial ways, most particularly only for samatha bhavana. Developing awareness of the breath strictly as a concentration on the breath, as a focussing technique, might bring the jhanas, but, by itself, would not fully implement vipassana. The instructions in the Anapanasati Sutta, that title being rendered by Buddhadasa as "Mindfulness while [not 'of'] Breathing", are quite explicit. -------------------------------------------------------- Jon: You (and I think Victor also) see the Anapanasati Sutta as 'instructional' in the sense of laying out a course of practice to be followed by anyone who wishes to develop insight. I would like to try and explain why I do not share that view. As in the case of any sutta, one needs to ask the question, 'What exactly is the message being conveyed here, and to/for whom?'. Nina has already given us a lot of material from the commentarial texts, which to me give a clear answer to those questions. However, as I know you have reservations about the authenticity of the commentaries, I would like to make one or two observations based on the text of the sutta alone, taking the first part of the passage quoted by you below as an example. 1. A closer look at the wording of the text. The structure of the passage is rather complex, so I think it helps to break it down a little. Here’s my breakdown-- (i) Now, on whatever occasion a monk breathing in [or out] long [or short] discerns that he is breathing in [or out] long [or short]; (ii) trains himself to breathe in or out sensitive to the entire body, or calming bodily fabrication: (iii) On that occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. (iv) I tell you, monks, that this -- the in-&-out breath -- is classed as a body among bodies, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. (v) This is how mindfulness of in-&-out breathing is developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination. To me, the words 'on whatever occasion' in par. (a) indicate that what immediately follows is not meant to be ‘instructional’, but to describe a situation that may occur. I see that expression as equivalent to present-day ‘in the case where’. The key to the whole passage seems to be par. (iii), because it is here that the first reference to mindfulness is found. Note, however, that par. (iii) does not tell us how mindfulness is to be developed, but seems to refer to mindfulness arising and taking a specific object, namely the body (i.e., rupas). So my reading of the whole passage would be something like this: If there is mindfulness of rupa as rupa ['the body in and of itself', in par. (iii)] while focussing on the breath [as described in par. (i) and (ii)] then this is mindfulness of breathing for the purposes of satipatthana [par. (iv)]. 2.The preliminary/underlying assumptions In the sutta, the whole passage on mindfulness of breathing, including the part quoted in your post, is preceded by the following: QUOTE "Now how is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination? "There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out..." This sets the context for what follows, including the passage discussed at 1/. above. I would like to focus on some particular aspects of this introductory section. Again, a breakdown may be helpful: (i) There is the case where a monk, (ii) having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, (iii) and sets mindfulness to the fore. (iv) Always mindful, he breathes in…" Again, this is a "case where" situation, not a "do this" passage [par. (i)]. To my reading, it refers to a particular class of monk, namely one who is not only leading the homeless life but is doing so in the manner recommended by the Buddha for those who wish to develop samatha to a high degree [par. (ii)], and in whom both samatha with breath as object and mindfulness/satipatthana are well developed [par. (iii) and (iv)]. Who else could 'set mindfulness to the fore' and be 'always mindful' when breathing? It is to such a person that the rest of the sutta is pitched. Howard, I hope these comments give you some idea as to why I do not read the sutta as a general exhortation to practise mindfulness of breathing as a means of developing satipatthana, but rather as being directed to those with already-developed samatha where breath is the object. (I am of course not saying the sutta has no relevance or application to the rest of us, but simply that it has to be understood in its proper context.) Jon -------- (end quote). ******* Nina. #62683 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:15 am Subject: re letters from Nina 34. nama and rupa. nilovg Dear Plamen, Are you new? Then welcome here. I see that you use Sanskrit terms, what is your background? Your question is very good, it touches on what is essential. ----------- P: I beg to differ on this point, as the reality that knows is the entire man taken as nama-rupa, rather than the nama only. No samjna, no vedana, no samskara, and no vijnana will be able to know anything about the object if there was no eye, ear, or any other material sense which organs (indriyas) are no less knowers than the already mentioned namas. ------- N: The organs are necssary conditions for knowing objects, true. But these organs themselves are rupas, they do not know anything. They are rupa-khandha, not the nama-kkhandhas. There are rupas outside, for instance the rupa of solidity present in what we call floor or table. The same kind of solidity is also present in eyesense. An operation or incision in the eyesense can be performed to improve it. This could never be done to mentality. Nama has no form or shape. It cannot be seen or touched at all. ----------- P: Thus, the answer to the question, Who knows? is not nama, but nama- rupa, the pancaskandhakam we know as Man, "this particular Brahmana" who is the bearer of the burden (Buddha). -------- N: It is only through the development of insight that doubts about nama and rupa are dispelled. Man is real in conventional sense but in the ultimate sense there are only nama and rupa which are entirely different from each other. Learning the truth in the ultimate sense will lead to detachment from the idea of self. There is no other way. I quote from my book Abhidhamma in Daily Life; < hearing is nåma; it has no form or shape, it has no ears. Hearing is different from earsense, but it has earsense as a necessary condition. The nåma which hears experiences sound. Earsense and sound are rúpas, they do not experience anything; they are entirely different from the nåma which hears. If we do not learn that hearing, earsense and sound are realities which are altogether different from each other, we will continue to think that it is self who hears. The Visuddhimagga (XVIII, 34) explains: Furthermore, nåma has no efficient power, it cannot occur by its own efficient power... It does not eat, it does not drink, it does not speak, it does not adopt postures. And rúpa is without efficient power; it cannot occur by its own efficient power. For it has no desire to eat, it has no desire to drink, it has no desire to speak, it has no desire to adopt postures. But rather it is when supported by rúpa that nåma occurs; and it is when supported by nåma that rúpa occurs. When nåma has the desire to eat, the desire to drink, the desire to speak, the desire to adopt a posture, it is rúpa that eats, drinks, speaks and adopts a posture.... Furthermore (XVIII, 36) we read: And just as men depend upon A boat for traversing the sea, So does the mental body need The matter-body for occurrence. And as the boat depends upon The men for traversing the sea, So does the matter-body need The mental body for occurrence. Depending each upon the other The boat and men go on the sea. And so do mind and matter both Depend the one upon the other.> ---------- Nina. #62684 From: connie Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:45 pm Subject: Re: Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' nichiconn dear Howard, Joop, Icaro, Howard: The phrase "no fixed measure" is quite close to "immeasurable"! Connie: just after I read in the Udaana Cy, p899: <> and earlier, p770: <> but you know i entertain this fantasy that we met as torah scribes in earlier times... talk about taking yourself seriously! anyway, awhile back you were pondering about "arising" and if you like to take a look before Sarah cleans house, i've uploaded "zHamlet.html" to groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/. It's a longish section of the udaana cy addressing, in part: <> I think, Joop, you would be interested in it, too & was actually thinking more of you when I was copying: <>. Good to see you yet again, Icaro. Scott has challenged me to read Conditional Relations and for sure, I'll need help when I get there. Alas, I worry about you ;) peace, connie For this is said: Which are those dhammas that provide exiting? The four ariyan paths unincluded (in the triple world) (cp Dhs 583, 992ff; P.ts i 84; Asl 50). #62685 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 4:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna nilovg Hi Matheesha, The jhaanacitta cannot experience a sense object, a ruupa appearing through one of the five sense-doors. It experiences the meditation subject with absorption through the mind-door. During the time of jhaanacittas one may be hit on the head without noticing anything. Did you see Htoo's posts on this subject before? He explained it very clearly. We have to differentiate plane of citta and plane of existence also. when you read: kaama, ruupa aruupa, usually three planes of existence are mentioned. M: Now it is possible to actually 'spread' the rapture in this manner and it is an incredible sensation when your whole body is glowing with rapture. To be able to do that one must have some idea of where the body is. I don't think I can find any more evidence for the matter, and it is really a small matter... ------- N: in between jhaanacittas one may notice such sensations. But if there is clinging to it, there is a hindrance for sure. Rapture or piiti is said to accompany jhaanacitta and then the object is the meditation subject of that stage of jhaana. Nina. Op 23-aug-2006, om 0:30 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > There are no sensual > thoughts (kaama) in rupa and arupa jhana. That is a different matter > to saying that no rupa (sense objects) can be experienced in rupa > jhana. #62686 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, Kel - In a message dated 8/23/06 3:51:59 AM Eastern Daylight Time, kelvin_lwin@... writes: > >reason for that. So far, nobody has displayed a sutta in which the > Buddha > >indicates that this is inevitable. That is what I am looking for, > along with why > >that is the case. > > Kel: Pretty sure there is no such sutta and no definitive answer > given by Buddha directly. See below for why I think that. > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel409 ============================ Thank you for all the useful information, Kel. In particular, I thank you for this link, which I have saved for leisurely perusal. With metta, Howard #62687 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Plamen (and Ken) - In a message dated 8/23/06 1:51:54 AM Eastern Daylight Time, pgradinarov@... writes: > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > > the single-mindstream view is incomplete, and morally problematical. > > > > While the multiple mindstream poses the problem of pre-established > intermonadic harmony and composite universal pratiniyama > (retribution). Which is as impossible paramarthatah as the chariot of > Nagasena; because it can be analyzed into further retributive > components and hence cannot be regarded as paramartha-sat. > > * * * > Plamen > ======================== Of course a multiplicity of mindstreams is not a paramattha dhamma. Even a single mindstream is not. Only the namas and rupas are the paramattha dhammas. The thing is, when properly considering paramattha dhammas as realties: 1) Within a single mindstream they do not appear as isolated phenomena, but in groups, and interrelated in important ways, and 2) There are paramattha dhammas that are not within your mindstream, but in others, and, moreover, there are relations holding among the paramattha dhammas of one mindstream with those of other mindstreams - which is what interaction among "mindstreams" (or so called sentient beings) really comes down to. Ken wrote "I think the best way to understand killing is in terms of akusala cetana-cetasikas that have the power to condition countless moments of very undesirable vipaka." I think that is indeed an important perspective on the matter of murder, but it is a single-mindstream-oriented perspective. It focuses on the effects of evil action on the perpetrator alone. A mindset oriented towards the welfare of all beings, a mindset of metta, is difficult to cultivate as the natural one when one's theoretical views are hard-fixed on a single mindstream. Ken, it is clear, is a very good and caring person, but, IMO, that is so in spite of his theoretical perspective. We dare not ignore the matter of relationship. If we do, we risk a radically skewed and morally dangerous view of reality,which has the potential to lead *away* from selflessness. With metta, Howard #62688 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' upasaka_howard Hi, Connie - In a message dated 8/23/06 6:55:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, connieparker@... writes: > dear Howard, Joop, Icaro, > > Howard: The phrase "no fixed measure" is quite close to "immeasurable"! > > Connie: just after I read in the Udaana Cy, p899: > < the trickling down of mere merit that flows with the cycle, [357] how much > greater (majesty) must there be from the container of the host of infinite > and immeasurable qualities that is the prop for the fruition of merit that > flows with the absence of that cycle, viz. the Buddha Jewel, the Dhamma > Jewel and the Sa"ngha Jewel?>> > and earlier, p770: < and so on that (something) is known as a "jewel", then the foundations of > mindfulness and so forth must, on account of this fact, themselves have > the status of a jewel.>> -------------------------------------- Howard: Interesting! ------------------------------------ > > but you know i entertain this fantasy that we met as torah scribes in > earlier times... talk about taking yourself seriously! ------------------------------------- Howard: LOLOL! ------------------------------------- > > anyway, awhile back you were pondering about "arising" and if you like to > take a look before Sarah cleans house, i've uploaded "zHamlet.html" to > groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/. It's a longish section of > the udaana cy addressing, in part: < non-cessation, and which he declares to be existence, arising? The state > of not having been abandoned, and the capacity of giving rise to fruition > on account of (such) fruition not yet having come into being and on > account of the capacity (to do so) not having been abandoned.>> I think, > Joop, you would be interested in it, too &was actually thinking more of > you when I was copying: < dependent co-arising>>. ------------------------------------------ Howard: Great! Thanks for doing that! :-) ----------------------------------------- > > Good to see you yet again, Icaro. Scott has challenged me to read > Conditional Relations and for sure, I'll need help when I get there. > Alas, I worry about you ;) > > peace, > connie > For this is said: Which are those dhammas that provide exiting? The four > ariyan paths unincluded (in the triple world) (cp Dhs 583, 992ff; P.ts i > 84; Asl 50). > ======================== With metta, Howard #62689 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna matheesha333 Hi Nina, > The jhaanacitta cannot experience a sense object, a ruupa appearing > through one of the five sense-doors. It experiences the meditation > subject with absorption through the mind-door. During the time of > jhaanacittas one may be hit on the head without noticing anything. > Did you see Htoo's posts on this subject before? He explained it very > clearly. M: See below.. >N: We have to differentiate plane of citta and plane of existence also. > when you read: kaama, ruupa aruupa, usually three planes of existence > are mentioned. M: These 3 planes are linked with the states in terms of rebirth. What does the abhidhamma say about the actual experience while in these cittas as compared to the experience while in these planes? Is it different or same? > M: Now it is possible to actually 'spread' the rapture in this > manner and it is an incredible sensation when your whole body is > glowing with rapture. To be able to do that one must have some idea > of where the body is. I don't think I can find any more evidence for > the matter, and it is really a small matter... > ------- > N: in between jhaanacittas one may notice such sensations. But if > there is clinging to it, there is a hindrance for sure. Rapture or > piiti is said to accompany jhaanacitta and then the object is the > meditation subject of that stage of jhaana. > M: Attachment cannot arise within a jhana. The Buddha said not to fear jhana, yet the commentators do not believe what the Buddha says and continue to fear it! Monks were divided amongst those who practiced in the jungles and those who set up their hut near villages and theorised. The sinhalese word for education is adhyapana, which aparently arose from a-dhyana (dhyana being sanscrit for the pali jhana), as in not being able to attain jhana. A little switch of a word here and there and it is possible to instantly demonise jhana. "And, Udayin, there are these five strings of sensuality. Which five? Forms cognizable via the eye — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. Sounds cognizable via the ear... Aromas cognizable via the nose... Flavors cognizable via the tongue... Tactile sensations cognizable via the body — agreeable, pleasing, charming, endearing, fostering desire, enticing. These are the five strings of sensuality. Now, any pleasure & happiness that arises dependent on these five strings of sensuality is called sensual pleasure, a filthy pleasure, a run-of-the-mill pleasure, an ignoble pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is not to be cultivated, not to be developed, not to be pursued, that it is to be feared. "Now, there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thought & evaluation, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, mindful & alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasurable abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html M: You say that in between jhana cittas one may experience sensations. So what does it mean to be able to stay in a jhana for long as one wants (ie-mastery of jhana). You seem to be saying that while in a jhana a person can experience non-jhana cittas as well? (There is this idea of a begining and and ending of a jhanic state - the duration of a jhana is alot longer than one citta.) Why are rupa jhanas called that if they cannot experience rupa? I'm sorry I did not see Htoo's explantion. My understanding is that in rupa jhana one can experience rupa if awareness is directed towards it intentionally. It is not possible to do this in an arupa and the object is always vast. You speak of always experiencing nimittas in jhana citta, but is that any different from normal day to day life? with metta Matheesha > > Op 23-aug-2006, om 0:30 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > > > There are no sensual > > thoughts (kaama) in rupa and arupa jhana. That is a different matter > > to saying that no rupa (sense objects) can be experienced in rupa > > jhana. > #62690 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 10:54 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily lIfe, 57. nilovg Dear friends, The arahat, when he experiences an unpleasant object or a pleasant object through the bodysense, has painful bodily feeling or pleasant bodily feeling arising with the ahetuka vipåkacitta which is body- consciousness, but he has no akusala cittas or kusala cittas after the vipåkacitta; instead he has kiriyacittas (``inoperative cittas''). We read in the Kindred Sayings (IV, Sa.laayatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings about Feeling, Book I, §6) that the Buddha said to the monks: ``The untaught manyfolk, monks, feels feeling that is pleasant, feeling that is painful and feeling that is neutral. The well-taught ariyan disciple, monks, feels the same three feelings. Now herein, monks, what is the distinction, what is the specific feature, what is the difference between the well-taught ariyan disciple and the untaught manyfolk?'' ``For us, lord, things are rooted in the Exalted One...'' `` The untaught manyfolk, monks, being touched by feeling that is painful, weeps and wails, cries aloud, knocks the breast, falls into utter bewilderment. For he feels a twofold feeling, bodily and mental... Touched by that painful feeling he feels repugnance for it. Feeling that repugnance for the painful feeling, the lurking tendency to repugnance fastens on him. Touched by the painful feeling, he delights in pleasant feeling. Why so? The untaught manyfolk, monks, knows of no refuge from painful feeling save sensual pleasure. Delighting in that sensual pleasure, the lurking tendency to sensual pleasure fastens on him...'' Is this not real life? Touched by painful feeling, we long for pleasant feeling; we believe that it is real happiness. We do not see life as it really is: dukkha. We wish to ignore sickness, old age and death, ``lamentation and despair'', and the impermanence of all conditioned realities. We expect happiness in life and when we have to suffer we think that pleasant feeling might cure us of suffering and we cling to it. ******** Nina. #62691 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 10:54 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 38 nilovg Dear friends, We can lead our daily life, talk to people, use all the tools we need, think about conventional realities, but at the same time right understanding of nama-elements and rupa-elements can be developed. The arising and falling away at each moment of a 'whole' such as a cup cannot be directly experienced, since a cup is a concept existing in our thoughts. When we touch a cup hardness is a rupa-element which can be directly experienced, through the body-door. The arising and falling away of hardness can be directly known by right understanding when it is more developed. That kind of understanding which knows impermanence not merely through thinking can effectively lead to detachment from realities. The realization of the arising and falling away of namas and rupas is a later stage of the development of understanding. First there is thinking about the different characteristics of nama and rupa and then one starts to recognize them when they appear. Gradually one learns to be aware of their characteristics one at a time. One should remember that also awareness is a mental phenomenon which arises and falls away and does not belong to a self who could control it. ****** Nina. #62692 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:23 am Subject: Re: Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' icarofranca Hi Connie! ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > but you know i entertain this fantasy that we met as torah scribes >in > earlier times... talk about taking yourself seriously! --------------------------------------------------------------------- You´re always an optimist, Connie! Despite the use of words like "Chesed" or "Mercy","Chokmah" or Wisdom, "Binah" or understanding, the primer Rabbis and scribes who raised the Cabbalistic doctrines - Simeon Bar Yochai, Ari Ben Safed,Leon Abravanel, Moshe Luzzato and others - were well known to keep themselves apart from the "Goym", or no-jewish people. It could be more easy coming back past to chat with Anurudha or Buddhaghosa... who were more sympathetical with others than the usual hebrew Scribe! -------------------------------------------------------------------- > Good to see you yet again, Icaro. Scott has challenged me to read > Conditional Relations and for sure, I'll need help when I get there. > Alas, I worry about you ;) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Your worries about my illusory self are always welcome, Connie! Now I am a usual habituée of the Santa Teresa´s Vihara - perhaps the only true theravada temple in all South America - headed by Bhante Puhulwelle Vipassi, here in Rio de Janeiro. He is a good Cingalese Bhikkhu with lots of good deeds and sound erudition ...I will post a photo as soon as possible! And, as usual, I am now with a new job - Military Engineer at the Rio de Janeiro´s Naval Arsenal... What´s a Kamma!!! Always dealing with weapons!!!!! With Metta, Ã?caro #62693 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 11:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna nilovg Hi Matheesha, you raise a lot of points! I made a little study and perhaps this answers some of your questions. The Commentaries are not afraid of jhaana, it is kusala of a high degree, and sati and pa~n~naa must be strong. They deal with it seriously, because one should not simplify it or think lightly of it. I was wrong when I said that alternately with jhaanacitta there can be the experience of the body. When one is skilled there will not even be bhavangacittas in between jhaanacittas. However, the whole matter is different when one develops both samatha and vipassanaa. Dhammasangani, §160: aloof from sensuousness, aloof from defilements, this is from the Pali: vivicc'eva kaamehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi... Kaama has two meanings: vatthukaama, the basis of sensuousness, and kilesa kaama, the sensuousness of defilements. Vatthukaama are the objects that are the bases on which desire or clinging depends. It also comprises the three classes of planes of existence. Any kind of dhamma other than lokuttara dhammas are vatthu kaama. The Atthasaalini explains (Expositor, p. 269) that ruupasa~n~na (perception of ruupa) can refer to ruupajhaanas. As to nimitta as object of jhaana, this is quite different from daily life. It is the sublimated image of the device one used in samatha such as a kasina, and even breath has a nimitta. It is very subtle. When we read tranquillity of body we have to remember that often body stands for mental body. I did not answer all your questions, I am short of time. Nina. Op 23-aug-2006, om 15:29 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > Why are rupa jhanas called that if they cannot experience rupa? I'm > sorry I did not see Htoo's explantion. My understanding is that in > rupa jhana one can experience rupa if awareness is directed towards > it intentionally. It is not possible to do this in an arupa and the > object is always vast. > > You speak of always experiencing nimittas in jhana citta, but is that > any different from normal day to day life? #62696 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:17 pm Subject: Santa Teresa´s Vihara icarofranca Hi folks! I´ve just posted a new photo here at DSG - the Theravada Temple at Santa Teresa, Rio de Janeiro, headed by the Ven. Puhulwelle Vipassi, an excellent cingalese Theravada Bhikkhu! I am becoming an usual member of its ranks! A true habituée!!! With Metta, Ícaro #62697 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon scottduncan2 Dear Howard, I like this: Howard: "Multiple mindstreams are no less real than the mindstream that is you or is me, to speak conventionally. Actually, 'people' is a darn good word! I used mindstream to get a *little* closer to the sort of speech so loved here! LOL!" Good one! You're a funny mindstream, you are. Or rather, within the mindstream we conventionally know as Howard arises, from time to time, some awfully hilarious dhammas, which then fall away yet are clung to long enough to laugh about and perhaps even giggle about later yet. Howard: "I sincerely think we need to know at both levels (if not many levels). We cannot know other people by just knowing "our" namas and rupas. For worldlings, our conceptual apparatus is an ESSENTIAL means of knowledge." We cannot help but know "other people," can we? Such is ignorance, I guess. What do you mean by "conceptual apparatus?" I wonder if you are referring to the six senses here? Or, more specifically, to the capacity of think with concepts as object as conditioned by a given sense impression. And what "knowledge" are you referring to? Some gradient within the continuum of pa~n~na, perhaps? I keep thinking that there are ultimate realities and although thinking about interactions with people it real, the people are not; and yet, as you say, the apparent fact that we do interact seems impossible to ignore. Is it fair or correct to attempt to bridge the ultimate and the conventional? Is it possible? I think that this is what you might be working on as you ponder things in your own inimitable fashion. Howard: "If you don't like the term 'mindstream' or 'namarupic stream', by all means substitute 'person'. The point is: There is not just "you". If there were just you, your conversations would be exercises in insanity!" This is such a difficult subject to negotiate. I know we are having a conversation. I know that I did laugh out loud earlier due to your hilarity. How does one really make sense of this? Not only is there "not just [me]" there is no "you" either, strictly speaking and in accordance with the anatta principle. And yet, as you note, conversations seem to occur. And of course they do. H: "It is a separate matter what a so called person is. In fact, it is just a stream of intricately interrelated namas and rupas, forming a recognizable pattern. Only the namas and rupas, interrelated as they are, are real. The viewing of them as a whole is our means of grasping the relational pattern." I can't help thinking that "patterns" must be used precisely or even carefully. Doesn't the term sort of connote the existence of a whole where there is none? I'm reminded of your intricate spiral thesis. I'll stop for now. Hopefully there is something here with which to continue the conversation - although there is no conversation ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #62698 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:50 pm Subject: Re: Santa Teresa´s Vihara matheesha333 That's 'Singhalese' icaro! Singh as in lion. :) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "icarofranca" wrote: > > Hi folks! > > I´ve just posted a new photo here at DSG - the Theravada Temple at Santa > Teresa, Rio de Janeiro, headed by the Ven. Puhulwelle Vipassi, an > excellent cingalese Theravada Bhikkhu! > > I am becoming an usual member of its ranks! A true habituée!!! > > With Metta, > > Ícaro > #62699 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 8:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Santa Teresa´s Vihara upasaka_howard Hi, Icaro - In a message dated 8/23/06 3:26:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, icarofranca@... writes: > Hi folks! > > I´ve just posted a new photo here at DSG - the Theravada Temple at Santa > Teresa, Rio de Janeiro, headed by the Ven. Puhulwelle Vipassi, an > excellent cingalese Theravada Bhikkhu! > > I am becoming an usual member of its ranks! A true habituée!!! > > With Metta, > > Ícaro > ======================= It looks lovely! However, there are all those meditation cushions!! Maybe think twice, huh? LOLOL! (Sorry, folks - just couldn't resist! ;-) With metta, Howard #62700 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:18 pm Subject: Re: Santa Teresa´s Vihara icarofranca Hi Mateesha! >--------------------------------------------------------------------- > That's 'Singhalese' icaro! Singh as in lion. :) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh well!!! In my brave and bold effort to raise a good english usage for foreigners I´ve made a so silly blunder!!!!:-) Corrections are welcome, pal! Thanks!!!! With Metta, Ícaro ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > I´ve just posted a new photo here at DSG - the Theravada Temple at > Santa > > Teresa, Rio de Janeiro, headed by the Ven. Puhulwelle Vipassi, an > > excellent cingalese Theravada Bhikkhu! > > #62701 From: "matheesha" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:35 pm Subject: Re: Santa Teresa´s Vihara matheesha333 Hi icaro, Your enthusiasm is contagious! It is amazing that it is only 2500 years later that theravada is reaching south america! How do people react to it??? I wish this little temple the absolute best and hope it has many more spin offs to other places there, in the future! I think you have a lot of work ahead of you! with metta Matheesha #62702 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 1:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Santa Teresa´s Vihara icarofranca Hi Howard! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > It looks lovely! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Indeed! The Santa Teresa Vihara follows up all the good classical norms - lightly far from Rio de Janeiro´s downtown, with few roads and streets around, in a quiet, secure and beautiful place with a lot of trees and pure air! -------------------------------------------------------------------- However, there are all those meditation cushions!! > Maybe think twice, huh? LOLOL! (Sorry, folks - just couldn't resist! ;-) --------------------------------------------------------------------- Ach!!! You won´t resist the MOSQUITOES over there! My white and fatty legs are a true luncheon for them - the last Vesak on there showed to all perplexed and unbelieving world that - definitively! - Mosquitoes aren´t veggies!!!!:-) With Metta, Ícaro #62703 From: "icarofranca" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 2:23 pm Subject: Re: Santa Teresa´s Vihara icarofranca Hi Matheesha! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Your enthusiasm is contagious! It is amazing that it is only 2500 > years later that theravada is reaching south america! How do people > react to it??? -------------------------------------------------------------------- Mainly with curiosity, I would say! We have to face some concurrence of other buddhistic schools, like Zen and Kagyu (this school has got other excellent buddhistic temple at Vargem Grande, VERY AFAR Rio´s downtown), but that´s no problem at all - at Vesak many Kagyu and Zen members come to our dear Vihara to pay hommage to Buddha! And keeping people close on is the best way to cultivate the true Dhamma: as Good James could say, we are inretested on REAL PEOPLE, with real demands and problems! --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I wish this little temple the absolute best and hope it has many > more spin offs to other places there, in the future! I think you > have a lot of work ahead of you! --------------------------------------------------------------------- Oh yes!!! There is now a Theravada study group at Sao Paulo, headed by an excellent layman called Ricardo Sassaki - he called his group "Nalanda". They published by own means some booklets of Bhikku Bodhi and Achaan Sumedho. And about hard work, a university friend of mine was member of the Vihara´s "Head staff" (if one can use this idea in a Vihara...)for many years, and told me much oh his "Labour of Love" about it!!! With Metta, Ícaro #62704 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Aug 22, 2006 10:21 pm Subject: Concentration = Samadhi! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What is the Concentration Link to Awakening? Fixed Focus is the characteristic of the Concentration Link to Awakening (Samadhi-Sambojjhanga). Ceasing of distraction, disturbance, diversion, agitation, mental instability and wavering is the purpose of the quality of Concentration (Samadhi). Incisive certainty is the manifestation of the Concentration Link to Awakening. This stability enables breakthrough to Understanding! Some concentration is present in all consciousness. Training anchoring of attention on only 1 object condenses this focus. The proximate cause of Concentration is Happiness! The resulting effect of Concentration is Knowledge & Vision! Concentration comes in increasing grades of intensity: 1: Momentary concentration with few seconds of one-pointedness. 2: Preparatory concentration of longer yet still unstable quality. 3: Access concentration approaching the 1st jhana absorption. 4: Absorption concentration with fixed mental one-pointedness. Fourfold is the blessing of Concentration: 1: Sublime Happiness here & now through the 4 absorptions. 2: Assured Knowledge & True Vision of things as they really are. 3: Awareness & Clear Comprehension of all transient phenomena. 4: Ceasing of all mental fermentation by absence of clinging. D33 The Buddha once said: What mental fermentations (asava) should be overcome by development? If a Bhikkhu by careful & rational attention develops the Concentration Link to Awakening based on seclusion, based on disillusion, based on ceasing, culminating in renouncing relinquishment, then neither can mental fermentation, nor any fever, nor any discontent ever arise in him. MN2 [i 11] In one whose body is calm and who enjoys a pleasurable happiness the mind becomes concentrated. The Concentration Link to Awakening arises right there. He develops it, and for him repeatedly meditating it goes gradually to the culmination of its development. MN118 [iii 85] Further inspirations on the condensing quality of Concentration: Feeding Concentration http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Concentration.htm What is Concentration http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_Concentration.htm Requisites for Jhana http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Requisites_for_Jhana_Absorption.htm --------- 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, Ceylon. Friendship is the Greatest ... Let there be Calm & Free Bliss !!! <....> #62705 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 12:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 8/23/06 3:58:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > I like this: > > Howard: "Multiple mindstreams are no less real than the mindstream > that is you or is me, to speak conventionally. Actually, 'people' is a > darn good word! I used mindstream to get a *little* closer to the sort > of speech so loved here! LOL!" > > Good one! You're a funny mindstream, you are. ------------------------------------ Howard: LOL! ----------------------------------- Or rather, within the > > mindstream we conventionally know as Howard arises, from time to time, > some awfully hilarious dhammas, which then fall away yet are clung to > long enough to laugh about and perhaps even giggle about later yet. > > Howard: "I sincerely think we need to know at both levels (if not > many levels). We cannot know other people by just knowing "our" namas > and rupas. For worldlings, our conceptual apparatus is an ESSENTIAL > means of knowledge." > > We cannot help but know "other people," can we? Such is ignorance, I > guess. What do you mean by "conceptual apparatus?" I wonder if you > are referring to the six senses here? Or, more specifically, to the > capacity of think with concepts as object as conditioned by a given > sense impression. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I do mean thinking. (And, of course, with concepts.) ----------------------------------------- And what "knowledge" are you referring to? Some> > gradient within the continuum of pa~n~na, perhaps? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: For us, it's pretty much just inferential knowledge based on perceptions. Oh, occasionally there's some wisdom mixed in, but not a helluva lot. ;-) --------------------------------------- I keep thinking> > that there are ultimate realities and although thinking about > interactions with people it real, the people are not; and yet, as you > say, the apparent fact that we do interact seems impossible to ignore. ---------------------------------------- Howard: It is, and I don't think it should be ignored. But we do have to keep in mind though that things are not as they seem. But some day, I do believe, we will "see face to face, and not through a glass ... darkly." ------------------------------------------ > Is it fair or correct to attempt to bridge the ultimate and the > conventional? Is it possible? > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I really do believe that it is possible, and that it is necessary. ----------------------------------------- I think that this is what you might be> > working on as you ponder things in your own inimitable fashion. > > Howard: "If you don't like the term 'mindstream' or 'namarupic > stream', by all means substitute 'person'. The point is: There is not > just "you". If there were just you, your conversations would be > exercises in insanity!" > > This is such a difficult subject to negotiate. I know we are having a > conversation. I know that I did laugh out loud earlier due to your > hilarity. How does one really make sense of this? Not only is there > "not just [me]" there is no "you" either, strictly speaking and in > accordance with the anatta principle. > -------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, that's so. It's really so. But the reality is, yet, something more, it seems to me. As I see it, the relations among dhammas is that something more. Interdependency is critical, as I see it. There is a kind of organic whole. Not a homogeneous unity, and ceratinly not a "thing", but a harmonious interconnectivity with every phenomenon inseparable from a multitude of others, with each being utterly essential, and yet, nothing at all in and of itself. -------------------------------------- And yet, as you note,> > conversations seem to occur. And of course they do. > > H: "It is a separate matter what a so called person is. In fact, it > is just a stream of intricately interrelated namas and rupas, forming > a recognizable pattern. Only the namas and rupas, interrelated as they > are, are real. The viewing of them as a whole is our means of grasping > the relational pattern." > > I can't help thinking that "patterns" must be used precisely or even > carefully. Doesn't the term sort of connote the existence of a whole > where there is none? > ------------------------------------------ Howard: It doesn't have to connote that, but it can, and I admit there is a dan ger in it. You are completely correct, I believe. There is/was a Son (Korean Zen) master, Seung Sahn I think is the name, who would always say "Open mouth already a mistake"! Yet I guess he had to open his mouth to say it! ;-) ---------------------------------------- I'm reminded of your intricate spiral thesis. > > > I'll stop for now. Hopefully there is something here with which to > continue the conversation - although there is no conversation ;-) > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > > ======================== Nice conversation we're not having, Scott! ;-) A pleasure, really. With metta, Howard #62706 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 7:38 pm Subject: Metta Revisited buddhatrue Hi Jon, I know that our thread on metta has stopped, but I want to pick it up again. I have been reading "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" by ASHIN JANAKABHIVAMSA, which really clicks with me because it isn't colored with the KS philosophy. I am grateful that I came across this book because I find many things which are worthwhile. Actually, after reading what I can find on the Internet, I feel that I understand the nature of my mind much better than before. Anyway, I know that you stress knowing the sporadic moments of metta which arise spontaneously throughout the day, and being grateful for them, but I really don't believe that that is sufficient to combat the akusala of the mind. As Janakabhivamsa writes in the introduction to his book: "Taking into consideration the situation of the present day, we find that the first three of four moral virtues called Brahmaviharas, namely, loving-kindness (metta), compassion (karuna), sympathetic joy (mudita) and equanimity (upekkha) appear to have ceased to flourish, to have dried up in the human mind. The element of 'heat' generated by beings through such cessation of virtues incinerates even the virtuous, who now find themselves on the verge of drying up. What Is Meant By the 'Heat Element'? The 'heat element' is nothing but greed (Lobha), hatred (dosa), conceit (mana), jealousy (issa) and avariciousness (macchariya), that leave no room for sympathy or compassion for one another. That 'heat element' causes drying up of virtuous elements not only in the present but also in the coming existences in the round of rebirths (samsara). Therefore people should endeavour in this very life to the best of their ability to extinguish the 'heat element' and seek to reside steeped in the cool elements of loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity which are the four sublime states of living (Brahmaviharas)." http://www.nibbana.com/ I truly believe in this and don't believe that we should be satisfied with periodic moments of loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity, we should seek that these four sublime states to be a CONSTANT, or as close to constant as possible, mental state. To achieve this, one should practice meditation on the brahma viharas to steer the mind in this direction. This is what the Buddha taught and this is what I sincerely believe. I just wanted you to know that though I do see your point of recognizing moments of metta throughout the day, I don't think it is enough. It is like crawling through a thorn bush just to smell a few roses. The entire state of the mind must be changed and akusala must be defeated. Metta, James #62707 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 4:24 pm Subject: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, all - The following has presented itself to me, and I thought I'd pass it on for what it might be worth. It's not a claim to be defended or a proposed definition for adoption by anyone. It is just an expression of what rings true to me: Nibbana is freedom in the sense of no-grasping. There is, already, at this very moment, no self to do any grasping nor anything, anywhere, of any sort, that is graspable. That absence, itself, is freedom. Nibbana is, always was, and always will be. It has never arisen and will never cease. It is neither dhamma nor concept. It is not a thing at all, but it is the ultimate nature of all things. The "grasplessness" of all dhammas is nibbana, an immeasurable openness and emptiness. The direct realization of that ultimate emptiness is bodhi and world-shattering release. With metta, Howard #62708 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Wed Aug 23, 2006 9:07 pm Subject: Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Beautiful, man! That must have been cool when this arose! H: "Nibbana is freedom in the sense of no-grasping. There is, already, at this very moment, no self to do any grasping nor anything, anywhere, of any sort, that is graspable. That absence, itself, is freedom. Nibbana is, always was, and always will be. It has never arisen and will never cease. It is neither dhamma nor concept. It is not a thing at all, but it is the ultimate nature of all things. The "grasplessness" of all dhammas is nibbana, an immeasurable openness and emptiness. The direct realization of that ultimate emptiness is bodhi and world-shattering release." Scott. #62709 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 12:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Letters from Nina, 34 sarahprocter... Hi Plamen (Joop, Kel and others*), Welcome to DSG and thanks for contributing. Would you care to introduce yourself a little and say where you live or a little more about your background in Buddhism? --- pgradinarov wrote: > > --- Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > There are two kinds of phenomena in our life: > the reality which knows or experiences something, nama, > the reality which does not know anything, rupa. .... > Thus, the answer to the question, Who knows? is not nama, but nama-rupa, > the pancaskandhakam we know as Man, "this particular Brahmana" who is > the bearer of the burden (Buddha). .... S: I agree with you that nama cannot know or experience without supporing rupas; for example, seeing consciousness cannot experience its visible object without eye-base as you suggested and also the arising of visible object which can be seen. However, these rupas do not know or experience anything when they arise. Visible object is merely that which is seeable and eye-base is merely the suport for eye-consciousness when the latter arises. If there is no eye-consciousness or seeing, nothing is seen. Like you suggest, the 5 khandhas make up what we think of and refer to as Man, but of these 5 khandhas, 4 are nama khandhas which can experience an object and one is rupa khandha which can never experience anything, Is this a different understanding from the one you are used to? Plamen, I'm travelling now, but will look forward to discussing any points with you further on my return home in a couple of weeks. Meanwhile I'll be reading your comments with interest. Metta, Sarah *p.s Kel, Joop and others -- many thanks for your posts addressed to me which I've been glad to read with all the others as I slowly catch up. Pls be patient as I will be responding to them, but again, probably when we're back in Hong Kong. Joop, thx for the very nice pic - how clever of you to attach a name:-)Looks like a nice group and meeting too. ========== #62710 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher jonoabb Hi Kel --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi Jon (Howard), > > > I agree that in the context of the development of jhaana it is > recommended > > that one proceed by placing oneself under a teacher. However, this > is a > > rather special case, and in any event is not a hard and fast rule. > > Vsm: So if someone with cankers destroyed is available, that is > good If not, then one should take it from a non-returner, a once- > returner, a stream-enterer, an ordinary man who has obtained jhana ... > > Kel: So RobK has pointed out that many arahants don't know jhana > even during Buddha's time. Certainly lower aryans probably don't know > jhana. So then why would one want a teacher who doesnt know jhana if > having a teacher is only useful to learn jhana? Thanks for coming in on this thread. I'm not sure exactly which point of mine your post addresses, but I suspect you are reading the Vsm passage, whici is from III, 64, out of context. Earlier, at III, 28 it says: "28. But mundane concentration should be developed by one who has taken his stand on virtue that is quite purified in the way already stated. He should server any of the ten impediments that he may have. He should then approach the good friend, the giver of a meditation subject, and he should apprehend from among the forty meditation subjects one that suits his own temperament. After that …" So the person he approaches is the person who is to give the meditation subject, i.e., is a teacher of samatha. The subsequent comments about the teacher's 'qualifications' (someone with cankers destroyed, etc) are to be read in that light, i.e., a samatha teacher who is with cankers destroyed, etc. Jon #62711 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nilovg Hi Howard, Nibbaana is a reality, a paramattha dhamma. As to the ultimate nature of all things, this expression could be misleading. Nibbaana is the unconditioned element, I would not call it the ultimate nature of other realities if that is what you mean. Nina. Op 24-aug-2006, om 5:24 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > It is neither dhamma nor concept. It is not a thing at all, > but it is the ultimate nature of all things. #62712 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited ken_aitch Hi Howard, I've got a bit behind in my DSG reading. Sorry for the delay in replying. ----- H: > It is not just kammic consequences for ourself that should serve as the basis for action, but consideration for others. ----- You say not *just* those consequences, but I would ask, can the consequences for ourself form *any part at all* of wholesome consideration? The ultimate results of killing are terrible, but they are not terrible for the person who performs them. Nor, of course, are they terrible for some other person; they are simply terrible in themselves. --------- H: > If an alleged "Dhammic perspective" obscures this, and I do *not* at all assume that it does for you, then a repositioning of view would be in order. --------- That is exactly what I have been saying ever since I joined DSG! But I have been saying it to the formal meditators. :-) Ultimately, there is no self, there are only dhammas. To be more specific, there are only the presently arisen dhammas. That is our right understanding. Any desire to cause better dhammas to arise in the future must surely indicate (1) a lack of right understanding and (2) a belief in something more than just dhammas. What say you? Ken H #62713 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna nilovg Hi Matheesha, I noticed the translation you used which may be misleading. It seems there is emphasis on bodily pleasure and this is not the aim of jhaana. When people find this a great experience it seems to me more like yogha, not jhaana. There is nothing wrong with yogha, it can help disturbed people. But jhaana is different, its aim is detachment from sense impressions. From the objects that are the basis of sensuality. I read: We should note: born of aloofness. He develops samatha and vipassanaa, and this is also stated by the Commentary. You mentioned the masteries. Very true, he should emerge from jhaana at any time he chooses, so that he can be mindful and develop all the stages of insight, while the objects are naama and ruupa. He overcomes likes and dislikes, and this is through insight. You quote from ATI: From another transl ( sister Upalavanna, Rob K's web); I did not see of pleasure that it is not to be feared. It seems the translator emphasizes bodily pleasure. -------- You write; These 3 planes are linked with the states in terms of rebirth. What does the abhidhamma say about the actual experience while in these cittas as compared to the experience while in these planes? Is it different or same? ------- Cittas of the sense-sphere (kaamaavacara cittas) can also arise in ruupa brahma planes of existence and in aruupa-brahmaplanes of existence, for example lobha-muulacittas, cittas rooted in attachment. Not dosa-muulacittas, there are no conditions for aversion while in those planes. Nina. Op 23-aug-2006, om 15:29 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > With the fading of rapture, he remains in equanimity, > mindful & alert, and physically sensitive of pleasure. #62714 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:02 am Subject: kaang krajan gazita2002 Hello all, esp Nina K.K. is a place in Thailand that is quiet, peaceful and has lots of fresh air, not like Bangkok! This morning over breakfast, we {T.A.Sujin and I} talked about how powerful panna must become to see more and more the subtlness of lobha, until lobha is finally eradicated at arahat stage. Now, lobha is very coarse and clings to anything at all when it arises, because that's it's very nature - to cling - just like the monkey lime mentioned in one of the suttas - sorry dont kknow which one. we also talked about the Buddha. T.A. pointed out that when we pay our respects to the Sammasumbuddho that we are paying respect to great, in fact perfect, wisdom, compassion and purity. Because as we all know, dont we, there is in reality no Buddha! I told her about a dream I had last nite, where I kept trying to cover my feet because every few seconds they were markedly chilled. It was in fact the fan in my room that was oscillating every few seconds over my feet. We laughed about it, but she remarked that it was kaya-vinnana followed by thinking/dreaming. It showed me how sense object impinging on one of the sense doors can be followed by thinking and making up a big story. Makes me think that there is no difference between thinking and dreaming. I guess until panna penetrates the dream state we continue to 'dream on'. Have just re-read part of the Adze Handle sutta which talks about how the carpenter sees his thumb and finger prints but does not know how much is worn away today, how much yesterday, how much at other times. 'but he knows the wearing away of it just by its wearing away'. This is how it is for the monk/or whoever who is developing insight, who wont know how much of the asavas is worn away today, how muich yesterday or at other times, but he/she knows the wearing away of them just by their wearing away. It is Panna that knows this, not a being. will cntinue when I get the opportunity, Patience, courage and good cheer, azita #62715 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 2:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/24/06 4:39:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > Nibbaana is a reality, a paramattha dhamma. > As to the ultimate nature of all things, this expression could be > misleading. > Nibbaana is the unconditioned element, I would not call it the > ultimate nature of other realities if that is what you mean. > Nina. > ======================== I expected this reply. Some insights can't be properly cast using words. But they also can't be quashed by words. I don't care whether nibbana is called a "dhamma" or not. It is fine with me if it is so called, though I am certain that if we should think that by so calling it we have come any closer to understanding it we are quite mistaken. It cannot be captured by the term. It can't be captured by 'grasplessness' either, though it can be pointed to by that. If nibbana is a "dhamma", it is radically diffferent from all other dhammas. In any case, nibbana is not delimitable by any "definition", and it is not encompassable by any system of thought, including Abhidhamma. Nibbana is a reality - with that I agree. With metta, Howard #62716 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 2:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/24/06 5:00:19 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > I've got a bit behind in my DSG reading. Sorry for the delay in replying. > > ----- > H: >It is not just kammic consequences for ourself that should serve > as the basis for action, but consideration for others. > ----- > > You say not *just* those consequences, but I would ask, can the > consequences for ourself form *any part at all* of wholesome > consideration? > > The ultimate results of killing are terrible, but they are not > terrible for the person who performs them. Nor, of course, are they > terrible for some other person; they are simply terrible in themselves. > > --------- > H: >If an alleged "Dhammic perspective" obscures this, and I do *not* > at all assume that it does for you, then a repositioning of view would > be in order. > --------- > > That is exactly what I have been saying ever since I joined DSG! But > I have been saying it to the formal meditators. :-) Ultimately, there > is no self, there are only dhammas. To be more specific, there are > only the presently arisen dhammas. That is our right understanding. > Any desire to cause better dhammas to arise in the future must surely > indicate (1) a lack of right understanding and (2) a belief in > something more than just dhammas. > > What say you? -------------------------------------- Howard: I say nothing, but I ask a couple things (for your consideration): What have you seen to be the nature of these dhammas. What direct understanding of them do you have? If none, do you expect that to change? And if so, why? -------------------------------------- > > Ken H > ==================== With metta, Howard #62717 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 6:17 am Subject: Rob's forum on MIndfulness of Breathing, no 8. nilovg QUOTE (The Four Frames of Reference) "[1] Now, on whatever occasion a monk breathing in long discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, discerns that he is breathing out long; or breathing in short, discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, discerns that he is breathing out short; trains himself to breathe in... &... out sensitive to the entire body; trains himself to breathe in... &... out calming bodily fabrication: On that occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- subduing greed & distress with reference to the world. I tell you, monks, that this -- the in-&-out breath -- is classed as a body among bodies, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself -- ardent, alert, & mindful -- putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. "[2] On whatever occasion a monk trains himself ... "[3] On whatever occasion a monk trains himself ... "[4] On whatever occasion a monk trains himself ... "This is how mindfulness of in-&-out breathing is developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination ..." ***************************************************** http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/15977 Jonathan Abbott writes: In your post below you ask: "What do you, or anyone else, see as the 'point' of mindfulness of in and out breathing, both in practice and according to the suttas?" This is an extremely complex matter, but in deference to your preferred style I'll try to give an answer in as short a space as possible ;-)). Mindfulness/awareness refers to moments of consciousness that directly experience a dhamma. The direct experience of a dhamma, is the basis for the panna (wisdom, insight) that sees the dhamma as it truly is, that sees the characteristics of the dhamma. It is by seeing dhammas as they truly are that attachment to them and to existence is eventually eradicated. In the context of 'mindfulness of breathing', this means mindfulness of one of the dhammas that we take for breathing, and the development of insight that arises based on that mindfulness. That insight is, of course, vipassana. However, 'mindfulness of breathing' can also refer to breath as an object of samatha development, and so it can also mean jhana based on breath as object. Now, jhana in and of itself is not something that leads to insight/enlightenment, nor is it even something that makes insight easier or more likely to occur. Yes, it is kusala accompanied by panna, but the panna is not the panna that sees the true nature of dhammas. While vipassana and samatha both involve the development of panna, it is panna of different levels and they lead to different goals. The 'point' of the sutta on mindfulness of in and out breathing is to illustrate how jhana with breath as object can be a basis for insight. In other words, how those who are advanced in the development of *both* samatha and vipassana can attain to enlightenment that is based on jhana. This is my understanding of the oft-repeated passage in the sutta that: QUOTE "Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. Mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, brings the four frames of reference to their culmination." Note the wording here, "brings the four frames of reference [four arousings of mindfulness] to their culmination". To bring something to its culmination is not the same as developing it from scratch, and I see the emphasis in the sutta as being very much on describing the final stages of development for those ready to achieve enlightenment in that very lifetime. Hence the description of the (hypothetical) monk who has already developed samatha (and satipatthana) to a high degree. I hope this is not too confusing. Jon (end quote) ******** Nina. #62718 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 6:22 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 96 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 96. Presence-condition, atthi-paccaya. Intro: With regard to presence-condition, atthi-paccaya, the conditioning dhamma consolidates the conditioned dhamma by its presence.The dhamma which conditions another dhamma in this way can arise at the same time as the conditioned dhamma, it can arise prior to it or after it. Conascent presence-condition pertains to nåma which conditions another nåma, to nåma which conditions rúpa, and to rúpa which conditions another rúpa. The same conditioning dhammas and conditioned dhammas which are related by conascence-condition, sahajåta-paccaya, are also related by conascent presence-condition. The conascent presence-condition seems to be identical with conascence-condition. However, the teaching of conascent presence- condition reminds us of the fact that the reality which conditions another reality which has arisen at the same time does so while it is still present and has not fallen away yet. As regards prenascent presence-condition, this pertains to the rúpas which are bases, vatthus, and the rúpas which are the sense objects and which condition the citta by way of object-condition. Presence-condition can also be postnascent. Citta consolidates rúpas of the body which have previously arisen but have not fallen away yet by way of postnascence-condition and by way of postnascent presence-condition. The teaching of postnascent presence-condition shows us that citta and the rúpas of the body it consolidates are still present to each other ---------- Text Vis.: 96. (21) A state that, by means of existingness characterized by presence, assists a like state by consolidating it, is a 'presence condition'. A sevenfold summary is laid down for it according to immaterial aggregates, great primaries, mentality-materiality, consciousness and consciousness-concomitants, great primaries, bases, and physical [heart] basis, according as it is said: 'The four immaterial aggregates are a condition, as presence condition, for each other. ------- N: The Tiika emphasizes with regard to presence-condition, that the conditioning dhammas support the conditioned dhammas in consolidating them (upatthambhakattena) by way of being present. The characteristic of presence, in Pali paccuppannalakkha.na, mentioned by the Tiika, implies that the dhammas involved in this condition have arisen, upanna. They have arisen and are present to them. The term atthi in atthi-paccaya means: it is, it exists. But the dhammas that condition other dhammas by presence-condition are only for an extremely short time present to them, and then they fall away. The Visuddhimagga text follows at first the Pa.t.thaana in the sevenfold summary. As we shall see, there is also a thirteenfold summary dealt with in the next section. We read first about the four naama-khandhas that consolidate each other by way of presence-condition. Citta and its accompanying cetasikas that arise together consolidate each other. They are conascent and condition each other by way of conascent presence- condition. ----------- Text Vis.: The four great primaries ... are ... for each other. ------ N: The four Great Elements of solidity, cohesion, temperature and motion always arise together in each group of ruupa. They consolidate each other while they are present to each other. They condition one another by conascent presence-condition. ---------- Text Vis.: At the time of descent into the womb mentality and materiality [are a condition, as presence condition,] for each other. _____ N: At the moment of rebirth, kamma produces the rebirth-consciousness and also ruupa. They consolidate one another by being present to each other. ---------- Tetx Vis.: States of consciousness and consciousness-concomitants are... for the kinds of materiality originated by consciousness. -------- N: Citta which produces rúpa is conascence-condition and also conascent presence-condition for that rúpa. Text Vis.: The four great primaries are ... for derived materiality. -------- N: The four great Elements are conascent presence-condition for the "derived rúpas'' (the rúpas other than the four great Elements). The four great Elements arise with all groups of ruupa as we have seen. They condition the derived ruupas they arise together with by consolidating them while they are still present. Visible object is a derived ruupa (upaadaa ruupa) and this arises together with the four great Elements which consolidate it by presence-condition. It could not arise without them. -------------- Text Vis.: The eye base is ... for eye-consciousness element [and for the states associated therewith]. The [ear base ... nose base... tongue base ...] body base is ... for the body-consciousness element. The visible-data base [is ... for the eye-consciousness element ... The sound base ... odour base ... the flavour base ...] tangible- database is a condition, as presence condition, for the mind element and for the states associated therewith. The materiality with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur is a condition, as presence condition, for the mind element, for the mind-consciousness element, and for the states associated therewith' (P.tn.1,6). -------- N: The rúpas which are bases and objects condition citta after having arisen prior to that citta. As to the words ‘ The materiality with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur’, this refers to the heart-base which is the physical base for all cittas other than the sense-cognitions of seeing etc. The physical bases and objects condition the relevant cittas after they have arisen previously, they are prenascent. They are not only prenascence-condition for these cittas, but also prenascent presence- condition. If we merely think of a prenascent condition we may not know whether it is still present when it conditions another reality. The teaching of prenascent presence-condition shows us that, although the conditioning reality has arisen previously, it is still present when it conditions another reality. In this section only the conascent and prenascent presence-conditons are dealt with, but the following section will deal with the postnascent presence-condition. -------------- Conclusion: Presence-condition occurs at this moment. Visible object is a derived ruupa that is conditioned by the four great Elements by way of conascent presence-condition, it is consolidated and supported by them. Visible object itself conditions seeing by way of prenascent presence-condition. It has arisen before seeing, but when it is experienced by seeing it is still present; it has not fallen away since ruupa lasts longer than citta. The other cittas of the eyedoor process also experience visible object which is still present. Seeing arises at the eyebase. The eye-base is a derived ruupa that is conditioned by the four great Elements by way of conascent pre-sence- condition. The eye-base itself conditions seeing by way of prenascent presence-condition. There is no self who can cause eyebase and visible object to arise at the right moment, prior to seeing, and to condition seeing while they are still present. The realities involved in presence-condition, the conditioning dhammas and the conditioned dhammas, have to fall away, they are impermanent. Learning about the conditions for base and object which in their turn condition seeing and the other sense-cognitions helps us to understand the truth of anattå, non-self. ************ Nina. #62719 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 6:34 am Subject: Abhidhamma in Daily LIfe 58 nilovg Dear friends, In the Buddha's teaching of the ``Dependent Origination'' it is said that feeling conditions craving. Not only pleasant feeling and indifferent feeling condition craving, but also unpleasant feeling conditions craving, since one wishes to be liberated from unpleasant feeling (Visuddhimagga, XVII, 238). Furthermore, we read in the sutta: ... If he feels feeling that is pleasant, he feels it as one in bondage. If he feels feeling that is painful, he feels it as one in bondage. If he feels feeling that is neutral, he feels it as one in bondage. This untaught manyfolk, monks, is called `in bondage to birth, death, sorrow and grief, woe, lamentation and despair. He is in bondage to dukkha'. So I declare. But, monks, the well-taught ariyan disciple, when touched by painful feeling, weeps not, wails not, cries not aloud, knocks not the breast, falls not into utter bewilderment. He feels but one feeling, the bodily, not the mental... If he feels a feeling that is pleasant, he feels it as one freed from bondage. If he feels a feeling that is painful, he feels it as one that is freed from bondage. If he feels a neutral feeling, he feels it as one that is freed from bondage. This well-taught ariyan disciple, monks, is called `freed from the bondage of birth, old age, from sorrow and grief, from woe, lamentation and despair, freed from the bondage of dukkha.' So I declare...'' Feelings arise because of conditions and fall away again. They are impermanent and they should not be taken for self. ******* Nina #62720 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 6:36 am Subject: Letters from Nina, 39 nilovg Dear friends, We cannot expect there to be many moments of awareness or mindfulness in the beginning, but at the moment there is awareness of a reality right understanding of that characteristic of reality can develop. My husband and I had been invited to a restaurant where it was very cold. I had aversion towards the cold and I was inclined to say something about it. But I found that this is impatience and lack of consideration for our host and hostess. I considered that the namas and rupas which arise are beyond control. They arise when there are conditions for their arising. We are always inclined to think that a self or person can be master of nama and rupa. Sometimes it seems that we can, but in reality it is not so. The experience of bodily ease or pain belongs to the eight 'worldly conditions' we are not master of. However, also when we do not feel well or when we are cold, awareness of realities can arise. There can be awareness of cold so that it can be known as it is: only a rupa which can be experienced through the bodysense. Then there is at that moment no notion of 'my feet' or 'the cold draught', which are not realities in the absolute sense but concepts we can think of. After a moment of mindfulness of a reality there will be moments of thinking of concepts. Thinking is real, it arises because there are conditions for its arising. There can be awareness of thinking so that it can be known as a kind of nama. When we remember the disadvantages of the eight 'worldly conditions' we can be urged to develop right understanding of realities. This will help us most of all to be more patient amidst the vicissitudes of life. ******* NIna. #62721 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 2:50 am Subject: Postnascence and Different Cittas Re: [dsg] Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 96 and Tiika. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/24/06 9:28:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@..., in quoting Buddhaghosa, writes: > Presence-condition can also be postnascent. Citta consolidates rúpas > of the body > which have previously arisen but have not fallen away yet by way of > postnascence-condition and by way of postnascent presence-condition. The > teaching of postnascent presence-condition shows us that citta and > the rúpas of > the body it consolidates are still present to each other > ========================= Because a rupa has not yet fallen away, it is yet available for conditioning. What does that conditioning amount to? In what manner is a not-yet-ceased rupa affected by the citta? Does that refer merely to the knowing of the rupa? I think so. Is that right? In any case, the postnascent conditioning is a present-time event, right? When the rupa first arose "one citta" was aware of it, and now it is "another citta" being aware of it, but the knowing is always "in the present" and not something going backwards in time, right? One question remaining: If the later citta is a knowing of the very same rupa previously known, why is this later citta considered different from the one which knew the rupa at the time it first appeared? If the answer is that now there are different cetasikas present, why does that make it a different citta? In what way has the citta changed? One would have to say it has not - so long as one considers a citta to be a separate thing. But if the citta is considered to be inseparable [I don't mean indistinguishable] from its object and from the accompanying cetasikas - if they are considered to be tied together and fundamentally interdependent, then that makes sense. (The essential importance of relations.) With metta, Howard #62722 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 7:48 am Subject: re Vis. 96, postnascence-condition. nilovg Hi Howard, H: Because a rupa has not yet fallen away, it is yet available for conditioning. What does that conditioning amount to? In what manner is a not-yet-ceased rupa affected by the citta? ------- N: I quote what I wrote before: We are inclined to take the body for self, but it is actually the four principal ruupas (the four great elements) and derived ruupas that originate from kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. After they have arisen and are still present for an extremely short moment, they are consolidated throughout our life by each citta that arises, except the rebirth-consciousness,. Seeing is dependent on eyesense, a ruupa that is produced by kamma. But, this ruupa, while it is still present, is consolidated by the citta arising afterwards by way of postnascence, otherwise eyesense could not perform its function. The cittas which are the sense-cognitions, such as seeing or hearing, do not produce ruupas themselves, but they consolidate the ruupas that have arisen just before. Thus, every citta arising at this moment, be it kusala citta, akusala citta, vipaakacitta or kiriyacitta, is supporting the ruupas of the body that have arisen just before and are still present, otherwise life could not continue. > ------- H: Does that refer merely to the knowing of the rupa? I think so. Is that right? ----- N: No. Cittas experience their relevant objects, and they also consolidate the groups of ruupa of the body produced by kamma, citta, temperature and nutrition. ------------ H: In any case, the postnascent conditioning is a present-time event, right? ------- N: Yes, they are present to each other. The pre-arisen ruupa has not fallen away yet when this condition operates. ------------ H: When the rupa first arose "one citta" was aware of it, and now it is "another citta" being aware of it, but the knowing is always "in the present" and not something going backwards in time, right? -------- N: It seems that your take is that each rupa that arises is known but this is not so. Countless rupas arise and are not known; how could all the ruupas all over the body be known? But they are essential for the continuation of life. Is the eyebase, that is eyesense, known? It can be known, but for us now? Still, it is the base for seeing. Eyesense that has arisen is consolidated by cittas arising after eyebase, but these need not know it. Eyebase in its turn supports and consolidates seeing. ------- H: One question remaining: If the later citta is a knowing of the very same rupa previously known, why is this later citta considered different from the one which knew the rupa at the time it first appeared? ------- N: Let us use an example, that will be easier. Take visible object, and this is known by a series of cittas in the eye-door process. First there is the eye-door adverting-consciousness, not yet seeing. Then it is succeeded by seeing and this only sees. It is accompanied by the minimum amount of cetasikas, seven. It is succeeded by another vipaakacitta which receives visible object. This citta does not see, but it still experiences visible object. It is succeeded by other cittas and then javanacittas arise, which are kusala cittas or akusala cittas. These are different cittas accompanied by different cetasikas. ----------- H: If the answer is that now there are different cetasikas present, why does that make it a different citta? In what way has the citta changed? ------ N: Cittas are different as regards jaati: kusala, akusala kiriya (inoperative) or vipaaka. One citta adverts to the object through one of the six doorways, another one is sense-cognition (seeing, etc.) another one is reacting to the object in a wholesome or unwholesome way. Citta changes and it changes more quickly then ruupa. ------ H: One would have to say it has not - so long as one considers a citta to be a separate thing. But if the citta is considered to be inseparable [I don't mean indistinguishable] from its object and from the accompanying cetasikas - if they are considered to be tied together and fundamentally interdependent, then that makes sense. (The essential importance of relations.) ------- N: Citta is closely associated with the accompanying cetasikas, but it falls away and then another citta arises with a different combination of cetasikas. Citta is not inseparable from the object, I would not use that expression. In the case of visible object different cittas experience one and the same object. When we speak of interdependence we have to study in what ways, this is necessary for precision. ******* Nina #62723 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nilovg Hi Howard, yes, it helps. It helps to know that there are four paramattha dhammas, citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbaana. Knowing that it is a reality indicates that it is not an abstraction. What is reality can be known. It is reachable, because there is a Path. This helps our confidence, saddhaa. Paramattha dhamma, this is not vague and abstract. Nina. Op 24-aug-2006, om 15:00 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't care whether nibbana is called a "dhamma" or not. It is fine > with me if it is so called, though I am certain that if we should > think that by > so calling it we have come any closer to understanding it we are quite > mistaken. #62724 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited nilovg Hi Howard, very good for consideration for all of us! Op 24-aug-2006, om 15:08 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Howard: > I say nothing, but I ask a couple things (for your consideration): > What have you seen to be the nature of these dhammas. -------------- N: On the level of intellectual understanding: they arise unexpectantly, no control whether there is seeing now, or hearing, or sudden aversion about something. A lot of thinking and this is also beyond control. We think on and on. A melody of a cell phone, and what associations this evokes, unbelievable. Sa~n~naa does its work. Beyond control. actually we tried it out, it used to awaken us in the middle of the night when my father had fallen out of bed! ----------- > H: What direct understanding > of them do you have? ---------- N: None. (good to realize!). ---------- > H:If none, do you expect that to change? And if so, why? ----------- N: Yes, I have confidence that listening and considering, and not to forget the development of all the paramis (all of them), is the right way that gradually leads to understanding of the present dhamma. It does so because of its own conditions (not because I direct it). Lovely questions, Howard. I quote some of Kh Sujin's book on the Perfection of pa~n~naa: < The person who has developed pa~n~naa can, when he listens to the Dhamma and also understands the characteristics of the dhammas that are appearing, realize at that moment the arising and falling away of realities. He is skilful in the åyatanas, such as seeing and what appears through the eyesense at this very moment. Some people wonder how, in the development of satipa.t.thåna, one can at the moment of seeing understand the characteristics of the realities that are appearing. There is only one way: when someone has listened to the Dhamma he can be mindful so that he will understand the characteristic of seeing that sees at this very moment, or the characteristics of the other dhammas that are appearing at this moment. At the moment of understanding realities, satipa.t.thåna is being developed. Sati is mindful of the characteristic of the reality which experiences or knows, such as seeing, and pa~n~naa is able to understand that characteristic, it realizes that it is only a reality which is not self, not a being, not a person. At whatever moment seeing, hearing, the other sense-cognitions or thinking present themselves, the åyatanas can be understood: the eye and visible object, the ear and sound, the other sense-bases and sense objects, thinking and dhammas (dhammaayatanas). At those moments pa~n~naa begins to develop by knowing the characteristics of realities which are appearing. We can use the word satipa.t.thåna for this process, but what matters above all is knowing how pa~n~naa is to be developed: when seeing appears, one begins to understand the characteristic of seeing, when hearing appears, one begins to understand the characteristic of hearing, and so on for the other sense-cognitions and for thinking. The perfection of energy, viriya, should arise together with pa~n~naa, otherwise one will make an effort for something else, different from the right effort to understand the characteristics of realities, just as they naturally arise in daily life.> Thus, when there is hearing now there can be a beginning of understanding of that characteristic. It is good to use the word 'beginning'. ***** Nina. #62725 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] kaang krajan nilovg Dear Azita, Thank you for your report, looking forward to the next ones. Have a lovely time. Nina. Op 24-aug-2006, om 14:02 heeft gazita2002 het volgende geschreven: > This morning over breakfast, we {T.A.Sujin and I} talked about how > powerful panna must become to see more and more the subtlness of > lobha, until lobha is finally eradicated at arahat stage. > Now, lobha is very coarse and clings to anything at all when it > arises, because that's it's very nature - to cling #62726 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:05 am Subject: Nama and rupa pgradinarov Dear Nina, Thank you for the welcoming words, I really enjoy being a member of this very active online sangha. Yes, I use Sanskrit because of my background - Buddhist and Indian Logic, plus lot of translation work in the classical Sanskrit commentaries of Yoga-darsana. And that's why I am here - to solve some logical queries and to learn more about the Theravada stages of samapatti, which in Yoga-darsana is identical with samadhi and has eight forms: savitarka & nirvitarka, savicara & nirvicara, sananda & nirananda, and finally sasmita and nirasmita-samapatti. As for the present topic of nama and rupa, yes, they are interdependent - and it is their interdependence that makes them not that universal and paramarthata as we would like them to be. In fact they are thus limited to the anthropological unity known as Man. Dharmas are all what we are... The problem is that We are not All that is. What about matter outside us and prior to our existing in this Universe? In what way is the keybord you are typing your brilliant and enlightening letters on related to my namas. There is no way for it to depend on my namas, or even on yours - unless you decide to break it into pieces... Or, to take the strong form of the question. How is it that the atoms and elementary particles after the Big Bang depend on our nama? Are Buddhists to follow the weird logic of the Anthropic Cosmological Principle and make the fundamental constants teleologically depend on our future existence in the Universe? And the epistemological question: What are the rupas - energies of matter existing independently of our mind, or just raw data - which is the only way they can be interpreted as interdependent with namas? If they are raw data, then they are sense-data, kind of indefinite "perceptions" - hence, namas that have not yet been identified as definite perceptions. On the other hand, if they were raw data, it would be impossible to say, The eyes see, The ears hear, The nose smells, The tongue tastes, The skin senses the touches. For raw data are raw data, they cannot sense anything. In the same way as perceptions cannot perceive anything, feelings cannot feel anything, intentions cannot intend anything, cognitions cannot cognize anything. It is something else that sees, hears, smells, tastes, touches, perceives, feels, intends, and knows - and this Else is the Man referred to as Pancaskandhakam. Yes, it is empty and it is anatta, but so are the skandhas, and even the paramartha-dharmas, so this is not an argument against its existence. It is true that we can analyse it away to reach the higher things (paramarthas) as prescribed by Vasubandhu (probably not without reference to the teachings of the Elders) - that's why this Bharahara (the Bearer of the burden) is called Pancaskandhakam. But let us not stop the reductive analysis down at the level of paramartha-dharmas, and see whether they can stand the analysis of self-substantiality. They cannot, because they are not the bearers of themselves. A dharma being the dharmin of itself is a logical nonsense and such claim drives us into petitio principii. So any dharma must have a dharmin different from itself in which it should reside, and this Dharmin is You and Me, the individual pancaskandhaka. It is we that do all the things listed above, not our ultimate properties (dharmas). Best reagrds, Plamen #62727 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 9:52 am Subject: Namarupic Stream pgradinarov How is that possible? The mindstream by definition contains only the "mind"-elements, or to be precise, the elements related to mind; because it is clear that the elements not related to citta (or dissociated from citta) would not form part of the stream of citta. TIA, Plamen #62728 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 12:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited pgradinarov --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Of course a multiplicity of mindstreams is not a paramattha dhamma. Even a single mindstream is not. > Dear Howard, Please provide a definition of mindstream and the closest paribhasika term used for it in Theravada. Thank you, Plamen #62729 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 9:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna pgradinarov --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > jhaanas of the realm of attenuated matter > Is that by chance the suksma-bhuta as opposed to the sthula-bhuta, and second, is there any technical division or differentiation between vitarka and vicara as having respectively sthula- and suksma-bhuta for their meditation-alambana? Thank you, Plamen #62730 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Letters from Nina, 34 pgradinarov --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Would you care to introduce yourself a little and say where you live or a little more about your background in Buddhism? > Dear Sarah, Here is my short presentation http://www.indopedia.org/Plamen_Gradinarov.html Some of you probably know me as Imago from e-Sangha. I have just posted a detailed reply to Nina's answer, so please excuse me for not repeating it here. Best regards, Plamen #62731 From: "Scott Duncan" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 1:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Letters from Nina, 34 scottduncan2 P: "Some of you probably know me as Imago from e-Sangha." Wow, man. Hi "Imago," good to see you here. Scott. #62732 From: "kelvin_lwin" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 2:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher kelvin_lwin Hi Jon, My basic point is that you're drawing artificial contexts where there is none. > mine your post addresses, but I suspect you are reading the Vsm passage, > whici is from III, 64, out of context. Earlier, at III, 28 it says: > > "28. But mundane concentration should be developed by one who has > taken his stand on virtue that is quite purified in the way already > stated. He should server any of the ten impediments that he may > have. He should then approach the good friend, the giver of a > meditation subject, and he should apprehend from among the forty > meditation subjects one that suits his own temperament. After that > …" > > So the person he approaches is the person who is to give the meditation > subject, i.e., is a teacher of samatha. The subsequent comments about the > teacher's 'qualifications' (someone with cankers destroyed, etc) are to be > read in that light, i.e., a samatha teacher who is with cankers destroyed, > etc. From same section: 54: The inhabitants of the vollage had a large pavilion built at the door of his dwelling, and they came daily to hear the Dhamma. Explaining by day what had been repeated by night, the Elder [Dhammarakkhita] eventually completed the instruction. Then he sat down on the mat on the ground before the Elder Abhaya and said, 'Friend, explain a meditation subject to me'. -- 'What are you saying, venerable sir, have I not heard it all from you? What can I explain to you that you do not already know"' The senior elder said, 'This path is different for one who has actually travelled by it'. Kel: I suppose you'll tell me that Elder Abhaya was a Sotapanna with jhanas. - Kel #62733 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] re Vis. 96, postnascence-condition. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 8/24/06 11:14:10 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Hi Howard, > H: Because a rupa has not yet fallen away, it is yet available for > conditioning. What does that conditioning amount to? In what manner is a > not-yet-ceased rupa affected by the citta? > ------- > N: I quote what I wrote before: > We are inclined to take the body for self, but it is actually the > four principal ruupas (the four great elements) and derived ruupas > that originate from kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. After > they have arisen and are still present for an extremely short moment, > they are consolidated throughout our life by each citta that arises, > except the rebirth-consciousness,. > Seeing is dependent on eyesense, a ruupa that is produced by kamma. > But, this ruupa, while it is still present, is consolidated by the > citta arising afterwards by way of postnascence, otherwise eyesense > could not perform its function. > The cittas which are the sense-cognitions, such as seeing or hearing, > do not produce ruupas themselves, but they consolidate the ruupas > that have arisen just before. Thus, every citta arising at this > moment, be it kusala citta, akusala citta, vipaakacitta or > kiriyacitta, is supporting the ruupas of the body that have arisen > just before and are still present, otherwise life could not continue. > > ------- > > H: Does that refer merely to the knowing of the > rupa? I think so. Is that right? > ----- > N: No. Cittas experience their relevant objects, and they also > consolidate the groups of ruupa of the body produced by kamma, citta, > temperature and nutrition. --------------------------------------- Howard: Nina, I don't know what it means to "consolidate" a rupa. I have no idea what that means. Also, does that imply that citta is more than knowing? It is more than vi~n~nana? --------------------------------------- > ------------ > H: In any case, the postnascent conditioning is a present-time event, > right? > ------- > N: Yes, they are present to each other. The pre-arisen ruupa has not > fallen away yet when this condition operates. > ------------ > H: When the rupa first arose "one citta" was aware of it, and now it is > "another citta" being aware of it, but the knowing is always "in the > present" and > not something going backwards in time, right? > -------- > N: It seems that your take is that each rupa that arises is known but > this is not so. Countless rupas arise and are not known; how could > all the ruupas all over the body be known? But they are essential for > the continuation of life. -------------------------------------- Howard: That wasn't my point. I'm talking about the rupas that are known. --------------------------------------- > Is the eyebase, that is eyesense, known? It can be known, but for us > now? Still, it is the base for seeing. Eyesense that has arisen is > consolidated by cittas arising after eyebase, but these need not know > it. Eyebase in its turn supports and consolidates seeing. > ------- > H: One question remaining: If the later citta is a knowing of the very > same rupa previously known, why is this later citta considered > different from > the one which knew the rupa at the time it first appeared? > ------- > N: Let us use an example, that will be easier. Take visible object, > and this is known by a series of cittas in the eye-door process. > First there is the eye-door adverting-consciousness, not yet seeing. ------------------------------------------ Howard: If it is not seeing, then what does it do? And what is its object? Is it a "turning towards" what *will* be the visible object? That is, it is associated with the object but does not know the object, and, in fact, isn't an awareness of anything? ---------------------------------------- > Then it is succeeded by seeing and this only sees. It is accompanied > by the minimum amount of cetasikas, seven. It is succeeded by another > vipaakacitta which receives visible object. > -------------------------------------- Howard: What does it mean to receive it? Is receiving a kind of knowing? If yes, what is its nature? ------------------------------------- This citta does not see, > > but it still experiences visible object. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Okay. But can you say in what way it experiences it? ----------------------------------- It is succeeded by other > > cittas and then javanacittas arise, which are kusala cittas or > akusala cittas. These are different cittas accompanied by different > cetasikas. > ----------- > H: If the answer is that > now there are different cetasikas present, why does that make it a > different > citta? In what way has the citta changed? > ------ > N: Cittas are different as regards jaati: kusala, akusala kiriya > (inoperative) or vipaaka. One citta adverts to the object through one > of the six doorways, another one is sense-cognition (seeing, etc.) > another one is reacting to the object in a wholesome or unwholesome > way. Citta changes and it changes more quickly then ruupa. ------------------------------------------ Howard: So, an adverting citta is an attention shift? Which means that it must be a "noticing" of the object, but not more than that? That seems clear to me. I think I'm starting to get the drift. But I get the sense that some of these cittas are really more like cetasikas. They differ from just plain vi~n~nana. They are certainly mental operations pertaining to objects, but they do not seem to be vi~n~nana. ------------------------------------------ > ------ > H: One would have to say it has not - > so long as one considers a citta to be a separate thing. But if the > citta is > considered to be inseparable [I don't mean indistinguishable] from > its object > and from the accompanying cetasikas - if they are considered to be > tied together > and fundamentally interdependent, then that makes sense. (The essential > importance of relations.) > ------- > N: Citta is closely associated with the accompanying cetasikas, but > it falls away and then another citta arises with a different > combination of cetasikas. > > Citta is not inseparable from the object, I would not use that > expression. In the case of visible object different cittas experience > one and the same object. > When we speak of interdependence we have to study in what ways, this > is necessary for precision. > > ******* > Nina > > ============================ With metta, Howard #62734 From: "matheesha" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 4:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna matheesha333 Hi Nina, > I noticed the translation you used which may be misleading. It seems > there is emphasis on bodily pleasure and this is not the aim of jhaana. M: I do know some dhamma, Nina! Maybe you were just making a statement in general. But it is comments like these, repeated over and over again, which negate the importance of jhana, which the Buddha strongly recommends developing. It is statements like these, which keeping getting repeated, which suggests fear of jhaana. You are trying to warn people of it. You think people will be mislead. Why is that? It is fear of jhana. It is sublte but it is there. This is the first thing that falls out when you start talking about it. Not it's importance. The words that you speak are negative, not positive like the buddha's words, when talking of jhana. > I read: suffuse this very body with the rapture and joy that are born of > aloofness (vivekha)... while he is thus diligent, ardent, self > resolute, those memories and aspirations that are worldly are got rid > of; by getting rid of them the mind itself is inwardly settled, > calmed, fosussed and concentrated...> M: Well excellent. Is this effect only while the person is within jhana or also when she comes out of it? > We should note: born of aloofness. He develops samatha and > vipassanaa, and this is also stated by the Commentary. > You mentioned the masteries. Very true, he should emerge from jhaana > at any time he chooses, so that he can be mindful and develop all the > stages of insight, while the objects are naama and ruupa. He > overcomes likes and dislikes, and this is through insight. M: I might disagree with your last statement. "These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana). "When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned. "When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned. "Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release." -AN 2.30 Vijja-bhagiya Sutta M: So it looks like overcoming craving has a lot to do with samatha as well. So much so that the Buddha attributed it entirely to the samatha element rather than the panna element here. The abdhidhamma would not agree with that? > You quote from ATI: the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance > of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: > purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This > is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, > self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be > cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be > feared.> > From another transl ( sister Upalavanna, Rob K's web); > earlier over coming,pleasure and displeasure, with mindfulness > purified with equanimity abides in the fourth jhaana. Then.he sits > pervading the whole body with that pure and clean mind, not leaving > out any spot. > > I did not see of pleasure that it is not to be feared. It seems the > translator emphasizes bodily pleasure. M: :) unbelievable Nina. The version I quoted MAJJHIMA NIKâYA II II. 2. 6. Lañukikopamasuttaü (66), at www.metta.lk is also sister Uppalavanna's translation. Looks like RobK left out an important chunk of the sutta out. I wonder why... You might want to be careful about using that website for sutta references in the future. You might also want to see the MAJJHIMA NIKâYA III 4. 9. Araõavibhaïgasuttaü which also says that jhana is a pleasure not be feared, but that pleasure of the 5 senses is. M: I still do not understand how one knows where the limits of the body are within a jhana, to spread rapture. If you say that the body cannot be felt, it is not compatible with this sutta. I apreciate all that you have typed out so far. with metta Matheesha #62735 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:32 pm Subject: Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna buddhatrue Hi Math, Nina, and Jon (Rob K. and Phil), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "matheesha" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > > I noticed the translation you used which may be misleading. It > seems > > there is emphasis on bodily pleasure and this is not the aim of > jhaana. > > M: I do know some dhamma, Nina! Maybe you were just making a > statement in general. But it is comments like these, repeated over > and over again, which negate the importance of jhana, which the > Buddha strongly recommends developing. It is statements like these, > which keeping getting repeated, which suggests fear of jhaana. You > are trying to warn people of it. You think people will be mislead. > Why is that? It is fear of jhana. It is sublte but it is there. This > is the first thing that falls out when you start talking about it. > Not it's importance. The words that you speak are negative, not > positive like the buddha's words, when talking of jhana. > I am really glad to see someone as concerned about this issue as I am. Speaking against jhana, in subtle and blatant ways, is directly contradicting what the Buddha taught. And the consequences for those who directly contradict what the Buddha taught can be grave- that is why this matter is no small matter. Jon wrote in one post about how his speech against jhana would not deter any would-be jhana meditators. I thought about commenting on that at the time but I let it drop, as I do get tired of arguing this subject so often. However, maybe now is the time to point out that Jon is quite mistaken. His comments, and Nina's comments, do have a great influence on people. For example, I witnessed the transformation of Phil, a beginning meditator when he joined this group, into an avowed non-meditator. It broke my heart to see the transformation, and I did everything I could do to stop it, but my efforts were to no avail. In that case, text manipulation and fancy Pali terms beat out common sense. And this is just an example of a posting member, what about all of the other silent members? So, what people post here does have a great influence on others and we each have a responsibility to present the truth. Rob K. presenting partial texts to support his non-meditation viewpoint is not the truth. Those who perpetuate this text manipulation are not presenting the truth. Again, the consequences for these types of actions can be grave (much graver, I believe, than the consequences of my harsh speech against them for doing it!). Metta, James #62736 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 5:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought buddhatrue Hi Nina and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard, > yes, it helps. It helps to know that there are four paramattha > dhammas, citta, cetasika, rupa and nibbaana. Knowing that it is a > reality indicates that it is not an abstraction. What is reality can > be known. It is reachable, because there is a Path. This helps our > confidence, saddhaa. > Paramattha dhamma, this is not vague and abstract. > Nina. With all due respect, I don't think that referring to nibbana as a paramattha dhamma really tells us all that much about it. So, it tells us that it is a reality. Well, yeah, no duh. If we didn't think it was a reality we wouldn't be Buddhists. I liked Howard's description, which seemed to bridge Theravada and Mahayana descriptions in an interesting way. However, to say that his description isn't correct, but to not offer an alternative description, isn't nice. However, since we are on the subject of nibbana, there is a question I have in my mind. I have been reading various texts about the Abhidhamma and I haven't found an answer to this question: How is it that an impermanent mind state, a citta, can know something which is permanent, nibbana? For example, when you look through a dirty microscope, everything you see will appear dirty. I would imagine that looking at nibbana through an impermanent citta, would make nibbana appear impermanent as well. How is that impermanent cittas can know nibbana as permanent? What does the Abhidhamma say about this? Metta, James #62737 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 2:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Plamen - In a message dated 8/24/06 4:28:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, pgradinarov@... writes: > Dear Howard, > > Please provide a definition of mindstream and the closest paribhasika > term used for it in Theravada. > > Thank you, > > Plamen > > ========================== By 'mindstream' I mean the stream of experience - the content of conciousness and the knowing of it. I suppose 'namarupa' comes close. With metta, Howard #62738 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 7:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited lbidd2 Hi Howard and Plamen, The word you are looking for might be 'santaana'. Here's what the Buddhist Dictionary has to say: santána = santati: 'continuity', may refer to the continuity of consciousness (citta-s.), of the groups of existence (khandha-s.), of sub-consciousness (bhavanga-s.), of corporeality (rúpa-s.), to the uninterrupted continuity of the paticcasamuppáda (q.v.), etc. (App.). Appendix: santána, santati: The terms citta-, rúpa-, khandha-, bhavanga-s.:, etc., are found, here and there, in the Abh. Canon (e.g. Dhs. § 634, Kath. 110; s. Guide V), but they are often met with in the Abh. Com. In the Sutta (Therag. 716) is found sankhárasantati. L: Another possibility is citta-viithi (consciousness process). Buddhist Dictionary: viññána-kicca: 'functions of consciousness', as exercised within a process of consciousness or cognitive series (cittavíthi). In the Abhidhamma Com. and Vis.M. XIV the following functions are mentioned: rebirth (patisandhi), subconsciousness (bhavanga), advertence (ávajjana), seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, body-consciousness; recciving (sampaticchana), investigating (santírana), determining (votthapana), impulsion (javana), registering (tadárammana), dying (cuti). A single unit of sense-perception (e.g. visual consciousness), being conditioned through a sense-organ and its corresponding object, forms in reality an extremely complex process, in which all the single phases of consciousness follow one upon another in rapid succession, while performing their respective functions, e.g.: "As soon as a visible object has entered the range of vision, it acts on the sensitive eye-organ (cakkhu-pasáda), and conditioned thereby an excitation of the subconscious stream (bhavanga-sota) takes place. "As soon, however, as subconsciousness is broken off, the functional mind-element (s. Tab. I, 70), grasping the object and breaking through the subconscious stream, performs the function of 'adverting' the mind towards the object (ávajjana). "Immediately thereupon there arises at the eye-door, and based on the sensitive eye-organ, the eye-consciousness, while performing the function of 'seeing' (dassana).... Immediately thereafter there arises the mind-element (Tab I, 39, 55) performing the function of 'receiving' (sampaticchana) the object of that consciousness.... ''Immediately thereafter there arises... the mind-consciousness-element (Tab. I, 40, 41, 56), while 'investigating' (santirana) the object received by the mind-element... "Immediately thereafter there arises the functional, rootless mind-consciousness-element (Tab. I, 71), accompanied by indifference, while performing the function of 'determining' (votthapana) the object...... "Now, if the object is large, then immediately afterwards there flash forth 6 or 7 'impulsive moments' (javana-citta), constituted by one of the 8 wholesome, or 12 unwholesome, or 9 functional classes of consciousness (Tab. I, 1-8; 22-23; 72-80). ''Now, if at the end of the impulsive moments, the object at the five-sense doors is very large, and at the mind-door clear, then there arises, once or twice, one of the 8 root-accompanied, karma-resultant classes of consciousness (Tab. I, 42-49) of the sense-sphere, or one of the 3 rootless karma-resultant mind-consciousness-elements (Tab. I, 40, 41, 56).... Because this consciousness after the vanishing of the impulsive moments, possesses the faculty continuing with the object of the subconsciousness, taking the object of the subconsciousness as its own object, therefore it is called 'registering' (tadárarmmana, lit. 'that object', or 'having that as object')" (Vis.M. XIV, 115ff). If, however, the sense-object is weak, then it reaches merely the stage of 'impulsion' (javana), or of 'determining' (votthapana); if very weak, only an excitation ot the subconsciousness takes place. The proeess of the inner or mind-consciousness, i.e. without participation of the 5 physical senses, is as follows: in the case that the mind-objeet entering the mind-door is distinct, then it passes through the stages of 'advertence at the mind-door' (manodvárávajjana), the 'impulsive stage' and the 'registering stage', before finally sinking into the subconscious stream. - (App.: citta-víthi). L: Nina can explain further. See also paticcasamuppada. http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma2/dictionary/bdindex.html Larry ----------------------- H: "Hi, Plamen - In a message dated 8/24/06 4:28:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, pgradinarov@... writes: Dear Howard, Please provide a definition of mindstream and the closest paribhasika term used for it in Theravada. Thank you, Plamen ========================== By 'mindstream' I mean the stream of experience - the content of conciousness and the knowing of it. I suppose 'namarupa' comes close. With metta, Howard" #62739 From: connie Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 8:57 pm Subject: Re: Santa Teresa€ ¦´s Vihara nichiconn :) just another quote from the udaana cy. best to you, ic. c. p1050 Praised as chief by the Buddha are alms in the form of a vihaara, (given) to the Sa"ngha (in which) to meditate, to practise vipassanaa, with the aim of (providing) a hideaway, with the aim of (providing) comfort. [420] Therefore the wise man, perceiving that which is in his own interest, should have delightful vihaaras built, should have those who have heard much dwell here. To these he should give food and drink, clothing and lodging, with a heart ultra-serene where those who are upright are concerned. They will teach him Dhamma expelling all dukkha, understanding which Dhamma he will, aasava-free, attain parinabbaana here" (Vin ii 147f). #62740 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 10:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought paulgrabiano... Hi Howard and All, "Nibbana is freedom in the sense of no-grasping. There is, already, at this very moment, no self to do any grasping nor anything, anywhere, of any sort, that is graspable. That absence, itself, is freedom. Nibbana is, always was, and always will be. It has never arisen and will never cease. It is neither dhamma nor concept. It is not a thing at all, but it is the ultimate nature of all things. The "grasplessness" of all dhammas is nibbana, an immeasurable openness and emptiness. The direct realization of that ultimate emptiness is bodhi and world-shattering release." That certainly rings true with the Tipitaka. And the Buddha and his closest adherents stress this again and again. Some examples and a bit of my intrusive commentary: "What lies on the other side of release?" "Unbinding lies on the other side of release." "What lies on the other side of Unbinding?" "You've gone too far, friend Visakha. You can't keep holding on up to the limit of questions. For the holy life gains a footing in Unbinding, culminates in Unbinding, has Unbinding as its final end. If you wish, go to the Blessed One and ask him the meaning of these things. Whatever he says, that's how you should remember it." Nibbana is a reality, for it can be known as that which is foremost upon the path, but nothing lies on the other side of unbinding. It is a reality in the sense that all realities are already such, empty and not self. It is the ultimate beginning, footing and end of the path; it is the unbinding. When the practitioner achieves path fruition lokuttara cittas which directly experience the unbinding utterly transform at that moment the very nature of how nama and rupa are intertwined with kamma-vipaka in that individual. The very operations, the very questionings which he or she would employ to discover what nibbana is are exposed as null and void, as akin to the subtle gauze of ignorance which sows so intricately the round of becoming. "However far the six contact-media go, that is how far complication goes. However far complication goes, that is how far the six contact media go. With the remainderless fading & stopping of the six contact-media, there comes to be the stopping, the allaying of complication." Nibbana is not the ultimate base or ultimate condition of realities. It is the recognition that what we are after is not itself a thing to be after. Nibbana simply points to the whole practice which we've been practicing all along, to its foremost fruition. Every time we feel compelled to think about nibbana we can read this: "'All phenomena are rooted in desire.1 "'All phenomena come into play through attention. "'All phenomena have contact as their origination. "'All phenomena have feeling as their meeting place. "'All phenomena have concentration as their presiding state. "'All phenomena have mindfulness as their governing principle. "'All phenomena have discernment as their surpassing state. "'All phenomena have release as their heartwood. "'All phenomena gain their footing in the deathless. "'All phenomena have Unbinding as their final end.' "On being asked this by those who have gone forth in other sects, this is how you should answer." Also, from the Mulapariyaya Sutta: "He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in Unbinding. Why is that? Because he has known that delight is the root of suffering & stress, that from coming-into-being there is birth, and that for what has come into being there is aging & death. Therefore, with the total ending, fading away, cessation, letting go, relinquishment of craving, the Tathagata has totally awakened to the unexcelled right self-awakening, I tell you." Nibbana is not something we do; neither is it a place; it is not the base or the foundation of realities; it is itself what is again and again at this moment, and to experience it directly truly should be our "foremost" concern. With metta, Paul #62741 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 10:40 pm Subject: Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna ken_aitch Hi James, When you post to DSG please leave personal insults out, and just discuss Dhamma. --------------- J: > I am really glad to see someone as concerned about this issue as I am. Speaking against jhana, in subtle and blatant ways, is directly contradicting what the Buddha taught. ---------------- You know very well that no one at DSG has ever spoken against jhana. At least, they haven't done so intentionally. I believe you and Matheesha speak against it unintentionally. You downgrade it whenever you say it is easy and that ordinary people, with strong attachments to sense pleasures, can do it at their leisure. ------------------------ J: > And the consequences for those who directly contradict what the Buddha taught can be grave - that is why this matter is no small matter. ------------------------- The trouble is there is no agreement among meditating Buddhists on what the Buddha taught. All they (you) agree on is that we should meditate. ----------- J: > Jon wrote in one post about how his speech against jhana would not deter any would-be jhana meditators. ----------- What do you think he meant by that? I know he would never deter anyone with a genuine capacity for jhana. Such a person would find Jon's comments an inspiration to continue. But if, by speaking the truth, Jon deters people from attempting something utterly unsuited to their accumulated tendencies, then we should all be grateful to him. -------- J: > I thought about commenting on that at the time but I let it drop, as I do get tired of arguing this subject so often. --------- There is a lesson for you in this. Over the years, there have always been people at DSG who have been willing to discuss the Dhamma with you endlessly - even though they disagree with most of what you say, and even though you are unappreciative. This is because genuine consideration and discussion of the Dhamma is never tiring. ----------------- J: > However, maybe now is the time to point out that Jon is quite mistaken. His comments, and Nina's comments, do have a great influence on people. ----------------- :-) "Maybe it's time?" Who do you think you're kidding? Every second post you send is designed to warn people against DSG. I have snipped the allegations of text manipulation. No one believes them, not even you. Ken H #62742 From: "Leo" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 10:46 pm Subject: village monk leoaive Hi I see that the most common is City Monk and Forest Monk. I do not see Village Monk as main category. At the same time it says in one Sutta that happy are people of Village, where Arahant lives. I was thinking is there any possible group or category can be found under Village monk? With Metta Leo #62743 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:44 pm Subject: Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna buddhatrue Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ken_aitch" wrote: > > Hi James, > > When you post to DSG please leave personal insults out, and just > discuss Dhamma. Hey dude, I didn't insult anyone. I don't know what you mean. The remainder of your post is meaningless (Is it an insult to say that??). Metta, James #62744 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna nilovg Hi Matheesha, let me get this straight. I did not know your quote came from this sutta, I was still looking in the kayagata satisutta. I shall quietly look at the texts later on, I have some work to finish first. As always, I appreciate correspondance with you. Nina. Op 25-aug-2006, om 1:07 heeft matheesha het volgende geschreven: > unbelievable Nina. The version I quoted MAJJHIMA NIKâYA II > II. 2. 6. Lañukikopamasuttaü (66), at www.metta.lk is also sister > Uppalavanna's translation. Looks like RobK left out an important > chunk of the sutta out. I wonder why... You might want to be careful > about using that website for sutta references in the future. #62745 From: "Sukinder" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:27 am Subject: Re: Scott 's question and more! sukinderpal Hi Kel, Been occupied with other things, hence the delay in responding. ---------------------------- > Kel: Any kusala of sufficient volition should be considered > paramis. I didn't agree it always have to have panna, that was my > basic point. Dana can be any kusala citta for example. Else why > have all these paramis? Just have panna would suffice. Nina's > latest post on this didn't clarify this either. Samatha is > accumulated to get the full powers, Buddhasatta as an ascetic always > get them. Suk: I think all levels of kusala should be encouraged, even the weak ones. And I believe that, given the fact that we have been around for so long, there must have been plenty of kusala with strong volition conditioned. If all these were Parami and as you say, dana in one form or the other, would this not mean that we are in fact quite ready for enlightenment? Of course we have also accumulated infinitely more akusala and this is enough to send us to the lower planes again and again. But I think the real problem is the accumulated `self view'. One reason I insist on seeing this matter the way I do, is because `self view' will take any dhamma as object, such that any kusala performed in close association with self view, would only serve to keep us even more bound to samsara? And are not the paramis, dhammas meant to lead one out of this cycle? In fact I believe that the paramis does develop as a `whole', all ten of them each supporting the other, though perhaps not all will arise in any single lifetime, So I don't think that it is possible for panna to be developed without the other paramis also being so at the same time. In any given lifetime, one may continue to do good with the help of `sanna', but only `panna' can be trusted to guarantee more of the same in future lifetimes, I think. Akusala comes in many subtle forms, without panna one not only fails to notice these, but also risk cheating oneself into taking what is not kusala to be so. It is recognition and familiarity with the various dhammas which will lead one to know and recognize them regardless of conventional situation. Dana may be relatively easy to arise, but even here most think in terms of giving material things. However without panna, would more subtle forms of dana be appreciated? Would giving for any number of lifetimes ever lead for example, to appreciation of patidana? --------------------------------------------------------- > > Sukin: I must be missing your point, because I don't see any inconsistency > > here. The very fact that he had the great panna as you say, to become an > > arahatta before aspiring to become a Sammasambuddha, shows that even in > > those lives in which there was no Sasana, he was able to keep on developing > > the parami, quite naturally, including when he was an animal. Nothing is > > lost, and the accumulated panna and other kusala can have the effect in the > > most unlikely settings, don't you think? Of course, the panna that > insights into the conditioned nature of reality is much higher and requires > quite a different "view" of things, but that which sees other aspects of > reality, such as impermanence and the value of kusala and harm in akusala, > these can arise, no? > > Kel: Nope, not what I said. One can be strong in one parami over > the other. People who are strongest in Dana have developed the > habit of giving. You should look at how Buddha encourage such > people to practice the highest Dana. Suk: One or more may be stronger than the others, but I doubt whether the development of the paramis will bear fruit in enlightenment, if they were not *all* developed to some minimum strength. --------------------------------------------------- > > True, metta is metta, alobha is alobha, and there is no difference if this > > arises in a Moslem or a Buddhist. Only what comes before and after > may be quite different. > > Kel: Even for a Buddhist, what comes before and after may be > quite different at different instances. That's why the kamma > resultant is so intricate because of the secondary effects. Suk: Yes, hence the importance of being informed by Right View. ------------------------------------------- > kel: if someone is thinking simply of others' well being then > it's fully kusala. There is just no need to worry about wrong view > for such a person. Happy rebirth is always cited as the least you > can expect. If it's already habitual then clearly it just comes > naturally for them. Suk: Not to be discouraging any kusala habits, but really any encouragement of this should never be done at the expense of the development of Right View. The Paramis are geared towards getting one out of the cycle and not for a more pleasant rebirth. ------------------------------------------ > > Sukin: No monopoly of course, otherwise we are all doomed. But you > would agree wouldn't you, that viewing the development of kusala in light of the > > development of Parami and how each of these are related, makes a huge > > difference in how we will approach the Dhamma, or whether we will > appreciate the Dhamma at all? > Kel: I dont think so. If you truly understand each and practice > correctly, the relationship is a given. Suk: So it is about understanding? ;-) ------------------------------------------- > > Don't you see a great danger in wrong view, such that even if presently > > someone is kind and generous, that this can easily change simply > by force of the accumulated self-view? > > Kel: If it's genuine kindness and generosity then there's nothing > to worry about. Accumulated anger can easily change the person > too. Accumulated craving can also come in and make them think > they're really great and wish for accolates. The danger is always 3- > prong, don't necessarily have to single out one. Suk: That is why only vipassana knowledge will more or less overpower any tendency to akusala. The person who with self view has managed to consistently do good in any particular lifetime, is dependent on `conventional situations' and knows nothing about the characteristic of dhammas. There is nothing like knowing dhammas by their characteristics. ----------------------------------- ps. if panna is foremost in everything why is there different types of Buddhas? Suk: I don't know. But surely they all *did* develop panna to the highest degree!!? Metta, Sukin. Ps: The discussions last Saturday went in a different direction. K. Sujin thought that my questions on this topic was due to concern about my own development, so she tried to tackle that. But I do not particularly need to know about this and can wait for until the right time comes. So Kel, I admit to being quite blurry about this matter, but at the same time I don't need to know one way or the other what the right explanation is. #62746 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Scott 's question and more! paramis nilovg Dear Sukin and Kel, Thanks Sukin. I like your dialogue. I could add something with quote. We should scrutinize ourselves: which paramis are not developed or underdeveloped? We need them all. But, this does not mean we have to think all the tyime of this or that parami. I quote from Kh Sujin's Perfections. She explained that siila can also be seen as a kind of daana. Like forgiving someone else. < Thus, síla can also be considered under the aspect of dåna. Abstaining from deeds that harm others as well as giving protection from danger is included in giving freedom from fear, abhayadåna. Moreover, also forgiving can be seen as an aspect of the giving of freedom from fear. When we forgive someone, we do not give in to ill feelings or revenge. If someone does not know that forgiving is a perfection he will not forgive someone else who has done him wrong. If we do not forgive others how can we attain enlightenment and eradicate defilements? If we consider this it may be a condition for the gift of freedom from fear. This is a way of generosity higher than the giving of material things, åmisa dåna. If we cannot forgive someone we do not like, it means also that we can neither develop other kinds of kusala with regard to this person. If we do not forgive him or if we are still angry with him, we cannot be generous to him, we cannot even give him material things. Neither can we give him the gift of Dhamma, Dhamma dåna, in helping him with Dhamma discussion, or advise him as to what is beneficial in life and what is not beneficial. The gift of freedom from fear is a condition for the perfection of morality, síla påramí, to develop; it is the condition for abstinence from wrong action and speech. If we do not forgive someone else, our conduct will not be that of a friend and thus kusala cannot develop. How could we then cross over to the further shore, namely, the eradication of defilements? This shows us that our consideration of the nature of kusala in daily life should be very refined. A person who develops paññå that is able to realize the four noble Truths, should know the nature of his citta; he should know when he is mentally ill and has no moral strength. If that is the case, how could he travel the extremely long road that is the eightfold Path? He should consider the nature of his citta, so that he can gain strength of citta by means of the perfections. He may know that the Path is satipaììhåna, the development of understanding of the characteristics of realities, but sati does not arise if the perfections are not strong enough for the realization of the four noble Truths. We all should develop the ten perfections with paññå, also when we practise generosity in our daily life. We should know the truth, we should know the difference between giving without paññå and giving with paññå, such as in the case of the Bodhisatta who gave with paññå. In this way we can consider and understand the perfection of truthfulness, sincerity for kusala, so that we can follow in the the footsteps of the Bodhisatta who developed the perfections during each life. He did not develop in one life just the perfection of morality, and in another life just the perfection of renunciation, but he developed all ten perfections, without exception, during each life.> ****** Nina. Op 25-aug-2006, om 10:27 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven: > Suk: One or more may be stronger than the others, but I doubt whether > the development of the paramis will bear fruit in enlightenment, if > they > were not *all* developed to some minimum strength. #62747 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati, Samadhi, Samatha, Vipassana and Panna nilovg Dear Plamen, I have trouble with your sanskrit terms. Alambana is object. Vitakka and vicaara is clear. but not: sthula- and suksma-bhuta Nina. Op 24-aug-2006, om 18:43 heeft Plamen Gradinarov het volgende geschreven: > Is that by chance the suksma-bhuta as opposed to the sthula-bhuta, and > second, is there any technical division or differentiation between > vitarka and vicara as having respectively sthula- and suksma-bhuta for > their meditation-alambana? #62748 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa nilovg Dear Plamen, Thank you for your post. I appreciate your interest. You are openminded to learn also the Theravada, I see. It is difficult to react to the contents of your post, because it is different from Theravada. You raise many points, perhaps one item at a time may be useful. Nina. Op 24-aug-2006, om 13:05 heeft Plamen Gradinarov het volgende geschreven: > The eyes see, The ears hear, The nose smells, The tongue tastes, The > skin senses the touches. For raw data are raw data, they cannot sense > anything. In the same way as perceptions cannot perceive anything, > feelings cannot feel anything, intentions cannot intend anything, > cognitions cannot cognize anything. > > It is something else that sees, hears, smells, tastes, touches, > perceives, feels, intends, and knows - and this Else is the Man > referred > to as Pancaskandhakam. #62749 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nilovg Hi James (and Howard), I appreciate your question. The citta purified from ignorance can see clearly. Pa~n~naa is like illumination, it illumines the object that is cognized. When the Path has been developed to such extent that pa~n~naa is able to clearly understand the characteristics of conditioned dhammas, their impermanence, dukkhaness and anattaness, there are conditions for the arising of a higher level of citta, called supramundane citta. This type of citta surpasses the class of cittas we have in ordinary daily life, such as seeing, wishing, etc. which have as their objects the sense objects, conditioned dhammas that arise and fall away. The supramundane cittas are accompanied by illuminating pa~n~naa that is able to experience the uncondiitoned dhamma that does not arise and fall away, like the dhammas we experience now. Also the supramundane cittas that experience nibbaana arise and fall away, they themselves are condiitoned dhammas, but they are able to have an unobstructed view of the unconditioned dhamma. I appreciate the clear and short definition of nibbaana as one of the four paramattha dhammas. It is clear and encouraging. Though it is the unconditioned element, it is a reality that can be known. But first the conditioned dhammas of citta, cetasika and rupa should be known as they truly are. BTW, sometimes I do not answer a post or a point, but this should not be taken personally. I follow Howard's sound policy: if it is not constructive or leads to repetition I do not pursue it. Defending myself does not help anybody else. so, I leave it. Nina. Op 25-aug-2006, om 2:44 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > How is it > that an impermanent mind state, a citta, can know something which is > permanent, nibbana? For example, when you look through a dirty > microscope, everything you see will appear dirty. I would imagine > that looking at nibbana through an impermanent citta, would make > nibbana appear impermanent as well. How is that impermanent cittas > can know nibbana as permanent? What does the Abhidhamma say about > this? #62750 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited ken_aitch Hi Howard, Thanks for the mini questionnaire. I liked Nina's answers, of course, but will try to give mine a different slant. --------- > What have you seen to be the nature of these dhammas. --------- Most importantly I have seen (at the intellectual level) that they are realities as distinct from concepts. And they are conditioned as distinct from random. ------------ > What direct understanding of them do you have? ------------ I'll repeat Nina's answer: None. (good to realize!). ---------- > If none, do you expect that to change? And if so, why? ---------- I expect it to change but not suddenly. So I should understand the way things are, and get used to it. :-) Ken H #62751 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rob K's forum on Mindfulness of Breath. no 2 jonoabb Hi Kel (and Nina) I have no argument with what you say in your concluding paragraph. Do you think the passage (of Nina's, I think) you have quoted suggests otherwise? I think Nina is there discussing anapanasati, not the attainment of the discriminations. As far as I know, it was not being suggested that the discriminations could only be attained by the development of anapanasati. Jon --- kelvin_lwin wrote: > Hi Jon, > > > The Buddha had the highest degree of these special > > kinds of knowledge, and his great disciples also had these, but in > a > > lesser degree. Arahats had different degrees of knowledge, and some > > arahats were without these. > > > > Breath had to be developed to the degree that the fourth jhaana > could be > > attained. There had to be masteries of jhaana (enter and emerge at > will, > > etc.) and then jhaana could be a base for insight, but still all > the > > stages of insight had to be developed. > > Kel: Let's see, I think whatever Nina wrote about discriminations > is misleading. Look following: > > XII 2. supernormal power described as "Having been one, he becomes > many', etc., he must achieve the eight attainments in the each of > the eight kasinas ending with the white kasina. <-- read, not breath > > He must also have complete control of his mind in the following > fourteen ways: (i) in the order of the kasinas (ii) in the reverse > order of the kasinas, (iii) in the order and reverse order of the > kasinas (iv) in the order of the jhanas (v) in the reverse order of > the jhanas (vi) in the order of the reverse order of the jhanas > (vii) skipping jhanas (viii) skipping kasinas (ix) skipping jhanas > and kasinas (x) transpoisition of factors (xi) transposition of > object (xii) transposition of factors and object, (xiii) definition > of factors and (xiv) definition of object. > > 11. It is only in Buddhas, Paccekabuddhas, chief disciples, etc., > who have vast previous endeavour behind them, that this > transformation by supernormal power and other such special qualities > as the discriminations are brought to success simply with the > attainment of Arahantship and without the progressive course of > development kind just described. > > Kel: I read this to mean they already practiced using eight > kasinas enough in previous lives to re-obtain the discrimations. It > doesn't have anything to do with breath object, I'm afraid. There > were also great disciples who get the powers as soon as they meet > Buddha anyway before they become Arahants. > > - Kel #62752 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher jonoabb Hi Howard --- upasaka@... wrote: > > I particularly draw your attention to the last clause: "the spiritual > > adviser and teacher, who must be a kalya?amitta (q. v.), one who has > > entered the Path" It is my understanding of the usage of the term that > the > > kalyanamitta is typically advanced, at least in comparison to oneself. > > > > Jon: > > Again, I think this is limited to the context of the development of > jhana. > > --------------------------------------- > Howard: > I believe that in general it is a requirement that a kalyanamitta > be more "advanced" in the Dhamma than oneself. > --------------------------------------- To my understanding, anyone from whom one hears helpful dhamma is a kalyana mitta at that moment. It is not necessarily an ongoing thing. For example, husband and wife, or parent and child, or two friends, could be kalyana mitta to each other (on occasions). Jon #62753 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samadhi sutta SN 35.99 jonoabb Hi Howard Thanks for explaining further what you mean by samadhi in connection with the development of insight. Some comments on parts of your post now (more comments later, if time permits). --- upasaka@... wrote: > Howard: > Actually, no, that is not what I had primarily in mind. That > momentary > heightened concentration is not something that one specifically works on > creating, but it is a result in part of what I *do* mean by developing > concentration. What I was referring to is what I attempted to go into > later in my post, > and which you quote below, namely: "And in the context of the > development of > samadhi, I view the "samadhi" as referring not only to momentary focus > of attention, but to a generally concentrated mind - a mind that has been > trained to > typically pay sharp attention [I wrote "intenion"] at most times and > which has > been calmed by jhana practice. I view the development of samadhi to > refer to a > process of conditioning the mind, making it a more fit tool for > investigation > of dhammas." (BTW, the Buddha often spoke of jhanic attainment making > the mind > malleable and a fit tool for investigation of dhammas.) OK, I am clear that in your view jhana is involved. I am not clear what other mind-states (or mental activities?) you have in mind, specifically when you refer to "a generally concentrated mind - a mind that has been trained to typically pay sharp attention at most times" and also "a process of conditioning the mind, making it a more fit tool for investigation of dhammas". If you'd care to elaborate on this, I'd be interested to discuss further. Are you referring to samatha or to some other form of kusala (I'm still not clear on this point)? > > Jon: If you are referring to the 'Samadhi' section (Part II) of the > Vism, > > please see my recent post commenting on the significance of the > passage > > from Ch III quoted by Kel that reads: > > > > "The method of developing the kind of concentration associated with > > the noble paths mentioned under that 'of two kinds of mundane and > > supramundane', etc. is included in the method of developing > > understanding (Ch XXII); for in developing [path] understanding that > > is developed too. So we shall say nothing separately [here] about > > how that is to be developed." > > > > As I read that passage it's saying that the samadhi associated with > > vipassana is developed along with the development of vipassana itself. > > (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/62533) > > -------------------------------------------- > Howard: > I really don't get your point. My point is that Buddhaghosa went > into > much detail on how one should, ever so conventionally, intentionally > take > steps to cultivate concentration and calm, and a concomitant point is > that > "formal" meditation is alive and well in the Theravada tradition as > reported by him. > Kel has provided much of that material. > ------------------------------------------ Yes, Buddhaghosa did give very detailed descriptions of/instructions on the development of samatha to the level of jhaana. That is in Part II of his work 'Samadhi' (Chapters III to about XIII from memory). He also deals with the development of insight, and this is found in Part III of his work (Chapters XIV onwards). The passage I quoted from Ch III seems to me to be making a distinction between the samadhi that is associated with the development of samatha and the samadhi that is associated with the development of insight. It says in effect that Part III deals with the former, while the latter is dealt with in Part IV and further that the concentration that accompanies insight is developed along with the development of insight. What do you understand by the passage? > Howard: > I don't know what the minimum level required is. I suspect it is > very > high for the higher paths. I do indeed believe that a mind trained in > samadhi > is required for insights sufficient to lead to any degrees of awakening. > I > find the concensus of the suttas clear on that. (You know: Looking at > the suttas > "as a whole"? LOL!) > -------------------------------------- LOL! But what about the development of insight at beginning level. Do the texts say that this requires any particular development of samadhi? > , and (b) having heard,> > > understood and reflected on the teachings on insight in this lifetime > and > > related what has been understood to the present moment. > > -------------------------------------- > Howard: > I agree that that is an important condition, though I do NOT see > the > necessity for such hearing, understanding, and reflecting to be a > current-lifetime matter. (Case in point: The Buddha had not heard the > Dhamma in the > lifetime in which he attained awakening. There was no one, in fact, for > him to hear it from.) > --------------------------------------- Yes, but this is a case of the exception proving the rule! What makes a Buddha (including a Paccekkha Buddha) a Buddha is (as I think you expalained to your friend/acquaintance mentioned in another thread) that he is self-enlightened, that is to say, he becomes enlightened without first having heard the dhamma in that lifetime. For all other beings, enlightenment (or the development of insight) cannot occur without first hearing the teachings. Jon #62754 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher jonoabb Hi Scott Thanks for sharing these thoughts. I appreciate the consideration you have given the matter. Jon --- Scott Duncan wrote: > Dear Jon, > > I've been thinking about this a lot. > > J: "The teachings speak often of the value of association with the > right person (as one of the factors for developing insight), but not > of formally putting oneself under a teacher. To my understanding, the > right person' is anyone from whom one hears the teachings explained in > a way that helps understanding of the true dhamma to arise." > > I think "association with" is what I am seeking, and not a formal > "putting [myself] under a teacher." I think that you (and all > respondents) have helped me clarify this. As an aside, this thinking > of needing "a teacher" in a formal way seems to have been an aspect of > a sort of stereotypic veneer with which "Buddhism" as a monolithic > entity of first-encounter is finished. I mean that one has to cut > through a lot of material in an attempt to find what is essential in > the whole of the Buddha's message. There is much that is held up as > essential which, upon examination, is not. I think "finding a > teacher" was one such thing that I had yet to realise was not as it > seemed. And I've felt this veneer come away bit by bit. #62755 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon jonoabb Hi Howard The problem comes with the term 'single-mindstream view'. Can you say what you mean by this? It doesn't sound like a description of anything I've said ;-)) Jon --- upasaka@... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and Nina and KenH) - > > Jon the recent discussion with Nina and Ken in messages 62637, > 62645, > 62646, 62648, and 62650 brings home to me the importance of the > interactions > among namarupic streams in the moral sphere, and the danger of fixating > on a > single mindstream. In fixating on (the elements of) a single mindstream, > there > is the danger of taking the fact of impersonality to an irrational and > immoral extreme. > Note: No one here has gone to an irrational or immoral extreme > with > regard to interpersonal relations, but that is due, IMO, not to having > adopted a > perfect perspective, but to a goodness that triumphs despite having > adopted a > less-than-perfect perspective. IMO, the single-mindstream view is > incomplete, > and morally problematical. > > With metta, > Howard #62756 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta Revisited jonoabb Hi James --- buddhatrue wrote: > Hi Jon, > > I know that our thread on metta has stopped, but I want to pick it > up again. You may have missed the post I sent a few days ago (Saturday, I think). If so, please let me know and I'll find it. I have been reading "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" by ASHIN > JANAKABHIVAMSA, which really clicks with me because it isn't colored > with the KS philosophy. I am grateful that I came across this book > because I find many things which are worthwhile. Actually, after > reading what I can find on the Internet, I feel that I understand > the nature of my mind much better than before. > > Anyway, I know that you stress knowing the sporadic moments of metta > which arise spontaneously throughout the day, and being grateful for > them, but I really don't believe that that is sufficient to combat > the akusala of the mind. As Janakabhivamsa writes in the > introduction to his book: > > "Taking into consideration the situation of the present day, we find > that the first three of four moral virtues called Brahmaviharas, > namely, loving-kindness (metta), compassion (karuna), sympathetic > joy (mudita) and equanimity (upekkha) appear to have ceased to > flourish, to have dried up in the human mind. The element of 'heat' > generated by beings through such cessation of virtues incinerates > even the virtuous, who now find themselves on the verge of drying up. > > What Is Meant By the 'Heat Element'? The 'heat element' is > nothing but greed (Lobha), hatred (dosa), conceit (mana), jealousy > (issa) and avariciousness (macchariya), that leave no room for > sympathy or compassion for one another. That 'heat element' causes > drying up of virtuous elements not only in the present but also in > the coming existences in the round of rebirths (samsara). Therefore > people should endeavour in this very life to the best of their > ability to extinguish the 'heat element' and seek to reside steeped > in the cool elements of loving kindness, compassion, sympathetic > joy, and equanimity which are the four sublime states of living > (Brahmaviharas)." > http://www.nibbana.com/ > > I truly believe in this and don't believe that we should be > satisfied with periodic moments of loving kindness, compassion, > sympathetic joy, and equanimity, we should seek that these four > sublime states to be a CONSTANT, or as close to constant as > possible, mental state. To achieve this, one should practice > meditation on the brahma viharas to steer the mind in this > direction. This is what the Buddha taught and this is what I > sincerely believe. The passage from the introduction appears to be the author's own ideas and not his presentation of the abhidhamma. Does he give any references for any of the ideas it mentions (there are some there that are new to me)? > I just wanted you to know that though I do see your point of > recognizing moments of metta throughout the day, I don't think it is > enough. It is like crawling through a thorn bush just to smell a > few roses. The entire state of the mind must be changed and akusala > must be defeated. Well only panna can truly defeat akusala (the development of metta can counter, in the sense of suppress, certain akusala, but not of course ignorance). However, the main point I wished to make was that moments of true metta can only be known as and when that quality arises naturally in us. If we embark upon a practice of wishing well to all beings, without knowing anything about the quality of metta as and when it arises naturally in our life, the chances are that what we are developing is not the kusala that is metta. Jon #62757 From: "icarofranca" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:36 am Subject: Re: Santa Teresa€ ¦´s Vihara icarofranca Hi Connie! >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > :) just another quote from the udaana cy. > best to you, ic. >---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thanks for the kindly words - I could announce it on all newspapers, but my own share on keeping our dearly Vihara is not so big. My older University pal - Carlos Lessa - made much more on support it, as many others, like the Ex-Bhikkhu Kaled Ahmed Assaury, Mr. Jorge and even the Bhante Puhulwelle Vipassi. Just a rememberance: at my former days on University I have got many talks on our free times about Dhamma and Buddhism at a whole. Carlos Lessa once said me: "Ã?caro, you can call me Kusala!" "Kusala! What a well mannered name, Carlos!" Only now I now what it means!!! Carlos Lessa is now and ever a dearly friend - a very cratfy Mechanical Engineer like me, with a specialization on Air Conditioning...meanwhile I am now working with weapons again, at the Rio de Janeiro´s Navy Arsenal! May Buddha have pity of my illusory (and unique, you see) Soul! With Metta, Ã?caro --------------------------------------------------------------------- > p1050 > Praised as chief by the Buddha are alms in the form of a vihaara, (given) > to the Sa"ngha (in which) to meditate, to practise vipassanaa, with the > aim of (providing) a hideaway, with the aim of (providing) comfort. > [420] Therefore the wise man, perceiving that which is in his own > interest, should have delightful vihaaras built, should have those who > have heard much dwell here. > To these he should give food and drink, clothing and lodging, with a heart > ultra-serene where those who are upright are concerned. > They will teach him Dhamma expelling all dukkha, understanding which > Dhamma he will, aasava-free, attain parinabbaana here" (Vin ii 147f). > #62758 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Multiple-Mindstream Interaction, continuation with dialogue with Howard nilovg Hi Ken H, Howard, Let us continue a bit. I hope Howard will give us more of such good questions as food for thought! I continued to consider them while I listened to audio Nalanda 2. Kh Sujin said: we cannot know what will be the next moment, seeing, thinking... Each moment is conditioned. Understand the moment with awareness and the moment without awareness. She often said that, that is the way to begin to develop it. Now we touch on what Ken H says about dhammas (appearing one at a time through one doorway only) and concepts. Two different worlds. I agree with Howard and Plamen that we should not neglect inter- human relations, not at all. But let us know the difference between these two worlds. This enables us to better function in society! The end result surely is more metta, patience, compassion, inclination to forgive insults, to cope with the worldly conditions. You learn more the conditionality of cittas. Citta is the source of speech and deeds. If we do not thoroughly know citta it is to the harm of ourselves and others. Kh Sujin continued that awareness is very natural, it is not self, trying so hard. We should not misunderstand this. When we try so hard to have awareness there is clinging to an idea of my awareness. She said: awareness is there before we can think about it. N: In the same way as hardness appears, before thinking of it. Kh S: You do not have to do anything, it arises not by our will or because of our expectations. When it is there one can see how natural it is. The talk was also about effort and about not resting nor over- exertion. Viriya cetasika arises already. It is not our effort. Nina. Op 25-aug-2006, om 12:55 heeft ken_aitch het volgende geschreven: > What have you seen to be the nature of these dhammas. > --------- > > Most importantly I have seen (at the intellectual level) that they > are realities as distinct from concepts. And they are conditioned as > distinct from random. #62759 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:48 am Subject: Re: Buddhas jwromeijn HalloHoward, Nina, Kel, all Of course your negative reaction was not personal to me, that was clear to me, but still the tone surprises me. It must be clear to you that this question of you can not be answered and is not answered by the Buddhha. What you want, is an impossible pesuedo-scientific answer; like: when there is no Buddha and buddhasasana disappears after some thousands years, then the level of dukkha rises and rises till that level has such a high rate (a critical value) that it makes one of the billions of bodhisattvas who are waiting for there moment (which one is not important, like one of the bees got queen), to make the last step for being reborn as a new Buddha. Of course such a theory is not a serious one. My personal believe: there has only one histotical Buddha been: Gautama. The rest is mythology and unknownable future. Nina thanks for your information about 'niyama' (cosmic order); the way I understood the way Ve, ledi used the term, I thought: this is more a Taostic then a buddhistic term (niyama=Tao) Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Joop (and all) - > >I'm not at all impressed by what you quoted. (No aspersion on you, of course!) > If it is saying that Buddhas arise due to a cosmic law, I say that > amounts to saying they arise because they arise! To say that Buddhas must arise > because there is a cosmic law that makes that so is empty of content, and > moreover it is contrary to the conditionality taught by the Buddha. Buddhas arise > because there are sentient beings who accomplish all that is needed for them to > accomplish in order for them to become Buddhas. To say that this is > inevitable because some cosmic law guarantees it is typical religious superstition > lacking in any legitimate content. > If, on the other hand, all this is saying is that if people accomplish > certain ends, then they will become Buddhas, that also says nothing of any > import. The question is why MUST there always be people who DO accomplish those > things. So, again, I consider the quoted material to appear to say something, > but actually to say nothing at all. > > With metta, > Howard #62760 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Larry (and Plamen) - In a message dated 8/24/06 10:57:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time, LBIDD@... writes: > Hi Howard and Plamen, > > The word you are looking for might be 'santaana'. Here's what the > Buddhist Dictionary has to say: > > santána = santati: 'continuity', may refer to the continuity of > consciousness (citta-s.), of the groups of existence (khandha-s.), of > sub-consciousness (bhavanga-s.), of corporeality (rúpa-s.), to the > uninterrupted continuity of the paticcasamuppáda (q.v.), etc. (App.). > > Appendix: santána, santati: The terms citta-, rúpa-, khandha-, > bhavanga-s.:, etc., are found, here and there, in the Abh. Canon (e.g. > Dhs. § 634, Kath. 110; s. Guide V), but they are often met with in the > Abh. Com. In the Sutta (Therag. 716) is found sankhárasantati. > > L: Another possibility is citta-viithi (consciousness process). > > Buddhist Dictionary: viññána-kicca: 'functions of consciousness', > as exercised within a process of consciousness or cognitive series > (cittavíthi). In the Abhidhamma Com. and Vis.M. XIV the following > functions are mentioned: rebirth (patisandhi), subconsciousness > (bhavanga), advertence (ávajjana), seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, > body-consciousness; recciving (sampaticchana), investigating > (santírana), determining (votthapana), impulsion (javana), registering > (tadárammana), dying (cuti). ---------------------------------------------- Howard: Thanks for that, Larry. The first seems closer to what I had in mind. ----------------------------------------------- > > A single unit of sense-perception (e.g. visual consciousness), being > conditioned through a sense-organ and its corresponding object, forms in > reality an extremely complex process, in which all the single phases of > consciousness follow one upon another in rapid succession, while > performing their respective functions, e.g.: > > "As soon as a visible object has entered the range of vision, it acts on > the sensitive eye-organ (cakkhu-pasáda), and conditioned thereby an > excitation of the subconscious stream (bhavanga-sota) takes place. > > "As soon, however, as subconsciousness is broken off, the functional > mind-element (s. Tab. I, 70), grasping the object and breaking through > the subconscious stream, performs the function of 'adverting' the mind > towards the object (ávajjana). > > "Immediately thereupon there arises at the eye-door, and based on the > sensitive eye-organ, the eye-consciousness, while performing the > function of 'seeing' (dassana).... Immediately thereafter there arises > the mind-element (Tab > I, 39, 55) performing the function of 'receiving' (sampaticchana) the > object of that consciousness.... > ''Immediately thereafter there arises... the mind-consciousness-element > (Tab. I, 40, 41, 56), while 'investigating' (santirana) the object > received by the mind-element... > "Immediately thereafter there arises the functional, rootless > mind-consciousness-element (Tab. I, 71), accompanied by indifference, > while performing the function of 'determining' (votthapana) the > object...... > > "Now, if the object is large, then immediately afterwards there flash > forth 6 or 7 'impulsive moments' (javana-citta), constituted by one of > the 8 wholesome, or 12 unwholesome, or 9 functional classes of > consciousness (Tab. I, 1-8; 22-23; 72-80). > > ''Now, if at the end of the impulsive moments, the object at the > five-sense doors is very large, and at the mind-door clear, then there > arises, once or twice, one of the 8 root-accompanied, karma-resultant > classes of consciousness (Tab. I, 42-49) of the sense-sphere, or one of > the 3 rootless karma-resultant mind-consciousness-elements (Tab. I, 40, > 41, 56).... Because this consciousness after the vanishing of the > impulsive moments, possesses the faculty continuing with the object of > the subconsciousness, taking the object of the subconsciousness as its > own object, therefore it is called 'registering' (tadárarmmana, lit. > 'that object', or 'having that as object')" (Vis.M. XIV, 115ff). > > If, however, the sense-object is weak, then it reaches merely the stage > of 'impulsion' (javana), or of 'determining' (votthapana); if very weak, > only an excitation ot the subconsciousness takes place. > > The proeess of the inner or mind-consciousness, i.e. without > participation of the 5 physical senses, is as follows: in the case that > the mind-objeet entering the mind-door is distinct, then it passes > through the stages of 'advertence at the mind-door' > (manodvárávajjana), the 'impulsive stage' and the 'registering > stage', before finally sinking into the subconscious stream. - (App.: > citta-víthi). > > L: Nina can explain further. See also paticcasamuppada. > http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma2/dictionary/bdindex.html > > Larry > ======================== With metta, Howard #62761 From: "Joop" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:52 am Subject: Re: Hebrew 'Chesed' and Pali 'Metta' jwromeijn Dear Connie This moment I only have short internet-access in a public library. I will read queit when i have again a possiblility Metta Joop --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, connie wrote: > > > dear Howard, Joop, Icaro, > ... > Joop, you would be interested in it, too & was actually thinking more of > you when I was copying: < dependent co-arising>>. > > Good to see you yet again, Icaro. Scott has challenged me to read > Conditional Relations and for sure, I'll need help when I get there. > Alas, I worry about you ;) > > peace, > connie > For this is said: Which are those dhammas that provide exiting? The four > ariyan paths unincluded (in the triple world) (cp Dhs 583, 992ff; P.ts i > 84; Asl 50). > #62762 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 7:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama and rupa pgradinarov --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > It is difficult to react to the contents of your post, because it is different from Theravada. You raise many points, perhaps one item at a time may be useful. > Agreed. Let's start with something chewed up and fairly Theravadin. Khajjaniya Sutta. In what sense does it say that rupa is called so because it ruppati? Does it mean that what we refer as rUpa is only pretending to be rUpa but in fact is ruppa, i.e., something formed by the rUpa and in this sense different from it? Because it is clear that rUpya is not the same as rUpaka. The former is an object for the action of the latter. Or with greater probability it is rather the rUpaka, because it is only the rUpaka that ruppati the rUpya. So what is it that is called so because it breakes up and brings molestation (ruppati)? Capable of rauben, destroyng what? If rupa is called so because it ruppati (see Ital. rompere, Fr. romper), what is it that it destroys and afflicts? Or probably rupa is called so because it has something by means of which it can bring affliction to (whom or to what)? Then the proper question would be, Kena puppati? Thank you in advance for your time, Plamen #62763 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - A question occurs to me, Nina: In a message dated 8/25/06 6:36:56 AM Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > Though it is > the unconditioned element, it is a reality that can be known. > ======================== I certainly do agree that nibbana is "knowable", but I am troubled by the idea of a citta (as one paramattha dhamma) knowing nibbana (as another). The main problem I have with that is the unconditioned nature of nibbana. [In the following I use the language of cittas as things which know, but, as you know, I consider them not to be agents which are aware, but, rather, instances of being aware.] Were a supermundane citta to know nibbana as an object, that would be a bringing of the two into relation. But that seems to compromise the unconditioned nature of nibbana, putting nibbana into relation with something distinct from it, the knowing citta. It seems to me that the "knowing of" nibbana must be a nondual knowing, not distinguishable from the unconditioned itself, and, in fact, beyond concept and language - beyond the possibility of genuine description. Is this issue addressed in the Abhidhamma or commentaries and answered in some way so far as you know? With metta, Howard P.S. The English word 'element' as in "the unconditioned element" in naming nibbana is disconcerting. (BTW, Goenka uses the term 'nibbana dhatu' - so I am not "pointing" at you in this at all.) The term carries the connotations "of elementary building block" and of "smallness", and it psychologically diminishes that which is the summum bonum to the status of one element among many. It makes me think of nibbana as something examinable under a microscope, when, in fact, it is utterly beyond the realm of conditionality and beyond all concept. #62764 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/25/06 6:55:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for the mini questionnaire. I liked Nina's answers, of course, > but will try to give mine a different slant. ----------------------------------- Howard: Thank you for answering. :-) -------------------------------- > > --------- > >What have you seen to be the nature of these dhammas. > --------- > > Most importantly I have seen (at the intellectual level) that they > are realities as distinct from concepts. And they are conditioned as > distinct from random. ------------------------------------ Howard: I agree with your characterization of them as being conditioned and as not be concepts. ---------------------------------- > > ------------ > >What direct understanding of them do you have? > ------------ > > I'll repeat Nina's answer: None. (good to realize!). > > ---------- > >If none, do you expect that to change? And if so, why? > ---------- > > I expect it to change but not suddenly. So I should understand the > way things are, and get used to it. :-) ------------------------------------------ Howard: What you didn't include here in your answer is why you expect it to change. (You are under no obligation, of course, to say anything in that regard!) ------------------------------------------ > > Ken H > > ===================== With metta, Howard #62765 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 7:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas nilovg Hallo Joop, I was also intrigued by the name tag on your photo. And who is the bhikkhu? The young one (to the left) seems a good long distance walker to me. A very good group, is it your Abhidhamma group? I received a lovely letter from Ms. Hermsen. Nina Op 25-aug-2006, om 15:48 heeft Joop het volgende geschreven: > Nina thanks for your information about 'niyama' (cosmic order); #62766 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samadhi sutta SN 35.99 upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/25/06 7:48:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@... writes: > Hi Howard > > Thanks for explaining further what you mean by samadhi in connection with > the development of insight. > > Some comments on parts of your post now (more comments later, if time > permits). > > --- upasaka@... wrote: > > >Howard: > > Actually, no, that is not what I had primarily in mind. That > >momentary > >heightened concentration is not something that one specifically works on > >creating, but it is a result in part of what I *do* mean by developing > >concentration. What I was referring to is what I attempted to go into > >later in my post, > >and which you quote below, namely: "And in the context of the > >development of > >samadhi, I view the "samadhi" as referring not only to momentary focus > >of attention, but to a generally concentrated mind - a mind that has > been > >trained to > >typically pay sharp attention [I wrote "intenion"] at most times and > >which has > >been calmed by jhana practice. I view the development of samadhi to > >refer to a > >process of conditioning the mind, making it a more fit tool for > >investigation > >of dhammas." (BTW, the Buddha often spoke of jhanic attainment making > >the mind > >malleable and a fit tool for investigation of dhammas.) > > OK, I am clear that in your view jhana is involved. I am not clear what > other mind-states (or mental activities?) you have in mind, specifically > when you refer to "a generally concentrated mind - a mind that has been > trained to typically pay sharp attention at most times" and also "a > process of conditioning the mind, making it a more fit tool for > investigation of dhammas". If you'd care to elaborate on this, I'd be > interested to discuss further. Are you referring to samatha or to some > other form of kusala (I'm still not clear on this point)? ------------------------------------------ Howard: The word 'accumulation' occurs to me here, Jon. I'm speaking of a mind that is inclined to be clear, calm, and undistracted as its most typical state. ------------------------------------------ > > >>Jon: If you are referring to the 'Samadhi' section (Part II) of the > >Vism, > >>please see my recent post commenting on the significance of the > >passage > >>from Ch III quoted by Kel that reads: > >> > >>"The method of developing the kind of concentration associated with > >>the noble paths mentioned under that 'of two kinds of mundane and > >>supramundane', etc. is included in the method of developing > >>understanding (Ch XXII); for in developing [path] understanding that > >>is developed too. So we shall say nothing separately [here] about > >>how that is to be developed." > >> > >>As I read that passage it's saying that the samadhi associated with > >>vipassana is developed along with the development of vipassana itself. > >>(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/62533) > > > >-------------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I really don't get your point. My point is that Buddhaghosa went > >into > >much detail on how one should, ever so conventionally, intentionally > >take > >steps to cultivate concentration and calm, and a concomitant point is > >that > >"formal" meditation is alive and well in the Theravada tradition as > >reported by him. > >Kel has provided much of that material. > >------------------------------------------ > > Yes, Buddhaghosa did give very detailed descriptions of/instructions on > the development of samatha to the level of jhaana. That is in Part II of > his work 'Samadhi' (Chapters III to about XIII from memory). > > He also deals with the development of insight, and this is found in Part > III of his work (Chapters XIV onwards). > > The passage I quoted from Ch III seems to me to be making a distinction > between the samadhi that is associated with the development of samatha and > the samadhi that is associated with the development of insight. It says > in effect that Part III deals with the former, while the latter is dealt > with in Part IV and further that the concentration that accompanies > insight is developed along with the development of insight. > > What do you understand by the passage? ------------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know. But I think of the sutta AN 4.170, the Yuganaddha Sutta that discusses several forms of concentration, one of which is "in-tandem". The part of the sutta that refers to that is "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed." ------------------------------------------- > > >Howard: > > I don't know what the minimum level required is. I suspect it is > >very > >high for the higher paths. I do indeed believe that a mind trained in > >samadhi > >is required for insights sufficient to lead to any degrees of awakening. > >I > >find the concensus of the suttas clear on that. (You know: Looking at > >the suttas > >"as a whole"? LOL!) > >-------------------------------------- > > LOL! But what about the development of insight at beginning level. Do > the texts say that this requires any particular development of samadhi? --------------------------------------- Howard: Well, c'mon, Jon - try to pay attention without paying attention! Near the beginning of the Satipatthana Sutta the Buddha writes "There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings... mind... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world." Remaining focused is concentrating, Jon. It is paying attention. There is no attending to what arises without attending. --------------------------------------------------- > > > , and (b) having heard,> > >>understood and reflected on the teachings on insight in this lifetime > >and > >>related what has been understood to the present moment. > > > >-------------------------------------- > >Howard: > > I agree that that is an important condition, though I do NOT see > >the > >necessity for such hearing, understanding, and reflecting to be a > >current-lifetime matter. (Case in point: The Buddha had not heard the > >Dhamma in the > >lifetime in which he attained awakening. There was no one, in fact, for > >him to hear it from.) > >--------------------------------------- > > Yes, but this is a case of the exception proving the rule! What makes a > Buddha (including a Paccekkha Buddha) a Buddha is (as I think you > expalained to your friend/acquaintance mentioned in another thread) that > he is self-enlightened, that is to say, he becomes enlightened without > first having heard the dhamma in that lifetime. For all other beings, > enlightenment (or the development of insight) cannot occur without first > hearing the teachings. > > Jon > ====================== With metta, Howard #62767 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited/Jon upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/25/06 7:48:57 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@... writes: > Hi Howard > > The problem comes with the term 'single-mindstream view'. Can you say > what you mean by this? It doesn't sound like a description of anything > I've said ;-)) > > Jon > > ======================== I'm sorry. I'm going to beg off on this. I can't do any better than I've done. With metta, Howard #62768 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma teacher upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 8/25/06 7:54:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jonoabb@... writes: > To my understanding, anyone from whom one hears helpful dhamma is a > kalyana mitta at that moment. It is not necessarily an ongoing thing. > For example, husband and wife, or parent and child, or two friends, could > be kalyana mitta to each other (on occasions). > ====================== And I believe that is an informal extension of the word as it is typically used. With metta, Howard #62769 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddhas upasaka_howard Hi, Joop - In a message dated 8/25/06 9:57:13 AM Eastern Daylight Time, jwromeijn@... writes: > HalloHoward, Nina, Kel, all > > Of course your negative reaction was not personal to me, that was > clear to me, but still the tone surprises me. ---------------------------------------- Howard: I'm regret your having "read" my tone in a way that was unintended. There was absolutely *nothing* personal intended by me. --------------------------------------- > It must be clear to you that this question of you can not be answered > and is not answered by the Buddhha. ------------------------------------- Howard: I don't know this. It may well be that the the Buddha never claimed that Buddhas MUST appear. I just don't know. I have been looking for answers on this, and not aiming at debate. I'd seriously like to know what is what. --------------------------------------- > > What you want, is an impossible pesuedo-scientific answer; like: when > there is no Buddha and buddhasasana disappears after some thousands > years, then the level of dukkha rises and rises till that level has > such a high rate (a critical value) that it makes one of the billions > of bodhisattvas who are waiting for there moment (which one is not > important, like one of the bees got queen), to make the last step for > being reborn as a new Buddha. -------------------------------------- Howard: No, what I want to know is what the Buddha said. ------------------------------------- > > Of course such a theory is not a serious one. My personal believe: > there has only one histotical Buddha been: Gautama. The rest is > mythology and unknownable future. ------------------------------------- Howard: Okay, I understand. As for me, while I question the inevitability of the arising of Buddhas, I accept the likelihood of eventual arising of Buddhas, because the fatcs of reality, the four noble truths, the tilakkhana, and dependent origination are, indeed, IMO, facts. -------------------------------------- With metta, Howard #62770 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 8:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Metta Revisited buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Jonothan Abbott wrote: > > Hi James > > --- buddhatrue wrote: > > > Hi Jon, > > > > I know that our thread on metta has stopped, but I want to pick it > > up again. > > You may have missed the post I sent a few days ago (Saturday, I think). > If so, please let me know and I'll find it. Yeah, I think I missed that. > > I have been reading "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" by ASHIN > > However, the main point I wished to make was that moments of true metta > can only be known as and when that quality arises naturally in us. If we > embark upon a practice of wishing well to all beings, without knowing > anything about the quality of metta as and when it arises naturally in our > life, the chances are that what we are developing is not the kusala that > is metta. That's six of one, half dozen of another. If we don't know metta when meditating, we are probably even less likely to know when it occurs during our busy and hectic lives. > > Jon > Metta, James #62771 From: "nidive" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 9:09 am Subject: Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nidive Hi Howard, Just a few thoughts on your nibbana post ... > Nibbana is freedom in the sense of no-grasping. There is, already, > at this very moment, no self to do any grasping nor anything, > anywhere, of any sort, that is graspable. That absence, itself, is > freedom. > > Nibbana is, always was, and always will be. It has never arisen and > will never cease. It is neither dhamma nor concept. It is not a > thing at all, but it is the ultimate nature of all things. > > The "grasplessness" of all dhammas is nibbana, an immeasurable > openness and emptiness. The direct realization of that ultimate > emptiness is bodhi and world-shattering release. The ultimate nature of all conditioned dhammas is anicca, dukkha and anatta. Being thus, all conditioned dhammas are ultimately "graspless". If that being so, isn't nibbana just a "derivative" of anicca, dukkha and anatta, cooked up in a different way? If nibbana is the "graspless" nature of all conditioned dhammas, then by logic, if conditioned dhammas were to cease altogether, so would nibbana! There is no such thing as a "graspless" nature without the arising of conditioned dhammas. Regards, Swee Boon #62772 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Swee Boon - In a message dated 8/25/06 12:15:49 PM Eastern Daylight Time, nidive@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > Just a few thoughts on your nibbana post ... > > >Nibbana is freedom in the sense of no-grasping. There is, already, > >at this very moment, no self to do any grasping nor anything, > >anywhere, of any sort, that is graspable. That absence, itself, is > >freedom. > > > >Nibbana is, always was, and always will be. It has never arisen and > >will never cease. It is neither dhamma nor concept. It is not a > >thing at all, but it is the ultimate nature of all things. > > > >The "grasplessness" of all dhammas is nibbana, an immeasurable > >openness and emptiness. The direct realization of that ultimate > >emptiness is bodhi and world-shattering release. > > The ultimate nature of all conditioned dhammas is anicca, dukkha and > anatta. Being thus, all conditioned dhammas are ultimately > "graspless". If that being so, isn't nibbana just a "derivative" of > anicca, dukkha and anatta, cooked up in a different way? -------------------------------------- Howard: If anything, I'd say it's more the opposite. The realization of any of the tilakkhana constitutes a portal to nibbana. -------------------------------------- > > If nibbana is the "graspless" nature of all conditioned dhammas, then > by logic, if conditioned dhammas were to cease altogether, so would > nibbana! There is no such thing as a "graspless" nature without the > arising of conditioned dhammas. --------------------------------------- Howard: The disappearance of all conditioned dhammas *as such* - as separate, self-existent realities - would be part and parcel of realizing nibbana. But I don't recall ever having seen presented the possibility of thefinal ceasing altogether that you hypothesize. Present conditions are the basis for future conditions (speaking from our perspective "under the heavens".) From the perspective of nibbana, of course, I would suppose there is nothing to be said at all. There is a referencing of nibbana as the supreme emptiness and of non-attachment. For example, at the site http://www.empty-universe.com/emptyuniverse/id42.htm, where quotations from the Patisambhidamagga are provided, there are found the following two items: - - - - - - - - - - - - - What is supreme emptiness? This Dhamma is supreme, this Dhamma is superior, this Dhamma is excellent: the calming of all fabrications, the relinquishing of all substrata of becoming, the exhaustion of craving, the fading away of greed, cessation, Nibbana. This is supreme emptiness. - - - - - - - - - - - - and - - - - - - - - - - - - (The Nibbana element) Or through the unconditioned element (nibbana-dhatu) without any clinging/grasping remaining-for one who is fully aware this [temporal] occurrence of eye [i.e temporal vision] ends and no further [temporal] occurrence of eye [temporal vision] arises; this [temporal] occurrence of ear [i.e temporal hearing] ends and no further [temporal] occurrence of ear [temporal hearing] arises; this [temporal] occurrence of nose [i.e temporal smelling] ends and no further [temporal] occurrence of nose [temporal smelling] arises; this [temporal] occurrence of tongue [i.e temporal taste] ends and no further [temporal] occurrence of tongue [temporal taste] arises; this [temporal] occurrence of body [i.e temporal tactual sensing] ends and no further [temporal] occurrence of body [temporal tactual sensing] arises; this [temporal] occurrence of mind [i.e temporal perceiving and thinking] ends and no further [temporal] occurrence of mind [temporal perceiving and thinking] arises. This is the ultimate meaning (paramattha) of emptiness [as it relates to] all kinds of emptiness, which is the terminating of [temporal] occurrence in one who is fully aware. - - - - - - - - - - - Also, please remember, when I spoke of nibbana as "grasplessness" and "an immeasurable openness and emptiness," I wasn't attempting a definition, but just a pointing-at. ------------------------------------- > > Regards, > Swee Boon > =================== With metta, Howard #62773 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:36 am Subject: Abhidhgamma in Daily LIfe 59 nilovg Dear friends, We read in the Kindred Sayings (Sa.låyatana-vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Third Fifty, §130, Håliddaka): Once the venerable Kaccåna the Great was staying among the folk of Avanti, at Osprey's Haunt, on a sheer mountain crag. Then the housefather Håliddakåni came to the venerable Kaccåna the Great. Seated at one side he said this: `` It has been said by the Exalted One, sir, `Owing to diversity in elements arises diversity of contact. Owing to diversity of contact arises diversity of feeling.' Pray, sir, how far is this so?'' ``Herein, housefather, after having seen with the eye a pleasant object, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that is a pleasant experience. Owing to contact that is pleasant to experience arises happy feeling. After having seen with the eye an unpleasant object, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that is an unpleasant experience. Owing to contact that is unpleasant to experience arises unpleasant feeling. After having seen with the eye an object that is of indifferent effect, a monk comes to know as such eye-consciousness that experiences an object which is of indifferent effect. Owing to contact that is indifferent to experience arises feeling that is indifferent. So also, housefather, after having heard a sound with the ear, smelt a scent with the nose, tasted a savour with the tongue, experienced tangible object with the body, cognized with the mind a mental object that is pleasant... Owing to contact that is pleasant to experience arises happy feeling. But after having cognized a mental object which is unpleasant... owing to contact that is unpleasant to experience arises unhappy feeling. Again, after having cognized with the mind a mental object that is indifferent in effect, he comes to know as such mind-consciousness that experiences an object which is of indifferent effect. Owing to contact that is indifferent arises feeling that is indifferent. Thus, housefather, owing to diversity in elements arises diversity of contact. Owing to diversity of contact arises diversity of feeling.'' If we are mindful of realities which appear through the different doorways we will come to know from direct experience different characteristics of nåmas and rúpas; we will know different types of citta and different kinds of feeling. We will understand that all these realities are only conditioned elements and not self. We will know from direct experience that there are not only cittas accompanied by lobha, dosa and moha, and cittas accompanied by ``beautiful'' roots, but also cittas which are ahetuka, cittas without roots. One may not find it useful and interesting to know more about seeing, hearing and the other realities appearing through the different doorways. However, in order to see things as they are, it is essential to know that the citta which, for example hears sound, has a characteristic which is different from the citta which likes or dislikes the sound and that these cittas arise because of different conditions. What the Buddha taught can be proved by being mindful of realities. ****** Nina. #62774 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:45 am Subject: Letters from Nina 40 nilovg Dear friends, Sixth Letter. June 28th, '82. Jakarta. Dear Blanche, Thank you for your letter in which you explain why you think mindfulness in daily life is too difficult and why you think one should first achieve one-pointedness and calm before there can be any insight. It is a point one often hears and I think it may be of some use also to others if I bring up this point again for discussion for my other friends. You write about mindfulness of all the namas and rupas of our daily life, such as seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, etc.: About the business of life, I do not think it makes any difference whether one is rushing to social functions, one's relatives, or looking at the purple mountains, or sitting crosslegged in a meditation room. Our thoughts are always busy, one falling away, the next one arising. Even while one is 'alone', one is not really alone when there is still attachment which arises more often than one would ever have thought. When one is honest, is it not true that one always lives with one's thoughts, one's dreams, one's hopes and expectations? 'Self' is important, one wants the self to be successful, even in meditation and calm. ******* Nina. #62775 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:42 am Subject: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breathing nilovg Dear friends, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/18466 Nina van Gorkom writes: Hi L. and all, In The Way of Mindfulness 33 we read: QUOTE "Because the subject of meditation of mindfulness on in-and-out- breathing is not easy to accomplish without leaving the neighbourhood of a village, owing to sound, which is a thorn to absorption; and because in a place not become a township it is easy for the meditator to lay hold of this subject of meditation, the Blessed One, pointing out the abode suitable for that, spoke the words, 'Gone to the forest,' and so forth." Right before the beginning, Because the subject... Ven. Soma left out a passage (editor note: Nina is referring to the Translation of the satipatthana sutta and Commentary by Soma thera) which I believe is essential for understanding this subject, for whom it is suitable and also the goal of anapanasati: developing insight and calm to the degree of jhana, using jhana as foundation for vipassana and attaining fruition of the arahat. It is also a passage translated in the Vis. VIII, 155: QUOTE Or alternatively, this mindfulness of breathing as a meditation subject- which is foremost among the various meditation subjects of all Buddhas, [some] Paccekaa Buddhas and [some] Buddhas¹ disciples as a basis for attaining distinction and abiding in bliss here and now- is not easy to develop without leaving the neighbourhood of villages... , whereas in the forest away from a village a meditator can at his ease set about discerning this meditation subject and achieve the fourth jhana in mindfulness of breathing; and then, by making that same jhana the basis for comprehension of formations [with insight] (Ch XX, §2f.) , he can reach Arahantship, the highest fruit... This is almost the same as my translation that follows (I saw the Vis tr later on): QUOTE apica, yasmaa ida.m kaayaanupassanaaya muddhabhuuta.m sabbabuddhapaccekabuddhabuddhasaavakaana.m visesaadhigama- di.t.thadhammasukhavihaarapada.t.thaana.m aanaapaanassatikamma.t.thaana.m N: And thus also, with regard to the meditation subject of anapanasati which has become the topmost of Body Contemplation, being the proximate cause for abiding in ease here, now (di.t.thadhammasukhavihaara, fruition attainment) for all Buddhas, Silent Buddhas and disciples of the Buddha, itthipurisahatthiassaadisaddasamaakula.m gaamanta.m apariccajitvaa na sukara.m sampaadetu.m, saddaka.n.takattaa jhaanassa. N: this is not easy to undertake when one has not abandoned the border of the village, full of sounds of women, men, elephants, horses etc. agaamake pana ara~n~ne sukara.m yogaavacarena ida.m kamma.t.thaana.m pariggahetvaa aanaapaanacatutthajjhaana.m nibbattetvaa tadeva jhaana.m paadaka.m katvaa sa"nkhaare sammasitvaa aggaphala.m arahatta.m paapu.nitu.m. N: If the meditator does not live in a village but in the forest, it is easy for him, after he has mastered this meditation subject, attained the fourth jhana of anapana sati, and made this jhana the foundation and has thoroughly comprehended conditioned dhammas (sankhare), to fulfill the highets frutuion, the fruition of arahatship; tasmaassa anuruupasenaasana.m dassento bhagavaa ``ara~n~nagato vaa''tiaadimaaha. N: Therefore the Blessed One, pointing out the dwelling suitable for that, said, gone to the forest etc. (As is) Remarks: We see here that this meditation subject is for those who can attain jhana and develop insight even to arahatship. ******* Nina. #62776 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 10:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nilovg Dear Swee Boon, I am so glad to see you again ater a long break. Before we had many interesting discussions, I still remember. Nina. Op 25-aug-2006, om 18:09 heeft nidive het volgende geschreven: > If nibbana is the "graspless" nature of all conditioned dhammas, then > by logic, if conditioned dhammas were to cease altogether, so would > nibbana! There is no such thing as a "graspless" nature without the > arising of conditioned dhammas. #62777 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:13 am Subject: nama and rupa. nilovg Dear Plamen, Since you know Sskr you will not have much trouble with Pali. However, the meanings may not be the same. Our moderators have a letter to newbies with some tips, and some of these could be of use to you. Also about a Pali glossary you may have already. I shall post this letter separately. Now about ruupa and ruppati, which is actually a word association and this is also elaborated on by the commentaries. ----------- Plamen: refers to Khajjaniya Sutta. In what sense does it say that rupa is called so because it ruppati? Does it mean that what we refer as rUpa is only pretending to be rUpa but in fact is ruppa, i.e., something formed by the rUpa and in this sense different from it? Because it is clear that rUpya is not the same as rUpaka. The former is an object for the action of the latter. Or with greater probability it is rather the rUpaka, because it is only the rUpaka that ruppati the rUpya. So what is it that is called so because it breakes up and brings molestation (ruppati)? --------- N: The body, consisting of ruupas, is so fragile, subject to much suffering. It is afflicted by cold, hunger, disease. This text helps us to see the disadvantage of the body to which we cling so much. In Kh Sujin's book on the Perfections (Paramis) I came upon a striking text about this subject I shall quote now: < We read in the “The Questions of Piògiya” (Cúlaniddesa of the “Khuddhaka Nikåya”) that the Brahmin Piògiya who was hundred and twenty years old asked the Buddha: “I am old and weak, I have lost my beauty, and moreover, my eyesight and my hearing are not clear. Meanwhile, Lord Buddha, may I not go astray, may the Lord explain the Dhamma that he penetrated, the Dhamma that makes an end to birth and old age.” A person with paññå would not ask for anything else but hearing the true Dhamma which makes an end to birth and old age. Although Piògiya was hundred and twenty years old, he wanted to listen to the true Dhamma. He had accumulated paññå to such degree that he saw the benefit of listening to the Dhamma. We read further on: “The Buddha said to the Brahmin Piògiya: ‘People are intoxicated, they are oppressed by physical phenomena, rúpas. It can be seen that people are disturbed because of rúpas. Therefore, Piògiya, you should not be neglectful, you should give up clinging to rúpas so that you will not be reborn.’ ” People who have developed paññå know that dukkha, suffering, arises because of clinging to rúpa. In order to abandon dukkha, we should eliminate clinging to rúpas. The dukkha in our life is caused by rúpas, because we cling and take delight in the sense objects of colour, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object. All these objects are the cause of diverse kinds of dukkha. Further on we read: “The term ‘by rúpas’ (rúpesu) means: by the four great Elements and the derived rúpas that are dependent on these. Beings are disturbed and troubled, they are hurt and killed because of rúpa; rúpa is the condition and the cause of this. Because of rúpa, Kings commit many kinds of deeds, they inflict many kinds of punishment. ....” Since there are rúpas one will experience the effect of being punished, one will be beaten by whips etc. We read further on: "...All beings are bound to be troubled, harmed and killed, because of rúpa. One can see, investigate and consider this so that paññå develops and one sees clearly that all beings are troubled and harmed in those ways. Therefore the Buddha said, that he saw all beings being troubled because of rúpa. " When we depart from this world, we do not know where we will go. It may happen that we shall receive punishment in the aforesaid ways. So long as we have a body we do not know what will happen to it, but when there is a cause for receiving tortures, which is the result of akusala kamma, rúpa is the cause, the reason for experiencing painful feeling. We read further on: When the eyesight declines, or even disappears altogether, people are troubled. Apart from trouble caused by the ear, the nose, the tongue, visible object, sound, odour, flavour and tangible object, it is caused by the family (which supports the monk), by the fellow monks of the monastery, gain, honour, praise, wellbeing, robes, almsfood, dwelling, medicines; when these things decline or disappear altogether so that one is without them, people are troubled. Because of these reasons it is said that everybody is disturbed because of rúpa. One should eliminate attachment to rúpa so that one can give it up in this life. With regard to Piògiya, he attained enlightenment when the Buddha had finished this Dhamma discourse. We see from this example that although Piògiya had accumulated perfections through listening to the Dhamma, he also needed the perfection of energy and of patience because paññå develops only very gradually, it is a long and difficult process. The perfection of truthfulness and the perfection of determination are a necessary foundation for being able to listen to the Dhamma. One should be unshakable in one’s determination to listen, no matter in what circumstances one may be.> ***** Nina. #62778 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:17 am Subject: Letter to Newcomers nilovg Dear Plamen, here is Sarah's letter: < Other suggestions: 1. Introduce yourself, your interest in the Buddha's teachings and give us an idea of what you'd like to hear about or discuss. Basic questions are often the best. 2. For now, just ignore all threads which make little or no sense and focus on your own threads. 3. Go to the files section of DSG http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ and scroll down to 'Useful Posts'. Here, scroll down to 'New to the list and new to Buddhism', also 'Abhidhamma-beginners', 'Kamma-beginners' and many more sections which may be relevant. [If it's all too much, just go to posts saved under 'zany' at the bottom:-)]. 4. If the Pali words are bugging you and you'd like to have help, consider printing out the simple Pali glossary in the files and having it next to your computer. 5. Keep asking people to clarify what they are talking about in simple language. You'll do everyone a favour. But we need an indication of what you're interested to have clarified first. If you give us a chance to offer you (and anyone else new to the list) a chance, you'll find a group of really friendly and helpful people who'll be glad to discuss the teachings with you anytime. Metta, Sarah ======= Nina. #62779 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:39 am Subject: re: Vis. 96, postnascence. nilovg Howard: Nina, I don't know what it means to "consolidate" a rupa. I have no idea what that means. -------- N: It happens right now. I speak now in general terms to clarify. What would the body be like without citta that supports it? It would collapse, be a dead body. Our life is a long series of citta succeeding one another, and all of them are essential supports of the ruupas of the body. Consolidate: strengthen, assist by giving support. ----------- H:Also, does that imply that citta is more than knowing? It is more than vi~n~nana? --------------------------------------- N: Vi~n~naa.na is just another name for citta, they are the same reality. Before I quoted a sutta text from Kindred Sayings where this is said. Citta cognizes an object, seeing cognizes visible object. Cittas (and the accompanying cetasikas) are conditions for ruupas in different ways, and in its turn, ruupa conditions cittas (and cetasika) in different ways. Bhavangacitta knows an object (the same one as the rebirth- consciousness) but it also operates as causing the continuity in one life. Rebirth-consciousness knows an object and also operates as linking the past life to this life. eye-door adverting-consciousness knows an object and also operates as adverting to a new object. And moreover, all of them support the ruupas of the body. And again, ruupas of the body originate from them (excepted are the sense-cognitions), since citta is one of the four factors that originate ruupas of the body. It is all very intricate. > ------------ > H: When the rupa first arose "one citta" was aware of it, and now it is > "another citta" being aware of it, but the knowing is always "in the > present" and > not something going backwards in time, right? > -------- > N: It seems that your take is that each rupa that arises is known but > this is not so. ... -------------------------------------- Howard: That wasn't my point. I'm talking about the rupas that are known. --------------------------------------- N: These are ruupas appearing now. -------- H: One question remaining: If the later citta is a knowing of the very > same rupa previously known, why is this later citta considered > different from > the one which knew the rupa at the time it first appeared? > ------- (snipped) ------------------------------------------ Howard: If it is not seeing, then what does it do? And what is its object? Is it a "turning towards" what *will* be the visible object? That is, it is associated with the object but does not know the object, and, in fact, isn't an awareness of anything? ---------------------------------------- N: First there are bhavangacittas in between processes of cittas and these do not know an object impinging on one of the six doors. The first citta of a new sense-door process of cittas is the sense- door adverting-consciousness which turns towards the object. If visible object has impinged on the eyesense, it is not seen immediately, there is first a turning towards it, but this citta experiences visible object, even though it does not see. It is citta, it experiences an object. We cannot say citta is associated with an object. We have to remember that all this occurs so extremely fast, we cannot have any idea of it. ------------- H:> Then it is succeeded by seeing and this only sees. It is accompanied > by the minimum amount of cetasikas, seven. It is succeeded by another > vipaakacitta which receives visible object. > -------------------------------------- Howard: What does it mean to receive it? Is receiving a kind of knowing? If yes, what is its nature? ------------------------------------- N: Seeing is vipaakacitta, the result of kamma and receiving- consciousness is a following vipaakacitta. This citta does not see, > > but it still experiences visible object. Thus, it knows, but in a way different from seeing. It needs the cetasikas vitakka (thinking but not in conventional sense) and vicara, which direct the citta to the object. It knows and has the function of receiving the object, I cannot say more about it. > ------------------------------------ Howard: Okay. But can you say in what way it experiences it? ----------------------------------- N: see above. Seeing arises at the eyebase, whereas receiving- consciosness arises at the heartbase. ...(snipped) ------------------------------------------ Howard: So, an adverting citta is an attention shift? Which means that it must be a "noticing" of the object, but not more than that? That seems clear to me. I think I'm starting to get the drift. ----- N: Yes, attention to a new object after the stream of bhavangacittas have been arrested. I think you get the drift. :-) ---------- H:But I get the sense that some of these cittas are really more like cetasikas. They differ from just plain vi~n~nana. They are certainly mental operations pertaining to objects, but they do not seem to be vi~n~nana. ------------------------------------------ N: Citta and vi~n~naa.na are the same. When we speak about citta we also imply the accompanying cetasikas. These are of great variety and cause citta to be so different. Citta knows an object and cetasikas are different from citta; they also experience that object but have their own operations/functions. Kh Sujin referred to a commentary when she said: there are 52 cetasikas, but with citta in addition we could speak of 53. **** Nina. #62780 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 11:51 am Subject: nibbaana nilovg Hi Howard' -------- Were a supermundane citta to know nibbana as an object, that would be a bringing of the two into relation. But that seems to compromise the unconditioned nature of nibbana, putting nibbana into relation with something distinct from it, the knowing citta. ------ N: Nibbaana as object conditions the lokuttara citta that experiences it by being its object. But it is not vice versa. Citta could never be a condition for nibbaana. Thus, it is not a question of putting nibbaana into a relation. ----------- H: It seems to me that the "knowing of" nibbana must be a nondual knowing, not distinguishable from the unconditioned itself, and, in fact, beyond concept and language - beyond the possibility of genuine description. Is this issue addressed in the Abhidhamma or commentaries and answered in some way so far as you know? ------------ N: I would not introduce the term non-dual knowing. My post to James may answer partly your question. Think of pa~n~naa as illumination. ---------- P.S. The English word 'element' as in "the unconditioned element" in naming nibbana is disconcerting. (BTW, Goenka uses the term 'nibbana dhatu' - so I am not "pointing" at you in this at all.) The term carries the connotations "of elementary building block" and of "smallness", and it psychologically diminishes that which is the summum bonum to the status of one element among many. It makes me think of nibbana as something examinable under a microscope, when, in fact, it is utterly beyond the realm of conditionality and beyond all concept. -------- N: Not element in the sense of science. Element as devoid or empty of self. Some people may think of nibbaana as a person. Not just Goenka but the Dhammasangani uses this term. Since it is said: unconditioned element it indicates enough. It is short but sufficient. Nina. #62781 From: "Plamen Gradinarov" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:46 pm Subject: Re: Letter to Newcomers pgradinarov --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: Dear Nina and Sarah! Thank you very much for these instructions and very helpful links. Plamen #62782 From: "matheesha" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 1:38 pm Subject: Re: Dhamma teacher matheesha333 Hi Jon, Howard, Butting in with a quote to spice up your discussion.. > > > > I agree that in the context of the development of jhaana it is recommended > > that one proceed by placing oneself under a teacher. However, this is a > > rather special case, and in any event is not a hard and fast rule. > > > > Howard: > > These subjects of meditation are given as 38 at DhsA 168 (cp. Cpd. 202), > > as 32 (dvatti?s' akara -- k°) at Vism 240 sq., as 40 at Vism 110 sq. (in > > detail); > > as pañca -- sandhika at Vism 277; some of them are mentioned at J i.116; > > DhA i.221, 336; iv.90; -- °? anuyuñjati to give oneself up to meditation > > Sasv 151; PvA 61; > > -- °? ugga?hati to accept from his teacher a particular instrument of > > meditation Vism 277 sq. (also °assa uggaho &ugga?hana); KhA 40; DhA i.9, > > 262; > > iv.106; PvA 42; -- °? katheti to teach a pupil how to meditate on one of > > the k° DhA i.8, 248, 336; PvA 61; -- °? adasi DhA iv.106; °ga? hati J > > iii.246; Vism 89; °acikkhana instruction in a formula of exercise DhsA > > 246; °dayaka the giver of a k -- ??h° object, the spiritual adviser and > > teacher, who must be a kalya?amitta (q. v.), one who has entered the Path; > > > > > > I particularly draw your attention to the last clause: "the spiritual > > adviser and teacher, who must be a kalya?amitta (q. v.), one who has > > entered the Path" It is my understanding of the usage of the term that the > > kalyanamitta is typically advanced, at least in comparison to oneself. > > > > Jon: > > Again, I think this is limited to the context of the development of jhana. > "The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment and ask him: 'How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. AN 4.94 Samadhi Sutta metta Matheesha #62783 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:08 am Subject: Equanimity = Upekkhaa ... !!! bhikkhu_ekamuni Friends: What is the Equanimity Link to Awakening? Even evaluation is characteristic of the Equanimity Link to Awakening. (Upekkha-Sambojjhanga). Preventing both deficiency & excess and securing impartiality is the function of Equanimity. Imperturbable ballance is the manifestation of the Equanimity Link to Awakening. Equanimity just looks on whenever new phenomena arises and ceases. This stable yet plastic patience purifies all the other advantageous mental states, which reach maximum, when joined with Equanimity... Equanimity (Upekkha) is a moderating mental construction. Equanimity is also a mood of neither gladness nor sadness. Equanimity is also a feeling of neither pain nor pleasure. Equanimity is also the neutral ability to be indifferent. Equanimity is also the 4th infinitely divine dwelling. Equanimity is also a quite high form of happiness. Equanimity is also a refined mental purification. Equanimity is therefore a Link to Enlightenment... There is Equanimity both regarding live beings and dead things. There is Equanimity both regarding all internal & external states. There is Equanimity both regarding all past, present and future. There is Equanimity both regarding all mentality & all materiality. The Buddha once said: What mental fermentations (asava) should be overcome by development? If a Bhikkhu by alert & rational attention develops the Equanimity Link to Awakening based on seclusion, based on disillusion, on ceasing, culminating in full renouncing relinquishment, then neither can mental fermentation, nor any fever, nor discontent ever arise in him. MN2 [i 11] When mind is concentrated one can observe all closely in equanimity. The Equanimity Link to Awakening arises right there. He develops it, and for him repeatedly meditating it goes gradually to the completion of its development. MN118 [iii 85] Further inspirations on the imperturbable quality of Equanimity: Feeding Equanimity http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Equanimity.htm Even is Equanimity http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Even_is_Equanimity.htm --------- Bhikkhu Samahita, Ceylon. #62784 From: connie Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:01 pm Subject: Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nichiconn dear Howard, James, C: Udaana Nibbaana Suttas, Cy, Masefield: p1011 {c: livelihood!} [390] In this Teaching, every thing, with the exception of nibbaana, having an own nature is discovered to be one having its livelihood contingent upon conditions, not one (whose livelihood is) irrespective of conditions. p1012 For nibbaana is spoken of as a *base in the sense of a cause on account of its being the object-condition for the knowledges associated with the paths and their fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth constitute the objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. p1018 That which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, that which is unconditioned (ajaata.m abhuuta.m akata.m asa"nkhata.m): all these [395] terms are synonymous with one another. p1021 and it is the unconditioned *element which (provides) this escape. peace, c. #62785 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 5:54 pm Subject: Re: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breathing buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Remarks: We see here that this meditation subject is for those who > can attain jhana and develop insight even to arahatship. No, what we see here is that this meditation subject (mindfulness of breathing) can be used to attain jhana and develop insight leading to arahatship. As per what the Buddha taught about it. This is a very important distinction as it has nothing whatsoever to do with certain types of 'persons'; the Vism. is speaking about the meditation subject itself. (BTW, I wouldn't trust the quotes that Rob K. provides from the Vism. He takes quotes out of context which changes their meaning.) > > ******* > Nina. Metta, James #62786 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:02 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited ken_aitch Hi Howard, -------------- > > > What direct understanding of them do you have? <. . .> > > > If none, do you expect that to change? And if so, why? KH: > > I expect it to change but not suddenly. So I should understand the way things are, and get used to it. Howard: > What you didn't include here in your answer is why you expect it to change. ---------------- I wondered at the time whether I was avoiding that part of your question. I wasn't sure what it meant. Things change for the better for a while and get worse for a while. In this way, we have gone around in circles for countless aeons. Why, in all that time, has there never been a permanent change - a way out? Clearly, it must be a very difficult thing to find. I assume your question is: do I believe that this time around (in this or in one of the next few lifetimes) - after all these aeons - direct insight is going to arise and there will be no more falling back into ignorance? I don't know how to answer that. As I understand it, every now and then there has been an opportunity to learn the way out, but we have always wasted that opportunity. I think this has been for two reasons; we have been too attached to samsara, and we haven't understood what the Dhamma was telling us. Sarah spoke recently about 'encouragement to keep going round and round in the cycle of birth and death.' I think that is what Buddhists receive almost everywhere except at DSG. We might complain, "How dare you tell me my theoretical understanding is wrong (or my insights are false insights, or my jhanas are false jhanas)!" but if that is what they are (according to the texts) what else should we be told? I think this time around I have been given, as a Buddhist, a rare opportunity, and, as a member of DSG, a *very* rare opportunity. Ken H #62787 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James (and Howard), > I appreciate your question. The citta purified from ignorance can see > clearly. Pa~n~naa is like illumination, it illumines the object that > is cognized. > When the Path has been developed to such extent that pa~n~naa is able > to clearly understand the characteristics of conditioned dhammas, > their impermanence, dukkhaness and anattaness, there are conditions > for the arising of a higher level of citta, called supramundane > citta. This type of citta surpasses the class of cittas we have in > ordinary daily life, such as seeing, wishing, etc. which have as > their objects the sense objects, conditioned dhammas that arise and > fall away. > The supramundane cittas are accompanied by illuminating pa~n~naa that > is able to experience the uncondiitoned dhamma that does not arise > and fall away, like the dhammas we experience now. Also the > supramundane cittas that experience nibbaana arise and fall away, > they themselves are condiitoned dhammas, but they are able to have an > unobstructed view of the unconditioned dhamma. I thank you for your efforts to answer this question. However, I would have liked it if you had said somewhere "This is what the Abhidhamma states" or "This is what the Abhidhamma teaches" because now I'm not sure where exactly you got this information. It could be from the Abhidhamma, from the commentaries, or from the sub- commentaries- or from a combination thereof. Anyway, if this is what the Abhidhamma states than I definately don't agree with it. Cittas are impermanent because of their grasping nature. Something with a grasping nature cannot directly know something which is ungraspable- it's impossible. To say, "Oh, but these are super cittas!" is a cop out, to my way of seeing things. It's like the type of explanation you would give to a five- year-old to shut him/her up. Sorry, I don't buy it. But, I would imagine that this issue isn't going to be solved. This is probably one of those issue which split the sangha. Metta, James #62788 From: "Paul Grabianowski" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 6:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought paulgrabiano... Dear Howard, James, Nina, Connie, Swee Boon, There seems to be some interesting differences between how we all understand nibbana. Since we must all use language to express our understanding of such a difficult reality, there is no doubt the danger of others misinterpreting what we mean. I would like to get to the bottom of what everyone thinks about nibbana being a base or an unconditioned reality. It appears evident to me (though I am quite open to other possibilities) that Buddha in the many passages quoted here from the Tipitaka (especially the ones I quoted and those that Connie quoted) is quite explicit that nibbana is not in any way a base or a substantial conditioned reality. The use of terms (in translation) like base or dimension are themselves misleading, but in the context in which we find them, they do not point to a "something else" in the sense of some other realm or some other object. This is explicitly rejected repeatedly. Rather, nibbana is always related to release and unbinding, to the very eightfold noble path itself. In other words, nibbana is a base only experientially and not constitutively. Or stated in another way, the experience of Nibbana expresses immediately and unconditionally the truth about realities; it opens realities to their innermost truth; it both justifies and makes known the path. Nibbana, I would say provisionally, does not ex-ist, rather it in-sists and is always operative in and through conditioned dhammas. It is that which is always already operative in phenomena that appear again and again. Attaining nibbana is neither an accretion, a badge, nor the attainment of something substantial; it is the opening of the phenomena which is here now (nama and rupa) again and again to the inner operativity of the nature of all phenomena as impermanent and not-self. Swee Boon makes an interesting point, though I might wish to state it differently: "If nibbana is the "graspless" nature of all conditioned dhammas, then by logic, if conditioned dhammas were to cease altogether, so would nibbana! There is no such thing as a "graspless" nature without the arising of conditioned dhammas." There are perhaps two renderings of nibbana. A) The Nibanna that is the true nature of all phenomena regardless of any knower B) The Nibbana which is known by citta. There is also a hypothetical third one could also imagine. C) A hypothetical Nibbana of any possible existence which expressed the true nature of that existence regardless of the nature of the conditioned nature of dhammas. In this sense, I agree with Swee Boon that without conditioned dhammas (without any universe) there is no nibanna. It appears that the Buddha, in stressing nibbana as a positive experience directly related to the noble path leading to release, makes it explicit that nibbana is nothing more nor less than the nature of reality as experienced by the arahant. To say that it is a reality itself is quite true, but can also be misleading. It is a reality because its attainment (path fruition) immediately transforms the mode in which all realities are known. It is a supreme understanding, a supreme direct experience which must be unlike all other conditioned dhammas. Being not nearly as thouroughly read in the intricacies of nibbana as I would like to be, I hope you all could point me to some interesting teachings that would either confirm or challenge any of this. with metta, paul ----- Original Message ----- > C: Udaana Nibbaana Suttas, Cy, Masefield: > > p1011 {c: livelihood!} > [390] In this Teaching, every thing, with the exception of nibbaana, > having an own nature is discovered to be one having its livelihood > contingent upon conditions, not one (whose livelihood is) irrespective of > conditions. > > p1012 > For nibbaana is spoken of as a *base in the sense of a cause on account of > its being the object-condition for the knowledges associated with the > paths and their fruitions and so on, just as visible forms and so forth > constitute the objective-conditions for eye-consciousness and so on. > > p1018 > That which is unborn, that which is unbecome, that which is uncreated, > that which is unconditioned (ajaata.m abhuuta.m akata.m asa"nkhata.m): all > these [395] terms are synonymous with one another. > > p1021 > and it is the unconditioned *element which (provides) this escape. #62789 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breathing upasaka_howard In a message dated 8/25/06 8:58:52 PM Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: > Hi Nina, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom > wrote: > > >Remarks: We see here that this meditation subject is for those who > >can attain jhana and develop insight even to arahatship. > > No, what we see here is that this meditation subject (mindfulness of > breathing) can be used to attain jhana and develop insight leading to > arahatship. As per what the Buddha taught about it. > > This is a very important distinction as it has nothing whatsoever to > do with certain types of 'persons'; the Vism. is speaking about the > meditation subject itself. --------------------------------------- Howard: In fact, as I recall, Buddhaghosa pointed out breathing as a meditation subject appropriate for all ttpes of persons. --------------------------------------- > > (BTW, I wouldn't trust the quotes that Rob K. provides from the Vism. > He takes quotes out of context which changes their meaning.) > > > > >******* > >Nina. > > Metta, > James > > ========================= With metta, Howard #62790 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 2:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/25/06 9:04:15 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > -------------- > >>>What direct understanding of them do you have? > <. . .> > >>>If none, do you expect that to change? And if so, why? > > KH: >> I expect it to change but not suddenly. So I should > understand the way things are, and get used to it. > > Howard: > > What you didn't include here in your answer is why you expect > it to change. > ---------------- > > I wondered at the time whether I was avoiding that part of your > question. I wasn't sure what it meant. Things change for the better > for a while and get worse for a while. In this way, we have gone > around in circles for countless aeons. Why, in all that time, has > there never been a permanent change - a way out? Clearly, it must be a > very difficult thing to find. ------------------------------------ Howard: Especially if one hasn't learned from the Buddha how to practice, or has learned but just doesn't practice. ------------------------------------- > > I assume your question is: do I believe that this time around (in this > or in one of the next few lifetimes) - after all these aeons - direct > insight is going to arise and there will be no more falling back into > ignorance? I don't know how to answer that. ------------------------------------ Howard: No, I wouldn't have asked that next or at all. When one keeps on doing the same things, one can expect the same results. ------------------------------------- > > As I understand it, every now and then there has been an opportunity > to learn the way out, but we have always wasted that opportunity. > ------------------------------------- Howard: Indeed. ------------------------------------ I> > think this has been for two reasons; we have been too attached to > samsara, and we haven't understood what the Dhamma was telling us. ----------------------------------- Howard: I agree with you. ----------------------------------- > > Sarah spoke recently about 'encouragement to keep going round and > round in the cycle of birth and death.' I think that is what Buddhists > receive almost everywhere except at DSG. > ----------------------------------- Howard: LOL! ----------------------------------- We might complain, "How dare> > you tell me my theoretical understanding is wrong (or my insights are > false insights, or my jhanas are false jhanas)!" but if that is what > they are (according to the texts) what else should we be told? > > I think this time around I have been given, as a Buddhist, a rare > opportunity, and, as a member of DSG, a *very* rare opportunity. ----------------------------------- Howard: Mmm, so how's it going? ---------------------------------- > > Ken H > > ================ With metta, Howard #62791 From: "Paul" Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 7:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought paulgrabiano... Hi James, Sorry for not stating sources. Most of the readings I've quoted I've gotten from AccesstoInsight.org. Just go to the subject search and scroll down to nibbana. I also looked up at the same site the interesting suttas Connie refered to. I've also been slowly reading my way through Sujin's "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas."b You Wrote: "Anyway, if this is what the Abhidhamma states than I definately don't agree with it. Cittas are impermanent because of their grasping nature. Something with a grasping nature cannot directly know something which is ungraspable- it's impossible. To say, "Oh, but these are super cittas!" is a cop out, to my way of seeing things. It's like the type of explanation you would give to a five- year-old to shut him/her up. Sorry, I don't buy it." It seems to me that we can get caught up in this notion of "super" cittas. My understanding, which may be quite different from others here, is that lokuttara cittas are "super" because of the very fact that they carry out a function that in itself must be different from the function of "regular" mundane conditioned cittas. How could there be an experience of the nature of conditioned realities by a regular old vipaka citta. There is no doubt that lokuttara cittas perform a function just like any other, but by nature of vipaka, the cause of past kusala kamma comes to fruition is such a way that determines that the next reality to be experienced will be nibbana. According to Sujin, the type of citta that arises (lokuttara citta) arises because of past kamma. Path-consciousness is vipakacitta; it happens because of conditions and is beyond our control. The very nature of what the lokuttara citta experiences is what makes it great. This is not to say, however, that it is great only by association with nibanna. It is itself a result of past kusala kamma and is perfectly disposed to experiencing nibanna. Dependent arising is still operative here; cittas do not stop arising and following away, but the very experience of reality must have been truly transformed. Anyway, I think your question is superb, and I'm only weaving together many sources here. I await a more thourough answer. metta, paul #62792 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought upasaka_howard Hi, Paul (and all) - In a message dated 8/25/06 9:34:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time, paulgrabianowski@... writes: > The use of terms (in translation) like > base or dimension are themselves misleading, but in the context in which we > find them, they do not point to a "something else" in the sense of some > other realm or some other object. This is explicitly rejected repeatedly. > Rather, nibbana is always related to release and unbinding, to the very > eightfold noble path itself. In other words, nibbana is a base only > experientially and not constitutively. Or stated in another way, the > experience of Nibbana expresses immediately and unconditionally the truth > about realities; it opens realities to their innermost truth; it both > justifies and makes known the path. Nibbana, I would say provisionally, > does not ex-ist, rather it in-sists and is always operative in and through > conditioned dhammas. It is that which is always already operative in > phenomena that appear again and again. Attaining nibbana is neither an > accretion, a badge, nor the attainment of something substantial; it is the > opening of the phenomena which is here now (nama and rupa) again and again > to the inner operativity of the nature of all phenomena as impermanent and > not-self. > > Swee Boon makes an interesting point, though I might wish to state it > differently: > > "If nibbana is the "graspless" nature of all conditioned dhammas, then > by logic, if conditioned dhammas were to cease altogether, so would > nibbana! There is no such thing as a "graspless" nature without the > arising of conditioned dhammas." > > There are perhaps two renderings of nibbana. A) The Nibanna that is the > true nature of all phenomena regardless of any knower B) The Nibbana which > is known by citta. There is also a hypothetical third one could also > imagine. C) A hypothetical Nibbana of any possible existence which expressed > > the true nature of that existence regardless of the nature of the > conditioned nature of dhammas. In this sense, I agree with Swee Boon that > without conditioned dhammas (without any universe) there is no nibanna. It > appears that the Buddha, in stressing nibbana as a positive experience > directly related to the noble path leading to release, makes it explicit > that nibbana is nothing more nor less than the nature of reality as > experienced by the arahant. To say that it is a reality itself is quite > true, but can also be misleading. It is a reality because its attainment > (path fruition) immediately transforms the mode in which all realities are > known. It is a supreme understanding, a supreme direct experience which > must be unlike all other conditioned dhammas. > > ========================== Paul, I like what you had to say in the foregoing very much! :-) With metta, Howard #62793 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Aug 25, 2006 3:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rob's forum on Mindfulness of Breathing upasaka_howard Hi, James - I missed the salutation in my last post to you on this thread. Sorry about that! With metta, Howard #62794 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 1:52 am Subject: Bangkok Sat. discussion - second attempt plus e-card from the East Coast! sarahprocter... Dear All (Azita & SweeBoon at the beginning), (Azita, glad to read your report from KK ¡V have a great trip to the States! Swee Boon, good to see your posts again ¡V I remember your past wise reflections on nibbana) We're swimming and surfing on an idyllic golden beach on the East Coast of Australia. Much of the time, we have the beach to ourselves¡K¡Kback every day (exhausted!) to catch up with all the interesting threads. Yes, opportunities for metta whenever we're with people. Even whilst writing there are so many opportunities for developing metta, whilst we're being friendly to everyone here, developing dana as we share our understanding of dhamma and sila too as we cultivate good speech and avoid hurting or offending others as best we can:-) Oh yes, and patience when we re-write lost letters or respond to critical ones:-)) When we appreciate these good qualities as dhammas, not our good qualities, they can develop as paramis or whatever else we like to call them. Anyway, back to some of the further topics we discussed on our last day in Bangkok (a second effort¡K..). This follows the points I posted a few days ago, ending with the one that Kel responded to with his 'cop-out' comment¡KLOL! (More or less in the order discussed for those present, but with my elaborations as some time has passed) a)- suta, cinta and bhavana maya panna (levels of listening, considering and understanding). Different levels, but we can't say first suta, second cinta etc. A Buddha would only have cinta and bhavana. Also, a child might have suta or cinta, but not necessarily with understanding. A recurring theme was that the Buddha used ordinary language already common, so the same terms can have different meanings in different contexts. b)- Every topic discussed came back to the importance of understanding seeing and visible object now. It really makes no difference at all whether one is looking out at the beautiful beach or at the busy traffic in Bangkok. Seeing just sees visible object and the rest are the stories and proliferations we have on account of the signs and details of what is seen. Back to awareness naturally following what is experienced right now and no need to look for any other object, time or place. Another example ¡V we touch objects many times a day, but there's no understanding of what is touched. The tangible object is anatta and by being aware of it or any other characteristic through any doorway, we can see how natural awareness is when it follows that reality. Anu-to follow, following immediately without any separation and also the meaning of 'not being forgotten' to be aware. c) ¡V More on the ayatanas, the coming together of dhammas. (btw, Nina, when Azita asked her question earlier on eye-base, I gave a response about ayatanas, but KS stressed the dvara instead in context. That's why I hope Azita will sometime give the Vism ref she was referring to as well. Btw, it might be a good idea to sometime re-post the entire segment with the footnote point which Connie quoted to replace it) For others ¡V lots in U.P. on 'Ayatanas'. d) ¡V Satipatthana arising by pakatupanissaya paccaya (natural decisive support condition), i.e. by accumulations having listened and considered the teachings about dhammas (realities). Also, only one way ¡V satipatthana, not samadhipatthana. e) ¡VSamadhi doesn't appear as an 'equal' or partner until vipassana nana (1st stage of insight) when samadhi and panna are yoked together and are the proximate condition for each other. This is apparent at this stage when the dhammas appear clearly through the mind-door. f) ¡V A question about whether we shouldn't try to make awareness (or any other dhamma arise). Answer: 'Who?'. g) ¡V more on the meaning of the right friend as being the association with right understanding. h) ¡V the understanding of realities as being in line with absolute truth i) ¡V the two conditions for right understanding as being ?partaghosa?? (another's words) an yoniso manasikara (wise attention). (B. Dhammanando, can you help with the spelling and ref?) The example of listening to the Buddha an one's own consideration. When we read a sutta now or hear what is in conformity with the teachings, it is the 'voice of the Buddha'. The other's words, having been heard, becomes one's own consideration. j) ¡V accumulations as used referring to asaya-anusaya (tendencies ¡Vgood and bad) as well as vasana. All kusala and akusala is accumulated and never lost. We know the terms kusala and akusala, but usually there's no understanding of the realities. k)- For the development of samatha, there must be sati sampajanna too. Different levels of understanding for samatha and satipatthana. l) ¡V Giving with no understanding of the path and giving with understanding ¡V the citta (consciousness and mental states) are quite different. Dhammanudhamma patipada (practice in accordance with the true dhamma) is the moment of satipatthana. m) ¡V 'the rule is the self'. In other words, as soon as we try to find rules for practice, it's with an idea of selfƒº. Even when reading texts, it all depends on the development of understanding of realities at such times. n) ¡V Changing accumulations overtime? 'From dirt, can it become a diamond?' o) ¡V A bhikkhu (??Sacchanika) with a yakka standing over (Rob K, do you have the name or link now?) debated and disagreed with the Buddha but was later reborn in Sri Lanka and became an arahant. Comment ¡V understanding developed even whilst hearing and debating). p) ¡V Lots of discussion on memorizing and the purpose of reciting the texts. Bhikkhus in the Burmese temples commonly memorize the Abhidammatha Sangaha initially in the study of Abhidhamma and of course usually bhikkhus recite texts together. If there is no reflection on the meaning whilst reciting, it's of no use. Understanding is the most important thing ¡V the development of satipatthana. Of course we can never tell by the appearances and one day one may be sleepy and just following the custom whilst another day there may be some wise reflection. q) ¡V Respect for the Buddha by way of reflecting on his virtues, reflection on the teachings and developing satipatthana. Just reciting the Metta Sutta without understanding metta will not lead to any metta. It depends on conditions whether any reflection or recital will condition later understanding and benefit, depending on the reflection. r) ¡V Bottom line ¡V whether it's meditation, chanting or scholarship ¡V 'it it's without panna, it's a waste of time'. 'The precious gem is the path leading out of samsara.' ********* Comments, additions or corrections welcome! I'll look forward to reading further discussions. Again, apologies for very delayed replies until I'm back at my computer. Metta, Sarah ======= #62795 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 2:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited ken_aitch Hi Howard, ------------ > H: > > > What you didn't include here in your answer is why you expect it to change. > > > KH: > > - a way out? Clearly, it must be a very difficult thing to find. > > H: > Especially if one hasn't learned from the Buddha how to practice, or has learned but just doesn't practice. ------------- Ah, now I get it! Until now I genuinely didn't understand your question. If I have finally got it right, it was: if I don't have a formal practice, why would I expect direct insight to eventually happen? --------------- H: > When one keeps on doing the same things, one can expect the same results. --------------- I think you are saying: 'Direct insight can't happen in the course of normal daily life. There has to be a ritual of some sort.' Needless to say, this is where we disagree. I know you don't like the word ritual, but what else could I call it? Rain will only fall when prevailing conditions make it fall. Primitive man couldn't make rain, but he tried the only thing he could think of - a rain dance. Insight (vipassana) will only arise when prevailing conditions make it arise. No one can make it happen. How is formal Buddhist meditation any different from a vipassana dance? ----------------- KH: > > 'encouragement to keep going round and > round in the cycle of birth and death.' I think that is what Buddhists > receive almost everywhere except at DSG. > Howard: > LOL! ---------------- Take, for example, the current conversations about Nibbana. The texts are being scorned, while personal "insights" are being lauded. In other words, people are being encouraged to 'keep going round and round in the circle of birth and death.' ----------------- H: > Mmm, so how's it going? ------------------ Fine thanks - always a pleasure to discuss Dhamma with you. Ken H #62796 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 2:21 am Subject: Perfections -revised sarahprocter... Dear Nina, (Howard, Lodewijk & all), I saw you mentioned that you were revising your translation of KS's text. In case I forget to mention it, one day we were discussing carita sila (habitual sila), virati sila (sila by abstention) etc with regard to right speech and especially how with the development of understanding one knows better and clearer before speech and deeds are performed what is right and wrong....it becomes more and more refined. (lots of social implications!)In otherwords, without satipatthana, it can never be adhi-sila which knows much better than just abstaining from harsh language or action (which of course may not even be kusala). Anyway, it related to the good discussion you and Howard were having on the development of habitual good action as well as virati. I quoted a short section of something which you re-posted at the time from 'sila' in the text about carita sila. I don't have it here, but when I raised a question on it, KS said it should be changed (both the English and Thai). I'll check it on return to Bkk or Hong Kong as I made a note, but from memory: after carita sila, a 'very' before subtle should be deleted and also instead of sati sampajanna, it should just read sati because otherwise people (like me!) read it as referring to satipatthana which isn't correct in context. She mentioned the Thai for this latter point also needed to be changed and I think she made another change to the Thai also. Pls remind me to double-check my note when I get home. I'm just mentioning it as you said a revision is in progress. Metta, Sarah ======= #62797 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 12:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Multiple-Mindstream Interaction Revisited upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 8/26/06 5:11:17 AM Eastern Daylight Time, ken_aitch@... writes: > Hi Howard, > > ------------ > >H: >>>What you didn't include here in your answer is why you > expect it to change. > >>> > > KH: >> > - a way out? Clearly, it must be a very difficult thing to find. > >> > > H: >Especially if one hasn't learned from the Buddha how to practice, > or has learned but just doesn't practice. > ------------- > > Ah, now I get it! Until now I genuinely didn't understand your > question. If I have finally got it right, it was: if I don't have a > formal practice, why would I expect direct insight to eventually happen? ------------------------------------------ Howard: First of all, if there is no practice yet there is expectation of progress towards awakening there must be some other basis presumed for the progress. I do want to understand what that basis is - seriously. The usual answer is "When the requisite conditions are in place, that is the basis." And, of course, that is true. But why should the requisite conditions become in place. That is, why for you any more than someone else. There are academicians who study the dhamma and are more knowledgeable than you or I or most folks here, but who don't *believe* in the Dhamma as fact. Does believing do it, IYO? Or is it something else? BTW, forget about "formal". I don't know what the mening of "formal" is in "formal practice". I only said "practice". ----------------------------------------- > > --------------- > > H: >When one keeps on doing the same things, one can expect the same > results. > --------------- > > I think you are saying: 'Direct insight can't happen in the course of > normal daily life. There has to be a ritual of some sort.' Needless to > say, this is where we disagree. ------------------------------------------ Howard: No, I didn't say that and I don't mean that. I mean that actions have consequences, and different actions have different consequences, and it *does* matter what we do. ----------------------------------------- > > I know you don't like the word ritual, but what else could I call it? ----------------------------------------- Howard: I'm sure you couldn't call it anything else. It is convenient for you to call it that, because it supports your inclination not to follow the Buddha's instructions. ----------------------------------------- > Rain will only fall when prevailing conditions make it fall. > ---------------------------------------- Howard: I was waiting for the pat "condition response" (or should I say "conditioned response"?), and you didn't disappoint. -------------------------------------- Primitive> > man couldn't make rain, but he tried the only thing he could think of > - a rain dance. -------------------------------------- Howard: Not-so-primitive man does better. The rain dance is an activity, and cloud seeding is an activity. The former is mere ritual, the latter is (intentional) setting up of useful conditions. --------------------------------------- Insight (vipassana) will only arise when prevailing> > conditions make it arise. No one can make it happen. How is formal > Buddhist meditation any different from a vipassana dance? --------------------------------------- Howard: Snooze. The Buddha didn't teach carrying out of ritual. He taught useful intentional activity. --------------------------------------- > > ----------------- > > KH: >>'encouragement to keep going round and > >round in the cycle of birth and death.' I think that is what Buddhists > >receive almost everywhere except at DSG. > > > Howard: > > LOL! > ---------------- > > Take, for example, the current conversations about Nibbana. The texts > are being scorned, while personal "insights" are being lauded. In > other words, people are being encouraged to 'keep going round and > round in the circle of birth and death.' > > ----------------- > > H: > Mmm, so how's it going? > ------------------ > > Fine thanks - always a pleasure to discuss Dhamma with you. -------------------------------------- Howard: :-) Always interesting, certainly. Are you sure it's always a pleasure? ;-)) ------------------------------------- > > Ken H > > =================== With metta, Howard #62798 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 6:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Perfections -revised nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you. This is at the very end of the chapter on Morality. I would like to know what else should be changed. Nina. Op 26-aug-2006, om 11:21 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > after carita sila, a 'very' before subtle should be > deleted and also instead of sati sampajanna, it should just read sati > because otherwise people (like me!) read it as referring to > satipatthana > which isn't correct in context. #62799 From: connie Date: Sat Aug 26, 2006 6:33 am Subject: Re: What is Nibbana: a Brief Thought nichiconn Hi again, Paul, Udaana Readers, another couple of options for reading Udaana Suttas in case you like to do some comparative readings or if ATI is still missing some (happy, btw, to see the progress on the path of purification transcription project there): sacred-texts.com/bud/index.html ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/TT-index.htm but for nibbaana, "bliss of separation", another Udaana Commentary quote: 1. Mucalinda p265 knowing this matter in all its modes, viz. that for the one experiencing the bliss of separation there is simply bliss wherever (he might be). gave rise to this Udaana elucidating the majesty of the bliss of separation. Herein: substrate of separation reckoned as nibbaana, is bliss. for the one who is satisfied by way of the contendness associated with the knowledge associated with the four paths. whose Dhamma has been made manifest, whose Dhamma has been heard far and wide. (alternative grammatical form) all this - that separation, or indeed whatever else there is to be beheld - [102] with the eye of knowledge attained through his own power in the form of energy. angerlessness; in this way it is the stage previous to loving kindness that is indicated. and that control with respect to beings <(sattesu)>, meaning non-injury is bliss; in this way it is the stage previous to compassion that is indicated. being without lust where this world is concerned is also bliss. Of what sort? means that that being without lust, that is spoken of as "That transcendence of sense-desires", is also bliss; in this way it is the path of the non-return that is talked about. by this means, moreover, it is arahantship that is talked about. For arahantship is spoken of as "the driving out, by way of tranquillization, of the 'I am' conceit"; and there is known no bliss behond this, for which reason he said "This is indeed the highest bliss". So did he bring that teaching to a climax by way of arahantship. The exposition of the first sutta is concluded. peace, c.